Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting David L (Reply 242): I think it needs to be pointed out that the majority of contributors to this thread are quite clearly trying to understand what really happened and are holding back on declaring any definitive "it's a fact" conclusions while there is still undiscovered evidence to be found, e.g. the aircraft. Not being 100% convinced that the Captain did it is not the same as saying he didn't do it. The "flying-saucer/nuke-bombs/dastardly government plot" theories are only coming from a handful of contributors and are not being supported by the aforementioned majority. All the views that don't 100% support that the Captain definitely did it cannot be lumped together as one body of thought. As I see it, most believe either: 1) the Captain may or may not have done it but there are plenty of unanswered questions either way or 2) the "Captain did it" is the most likely (or least unlikely), explanation but accept it isn't an undisputed fact, and in addition: 3) a small number believe it to be an undisputed fact that the Captain did it, 4) a small number believe it was something more sinister involving governments, secret weapons, a nuclear device, kidnapping, etc. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 255): I am a pilot, a VFR pilot, but I do understand the issue made here. It's not complex at all. If this were a Sherlock Holmes type of case about a stolen laptop or something like that, sure a delay would be meaningless, there have even been pilots who put it off for a moment and then forgot to report in, and there have been cases of that where the controller didn't notice a failure to check in right away either. But this event is quite different from any other event in airline history, because at that moment (one minute seven seconds later) MH370 began its disappearance when the Mode S was set to standby. From the time of acknowledgement of turnover at 1:19:29 until the time Thailand's radar saw 9MMRO approaching the coast near Koto Bharu (1:28) is only eight and a half minutes, so we have to assume that the plane was already turning immediately after the turnover response at 1:19:29. Out of context, sure a little delay means little, but in context there is no other way to explain it than to see it as deliberate. |
Quoting benjjk (Reply 2): In July last year a MAS branded towelette was apparently found on a West Australian beach. It is yet to be confirmed that it belonged to MH370, so be skeptical, but this could be an interesting find. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 4): Quoting 777Jet (Reply 1): As in, it was delibertae but you accept that it could have been done by somebody / persons other than the captain? Like who? |
Quoting David L (Reply 262): Indeed. How many accident reports do not contain words to that effect? |
Quoting David L (Reply 262): Apparently many of us have a lot more faith in the professional and legal integrity of the NTSB, AAIB, BEA, ATSB, etc. than you do. If your allegations are true then what would that say about the suitability of those organisations to conduct any accident investigations? |
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 172): Article 5.12 "The State conducting the investigation of an accident or incident shall not make the following records available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation ... c) medical or private information regarding persons involved in the accident or incident; ... e) opinions expressed in the analysis of information." |
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 172): Under Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation the NTSB is a required participant in the investigation (state of manufacture) and has the right under article 6.3 to have a dissenting report included in the final report. |
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5): Quoting tailskid (Reply 4): Quoting 777Jet (Reply 1): As in, it was delibertae but you accept that it could have been done by somebody / persons other than the captain? Like who? A hi-jacker / hi-jackers. |
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7): Do you accept that it is *possible* that MH370 *could* have been a hi-jack or failed hi-jack attempt? Or do you rule it out 100% and are still 100% sure that the captain is 100% guilty? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): It's a disclaimer David. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): what I have done is to say that even if these Orgs had a part in the writing of the Interim Report (which I doubt very much) |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 172): Article 5.12 "The State conducting the investigation of an accident or incident shall not make the following records available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation ... c) medical or private information regarding persons involved in the accident or incident; ... e) opinions expressed in the analysis of information." The part played by the other participants is stated here: Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 172): Under Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation the NTSB is a required participant in the investigation (state of manufacture) and has the right under article 6.3 to have a dissenting report included in the final report. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Along with this, as supporting evidence, the fact that Zaharie answered the release from the FIR indicates that he was alone in the flight deck because Fariq had handled all the previous communications with ATC. |
Quoting AR385 (Reply 3): 1) A struggle in the cockpit between who knows. That suits the turn to the right at IGARI before the turn to the left to return to Peninsular Malaysia. But that would not explain the subtle variations in altitude revealed yesterday if both the crew members were incapacitated under that struggle. That leads me to believe that neither of the crew members were responsible for such struggle but were incapacitated by another party. Somebody who was able to do the later maneuvers (skirting Indonesia) to then set final course for Antarctica. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): 3. Post 9-11 the flight deck security barrier is unbreachable especially within the time constraints in this diversion. |
Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 10): Doubt it, Fariq was undergoing line training and as PNF he would be handling the comms. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 12): What do you doubt? That Zaharie received the FIS release? |
Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 13): No I was referring to the second part of what you said, I doubt he was alone in the flight deck. |
Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 10): Plus, he would attempt to gain entry if locked out. Much easier to execute this without other crew or passengers knowing anything is amiss. There is a crash axe handy |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 14): You would have to be suggesting that they both were in on it from what you are saying. And you do know that Fariq was very junior and that Zaharie could have sent him on an errand in the cabin - right? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 15): fire axe |
Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 20): Couldn't he simply say he was having a transponder problem and get plenty of getaway time, if ATC noticed. |
Quoting Schweigend (Reply 23): |
Quote: As stated in the findings of the report, the Engineering Maintenance System was not updated correctly when the ULB battery was first installed. This was a maintenance scheduling oversight. |
Quoting Schweigend (Reply 23): Why were they flying with an FDR whose pinger battery had expired a year before? |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): There is already evidence that maintenance standards appear to have been poor - |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): the apparently non-functioning FDR seems to point in that direction? Personally I think that a sudden catastrophic failure of the aircraft's systems is a lot more likely than 'pilot suicide'? |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): In this case, the captain's last recorded words (to ATC) were "All right, goodnight." Can't help feeling that if he was indeed intent on crashing the aeroplane and killing everyone on board, he'd have said something a bit more memorable? |
Quoting Schweigend (Reply 26): I don't know if MX standards overall have been poor, but the "maintenance scheduling oversight" admitted by MH in the press release linked by Flying Disk could mean that other "oversights" have happened.... Still might have nothing to do with this case. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7): Do you accept that it is *possible* that MH370 *could* have been a hi-jack or failed hi-jack attempt? Or do you rule it out 100% and are still 100% sure that the captain is 100% guilty? I rule it out 100% for several reasons: |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): 1. All the passengers are known and they have all been vetted. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Along with this, as supporting evidence, the fact that Zaharie answered the release from the FIR indicates that he was alone in the flight deck because Fariq had handled all the previous communications with ATC. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Oh, and Faraq is as clean as a whistle, he was an establishment kid engaged to a drop dead good looking lady who was from money and who also was a commercial pilot. |
Quoting Schweigend (Reply 23): This certainly could have hampered the so far unsuccessful search for MH370, and compensation may be due to Australia for its wasted efforts, although I believe Oz would never make a stink about the matter. |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): The other possibility, of course, is that there was a major malfunction (like, say, sudden de-pressurisation) which killed everyone on board, in a very few minutes - after which the aeroplane crashed? |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): In this case, the captain's last recorded words (to ATC) were "All right, goodnight." Can't help feeling that if he was indeed intent on crashing the aeroplane and killing everyone on board, he'd have said something a bit more memorable? |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): so many posters on here seem to be unalterably convinced that this was a case of 'pilot suicide.' |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): It's a disclaimer David |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): One of the more unscrupulous methods of debate is to state your opponents claim in an exaggerated manner and then attack that statement of your own - and that is exactly what you are doing here. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): I have not questioned the professional and legal integrity of those Orgs. what I have done is to say that even if these Orgs had a part in the writing of the Interim Report (which I doubt very much) they were completely dependent on the data provided by Hishammuddin. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Along with this, as supporting evidence, the fact that Zaharie answered the release from the FIR indicates that he was alone in the flight deck because Fariq had handled all the previous communications with ATC. |
Quoting Rara (Reply 30): I think it's really just two (or one). The number of posts can be deceiving. |
Quoting Rara (Reply 30): whatever happened to the investigation into the Captain's flight simulator? I remember rumours that they found deleted evidence of landing practices on some isolated island or some such? |
Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25): Must admit to being surprised that so many posters on here seem to be unalterably convinced that this was a case of 'pilot suicide.' |
Quoting Rara (Reply 30): What I wanted to ask though (since I haven't read the report) - whatever happened to the investigation into the Captain's flight simulator? I remember rumours that they found deleted evidence of landing practices on some isolated island or some such? Was there anything to it, and is that mentioned in the report at all? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): I rule it out 100% for several reasons |
Quoting Rara (Reply 30): I think it's really just two (or one). The number of posts can be deceiving. |
Quoting Rara (Reply 30): What I wanted to ask though (since I haven't read the report) - whatever happened to the investigation into the Captain's flight simulator? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 4): Like who? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): 1. All the passengers are known and they have all been vetted. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): 2. The cabin crew have been looked into also. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): 4. Captain Zaharie was (unexpectedly) the person who received the release from KLATCC at 1:19:29. Were he to have been under attack he would have been able to signal the ATC with a hijack code. |
Quoting exfss (Reply 33): Only this (among all your post tailskid ) tell me that you are not here to find the truth, you are here to push your truth. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): I rule it out 100% for several reasons: 1. All the passengers are known and they have all been vetted. 2. The cabin crew have been looked into also. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 8): Oh, and Faraq is as clean as a whistle, he was an establishment kid engaged to a drop dead good looking lady who was from money and who also was a commercial pilot. |
Quoting exfss (Reply 33): Only one (well...or two!)have already everything figured out based mostly on a poem written on Facebook. |
Quoting bond007 (Reply 38): LOL ... I wonder how many terrorists, serial killers, child molesters fit this description ....not saying he had anything to do with it, but it's hardly evidence to the contrary! |
Quoting David L (Reply 31): Quoting tailskid (Reply 6): It's a disclaimer David Not for the first time, you've chosen to play word games with the least significant part of someone's quote and skipped over the more significant part. |
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 35): But, you don't think Zaharie was looked into as well? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 40): A statement included in a document which limits the scope of the document, as in this case limiting it to the purposes of airline safety and specifically excluding it from determination of guilt or fault is a disclaimer. |
Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 42): likely scenario. |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 41): Also, how could any psychological assessment of a man who is in the process of ending a 30 year marriage gloss over that kind of a fact? |
Quoting tailskid (Reply 48): LOL there were no changes in his lifestyle other that his wife of thirty years was in the process of moving out. |