User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 1:00 am

Part 76 was getting too long with over 200 replies so I made a new thread to continue the discussion:

Part 76 link: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 76 (by 777Jet Mar 9 2015 in Civil Aviation)

SOME IMPORTANT REMINDERS FOR ALL OUR MEMBERS TO CONSIDER BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD:

**** Out of respect to the crew, passengers and also family members; close to those on board MH370; please keep science fiction theories and content related to past / current movies or possible future movie rights out of these threads. ****

**** PLEASE DO NOT REPEAT QUESTIONS AND SCENARIOS THAT HAS BEEN COVERED AND DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS THREADS AND WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE OR APPLY, IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER, TOWARDS THIS CONVERSATION ANY LONGER. ****

**** Please make an effort to read through some of the threads, if possible the latest in the series, before adding your own comments and theories to the current, active thread on this issue. ****

**** PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL TOWARDS OTHER USERS AND KEEP THE FORUM RULES AND REGULATIONS IN MIND WHEN POSTING IN THE FORUMS. SHOULD THERE BE ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, PLEASE BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MODERATORS BY MAKING USE OF THE SUGGEST DELETION FUNCTION.
****

**** WHEN STATING FACTS, STATISTICS OR NEWSWORTHY BULLETINS, PLEASE BE SURE TO INCLUDE AN HTML LINK OR REFERENCE TO A PUBLICATION. IF YOU ARE MERELY PROVIDING AN OPINION, PLEASE MENTION THIS IN YOUR POST. ALL MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO AVOID ARGUMENTS BASED ON RUMORS OR MISINFORMATION

**** Some members may not be aware of the fact that all members have an edit window of 60 minutes, from the time you first make a post in which to add or remove any additional comments or information into/from the post. Please make use of this feature made available to you, for your own convenience, instead of posting one post after another (doubles, triples or more).

**** Also keep in mind that this is a discussion forum and not a chat room. If you would like to chat about this incident, kindly make use of the "Live Chat" option, which is available in the "forum drop-down menu". Messages of agreement such as "ME TOO", "I AGREE WITH X", YES OR NO have been found to waste time and space and are therefore to be avoided. A message consisting of only one or two lines of text is probably not worth posting. Do not make posts that contain only a smiley face, check mark, etc. Make sure the content of your post is relevant to the topic.

777Jet
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 1:13 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 193):
What is important here is, that we may be dealing with possible events or occurrences for which there is simply no precedent.

  

That is very true and also illustrates the importance of locating the plane and finding out what happened - so a similar type of event can hopefully be prevented from happening again.

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 193):
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but I reckon that MH370 is setting a precedent in its own right.

I agree there - MH370 has definitely set some kind of precedent in its own right.

That a 777 with 239 SOB has been missing for over a year is kind of unbelievable IMHO...

BTW - Happy 1 year A.Net Birthday YoungMans  

[Edited 2015-03-15 18:17:15]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
AR385
Posts: 6927
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 2:49 am

From thread 76:

Tailskid
"Then how do we explain a flight path that would cause the plane to make a 165° turnaround and fly to and then across the Malaysian peninsula next to, but not over, the Thai border, which brought the plane into the Malacca Strait just south of Pinang, where a 60° or so turn northward was made, with the plane flying 350 miles up the Strait skirting but avoiding the Indonesian FIS, and continuing to a point past MEKAR where a 45° or so turn was made towards the west which allowed the plane to pass the northern tip of Sumatera, without intruding into Indonesian airspace, and where after 40 miles or so on a westerly course, another turn of about 90° was made, putting the plane on a heading of almost due south for the next four and a half hours until apparent fuel exhaustion?"

Me:

I agree. Unfortunately, all the scenarios one can come up with, with all the info available so far, the contributions from expert members here, and other info., it is very difficult to imagine a scenario where these turns that seem to indicate intent to evade Indonesian airspace could be explained due to a failure of some sort. All the scenarios hit a wall when confronted with those maneuvers. One or two turns after IGARI maybe. But the whole series? That´s the main problem for me.

Still, not enough to say any of the crew members are responsible, but it is hard to imagine someone or something was not controlling the plane.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 3:16 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 2):
it is very difficult to imagine a scenario where these turns that seem to indicate intent to evade Indonesian airspace could be explained due to a failure of some sort.

Then we add to that set of facts, the facts that the event began at FIS turnover, which was the only moment in the flight when MH370 was not under the control of any ATC controller and that the event was signaled by transponder turnoff and a communications blackout.

All this indicates that someone was in control of the plane.

Then we have to take into account the powering up of the AES at 18:25 which included a power up and initialization of the entertainment system. Under any onboard emergency such as fire or electrical malfunction, the first thing to be powered off on any checklist is the entertainment system. So from that, we glean that someone was in control, and there had been no use of emergency checklists.

The only question left is: who was in control of the plane?
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 4:04 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 3):
The only question left is: who was in control of the plane?

Really could have been just about anyone. We can never know. My percentages:

Hijackers 20%
Aliens 79%
Co-pilot Fariq Hamid .99%
Pilot Ahmad Zaharie Shah .01...he was an honorable man.
 
Brewfangrb
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:13 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 4:06 am

From thread 76 by YoungMans

Quote:
The 50 : 50 possibility, of the satellite data being false or not, cannot be expressed in any other way.
The data is either correct or it is not; there can be no ‘in-between’.

With all respect, I'm not sure if you simply don't understand "probability" or if you've misunderstood the question. The PROBABILITY of the data, as presented, being falsified or not, is not 50%. This not like a set of 2 dice, where the probablility of an 11 is 1:36.

Now, if asked what the probability of that 11 being falsified or not, that's an entirely different issue.

The issue with the data is not so simple as it must be correct or it must be incorrect. For it to be incorrect, any number of things could have caused it to be incorrect--from unitentional and undetected technical errors either by the satelitte itself, the ACARS system on the aircraft or by the analysts interpreting the data...or intentional falsification, which itself has any number of motives and could have be driven by the unintentional and undetected errors noted above.

Thus, while you're technically right that the data must be correct or incorrect, the probability of which is true is entirely different than 50:50.

So to put another way: What is YOUR opinion as the probability the data are correct and are incorrect? If you say 50:50 again, that's literally saying there's a 50% likelihood that for some reason the data cannot be trusted either through technical error or malfaesance. That's like saying if I throw an 11 on the dice table, there's a 50% chance the dice were interfered with--either through an innocent manufacturing defect of the dice or table or an intentional act by the casino. In that context, I think most would agree the probability of the data being incorrect being 50% is not reasonable...no?
 
flightless
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 4:45 am

The probability of what happened to MH370 is:

100% : whatever actually happened.
0% : everything else.

What we can cut up into little numbered buckets is where we put our guesses. Good solid factual information will help us accurately label and choose those buckets. The lack of good information makes it difficult to properly associate guesses with reality.

In this case, the information is so lacking that any "probabilities" we might assign are nothing more than personal bias and a popularity contest.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:07 am

Quoting flightless (Reply 6):
In this case, the information is so lacking that any "probabilities" we might assign are nothing more than personal bias and a popularity contest.

You might have missed this. These are known facts.

9MMRO flew a flight path from just before it was to reach IGARI which began with it making a 165° turnaround and flying to and then across the Malaysian peninsula, flying next to but not over the Thai border, which brought the plane into the Malacca Strait just south of Pinang, where a 60° or so turn northward was made, with the plane flying 350 miles up the Strait skirting but avoiding the Indonesian FIS, and continuing to a point past MEKAR where a 45° or so turn was made towards the west which allowed the plane to pass the northern tip of Sumatera, without intruding into Indonesian airspace, and where after 40 miles or so on a westerly course, another turn of about 90° was made, putting the plane on a heading of almost due south for the next four and a half hours until apparent fuel exhaustion.

Other KNOWN FACTS are:

The event began at FIS turnover, which was the only moment in the flight when MH370 was not under the control of any ATC controller and that the event was signaled by transponder turnoff and a communications blackout. Also we know that at 18:25 the AES was powered up and the Satellite data at this time shows that a power up and initialization of the entertainment system occurred, and we know that under any onboard emergency such as fire or electrical malfunction, the first thing to be powered off on any checklist is the entertainment system.

So from that, we can KNOW that there had been no use of fire or electrical emergency checklists.
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:44 am

There is a saying:
While on the flight deck, airline pilots don't roll the dice..!!

Quoting brewfangrb (Reply 5):
The issue with the data is not so simple as it must be correct or it must be incorrect. For it to be incorrect, any number of things could have caused it to be incorrect--from unitentional and undetected technical errors either by the satelitte itself, the ACARS system on the aircraft or by the analysts interpreting the data...or intentional falsification, which itself has any number of motives and could have be driven by the unintentional and undetected errors noted above.

The points you are making in your reply are good ones and interesting.
As you say, there are probably a number of things that could distort the data, however much or little. Those small errors got logged in the record of the satellite communications. I'm pretty sure, too, from what I understood, the experts working with this data, were and are well aware of this.

They would be the limitation of the system.
That is not what I mean when I question whether the data is correct or not.

In my view, the data should be considered incorrect, i.e. false, only if it is as the result of deliberate action.
In other words if someone, somewhere on the line, fiddled with that data and manipulated it.

Quoting brewfangrb (Reply 5):
So to put another way: What is YOUR opinion as the probability the data are correct and are incorrect?

A valid question and one that was asked by others as well.
In Reply 122 (Thread 76) I already answered that and you might like to refer back to it.

I would also like to suggest here, in a roundabout way, that we shouldn't get too carried away about satellite data spoofing itself; if it happened, that would have been only a means to a much bigger end.
If it did happen, if the data is false, than it was for a purpose and that purpose was to deliberately mislead; in other words it was to make it appear that the aircraft went one way when in reality it went somewhere else.

How often do we hear it, here on A.net, in various media, in peoples circles of friends and work colleagues that they don't really believe it that the aircraft is in the SIO. How many people, then, take the next step and ask themselves, if it's not there, how do we know it's not. Or turn that question around, how do we know as fact that the aircraft is in the Indian Ocean where they are searching, right now, at great costs.

There is only one thing that tells us so - and those are the few computer entry lines after 18:25 when the SatCom (apparently) came back on line. There is no guarantee for it, only the word of those who are telling us so.

With all that in mind, I was hoping to get away with it by just calling it 50:50.
And in some fashion it is ..well, very simple, actually; the data is either correct or it is not. No in between ....
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:36 am

Here, let me fix that for you:

Quoting tailskid (Reply 7):
9MMRO flew a flight path from just before it was to reach IGARI which began with it making a 165° turnaround and flying to and then across the Malaysian peninsula, flying next to but not over the Thai border, which brought the plane into the Malacca Strait just south of Pinang, where a 60° or so turn northward was made, with the plane flying 350 miles up the Strait skirting but avoiding the Indonesian FIS, and continuing to a point past MEKAR where a 45° or so turn was made towards the west which allowed the plane to pass the northern tip of Sumatera, without intruding into Indonesian airspace, and where after 40 miles or so on a westerly course, another turn of about 90° was made, putting the plane on a heading of almost due south for the next four and a half hours until apparent fuel exhaustion.


Your description of the flight path strongly implies a malicious intent to evade military response, which shows up nowhere in the list of what you describe as KNOWN FACTS. You are connecting the dots.

Proximity to the Thai border could be accidental, if trying to reach Penang as quickly as possible for an emergency landing. Flying up the middle of the Straits could be an attempt to buy time to troubleshoot a crippling system failure that is not accounted for in any checklist. If you don't think it's prudent to conduct an approach and landing with the aircraft in its current state, or with your incomplete understanding of its current state, and you have no comms, and it's the dead of night, would it not make sense to stay as far out of the way as you can while you attempt to figure it out?

You might correctly point out that I am connecting the dots a different way. The difference between us, however, is that I still believe that the dots can be connected in multiple ways. And I don't exclude your way... the probability of the rogue captain scenario is definitely not zero. What I personally don't like about it is that it is a lazy explanation: every strangeness or complication in the evidence available to us can simply be ascribed to the boundless cunning of the captain. I don't know why it's so important that I or anyone else should buy into that as a 100% certainty.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:21 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 9):

They are all known facts. I just didn't go back and highlight the first time I used the term. I was responding to flightless, not you or Youngmans or NAV30 or Mandala or anyone else. I know that you all have differing opinions, they are yours, I don't seek to change your mind or prevent you from posting your theories.

What I posted above were not my theories but known facts. If you are going to post my words with "flying next to but not over the Thai border", "skirting but avoiding the Indonesian FIS" and "without intruding into Indonesian airspace" crossed out, it seems to me that you are obligated to should show how those words are false.

But they they are not false just because you don't like them.

It is significant that the plane didn't fly over Thai airspace on its way from IGARI to VAMPI it bares mentioning.

It is significant that the plane flew from Pinang to IGEBO via VAMPI because the direct route would have taken it through Indonesian FIR; it bares mentioning.

It is significant that the plane avoided Indonesian airspace while transiting past Banda Aceh because it all but provides the smoking gun that the flight path was intentional. Why would anyone ignore or pretend that this didn't happen?

I didn't see any need to connect the dots, just laying out the known facts was all I did in post 7.
I will say that I resent the argument that "we don't know anything, there are no facts" that argument is disingenuous. I do push back against that nonsense.

[Edited 2015-03-16 00:23:57]
 
mandala499
Posts: 6591
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 10:36 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 10):
Why would anyone ignore or pretend that this didn't happen?

You're mixing facts with opinion (obfuscating?)
The flight paths are known. They are facts.
Why it took those flight paths, there is no evidence that says it is intentional, it only seems so. That is the weakness of the "intentional" theory. I am not saying that it is impossible for that theory to be true, but there is just not enough evidence.
If I say the airplane had a mode S drop off and a satcom logon at 1825, they are facts... BUT, if I say the airplane suffered a mishap based on the Mode S drop off and then the satcom logon at 1825, then I'm mixing facts with opinions.

---
Let's get a reality check shall we?

The problem with "the captain did it" or "it's a malfunction" arguments is that the simple versions of these theories cannot be true... As the facts shown shows that "it cannot be that simple". Let's have a look at the strengths and weaknesses of the 2 leading theories based on the facts:

Theory: "Someone took it over and intentionally made it disappear"
Strengths:
- Flight path seems intentionally evading Thai airspace and Indonesian airspace.
- Aircraft flew over waypoints or very nearby waypoints.

Weaknesses:
- 37 seconds of mode S drop off before loss of secondary radar response altogether makes this unlikely.
- Satcom logon at 1825 makes this unlikely (why switch it on again if it drops off)

Theory: "The Captain did it"
Strenghts (In addition to the above):
- Captain is a known sympathizer of the opposition whose leader was re-sentenced a few hours earlier.

Weaknesses (In addition to the above):
- Investigation checked the character of the captain and his life and has not raised any alarms in the factual report.

Theory: "It's a accident"
Strengths:
- 37 seconds of mode S drop off before loss of secondary radar response makes this likely.
- Satcom logon at 1825 indicates that left main AC bus was unpowered, and that this logon was due to power restored.

Weaknesses:
- If the logon at 1825 is due to someone troubleshooting, it makes little sense for the aircraft to go on for another few hours and towards the Indian ocean instead of turning back to where they were.
- Flight path it took seems too coincidental if this was an accident.

If anyone has any other theories, let's list the strengths and weaknesses. We can all build the strengths and weaknesses of each theory. Now, theories that involve "falsification" of some of the facts, should go under the alternative theories... eg:

Theory: "BFO spoofed and aircraft ended up on the northern arc"
Strengths:
- No debris found in the Indian ocean
- Doppler correction of ping replies can be altered.

Weaknesses:
- Number of countries/borders it has to fly over.
- Has to land somewhere and be hidden, but not yet found nor has anyone talked.

Theory: "Shot down somewhere", etc, etc, etc...

Anyone wanna help with this exercise?  

I got a hunch that this could end up being a combination of both "someone took it over" and "a tech mishap"... *or am I just being too hopeful*
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 11:25 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):

Good idea this, I reckon; let's sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Theory: "Professional Hijacking"
Strengths:
- The known flight path to the point of last radar contact and 18:25 would fit perfectly as known.
- Details to that point/location (last radar contact and 18:25) would correspond with the Factual Information Report.
Weaknesses:
- It would have to be ascertained (guaranteed, one way or the other) if the satellite data was manipulated (falsified) or not.
- Full disclosure would be required; governments would have to release to the public the full truth; i.e. what they know.

There would be more to say, of course, but that would only be additional detail.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 11:29 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
The problem with "the captain did it" or "it's a malfunction" arguments is that the simple versions of these theories cannot be true... As the facts shown shows that "it cannot be that simple". Let's have a look at the strengths and weaknesses of the 2 leading theories based on the facts:

Thanks for this. Very useful. We should continue the exercise.
 
bond007
Posts: 4428
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 1:50 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 10):
It is significant that the plane didn't fly over Thai airspace on its way from IGARI to VAMPI it bares mentioning.

It is significant that the plane flew from Pinang to IGEBO via VAMPI because the direct route would have taken it through Indonesian FIR; it bares mentioning.

It is significant that the plane avoided Indonesian airspace while transiting past Banda Aceh because it all but provides the smoking gun that the flight path was intentional. Why would anyone ignore or pretend that this didn't happen?

No, these are only significant because it's your opinion that that are, and again, because it fits your theory.

They may or may not be significant to determining what actually happened, but neither you, nor anyone else at this point in time can say that based on the evidence.

Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:26 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):

Weaknesses:
- 37 seconds of mode S drop off before loss of secondary radar response altogether makes this unlikely.

It could have been done by modifying the aircraft 24-bit Mode S address. The problem is that modifying the address is not easy to do; it requires physically strapping certain pins in the transponder interconnection.

However, if it would have been done on one of the transponders and switching that transponder active, it would have resulted in transponder not responding to Mode S queries any longer as the transponder would not have recognized the address as its own. This would have resulted in Mode S symbol dropping off the ATC radar screen, as there would have not been Mode S replies to the radar any longer. Other transponder modes would have functioned as they don't rely on 24-bit Mode S address.

[Edited 2015-03-16 10:40:37]
 
mandala499
Posts: 6591
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:10 pm

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 15):
The problem is that modifying the address is not easy to do; it requires physically strapping certain pins in the transponder interconnection.

I think this one would go down in the alternative theory list...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 9:42 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 11):
The flight paths are known. They are facts.

It's nice to hear you say that in relation to my post 7 above; for all of the last year you've been harping on "keeping an open mind" and how one should not be so quick to discount the northern track, the Maldives "sighting", the oil rig worker and how the Inmarsat findings were questionable. You had discounted even very recently the radar reports by Vietnam, Thailand, China, Singapore, Indonesia and even Malaysia. Your latest gambit had been the "spoofing" of Inmarsat data.

So now we are in agreement on the flight path: that's huge. But keep in mind that the guy right below your post is still questioning the Inmarsat data, so you're getting out ahead of your pack on this one.

As for your "reality check(s)", you merely posed generalized vague arguments and answered these generalities with other generalities. Much like a discussion with strawmen.

I'll remind you that my post #7 only dealt with the flight path and didn't delve into who was controlling the plane. I think that we can now put questions about the flight path behind us and assume that anyone who questions the basic assumptions in post 7 is pursuing an outlier theory, or as you say, an alternative theory.

So now as a separate issue, I will state that given the known flight path, it is impossible for that path to have been a result of random chance: someone was in control of the plane at least up to the point of the last turn south. If we can (almost) all agree to that, we can put that question behind us and move on to the next question(s).
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 9:58 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 17):
it is impossible for that path to have been a result of random chance: someone was in control of the plane

I had no idea this was controversial! Of course someone was in control of the plane. I would even venture to say that it was most likely the pilot.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Mon Mar 16, 2015 11:48 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 18):
Quoting tailskid (Reply 17):
it is impossible for that path to have been a result of random chance: someone was in control of the plane

I had no idea this was controversial! Of course someone was in control of the plane. I would even venture to say that it was most likely the pilot.

And which pilot was the last person on MH370 whose voice was heard? Captain Zaharie!

The Captain was the last confirmed person alive in the cockpit before something happened near IGARI.

Was the FO still in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

Were invited guests in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

Were bad guys like hi-jackers in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

Was the Captain calling the shots or being forced by others at that time? We don't know.

Was the Captain or the FO even still alive minutes later when something happened? We don't know.

There are so many unanswered questions...

But, we do know the last voice heard from MH370 belonged to the Captain and it was not long before something happened...

Also, whilst this has been discussed before, seeing it again whilst reading through the ATC transcript in the latest report makes me again wonder / consider:- was there more behind the FO's redundant / repeat "Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero" call to ATC about 6 minutes after the first "Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero maintaining flight level three five zero" call than just a simple error???

The FO was looking after the ATC calls. Then the FO makes a redundant / repeat call of a transmission he made about 6 minutes earlier - that was the FO's final ATC call. Then after about 11 minutes the next communication to ATC was spoken by the Captain and that was the last time humans were ever heard from MH370.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 12:32 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Also, whilst this has been discussed before, seeing it again whilst reading through the ATC transcript in the latest report makes me again wonder / consider:- was there more behind the FO's redundant / repeat "Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero" call to ATC about 6 minutes after the first "Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero maintaining flight level three five zero" call than just a simple error???

The best guess on this that I've heard is that this was a nudge for Malaysian ATC to make the turnover a bit early. Zaharie might have ordered Fariq to make that call.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Was the FO still in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

If he were in the cockpit, it would have been his job to handle radio communications, so we have a strong indication that he wasn't on the flight deck.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Were invited guests in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

There were no dignitaries or MAS pilots as passengers so we can answer this no. Post 9-11, the flight deck door is kept "closed."

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Were bad guys like hi-jackers in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.
Was the Captain calling the shots or being forced by others at that time? We don't know.

We can safely say that Zaharie wasn't being hijacked due to the fact that he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously.
 
liquidair
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:01 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 12:53 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero

I haven't had a chance to read the report yet... It's interesting if those were the exact words.

I mean, erroneous repeat of 7370... To my mind indicates a confused state of thought. Or do pilots often make mistakes like that?
trying to stop my gaseous viscosity go liquid
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 1:21 am

Quoting liquidair (Reply 21):
I haven't had a chance to read the report yet... It's interesting if those were the exact words.

The audio of these transactions have been in the public domain for many months.
 
ATCtower
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 1:34 am

Quoting liquidair (Reply 21):
I haven't had a chance to read the report yet... It's interesting if those were the exact words.

I mean, erroneous repeat of 7370... To my mind indicates a confused state of thought. Or do pilots often make mistakes like that?

Incredibly common, even in America where English is our first language. With foreign pilots it is almost expected. This raises very little concern with me.

As for the redundant (2X) 'check in' calls of where they were, this too is not at all uncommon if the pilot forgets if they checked on freq or even their way of doing a radio check.

I would love to read more into this thinking perhaps something was wrong with one/both of them, but neither of the above raises any sort of suspicion with me as an enroute controller in America.
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
bond007
Posts: 4428
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:26 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
If he were in the cockpit, it would have been his job to handle radio communications, so we have a strong indication that he wasn't on the flight deck.

We have absolutely no indication who was in the cockpit!

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
There were no dignitaries or MAS pilots as passengers so we can answer this no. Post 9-11, the flight deck door is kept "closed."

Again, we have no idea who was in the cockpit at this time!

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
We can safely say that Zaharie wasn't being hijacked due to the fact that he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously.

We can safely say we have no idea whether he was being hijacked or not. Are you serious that we should assume it wasn't hijacked because .. "he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously" ..

LOL ....seriously I am.

Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:38 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
If he were in the cockpit, it would have been his job to handle radio communications, so we have a strong indication that he wasn't on the flight deck.

not necessarily. Who was PF and who was PM? I don't recall seeing anything in the preliminary report, although I may be mistaken. If the FO was PF (which would be expected on a final training flight), then he would likely have been flying with the PIC acting as PM and handling comms.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:55 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 25):
If the FO was PF (which would be expected on a final training flight), then he would likely have been flying with the PIC acting as PM and handling comms.
AIRWALK:

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 10):
Fariq was undergoing line training and as PNF he would be handling the comms. Unlikely he wouldn't be present or have left at an earlier stage.

.
Quoting bond007 (Reply 24):
We have absolutely no indication who was in the cockpit!

We surely do, it was Zaharie who handled the last transmission and said: “good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero” .

Quoting bond007 (Reply 24):
Are you serious that we should assume it wasn't hijacked because .. "he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously" ..
Yes I am.
 
exfss
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:54 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:12 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
We can safely say that Zaharie wasn't being hijacked due to the fact that he didn't notify ATC surreptitiously.

hahaha safely? I guess.
It does not mean anything anyway.
I could also say that the captain made his last radio contact with a gun at the head of the copilot.
I am as safe, saying that as you are.
I hope you realise that you have no more truth than anybody here.

Sitting in a living room,with a mind stuck-upped with one theory ,is so non-productive.
In fact , a preconceived idea is the worst ennemy of the truth, in any investigation.

The FO could have had to go to washroom and the captain took over the radio ,
The FO could be on a check list for some trouble and the captain took over the answer.
The FO could have been eating or receiving his coffee when ATC called him so the captain just answered back.
There is millions other possibilities.
including the rogue pilot.
But no facts are backing it up solid.
Absolutely no facts.
No question is stupid.Only answers can be.
 
Brewfangrb
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:13 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:24 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 8):
With all that in mind, I was hoping to get away with it by just calling it 50:50.
And in some fashion it is ..well, very simple, actually; the data is either correct or it is not. No in between ....

Oh, for God's sake. Carry on. I don't argue with the obtuse.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:26 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Were invited guests in the cockpit at that time? We don't know.

There were no dignitaries or MAS pilots as passengers so we can answer this no. Post 9-11, the flight deck door is kept "closed."

The two young South African ladies who were entertained by Fariq Abdul Hamid and the then Captain of the MH flight from Phuket in December 2011 were neither dignitaries nor MAS pilots traveling as passengers but they managed to ride in the cockpit during the entire flight! This was well post 9-11.

We really don't know if anybody else apart from Zaharie and Fariq were in the cockpit of MH370. All we know is that Fariq was in there at least until 1707:56 UTC and Zaharie was in there at least until 1719:30 UTC based on ATC records.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 21):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 19):
Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero

I haven't had a chance to read the report yet... It's interesting if those were the exact words.

These are the last few exchanges between MH370 and ATC:

1646:58 UTC
[0046:58 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Seven Zero Lumpur Radar good
morning climb flight level two five zero.
1647:03 UTC
[0047:03 MYT]
MAS 370 Level two five zero Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero.
1650:08 UTC
[0050:08 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Seven Zero climb flight level three
five zero.
1650:11 UTC
[0050:11 MYT]
MAS 370 Flight level three five zero Malaysian aa Three Seven
Zero.
1701:17 UTC
[0101:17 MYT]
MAS 370 Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero maintaining flight level
three five zero.
1701:21 UTC
[0101:21 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Seven Zero
1707:56 UTC
[0107:56 MYT]
MAS 370 Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level
three five zero.
1708:02 UTC
[0108:02 MYT] Malaysian Three Seven Zero.
1719:26 UTC
[0119:26 MYT]
Lumpur Radar Malaysian Three Seven Zero contact Ho Chi Minh
one two zero decimal niner good night.
1719:30 UTC
[0119:30 MYT]
MAS 370 Good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero.

Quoting bond007 (Reply 24):
Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
If he were in the cockpit, it would have been his job to handle radio communications, so we have a strong indication that he wasn't on the flight deck.

We have absolutely no indication who was in the cockpit!

As I said above, all we know is that Fariq was in the MH370 cockpit at least until 1707:56 UTC and Zaharie was in there at least until 1719:30 UTC based on ATC records.

[Edited 2015-03-16 22:30:18]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:45 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 29):
they managed to ride in the cockpit during the entire flight!

Do you have a source for this? I've seen the pictures of them in the cockpit while the plane was on the ground but this is the first time I've seen it said that they were in the 'cockpit" while in the air.

I've always considered that story a bit overdone.

Edit: never mind I've found it, teenage girls - well well.
But Fariq wasn't the Captain.

[Edited 2015-03-16 23:20:37]
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:48 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 29):
As I said above, all we know is that Fariq was in the MH370 cockpit at least until 1707:56 UTC and Zaharie was in there at least until 1719:30 UTC based on ATC records.

You're assuming (IMO correctly) that it was Fariq who made the redundant transmission. So we cannot state this as fact, as likely as it seems.

What is FACT is the Z made the last transmission, failed to read back the frequency, failed to then check in with HCM, failed to alert ATC to any problem and APPARENTLY initiated a diversion from the intended flight path.

We then know the flight path with a high degree of certainty. Considering the relative intricacy of the demonstrated flight path, I would ask...who better to execute the flight of the t7 through the regional FIR's, with good knowledge of radar installations, all the while with a depowered left bus? Can't imagine.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:43 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 30):
Do you have a source for this? I've seen the pictures of them in the cockpit while the plane was on the ground but this is the first time I've seen it said that they were in the 'cockpit" while in the air.

I've always considered that story a bit overdone.

Edit: never mind I've found it, teenage girls - well well.

In addition to the print sources, here is a short clip of an interview done on Australian TV with one of the young ladies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqekX-I97EI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqekX-I97EI

Quoting tailskid (Reply 30):
But Fariq wasn't the Captain.

Very true, but this incident nonetheless raises questions concerning how seriously cockpit security / procedures are taken by *some* MH pilots, even after 9-11. Whilst the young ladies might have appeared to be harmless, this incident was nonetheless a massive breach of security / procedures IMO.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:59 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 16):
I think this one would go down in the alternative theory list...

Agreed, and besides there really is no point in making Mode S roll call replies disappear.

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 31):

You're assuming (IMO correctly) that it was Fariq who made the redundant transmission. So we cannot state this as fact, as likely as it seems.

It depends on whether we consider "Factual Information" as facts or not.

Quote:
Five sets of audio recordings were analysed starting from Airway Clearance Delivery at 1625:52 UTC [0025:52 MYT] till the last utterance from Lumpur Radar at 1719:30 UTC [0119:30 MYT]. There were a total of 23 utterances as follows:

a. Airway Clearance Delivery (ACD) - frequency 126.0 MHz -- 4 utterances
b. Lumpur Ground (LG) - frequency 122.27 MHz -- 6 utterances
c. Lumpur Tower (LT) - frequency 118.8 MHz -- 4 utterances
- 1636:30 UTC Tower Malaysian Three Seven Zero morning.
- 1636:37 UTC Alfa One Zero Malaysian Three Seven Zero.
- 1638:45 UTC Line up Three Two Alfa One Zero Malaysian Three Three Seven Zero.
- 1640:40 UTC Three Two Right clear for take-off Malaysian Three Seven Zero thank you bye.
d. Approach Radar (AR) - frequency 121.25 MHz -- 3 utterances
- 1642:50 UTC Departure Malaysian aaa… Three Seven Zero.
- 1643:01 UTC Okay… level one eight zero direct IGARI Malaysian One… aaa Three Seven Zero.
- 1646:42 UTC Night one three two six Malaysian err… Three Seven Zero.
e. Lumpur Radar (LR) - frequency 132.6 MHz -- 6 utterances
- 1646.55 UTC Lumpur Control Malaysian aa Three Seven Zero.
- 1647.03 UTC Level two five zero Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero.
- 1650:11 UTC Flight level three five zero Malaysian aa Three Seven Zero.
- 1701:17 UTC Malaysian aaThree Seven Zero maintaining flight level three five zero.
- 1707:56 UTC Ehhh… Seven Three Seven Zero maintaining level three five zero.
- 1719:30 UTC Good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero.

From the information available, the first 3 sets of audio recordings (ACD, LG, LT), the speech segments are those of the Flight Officer before take-off, and the 4th & 5th (AR & LR) sets of the audio recordings originated from the Captain after take-off.


Source: page 21 of Factual Information and recordings in the Appendices 1.18A-G

[Edited 2015-03-17 00:19:41]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:01 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 8):
Quoting brewfangrb (Reply 5):
So to put another way: What is YOUR opinion as the probability the data are correct and are incorrect?

A valid question and one that was asked by others as well.
In Reply 122 (Thread 76) I already answered that and you might like to refer back to it.

Here are YoungMans' odds from the previous thread:

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 122):

Well, here goes:
20 % - Professional hijacking. This would involve spoofing the satellite data as a cover for that type of operation.
35 % - Fire or other technical chains of events; which also resulted in crew incapacitation.
15 % - Simple hijacking that ended in failure and tragic consequences. (No satellite spoofing)
2 % - The Captain did it.
10 % - Unknown, weird or totally unexpected causes. This could possibly involve satellite spoofing.
Quoting brewfangrb (Reply 28):
Quoting YoungMans (Reply 8):
With all that in mind, I was hoping to get away with it by just calling it 50:50.
And in some fashion it is ..well, very simple, actually; the data is either correct or it is not. No in between ....

Oh, for God's sake. Carry on. I don't argue with the obtuse.

That was not nice.

[Edited 2015-03-17 00:04:50]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:04 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 32):
this incident was nonetheless a massive breach of security / procedures IMO.

No big deal IMO. But I'm not surprised that you think it was a big deal. Ko Phuket in December is overrun with Tourist chickies, young guys like Fariq probably try to snag a couple on every trip out.

This has nothing to do with what happened to MH370.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:14 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
This has nothing to do with what happened to MH370.

More facts?

Because all passengers were vetted?

But the captain was also, no?

All rhetorical of course.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:19 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 33):
It depends on whether we consider "Factual Information" as facts or not.

Thanks. So Zaharie was definitively on comms for all transmissions post take-off, if I am understanding the report correctly.

Pretty interesting.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:19 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
No big deal IMO.

No big deal that complete strangers were allowed to ride in the jumpseat for an entire flight? Hmmmm...

Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
But I'm not surprised that you think it was a big deal.

I'm not surprised that you think it wasn't a big deal given that the idea of MH pilots allowing strangers into the cokpit heads in a different direction to the 'Captain did it' scenario that you are 100% sure of in regards to MH370.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
Ko Phuket in December is overrun with Tourist chickies, young guys like Fariq probably try to snag a couple on every trip out.

How professional of him and his Captain on that flight. I wonder what other procedures they breach?

Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
This has nothing to do with what happened to MH370.

It might not, but it is evidence that the below quote is not necessarily always put into practice:

Quoting tailskid (Reply 20):
Post 9-11, the flight deck door is kept "closed."

I guess the flight deck door was always kept "closed" on the flight in which the two young ladies were visiting Fariq and his Captain as they were already inside the cockpit - before takeoff and until after landing   I guess there was not a breach of security / procedures after all if the door remained closed for the entire 'flight' - never mind who else was in the cockpit and what was going on  
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:21 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 36):
More facts?
Because all passengers were vetted?
But the captain was also, no?
All rhetorical of course.

It's taken a year to drag you guys to face the truth of the flight path and that the plane was under the control of a pilot.

There is probably no reason to think that you'll be more perceptive currently and in the future than you have been in the past.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Topic Author
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:24 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 36):
Quoting tailskid (Reply 35):
This has nothing to do with what happened to MH370.

More facts?

Because all passengers were vetted?

But the captain was also, no?

  

Exactly!

Anybody who argues that the pax were all good because they were vetted must also accept that the pilots were also good because they were vetted too!

And I have a feeling that the pilots would have been vetted more thoroughly than the pax  

Any argument that so and so was good just because they were vetted is nonsense IMHO anyway...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:32 am

To be honest, I don't care if it ends up being the pilot whodunnit or not. It's all done now - there's nothing anyone can do to change history. Searching for answers is all that's left at this point. Having said that, if only one answer will do, then something is wrong, no matter how "obvious" it may seem.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:36 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 41):
Having said that, if only one answer will do, then something is wrong, no matter how "obvious" it may seem.

I dare say that there is only 'one' answer. What in the world is 'wrong' with this? I'm confused.

[Edited 2015-03-17 00:37:25]
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 39):
It's taken a year to drag you guys to face the truth of the flight path and that the plane was under the control of a pilot.

Well, considering I checked out from about thread 20 to about thread 75, with almost no interest in between, I'm not sure if "you guys" is referring to me? Unless "you guys" is anyone who questions you?

Quoting tailskid (Reply 39):
There is probably no reason to think that you'll be more perceptive currently and in the future than you have been in the past.

Maybe if you were a touch more persuasive and a touch less abrasive, more people would join your march to justice. Just my humble opinion. But you can certainly look at everyone else like it's their problem if you like.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
Brewfangrb
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:13 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:44 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 34):
Here are YoungMans' odds from the previous thread:

I know. But he still wouldn't give his idea on the probability of whether the data were incorrect. These were his opinion of the probabilites of the causes of the crash if the data were incorrect. Sure, he explained his rationale for the "it's right or it's not" but that's true of everything.

Note that in his most recent reply to me, he stated is defintion of "incorrect" is really "falsified", which can be 2 different things. And despite his protestations, the likelihood of the data being incorrect, especially using his definition, is not a de facto 50%.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 34):
That was not nice.

I disagree. I ended our discussion because it was fruitless. I believe he is purposely "misunderstanding" the question or refusing to answer the question for what it is. He then comes up with his own defintion of "incorrect". That's obtuse. It's his choice to answer in the manner he did and it doesn't bother me at all. But I won't continue the discussion if it remains in that vein. I suspect he knows precisely what I (and others) have asked--simply for the sake of conversation and discussion, but for whatever reason, he won't answer. Ce la vie.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:45 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 41):
if only one answer will do, then something is wrong, no matter how "obvious" it may seem.
That logic is beyond me. The Challenger disintegrated on launch because of *only* one reason - the O-ring. I could list a hundred, or a thousand or ten thousand similar occurrences where the cause was identified. But where MH370 is concerned you need multiple reasons?

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 41):
I don't care if it ends up being the pilot whodunnit or not.
You've spent many months here stonewalling any idea that the Captain did it. If you've really changed, that will soon be noticeable.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:51 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 42):
I dare say that there is only 'one' answer. What in the world is 'wrong' with this? I'm confused.

I'm referring to this thread and not the investigation.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 45):
You've spent many months here stonewalling any idea that the Captain did it. If you've really changed, that will soon be noticeable.

That's laughable.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 45):
The Challenger disintegrated on launch because of *only* one reason - the O-ring. I could list a hundred, or a thousand or ten thousand similar occurrences where the cause was identified. But where MH370 is concerned you need multiple reasons?

So you knew that it was the O-ring BEFORE the investigation was complete? Because in the MH370 disappearance, the investigation continues. Once it has concluded, and a finding has been made, then yes - there will have been only one reason. But for now, that finding has not been made. Well, I guess for you it has.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:55 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 43):
Maybe if you were a touch more persuasive and a touch less abrasive, more people would join your march to justice.

I wouldn't for a moment want to think I swayed anybody to my side by my salesmanship or personality. Just the facts mam, nothing but the facts for me. But beyond that, if you hadn't noticed, the rudeness and insults preceded my entry into this debate. I walked into a bitter flame war here and the people who were selling lies were winning. I stuck with it, and gave back what was thrown my way. I would have preferred that it had been a civil discussion all along but it never has been.
 
tailskid
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:59 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 46):
So you knew that it was the O-ring BEFORE the investigation was complete? Because in the MH370 disappearance, the investigation continues. Once it has concluded, and a finding has been made, then yes - there will have been only one reason. But for now, that finding has not been made. Well, I guess for you it has.

The Challanger was investigated by engineers. MH370 has been and will be investigated by crooked politicians who just want to cover up what actually happened.

There's a large difference there.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2185
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK Part 77

Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:19 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
I wouldn't for a moment want to think I swayed anybody to my side by my salesmanship or personality.

The fact is that you haven't swayed anybody to your side. Full stop. So either everybody else here (hundreds of people) are all obtuse, or it is you who is being obtuse.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
Just the facts mam, nothing but the facts for me.

This is so laughable. You have been distorting and inventing "facts" from day one. Your posts have been full of half-truths, exaggerations, and innuendo from day one (oh and Facebook entries!).

Quoting tailskid (Reply 48):
MH370 has been and will be investigated by crooked politicians who just want to cover up what actually happened.

Yeah, like the NTSB, the AAIB, the Australian agency, etc. Crooked politicians them all...
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/350/380

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos