LovesCoffee
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 4:07 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:44 am

Quoting morsecoder (Reply 42):
There's been a lot of comments to the effect that neither one could have done it because they are pilots and pilots don't do those sorts of things

Would you mind listing a few of those? I've followed every thread in this and I don't remember ever reading anything of the sort.

Germanwings should be a reminder that this can happen, albeit very, very rarely.

Thanks in advance.
Life is too short for cheap coffee.
 
morsecoder
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:42 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:06 am

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 50):
Would you mind listing a few of those? I've followed every thread in this and I don't remember ever reading anything of the sort.

There were any number of posts early on, and again in the GW threads, that objected to "the pilot did it" scenario on the basis of a belief in the fundamental ethics of professional pilots. That said, I set the statement up as a strawman in order to refute it. It served its purpose and I'll concede the point.

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 50):
Germanwings should be a reminder that this can happen, albeit very, very rarely.

I agree completely and that is exactly the point I was trying to make.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:40 am

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 50):
Germanwings should be a reminder that this can happen, albeit very, very rarely.

I believe the correct assumption is to trust no one but to trust everyone. You can't accurately predict what a single person can do in all cases it doesn't matter if they are a captain, first officer, flight attendant, office worker, terrorist, criminal, kidnapper, ... what you should be able to trust is that most of the people on the plane do not want to needlessly die (comes standard on life in general) and will do everything in their power if given the knowledge and ability to do so to ensure this simple objective is achieved.

The way the door works on planes post 9/11 placed all the trust on whoever or whatever was on the flight deck side of the door. It doesn't matter if they are a terrorist, suicidal crew member, revenge attacker, insane person, cat, dog, or even a stick. Get that lock switch switched while in flight and your locked out without any means to gain entry even if your both authorized to and must get past the door. (The lock control panel logic are you allowed to hold the lock switch down to make the timeout infinite such that the pin pad is always disabled or does it require you to release it and lock it again on the next entry request or pin entry)(If that is the case then that alone is terrible design that could be fixed with one line of code to at least make it impossible to dead man the momentary lock switch)

MH370's lack of action past the initial turn around and why no one could reverse the actions of whatever caused the plane to fly off into the ocean is very likely due to the door being very secure without any means of the cabin crew to unlock it even when they have hours to try. Nothing special, it is working as designed a truly secure door with no keyhole...

What would be terrible is that they discover the plane decades later and find clear evidence of a persistent attack on the door which failed to penetrate it. A pooled cabin crew electronic key system would at least offer a secure method of entry. This allows for the chance that those people in general could act appropriately. And even if there are terrorists amongst the passengers attacking crew members to obtain the multi-part key would cause a riot and since you design the keys so you can erase them in that situation it would be very difficult to get every crew member who has a key before they covertly erase it.

The numbers of keys and who has them can be adjusted for the plane, risk profile, and crew numbers. It would use basic cryptographic principles so that users would not have to remember key material in their heads so that there is no risk of them leaking it or being forced to reveal the secret. The temporary codes would be generated by the door lock system itself and would be loaded on every flight with the crew carding in as you would when you enter an office building so that copying override code would be impossible and a brute force attack would be impossible due to the time constraints. This would all run on bog standard smart cards which are direct contact interface only (no wireless technology) with standard RF shielding to prevent eavesdropping or interference.

Cards would use industry standard encryption with tamper detection with a chain of cryptographic trust built in and a duress erase mechanism built into the design to allow users to jumble their override code covertly in a terrorist attack scenario. These same cards can be used to authentic staff/crew at the airport and gate using centrally managed codes independent of the temporary override code, the duress erase mechanism would be applicable even if some is attacked outside the airport and is forced to give up their card as they can erase it which would flag the card for review.

To protect against accidental erasure the system can allow for n number of erases before the override cannot be used depending again on the crew number, plane, risk profile. On the ground if someone erases their override portion of the card by accident they would merely be flagged for extra screening to make sure their photo identification is correct and they are not posing as a crew member.

Crews would obviously need to be trained on the use of the card pool if someone has taken over the cockpit and when to erase their card in flight during a terrorist hijack attempt to break into the cockpit.

Obviously adversaries would be aware of this system and would either try to crash the plane quickly which airbus can mitigate and is out of the purview of this concept as it only is intended to offer a fighting chance and prevent attacks which take longer than a few seconds (9/11, GW, ...). Other attempts at abuse include having the terrorists attempt to obtain all the keys which is mitigated by the passengers reaction and the fact the would not be able to get all the crew keys before some are covertly erased in the struggle, all it takes is one or so to be erased.

For a cockpit lockout attempt an attacker would try to disable the override by either stealing or erasing other users cards covertly. The countermeasure to this is that by forcing the attacker out into the cabin you increase the chances they can be discovered and stopped without the protection of the secure cockpit door. And if detected they may try to force their way back into the cockpit and instead steal the remaining keys to gain override access. This is mitigated by both the valid erase procedure and the time it would take to use the keys together without being subdued.

And if anyone says the door lock method is too complex you should remember that it is just a dumb stand alone door lock controller and pales in comparison to the complexity of all existing flight control systems. It is both cheap, effective, and offers a balanced security so that either side of the door can be defended through the correct assumption that people in general don't want to die. You could put it on their staff badges and it is far better than having people remember secret pin numbers that are probably the same across many doors and don't change very often.

The invalid assumption the door lock design had was that it was impossible to have anything malicious in control of the flight deck. Just have a logical method to unlock the door when most of the crew is willingly cooperating with each other. It was design as a knee-jerk reaction to a totally insecure door but didn't consider the consequences of their rushed design.

Edit: Another defence that could be integrated is a poison pill pool system where two or more user's cards can be used to disable the override if used but the key part is that only that crew member knows and it is given at random that they are the poison pill (the pilots obviously can't have a poison pill card as they wouldn't be able to use it normally). In this manner a terrorist won't know which keys are good and which are bad and no crew member knows who else has a poison key and coupled with the fact you must still use a pool of keys it offers them plausible deniability people could claim to have a poison key when they really have a valid key that they just erased. There could even just be zero poison cards on the plane but it is all randomly controlled so there is no way to know prior.

The crew members with the poison cards could in theory together maliciously disable the override but this is unlikely as two or more random crew members in the cabin are not both insane inversely a totally insane crew could also pool their cards to take over the flight deck but this too is considered very unlikely. Also the two person system fails because it is just a 1v1 instead of a 0v1 the odds of who wins is not very easy to determine especially since the attacker has the opening advantage. In my proposed system it would all the cabin crew fighting back.

In a valid override scenario crew members would come forward to verify that the calling attendant is not under duress and each person could independently evaluate if the request is valid. If the entire poison pool thinks it is valid then they don't insert their cards when it is their turn and if they do think something is up they insert their card in the hope that other poison pill users have decided similarly. If the unlock group believes the request is valid they all insert their keys and if they do not believe the request is valid can abstain by saying they have a poison card and erase their code.

An optional improvement to security if crew numbers and the need arises. It's mere existence as part of the protocol would deter attack.

[Edited 2015-03-28 00:08:18]
 
LovesCoffee
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 4:07 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:46 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 54):

Very well said, sir. Thank you.
Life is too short for cheap coffee.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:11 am

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 55):

Thanks, I did however TLDR about my door control logic idea. I'm basically writing out my design as it evolves. It is motivated by both MH370 and GW coupled with all the other engineering ideas that float around.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1742
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 10:26 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 37):
There is no propaganda coming from me, I have no dog in this fight other than to seek the truth and to see the truth represented here. The reason I am here is to counter the blatant obfuscation (which in this case is a form of propaganda) that I have seen spewed here even before my entrance into this debate. What I have found particularly offensive is that your euphemisms and obfuscations exactly parallel the lies and obfuscations dispensed by Hishammuddin and Najib Razak. I don't see this as coincidence.

Again no one is stonewalling the truth on the forums. The problem is you see it this way and you are robustly defending your view against members that is not agreeing with you. Whilst some may not agree with your posts, this does not mean they exclude the scenario you believe in. It means they are waiting for the facts to come out first before being 100% sure what happened.

The scenario presented in the early stages after the GW accident was that the A320 FBW is to blame. Once it came out that the accident had nothing to do with the aircraft those that proclaimed the A320 a crash waiting to happen has been silent, for the moment. Having read the AF447, Asiana Airlines 214, MH370 and now the Germanwings accident (any incident on an aircraft actually) the threads follow a very similar pattern. You have posters that are adamant in their position, whether it would be that the aircraft is dangerous or the pilot responsible is an idiot. The members that are involved in the industry take a more moderate view and tries to convey that on the thread. Posters get angry because they do not agree with their black and white view of the incident and accuse them of having an agenda. The particular member gets upset and tired of the abuse he suffers and leaves the threads and forums, to the detriment of us all.

If MH370 is never found we will never know for sure what happened. This will not change, whether you like it or not. We know you are 100% certain in your belief on what happened, but you just have to accept that without the facts needed there is very few people who will agree with you.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
And as I clicked away from this post, I find that the girlfriend of the Germanwings FO has spoken and his depression is now confirmed as fact. But that doesn't change Zaharie's political zealotry one bit.
The elections are over so the ruling party is attempting to destroy us. We are not going to be quiet. Something is going to happen.

Your theory on his political zealotry* doesn't hold up for me, especially this quote. Why would the captain "hide" the accident if the idea was to make a statement against the government? How does it provide the political change he wants in Malaysia? Surely he would have been aware that people forget and no-one will remember the accident and the response from the government at the time of the next elections? Surely crashing into parliament or a government building would have been a better statement if he truly was making a statement?

*I do not discard your theory, however I can only change my mind if facts are found, a letter or his voice on the recorded stating his views, until then I need to be convinced.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:08 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 51):
That you (and your ilk) have an agenda to conveniently sweep this away is indisputable

Along with the NTSB, ATSB, AAIB (UK), AAIB (Singapore), BEA, CAAC, NTSC. I think he's in good company.

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 51):
Despicable.

Perhaps you regard those organizations as despicable. I don't
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:08 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 54):

I appreciate your reply because it probably took a fair bit of work and, as far as I can tell, it is a sincere contribution.
Whilst I can agree with the general thrust of what you are getting at, I cannot let this stand ....

Quoting tomlee (Reply 54):
MH370's lack of action past the initial turn around and why no one could reverse the actions of whatever caused the plane to fly off into the ocean is very likely due to the door being very secure without any means of the cabin crew to unlock it even when they have hours to try. Nothing special, it is working as designed a truly secure door with no keyhole...

We don't know that the plane (MH370) flew off and into the ocean.
That is an assumption we are led to believe, based wholly and solely on a few lines of data that is presented as fact.
That data may well be true and correct, then again, it may not be.
Until there is actual evidence or other irrefutable facts, MH370's final destination (resting place ?) is and can only be an assumption.

If it actually happened, that the 'Captain-did-it', and many here on A.net are working hard to make that a case, then the 'locked-door' would be an issue of importance.
There are, of course, other scenarios where the issues around the locked door come also into play. Ultimately, though, they would all just revolve around that one serious conflict, the one you are getting at, I believe. On the one hand keeping trouble makers off the flight deck and, on the other hand, getting access to that flight deck if the trouble maker has reached there or (heavens forbid) if it is one of the pilots.

Whilst I agree with the sentiments of you reply, I had to do this bit of nit-picking because, I feel, it is fundamental that we understand that 9M-MRO may or may not be where they say it is.
 
EMAman
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:13 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:31 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 15):
The door locks work the other way, they need power to unlock; no power no open.

Yes, correct - but perhaps in his desperation to get back into the cockpit, the locked out pilot was prepared to try anything.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:56 pm

Quoting thunderboltdrgn (Reply 62):
Quoting oxymorph (Reply 58):
You don't care much for the facts

What facts? I assume that you have some kind of proof to back up your theory?

Here are some facts from the interim report of the investigative team that includes NTSB, ATSB, AAIB (UK), AAIB (Singapore), BEA, CAAC, and NTSC. The report is entitled "Factual Information".

1.5.6 Financial Background and Insurance Cover
The Captain held bank accounts, two saving accounts, one current account, two national trust funds (ASB and ASN) and a joint account with his wife. He had a credit card. He was contributing to Employees Provident Fund. There is no record of him having secured a life insurance policy. He had 2 houses, one in Shah Alam and the other in Subang Jaya. He had taken a bank loan on one of his houses and had a mortgage insurance policy on this loan. He also had 3 vehicles. His gross monthly income and out-of-pocket expenses indicated nothing unusual.

1.5.8 Psychological and Social Events
The Captain’s ability to handle stress at work and home was good. There was no known history of apathy, anxiety, or irritability. There were no significant changes in his life style, interpersonal conflict or family stresses.

1.5.9 Behavioural Events
There were no behavioural signs of social isolation, change in habits or interest, self-neglect, drug or alcohol abuse of the Captain, First Officer and the Cabin Crew.

On studying the Captain’s behavioural pattern on CCTV recordings on the day of the flight and prior 3 flights there was no significant behavioural changes observed. On all the CCTV recordings the appearance was similar, i.e. well groomed and attired. The gait, posture, facial expressions and mannerism were his normal characteristics.



On the other hand, we have Facebook:


Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
The elections are over so the ruling party is attempting to destroy us. We are not going to be quiet. Something is going to happen.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:23 pm

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 61):
We don't know that the plane (MH370) flew off and into the ocean.
That is an assumption we are led to believe, based wholly and solely on a few lines of data that is presented as fact.
That data may well be true and correct, then again, it may not be.
Until there is actual evidence or other irrefutable facts, MH370's final destination (resting place ?) is and can only be an assumption.

Technically speaking it doesn't matter if it flew up/down and crashed somewhere that no one noticed either on land or in the ocean the fact is it clearly didn't stick to its original flightpath. Basically what we do know is that the flight was lost for all intensive purposes and we know with 100% certainty the flight went on for hours that much is certain. The question as to why no one could access the cockpit to turn the flight back, communicate with anyone, is very likely because they just could not gain entry to the cockpit. Even if they didn't have hours for some reason they very likely would have had at least minutes to act as in GW case but the door has no properly designed override. Why the cockpit was not under control or did what happened we do not know with certainty.

Another thing is that does anyone know about the door control lock panel in that while the switch is momentary towards lock or unlock can the pilots hold the switch forever without needing to release it because that alone is a serious control logic issue as it allows for does not follow proper dead man switch logic and would even allow for a stuck switch situation to block the door control.
 
awthompson
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:59 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:04 pm

Quoting tailskid (Reply 31):
Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 20):
Come on guys, I'm an IT expert. You build a simulator, run your dubious plans through it several times and then delete the hard drive. Did he delete like a professional delete (writing 1,0's over the old data 7 times) or was it a simple delete? Its either or.

It's all 1,0's no matter who is using the computer or whatever they are writing to the hard drive.

Yes it all 1's and 0's but in a special sequence if it is meaningful data. The downloadable program DriveScrubber, which I happen to have 'cleans' data on a hard disk or memory card by making as many passes as the user wishes to select (up to a maximum of 10 as far as I remember) and each time it writes a repetitive meaningless pattern of 1's and 0's over the preexisting data. (I'm not exactly sure why once is not enough!) When this is done, it is impossible to recover files. Any time I sell or put an old computer/laptop/phone to recycling, I always run DriveScrubber to ensure no-one can ever get any of my personal/ID or financial information. I'm not trying to hide anything in particular, just following recommended good practice similarly to how I have always shredded old bank statements or documents rather than simply binning them.
 
awthompson
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:59 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 6:53 pm

I'm not perhaps as adamant as tailskid but I do lean quite heavily towards the 'deliberate' theory, ie. a disappearance premeditated and perpetrated by one of MH370's flight deck crew, most likely the Captain. In saying this, I accept that there remains a minute possibility that a very unusual technical reason other than the 'deliberate' theory could have been the cause.

With the 'deliberate' theory in mind, some things jumps out at me from the GWI9525 disaster that have not yet been fully elaborated on.

In the GWI crash, Lubitz did not speak we are led to believe, ie. he did not make any ATC transmissions or record on the CVR any statement or words to give investigators any personal direct proof of what he was doing and/of why he was doing it. He could easily have done so but in his 'master plan' he chose not to. Nor has a suicide note yet been found at home or anywhere else.

This appears to have a parallel with MH370. Perhaps Lubitz even built his master plan around some of the details of MH370.

My second, and much more interesting observation was the almost complete destruction of D-AIPX as a result of impacting the ground in controlled flight at very high speed. I've heard different figures stated and precise speed will not be known until FDR is found and read but it appears to have been in excess of 400mph. Based on the GWI9525 ADSB data which I have studied, the ground speed on the descent ranges from 417 to 480 knots at least until around 11,400ft. Below that altitude I don't have data. It was my hunch that MH370 was not flown until it crashed after fuel exhaustion but was flown deliberately with power and full control at maximum speed into the ocean to ensure maximum destruction and the lowest likelihood of being found. Seeing the destruction of D-AIPX, can we imagine even higher speeds into the ocean, which is little less solid than rock at such speeds. If this is the case, it may explain no found floating debris and also why underwater searches have not, and may not ever reveal anything. Can you imagine the debris of GWI9525 at the bottom of a deep ocean with an already jagged floor. Also consider that during the lengthy period that it would have taken the debris from MH370 to sink thousands of feet to the ocean bed, it would be much more spread out than in the case of GWI9525.

Would any pilots (other than me flying light aircraft only) care to suggest what speeds might have been possible in the case of MH370 if maximum speed without in flight break up was an intention?

I don't now hold high confidence that the debris of 9M-MRO will ever be found and that may have been the perpetrator's intention. For this reason, it may be up to each individual to go with their gut feeling on what was the cause as there may be no more new information ever come available.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1742
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 8:26 pm

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 58):
You don't care much for the facts, so you frame it as though they do not exist. They do, and they all point well and good to a pilot (Zaharie Shah) murdering 238 innocent people, and shattering the lives of countless others.

You just don't care much for this stark reality, and would rather the truth not be told. But some of us care only about the truth.

Eh? Please, as thunderboltdrgn also asks, show us the facts that show one hundred percent that the captain did it and not the FO or one of the passengers. Whilst I agree that there is compelling evidence that do point to a probable deliberate action, there is also other factors that doesn't fit this theory and you cannot state that at this moment in time with 100% certainty either way. I do not want to accuse someone without being certain.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 10:21 pm

Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
Would any pilots (other than me flying light aircraft only) care to suggest what speeds might have been possible in the case of MH370 if maximum speed without in flight break up was an intention?

The last partial Inmarsat handshake points to fuel starvation. Hence no power-on high speed ditch.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14558
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:03 pm

I am concerned that the likely cause of the Germanwings flight as co-pilot caused could distort the investigation of MH370. Along with the lack of physical and limited data evidence so far, it may mean a strong leaning as to the 'blame the pilot' scenario which would be convenient for the Malaysian government, Airbus and component makers as well as cause less desire (and money) to seek the remains of this aircraft.
 
gzm
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:52 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:06 pm

I repeat,because my post was deleted from part 77,have asked an engineer of the former Olympic Airlines whose opinion is that MH 370 must have had an electrical problem which escalated into a case "a la Helios". If we accept that in the case of GW the culprit was the copilot, (before the final verdict is issued) then it bears no resemblance to MH 370. I am glad there are others who have reservations like I do about accusing the pilot so fanatically! One wonders...
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:31 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 54):
Just have a logical method to unlock the door when most of the crew is willingly cooperating with each other.
Quoting tomlee (Reply 56):
I'm basically writing out my design as it evolves.
Quoting tomlee (Reply 65):
The question as to why no one could access the cockpit to turn the flight back, communicate with anyone, is very likely because they just could not gain entry to the cockpit. Even if they didn't have hours for some reason they very likely would have had at least minutes to act as in GW case but the door has no properly designed override. Why the cockpit was not under control or did what happened we do not know with certainty.

Perhaps nobody could gain access to the MH370 cockpit because the bad guy in the cockpit intentionally depressurized the cabin to eliminate any threat coming from the cabin - the threat posed by 238 others in the case of MH370?

Whilst it seems pretty clear that the GW FO did not depressurize the cabin to deal with those on the other side of the door given the sounds of the Captain trying to bust open the door, or the pax screaming towards the end, we can't rule out the idea of intentional cabin depressurization with MH370.

Having said that, whilst your idea sounds like a nice attempt to solve an issue with no perfect soultion, if a bad guy in the cockpit intentionally depresurizes the cabin to take everybody out then your plan would most likely fail as the crew would be eliminated unless they all managed to get to the portable oxygen in time and figure out what was going on before pretty quickly. Your solution might have worked in the GW case, but it might not work when an intentional cabin depressurization takes place.

Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
Perhaps Lubitz even built his master plan around some of the details of MH370.

There was an article in yesterday's print edition of Sydney's 'Daily Telegraph' Newspaper in which the same was said. The article was titled 'MH370's fate may have been a trigger'. It was suggested that GW FO "may have been inspired by the rogue-pilot theory applied to the MH370 mystery". Some aviation insiders trying to make sense of his motivation believe that "publicity given to the 2014 disappearance of... MH370 and speculation about the pilot's role may have influenced Lubitz"...
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
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:37 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 70):
I am concerned that the likely cause of the Germanwings flight as co-pilot caused could distort the investigation of MH370. Along with the lack of physical and limited data evidence so far, it may mean a strong leaning as to the 'blame the pilot' scenario which would be convenient for the Malaysian government

Look at post 64. The report would have been a golden opportunity to start blaming the pilot.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3487
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 4:32 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 26):
No, that means that after 78 threads you don't know any more about this disappearance than you did 77 threads ago.Please speak for yourself.

What happened to it then? Ah that's right, no-one knows!

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 28):
Umm at the very same time that people were posting things like 'MH370 had just crashed into the South China Sea', 77 threads ago, the plane was still flying...

How do we know that? Have we found a blackbox to confirm?

Quoting morsecoder (Reply 36):
I think events of the past few days have had the net result of creating less certainty about MH370, not more.

Not really. We still don't really know anything at all about what happened on or to MH370. Whereas we know exactly what happened aboard Silkair, Egyptair etc in other cases of Pilot Suicide.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:13 am

Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
was my hunch that MH370 was not flown until it crashed after fuel exhaustion but was flown deliberately with power and full control at maximum speed into the ocean to ensure maximum destruction and the lowest likelihood of being found.

There was a SATCOM logon attempt at 0019Z that is consistent with loss of electrical power due to fuel exhaustion and brief APU start-up with the fuel remaining in the APU fuel pipes. If you are suggesting no fuel exhaustion, you have to find an alternative explanation for the SATCOM logon attempt at 0019Z.

[Edited 2015-03-28 22:30:56]
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:36 am

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 75):
There was a SATCOM logon attempt at 0019Z that is consistent with loss of electrical power due to fuel exhaustion and brief APU start-up with the fuel remaining in the APU fuel pipes. If you are suggesting no fuel exhaustion, you have to find an alternative explanation for the SATCOM logon attempt at 0019Z.

Fuel exhaustion is still consistent with either an unpowered glide (with pilot inputs) or an unpowered dive (with pilot inputs).

It really makes little sense that Z would not have been alive after FMT. What make less sense is his waiting until fuel exhaustion, but doubtless he rehearsed this on his sim. Probably felt confident enough to accomplish whatever end stage condition he desired, or wanted the 100mile or so of glide...though the BFO seems to suggest a steep descent.

Doesn't really much matter in the grand scheme of things.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 7:46 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 72):
Perhaps nobody could gain access to the MH370 cockpit because the bad guy in the cockpit intentionally depressurized the cabin to eliminate any threat coming from the cabin - the threat posed by 238 others in the case of MH370?

Whilst it seems pretty clear that the GW FO did not depressurize the cabin to deal with those on the other side of the door given the sounds of the Captain trying to bust open the door, or the pax screaming towards the end, we can't rule out the idea of intentional cabin depressurization with MH370.

De-pressurization could be noticed by people on-board and there is enough oxygen for the passenger cabin crew and pax to act in the range of a few minutes or more. This would be enough time to use the card pool to open the door and fight back. Even if you put both outflow valves into manual open to allow the air to escape the pressure would not instantly jump to the outside pressure (unless you used a bomb) and would be very noticeable as the plane unlike Helios air would have been pressurized after take-off. You can't use the auto-control to slowly fry the frog so to speak as it has a limit and the moment you switch to manual your going to cause the altitude to rise uncontrollably which would be very noticeable and have noticeable temperature, ear pressure changes.

Helios air was a gradual pressure change as the cabin was never pressurized to start and the altitude rose with the climb so no one noticed the gradual change. If you tried to go from normal cabin pressure to outside cruising or higher it would not be gradual to say the least. (You would still have a few minutes to don a mask or portable tank)

The de-pressurization attack only works because the secure door can be locked out. You merely select lock and the cabin crew who desperately are trying to break into the unresponsive cockpit run out of O2. After tens of minutes everyone would be dead due to hypoxia and the exhaustion of any supplemental O2 in the cabin. The cockpit could then re-engage the auto control and continue with impunity regardless.

The other issue is that de-pressurization currently is not even required to take over the plane as GW demonstrates and occam razor selects because the door cannot be opened by the cabin crew ever there is no need to incapacitate the people. You don't need to incapacitate anyone because they are not even a threat due to the door.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 72):

Having said that, whilst your idea sounds like a nice attempt to solve an issue with no perfect soultion, if a bad guy in the cockpit intentionally depresurizes the cabin to take everybody out then your plan would most likely fail as the crew would be eliminated unless they all managed to get to the portable oxygen in time and figure out what was going on before pretty quickly. Your solution might have worked in the GW case, but it might not work when an intentional cabin depressurization takes place.

This idea is a clearly better idea to a problem with no perfect solution and the existing idea is a terrible idea that is a major factor in GW and very well could also be one in MH370. Not changing the design of the door lock will make copycats jump at the opportunity in the future. The security flaw of the door is that it cannot be opened no matter what if the flight deck is under malicious control.

You cannot make the cabin pressure go instantly to FL whatever you pick. From a first order calculation you have at least a minute or two before the pressure equalizes and this assumes blindly that the pressure in the cabin does not fall (Altitude remains fixed) while it is venting which if included would slow down the process even more. (As the pressure drops the flow rate out of the outflow valves would also drop extending the time to equalize the cabin volume) As a good ball part figure you have 10 minutes to act. (Plenty of time to unlock the door coupled with the portable O2 tanks in the cabin which are for use by cabin crew and provide an additional give it 10-20 minutes of time to unlock the door)

OH WAIT, BIG PROBLEM you can't unlock the door because the LED is red. You bang and bang and then you run out of O2 and everyone dies. OR You bang and bang for hours and die. (Net result is the same the stupid door logic is crap)

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 72):
There was an article in yesterday's print edition of Sydney's 'Daily Telegraph' Newspaper in which the same was said. The article was titled 'MH370's fate may have been a trigger'. It was suggested that GW FO "may have been inspired by the rogue-pilot theory applied to the MH370 mystery". Some aviation insiders trying to make sense of his motivation believe that "publicity given to the 2014 disappearance of... MH370 and speculation about the pilot's role may have influenced Lubitz"...

You can't really say that MH370 didn't inspire GW the rumours and postulations of suicide and all the scenarios (Which also point to the fact the door locking system sucks by the way) even if the talk turns out to be false it doesn't mean the faults they describe don't exist. The GW person could have taken this idea and exploited it. The fact is that it doesn't matter if it is conclusive or not MH370 demonstrated it was possible. And if you reveal a security exploit possibility it is only a matter of time before it definitely is exploited and it won't stop until the crappy door logic is fixed.

A cabin crew key pool would mitigate both the de-pressurization and long fly into the ocean scenario. At minimum you at least can discover the flight crashed on take off without wondering what happened forever possibly. At best you can stop people in the act and save lives. This security hole enables 9/11 scale events it is a gaping huge flaw.
 
awthompson
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:59 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 9:15 pm

We may never get the truth, and finding tiny pieces of wreckage with an over recorded CVR (and I even doubt these things will ever be found) may not even reveal all the necessary facts to reach a solid conclusion.

Hence, it is each person to their own conclusion for now. Most must have a gut feeling.

Can anyone answer whether a 777 can still be flown in some form of controlled dive after fuel exhaustion? I take it the scenario I gave a few posts up is still plausible even if crash into ocean occurred after fuel exhaustion? Although perpetrator could have practiced this on a simulator as has been suggested, the simulator would not have been very accurate in such an unusual situation at the limits or outside the normal flight envelope.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 9:54 pm

Quoting awthompson (Reply 79):
Can anyone answer whether a 777 can still be flown in some form of controlled dive after fuel exhaustion?

Easily, between the battery, the RAT and the windmilling engines there's enough electrical/hydraulic power generated to do a descent and a flare just prior to touchdown. Just like the A320 on the Hudson.

[Edited 2015-03-29 14:55:24]
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 10:12 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 77):
De-pressurization could be noticed by people on-board and there is enough oxygen for the passenger cabin crew and pax to act in the range of a few minutes or more.

yes, and I appreciate your idea.
But keep in mind that Egypt Air happened before 9/11 and the captain came into the cockpit, but to late. Opening the door removes some ways of deliberately crashing but not all of them. A perpetrator could easily act slightly different and still crash the plane
 
EMAman
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:13 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
It was my hunch that MH370 was not flown until it crashed after fuel exhaustion but was flown deliberately with power and full control at maximum speed into the ocean to ensure maximum destruction and the lowest likelihood of being found.

I actually think not, which explains the lack of debris - the fact that it entered the indian ocean pretty intact and sunk whole. It would have to have been a soft landing from fuel exhausation. I believe some debris would have drifted ashore by now, even if it was mid-ocean, had that type of destruction took place.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Sun Mar 29, 2015 10:50 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 81):
yes, and I appreciate your idea.
But keep in mind that Egypt Air happened before 9/11 and the captain came into the cockpit, but to late. Opening the door removes some ways of deliberately crashing but not all of them. A perpetrator could easily act slightly different and still crash the plane

Yes obviously it is impossible to stop all cases where the plane could crash. It just is designed to stop allowing a minutes to hours long flight into a desired target (office tower, deep ocean) without any worry or need to even incapacitate those in the passenger cabin because the door simply cannot be opened.

In the case of MH370 the door likely allowed for the flight to go on for the hours it needed to get very totally lost and the CVR overritten many times over. If instead of hours the situation only had to occur within minutes then the CVR could still be usable to conclude what actually happened. MH370 if it is ever found will never be totally conclusive without the CVR record which we already know is not going to cover the critical time point of interest where it left the flight path and did a number of unusual actions. The fact the plane likely is somewhere random at the bottom of the ocean with an overwritten CVR is all a bit odd. If it wasn't for the inmarsat modem design we wouldn't even know the flight went on for hours.

Cases where a fight occurs even if the good side loses is still better than no fight at all against malicious actions. (At least you had a chance even if remote)(With the door lockout your chances are exactly 0% in recovering the flight) The slight modification a perpetrator would have to use excludes the possibility of another MH370 or GW like case and the crash would very likely occur on take off or landing when speeds are lower and survivability is at least not 0% or have to occur within seconds at cruising altitude with little choice in what your going to hit (Not ideal yes but better than before). The reduced aiming and time allowed for their act makes the concept less desirable.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:13 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 74):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 28):
Umm at the very same time that people were posting things like 'MH370 had just crashed into the South China Sea', 77 threads ago, the plane was still flying...

How do we know that? Have we found a blackbox to confirm?

Because of the pings / satellite handshakes.

The Inmarsat data confirmed how long the plane flew for.

Moreover, the time the Inmarsat data indicates that fuel exhaustion might have occurred is consistent with what would have been expected given the ammount of fuel estimated to have been on board 9M-MRO.

Do you not think that the Inmarsat data is enough to confirm that the plane was at least flying for hours after it went silent near IGARI?

Even some who are sceptical of the Inmarsat data regarding what direction the plane went seem to have accepted that the plane at least flew on for hours.

At the time the first MH370 thread was started and people were talking about an accident near IGARI 9M-MRO was actually still flying...

Quoting tomlee (Reply 77):
A cabin crew key pool would mitigate both the de-pressurization and long fly into the ocean scenario.

I appreciate the effort you are giving your idea.

How would it work in a pilot suicide scenario under, what you could call, the 'common sense' pilot suicide approach - as soon as the other pilot is out / locked out of the cockpit the nut job pilot pushes forward on the controls ASAP and nose dives the plane into the ground?

This is probably most unsurprising method of pilot suicide, and is usually over in a minute or so - that's if the plane hasn't allready started breaking up because of forces and therefore become useless in a much quicker timeframe that anybody could get the cockpit door open to try to save the plane.

I don't think your cabin crew pool key solution would be much use at all if the pilot at the controls tried to end the flight ASAP. The G-forces in the cabin would make it almost impossible for the crew to do anything.

Your solution might have worked in the GW incident given the slow descent, but the GW descent is not your typical / expected pilot suicide ending. Also, if the nut job pilot was aware of the cabin crew pool key solution, which they would be for sure if it was implemented, then for sure the nut job pilot would go nose down and try to end the flight ASAP.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 80):
Quoting awthompson (Reply 79):
Can anyone answer whether a 777 can still be flown in some form of controlled dive after fuel exhaustion?

Easily, between the battery, the RAT and the windmilling engines there's enough electrical/hydraulic power generated to do a descent and a flare just prior to touchdown.

Thanks for that info. I'm not surprised.

Quoting EMAman (Reply 82):
Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
It was my hunch that MH370 was not flown until it crashed after fuel exhaustion but was flown deliberately with power and full control at maximum speed into the ocean to ensure maximum destruction and the lowest likelihood of being found.

I actually think not, which explains the lack of debris - the fact that it entered the indian ocean pretty intact and sunk whole. It would have to have been a soft landing from fuel exhausation. I believe some debris would have drifted ashore by now, even if it was mid-ocean, had that type of destruction took place.

I still like the long glide from altitude after fuel exhaustion followed by an attempted ditching idea. That would have allowed another 100+ miles easily depending on the altitude as well as given the Captain the final test - open ocean ditching with limited control...

[Edited 2015-03-29 17:32:57]
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
 
aerodog
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:48 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:25 am

I have often wondered, what would the full flaps, gear up, stall speed be with zero fuel?
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:11 am

Quoting aerodog (Reply 79):
I have often wondered, what would the full flaps, gear up, stall speed be with zero fuel?

Stick shaker would be about 95 kts or less at MH370 weight (best guess), so stall speed -- lets say 90 kts.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:25 am

The exact speed I don't know and also will depend on meteorological conditions as winds and its directions but it will pretty low for a big wing and no fuel so the weight will be low, 125 to 130 knots maybe even less...

The problem with suicide on this case is that by now we should have found some kind of debris and I don't buy the "the Aircraft, sank completely" scenario....

I don't have a tin foil hat but I think the MH370 was highjacked and landed somewhere... putting it simply, there is no way to put such a big plane on water (specially on that horrible ocean) without breaking up or leaving some kind of debris..

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:26 am

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 80):
Stick shaker would be about 95 kts or less at MH370 weight (best guess), so stall speed -- lets say 90 kts.

Thanks!...that is pretty low...
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:27 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 84):
How would it work in a pilot suicide scenario under, what you could call, the 'common sense' pilot suicide approach - as soon as the other pilot is out / locked out of the cockpit the nut job pilot pushes forward on the controls ASAP and nose dives the plane into the ground?

This is probably most unsurprising method of pilot suicide, and is usually over in a minute or so - that's if the plane hasn't allready started breaking up because of forces and therefore become useless in a much quicker timeframe that anybody could get the cockpit door open to try to save the plane.

I don't think your cabin crew pool key solution would be much use at all if the pilot at the controls tried to end the flight ASAP. The G-forces in the cabin would make it almost impossible for the crew to do anything.

Your solution might have worked in the GW incident given the slow descent, but the GW descent is not your typical / expected pilot suicide ending. Also, if the nut job pilot was aware of the cabin crew pool key solution, which they would be for sure if it was implemented, then for sure the nut job pilot would go nose down and try to end the flight ASAP.

I think from MH370 and GW show that suicide cannot have a "common sense" approach one size fits all because that is provably not how it works.

You want the nose dive immediately to be the only option as that singular option is an order of magnitude smaller than before where you have basically have unimaginable freedom to pick your spot.

In MH370 door enabled an almost perfect suicide with hours of flying time and enables a de-pressurization kill off to actually work (MH370 was almost totally lost but for all intensive purposes we can never fully conclude with certainty because the evidence won't exist even if we do find the plane, maybe the door can prove people tried to enter but I doubt the evidence will remain for the years if ever it takes to find the plane.)

In future cases without the security exploit being closed people can abuse it with full knowledge they can do whatever they want and people can't breach the door. They don't have to fly immediately into the ground they can pick whatever they want to hit within a large radius.

The point is not to cover all cases but to cover the very bad ones the ones that could cause another 9/11 type bad ones. To offer an improved system that limits failure modes to a known quantity instead of an unbounded Pandora box of possibilities which people can cook up and execute. You want to remove any ability for a malicious actor to have the freedom to aim and choose a target and both of those requires time in the order of at least minutes if not hours.

So yes the key pool is not indented for an ASAP crash plane now, but clearly in MH370 and GW these did not happen ASAP and that is where the key pool comes into play it allows a united 93 scenario to occur hopefully with a more positive outcome. The foreknowledge of 9/11 + a cabin crew key pool would make the fight happen immediately.

Again "typical and expected" are not words commonly associated with suicide.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 3:58 am

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 82):
Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 80):
Stick shaker would be about 95 kts or less at MH370 weight (best guess), so stall speed -- lets say 90 kts.

Thanks!...that is pretty low...

  

Much lower than I had expected...

Quoting tomlee (Reply 83):
So yes the key pool is not indented for an ASAP crash plane now, but clearly in MH370 and GW these did not happen ASAP

Probably because the FO in the GW incident knew that nobody could enter the cockpit and challenge him so there was no need to rush?

Perhaps if there was a cabin crew key pool the GW FO would have dove the plane straight down making it useless anyway?

Who knows...

Quoting tomlee (Reply 83):
The foreknowledge of 9/11 + a cabin crew key pool would make the fight happen immediately.

A when a suicidal pilot has foreknowledge of the cabin crew key pool he might be more likely to make the plane go down immediately  
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
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:31 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 84):
Probably because the FO in the GW incident knew that nobody could enter the cockpit and challenge him so there was no need to rush?

Perhaps if there was a cabin crew key pool the GW FO would have dove the plane straight down making it useless anyway?

A when a suicidal pilot has foreknowledge of the cabin crew key pool he might be more likely to make the plane go down immediately



I've already said that having a known quantity (1 method) is a large improvement over an unknown quantity (any method, any target, any time) the risk is that the next target won't be a specific mountain or ocean it will be a particular building. Removing the ability carefully aim and wait is a massive improvement.

The many more possible scenarios other than a direct dive exist without any change, as such eliminating these many varied possibilities with an improvement makes a lot of sense.

[Edited 2015-03-29 22:05:08]
 
UALWN
Posts: 2186
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:43 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
And as I clicked away from this post, I find that the girlfriend of the Germanwings FO has spoken and his depression is now confirmed as fact. But that doesn't change Zaharie's political zealotry one bit.
The elections are over so the ruling party is attempting to destroy us. We are not going to be quiet. Something is going to happen.

You keep on clinging to lies, half truths and innuendo. The 4U co-pilot suffered from depression ,and the MH captain didn't, yet... Now you bring up zealotry. Nothing is mentioned in the MH370 report, even if the captain was clearly against the ruling party in Malaysia: a great opportunity to blame him has not been taking advantage of. And then you bring up those Facebook posts, neglecting to mention that they were posted some 10 months before the MH370 disappearance... Nothing new.
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
 
YoungMans
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:31 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 1:20 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 78):
How do we know that? Have we found a blackbox to confirm?
Because of the pings / satellite handshakes.

The Inmarsat data confirmed how long the plane flew for.

No, the Inmarsat data did not 'Confirm' such thing. We must be precise here ....
The Inmarsat data is assumed and generally believed to be true and correct; otherwise they wouldn't be using it for doing the searches out there on the ocean. And it is likely to a fairly high degree that the data may be correct ....
But.., unless we have absolute certainty on this, the data does not (yet) confirm anything!
Ultimately this is nit-picking, but we must be precise.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 78):
I don't think your cabin crew pool key solution would be much use at all if the pilot at the controls tried to end the flight ASAP.

Without flooding the thread with just this one issue ....
Doing something, especially if it doesn't cost much, is probably better than doing nothing or not much.
When I fly to Germany later this year, I don't want to be sitting there, watching in the final minutes of my life how an airline captain is desperately banging on the cockpit door ..: "Please .., let me in ...!"

Edit:
Plus the possibility, that the aircraft may disappear completely; heavens forbid..!

[Edited 2015-03-30 06:39:46]
 
markalot
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:07 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 2:19 pm

Tailskid, you insulted someone who put forth his theories and thoughts. Your act, and the claim you have no dog in this fight, is getting really old. If you are a retired engineer then please act your age. I'm only 51 and I know better.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 47):
The elections are over so the ruling party is attempting to destroy us. We are not going to be quiet. Something is going to happen.

I don't see anything dangerous or nefarious about that comment. Unless a mental illness is involved I don't think being mad at the government is going to make someone a murderer. You constantly harp on this yet there is a mountain of evidence, in nearly every suicide and every mass murder, that something + mental illness is involved. It seems to me you are ignoring this to try and force closure to an incident that has none.

To top it all off, if something was going to happen he failed completely because we have no idea anyone did anything or why. I also find it disturbing that political opposition is turned into terrorism so easily. I don't think it's that easy.

--> Now this does not mean I don't think the captain did it. I still think it's the most likely explanation due to the fact there are no good explanations and right now this seems to the simplest. That's another issue you have with this conversation. You desire to shut down any talk of any theory that the captain did not do it, and you do so with insults, yet you have no skin in this game?

Maybe you keep at it because you want to keep the thread going?
M a r k
 
aerodog
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:48 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:59 pm

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 80):


Quoting aerodog (Reply 79):
I have often wondered, what would the full flaps, gear up, stall speed be with zero fuel?

Stick shaker would be about 95 kts or less at MH370 weight (best guess), so stall speed -- lets say 90 kts.

Thanks for the feed back. An interesting number considering the fact that the energy goes up with the square of the velocity. There is 60% more energy to dissipate at 120 kts than at 95 kts.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18248
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 6:18 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 65):
it may mean a strong leaning as to the 'blame the pilot' scenario which would be convenient for the Malaysian government, Airbus and component makers as well as cause less desire (and money) to seek the remains of this aircraft.

Why would not finding MH370 be convenient for Airbus?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:11 pm

Quoting markalot (Reply 88):
I don't see anything dangerous or nefarious about that comment

Not just that comment alone. Some 300+ comments over a 5 month period. Some of them more troubling than the one you refer to. Need they once again be posted?

Quoting markalot (Reply 88):
You constantly harp on this yet there is a mountain of evidence, in nearly every suicide and every mass murder, that something + mental illness is involved.

Political and religious ideology has been responsible for infinite more suicide and mass murder than mental illness.

Quoting markalot (Reply 88):
I also find it disturbing that political opposition is turned into terrorism so easily

You may find it disturbing, but it is a grim reality of human existence.

Quoting markalot (Reply 88):
You desire to shut down any talk of any theory that the captain did not do it, and you do so with insults, yet you have no skin in this game?

Sadly, ALL other theories are frankly preposterous. You are welcome to put forward a scenario you feel is compelling, but good luck with that.
 
awthompson
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:59 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting EMAman (Reply 76):

Quoting awthompson (Reply 67):
It was my hunch that MH370 was not flown until it crashed after fuel exhaustion but was flown deliberately with power and full control at maximum speed into the ocean to ensure maximum destruction and the lowest likelihood of being found.

I actually think not, which explains the lack of debris - the fact that it entered the indian ocean pretty intact and sunk whole. It would have to have been a soft landing from fuel exhausation. I believe some debris would have drifted ashore by now, even if it was mid-ocean, had that type of destruction took place.

Yes, I have indeed struggled with the lack of floating debris found and a successful ditching would help explain that. However, what does the perpetrator do after that has been completed? He will have to kill himself or just succumb to drowning. Whereas Lubitz chose a painless instantaneous death of a high speed impact. This is the type of death those who commit suicide generally choose. Albeit, if MH370 was a deliberate act, then it was a much more elaborate stunt than merely a 'suicide'.

Would an extremely high speed impact into remote ocean produce very much floating debris? Certainly no large pieces. I believe this is still a possible scenario.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Mon Mar 30, 2015 11:20 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 83):
In MH370 door enabled an almost perfect suicide

We have no evidence that MH370 was suicide (and mass murder!). The captain did not particularily like his government. So do i, and i promise not to have the slightest suicidal intention.

Imho, when push comes to shove the question to decide is where the ultimate control of the door lies. In the cockpit or in the cabin ?
Disadvantage cockpit: possible roque pilot(s)
Disadvantages cabin:
- can't fly
- keys may be stolen, robbed and details extracted by torture.

Why not forget the startegy of the unbreakable door completely ?
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 1:22 am

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 87):
777Jet - The Inmarsat data confirmed how long the plane flew for.

No, the Inmarsat data did not 'Confirm' such thing. We must be precise here ....

Then what do you think the usual hourly pings followed by the final ping at a time consistent with when fuel exhaustion would have occurred actually mean?

I know you question the data and the direction the plane supposedly went as that fits in with your pet theory, but are you actually now saying that the pings are not even enough evidence to confirm that the plane flew for X hours???

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 87):
But.., unless we have absolute certainty on this, the data does not (yet) confirm anything!
Ultimately this is nit-picking, but we must be precise.

If you need "absolute certainty" on things before you accept them as fact then there must be many, many more things than just the MH370 Inmarsat data that you question, correct?

Do you at least accept that MH370 took off at all that night, given the lack of CCTV footage actually showing the same plane that Zaharie, his crew and passengers boarded actually lifting off of the ground?

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 87):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 78):
I don't think your cabin crew pool key solution would be much use at all if the pilot at the controls tried to end the flight ASAP.

Without flooding the thread with just this one issue ....
Doing something, especially if it doesn't cost much, is probably better than doing nothing or not much.

Many airlines have already done something in the wake of the GW tragedy - make it mandatory that there is always two people in the cockpit. When a pilot steps out of the cockpit for whatever reason a FA must enter and stay in the cockpit with the other pilot. This does not cost anything and can be implemented immediately. In fact, Australia announced yesterday that it would now be mandatory for two people to be in the cockpit at all times on all domestic and international flights, effectively immediately. So, something that "doesn't cost much" has already been done at many airlines and in some countries. This was a quicker and much cheaper solution to implement than something that is still just an idea...

[Edited 2015-03-30 18:25:14]
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
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 1:30 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 91):
Political and religious ideology has been responsible for infinite more suicide and mass murder than mental illness.

This is basically like saying thinking leads to murder which is true but absurd at the same time.

Quoting awthompson (Reply 92):
Yes, I have indeed struggled with the lack of floating debris found and a successful ditching would help explain that. However, what does the perpetrator do after that has been completed? He will have to kill himself or just succumb to drowning. Whereas Lubitz chose a painless instantaneous death of a high speed impact. This is the type of death those who commit suicide generally choose. Albeit, if MH370 was a deliberate act, then it was a much more elaborate stunt than merely a 'suicide'.

Would an extremely high speed impact into remote ocean produce very much floating debris? Certainly no large pieces. I believe this is still a possible scenario.

A high impact into the ocean should have to generate at least an order of magnitude more debris than a successful ditching into the ocean (That is probably very hard to do with the ocean conditions in the area).

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 93):
We have no evidence that MH370 was suicide (and mass murder!). The captain did not particularily like his government. So do i, and i promise not to have the slightest suicidal intention.

Imho, when push comes to shove the question to decide is where the ultimate control of the door lies. In the cockpit or in the cabin ?
Disadvantage cockpit: possible roque pilot(s)
Disadvantages cabin:
- can't fly
- keys may be stolen, robbed and details extracted by torture.

Why not forget the startegy of the unbreakable door completely ?

Even if it wasn't suicide assuming we discover the real cause at some point other copy cats will still look at it as such as the conditions match the hypothetical story.

First of all the door is not unbreakable. Secondly the door is meant to allow authorized access and prevent terrorists from getting into the cockpit how this is achieved does not matter. The door on MH370 and GW failed to allow authorized access (It enables a decompression scenario to work and a slow dive into whatever target you want including city center buildings)

We don't know if it was a confirmed suicide but it would certainly be an almost perfect suicide because we cannot confirm it with any certainty due to the CVR being useless and the plane being lost somewhere we can't find it. (If we didn't have that modem data we would be even more lost and the prevailing theory is something terrible happened and the plane crashed somewhere near where contact was lost with ground radar data being all we have to go on)

Who should have ultimate control of the door, the crew as a group. They are the ones we trust to get us there safely and are employees of the company that we are paying for the service.

I will link in the technical aspects when I finished some more literature review. But, I can say it doesn't matter if the keys are stolen as you won't know how many to use or which ones are bad to use and you can't extract any useable information through torture because it is designed with that in mind.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14558
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 1:36 am

Lets say MH 370 ran out of fuel, and gradually lost altitude until it hit the water somehow with a slight flare. It could have ended up like 'the Hudson River Miracle' which hit the river at a relatively low speed, a slight flare and stayed intact upon landing and actually floated for a while moving downriver until secured. Even if it landed 'soft' it likely had enough damage to let in water and sink relatively intact.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 1:38 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 95):
The door on MH370 and GW failed to allow authorized access (It enables a decompression scenario to work and a slow dive into whatever target you want including city center buildings)

The door on GW failed to allow authorized access.

MH370 has not even been found yet. If MH370 is ever found and it turns out to be an accident, which most people including myself still think is a possibility, the cockpit door might have played no part at all in what happened to 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
 
AIRWALK
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:33 am

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:17 am

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 96):
Lets say MH 370 ran out of fuel, and gradually lost altitude until it hit the water somehow with a slight flare. It could have ended up like 'the Hudson River Miracle' which hit the river at a relatively low speed, a slight flare and stayed intact upon landing and actually floated for a while moving downriver until secured. Even if it landed 'soft' it likely had enough damage to let in water and sink relatively intact.

This would require someone manipulating the controls. After fuel exhaustion the AP would trip and the aircrafts descent would most likely develop into a spin and uncontrolled descent. Based on the ATSB search area, they believe that this is what occurred. Quoting from the ATSB:

"The latest information and analysis confirms that MH370 will be found in close proximity to the arc set out in the map and labelled as the 7th arc. At the time MH370 reached this arc, the aircraft is considered to have exhausted its fuel and to have been descending. As a result, the aircraft is unlikely to be more than 20 NM (38 km) to the west or 30 NM (55 km) to the east of the arc."

If the aircraft was in a controlled glide it could have flown a lot further than 20-30NM in any direction.
I'm sure this thread will take off soon
 
oxymorph
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:57 pm

RE: Malaysia Airlines B772 Missing KUL-PEK - Part 78

Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:18 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 95):
Quoting oxymorph (Reply 91):
Political and religious ideology has been responsible for infinite more suicide and mass murder than mental illness.

This is basically like saying thinking leads to murder which is true but absurd at the same time.

Suicide bombers (with a statistical few outliers) are not by any clinical definition insane. They are driven to act by a cause they view as greater than themselves, and worth sacrificing for. The slaughter of innocents (and sometimes enemy combatants) is an means to an end, and a justifiable means from the perpetrators pov. Zaharie made reference to this 'concept' (of sacrifice, not of mass murder) often, imploring Malaysians to rebel and not sit idle in the face of repression.

The only absurdity is in your poorly chosen analogy.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 97):
MH370 has not even been found yet. If MH370 is ever found and it turns out to be an accident, which most people including myself still think is a possibility, the cockpit door might have played no part at all in what happened to MH370.

I've no idea as to how you can look at the totality of the event and possibly remain open to a truly tragic and inadvertent accident. Zaharie, the timing of the diversion, the ensuing flight path, Hishammuddin, Anwar, Malaysia, MAS ops room etc, etc...But I understand your wanting very much to appear 'open-minded', I suppose.

No way in hell this was an accident.

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