Malaysia Airlines 777 loses contact...not found

[Mystic]

It is being reported on the news that according to an investigation by a Wall Street Journal reporter three separate communications systems were shut off manually in the cockpit of the airliner. Two of those were shut off 14 minutes apart. And there is now solid evidence that the aircraft was flying for some five hours after it had last communicated. It is believed that the aircraft was headed in the general direction of the Indian Ocean and a US Navy destroyer is being sent to the Indian Ocean. I watch Fox News and all of this was reported on the Megan Kelly Show. ABC News is also supposed to be reporting on all of this.

It is believed that the airliner was over ocean when the last automatic data was transmitted. It is unknown where the aircraft had been trying to go unless the intention of whoever was flying the aircraft was just to crash the airliner into the Indian Ocean. I don't know how they can determine this but in the report it was stated that the last transmission of the automatic data took place over water. It was also reported that the aircraft might conceivably have landed somewhere and then taken off again.

This is what was reported. Is this information accurate? I don't know. But if the airliner crashed into the Indian Ocean there should be floating wreckage detected. India is also going to be involved in the search for the aircraft or wreckage from the aircraft.

 

[Mystic]

If all of this information is accurate I think they need to check out the five people who were going to fly on this airliner but then left. But apparently their luggage was still on board the aircraft. It is hard to tell because the left hand does not seem to know what the right hand is doing when it comes to the investigation in Malaysia.

If the aircraft did in fact land somewhere something could have been removed from the aircraft.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Turk
US Spy Satellites can zero in on stuff much smaller that pieces of Aircraft, so why hasn't this been spotted yet?

I wonder how much of the problem is the signal to noise ratio. I'm not an environmental alarmist, but there does seem to be enough junk floating on the ocean, at least in the grand scheme of things, to generate an annoying number of false positives.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: Mystic


If the aircraft did in fact land somewhere something could have been removed from the aircraft.


The plane one way or another has "landed" by now. 4-5 hours? A LONG way away. THAT is why it's not been found.

 

[Mystic]

Pablo that could be something like 2500 miles away from where they were searching. But it was suggested in the reporting that they could have landed somewhere and then taken off again. What about all of those people? They may have let them die on the aircraft so that there are no witnesses to whatever happened.

Unless this was an elaborate suicide routine. And why go through all of this just to kill yourself and all of those other innocent people?

And who was flying the aircraft when it went into the water? Can this aircraft take off under some sort of automatic system?

 

[Pablo]

 

[friendly_jacek]

If they flew west for 4-5 hrs, they could have landed somewhere in India or nearby. Now, cellular communication would have to be removed from passengers first and airplane would have to fly very low to avoid radar detection.

Ocean crash seems more likely. I would check pilots' insurance policies and/or any links to Islamist radicals.

One more thing. The captain had a sophisticated flight simulator at home. I would check what kind of flights he simulated.

 

[Mystic]

It has also been suggested that this may have been a failed hijacking where hijackers took over the aircraft and forced the pilots to change course but the hijackers maybe did not realize the aircraft could not reach whatever destination they had planned to reach. The aircraft may have simply run out of fuel. Or the hijackers may have killed the pilots but the hijackers thought they could reach whatever destination they had wanted to reach. And the aircraft ran out of fuel.

 

[Drew99GT]

No one lands a 777 without "someone" seeing it and squealing. It's not exactly like you can land one on a dirt strip in the middle of BFE.

 

[Mystic]

That is a cool map Pablo.

 

[Mystic]

A former Boeing 777 pilot said that a 777 can be landed especially when it is low on fuel in I think he said 3500 feet of runway. And then take off again if it has a very light load of fuel. I think he said 3500 feet but I can't remember exactly. He said any concrete strip of that length would work. He said landing was not the problem. Taking off with a heavy fuel load was the problem. But with a very light fuel load the aircraft could do it.

 

[Mystic]

There has been so much mumbo jumbo with all of this investigation into this Malaysian airliner that I am not going to believe anything unless and until it has been proved to be true.

But the ones I am sorry for are those innocent passengers. If the aircraft did land somewhere maybe the passengers were allow to get off. But if so we probably would have heard something by now.

That Wall Street Journal reporter is staking his reputation on this story. If it proves to be not correct good luck with the rest of his career.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
There has been so much mumbo jumbo with all of this investigation into this Malaysian airliner that I am not going to believe anything unless and until it has been proved to be true.

But the ones I am sorry for are those innocent passengers. If the aircraft did land somewhere maybe the passengers were allow to get off. But if so we probably would have heard something by now.

That Wall Street Journal reporter is staking his reputation on this story. If it proves to be not correct good luck with the rest of his career.


What story Mystic.
What's his version that he's so confident of if you don't mind. Inbox me if you'd rather not post here.

Thanks

 

[Mystic]

Clevy, the Washington Post said that the Wall Street Journal has issued a correction to their story. They are saying that it was not data from the Rolls Royce engines but rather data being transmitted by a system known as ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing And Reporting System). Apparently that system cannot be shut off in the cockpit. But the Wall Street Journal is sticking to the story that the aircraft flew at least four hours (probably five hours) after the last known location.

There have been so many twists and turns in this story that I am hesitate to believe anything Clevy. But the Wall Street Journal seems to be confident in their reporting. They have some source of information that apparently does not want to be named.

I figured I would post all of this information here to everybody who is interested in this airliner story. But like I said until everything has been proved I am not going to believe 100% in any information. And with so many twists and turns in this story I am going to say again-I WILL NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING UNTIL IT IS PROVED BEYOND A DOUBT. I am just repeating what I heard on the news. This story took up much of the one hour Megan Kelly Show. And the Wall Street Journal seems to be sticking to the story.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Clevy, the Washington Post said that the Wall Street Journal has issued a correction to their story. They are saying that it was not data from the Rolls Royce engines but rather data being transmitted by a system known as ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing And Reporting System). Apparently that system cannot be shut off in the cockpit. But the Wall Street Journal is sticking to the story that the aircraft flew at least four hours (probably five hours) after the last known location.

There have been so many twists and turns in this story that I am hesitate to believe anything Clevy. But the Wall Street Journal seems to be confident in their reporting. They have some source of information that apparently does not want to be named.

I figured I would post all of this information here to everybody who is interested in this airliner story. But like I said until everything has been proved I am not going to believe 100% in any information. And with so many twists and turns in this story I am going to say again-I WILL NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING UNTIL IT IS PROVED BEYOND A DOUBT. I am just repeating what I heard on the news. This story took up much of the one hour Megan Kelly Show. And the Wall Street Journal seems to be sticking to the story.


Thanks Mystic.

The Wall Street journal isn't just some rag,they've got some integrity. Interesting that they're sticking to their guns.
Thanks for the recap. I am pretty much in the dark when it comes to this plane. All I really know is that its missing.

 

[xfactor9]

That map that Pablo posted is for the range of a 777 flying at 36,000 feet. But at that altitude it would hard pressed to fly over land and evade military radar. Well if it somehow did, some air force general is gonna lose his job. So either it flew very low (in which case its range would be 1/3 to 1/2 less; or it flew over the vast oceans.

 

[LazyPrizm]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Has anyone participated in the satellite search here: http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014

I have, but the images are from yesterday. A bit too late. Also no map to orient or chose the images

I guess the site is back up. Didn't play well w/ Chrome but it's working for me in FF. So far I've looked at a bunch of ocean, but I did spot a pair of ~80ft ships on some IR images from Tue AM.

 

[rockydee]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
No one lands a 777 without "someone" seeing it and squealing. It's not exactly like you can land one on a dirt strip in the middle of BFE.

Exactly, these things are big, you don't just hide it behind a house or something.

 

[Astro14]

Further the jet's size and weight limit where it can land. It can stop in 5,000 feet, but most runways of that length would buckle under its weight. Taxiways at those small airports aren't wide enough for its landing gear...options for a jet that big are limited....

 

[ryansride2017]

If the plane is not on the bottom of the ocean, why wouldn't the "pinging" which allowed tracing the plane to the Indian Ocean, still be providing data to its current location?

Can you shut off this "pinging" function as well?

The aviation expert on GMA yesterday said the plane could have made it as far west as Yemen. I find that hard to believe for a few reasons.