Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 hijacked, official says

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
8:11 was the last handshake contact. The US is handling the investigation of electronic signals from the plane so at this point it is pretty solid data. I think the Malaysians are also reining in their communications . 2 hours agos Indians announced they were putting their search on hold are the request of the Malaysians.
Inmarsat isn't saying anything about what the reports were or what their source electronic is. A plan that crashes might still have functioning components. Heck, some components only turn on after a crash. A return ping doesn't mean "still flying" unless that ping includes data that says it's flying. The Inmarsat report came out what, 3 days ago? After days of denial that it's important, suddenly everyone is taking it seriously? A "keep alive" ping is just that, a simple ping. It doesn't reveal anything about the condition of the aircraft.

I did just find reports that India is standing down... 3 hours ago now the decision was made apparently, but not by India's own choice, as you said, but by the Malaysians. Like I said, the Malaysians have said and believed many things over the last few days, I'm going to take what they say with a grain of salt. It's certainly possible, I've always said all the theories are possible, but I'm not going to suddenly believe a guy who has changed his mind a dozen times or suddenly take a report seriously that everyone has ignored for days. I'll remain skeptical of pretty much anything at this point. Until the plane is found, I'm not really dismissing or adopting any theory.
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
http://beforeitsnews.com/events/201...aysia-plane-24-suspects-on-board-2432744.html

Or this one. I stopped reading when I got to cloaking technology. Not because this story is so much less likely than anything else, but because holy mother of god it's 3AM. I know someone taking a sick day tomorrow. No [duration of flight redacted for privacy] hour flight for me in this condition. Man I wish I had a job that I could do tired. Or hung over. Or just hungry. I wish someone delivered pizza at this time of night in Mississauga.
 

harryass

Well-known member
Oct 27, 2010
3,230
898
113
perhaps hijacking involved the pilots and Somalia pirates and authorities know all ready where the plane is and negotiating in secret due to something or someone on the plane that big bro don't want the world to know about and perhaps never will know the real truth.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,490
1,359
113
Inmarsat isn't saying anything about what the reports were or what their source electronic is. A plan that crashes might still have functioning components. Heck, some components only turn on after a crash. A return ping doesn't mean "still flying" unless that ping includes data that says it's flying. The Inmarsat report came out what, 3 days ago? After days of denial that it's important, suddenly everyone is taking it seriously? A "keep alive" ping is just that, a simple ping. It doesn't reveal anything about the condition of the aircraft.

I did just find reports that India is standing down... 3 hours ago now the decision was made apparently, but not by India's own choice, as you said, but by the Malaysians. Like I said, the Malaysians have said and believed many things over the last few days, I'm going to take what they say with a grain of salt. It's certainly possible, I've always said all the theories are possible, but I'm not going to suddenly believe a guy who has changed his mind a dozen times or suddenly take a report seriously that everyone has ignored for days. I'll remain skeptical of pretty much anything at this point. Until the plane is found, I'm not really dismissing or adopting any theory.
Very unlikely the plane would send a ping after it crashed. These come from the engine, and unless it was a very gentle crash, they will not have electricity to send a ping.
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
Very unlikely the plane would send a ping after it crashed. These come from the engine, and unless it was a very gentle crash, they will not have electricity to send a ping.
We don't know if these came from the engine, though my suspicion is they didn't. My understanding is that Malaysian didn't purchase the satellite ACARS option, which means their aircraft use a VHF link to transmit that data and it's routed to Rolls Royce, not satellite. Even if it was ACARS engine data, it would've automatically been routed to Rolls Royce who have made it very clear that the last ACARS transmission was received at 01:07 during climb-out. Inmarsat hasn't released any information about what this ping came from. There are 3 major companies that deal with aircraft/marine satellite data: Inmarsat, Iridium and Thuraya. They monitor a variety of systems, not just ACARS. If the aircraft was sending data, why no word from Iridium or Thuraya? Maybe they didn't have satellites over the area, or maybe they did. And don't forget, the transmissions aren't always accurate. It's also worth bearing in mind that satellites can carry a 5 hour lag or more with transmissions depending on atmospheric conditions (which is why even if you pay for the satellite ACARS, your data goes out over VHF/UHF if a connection is available). Now if it's sending out a ping every hour, it's probably not lagging behind. But if it's sending out a ping every hour, they have a much more accurate position than anywhere along their curved line. They'd have a good indication of direction of movement... If it was indeed moving. And if it wasn't, why is it so unfeasible that it's a component floating in the ocean?

The conclusion is that we can't draw a conclusion. Maybe the airplane flew for hours, maybe it didn't. Maybe a oil rig worker saw it crash, maybe he didn't. Maybe the pilots killed themselves, maybe they didn't. Nothing that's been presented to the public so far rules out any theory. There's still a hell of a lot of unknowns, and as with most investigations, we, the public, aren't really "need to know". A lot of info is likely being kept from us for reasons from politics to negotiations to public perception.

Speaking of politics, don't underestimate that factor. Remember EgyptAir 990? Pretty much every country in the world has chalked it up to pilot suicide...except Egypt who remain vehement in their denials. Politics is a factor that should not be dismissed.

Besides, as unlikely as it is for data to be transmitted hours after a crash, it's also pretty unlikely to steal a 777... Pretty much exactly as unlikely. I mean, it's not exactly hard to get your hands on one. So if that's the case, what's the reason? Without a reasonable motive, it's a pretty big stretch.
 

bestman007

Well-known member
Jun 20, 2013
1,340
189
63
What's the motivation for a hijacking that no one claims responsibility?
Could be a trial run... working on their craft in the minor leagues before they're promoted to the majors with bigger and better things on the horizon in their minds. UK or US could be next...
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
Could be a trial run... working on their craft in the minor leagues before they're promoted to the majors with bigger and better things on the horizon in their minds. UK or US could be next...
I suppose... Though I think this will make it hard for them to get into the cockpit of an airliner again. Not to mention different radar types, different radar coverage, different responses. Besides, like I said, it's not hard to get a 777. They could've tested all this in a much less conspicuous manner.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,498
4,903
113
I suppose... Though I think this will make it hard for them to get into the cockpit of an airliner again. Not to mention different radar types, different radar coverage, different responses. Besides, like I said, it's not hard to get a 777. They could've tested all this in a much less conspicuous manner.
Why would anybody fly it into the south Indian ocean, where there is nothing???
 

Gyaos

BOBA FETT
Aug 17, 2001
6,172
0
0
Heaven, definately Heaven
There's no way it's fully fueled. No airline would send an aircraft on a 6 hour flight with 22 hours worth of fuel. It's not happening. Not ever.
Yeah right. And no way would any country like Malaysia allow 11 countries to search on one side of the sea when their government knew the plane flew the other way. Yeah, it wasn't fully fueled.

What's the motivation for a hijacking that no one claims responsibility?
Ah, well......what would a series of [assumed male] hijackers motivation be with a Malaysian Air cabin crew of hot girls? Hmm? Have you ever stayed at a hotel where their crew rested?
Holy Moly! Erection city. And then a 777 jet to land in maybe Western China after flying over the Himalayas? Or Burma.

In fact, a 777 doesn't need a very long runway at all. All the [pundits] are saying it needs 7500 feet. Well, this bigger plane only needed 6101 feet, remember?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/21/travel/kansas-cargo-plane-wrong-airport/

Gyaos.
 

Gyaos

BOBA FETT
Aug 17, 2001
6,172
0
0
Heaven, definately Heaven
Why would anybody fly it into the south Indian ocean, where there is nothing???
There is Antarctica and they could land it on Blue Ice-----that can be done. Only problem is someone else would have to be there for an instant pick-up, the engines would freeze as Summer (down there) just ended.
I say, it never went in that direction. The Chinese communists are keeping all of this under wraps----this is why we are hearing nothing.

Gyaos.
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
Why would anybody fly it into the south Indian ocean, where there is nothing???
We still don't know for sure that they did. Nor will we until we find the airplane. And when we do, if they did fly there, perhaps we can find the reason.

I'm not saying it's not a hijacking, I'm just asking the questions.
 

outlander

Member
Jun 22, 2010
174
2
18
Would the authorities be able to track/check the passengers and crews cell phone records? To get the last place the phones logged on? Is that even feasible?
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
Yeah right. And no way would any country like Malaysia allow 11 countries to search on one side of the sea when their government knew the plane flew the other way. Yeah, it wasn't fully fueled.

Ah, well......what would a series of [assumed male] hijackers motivation be with a Malaysian Air cabin crew of hot girls? Hmm? Have you ever stayed at a hotel where their crew rested?
Holy Moly! Erection city. And then a 777 jet to land in maybe Western China after flying over the Himalayas? Or Burma.

In fact, a 777 doesn't need a very long runway at all. All the [pundits] are saying it needs 7500 feet. Well, this bigger plane only needed 6101 feet, remember?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/21/travel/kansas-cargo-plane-wrong-airport/

Gyaos.
We aren't talking about the government, we're talking about a private enterprise. Fuel costs roughly $10,000/hour for a 777. If you were working at any point in the chain and found out an aircraft wanted to carry $160,000 of EXTRA fuel, you don't think that would raise an eyebrow? This fuel doesn't disappear, it's not "free" to carry. If you need $60,000 worth of fuel to conduct your flight, but take $220,000, over the course of your 6 hours, you'll probably burn through an extra $60,000 worth of gas carrying it. Do you believe a single flight generates $60,000 in profit? If the captain ordered it, you don't think the First Officer would say, "Errr....sir? Why are we carrying 22 hours of fuel for a 6 hour flight?" Or vice versa? You don't think the refueller would've reported it as suspicious knowing that he routinely only puts $60,000 worth of gas in for this flight and suddenly they want $220,000? You don't think the maintenance crew when they received their first reports saying the aircraft was being flown with excessive fuel would've questioned it? You don't think the flight planner who had to revise their calculations to account for the extra $160,000 worth of fuel? You don't think the dispatcher who needs to calculate the weight loading and aircraft balance would question why the aircraft has so much? I'd be surprised if at least 2 of these groups wouldn't file paperwork on something like this. When you consider that, on average, about $150-175 per seat is the profit returned for a commercial airline, that means this flight of 239 people stood to make a profit of $41,825. So you're telling me that a pilot proposes to order $220,000 worth of fuel when $60,000 is enough, causing an extra $60,000 in fuel burn, resulting in a $42k profit turning into an $18k defecit at a minimum (because the plane might be overloaded for the next flight, in which case fuel is drained out, and considered contaminated so it can't be used again, wasting another...what? $30,000, so now they lost more than they stood to make), and management has no problem with that?

The plane wasn't fully loaded. It's inane to thinks so. And the government still doesn't "know" anything. Unless they're hiding something. But in any case, there is no way a commercial airlines leaves with $220,000 worth of gas for a $60,000 flight. It is not happening. No way, no how. That's a complete fiction. I've been saying all along that we don't have enough information to dismiss any probability, but I retract that statement. It is not possible, even remotely, that this aircraft left fully-loaded with fuel. 0% chance. Without a shred of doubt.

As for landing distance, may I ask where you got your figure from? I know the actual figures and I'm willing to share them with you, but I'd like to know where you get your information from that you're confident throwing around your numbers so matter-of-factly.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I just clued in to this...are you proposing that the plane was hijacked simply so that the pilots could rape the flight attendants? Have you met any commercial pilots? The reason I see SP's is because when women find out you fly big planes, they don't leave you alone and I'm not looking to settle down... It's certainly easy to get tail in this gig. Heck, when I flew jets in the military I had a harder time getting girls than I do as a commercial pilot.
 

SkyRider

Banned
Mar 31, 2009
17,572
2
0
CNN is now reporting that the pilot and co-pilot did not ask to fly together. Maybe there was a fight in the cockpit?
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
What's the motivation for a hijacking that no one claims responsibility?
Plus, if that plane entered a populated area, at least one mobile phone would have acquired a connection to a cell tower and the police would by now know about it. Not everybody turns off their phone in flight. And if the passengers weren't dead, at least one would get a tweet, text, or phone call out.

Whatever happened, it did not end in range of the mobile network
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
There is Antarctica and they could land it on Blue Ice-----that can be done. Only problem is someone else would have to be there for an instant pick-up, the engines would freeze as Summer (down there) just ended.
I say, it never went in that direction. The Chinese communists are keeping all of this under wraps----this is why we are hearing nothing.

Gyaos.
Current temperature at Amundsen-Scott South Pole is -59. I routinely fly my bird when the outer air temps register -70. You know it's colder 40,000 feet up, right? "Standard" atmosphere would yield a -55 temp at 40,000 feet. Planes would be falling out of the sky daily if -59 was so cold the engines would freeze.
 

BlueLaser

New member
Jan 28, 2014
1,023
0
0
CNN is now reporting that the pilot and co-pilot did not ask to fly together. Maybe there was a fight in the cockpit?
It's pretty rare you get to ask who you want to crew with. Usually you bid on a flight based on seniority. So unless the most senior captain and the most senior first officer want the same route, it's not likely you get to choose who to be with. Besides, what's their to fight over in a cockpit? Who gets to take the nap first? Whether or not the FO is allowed to land? Which FA is cuter?
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,490
1,359
113
We don't know if these came from the engine, though my suspicion is they didn't. My understanding is that Malaysian didn't purchase the satellite ACARS option, which means their aircraft use a VHF link to transmit that data and it's routed to Rolls Royce, not satellite. Even if it was ACARS engine data, it would've automatically been routed to Rolls Royce who have made it very clear that the last ACARS transmission was received at 01:07 during climb-out. Inmarsat hasn't released any information about what this ping came from. There are 3 major companies that deal with aircraft/marine satellite data: Inmarsat, Iridium and Thuraya. They monitor a variety of systems, not just ACARS. If the aircraft was sending data, why no word from Iridium or Thuraya? Maybe they didn't have satellites over the area, or maybe they did. And don't forget, the transmissions aren't always accurate. It's also worth bearing in mind that satellites can carry a 5 hour lag or more with transmissions depending on atmospheric conditions (which is why even if you pay for the satellite ACARS, your data goes out over VHF/UHF if a connection is available). Now if it's sending out a ping every hour, it's probably not lagging behind. But if it's sending out a ping every hour, they have a much more accurate position than anywhere along their curved line. They'd have a good indication of direction of movement... If it was indeed moving. And if it wasn't, why is it so unfeasible that it's a component floating in the ocean?

The conclusion is that we can't draw a conclusion. Maybe the airplane flew for hours, maybe it didn't. Maybe a oil rig worker saw it crash, maybe he didn't. Maybe the pilots killed themselves, maybe they didn't. Nothing that's been presented to the public so far rules out any theory. There's still a hell of a lot of unknowns, and as with most investigations, we, the public, aren't really "need to know". A lot of info is likely being kept from us for reasons from politics to negotiations to public perception.

Speaking of politics, don't underestimate that factor. Remember EgyptAir 990? Pretty much every country in the world has chalked it up to pilot suicide...except Egypt who remain vehement in their denials. Politics is a factor that should not be dismissed.

Besides, as unlikely as it is for data to be transmitted hours after a crash, it's also pretty unlikely to steal a 777... Pretty much exactly as unlikely. I mean, it's not exactly hard to get your hands on one. So if that's the case, what's the reason? Without a reasonable motive, it's a pretty big stretch.
even when you don't purchase the option the engines are equipped with the electronics and they do send pings...apparently. This was said in an interview of some expert on CNN...
 
Toronto Escorts