Mar 17, 2014, 3:08 pm
Last edit by: JDiver
PLEASE READ FIRST: WELCOME and MODERATOR NOTE
Welcome to the MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
Welcome to the MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
If you are new to us, welcome to FlyerTalk!
Who we are: FlyerTalk features discussions and chat boards that covers the most up-to-date traveler information; an interactive community dedicated to the topic of travel.
All travelers are welcome in the community. Just choose a forum: conversing about airlines and their programs, airports, destinations, dining and how to make the most of your miles and points, or visit our Information Desk to start.
All travelers are welcome in the community. Just choose a forum: conversing about airlines and their programs, airports, destinations, dining and how to make the most of your miles and points, or visit our Information Desk to start.
Respect our Diversity - link to this guideline
FlyerTalk members come from all walks of life and all parts of the world. We are as diverse in our makeup as we are alike in our passion for frequent flyer programs. Because we all bring a unique perspective to the forum, our collective experience is broadened, and we gain new insights.
Our diversity demands that we respect each other. Due to the inherent constraints of the Internet, humor, sarcasm, language and slang can be easily misinterpreted - especially when crossing cultural boundaries.
When posting a message, pay extra care to how it might be interpreted. And when you come across a post that offends you, read it with an eye toward giving the poster the benefit of the doubt.
If you have an issue with a post, please contact the member privately or contact a moderator (click on the
button). Do not make a situation worse by publicly responding.
FlyerTalk members come from all walks of life and all parts of the world. We are as diverse in our makeup as we are alike in our passion for frequent flyer programs. Because we all bring a unique perspective to the forum, our collective experience is broadened, and we gain new insights.
Our diversity demands that we respect each other. Due to the inherent constraints of the Internet, humor, sarcasm, language and slang can be easily misinterpreted - especially when crossing cultural boundaries.
When posting a message, pay extra care to how it might be interpreted. And when you come across a post that offends you, read it with an eye toward giving the poster the benefit of the doubt.
If you have an issue with a post, please contact the member privately or contact a moderator (click on the
button). Do not make a situation worse by publicly responding.
In order to a) keep the original thread focused on confirmed news and known facts, and b) allow folks a place to discuss their ideas about what might have happened, the MH370 moderators and Community Director have decided to open this thread.
Here are the expectations:
1. The normal FT TOS apply. (Including not discussing moderation actions on-thread). And please be particularly attentive to "discussing the idea and not the poster" when you have a disagreement. Civility and mutual respect are still expected and are what we owe each other as a community.
2. You are expected respect our diversity , and therefore refrain from posting inflammatory comments about race, religion, culture, politics, ethnicity, orientation, etc." Do not cite, copy, or report on such.
3. Please do continue to be attentive to the sensibilities of the families of those on the flight. Think about if you were them what you would and would not want to see posted. Speculation about what happened is permissible; please, though, do not indulge in inflammatory or overly-lurid descriptions that could well be hurtful.
4. Overly / extravagantly exaggerative posts such as conspiracy theories, posts beyond the realm of science and known facts, etc. as well as posts with information that has been posted several times previously, information that has been posted in the News thread wiki or FAQ, may be deleted. E.g. the aircraft was vaporized.
In terms of housekeeping, posts may get moved from the "news" thread if and as needed, and posts that do not conform to these simple expectations, above, will be deleted.
Also note: this wiki is locked; changes can only be made by moderators.
Thank you.
Your MH370 Moderation Team
aBroadAbroad; cblaisd; JDiver; l'etoile; NewbieRunner; oliver2002; Prospero
and Community Director
SanDiego1K
MH370 Discussion and Speculation Thread
Mar 19, 2014, 6:54 pm
#646
Ambassador: LATAM
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: PNA
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 4,648
I have wondered this recently. I once flew LHR to IAH and forgot to turn my phone off. When I arrive I had network welcome messages from both Iceland and Canada.
At Atalaia do Norte in Amazonas Brazil, you can get a signal from Claro Colombia in Leticia. That is 21 miles (or 110800 feet) and you can actually make a voice call. Admittedly that is horizontal distance and cell towers are most probably directional.
Notwithstanding, I think cellphones have much more range than we realise.
At Atalaia do Norte in Amazonas Brazil, you can get a signal from Claro Colombia in Leticia. That is 21 miles (or 110800 feet) and you can actually make a voice call. Admittedly that is horizontal distance and cell towers are most probably directional.
Notwithstanding, I think cellphones have much more range than we realise.
Mar 19, 2014, 6:59 pm
#647
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
My evolving working armchair hypothesis so far to "fit the curve" as the simplest possible explanation where more things go wrong than go correctly and precisely:
1. A progressive electrical problem starting soon after the last ATC transmission. Initially, the avionics in the cockpit start to go on the blink and pilots unable to contact Vietnam ATC or anybody else.
2. FMS becomes inoperative. Pilots decide to do an immediate diversion to land. They may have tried to communicate but had no idea if anyone heard them. No sign or warnings of any fire or smoke.
3. The first decision is to land at Langkawi but essentially flying VFR at night with avionics shut off or partially or behaving erratically. Pilots are also concerned about flying into other traffic. Descend to mid flight levels to at least give 500 ft separation to other flights in cruise. Don't descend further yet until they have visual sight of Langkawi to give maximum glide distance in case they lose power and have difficulty finding the airport without NAV.
4. Probably using maritime lights on water and any visible lights from land to head to the west coast of the peninsula. No signs of fire or smoke.
5. They reach the west coast with the pilot trying to get visual bearings to make an approach to Langkawi. Overfly it to make visual still at altitude.
6. So far, the only known problem is inoperative avionics. Pilots make a decision to go through the troubleshooting procedure over sea to try to get avionics back as a preferred method before landing than landing blind with no NAV/COM at Langkawi. This decision may have been wrong in retrospect but pilots make perfect decisions only in movies. Or alternatively, they may have decided to dump fuel first. They fly the waypoints to the west of Langkawi trying to get into a circling pattern away from potential aircraft in the area but aren't successful in doing either meanwhile (getting avionics reset or dumping fuel). They are not able to raise anybody on radio either still.
7. Something terribly goes wrong at this point. Either a fire breaks out filling cockpit with smoke or the attempts to dump fuel for some reason starts a fire or fuels an existing smaller one. They may have tried to climb to starve out the fire if that radar altitude data is accurate and may have gotten into a stall. They set a course back to where they think Langkawi without much NAV help. Engage auto pilot to battle fire and smoke. Unfortunately, the heading they set in the confusion (or intentionally to not crash a burning plane on land) is towards open sea to the south away from Langkawi.
8. They are incapacitated during this struggle from smoke, the electrical fire burns out and the flight continues south on auto pilot until it runs out of fuel and crashes in South Indian Ocean.
1. A progressive electrical problem starting soon after the last ATC transmission. Initially, the avionics in the cockpit start to go on the blink and pilots unable to contact Vietnam ATC or anybody else.
2. FMS becomes inoperative. Pilots decide to do an immediate diversion to land. They may have tried to communicate but had no idea if anyone heard them. No sign or warnings of any fire or smoke.
3. The first decision is to land at Langkawi but essentially flying VFR at night with avionics shut off or partially or behaving erratically. Pilots are also concerned about flying into other traffic. Descend to mid flight levels to at least give 500 ft separation to other flights in cruise. Don't descend further yet until they have visual sight of Langkawi to give maximum glide distance in case they lose power and have difficulty finding the airport without NAV.
4. Probably using maritime lights on water and any visible lights from land to head to the west coast of the peninsula. No signs of fire or smoke.
5. They reach the west coast with the pilot trying to get visual bearings to make an approach to Langkawi. Overfly it to make visual still at altitude.
6. So far, the only known problem is inoperative avionics. Pilots make a decision to go through the troubleshooting procedure over sea to try to get avionics back as a preferred method before landing than landing blind with no NAV/COM at Langkawi. This decision may have been wrong in retrospect but pilots make perfect decisions only in movies. Or alternatively, they may have decided to dump fuel first. They fly the waypoints to the west of Langkawi trying to get into a circling pattern away from potential aircraft in the area but aren't successful in doing either meanwhile (getting avionics reset or dumping fuel). They are not able to raise anybody on radio either still.
7. Something terribly goes wrong at this point. Either a fire breaks out filling cockpit with smoke or the attempts to dump fuel for some reason starts a fire or fuels an existing smaller one. They may have tried to climb to starve out the fire if that radar altitude data is accurate and may have gotten into a stall. They set a course back to where they think Langkawi without much NAV help. Engage auto pilot to battle fire and smoke. Unfortunately, the heading they set in the confusion (or intentionally to not crash a burning plane on land) is towards open sea to the south away from Langkawi.
8. They are incapacitated during this struggle from smoke, the electrical fire burns out and the flight continues south on auto pilot until it runs out of fuel and crashes in South Indian Ocean.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:00 pm
#648
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: District of Columbia
Programs: AA ExecPl, AT Gold, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Diamond, Hilton Diamond, National
Posts: 2,440
Mar 19, 2014, 7:05 pm
#649
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 31
essentially you have the same ending as what i have. auto pilot lead them out to sea.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:19 pm
#650
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
A theory of what may have led to it without assuming a conspiracy or a sequence of perfect executions while fitting the known data with the simplest explanation has not been easy.
We should know a lot if and when we eventually find the aircraft.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:29 pm
#652
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 97
My evolving working armchair hypothesis so far to "fit the curve" as the simplest possible explanation where more things go wrong than go correctly and precisely:
1. A progressive electrical problem starting soon after the last ATC transmission. Initially, the avionics in the cockpit start to go on the blink and pilots unable to contact Vietnam ATC or anybody else.
2. FMS becomes inoperative. Pilots decide to do an immediate diversion to land. They may have tried to communicate but had no idea if anyone heard them. No sign or warnings of any fire or smoke.
3. The first decision is to land at Langkawi but essentially flying VFR at night with avionics shut off or partially or behaving erratically. Pilots are also concerned about flying into other traffic. Descend to mid flight levels to at least give 500 ft separation to other flights in cruise. Don't descend further yet until they have visual sight of Langkawi to give maximum glide distance in case they lose power and have difficulty finding the airport without NAV.
4. Probably using maritime lights on water and any visible lights from land to head to the west coast of the peninsula. No signs of fire or smoke.
5. They reach the west coast with the pilot trying to get visual bearings to make an approach to Langkawi. Overfly it to make visual still at altitude.
6. So far, the only known problem is inoperative avionics. Pilots make a decision to go through the troubleshooting procedure over sea to try to get avionics back as a preferred method before landing than landing blind with no NAV/COM at Langkawi. This decision may have been wrong in retrospect but pilots make perfect decisions only in movies. Or alternatively, they may have decided to dump fuel first. They fly the waypoints to the west of Langkawi trying to get into a circling pattern away from potential aircraft in the area but aren't successful in doing either meanwhile (getting avionics reset or dumping fuel). They are not able to raise anybody on radio either still.
7. Something terribly goes wrong at this point. Either a fire breaks out filling cockpit with smoke or the attempts to dump fuel for some reason starts a fire or fuels an existing smaller one. They may have tried to climb to starve out the fire if that radar altitude data is accurate and may have gotten into a stall. They set a course back to where they think Langkawi without much NAV help. Engage auto pilot to battle fire and smoke. Unfortunately, the heading they set in the confusion (or intentionally to not crash a burning plane on land) is towards open sea to the south away from Langkawi.
8. They are incapacitated during this struggle from smoke, the electrical fire burns out and the flight continues south on auto pilot until it runs out of fuel and crashes in South Indian Ocean.
1. A progressive electrical problem starting soon after the last ATC transmission. Initially, the avionics in the cockpit start to go on the blink and pilots unable to contact Vietnam ATC or anybody else.
2. FMS becomes inoperative. Pilots decide to do an immediate diversion to land. They may have tried to communicate but had no idea if anyone heard them. No sign or warnings of any fire or smoke.
3. The first decision is to land at Langkawi but essentially flying VFR at night with avionics shut off or partially or behaving erratically. Pilots are also concerned about flying into other traffic. Descend to mid flight levels to at least give 500 ft separation to other flights in cruise. Don't descend further yet until they have visual sight of Langkawi to give maximum glide distance in case they lose power and have difficulty finding the airport without NAV.
4. Probably using maritime lights on water and any visible lights from land to head to the west coast of the peninsula. No signs of fire or smoke.
5. They reach the west coast with the pilot trying to get visual bearings to make an approach to Langkawi. Overfly it to make visual still at altitude.
6. So far, the only known problem is inoperative avionics. Pilots make a decision to go through the troubleshooting procedure over sea to try to get avionics back as a preferred method before landing than landing blind with no NAV/COM at Langkawi. This decision may have been wrong in retrospect but pilots make perfect decisions only in movies. Or alternatively, they may have decided to dump fuel first. They fly the waypoints to the west of Langkawi trying to get into a circling pattern away from potential aircraft in the area but aren't successful in doing either meanwhile (getting avionics reset or dumping fuel). They are not able to raise anybody on radio either still.
7. Something terribly goes wrong at this point. Either a fire breaks out filling cockpit with smoke or the attempts to dump fuel for some reason starts a fire or fuels an existing smaller one. They may have tried to climb to starve out the fire if that radar altitude data is accurate and may have gotten into a stall. They set a course back to where they think Langkawi without much NAV help. Engage auto pilot to battle fire and smoke. Unfortunately, the heading they set in the confusion (or intentionally to not crash a burning plane on land) is towards open sea to the south away from Langkawi.
8. They are incapacitated during this struggle from smoke, the electrical fire burns out and the flight continues south on auto pilot until it runs out of fuel and crashes in South Indian Ocean.
This is all possible but why the passengers did not try to communicate- use mobile phones at at 2.? No communication? Why the crew or the pilot did not use mobile phones?
IMO passengers phones were taken off them.. or they were incapacitated by the 45000ft jump..
Just after the turn back the plane jumps at 45000ft, drops to 5000ft and then jumps to 35 000 again..
Mar 19, 2014, 7:39 pm
#654
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 97
Written by Malaysian officer. Some really good info re the route of the MH370 - You can ask questions..
http://seademon.wordpress.com/2014/0...0-i-speak-out/
http://seademon.wordpress.com/2014/0...0-i-speak-out/
Mar 19, 2014, 7:39 pm
#655
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 31
lets be clear im no pilot but for someone to do this they are trying to put out a fire or getting down to better air?
Mar 19, 2014, 7:42 pm
#656
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
First, a turn (or more likely a diversion waypoint) being "programmed" is unsubstantiated based only on a NY Times article reporting a US source and dismissed by Malaysian authorities. This assumes that the "program" appeared in the ACARS data at 1:07.
Second, being "programmed" doesn't imply accepted and activated the diversion. Some media outlets have sloppily reported this based on the NY Times article. There is no evidence that it turned at all before they broke contact with ATC with the good night. Otherwise, it would not have been a simple good night while the plane was going off course. The transponder was still responding then and the flight was on course when the last ATC communication happened.
If there was such programming, some pilots play add a diversion point just to keep themselves occupied or to make sure things are working or may be the senior pilot was getting the younger co-pilot to try some things on the programming to pass time.
This is based on the verified information available so far, not claims by various unnamed sources.
Second, being "programmed" doesn't imply accepted and activated the diversion. Some media outlets have sloppily reported this based on the NY Times article. There is no evidence that it turned at all before they broke contact with ATC with the good night. Otherwise, it would not have been a simple good night while the plane was going off course. The transponder was still responding then and the flight was on course when the last ATC communication happened.
If there was such programming, some pilots play add a diversion point just to keep themselves occupied or to make sure things are working or may be the senior pilot was getting the younger co-pilot to try some things on the programming to pass time.
This is based on the verified information available so far, not claims by various unnamed sources.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:49 pm
#657
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
The map display channel would likely have become dead from the in-operative avionics that had stopped providing location data.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:50 pm
#658
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,044
1. NO it wasnt a terrorist attack so stop thinking about it. theres no one claiming they usually do, no reported terrorists linked to the passengers list. and if so someone would of sent some kind of communication, phone/text or otherwise.
2. NO it wasnt a suicide. theres too many ppl onboard that could of stopped him, and from his friends this is something he wouldnt do.
with that in mind it only leaves an accident. not a large accident or debris of been found straight away. nor was it a long known accident or someone would of communicated much like the terrorist idea.
any other alarmed problem would of been reported as im fairly certain its standard protocol to radio in major faults.
This only leaves a progressive accident that went undetected by any alarm on the plane until it was TOO late. (slow decompression on a "red eye" shift)
2. NO it wasnt a suicide. theres too many ppl onboard that could of stopped him, and from his friends this is something he wouldnt do.
with that in mind it only leaves an accident. not a large accident or debris of been found straight away. nor was it a long known accident or someone would of communicated much like the terrorist idea.
any other alarmed problem would of been reported as im fairly certain its standard protocol to radio in major faults.
This only leaves a progressive accident that went undetected by any alarm on the plane until it was TOO late. (slow decompression on a "red eye" shift)
We don't know if it was a suicide. We cannot be sure anyone could have stopped it. We don't know who "he" even is so it us rather difficult to estimate the likelihood.
It is also possible, as mentioned on one of these threads that it was a cargo theft.
It is also the case that of someone wanted to cover up for a terrorist attack or a suicide diverting to the Indian Ocean would help cover evidence. The Indian Ocean is about 100 times as deep on average as the South China Sea from the numbers I read.
Mar 19, 2014, 7:50 pm
#659
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 97
45000 - 5000 - 35 000
It would be really useful to have a pilot clarify what this manoeuvre means after the turn back..
http://news.sky.com/story/1228537/mi...xplain-mystery
Mar 19, 2014, 8:03 pm
#660
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: BKK
Programs: AA Plat, HH Diamond, SPG Gold
Posts: 2,395
Friendly Reminder!
Please be sure to read the Wikipost and MH370 FAQ in the main MH370 KUL-PEK Missing thread before posting your questions here. Many of the known facts and questions surrounding this event have been summarized and answered there. Repeatedly posting questions that have already been thoroughly discussed and answered makes for overly long and hard-to-follow discussion threads.
Thanks!
aBroadAbroad, on behalf of the moderator team
Thanks!
aBroadAbroad, on behalf of the moderator team