Changing your theory Jim?
Nope. Still sticking to a land crash, but frankly, I am as flummoxed as everyone.
-
The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!
Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day! -
TUG started 31 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!
Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 31st Birthday TUG! -
TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!
Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!
Visit TUG on Youtube! -
TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $23,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!
Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $23 Million dollars -
Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!
Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners! -
Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!
All T-shirt options here!
[2014] Most plausible explanation of mystery of Malasyian Flight 370
- Thread starter Clemson Fan
- Start date
Nope. Still sticking to a land crash, but frankly, I am as flummoxed as everyone.
Why land when there is so much more water to target.
Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk
Well, the plane flew for several hours presumably in a NW or SW direction. The governments there are not exactly open about what happens within them. There is not much radar coverage of central Asia, and some humonhous mountains to get in the way of a lowflying sneaky airplane. That, along with no flotsam being found by some fisherman (yet) or spotted from the air make me think it ended up splattered into a mountain.
Or you might say it was a guess. I don't know any more than anyone else what happened to it. Or why.
But there is nothing to indicate this was a lowflying aircraft.
As other theorists have theorised, he was hiding in plain (plane) sight by sticking to the major marker points and routes, just a blip that was not transponding heading in a usual direction.
As other theorists have theorised, he was hiding in plain (plane) sight by sticking to the major marker points and routes, just a blip that was not transponding heading in a usual direction.
camachinist
TUG Member
Been following this tragedy on Pprune and Flyertalk and have done some independent research and figured I'd jump in here.
Most customers, MH included apparently, go for the less expensive oxygen generators for pax oxygen, which normally will last 12-15 minutes, tops, which is more than sufficient to allow for an emergency descent from FL35-40 to FL14 where pax can generally breathe unaided. Crew has compressed oxygen available to them in the cabin and my understanding is that it can last up to 30 minutes. Pilots have a different supply and special masks and can go longer than any crew or pax.
My personal feeling is that the plane was commandeered, either by a third party or one or both pilots, and was intended to be flown to a certain location but failed.
Secondarily, though more remote, the 'Payne Stewart' scenario is also possible, more recently seen on a Helios flight. Plane had issues, cascading beyond the QRH, with pilots making initial change to head to divert and conditions on the plane took them out and flew on via its own technology until CFIT or the autopilot disengaging due to fuel starvation took it.
Last edited:
Nor anything to indicate it wasn't, either. Though jets use a lot less fuel at higher flight levels than they do at low ones. Denser, warmer, more humid air to fly through.
It's just a guess. Some day the plane will be found, though it is unlikely all the answers will be.
^ Well the radar tracking of the blip on the Malaysian military radar had it a FL21 or thereabouts. 3 miles up is not skimming the surface (not your words, those of some of the conspiracy theorists) of the ocean by any measure.
As you note, range and airspeed have to reduce if you are lower so if these pilots are on a plan they would execute it nearer their usual flying paramenters, not hundreds of knots slower at sea level.
Though that said, FL21 flys you into a few mountains around there.
As you note, range and airspeed have to reduce if you are lower so if these pilots are on a plan they would execute it nearer their usual flying paramenters, not hundreds of knots slower at sea level.
Though that said, FL21 flys you into a few mountains around there.
T_R_Oglodyte
TUG Lifetime Member
Depends. If it was intended to be flown to a certain location and hidden, they might very well have succeeded.
Phydeaux
TUG Member
It's interesting to me that there seem to be a large percentage of people that believe the aircraft has crashed. Indeed it may have. However, there is no evidence thusfar to suggest it crashed. So, its curious to me that the majority feels it crashed, whereas logic suggests it was fully capable of landing, and had a choice of over 600 runways to do so.
Interesting...
Interesting...
I think it's likely. I'll base that on the fact there have been no terror groups claiming responsibility or making demands (at least publicly).
I don't think anyone can say one way or the other for sure, so why does it surprise you?
Phydeaux
TUG Member
It surprises me because it appears the majority believe it crashed. I do not, and haven't since day 2. I would think, given what we know, it would be much closer to 50/50 with those believing the aircraft landed safely. I don't know the breakdown, but there seems to be many more that feel it crashed. However, I also believe as days pass and if no wreckage is found, some will reverse their opinion.
Again, what is so unbelievable about a safe landing at an abandoned airstrip?
Nothing. However, I feel that finding it at the bottom of the ocean is more likely. That's the problem.
Phydeaux
TUG Member
Now were getting somewhere. Why do you feel that's more likely?
I don't understand the lack of "terror groups claiming responsibility or making demands" point. If the intent is to steal the aircraft, load it with fuel and nukes (or biological weapons) and crash it in Los Angeles or London, I don't think the involved parties are going to proclaim such or demand anything??????
I'm not saying it didn't happen that way. The question is what do I think? I just feel the crash landing in the ocean is the most likely.
Because that's where they're searching (in the ocean) and they know more of the details and facts than any of us do.
Phydeaux
TUG Member
You don't suppose anyone is looking at those 600 runways also?
LOL - I'm not discounting the runway theory.
If I was to respond to a survey on what I believe happened, I'm going with the bottom of the ocean, based on what I know at this point. And I'm not surprised that's what most people think.
- The abandoned strip, unless there are many others involved, has no navigation and landing guidance systems on it making it much harder to find in the middle of a moonless night.
- Nobody has claimed responsibility or any other indication that this happened.
- Since landing 10 days ago the plane has not been powered back up, the engines have not pinged the base again so it landed, got powered down, then nothing, so it is sitting where it stopped or they also have a 777 sized tug to move it about?
- I could see that was the plan and that the pilots flight sim may reveal airports he was intending to land at, was practicing landing at but I think that the plan did not work out.
- There are many others involved in getting a commercial widebody aircraft from point to point, dispatchers, ground handling crew, ground / airport ATC, ATC, ground / airport ATC, ILS, landing lights, runway lights, glidescope lights / radio and other visual clues as to where to land / ground crew, heck you would even need some steps to get down from the plane once you landed it, you lost the support team when you went rogue and putting that team together is pretty hard.
There is more ocean than land, this is also my assumption.
Quadmaniac
TUG Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,913
- Reaction score
- 217
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Resorts Owned
- Marriott Willow Ridge (x2), Ko Olina week 51 (x3) & 52(x2)
What is the probability that a plane with 239 people, assuming just 4 were involved with disappearance, would not have made a phone call once they noticed something was wrong or when they landed ? That's a possibility of 235 cell phones. The chances that one call did not make it out is highly unlikely. Look at the crashes from 9/11. How many made calls to their loved ones before crashing ? Numerous.
In this accident, not one call to a relative ? That would suggest no one knew anything was wrong and never had a chance to call anyone before crashing. If they landed, guaranteed they would know they were not where they are supposed to be and unless there is no cell coverage, the cell phones would be blazing, even before landing. Does not make logical sense.
Boeing 777 is a huge plane and it needs a long landing strip. Any location that can accommodate the landing of a plane that large would most probably be in cell phone range. It would not be a tiny isolated airstrip.
Last edited:
Phydeaux
TUG Member
And you can't, or wont explain why. That's what I find interesting. No harm, no foul.
No, I mentioned that I believe that because that happens to be where they are frantically searching right now. And they know more than any of us do currently.
Phydeaux
TUG Member
A few key differences here than with 911. First, is there cellular coverage in this area?,second, if pax were unconscious, they can't call. Nor can they call if their phones were all collected.
Phydeaux
TUG Member
So you believe the airstrips are not being "frantically searched" right now?