[2014] Most plausible explanation of mystery of Malasyian Flight 370

[ace2000]

Maybe the pilot botched the plan of killing everybody first through asphyxiation and he accidentally killed himself too?

I've wondered about that also. Does anyone know if it has been confirmed if the flight diversion was programmed before or after the altitude climb to 45K? I guess it's possible that there's no way to know that.

 

[Beefnot]

What's the meaning of the 9/11 reference?

The 9/11 reference was in response to Clemson Fan.

The plane stealing to use as a WMD theories I just don't buy at all. The logistics something like that would take not only to pull off the theft, but to keep it hidden over a several week to month timeframe I just think make that theory highly highly improbable. That would take a fairly sized number of people involved in the conspiracy and the more people you have involved, the more likely it is to be uncovered.

 

[Beefnot]

I've wondered about that also. Does anyone know if it has been confirmed if the flight diversion was programmed before or after the altitude climb to 45K? I guess it's possible that there's no way to know that.

I forget if someone answered this already but how do they know that the flight diversion was manually programmed vs. a catastrophic malfunction? Does any time an alteration to flight path is entered, an electronic communication is transmitted? And if so, then why didn't anyone notice or address it at the time it occurred?

 

[Clemson Fan]

I forget if someone answered this already but how do they know that the flight diversion was manually programmed vs. a catastrophic malfunction? Does any time an alteration to flight path is entered, an electronic communication is transmitted? And if so, then why didn't anyone notice or address it at the time it occurred?

Good question. Reports I've seen on this have been conflicting.

 

[Beefnot]

Good question. Reports I've seen on this have been conflicting.

Or what if the pilot misentered the coordinates that caused the supposed super hard turn? Could the programming in of such a severe course alteration have freaked out the computer and caused multiple systems to shut down or malfunction immediately before, during, or after that hard turn initiated?

 

[Clemson Fan]

The 9/11 reference was in response to Clemson Fan.[/I]

Yes, I get it. With 9/11, though, the plan was kept in complete secrecy until it was hatched and then once it was hatched it was over with in a couple of hours. Even in that short few hours, the passengers on United 93 were smart enough to figure it out and at least thwart that part of the plan. Maybe they planned this to be like some 9/11 plot to use the plane as a weapon and part of that plan was to kill all the passengers on board so they wouldn't be disruptive and they just botched that part and killed themselves to in the process?

However, to steal a plane to be stuffed with WMD to be used at a later date as a weapon just seems highly improbable to me. If you're in control of a fueled 777 in the air with nobody on the ground knowing what's going on, the time to use it as a weapon would be then. Remember, we're talking weeks now (not hours) after the "plan" was hatched. The logistics and people that would need to be involved in attempting something like that when you know the US and every other country is now alerted and are using their resources (spy satellites, intel, etc. etc.) to try and find that plane would be close to impossible to pull off. It would really need to be some type of state sponsored terrorism to pull something like that off. Then, of course, if it's state sponsored terrorism with a plan to use the plane as a weapon, then why such an elaborate theft/hoax? If you're a state, I'm sure there are easier ways to acquire a plane. I just don't buy it at all!

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Yes, I get it. With 9/11, though, the plan was kept in complete secrecy until it was hatched and then once it was hatched it was over with in a couple of hours. Even in that short few hours, the passengers on United 93 were smart enough to figure it out and at least thwart that part of the plan. Maybe they planned this to be like some 9/11 plot to use the plane as a weapon and part of that plan was to kill all the passengers on board so they wouldn't be disruptive and they just botched that part and killed themselves to in the process?

However, to steal a plane to be stuffed with WMD to be used at a later date as a weapon just seems highly improbable to me. If you're in control of a fueled 777 in the air with nobody on the ground knowing what's going on, the time to use it as a weapon would be then. Remember, we're talking weeks now (not hours) after the "plan" was hatched. The logistics and people that would need to be involved in attempting something like that when you know the US and every other country is now alerted and are using their resources (spy satellites, intel, etc. etc.) to try and find that plane would be close to impossible to pull off. It would really need to be some type of state sponsored terrorism to pull something like that off. Then, of course, if it's state sponsored terrorism with a plan to use the plane as a weapon, then why such an elaborate theft/hoax? If you're a state, I'm sure there are easier ways to acquire a plane. I just don't buy it at all!

Totally agree. With 9/11 you only need to keep secrecy within your cell - a limited group of people, who are presumably committed to your cause and whom you are able to vet and observe over a period of years.

If you're going to land and stow a plane somewhere, hundreds or thousands of people are not part of any cell are going to see the plane flying in and landing. Unless you have complete control of the landing strip and air field, there are going to be more people associated with activities at the site who are not part of any cell.

And if you posit that it must be an air strip that is under exclusive control of your cell, but yet is large enough and in good enough condition for take-off and landing of a 777, it would be pretty easy to locate where the plane is by process of elimination. Because there are few, if any, airports that would meet those criteria.

 

[ace2000]

I forget if someone answered this already but how do they know that the flight diversion was manually programmed vs. a catastrophic malfunction? Does any time an alteration to flight path is entered, an electronic communication is transmitted? And if so, then why didn't anyone notice or address it at the time it occurred?

I don't know if it's because of the recent search near Australia or some other reason. But, it seems that the experts and talking heads are backing away from the malfunction theory. Basically they're saying that there's no way for the plane to remain airborne for that long.

If you take that out of the equation, it had to be manually programmed.

 

[Phydeaux]

However, to steal a plane to be stuffed with WMD to be used at a later date as a weapon just seems highly improbableto me.

At least you no longer consider it "crazy talk".

For the record, my original theory didn't suggest loading it with WMD.

 

[SMHarman]

Or what if the pilot misentered the coordinates that caused the supposed super hard turn? Could the programming in of such a severe course alteration have freaked out the computer and caused multiple systems to shut down or malfunction immediately before, during, or after that hard turn initiated?

The Pilot tells the plane the waypoint to head to.

The plane then safely executes an adjustment in heading to get to that waypoint.

While a 777 can execute a turn with a bank angle of 30+ degrees this is at the edge of the flight envelope and the FMC would not execute a turn at altitude and speed at that angle, more like 15degrees and likely this would barely be noticed by those sitting in the back.

FMC will not freak out at a change, it will execute it within the aircraft flight envelope and furthermore, within the comfort parameters programmed by the carrier.

A 777 would likely only be executing 30 deg banks if it needed to make them to stay in a holding stack or on a convolutied final approach or noise abatement takeoff or similar. The controls apply greater resistance as the plane reaches the edge of the flight envelope as a tactile feedback to the pilot that they are pushing to hard. The plane pushes back harder!

Totally agree. With 9/11 you only need to keep secrecy within your cell - a limited group of people, who are presumably committed to your cause and whom you are able to vet and observe over a period of years.

If you're going to land and stow a plane somewhere, hundreds or thousands of people are not part of any cell are going to see the plane flying in and landing. Unless you have complete control of the landing strip and air field, there are going to be more people associated with activities at the site who are not part of any cell.

And if you posit that it must be an air strip that is under exclusive control of your cell, but yet is large enough and in good enough condition for take-off and landing of a 777, it would be pretty easy to locate where the plane is by process of elimination. Because there are few, if any, airports that would meet those criteria.

Which gives you very few countries. Somalia springs to mind.

 

[MULTIZ321]

Nothing in the story that you didn't already read upthread. Who needs the BBC when you've TUGgers are at hand???

An MH370 theory that was simple, compelling and wrong

"While it's true that MH370 did turn toward Langkawi and wound up overflying it, whoever was at the controls continued to manoeuvre after that point as well, turning sharply right at VAMPI waypoint, then left again at GIVAL," he says. "Such vigorous navigating would have been impossible for unconscious men."



Can someone who is a pilot or familiar with flying give an explanation of "VAPMI Waypoint" and "Gival Waypoint". How does the pilot know he/she is at these waypoints" ? Is it an electronic monitor signal that appears on one of the airplane monitors? How does an aircraft controller or a monitor know that these waypoints have been crossed?


Thanks for any elucidation on this.


Richard

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Which gives you very few countries. Somalia springs to mind.

I thought of that about a week ago. But the Horn of Africa appears to be beyond the maximum distance the plane could have flown.

But that does raise the possibility that the whoever was piloting the plane was trying for Somalia but didn't make it.

 

[Clemson Fan]

At least you no longer consider it "crazy talk".

LOL! Or maybe I just found a more polite way of saying it? :ignore:

 

[Phydeaux]

LOL! Or maybe I just found a more polite way of saying it? :ignore:

Or, your theory changes based on developments. No harm no foul. When they eventually find (or tell us) where the parked aircraft is, just don't say "I told you so".

 

[camachinist]

Can someone who is a pilot or familiar with flying give an explanation of "VAPMI Waypoint" and "Gival Waypoint". How does the pilot know he/she is at these waypoints" ? Is it an electronic monitor signal that appears on one of the airplane monitors? How does an aircraft controller or a monitor know that these waypoints have been crossed?

In layperson's terms, the FMS and EFIS operate a lot like the little Garmin GPS you might have in your car, of course in a far more complex manner.

Just like you programming an 'address' into your Garmin and then the unit telling you to turn here, turn there, etc, etc, pilots (or the autopilot!) follow similar instructions which are provided to them by EFIS as they're flying along. Imagine when you're in a strange city and using your Garmin and following its instructions to the letter. Ever end up on a route that seems nonsensical when observed later on a map? If so, that mimics, to some degree, how it's possible to follow a similar route via waypoints. Here's a short description of what they are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waypoint#In_aviation

Instead of '1st street and 12th avenue', it's 'xxx latitude and yyy longitude'.

Disclaimer: Not a pilot but fly a fair amount and have pilot friends.


Back on the search going on, I was thinking this search might be a perfect test for the new Orion UAS or similar long range UAS which can handle the long ferry time and still loiter for hours. Pretty impressive technology and it doesn't need crew rest like the P8 Poseidon currently sitting at Perth for rest and maintenance.

 

[SMHarman]

"While it's true that MH370 did turn toward Langkawi and wound up overflying it, whoever was at the controls continued to manoeuvre after that point as well, turning sharply right at VAMPI waypoint, then left again at GIVAL," he says. "Such vigorous navigating would have been impossible for unconscious men."

Of course it would not be vigorous navigating if all of those turns had been programmed at the same time as the first turn and the FMS was just executing the plan.

Can someone who is a pilot or familiar with flying give an explanation of "VAPMI Waypoint" and "Gival Waypoint". How does the pilot know he/she is at these waypoints" ? Is it an electronic monitor signal that appears on one of the airplane monitors? How does an aircraft controller or a monitor know that these waypoints have been crossed?

Thanks for any elucidation on this.

Richard

Up in the commercial sky is a system of virtual roads. The junctions in those virtual roads are the waypoints.

So to fly from say Newark to Los Angeles a plane will not take off and point the nose directly at Los Angeles, it will have filed a flight plan that defines the virtual roads it intends to take waypoint by waypoint. E.G. Newark> Pittsburg, PA> FortWayne, IN > Springfield, IL > Springfield, MI > Amarillo TX > oh you get the picture... Of course this is not likely to be a straight line.

Waypoints have radio beacons at them and are defined by lat / long so now GPS can also be used to navigate via the waypoints virtually rather than navigating from beacon to beacon.

As the carrier / dispatcher / crew know the flight plan, this is uploaded into the flight management system and once out of the more congested airport airspace in good weather the plane is left to fly from waypoint to waypoint along the planned route.

If you want to deviate from that route (weather etc) you ask permission from the controller in that airspace to exit the corridor (virtual roadway) you are flying on.

A plane like a 777 will both be able to monitor the radio beacon and its gps location and have a check and balance that it has reached a waypoint and set move along the steps and fly to the next waypoint.

As an aside, this is an old fashioned (and clearly safe) way of avoiding mid air collisions). The US is slowly working toward a system where you do literally point the nose of the plane in this example toward LAX and use GPS navigation and ACAS (Airborne Collision Avoidance System) to allow flights to take more efficient routes to their destinations. This should save the airlines some gas money and move the day of peak oil and save us all some bum in seat time when it happens.
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/briefing/
http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/

Note to add reading Camachinists point above. Unlike the way you program your GPS with just the destination and the GPS works out a route, here you are telling the GPS the route and the GPS is helping you stick to that route and not decide to take the virtual equivilant of I78 instead of the I80 that you documented in your plan.

 

[Phydeaux]

Back on the search going on, I was thinking this search might be a perfect test for the new Orion UAS or similar long range UAS which can handle the long ferry time and still loiter for hours. Pretty impressive technology and it doesn't need crew rest like the P8 Poseidon currently sitting at Perth for rest and maintenance.

Let's not forget our friends underwater. We have submarines dispatched over the globe, 24/7/365 and their instruments are beyond most peoples comprehension. As in PING

 

[easyrider]

Retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney was on the news and he said that he thinks the airplane was taken to Pakistan because of information from the Langley Intelligence Group Network. McInerney is a highly decorated Air Force strategic commander, now retired.

McInerney said there are at least three bases in Taliban-controlled areas of western Pakistan that could handle the jet.

His theory is consistent with reports that the last “ping” heard from the jet’s Rolls Royce engines was about seven hours after takeoff in Malaysia.

LIGNET, the Langley Intelligence Group Network, provides global intelligence and forecasting by former CIA officers and others.

The LIGNET report McInerney cited noted that the Malaysian government “reportedly is investigating the possibility that missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 avoided radar detection and landed in Pakistan near the Afghanistan border inside Taliban-controlled territory, according to the UK Independent.”

The Malaysian foreign minister told reporters that Malaysia asked several Asian countries for assistance in its investigation, including Pakistan.

“Pakistan dismissed the idea that a Boeing 777 could land undetected inside the country but promised to work with the Malaysian government in its search for the missing plane,” the report said.

A LIGNET analyst, however, “received information from a source at Boeing that the company believes the plane did land in Pakistan.”

Israel, consequently, is mobilizing air defenses and scrutinizing approaching civilian aircraft, according to the Times of Israel.

A Boeing 777, LIGNET noted, requires a 7,500-foot runway, which are available in Pakistan, “meaning Flight 370 could conceivably be hidden in a hangar inside the country.

Here is the interview.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hanni...mcinerney-stand-controversial-pakistan-theory

Bill

 

[MULTIZ321]

In layperson's terms, the FMS and EFIS operate a lot like the little Garmin GPS you might have in your car, of course in a far more complex manner.

Just like you programming an 'address' into your Garmin and then the unit telling you to turn here, turn there, etc, etc, pilots (or the autopilot!) follow similar instructions which are provided to them by EFIS as they're flying along. Imagine when you're in a strange city and using your Garmin and following its instructions to the letter. Ever end up on a route that seems nonsensical when observed later on a map? If so, that mimics, to some degree, how it's possible to follow a similar route via waypoints. Here's a short description of what they are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waypoint#In_aviation

Instead of '1st street and 12th avenue', it's 'xxx latitude and yyy longitude'.

Disclaimer: Not a pilot but fly a fair amount and have pilot friends.


Back on the search going on, I was thinking this search might be a perfect test for the new Orion UAS or similar long range UAS which can handle the long ferry time and still loiter for hours. Pretty impressive technology and it doesn't need crew rest like the P8 Poseidon currently sitting at Perth for rest and maintenance.

Let's not forget our friends underwater. We have submarines dispatched over the globe, 24/7/365 and their instruments are beyond most peoples comprehension. As in PING

Of course it would not be vigorous navigating if all of those turns had been programmed at the same time as the first turn and the FMS was just executing the plan.

Up in the commercial sky is a system of virtual roads. The junctions in those virtual roads are the waypoints.

So to fly from say Newark to Los Angeles a plane will not take off and point the nose directly at Los Angeles, it will have filed a flight plan that defines the virtual roads it intends to take waypoint by waypoint. E.G. Newark> Pittsburg, PA> FortWayne, IN > Springfield, IL > Springfield, MI > Amarillo TX > oh you get the picture... Of course this is not likely to be a straight line.

Waypoints have radio beacons at them and are defined by lat / long so now GPS can also be used to navigate via the waypoints virtually rather than navigating from beacon to beacon.

As the carrier / dispatcher / crew know the flight plan, this is uploaded into the flight management system and once out of the more congested airport airspace in good weather the plane is left to fly from waypoint to waypoint along the planned route.

If you want to deviate from that route (weather etc) you ask permission from the controller in that airspace to exit the corridor (virtual roadway) you are flying on.

A plane like a 777 will both be able to monitor the radio beacon and its gps location and have a check and balance that it has reached a waypoint and set move along the steps and fly to the next waypoint.

As an aside, this is an old fashioned (and clearly safe) way of avoiding mid air collisions). The US is slowly working toward a system where you do literally point the nose of the plane in this example toward LAX and use GPS navigation and ACAS (Airborne Collision Avoidance System) to allow flights to take more efficient routes to their destinations. This should save the airlines some gas money and move the day of peak oil and save us all some bum in seat time when it happens.
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/briefing/
http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/

Note to add reading Camachinists point above. Unlike the way you program your GPS with just the destination and the GPS works out a route, here you are telling the GPS the route and the GPS is helping you stick to that route and not decide to take the virtual equivilant of I78 instead of the I80 that you documented in your plan.

Thanks Camachinist & SH,

Great explanations!


Richard

 

[Clemson Fan]

Let's not forget our friends underwater. We have submarines dispatched over the globe, 24/7/365 and their instruments are beyond most peoples comprehension. As in PING

That would require active sonar which would give away their position. They almost always use passive sonar and the active sonar is mainly used for rangefinding to target something. Also, I'm not sure how effective active sonar would be at finding debris on the ocean floor. If there is any debris still on top of the ocean bobbing around, there should be more effective ways then active sonar from a sub to locate it.

 

[Phydeaux]

That would require active sonar which would give away their position. They almost always use passive sonar and the active sonar is mainly used for rangefinding to target something. Also, I'm not sure how effective active sonar would be at finding debris on the ocean floor. If there is any debris still on top of the ocean bobbing around, there should be more effective ways then active sonar from a sub to locate it.

Passive SONAR is what would be utilized to detect and triangulate the PINGs emitted from the black box.

 

[ace2000]

Retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney was on the news and he said that he thinks the airplane was taken to Pakistan because of information from the Langley Intelligence Group Network. McInerney is a highly decorated Air Force strategic commander, now retired.

Interesting, but I'm skeptical. If those sites could handle that type of plane, then that would mean the Taliban in that area would already have their own planes, right? And then why would they want a plane with over 200 passengers? If it's a hostage situation, surely their demands would have been made known by now, right?

 

[Phydeaux]

Perhaps you missed this theory: http://marklberry.com/2014/03/16/high-alert-mh370-found/

 

[ace2000]

Perhaps you missed this theory: http://marklberry.com/2014/03/16/high-alert-mh370-found/

I've seen it. I'm just assuming that if the Taliban had an airstrip and hangar that could accommodate a 777, wouldn't that mean they already have their own large plane? Definitely not a 777, but it seems that would have their own large plane already. Sorry, not buying into either one of these theories.

 

[pedro47]

A plane can not be detective if it flies under a certain height and uses a stealth device.