It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Beijing-bound MAS plane carrying 239 people missing as of 20 mins ago.

page: 146
181
<< 143  144  145    147  148  149 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


Flight recorders are installed in the rear of the aircraft. Don't know where exactly.




posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   
How come it's been fully overlooked that this occurred on the anniversary of a similar hijacking of another flight heading to Beijing? No one believes there can be a connection? Really? On a conspiracy site?



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ManiShuck
 


Some decent information being released now.

So far, from recent updates:

Whoever was flying it tried taking out the communications but forgot to unplug the panel so pings were still being made to Boeing /RR and course detectable by military.

From the route taken according to pings, looks like they were trying to 'blend in' by using known flight paths.

Therefore whoever was flying or commanding the flight has knowledge of flight paths and how to dull communications (though they didn't do this entirely) which suggests some knowledge of plane electronics / mechanics (these things could be learned from training as a pilot or as a lay person).

The sabotage could have been done manually or by programming the autopilot.

If it was done remotely by hacking and programming the autopilot it would explain the lack of thoroughness in that the electronics panel enabling pings wasn't unplugged and hence still able to send pings.

The passengers and crew could easily have been subdued / knocked out with a programmed chemical device hence lack of distress calls / phone calls from passengers etc.

If it was done remotely and the panel still intact it suggests it landed in the ocean as that is where the pings were last detected.

Alternately, if it was done manually, whoever unplugged the communications could have realised pings were still being sent and unplugged the main panel hence no further pings after a certain point and plane flown onto somewhere, landed, refueled, resprayed etc.

The authorities are not releasing all the information yet due to sensitivities so obviously there is more going on behind the scenes, which suggests the possibility it could have landed somewhere.

Seeing as there isn't any information released yet as to the GPS from passengers mobile devices, it could be that the authorities know where it is if it landed though are playing schtum because they are investigating it and hence all the military action.

www.cbc.ca...


That course — headed into the Andaman Sea and towards the Bay of Bengal in the Indian Ocean — could only have been set deliberately, either by flying the Boeing 777-200ER jet manually or by programming the auto-pilot.




The fact that the plane — if it was MH370 — had lost contact with air traffic control and was invisible to civilian radar suggested someone on board had turned off its communication systems, the first two sources said.



edit on 14-3-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 


The system that has said to be giving off the 'pings' for 4 hours is not to do with tracking but some kind of maintenance system as far as I understand it.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Advances in electronic warfare fly under the public's radar

This kind of goes to the Before Its News stuff from the other day...


New electronic weapons allow jamming, blinding, deafening and more, so that a plane could possibly vanish from radar detection and security systems would not be activated. Basic radar Electronic Counter-Measure strategies used in electronic warfare (EW) are: 1) radar interference, 2) target modifications, and 3) changing electrical properties of air. [Source]


edit on 3/14/2014 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


It is for airline maintenance, the airline didn't subscribe to it but it sends the pings anyway, hence that the airline might not have known but military and RR did.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by ManiShuck
 


Some decent information being released now.

So far, from recent updates:

Whoever was flying it tried taking out the communications but forgot to unplug the panel so pings were still being made to Boeing /RR and course detectable by military.

.......



Boeing and Rolls Royce stood with the Malaysians at the press conference and stated they have no data from their systems after the last known whereabouts of the plane. This was corrected in the WSJ, which was where the 2 unamed sources were first quoted.


If there are any 'pings' they have come from some kind of maintenance system that has nothing to do with tracking but a powerful US satellite has picked it up regardless. This was detailed in the WSJ correction - it's still from unverified sources though!



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:31 AM
link   

DrHammondStoat
reply to post by Bilk22
 


The system that has said to be giving off the 'pings' for 4 hours is not to do with tracking but some kind of maintenance system as far as I understand it.
It's the way I understood the explanation for it as well. Was just responding to the poster who said every piece of electronics could be disabled from the cockpit. My understanding of the equipment in question is it's a data feed for the manufacturers of various components so they can make realtime use observations of their equipment for future improvements. It's a service they pay a third party for collecting and transmitting to them.
edit on 56534Fridayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


It is for airline maintenance, the airline didn't subscribe to it but it sends the pings anyway, hence that the airline might not have known but military and RR did.


Yes that's what has been stated in the WSJ after their 'correction'. So the Airline and RR aren't being shifty when they say they have no further data.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


The pings were detected by military / higher agency, RR refused to comment if it received the pings, which it probably did.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 


So I would think it's not something you could disable?



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


Exactly, the airline didn't get the pings and RR refused to release details.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


It is built into the engines.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   

theabsolutetruth
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


The pings were detected by military / higher agency, RR refused to comment if it received the pings, which it probably did.


I'm really not sure that RR would receive them as their data comes from their engines, not other systems on the plane. I'm no expert though could be wrong.

RR denied they got any more data after the plane went missing.



As Hishammuddin mentioned, Rolls-Royce has issued a statement denying that its engines sent out signals from the missing aircraft after it vanished from air traffic control screens.

The statement, which was also sent to the Guardian, said:

Rolls-Royce continues to provide its full support to the authorities and Malaysia Airlines. Rolls-Royce concurs with the statement made on Thursday 13 March by Malaysia’s transport minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, regarding engine health monitoring data received from the aircraft.

edit on 14-3-2014 by DrHammondStoat because: (no reason given)


www.theguardian.com...-5322d72be4b04f4ca4499f bd
edit on 14-3-2014 by DrHammondStoat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:41 AM
link   

DrHammondStoat
reply to post by Bilk22
 


So I would think it's not something you could disable?
I have no real knowledge of the workings of any plane much less a sophisticated 777, but yeah I would guess that system is self-contained and cannot be disabled by flight personnel.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Bilk22
How come it's been fully overlooked that this occurred on the anniversary of a similar hijacking of another flight heading to Beijing? No one believes there can be a connection? Really? On a conspiracy site?
No one wants to address this?

www.nydailynews.com...

The attempt in 2008 happened on March 7th. This last event pretty much occurred on the anniversary of that date. The prior incidents were thwarted. What reason do we have to believe this wasn't as well? In both those incidents the flights were redirected. The initial report on this incident has the same thing happening. This event is connected to China. No doubt in my mind.

Edit: I'll add that the Chinese were similarly given a warning a few weeks prior to this event.
edit on 57447Fridayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)

edit on 57649Fridayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Weird pit bull and sharia plane reference in song


Article-plane reference



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   

DrHammondStoat
reply to post by Bilk22
 


So I would think it's not something you could disable?
My understanding is there is no "off-switch" but that it could be disabled by removing a fuse. One speculation is if someone turned off what they knew how to turn off, but they didn't pull the fuse on the satellite link communication, because they didn't know about it/didn't know how, but this is just regurgitating what someone else posted, not sure of its accuracy. Sounds plausible though.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Arbitrageur

DrHammondStoat
reply to post by Bilk22
 


So I would think it's not something you could disable?
My understanding is there is no "off-switch" but that it could be disabled by removing a fuse. One speculation is if someone turned off what they knew how to turn off, but they didn't pull the fuse on the satellite link communication, because they didn't know about it/didn't know how, but this is just regurgitating what someone else posted, not sure of its accuracy. Sounds plausible though.
That sounds like what was explained by the "expert" on CNN.



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
 


The pings are sent from the engines via VHF Radio or Satellite, it was either these that were detected by military or the plane somehow spotted on military radar, this has yet to be clarified.

www.reuters.com...


Satellites picked up faint electronic pulses from the aircraft after it went missing on Saturday, but the signals gave no information about where the jet was heading and little else about its fate, two sources close to the investigation said on Thursday.

But the "pings" indicated its maintenance troubleshooting systems were switched on and ready to communicate with satellites, showing the aircraft was at least capable of communicating after losing touch with air traffic controllers.

The system transmits such pings about once an hour, according to the sources, who said five or six were heard. However, the pings alone are not proof that the plane was in the air or on the ground, the sources said.






top topics



 
181
<< 143  144  145    147  148  149 >>

log in

join