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.

 

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

page: 298
181
<< 295  296  297    299  300  301 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Mikeultra

Seek_Truth
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


I followed Wiki's source on the ETOPS to a pdf file created by Boeing.

Found this interesting to say the least:


Typical Policy Statement for Remote US Military Airports:

"The US Navy advises that NSF Diego Garcia may be identified as an Extended Range Twin Engine Operations (ETOPS) emergency landing site (en route alternate) for flight planning purposes. This is consistent with US government policy that an aircraft can land at any US military airfield if the pilot determines there is an in-flight emergency that would make continued flight unsafe. However, as NSF Diego Garcia is a military facility, it s incumbent on aircraft operators to continuously monitor NOTAMS which may temporarily restrict the use of the airfield, even for emergency diversions. It is imperative that aircraft diverting to NSF Diego Garcia comply fully with all air defense procedures, as non-compliance could be misconstrued as a hostile act.

Further, it s understood there are published criteria for ETOPS airfields, and our policy concerning emergency use is not agreement or certification that this airfield meets those criteria. NSF Diego Garcia is a remote location with resources (accommodations, medical, hangars, crash/fire/rescue, etc) limited to levels essential for support of assigned personnel and the military mission. The airfield is available "as is" for emergency use only as indicated above."

-Policy Statement for NSF Diego Garcia, 2002


Boeing PDF


Interesting... so if there were incapacitated pilots flying by autopilot and they didn't respond to Diego Garcia, they would be treated as hostile! That explains why Immarsat, a British company has misdirected the search to the far South Indian Ocean!


Exactly! Makes complete sense to me.

Edit to Add: This also explains why the pilot had Diego Garcia programmed into his flight sim. Most likely he needed to learn/practice the route and landing in case it applied to a real life scenario. In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


edit on 25-3-2014 by Seek_Truth because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Mark Kennedy and Jeff Reynolds were both decorated ex-Navy Seals and died on the Maersk Alabama while working for The Trident Group. Marks Kennedy obituary.
www.legacy.com...

navysealsfund.org...

www.nbcsandiego.com...

www.legacy.com...
edit on 25-3-2014 by Mikeultra because: (no reason given)


homepost.kpbs.org...
edit on 25-3-2014 by Mikeultra because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2014 by Mikeultra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Seek_Truth

Mikeultra

Seek_Truth
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


I followed Wiki's source on the ETOPS to a pdf file created by Boeing.

Found this interesting to say the least:


Typical Policy Statement for Remote US Military Airports:

"The US Navy advises that NSF Diego Garcia may be identified as an Extended Range Twin Engine Operations (ETOPS) emergency landing site (en route alternate) for flight planning purposes. This is consistent with US government policy that an aircraft can land at any US military airfield if the pilot determines there is an in-flight emergency that would make continued flight unsafe. However, as NSF Diego Garcia is a military facility, it s incumbent on aircraft operators to continuously monitor NOTAMS which may temporarily restrict the use of the airfield, even for emergency diversions. It is imperative that aircraft diverting to NSF Diego Garcia comply fully with all air defense procedures, as non-compliance could be misconstrued as a hostile act.

Further, it s understood there are published criteria for ETOPS airfields, and our policy concerning emergency use is not agreement or certification that this airfield meets those criteria. NSF Diego Garcia is a remote location with resources (accommodations, medical, hangars, crash/fire/rescue, etc) limited to levels essential for support of assigned personnel and the military mission. The airfield is available "as is" for emergency use only as indicated above."

-Policy Statement for NSF Diego Garcia, 2002


Boeing PDF


Interesting... so if there were incapacitated pilots flying by autopilot and they didn't respond to Diego Garcia, they would be treated as hostile! That explains why Immarsat, a British company has misdirected the search to the far South Indian Ocean!


Exactly! Makes complete sense to me.

Edit to Add: This also explains why the pilot had Diego Garcia programmed into his flight sim. Most likely he needed to learn/practice the route and landing in case it applied to a real life scenario. In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


edit on 25-3-2014 by Seek_Truth because: (no reason given)


Or he landed. if reaching DG how many hours would the plane have been in the air?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Star for you.
In IMHO, McLaughlin was shilling a bit. Not at first, but as the day wore on, and he'd been interviewed by every hungry-for-ratings TV journalist, he sounded sales-pitchy. Ambition seemed to cut both ways (again, IMHO) between him and the TV hosts. It makes me wonder how many corporations will benefit from this tragic mystery.
edit on 25-3-2014 by drwill because: clarity not my forte



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   

RP2SticksOfDynamite

Seek_Truth

Mikeultra

Seek_Truth
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


I followed Wiki's source on the ETOPS to a pdf file created by Boeing.

Found this interesting to say the least:


Typical Policy Statement for Remote US Military Airports:

"The US Navy advises that NSF Diego Garcia may be identified as an Extended Range Twin Engine Operations (ETOPS) emergency landing site (en route alternate) for flight planning purposes. This is consistent with US government policy that an aircraft can land at any US military airfield if the pilot determines there is an in-flight emergency that would make continued flight unsafe. However, as NSF Diego Garcia is a military facility, it s incumbent on aircraft operators to continuously monitor NOTAMS which may temporarily restrict the use of the airfield, even for emergency diversions. It is imperative that aircraft diverting to NSF Diego Garcia comply fully with all air defense procedures, as non-compliance could be misconstrued as a hostile act.

Further, it s understood there are published criteria for ETOPS airfields, and our policy concerning emergency use is not agreement or certification that this airfield meets those criteria. NSF Diego Garcia is a remote location with resources (accommodations, medical, hangars, crash/fire/rescue, etc) limited to levels essential for support of assigned personnel and the military mission. The airfield is available "as is" for emergency use only as indicated above."

-Policy Statement for NSF Diego Garcia, 2002


Boeing PDF


Interesting... so if there were incapacitated pilots flying by autopilot and they didn't respond to Diego Garcia, they would be treated as hostile! That explains why Immarsat, a British company has misdirected the search to the far South Indian Ocean!


Exactly! Makes complete sense to me.

Edit to Add: This also explains why the pilot had Diego Garcia programmed into his flight sim. Most likely he needed to learn/practice the route and landing in case it applied to a real life scenario. In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


edit on 25-3-2014 by Seek_Truth because: (no reason given)


Or he landed. if reaching DG how many hours would the plane have been in the air?


A 777 cruises at Mach .84 which is 639 miles per hour at 35,000 feet. Kuala Lumpur to Diego Garcia is 2136 miles. That's 3.34 hours flight time. I think it was shot down. The U.S. has done it before. Iran Air 655 July 03, 1988 en.wikipedia.org...
TWA 800 July 17, 1996 abcnews.go.com...

There was missile testing going on from Wallops Island, VA when TWA800 was downed by a anti-missile fired from a U.S. Navy ship.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I have a question that was probably answered somewhere in this thread but I probably missed it. So if anyone knows, please let me know.

I still don't understand why they didn't know the plane was missing within the first couple hours of the flight? Isn't the flight usually handed off from one control tower to the other?

I just don't believe in this post 9/11 age, a plane could go missing for over five hours before people started to look for it.

I also don't believe that countries can only detect planes with 30 miles from a radar station. Maybe civilian airports but the military has to have way more advanced tracking than that. You tell me a military base wouldn't know of an unknown incoming plane until it was within 30 miles?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Don't forget about Israel... they have done it before as well, and their immediate alarmist styled reaction to the missing flight was questioned by many.

Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Seek_Truth
In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


With what? Diego Garcia houses bombers and cargo aircraft that fly to the region, including Afghanistan and Iraq. There is nothing there to shoot it down with. They don't even house Patriot batteries there. So how did they shoot it down?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


Because planes occasionally suffer radio and transponder failure. Most of the time the crew is able to fix it, and they come back up. Until it's scheduled landing time, and going overdue, there was no way to know with any certainty that it was missing.

As far as the radar, all airports have Primary radar to cover the TCA. Primary radar is all that can see the actual aircraft itself, not just the transponder. Radar can see out to about 250 miles or so before the horizon curve blocks the signal. But you can't tell what it is without the transponder signal.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   

OatDelphi
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Don't forget about Israel... they have done it before as well, and their immediate alarmist styled reaction to the missing flight was questioned by many.

Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114





Thanks for that one. I didn't know about that. So the Libyan plane got lost in a sandstorm and when Israeli F-4 fighters wanted the plane to follow them, the Libyan plane turned west. That was just too threatening to the Israelis and they shot it down! Criminals they are!


At 13:54, Flight 114 entered airspace over the Sinai desert, cruising at 20,000 feet (6,100 m). Two minutes later, two Israeli Air Force F-4 fighters were scrambled to investigate and they intercepted the airliner at 13:59. The Israeli fighter pilots attempted to make visual contact with the passenger airliner's crew, and tried to communicate to them by signaling with their hands, dipping their wings and firing warning shots, that they should follow the F-4s back to Rephidim Air Base. The 727 crew's response was interpreted as a denial of that request.[2]:289 The 727 turned back to the west, and the Israeli pilots interpreted this as an attempt to flee.[8] The Israeli F-4 pilots fired bursts of 20mm rounds with the F-4's cannon. The rounds severely damaged control surfaces, hydraulic systems, and the wing structure itself. Flight 114 crashed while attempting an emergency landing[2]:289 in an area covered with sand dunes. Following an explosion near the right main landing gear during the crash, 108 of the 113 people aboard died.
en.wikipedia.org...

Also the Korean flight 007 shot down by the Soviets on 09/01/1983 en.wikipedia.org...

So to the skeptics out there, this really does happen in real life! I hope they get busted for covering this one up!



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


Pretty much.

We can put man on the moon with primitive avionics/rocketry/computing.

But like, a nation state doesn't notice a plane without a transponder going over their main peninsular on their military radar...or they notice and fail to say/do anything.

That's good to know, like I said about the Andaman Islands and the Indians saying "Hey, yo, we didn't have our radar switched on!" and hey Malaysia apparently is slow or null to react to a mystery object going overhead. Yeah, I would be more keen to attack/invade knowing such a weakness in defense! Boooyah!

*sings* you can't start a fireeee, can't start a firee without a sparrrk

Edit: Mikeultra, check your inbox darn it
edit on 25-3-2014 by auroraaus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


So what type of fighter that wasn't at Diego Garcia did they use?

See, that's the HUGE flaw in the theory. They don't base fighters there. They don't have SAM systems there. So how did they shoot it down?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Zaphod58

Seek_Truth
In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


With what? Diego Garcia houses bombers and cargo aircraft that fly to the region, including Afghanistan and Iraq. There is nothing there to shoot it down with. They don't even house Patriot batteries there. So how did they shoot it down?




Fighters are just a phone call away!



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Zaphod58

Seek_Truth
In this case, it was a real life scenario, he did what he thought was best and flew towards Diego Garcia for an emergency landing w/out comms, and they shot him down.


With what? Diego Garcia houses bombers and cargo aircraft that fly to the region, including Afghanistan and Iraq. There is nothing there to shoot it down with. They don't even house Patriot batteries there. So how did they shoot it down?



Typical Policy Statement for Remote US Military Airports:

"The US Navy advises that NSF Diego Garcia may be identified as an Extended Range Twin Engine Operations (ETOPS) emergency landing site (en route alternate) for flight planning purposes. This is consistent with US government policy that an aircraft can land at any US military airfield if the pilot determines there is an in-flight emergency that would make continued flight unsafe. However, as NSF Diego Garcia is a military facility, it s incumbent on aircraft operators to continuously monitor NOTAMS which may temporarily restrict the use of the airfield, even for emergency diversions. It is imperative that aircraft diverting to NSF Diego Garcia comply fully with all air defense procedures, as non-compliance could be misconstrued as a hostile act.

Further, it s understood there are published criteria for ETOPS airfields, and our policy concerning emergency use is not agreement or certification that this airfield meets those criteria. NSF Diego Garcia is a remote location with resources (accommodations, medical, hangars, crash/fire/rescue, etc) limited to levels essential for support of assigned personnel and the military mission. The airfield is available "as is" for emergency use only as indicated above."

-Policy Statement for NSF Diego Garcia, 2002


Why would such a statement be made if they weren't prepared to act accordingly to something hostile?

Certainly they have something they could shoot it down with. What, I have no idea.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


So they used a fighter that was retired years ago?

Uhm, no. No they're not. Unless there is a carrier in the area, which there currently isn't, there are NO fighters near Diego Garcia that could just be whistled up to shoot down a random plane. That's where you theory falls to tiny little pieces.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Seek_Truth
 


Warships occasionally dock there as part of convoys, or as singletons. They're not stationed there permanently, and there are no SAM batteries there to be found. All military bases that the US operates from have rules that you have to follow air defense procedures. But it would have to be the luck of the draw for a warship to just HAPPEN to be there when MH370 approached. And shooting it down is the LAST possible straw. They would identify it first, long before they were ready to shoot.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Seek_Truth
 


Warships occasionally dock there as part of convoys, or as singletons. They're not stationed there permanently, and there are no SAM batteries there to be found. All military bases that the US operates from have rules that you have to follow air defense procedures. But it would have to be the luck of the draw for a warship to just HAPPEN to be there when MH370 approached. And shooting it down is the LAST possible straw. They would identify it first, long before they were ready to shoot.


So what you are saying is that Diego Garcia is essentially a sitting duck to any attack from the air? Unless it happens to have a warship in port?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


So they used a fighter that was retired years ago?

Uhm, no. No they're not. Unless there is a carrier in the area, which there currently isn't, there are NO fighters near Diego Garcia that could just be whistled up to shoot down a random plane. That's where you theory falls to tiny little pieces.


How did I know you were going to tell me the Tomcat was retired? I just did. I'm sure an FA-18 is not far off on a carrier somewhere.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Seek_Truth
 


Warships occasionally dock there as part of convoys, or as singletons. They're not stationed there permanently, and there are no SAM batteries there to be found. All military bases that the US operates from have rules that you have to follow air defense procedures. But it would have to be the luck of the draw for a warship to just HAPPEN to be there when MH370 approached. And shooting it down is the LAST possible straw. They would identify it first, long before they were ready to shoot.


Did the USS Vincennes bother to identify Iran Air 655 before blowing it out of the sky? en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Seek_Truth
 


You would be amazed at how many US bases have little to no defense on them. Diego Garcia is just another one of them.



new topics

top topics



 
181
<< 295  296  297    299  300  301 >>

log in

join