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: 302
181
<< 299  300  301    303  304  305 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Also just out of interest - someone mentioned an area of flight route 370 would have flown where its transponder signal would not have been detected? so why do other aircraft including Malaysian flights flying the same route to china show up there whole route? I know ive watched them on FR24 the whole un interupted route from Malaysia to China.




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Zaphod58
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.



I would think radio communications would be one of those systems that have numerous backups built in?

Even so, wouldn't even a brief communication failure be considered an emergency? After all, you can't warn the aircraft of weather or other important info. What happens when the crew isn't able to fix their radio and needs to land?

I would guess you start to try to find the plane by contacting the controllers around the last known flight path to see if they can contact them or find them on their radar. I can't see this taking more than 30 minutes.

If you still can't find them, any reasonable person who at least suspect a hijacking and notify the military. I would assume at that point all the super secret military stuff would be put to use and jet fighters would be up in the air.

I would be interested in hearing from air traffic controllers or pilots on what they think would happen if a flight didn't respond to air traffic control.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   

UKGuy1805
So - is there a safer type of fire that would knock out all communication equipment and let the plane travel several thousand miles to an airfield of choice????
I'd expect the fire at 35,000 feet to play out differently than the fire on the ground did. When the hull breached on the ground, there was still plenty of oxygen outside the aircraft to keep fueling the fire. If this happens at 35,000 feet, once the hull breaches, there's not as much oxygen outside to fuel the fire and decompression also starves the fire inside the cockpit. Seems like a major difference to me.

I'm not saying fire caused it, but I see no reason to rule it out, as what you suggest about a different kind of fire under much different conditions seems completely within the realm of possibility.
edit on 25-3-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


I used to get 5 or 6 "comms out" alerts a day. It could be something as simple as a pilot missing a frequency change, to an electrical problem. There are usually at least two radios, and there are short range radios as well, but you can still lose communications. If they were to send out search and rescue for every plane that lost communications, then SAR would be so busy they'd be burned out when they WERE needed.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


I agree Big Time especialy post 911 and with Ukraine-Russia-North Korea, QRA
would have been hotter than a burger on a barby...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Prove it exists. Prove it even exists past the patent stage, instead of just spamming the thread with it. Show me one plane that has it installed.


I don't think they would ever let the public know this was installed. They wouldn't want people to know so it couldn't be disabled by hijackers or hacked into and used by terrorists.

So you can't use the lack of public proof to say it doesn't exist. It's a possibility.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Prove it exists. Prove it even exists past the patent stage, instead of just spamming the thread with it. Show me one plane that has it installed.


I can't physically show it to you over the internet. Can you prove to me that it is not installed on any aircraft? Why isn't the media considering this possibility? Because they've been told not to. The patent and idea are there to see in black and white. That is more evidence than you can provide that it's not in any aircraft.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


So if a communication is out, how does the plane land?

What is the procedure for lost communications?

I'm not talking a little plane but a commercial airliner?
edit on March 25th 2014 by Daughter2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


reply to post by Daughter2
 


So let me get this straight. I can't prove that it DOESN'T exist, because no one has ever said it's out there. But you can say that it DOES exist, because no one has said it's out there.

Wow, what amazing logic there.


edit on 3/25/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


Generally the transponder is working, which means they set it to 7600, which is the radio out code, and the air traffic control clears the way for them if they can't get them on one of the other radios.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


No, I can say its possible it exists.
edit on March 25th 2014 by Daughter2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


It's also possible that a lot of things exist. But there is absolutely zero evidence that this ever went past the patent stage. Not one engineer, not one mechanic, not one pilot has EVER talked about it being installed on an aircraft. No one has ever said "Hey, this is a really bad idea, because someone could take the plane over and crash it, and we can't stop them". So apparently, everyone thinks it's a great idea, and no one has said it's actually in use, because Boeing told them not to.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


reply to post by Daughter2
 


So let me get this straight. I can't prove that it DOESN'T exist, because no one has ever said it's out there. But you can say that it DOES exist, because no one has said it's out there.

Wow, what amazing logic there.


edit on 3/25/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


You completely jumbled all of that up. I said I presented more evidence of its existence, than you have that it doesn't exist.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


You presented a patent. That doesn't prove anything but an idea.
edit on 3/25/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Have you ever had a plane without communication or a working transponder?

If you did what did you do - if you never did, what would you have done?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


I was a ramp rat, so I would have had to fix them. But if you lose communications you put in 7600 on the transponder, which tells ATC that you are radio out.

If you lose just the transponder, you can simply radio them and tell them that your transponder is out (or they will tell you that it's out when they lose the signal).

There are a number of codes that go into the transponder that tell ATC various things going on without you having to radio them. 7500 is hijacking, 7600 is radio out, 7700 is in flight emergency, etc.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


MAH370 had some communication because it talked to a JAL flight after Vietnam controllers lost it. For how long after that, who knows.

High jackers might prevent communication because they have the plane and do not want others to know since the military reaction you mentioned would come into play.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Could this be related to the missing MH370?
Israeli embassies shut down due to strike

MANILA, Philippines- A global strike among Israeli diplomats led to the shutdown of Israeli embassies worldwide, including the Philippines. “At this time, we are sorry to inform the general public that the Embassy of Israel in the Philippines, along with Israeli embassies worldwide, will be closed until further notice,” a statement from the Israel embassy in Manila Tuesday. It added that it is the first time in the history of the state of Israel, that such situation has occurred.
globalnation.inquirer.net...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


So if a Plane is in any sort of emergency, hi jacking, technical difficulties, fire etc...
but cannot communicate at all & all contact is lost... like in this situation...
& needs to land urgently...

What would protocol be???

Is it possible that a flight could be shot down for trying to enter a landing strip without some sort of communication to let people know they're incoming???


Peace Zaphod!



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


My thought is that they are preparing to do something and know the embassies would become targets. Of course that's just the paranoid view from me.



new topics

top topics



 
181
<< 299  300  301    303  304  305 >>

log in

join