It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by Murgatroid
The AAIB guys analysed the sat data from Inmarsat, they aren't the Malaysian investigators. And thanks to Inmarsat and AAIB, there is data at all as obviously the Malaysian guys and FBI had nothing to go on and there wouldn't have been anything known were it not for the Inmarsat and AAIB guys.
The arcs were formulated because of the Inmarsat pings, the arcs were then narrowed down to a 3% area using doppler effect, which is 100% more than came from any of the other supposed investigators. When Inmarsat and AAIB professionally analysed the data, it was then peer reviewed before being released to Malaysia who then checked the data themselves for confirmation before public release.
Instead of blaming the lack of information on conspiracy, perhaps blame the lack of controls in the handover process of ATC areas, blame the lack of security on planes, blame the lack of security measures for ensuring planes stick to flight paths, blame the fact that transponders and ACARS are able to be switched off, blame the lack of immediate action when it went off radar, blame the lack of constant radar coverage, blame the option for buying ACARS instead of a compulsory system, blame the lack of information being released on basic lack of information.
reply to post by sy.gunson
Except, again, OTH-B antennas are subject to ionospheric interference. So the range could be cut down, or the returns could be almost unreadable. You have to check what the ionosphere was doing that day to determine if they could have tracked it.
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
Yeah, you're right. The entire crew most likely wanted to commit suicide.
reply to post by haveblue
It may have started small, and one pilot was programming the autopilot, while the other fought it. Then he joined him because it was too much for one
Firstly you would call in a flight attendant to assist, and therefore not have two pilots fighting the same fire while no one is flying the plane. Flight attendants are trained in fire fighting, and they are the crew that fight the fire if it's in the cabin.
Secondly if the fire was too much for one pilot to handle I suggest it's probably uncontained, or at least a big enough issue not bother with programming an autopilot immediately.
If the fire was contained then why didn't they land at the nearest suitable airport? The crew would have used the smoke removal proceedure and diverted to the nearest suitable alternate. No pilot would continue flying anywhere after they've extinguished a fire. If you've got a fire you squawk 7700, you don't turn the transponder off.
reply to post by sy.gunson
Inmarsat and AAIB are qualified to know their stuff, they know more than you about the data, the details and the investigation and have concluded your theory of 'fire' as EXTREMELY UNLIKELY, so no matter how much you throw your dummy out the pram and calling me names, you are probably wrong and the guys qualified to say so, say so. Face the facts, making little conspiracy theories that are against the facts only proves your lack of facts.
I suggest you write to Inmarsat and AAIB, tell them your theory, do you think they didn't consider 'fire', 'structural', 'accidental' etc as a first call, pretty sure they did and their conclusion is that it is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY, but hey some guy making conspiracy theories on ATS doesn't agree, he want's his own theory. Tantrum much? At least you are a good case study for the psychology students.edit on 25-3-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)
reply to post by WanDash
FlightRadar24 only tracks transponders, and only ADS-b transponders. It wouldn't show anything.
If the data sy.gunson has been turned toward is accurate - being that MH 370 turned right (rather than 'left') at/about the time it disappeared from primary radar...then, flew a direct (virtually) route to the southern Indian Ocean...
This would mean that the plane would have tracked back through the radar-field it had just left...in a short time span.
Does that "radar" (flightradar24), and/or the Malaysian military radar...only track active transponders?
Wouldn't the plane have shown as a blip or some unidentifiable return, when passing back through the primary radar field of Kuala Lumpur's towers?
Does anyone have access to (or - can give a link) FlightRadar24's displays for the hour or so after MH 370 disappeared from view?
The Malaysian military radar purported to have tracked the plane back across the peninsular, and into the Strait of Malacca...
Thailand's military radar was reported to have, likewise, tracked the plane (later determination) south across the Gulf of Thailand, then across Kota Bahru to the Straits of Malacca...
Isn't that awful coincidental?
One of the biggest mystery disappearances of modern times...and, there's another unidentified craft darting around in the same vicinity...leading military investigators away from the...peer reviewed Inmarsat Answer?
How many coincidences does it take to raise a hackle?