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: 314
181
<< 311  312  313    315  316  317 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by pejanene
 


I can't remember why, but your post reminded me of something that was said on this thread back in the first week I think

ats thread and somewhere around those pages

The plane had a had a hatch that if anyone knew about it and it's location, would have had access sensitive parts of the plane?

Expert needed to disable b777 systems


A physical disconnection of the satellite communications system would require extremely detailed knowledge of the aircraft, its internal structure and its systems.

The satellite data system is spread across the aircraft and disabling it would require physical access to key components.

Disconnecting the satellite data system from the jet's central computer, known as AIMS, would disable its transmission. The central computer can be reached from inside the jet while it is flying, but its whereabouts would have to be known by someone deeply familiar with the 777.

Getting into the area housing the 777's computers would "not take a lot" of knowledge, said an aviation professional who has worked with the 777.

However, this person added, "to know what to do there to disable" systems would require considerable understanding of the jet's inner workings.

Some airlines outfit the access hatch to the area below the floor with a special screw to prevent unauthorized intrusion, the person added.


So... is it still possible for a hijacking by persons who were familiar with 777s? Training privately? Someone who used to work in aircraft maintenance and had access to special screw to secretly copy it? Too far fetched?

Edit: Gee willickers!!! On the Pprune forum 787 E/E Hatch post, there is a user asking specifically about the electronics hatch being accessible, for Boeings (not specifically the 777). If that user is lurking here, I say G'day!




woodja51
12th Oct 2013, 03:31
Guys , thanks for responses.

I am after info on the Boeing specifically as the airbus hatch is within the flight deck ...on the Boeing it is in the pax cabin ...

My reasons for asking is to get an idea of why / how / what precipitated operators to install some sprt of lock and how they did this given airworthy authorities normally have to approve modifications if they involve any physical changes to the aircraft as delivered...

I had designed certain fixes to this myself and now find that others may have used my ideas ... Which is fine as yet I dont have any patent protection , but might have precedence on the ideas down the track... Without knowing how various folks have done it I am guessing.. That is why I am after info ... Its a bit like the guy that designed the intermittent wiper .. Ford took it on as their own ( ie stole the idea) and he took years to get them to admit they had pinched it... Not that I thinkI have anything like that... Just researching..


Curious indeed!
edit on 27-3-2014 by auroraaus because: (no reason given)


2nd edit: here's his video on accessibility from a b777 from pax cabin



towards the end of the vid, the cockpit door can depower amongst all the other things... sheesh. Guys!!
edit on 27-3-2014 by auroraaus because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:22 AM
link   
2nd edit: here's his video on accessibility from a b777 from pax cabin


towards the end of the vid, the cockpit door can depower amongst all the other things... sheesh. Guys!!
edit on 27-3-2014 by auroraaus because: (no reason given)


Wow...interesting video. Seriously wondering just how much information is being held back in this investigation.
edit on 27-3-2014 by pejanene because: remove video



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by pejanene
 


Well gives those lawyers in the USA something to sue Boeing for I suppose.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by auroraaus
 


a separate thread was started, this post is very throrough , long but worth the read

sofrep.com...

after explaining why the other possibilities don't work, they explain below what happened and it makes a lot of sense


So, What Do I Think Happened?

I think that Captain Shah and his co-pilot, First Officer Fariq Ab Hamid, conspired together to take the plane and passengers hostage in order to force the Malaysian Government to set aside the conviction of PKR opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. It is fair to say that they worked together based on the following facts.

First, air traffic controllers described the interactions with the flight crew as routine and normal. We know that this routine interaction was occurring even as the flight began to deviate from its approved flight plan about 20 minutes after takeoff. This deviation was the result of an alternate flight plan being executed by the Flight Management System computer.

The air traffic controllers say they are certain that the voice saying “Alright, good night” was the voice of First Officer Hamid, and not Captain Shah. This is significant because normal procedure would have the non-flying pilot communicating with the tower and operating the Flight Management System – that would be the First Officer.

Also significant is that any deviation from the filed flight plan would include an immediate notification by the flight crew to ATC of that change and the reason for it. The plane began to deviate from that flight plan after 20 minutes in flight without such notice to Kuala Lumpur ATC. And we have no report that this deviation was reported by the flight crew, or even noticed by KL ATC.

Next, when the plane reached the limits of Kuala Lumpur’s ATC radar coverage, its Flight Data Transponder was turned off. This occurred two minutes after KL ATC handed the flight off to Ho Chi Minh ATC. There is a report that HCM ATC noticed after 3 minutes or so that the plane did not make contact with them, and would have reported that to KL ATC.

What should have happened next is that KL ATC should have noticed that the Flight Data Transponder had been turned off. They would have tried to raise MH 370 by radio, tell them that their transponder was off, to switch to their alternate and ask why they did not contact HCM ATC. If they received no answer, they would have contacted another plane in the area and asked them to try to reach the MH 370 on their own radio. This is standard operating procedure, and yet there is no report of this happening.

There is a report that another plane heard what they believed was mumbling on an open mike that is being attributed to MH 370, but there is no way to confirm this. Until the Malaysian authorities release the transcripts of the full and complete conversation between MH 370 and KL ATC, and disclose their actions upon learning the plane never made contact with HCM ATC, we aren’t going to know.

I think the gentle turn to the NNW up to Thailand was done to not disturb the passengers, who would not have noticed the slow turn and were probably asleep for the most part on this red-eye to Beijing. In the dark, and over water, anyone still awake would have been looking out into inky blackness. If the plane had an inflight entertainment system which included a video map of the plane’s flight progress, this would have been shut off by the pilots, perhaps reporting to the passengers that it was broken.

I think this may explain why no one made a call, text or tweet saying they had been hijacked. They didn’t know anything was wrong.

As the plane flew into the Gulf of Thailand, I think it made a programmed gradual descent down below 5,000 feet and the pilot throttled it back to about 250 kts. On radar it would have looked like a small private plan or inter island cargo plane and would not have attracted much notice from Thailand, which paid it no notice apparently, or the Malaysian military, which also didn’t notice it until it was told to look for it days later. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 27-3-2014 by research100 because: corrected spelling



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:45 AM
link   
And the towed pinger locator has arrived in Perth. It takes roughly 4 hours to get out to the site, and unsure if it's "Ready to roll" given the bad seas.
Pinger locator ready to roll

The Towed Pinger Locator 25 (TPL-25), a United States Navy equipment has arrived in Perth, Australia to assist in the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines MH370.
The new equipment enable the team to locate the flight recorder at a maximum depth of 20,000 feet.
The TPL-25 would be towed behind a vessel at slow speeds, generally from 1 - 5 knots depending on the depth.
Recovery of the “pingers” which usually mounted directly on commercial aircraft flight recorder was critical in the accident investigation.
Most “pingers” transmit every second at 37.5 kHz, however the TPL-25 can detect any “pinger” transmitting between 3.5 kHz and 50 kHz at any repetition rate.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   

research100
reply to post by auroraaus
 


a separate thread was started, this post is very throrough , long but worth the read

sofrep.com...

after explaining why the other possibilities don't work, they explain below what happened and it makes a lot of sense


So, What Do I Think Happened?

I think that Captain Shah and his co-pilot, First Officer Fariq Ab Hamid, conspired together to take the plane and passengers hostage in order to force the Malaysian Government to set aside the conviction of PKR opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim....




I posted a similar theory a few pages back. It does indeed make sense in many areas, although the profile released for the co-pilot doesn't paint him as a political activist.

For me, what doesn't make sense is that if negotitations fell through for such an elaborate plan, there's no way the pilot would not have been savvy enough to make the crash an international event. Why would he quietly crash the plane? Inconsistent with his motives. Or he could've landed it in another country to highlight his cause. If this scenario were true, I'd say it would have had to ended with Malaysia shooting the plane down due to perhaps a threat from the pilot.
edit on 27-3-2014 by pejanene because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:26 AM
link   

auroraaus
reply to post by pejanene
 


I can't remember why, but your post reminded me of something that was said on this thread back in the first week I think

ats thread and somewhere around those pages

The plane had a had a hatch that if anyone knew about it and it's location, would have had access sensitive parts of the plane?

Expert needed to disable b777 systems


A physical disconnection of the satellite communications system would require extremely detailed knowledge of the aircraft, its internal structure and its systems.

The satellite data system is spread across the aircraft and disabling it would require physical access to key components.

Disconnecting the satellite data system from the jet's central computer, known as AIMS, would disable its transmission. The central computer can be reached from inside the jet while it is flying, but its whereabouts would have to be known by someone deeply familiar with the 777.

Getting into the area housing the 777's computers would "not take a lot" of knowledge, said an aviation professional who has worked with the 777.


It is no great secret Auroraaus...



This is the avionics bay of the Boeing 777





At the foot of the ladder visible in the previous photo are oxygen bottles:



Therefore you don't need terrorists, because electrical arcing in this avionics bay is enough to induce an electrical charge through electrically insulated pilot oxygen lines sufficient to rupture them.

Boeing tests have proven at 28VAC 5amps or more and temperatures above 600.F pilot oxygen hoses will rupture and feed a fire beneath the cockpit.

There are two recent examples of this: 28 June 2008 an oxygen fed fire destroyed flight deck of a 767 awaiting departure at San Francisco and Egyptair Flight 667 in 2011.









edit on 27-3-2014 by sy.gunson because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:36 AM
link   

judydawg
reply to post by auroraaus
 



One other thing I went back and could not find the last cockpit communications, I believe at the end was a mumble, which could mean the pilots went unconscious, nothing adds up so they still don't know or we are being mislead. At this point anything could have happened. I also think everyone is trying to fit a story together not to be sued.


Not quite, JAL 750 was asked to raise MH370 on the emergency distress frequency 121.5 MgHz. MH088 claimed to have spoken with MH370 and got some garbled response on 121.5 MgHz. Nobody has ever confirmed MH370 replied.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:50 AM
link   

research100
reply to post by auroraaus
 


a separate thread was started, this post is very throrough , long but worth the read

sofrep.com...

after explaining why the other possibilities don't work, they explain below what happened and it makes a lot of sense


So, What Do I Think Happened?

I think that Captain Shah and his co-pilot, First Officer Fariq Ab Hamid, conspired together to take the plane and passengers hostage in order to force the Malaysian Government to set aside the conviction of PKR opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. It is fair to say that they worked together based on the following facts.

First, air traffic controllers described the interactions with the flight crew as routine and normal. We know that this routine interaction was occurring even as the flight began to deviate from its approved flight plan about 20 minutes after takeoff. This deviation was the result of an alternate flight plan being executed by the Flight Management System computer.

The air traffic controllers say they are certain that the voice saying “Alright, good night” was the voice of First Officer Hamid, and not Captain Shah. This is significant because normal procedure would have the non-flying pilot communicating with the tower and operating the Flight Management System – that would be the First Officer.

Also significant is that any deviation from the filed flight plan would include an immediate notification by the flight crew to ATC of that change and the reason for it. The plane began to deviate from that flight plan after 20 minutes in flight without such notice to Kuala Lumpur ATC. And we have no report that this deviation was reported by the flight crew, or even noticed by KL ATC.

Next, when the plane reached the limits of Kuala Lumpur’s ATC radar coverage, its Flight Data Transponder was turned off. This occurred two minutes after KL ATC handed the flight off to Ho Chi Minh ATC. There is a report that HCM ATC noticed after 3 minutes or so that the plane did not make contact with them, and would have reported that to KL ATC.

What should have happened next is that KL ATC should have noticed that the Flight Data Transponder had been turned off. They would have tried to raise MH 370 by radio, tell them that their transponder was off, to switch to their alternate and ask why they did not contact HCM ATC. If they received no answer, they would have contacted another plane in the area and asked them to try to reach the MH 370 on their own radio. This is standard operating procedure, and yet there is no report of this happening.

There is a report that another plane heard what they believed was mumbling on an open mike that is being attributed to MH 370, but there is no way to confirm this. Until the Malaysian authorities release the transcripts of the full and complete conversation between MH 370 and KL ATC, and disclose their actions upon learning the plane never made contact with HCM ATC, we aren’t going to know.

I think the gentle turn to the NNW up to Thailand was done to not disturb the passengers, who would not have noticed the slow turn and were probably asleep for the most part on this red-eye to Beijing. In the dark, and over water, anyone still awake would have been looking out into inky blackness. If the plane had an inflight entertainment system which included a video map of the plane’s flight progress, this would have been shut off by the pilots, perhaps reporting to the passengers that it was broken.

I think this may explain why no one made a call, text or tweet saying they had been hijacked. They didn’t know anything was wrong.

As the plane flew into the Gulf of Thailand, I think it made a programmed gradual descent down below 5,000 feet and the pilot throttled it back to about 250 kts. On radar it would have looked like a small private plan or inter island cargo plane and would not have attracted much notice from Thailand, which paid it no notice apparently, or the Malaysian military, which also didn’t notice it until it was told to look for it days later. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 27-3-2014 by research100 because: corrected spelling




The aircraft did not turn into the Gulf of Thailand, nor climb to 45,000ft nor descend to 5,000ft. These are falsehoods liberally scattered by the Malaysian government which misled most people including myself.

MH370 reached IGARI and just like three flights MH66, MH88 and MH52 which proceeded MH370 all turned right to 40 degrees and tracked to waypoint BIBAN (southern tip of Vietnam). It was a regular aerial highway and that was a common route.

Up to IGARI flights are under radar control, past IGARI they are under procedural control (ie voice contact).

Your entire theory is fantasy because we now know from INMARSAT satellite pings that it never turned west
...it never climbed to 45,000ft
...it never descended below 30,000ft
...it never flew to the Straits of Malacca
...it turned south from Vietnam and maintained a steady 450knots.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Mikeultra
I have done some simple math figuring the operating empty weight, maximum takeoff weight, and maximum landing weight for the Boeing 777-200ER. This model aircraft can carry a maximum of 282 passengers in seating configuration C35Y247. Flight MH370 only had 227 passengers and 12 crew. So the numbers are as follows;

304,500 lbs. - operating empty weight
+36,320 lbs. - 227 passengers @ 160 lbs each
=340,820 lbs. - net weight
+ 1920 lbs. - crew weight
= 342,740 lbs. - net weight

656,000 lbs. - maximum takeoff weight
- 342,740 lbs. - net weight (crew, passengers, and aircraft)
= 313,260 lbs. - available for secret cargo

That's right the cargo was secret, Malaysian Air will not divulge what the massive cargo was.
en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 26-3-2014 by Mikeultra because: (no reason given)


Oh dear ....everybody here's a warning.

Don't ever board a flight with Captain Mikeultra because he miscalculated the passenger weight and made no allowance for fuel.

Nevermind with zero fuel he probably wont ever taxi past the gate either.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   

sy.gunson

The aircraft did not turn into the Gulf of Thailand, nor climb to 45,000ft nor descend to 5,000ft. These are falsehoods liberally scattered by the Malaysian government which misled most people including myself.

MH370 reached IGARI and just like three flights MH66, MH88 and MH52 which proceeded MH370 all turned right to 40 degrees and tracked to waypoint BIBAN (southern tip of Vietnam). It was a regular aerial highway and that was a common route.

Up to IGARI flights are under radar control, past IGARI they are under procedural control (ie voice contact).

Your entire theory is fantasy because we now know from INMARSAT satellite pings that it never turned west
...it never climbed to 45,000ft
...it never descended below 30,000ft
...it never flew to the Straits of Malacca
...it turned south from Vietnam and maintained a steady 450knots.




Why are you so sure that the INMARSAT data is the gospel? If the information that you deem were falsehoods are according to you liberally scattered by the Malaysian government, what first hand evidence and information do you hold that makes you privvy to the fact that INMARSAT's analysis is infallible? Fool me once...

By no stretch of the imagination am I endorsing any single theory, but I come back to the Australian official (whose name I've unfortunately forgotten) who coherently said something along the lines that until concrete evidence or wreckage of the plane is found, everything is speculation.

Everyone here is trying to make sense of a colossal mystery and cluster f#$ of an accident investigation, and it annoys me to those who are also armchair warriors making statements as if they have proof.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:13 AM
link   

auroraaus
reply to post by Mikeultra
 


Yeah, you need the fuel in that equation, plus the weight of the passengers luggage and carry on luggage, plus the carry on for the crew,

and 3-5 metric tonnes of mangosteens and 200kgs of lithium-ion batteries and small radios/walkie talkies.

Plus what Zaphod said.



31,000 US gallons at 6.7lb per gallon (=207,700lb/94,295.8kg) with a payload of about 34,400kg plus empty weight of 138,100kg

Take off weight 266,795.8kg = 8,000ft take off distance Standard ISA + 15 degrees C

....no payload capacity to spare Capt. Mikeultra unless you want to overrun the runway?



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:21 AM
link   

pejanene

sy.gunson

The aircraft did not turn into the Gulf of Thailand, nor climb to 45,000ft nor descend to 5,000ft. These are falsehoods liberally scattered by the Malaysian government which misled most people including myself.

MH370 reached IGARI and just like three flights MH66, MH88 and MH52 which proceeded MH370 all turned right to 40 degrees and tracked to waypoint BIBAN (southern tip of Vietnam). It was a regular aerial highway and that was a common route.

Up to IGARI flights are under radar control, past IGARI they are under procedural control (ie voice contact).

Your entire theory is fantasy because we now know from INMARSAT satellite pings that it never turned west
...it never climbed to 45,000ft
...it never descended below 30,000ft
...it never flew to the Straits of Malacca
...it turned south from Vietnam and maintained a steady 450knots.




Why are you so sure that the INMARSAT data is the gospel? If the information that you deem were falsehoods are according to you liberally scattered by the Malaysian government, what first hand evidence and information do you hold that makes you privvy to the fact that INMARSAT's analysis is infallible? Fool me once...

By no stretch of the imagination am I endorsing any single theory, but I come back to the Australian official (whose name I've unfortunately forgotten) who coherently said something along the lines that until concrete evidence or wreckage of the plane is found, everything is speculation.

Everyone here is trying to make sense of a colossal mystery and cluster f#$ of an accident investigation, and it annoys me to those who are also armchair warriors making statements as if they have proof.


Because Malaysian authorities have lied and then lied again multiple times to cover up and then cover up their cover ups.

Also because MH370 flew right through OTHR radar coverage by the Australian JORN system and was watched in real time on its last flight and INMARSAT merely corroborates the OTHR data.

The other reason is that flight to 45,000ft by a Boeing 777 at 266,000kg minus 6,000kg for climb to cruise is physically impossible.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   

auroraaus
reply to post by drwill
 


I was re-reading the info about the previous murder-pilot suicide flights in the past two decades (I can't believe the 90s were 20 years ago... I feel like I am missing a decade somewhere lol)

1. Out of all those pilot suicides-murders - all of them went straight into terrain some moments after take off, or about 40 mins after take off...
2. One of the pilots (think it was egyptair?) had a huge problem with his finances, huuuuge problem - what do we know of the finances of the pilots of mh370?
3. Was it the SilkAir one, where the NTSB said it was pilot suicide, a jury in the LA Supreme court couldn't hear or see evidence from the NTSB investigations and decided it was a failure of some valve thingamejig, so that allowed for the manufacturer of said valve and families of the deceased to settle out of court, although manufacturer didn't accept liability. And the Indonesians investigating said all evidence inconclusive. 3 different outcomes. What a headache!


One again, Plane was going along for about 7 hours after lost ATC and transponder switched off. I really doubt any of the pilots would have been happy to knock everyone out and let the plane run out of fuel. I doubt the Captain as a "devout" follower of Anwar would want to besmirch his name further by killing 238 other people and take the plane somewhere where no one would ever find the wreckage.

Nothing is impossible, but I am saying suicide in this case (at least intentional murder-suicide by pilot) is improbable.

I respect that some of you have different opinions in regard to this.


2nd that! No way suicide for me. Hijack by someone, either ME's or US



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 

Dearest Sy,

What would I do without your input? Thanks


Can I just ask, sorry if it's been answered before, but there's about 300 pages here and I can be a little dense sometimes.. but if the plane didn't go below 30kft, then how come it wasn't noticed on civilian radar? (but noticed on military radar going back over the peninsular and not deemed a threat...for some reason)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 03:41 AM
link   

sy.gunson

pejanene

sy.gunson

The aircraft did not turn into the Gulf of Thailand, nor climb to 45,000ft nor descend to 5,000ft. These are falsehoods liberally scattered by the Malaysian government which misled most people including myself.

MH370 reached IGARI and just like three flights MH66, MH88 and MH52 which proceeded MH370 all turned right to 40 degrees and tracked to waypoint BIBAN (southern tip of Vietnam). It was a regular aerial highway and that was a common route.

Up to IGARI flights are under radar control, past IGARI they are under procedural control (ie voice contact).

Your entire theory is fantasy because we now know from INMARSAT satellite pings that it never turned west
...it never climbed to 45,000ft
...it never descended below 30,000ft
...it never flew to the Straits of Malacca
...it turned south from Vietnam and maintained a steady 450knots.




Why are you so sure that the INMARSAT data is the gospel? If the information that you deem were falsehoods are according to you liberally scattered by the Malaysian government, what first hand evidence and information do you hold that makes you privvy to the fact that INMARSAT's analysis is infallible? Fool me once...

By no stretch of the imagination am I endorsing any single theory, but I come back to the Australian official (whose name I've unfortunately forgotten) who coherently said something along the lines that until concrete evidence or wreckage of the plane is found, everything is speculation.

Everyone here is trying to make sense of a colossal mystery and cluster f#$ of an accident investigation, and it annoys me to those who are also armchair warriors making statements as if they have proof.


Because Malaysian authorities have lied and then lied again multiple times to cover up and then cover up their cover ups.

Also because MH370 flew right through OTHR radar coverage by the Australian JORN system and was watched in real time on its last flight and INMARSAT merely corroborates the OTHR data.

The other reason is that flight to 45,000ft by a Boeing 777 at 266,000kg minus 6,000kg for climb to cruise is physically impossible.




Thanks for the reply, and I am certainly on the same page that much of the information from Malaysia has been lies. I am truly curious though, as I'm personally trying to formulate a well-informed perspective on this whole matter:

Where is the evidence and hard data that MH370 flew through the JORN system's radars? From what I know it was supposedly pointed in the wrong direction? Of course they may be saying that to protect their military information but where did you get this information from specifically? That information would pretty much put everything to rest and allow all involved to have an accurate track of the plane.

Lastly, has it been fully divulged by the Malaysians the payload, etc. of this flight? I thought Malaysia has never come clean about this?
edit on 27-3-2014 by pejanene because: crappy grammar again



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 04:06 AM
link   
Somewhere someone (on this thread) said that the plane had enough fuel for 12 hours flight.
This was because fuel in China is expensive and flights going there often carry extra fuel to return without refuel in China(pprun.org)

This would alter the weight calculations and might be the reason for the passengers on the waiting list not being able to board and for the extra weight which we think is for some unknown cargo. In the early days of this thread it was reported that 50 passengers could not get on due to weight restrictions and subsequently there was a seating/weight calculation indicating that it was just over 40 passengers-worth of weight not 50. The Malaysians do not want to admit to the exra fuel (hence extra weight) due to the fact that they may offend China (price of expensive fuel)

There may not be any extra secret cargo if the weight of this extra fuel is taken into account. How does the distance pan out with that fuel on board assuming that the plane ran out of fuel in the Indian Ocean.

Strange how the Chinese French and the Australians all found their pieces of debris in roughly the same area. (according to the French article posted earlier) Maybe there is something to this theory that the plane crashed off Perth in the Indian Ocean?

We must not forget that the captain was an in-law of some Malaysian politician and so HIS WIFE is going to be a relative of the politician. This means that the politician (Prime MInister?) will probably be insisting that she does not get interviewed or harassed by the media there.

Chinese insurers pay compensation to MH370 relatives

BEIJING, March 27 (Xinhua) -- Chinese insurance companies told Xinhua on Thursday they have begun paying compensation to the families of passengers aboard the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

The companies said compensation work was immediately launched after Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said late on Monday that the flight "ended" in the southern Indian Ocean, even though no concrete evidence or full information has supported this conclusion yet.

China Life, the country's largest insurance company, said it has 32 clients on board the flight and estimated its total compensation at around 9 million yuan (1.46 million U.S. dollars). The company had paid 4.17 million yuan in compensation to families of seven clients by Tuesday.


If anyone wants a search done on this thread, I can search for a word/phrase and pm you the page/post ids.
edit on 27 Mar 2014 by qmantoo because: add xinhua link



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 04:13 AM
link   



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 04:27 AM
link   

gisolator
Sorry in case this was posted already:

Malaysia says there's sealed evidence on MH370 that cannot be made public

Lol. such as ufo activity?



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   

gisolator
Sorry in case this was posted already:

Malaysia says there's sealed evidence on MH370 that cannot be made public
If that's confirmed I'm surprised they would seal the ATC communications. That will fuel some conspiracy theories and if I was a family member I'd want to know why it's sealed. I'm not even a family member and I still want to know.




top topics



 
181
<< 311  312  313    315  316  317 >>

log in

join