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: 382
181
<< 379  380  381    383  384  385 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


Not necessarily wild speculation. That same theory has been brought forward several times in the nearly 400 pages of this thread.




posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Mikeultra

Zaphod58
reply to post by Tallone
 


And taking no. 1 doesn't change the fact that the laws of physics still apply. You can not believe anything the media or government says, and be so own minded your brain falls out. But that's not going to change how aircraft fly, or how far they can fly.

You talk about logic and reason, well no matter how you look at it, the aircraft can't fly out of Kuala Lumpur with enough fuel to get its full range. Unless of course it took off without passengers or cargo.


Now you're cooking with fire. I like that theory. No passengers, cargo, or crew! This was a test for a Boeing fully remote controlled flying "terrorist weapon". This was just a test with no target. MH370 was probably flown to Diego Garcia, broken up, loaded on a military cargo ship bound for Melbourne, so they could dump it in the Indian Ocean garbage gyre so it would never be found.

The next time Boeing aircraft disappear it will involve normal flights carrying passengers, will involve multiple aircraft (like 911, all Boeing aircraft) and it will be made possible using the Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot. Boeing is a defense contractor it must be understood. It should be obvious by now that they are not telling the truth in so many ways and they are not going to retrieve any wreckage or black boxes. This was all a test to see how easily the media via the boob tube can lead people to believe something happened, which in fact didn't. It could be a complete fabrication. Let me take a guess as to what network broke the news, CNN? They are perfecting their propaganda mind control. People will believe anything that comes from the TV.

There is no logical explanation for all the changing accounts involved with this incident. That leaves only the unfathomable, not nice to believe but it's all that's left. The U.S., U.K., Malaysians, and Saudis are practicing for the next 911. Will it be in 2014?


I seriously doubt this "no passengers" theory because it is practically impossible to fake the grieving families and relatives.
I am open to the "remote hijack" theory though.

Came across this video on Reddit's /r/conspiracy.
This video mentions two interesting facts:
- The planes hitting the twin towers were turned at the precise second and at the correct angle of turn. Video questions how amateurs were able to perform this highly technical feat.
- Unidentified jumbo jets were seen over White House airspace on 9/11. No official explanation was ever offered as to why these jets were present in this highly restricted airspace, or what airline they belonged to.
EDIT: Zaphod58 says these "unidentified jumbo jets" were a single E-4B operating out of Andrews air force base.


Let me know if yall think this is nonsense.
edit on 13-4-2014 by jsl2837 because: "Unidentified jumbo jets" identified as a single E-4B from Andrews AFB.



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jsl2837
 


The "unidentified jumbo jets" were a single E-4B operating out of Andrews AFB.



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by rockflier
 


Ok, i entered this thread at page 370 (what a coincidence) so i didn't know that.

But there should be a good valid reason behind it if this truly has been a cyber hijacking.

@jsl2837

This video is very interesting, i did not know they were already so advanced at remotely controling an airliner back in 2001
Thanks for sharing

edit on 13-4-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


You can't hack what you can't access. There is no external access to the FMS on a 777. Not without special connectors, and direct access to the system.
edit on 4/13/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by earthling42
 


You can't hack what you can't access. There is no external access to the FMS on a 777. Not without special connectors, and direct access to the system.
edit on 4/13/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


On live aircraft, is it not possible for the ACARS system to talk to the FMS?



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

roadgravel

Zaphod58
reply to post by earthling42
 


You can't hack what you can't access. There is no external access to the FMS on a 777. Not without special connectors, and direct access to the system.
edit on 4/13/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


On live aircraft, is it not possible for the ACARS system to talk to the FMS?


It is possible to import flightplans to the FMC from ACARS, it is NOT possible to execute any actions from ACARS to the FMC.

Edit to add: Most of the time we receive the flightplan ICAO codes for depature and destination airports from dispatch through ACARS.

It might look like this: ENGMLSGG-350. (Oslo-Geneva, flightlevel 350.

We then put that into the FMC and get the flightplan With all the waypoints from the onboard database.

No need to import anything from ACARS.
edit on 13-4-2014 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by earthling42
 


You can't hack what you can't access. There is no external access to the FMS on a 777. Not without special connectors, and direct access to the system.
edit on 4/13/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


Do you know anything of this 'lawsuit' involving a so-called "Uninterruptible Autopilot" that was allegedly installed on Delta Airlines' Boeing fleet in 2009?
Link: www.abeldanger.net...

Link was found here: 'Re: Flight Termination System brought down Flight 370 and others'
edit on 13-4-2014 by jsl2837 because: Minor typo



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jsl2837
 


Yeah, the guy is a nutter. He claims accidents that had absolutely nothing to do with the autopilot have "the signature of the Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot", including crashes by Airbus and Sukhoi aircraft that somehow have the system installed.



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Here is the push back and start of 9M-MRO in Frankfort in 2012.

Youtube link


edit on 4/13/2014 by roadgravel because: embeds do not work in preview - removed link



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Ivar_Karlsen
 

OK. So the FMC input is manual. That's what I have been trying to find. If the ACARS doesn't send data into the FMC then it can't affect it.

A question. In reference to the phrase 'programming a way point'. I thought those points exist in a system database. So does that phrase mean activating it as the next point to be flown to or adding to the current list in the flight plan? Or does it mean actually adding a completely new point into the system database.

For example: When the west Malaysia waypoint (maybe VAMPI) was said to be programmed before the lost of contact, did that mean it would cause the plane to fly to that point after reaching IGARI? (Next point in flight path?)

Also, can a second flight path (maybe non standard route) be setup and saved, then executed by cancelling the original path?



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


I think it can be done.

The problem is, according to the information we have sofar, this jet descended fast and flew toward Bachok and then Butterworth, Penang and on to VAMPI and to the south.

It is supposed to be flying at a very low altitude, atleast below 7000ft so a cell phone connection was possible.

The thing is, no pilot will dare to fly so low over an area with mountains and take the risk to crash at a mountainside.
So it must have been flying higher and when it had passed the mountains, it descended to below 7000ft on its way to Langkawi.
I really think the plan has been to try to land there as this aircraft had some kind of malfunction of which we are not aware.

Would it have been flying on autopilot? no i do not think so, it changed its altitude and direction multiple times according to the information we have.

edit on 13-4-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
i think i found the 777 PING ,,,(sorry Possable mh370 Black Box, Acoustic Signal,, for the anal-ists)







Owned and maintained by Australian Bureau of Meteorology
STB - SAIC Tsunami Buoy
STB payload
13.991 S 110.097 E (13°59'27" S 110°5'49" E)

maybe.
edit on 4/13/2014 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

roadgravel
reply to post by Ivar_Karlsen
 

OK. So the FMC input is manual. That's what I have been trying to find. If the ACARS doesn't send data into the FMC then it can't affect it.


Most of the time it is manual. (In my airline)
However, if the route is not in the database the route With all waypoints is uploaded to us through ACARS.
ACARS never send anything to the FMC, one have to import it to the scratchpad from the FMC, then activate and execute it.

So NO, ACARS can never send anything to the FMC, and if it could pilots stil have to validate and execute it to make it work.




A question. In reference to the phrase 'programming a way point'. I thought those points exist in a system database. So does that phrase mean activating it as the next point to be flown to or adding to the current list in the flight plan? Or does it mean actually adding a completely new point into the system database.


It is possible to create a new by entering lat/long into the FMC, it is however not stored into the onboard database. (Can not be modified by pilots)
After landing the waypoint created is gone.




Also, can a second flight path (maybe non standard route) be setup and saved, then executed by cancelling the original path?


The B777's i used to fly had a flightplan 2 option, depending on FMC updates and customer options there could be more.




For example: When the west Malaysia waypoint (maybe VAMPI) was said to be programmed before the lost of contact, did that mean it would cause the plane to fly to that point after reaching IGARI? (Next point in flight path?)


Depends on the sequence the waypoints are entered, if VAMPI is before (lower number) than IGARI the autopilot will fly to VAMPI first.
edit on 13-4-2014 by Ivar_Karlsen because: Dead tired



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


The problem is that 7,000 feet is not always 7,000 feet. Was it 7,000 feet above sea level, or 7,000 ferry above ground level? There's a huge difference between the two.



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 





So it must have been flying higher and when it had passed the mountains, it descended to below 7000ft on its way to Langkawi. I really think the plan has been to try to land there as this aircraft had some kind of malfunction of which we are not aware.


That seems reasonable but how did it then make the turns around Java on it's own without being given that path?



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Yes it is, but isn't it always above sea level?



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


It's supposed to be, but I've seen some given as AGL before, when talking about an accident timeline.



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


The last turn to the south must have been done by a pilot to ditch the plane.
Why it did not land will remain a mistery untill the black box has been retrieved.
edit on 13-4-2014 by earthling42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   
guys, sorry but I was thinking maybe you would like to see this video about the missing plane.




new topics

top topics



 
181
<< 379  380  381    383  384  385 >>

log in

join