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.
Good theory, the one thing I can't understand is despite turning off the transponder and everything else, a ground radar would surely still pick up the aircraft would it not ? Legitimate question there
reply to post by Stealthbomber
Read the EAD. All 777 operators were warned of cracks that could cause a leak near the SATCOM antenna. Which also happens to be near the GPS, and ADS-b. Comms didn't have to go out at all. They were nearing 35,000 when they disappeared. The crew would already be going slightly hypoxic at least, depending on when the leak started.
Yeah hypoxia crash is an unfortunate likeliness when it comes to crash scenarios, unless someone knows of ways you could disable 100 mobile phones in one quick go? However I would've thought flight crews were better trained about this since the Helios 522 incident some years ago.
The problem is, that in itself wouldn't turn the transponders off. Unless the cracking around this apparent "weak spot" was so intense the whole thing snapped off, and at around the same moment or just minutes before, the hypoxia had kicked in.
But I read that although it was an FAA instruction that their could be a problem, Malaysia Airlines did not have that antenna that had this fault fitted to their 777's. The same as they possibly didn't have the real-time data (for engines etc) setup, because that too is an "optional extra". Someone might want to try and confirm those facts for themselves, I'm not sure I can find the articles again in all the churning news...
I don't want to stoke the fire really...but this is ATS, so I will
I also found Malaysia's involvement (SAR) interesting. Sounded impressive on paper, looked appaulling on camera.edit on 13-3-2014 by markymint because: (no reason given)
If anyone still believes that the US, Malaysia and pretty much every other world government doesn't know where that plane is, they're not paying attention. It took six hours for the Malaysians to report it missing. If anyone believes if this were a real missing plane event, it certainly would not have taken that long to admit it was not going to make it to Beijing. Now if it were still heading toward China during those six hours, but the transponder and normal communications weren't working, then maybe, just maybe they believed there was some kind of electrical problem and that once in Beijing, they would sort it all out. But then that never happened. The plane landed in a different destination in China and at that point they had no choice but to come clean that the plane was "missing" as there were families to deal with and eventually news agencies.
reply to post by lightedhype
Unless it was landed on a military controlled runway. Everything else since then has been misdirection as part of the cover up. That's what all the conflicting stories are designed to do: create confusion and disinterest.edit on 3/13/2014 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)
Malaysia Airlines verifying report that missing plane lands in Nanming March 8, 2014 10:51 am Malaysia Airlines are working to verify the authenticity that its flight MH370 that had lost contact with traffic control has reportedly landed in Nanming, Group CEO Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said Saturday. In his statement, he confirmed that the flight had lost contact with Subang Air Traffic Control at 2.40am, today. It It departed Kuala Lumpur at 12.41 am earlier this morning bound for Beijing. The aircraft was scheduled to land at Beijing International Airport at 6.30am local Beijing time. "We are deeply saddened this morning with the news on MH370. There has been speculation that the aircraft has landed at Nanming. We are working to verify the authenticity of the report and others," he said. He apparently referred to Nanming in China. The flight was carrying a total number of 239 passengers and crew - comprising 227 passengers (including 2 infants), 12 crew members. The passengers were of 14 different nationalities from; China - 152 plus 1 infant, Malaysia - 38, Indonesia - 12, Australia - 7, France - 3, United States of America - 3 pax plus 1 infant, New Zealand - 2, Ukraine - 2, Canada - 2, and one each from Russia, Italy, Taiwan, Netherlands and Austria. The flight was piloted by Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, 53, a Malaysian. He has a total flying hours of 18,365 hours and joined Malaysia Airlines in 1981. First officer, Fariq Ab.Hamid, a Malaysian, 27 and has a total flying hours of 2,763 hours. He joined Malaysia Airlines in 2007. Our focus now is to work with the emergency responders and authorities and mobilize its full support. Our thoughts and prayers are with all affected passengers and crew and their family members, Ahmad said. Latest stories in this category Study of Bahasa Melayu gains popularity in South ahead of AEC Study of Bahasa Melayu gains popularity in South ahead of.. Bahasa Melayu has emerged as a popular choice for.. Thai language fever stirs in Vietnam Study sheds light on school-related gender.. We Recommend Malaysia Airlines verifying report that missing plane lands in Nanming Malaysia Airlines verifying report that missing plane lands.. Malaysia Airlines are working to verify the.. Chinese family makes contact with missing.. Bid to sign up 100,000 democracy guards Comments conditions Users are solely responsible for their comments.We reserve the right to remove any comment and revoke posting rights for any reason withou prior notice.
Who said it was a maintenance problem? I'm sticking with what I claimed in the other thread. We don't know about any killing so why go there right now? Let's find what happened to the plane first. But the fuel, according to the article, was ample to get them pretty much anywhere in that hemisphere.
reply to post by Bilk22
So now it landed because of a maintenance problem, and what, China decided to grab the tech guys and kill everyone else? And in a few days, what, they'll scatter debris to "find" to make it look like an accident?