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.
Much has been made of the fact the pilot and co-pilot didn't request to fly together, but can a pilot request a particular flight? Would they be aware in advance of a particularly valuable payload?
We have a bidding system where you can bid on how your monthly roster will look like-i.e. what destinations you fly to and sometimes which crew. Depending on your seniority, the more senior(more experienced) you are, the more likely your bids are to be accepted. As you stay longer with your airline and gain more experience, you'll gradually move up the seniority list.
20 freescale employees last time I heard it was 4 of them apparently.
20 Freescale employees onboard the flight. 4 of them were part of the patent that had been passed as per earlier posts.edit on 18-3-2014 by ChocolateStarfish because: (no reason given)
Oh dear ... I'm a little disappointed that the Graun printed this. Would it have killed you to wait until you'd got an opinion from some professional pilots before giving oxygen to this (no doubt well-intentioned) twit?
I trust someone will ask the crew of SIA68 whether, on the night in question, they encountered any turbulence. It would be unusual if they had none at all. If so, do they remember occasionally bouncing off a Malaysian 777 which had been flying beneath them in perfect formation for hours?
Also, when they made altitude changes and altered course, did they do hand signals out the window to ensure that the Malaysian plane stayed perfectly in position while banking at 400 mph?
Flying sleek, fast, agile, high power-to-weight-ratio little planes in formation is demandingly difficult. Doing so in close formation is even more difficult, and prone to accidents. The whole activity is tough and dangerous even when all the pilots of all the aircraft know precisely what they're going to do next during a series of choreographed manoeuvers.
The idea that a 777 pilot (assuming he could even find the Singapore plane at night) could fly for hours in close formation with another (and completely unaware, therefore offering no cooperation) widebody jet is simply absurd. Large planes create exceptional vortices in the airstream around them— heck, airports enforce miles of separation behind big jets because of this—and it's quite possible that the planes would get sucked together into a collision before many minutes had elapsed.
From a radar point of view, the effectiveness of the technique would be entirely dependent on the quality and power of the radar and the aspect presented by these two planes. What might look like a single blip to a radar over here would be clearly discriminated as two blips by the one over there. I think by now some radar operator in India/wherever would have remembered the Mysterious Amoeba Aeroplane—the one that kept splitting and fusing as it trundled across his screen.
No, it's just nonsense.
I accept that the increasing possibility that the satellite-ping-driven 'search arcs' are a red herring, plus the failure to find any wreckage so far, leaves ample room for wild theories, but surely there is a responsibility to evaluate these for some level of practical realism before printing them?
reply to post by DrHammondStoat
By implication it means you have seen the passenger list. Could you please furnish us with this list so we can see it for ourselves please?
They don't seem to have any idea what they are talking about to me, because they seem to be assuming some kind of close formation flying which would not be necessary at all to hide in the radar shadow of another plane. We aren't talking blue angels formations here. You could fly 5000 feet beneath another plane and never have any danger of collision no matter how much turbulence they encountered. If you're slightly off, the radar blips aren't that precise and they would probably never notice if the blip stretched out a little due to that because air traffic controllers are usually paying attention to the transponder information.
I was sceptical about MH370 being able to hide from radar behind another plane but I'm not a pilot, so I've looked for more informed viewpoints. This is the opinion of a poster on the guardian's comments that seems to know what they're talking about.
What do you make of this?