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.

 

Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68 (another 777)?

page: 2
88
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   
This theory is a dead ringer and matches up with everything we know to date. Another interesting fact is that the P.I.C.'s (pilot in command) family left the next day. Where did they go? This is a real life Tom Clancy novel and the main players are not the usual suspects.

Blocking off seats due to heavy cargo and throwing on 1/2 load or more of fuel (pilot signs off on fuel load) which is more than the 45 min reserve needed to make the flight says the captain had this planned and the copilot may have been in on it also. The real question is who got to the pilot(s) and what was this bird carrying that was so valuable to risk this type of piracy?
edit on 3/17/2014 by pstrron because: structure

edit on 3/17/2014 by pstrron because: spelling




posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:41 AM
link   

amraks

hexillion

amraks
Not sure how you come to this conclusion that alarm bells are going to be set off for collision warnings with air traffic controllers when transponders where turned off on the plane.

Which thread are we posting in? The one that proposes this complicated tactic had any purpose under those same conditions?


if this plan is so complicated for you to comprehend, I suggest you don't have input on the subject.

##snipped## you're the one who just suggested that this complicated plan is entirely unnecessary since the transponders were switched off.


edit on 17-3-2014 by hexillion because: (no reason given)

edit on Mon Mar 17 2014 by DontTreadOnMe because: We expect civility and decorum within all topics.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   
As far as countries like Pakistan saying they would have picked it up on radar.

We sent 7 helicopters, 2 of them Chinooks, into Pakistan for the Osama raid and they didn't know we were there until we blew one up.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Hmmmmmmm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by hexillion
 



Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to radar?

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to other planes?

Does flying in another plane's radar shadow make a plane essentially invisible to radar?



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

hexillion

amraks

hexillion

amraks
Not sure how you come to this conclusion that alarm bells are going to be set off for collision warnings with air traffic controllers when transponders where turned off on the plane.

Which thread are we posting in? The one that proposes this complicated tactic had any purpose under those same conditions?


if this plan is so complicated for you to comprehend, I suggest you don't have input on the subject.


How about you attempt to explain WTF you are on about rather than acting like a smart ass.
We are posting in a thread, the topic of which is the suggestion that the disappearance of this plane could be explained if they had pulled off an extremely dangerous, skilled, elaborate and brain-fryingly-long tactic of tailgaiting another plane to mask one aircraft's radar signature by another's.

You've suggested that simply turning off the transponder would mean none of that was necessary. You apparently think radar contacts identified in such close proximity to other aircraft where they could be mistaken for a single contact, isn't something that would raise an issue.

Which would mean we could close the thread since there's no point to this elaborate scenario which isn't necessary.

Yeah.... one of us certainly confused as to what's being discussed.



I haven't said anywhere that turning the transponder off isn't necessary..

Ground radar isn't very accurate either so it could of appeared as a glitch on radar.

If you have read the full article you would see this is plausible, the Pilot had skill, he had a simulator, he had years of flying experience, this seems to have been planed I would be interested to see recordings of his other flights, seeing if he has played with any of these flying tactics people are coming up with...

edit on 17/3/2014 by amraks because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   

GMan420
reply to post by hexillion
 



Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to radar?

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to other planes?

Does flying in another plane's radar shadow make a plane essentially invisible to radar?


That was my point. So now 2 people get it, waiting on a 3rd.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Easily the best theory I've heard.

This is not going to be one of those cases where we never find out.

I was leaning towards hijacking followed by crash in an the open sea till I heard this.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   

hexillion

amraks

hexillion

amraks
Not sure how you come to this conclusion that alarm bells are going to be set off for collision warnings with air traffic controllers when transponders where turned off on the plane.

Which thread are we posting in? The one that proposes this complicated tactic had any purpose under those same conditions?


if this plan is so complicated for you to comprehend, I suggest you don't have input on the subject.

Moron, you're the one who just suggested that this complicated plan is entirely unnecessary since the transponders were switched off.


edit on 17-3-2014 by hexillion because: (no reason given)


I never suggested such thing...



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:07 AM
link   

hexillion

DigitalSea
Then there is the patent link. A Freescale patent was approved days before the plane went down which you can read here — 4 of the 5 Patent holders are Chinese employees of Freescale Semiconductor of Austin TX who were on the plane supposedly. The patent was split 20% between each holder, the fifth holder is Freescale Semiconductor. If a patent holder dies, his share is distributed to the remaining patent holders, the only live holder is Freescale Semiconductor.


That linked source shows 4 of the 4 patent holders to be said Chinese. Where'd you get the extra story from about the 5th?


Freescale is listed as the Assignee, who is technically the property owner. The applicants/inventors - the 4 missing employees - would have been compensated in some way; maybe it was a even share - its not absolute though. I'm not sure if its speculation that they were each due 20% or if its documented somewhere.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Somebody shoot holes in my theory for me.
Here goes:

I read in another thread that these airplanes are able to be remotely flown. BUAH system or something like that. No, I don't know what the acronym stands for. So, if that's the case, could some nefarious group, ie, CIA, arrange for a particular pilot to be scheduled for a particular flight? Let's say that the CIA wanted to do a false flag. They choose a flight, arrange for a pilot on whom they could attach doubt because he was a 'political fanatic, take control of the flight remotely, turn off the cabin pressure and fly up to 45000 feet killing all on board, return to a lower altitude and evade radar in whatever method that they apparently did, land somewhere and rig the plane for a false flag and blame it on x.

I'm sure this is full of holes, but, that's the gist of what I think is going on... Or, it's aliens.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:11 AM
link   

wirefly
Somebody shoot holes in my theory for me.
Here goes:

I read in another thread that these airplanes are able to be remotely flown. BUAH system or something like that. No, I don't know what the acronym stands for. So, if that's the case, could some nefarious group, ie, CIA, arrange for a particular pilot to be scheduled for a particular flight? Let's say that the CIA wanted to do a false flag. They choose a flight, arrange for a pilot on whom they could attach doubt because he was a 'political fanatic, take control of the flight remotely, turn off the cabin pressure and fly up to 45000 feet killing all on board, return to a lower altitude and evade radar in whatever method that they apparently did, land somewhere and rig the plane for a false flag and blame it on x.

I'm sure this is full of holes, but, that's the gist of what I think is going on... Or, it's aliens.


Remotely landing the plane would be hard lining up the run way for the last approach.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   

hexillion

GMan420
reply to post by hexillion
 



Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to radar?

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to other planes?

Does flying in another plane's radar shadow make a plane essentially invisible to radar?


That was my point. So now 2 people get it, waiting on a 3rd.


One of us is misunderstanding... I am currently under the assumption that you don't believe that both of the acts of turning off the transponder AND flying in another plane's radar shadow were necessary to hide the plane? Am I wrong in assuming that?

If I am correct that you don't believe both actions would be necessary to hide the plane, my post would not back up your belief.


Maybe if I answer my own questions with what I believe to be the correct answers, you might not agree with my post:

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to radar? NO

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to other planes? YES

Does flying in another plane's radar shadow make a plane essentially invisible to radar? YES



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by GMan420
 



That breaks it down for him.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   

pstrron
This theory is a dead ringer and matches up with everything we know to date. Another interesting fact is that the P.I.C.'s (pilot in command) family left the next day. Where did they go? This is a real life Tom Clancy novel and the main players are not the usual suspects.

Blocking off seats due to heavy cargo and throwing on 1/2 load or more of fuel (pilot signs off on fuel load) which is more than the 45 min reserve needed to make the flight says the captain had this planned and the copilot may have been in on it also. The real question is who got to the pilot(s) and what was this bird carrying that was so valuable to risk this type of piracy?
edit on 3/17/2014 by pstrron because: structure

edit on 3/17/2014 by pstrron because: spelling


This case is getting stranger by the day and it has everyone chasing their tails i read on a pilot's site the Australian military can detect a small plane taking off 4000 km away and the plane still transmitted to the satellite for hours -you cannot jam a satellite and nobody knows where it is


but the cell phones ringing and getting picked up with no answer is a BIG BIG xx up by somebody .

50 seats missing from the plane for extra cargo and the failure to say what it was and the extra fuel points to the players being a Goverment that is hell bent on war at any price .


Something Evil is about to happen that will make 9-11 look like a picnic



time to bug out me thinks



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by wirefly
 


They can't be remotely flown without extensive and obvious modification.

It was physically impossible for it to reach 45,000 feet at that phase of flight (and there was no reason to as 35,000 would kill you as easily as higher).



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   

hexillion

GMan420
reply to post by hexillion
 



Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to radar?

Do transponders being turned off make a plane invisible to other planes?

Does flying in another plane's radar shadow make a plane essentially invisible to radar?


That was my point. So now 2 people get it, waiting on a 3rd.


I think you misunderstand. The answer to 2 out of 3 of those questions is a definite YES, so exactly how does it prove or even support your assertions?

Do do disabled transponders make a plane invisible to radar? ......NO, but flying in the shadow of another plane definitely can and so can flying at an altitude below the radar's detection envelope.

Do disabled transponders make a plane invisible to another plane? .....YES, unless it's an AWACS plane or another similar plane with onboard radar.

Can flying in the shadow of another plane make it invisible to radar? ......YES it can. I'm not saying that it's "always" does, but it is a distinct possibility and it is a tactic that has been utilized by the military of numerous nations in the past.

I could be wrong, but I think GMan420 is actually in disagreement with your position. If I'm right, not only do you NOT have 2 people who "get it," you're still a long way from having a third.

IMO, the theory proposed in the OP is definitely plausible. At least as plausible as anything I've heard so far.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by DigitalSea
 


US/UK airbase @Diego Garcia is located in the Indian Ocean and well within range of where the flight dropped off radar. I hope all you conspiracy hounds have crossed the US off the suspect list.

You've done that, right?

I've mentioned this a time or two on different threads and they get replied to in a peculiar way.
So someone please reply and state that the US is a power for good and would never do something like this. Or throw down some noise if you like.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   

InverseLookingGlass
US/UK airbase @Diego Garcia is located in the Indian Ocean and well within range of where the flight dropped off radar. I hope all you conspiracy hounds have crossed the US off the suspect list.


it is not even remotely within range of where the last satellite ping occurred.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Just throwing this out there. The reason I was told this is not a good theory is because the 4 'inventors' were not on the passenger list...

Rainbows
Jane



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   

angelchemuel
Just throwing this out there. The reason I was told this is not a good theory is because the 4 'inventors' were not on the passenger list...

Rainbows
Jane


whats not a good theory?
the flying under the cover another aircraft theory?




top topics



 
88
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join