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: 3
88
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   

InverseLookingGlass
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.


this case reminds me of japan airlines flight 123 in 1985 where 17 designers of THE TRON O/S were lost then microsoft took the crown and TRON vanished .

i wonder what the geeks at Freescale were working on that was so secret that it cost them their lives .

CUI BONO
edit on 17-3-2014 by 999zxcv because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   

DigitalSea
This is probably the only well-thought-out theory I've seen as to what happened to the plane that didn't involve aliens, pointing fingers at terrorists....
I don't see where it rules out terrorism. I don't know how likely it is, but it seems plausible, though he doesn't really describe exactly what is meant by flying in the "radar shadow" of another plane. I'm guessing he means trying to match the other plane's position but fly at a lower altitude or something, and the lower altitude would use more fuel and limit the plane's range.

If you flew at the same altitude as the other plane, you might show up on radar if you get too far behind, and if you get too close the jet wash could cause problems, which is why minimum distances are usually maintained. With all the speculation floating around, it's as good a speculation as any, or at least I don't see the problems with it other than what I mentioned which aren't serious problems.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


OK champ. where was the last satellite ping then. What you've done so far is add noise. Add some information.

The place the transponders were turned off was just off the coast of Malaysia en route to Beijing. At that location, the plane could probably reach DG even flying at a low altitude.

look for yourself
edit on 17-3-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: spelling



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:22 AM
link   

999zxcv

InverseLookingGlass
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.


this case reminds me of japan airlines flight 123 in 1985 where 17 designers of THE TRON O/S were lost then microsoft took the crown and TRON vanished .

i wonder what the geeks at Freescale were working on that was so secret that it cost them their lives .

CUI BONO
edit on 17-3-2014 by 999zxcv because: (no reason given)


We was robbed 286's could do what most computers can do today..



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   

InverseLookingGlass
OK champ. where was the last satellite ping then. What you've done so far is add noise. Add some information.

The place the transponders were turned off was just off the coast of Malaysia en route to Beijing. At that location, the plane could probably reach DG even flying at a low altitude.


I am not referring to the transponders. The engine pinged the satellite at 8:11 on one of the two arcs. Neither of these is even remotely close to Diego Garcia. The aircraft could only have gotten one hour further from either of these arcs maximum as there was no ping at 9:11. This is simple physics and geometry.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Very interesting theory, it all sounds very plausible at least.

I have one question though: looking at the maps / diagrams in the article linked in the OP, was this flight then already flying off course before it disappeared? To me, it seems unlikely that this plane was "chasing down" another 777 on it's regular flight route and then suddenly disappeared when it caught up.
edit on 17/3/2014 by RationalDespair because: typo



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Please post your source for the engine sending signals that were received by satellite. Rolls Royce runs that or Boeing or the aircraft owner or operator?

I'd like to learn all bout that and I'm sure others would too. Maybe I'll learn how those pieces of information can't be cut-off or spoofed.
edit on 17-3-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: spelling


This information seems to contradict your information why is that? Engines provided no location data after transponders were disabled.
edit on 17-3-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: added link



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by InverseLookingGlass
 


The engine data goes to Rolls Royce.


www.straitstimes.com...

The engine data doesn't provide location data, as there is no GPS attached. It did however handshake with the satellite, which it can only do if there is power.
edit on 3/17/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Wouldn't the other plane be able to visually see the other plane? I thought one of the main civilian uses for radar is to make sure planes aren't too close to each other? I'm surprised tech isn't able to distinguish to planes close to each other.


What's the range for the radar shadow?



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 


It would be behind and below (not that I buy the theory) and aircraft like this only have weather radar. Avoidance systems rely on transponder signals.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:00 AM
link   

amraks

999zxcv

InverseLookingGlass
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.


this case reminds me of japan airlines flight 123 in 1985 where 17 designers of THE TRON O/S were lost then microsoft took the crown and TRON vanished .

i wonder what the geeks at Freescale were working on that was so secret that it cost them their lives .

CUI BONO
edit on 17-3-2014 by 999zxcv because: (no reason given)


We was robbed 286's could do what most computers can do today..


rumor has it the geeks of freescale were working on a device that would have made Big Oil very nervous and that silicone tech was another that had made a big advance recently



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:10 AM
link   

InverseLookingGlass
Please post your source for the engine sending signals that were received by satellite. Rolls Royce runs that or Boeing or the aircraft owner or operator?


The Wall Street Journal reported this last week.


This information seems to contradict your information why is that?


I did not say it gave an exact location, you would need three satellites for that. It can only place it on an X coordinate on two divergent arcs.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


This is the search radius and DG is in range. That's all I'm saying. Please confirm or debunk.

MH370 search radius based on hourly engine pings

How is the location constrained to two arcs by one satellite? Requesting information here.
edit on 17-3-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: added link



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by InverseLookingGlass
 


There are two primary search areas based on the pings, neither is anywhere near Diego Garcia.

The satellite detects the general area based on the angle of the signal. Directly under is 90 degrees, the Pole is 0. The signal from MH370 was 40 degrees. They can take that angle and figure out general areas from it. Too far out or too far in and it would be a different angle.
edit on 3/17/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
The theory sounds possible, which, if the plane flew over Afghanistan would lead the reader to suspect that it was just a hop skip and jump to Iran which is directly next door. Think about this.

Thus the little additive of the two false passports could lend credence to that suspicion, and the extra cargo in place of seats would lead one to suspect embargoed goods right? Except that I cannot think of Iran without thinking of Mossad and Bibi trying to convince the world to launch a pre-emptive strike. I can picture a further macabre scenario to bring this about, but I won't go there.

This guy opens a blog to post this one and only offering. (Mossad?) Because Iran would not point the finger at itself, even indirectly, would it?

Sorry to post this, but it has to be put out there somewhere in the hope of avoiding the rest of my imagined scenario.

And no, before someone says it, I am not 'anti' any country or people.
edit on 17-3-2014 by aboutface because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I'm aware of that. Do you know how the two arcs are determined from these pings with virtually no information?

The satellite over the Indian Ocean is older. Existing and evolved services only.

Aeronautical (Classic Aero): provides voice/fax/data services for aircraft. Three levels of terminals, Aero-L (Low Gain Antenna) primarily for packet data including ACARS and ADS, Aero-H (High Gain Antenna) for medium quality voice and fax/data at up to 9600 bit/s, and Aero-I (Intermediate Gain Antenna) for low quality voice and fax/data at up to 2400 bit/s. Note, there are also aircraft rated versions of Inmarsat-C and mini-M/M4. The aircraft version of GAN is called Swift64 (below) Inmarsat-B: provides voice services, telex services, medium speed fax/data services at 9.6 kbit/s and high speed data services at 56, 64 or 128 kbit/s. There is also a 'leased' mode for Inmarsat-B available on the spare Inmarsat satellites. Inmarsat-C: effectively this is a "satellite telex" terminal with store-and-forward, polling etc. capabilities. Certain models of Inmarsat-C terminals are also approved for usage in the GMDSS system, equipped with GPS. Inmarsat-M: provides voice services at 4.8 kbit/s and medium speed fax/data services at 2.4 kbit/s. It paved the way towards Inmarsat-Mini-M. Mini-M: provides voice services at 4.8 kbit/s and medium speed fax/data services at 2.4 kbit/s. One 2.4kbit/s channel takes up 4.8kbit/s on the satellite. GAN (Global Area Network): provides a selection of low speed services like voice at 4.8 kbit/s, fax & data at 2.4 kbit/s, ISDN like services at 64 kbit/s (called Mobile ISDN) and shared-channel IP packet-switched data services at 64 kbit/s (called Mobile Packet Data Service MPDS, formerly Inmarsat Packet Data Service – IPDS). GAN is also known as "M4". Fleet: actually a family of networks that includes the Inmarsat-Fleet77, Inmarsat-Fleet55 and Inmarsat-Fleet33 members (The numbers 77, 55 and 33 come from the diameter of the antenna in centimeters). Much like GAN, it provides a selection of low speed services like voice at 4.8 kbit/s, fax/data at 2.4 kbit/s, medium speed services like fax/data at 9.6 kbit/s, ISDN like services at 64 kbit/s (called Mobile ISDN) and shared-channel IP packet-switched data services at 64 kbit/s (called Mobile Packet Data Service MPDS). However, not all these services are available with all members of the family. The latest service to be supported is Mobile ISDN at 128 kbit/s on Inmarsat-Fleet77 terminals. Swift 64: Similar to GAN, providing voice, low rate fax/data, 64kbit/s ISDN, and MPDS services, for private, business, and commercial aircraft. Swift 64 is often sold in a multi-channel version, to support several times 64kbit/s. Inmarsat D/D+/IsatM2M: Inmarsat's version of a pager, although much larger than terrestrial versions. Some units are equipped with GPS. The original Inmarsat-D terminals were one-way (to mobile) pagers. The newer Inmarsat-D+ terminals are the equivalent of a two-way pager. The main use of this technology nowadays is in tracking trucks and buoys and SCADA applications. SkyWave Mobile Communications is a provider of D/D+/IsatM2M satellite data services with its DMR and SureLinx series products. SkyWave also provides satellite tracking, monitoring and control capabilities through its GlobalWave MT series products.[26] Competing systems such as from Skybitz only operate on the MSAT geostationary satellite over North America. MPDS (Mobile Packet Data Service): Previously known as IPDS, this is an IP-based data service in which several users share a 64kbit/s carrier in a manner similar to ADSL. MPDS-specific terminals are not sold; rather, this is a service which comes with most terminals that are designed for GAN, Fleet, and Swift64. IsatPhone: provides voice services at 4.8 kbit/s and medium speed fax/data services at 2.4 kbit/s. This service emerged from a collaboration agreement with ACeS, and is available in the EMEA and APAC satellite regions. Coverage is available in Africa, the Middle-East, Asia, and Europe, as well as in maritime areas of the EMEA and APAC coverage.


link to source



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Interesting theory.

Similar to a submarine hiding in the baffles of another sub to avoid detection.

IF MAL370 had the flight plan of SIA68, could then have loaded it once they established a position behind SIA68, activated it and essentially had autopilot do the rest?

How long was SIA68 in the air?

It's starting to get very bothersome watching the MSM on this now. NO mention of Freescale, and the focus this morning was that the plane went the southern route into the Ocean. Makes absolutely no sense if a pilot is out to kill himself, whether he did it shortly after takeoff, in the middle of the Straights of Malaysia, or the Indian Ocean!

What about the super-secret spyplane the X-37B. What if this mission was to capture electronic data/signatures from these aircraft.

Then, like a sub that deploys electronic counter-measures, this aircraft could have activated a device that made the plane appear as something else or hide it's signature.

Did Freescale have ANYTHING to do with the X-37B program? If so, then we have a HUGE false flag operation underway.

And is the timing with the events unfolding in Crimea/Russia/Ukraine coincidental?

How prepared are you?



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Zaphod58
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).


I saw in another thread, there are sooooooo many though, I can't point to it, that the Boeings are able to be remotely controlled. That's why I stated that. If there are any members that know of this that can point me to that, please let me know. I actually didn't think that was possible either, so, I was really surprised.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Just to add I saw this on the Washington post on-line story today.


Correction: An earlier version of this article said the satellite data indicated possible flight paths of the missing plane. The data indicated possible points at which the plane last made its satellite contact, not specific paths. This version has been corrected.


sourc e link



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:51 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


Well sure, there's that




top topics



 
88
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join