The Best Flight 370 Scenario So Far - Theory of an actual pilot

reply to post by Vasa Croe


If it is an electrical fire then cutting power is the first step in fighting it. If you don't cut power it keeps arcing and the fire keeps going.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

You need to be able to cut power because they fail sometimes, and start going off for no reason.

We used to use an ejectable unit that was in the base of the tail. There were shock sensors in the wheel wells. Hit them too hard and a mechanical ejector launched it.

We had a bird sit there and fire three of them while sitting parked because of a bad sensor.

So this unit has to be power assist ejected as in if the power is cut, no matter what it will not go off? Guessing there is some kind of trip switch on the ejector mechanism that switches the battery on and begins the transmission of signal and the trip switch or power assist ejection is what is disconnected and renders the ELT useless?

Again, seems like the design on these is highly flawed for it to be a true "safety" device. Guessing there will be some revisions on this device coming up if MH370 is ever found and deemed to be a crash.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


This unit is different, it remains attached. The activation method is the same. The battery in if is used to broadcast for the full 48 hours after activation.

These units are pretty bulletproof, but like everything built by people they can and do fail. There are no systems that are guaranteed to survive a crash. You are talking about an event that puts several hundred Gs on equipment and people in a very short hard period of time. Before you add in any explosion.

Plane crashes are incredibly violent events. That is why the recorders are so strong.

Vasa Croe
Again, seems like the design on these is highly flawed for it to be a true "safety" device. Guessing there will be some revisions on this device coming up if MH370 is ever found and deemed to be a crash.

If I remember correctly on Air France 477, which impacted the ocean at a severe angle of attack and at high rate of speed, did not have any of its ELTs deploy and it can safely assumed that they were destroyed on impact.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

This unit is different, it remains attached. The activation method is the same. The battery in if is used to broadcast for the full 48 hours after activation.

These units are pretty bulletproof, but like everything built by people they can and do fail. There are no systems that are guaranteed to survive a crash. You are talking about an event that puts several hundred Gs on equipment and people in a very short hard period of time. Before you add in any explosion.

Plane crashes are incredibly violent events. That is why the recorders are so strong.

Odd they would build the recorder stronger than the ELT. Again...seems like poor planning and engineering. If you can't find the plane then what good is the black box?

Anywho....thanks for all the replies.

AugustusMasonicus

Vasa Croe
Again, seems like the design on these is highly flawed for it to be a true "safety" device. Guessing there will be some revisions on this device coming up if MH370 is ever found and deemed to be a crash.

If I remember correctly on Air France 477, which impacted the ocean at a severe angle of attack and at high rate of speed, did not have any of its ELTs deploy and it can safely assumed that they were destroyed on impact.

Just looked it up and appears correct. Appreciate all the replies.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


In all honesty the recorders are the most important piece of equipment on board. The ELT will tell you where to look. The recorders tell you why you are looking.

AugustusMasonicus

Vasa Croe
Again, seems like the design on these is highly flawed for it to be a true "safety" device. Guessing there will be some revisions on this device coming up if MH370 is ever found and deemed to be a crash.

If I remember correctly on Air France 477, which impacted the ocean at a severe angle of attack and at high rate of speed, did not have any of its ELTs deploy and it can safely assumed that they were destroyed on impact.

If this plane did go the way that Chris Goodfellow says, when it ran out of fuel whether are 5K or 25k the plane would go into a flat spin and throw itself apart. It will not take a direct nose dive as the AirFrance craft did.

the pieces will be large enough to find.

ChesterJohn
If this plane did go the way that Chris Goodfellow says, when it ran out of fuel whether are 5K or 25k the plane would go into a flat spin and throw itself apart. It will not take a direct nose dive as the AirFrance craft did.

Planes have run out of fuel and landed safely before, so I don't know why you'd say it would go into a flat spin.

Air Transat Flight 236

reply to post by ChesterJohn


The two cases it happened with had different crash types, but Helios 522 had someone with flight experience trying to save it.

Payne Stewarts' Lear spiralled straight down.

optimumsource
reply to post by xmaddness

 

On March 18 Jeff Wise wrote an article for Future Tense with the headline 'A “Startlingly Simple Theory” About the Missing Airliner is Sweeping the Internet. It’s Wrong.' He goes on to state later in the article that 'For one thing, while it’s true that MH370 did turn toward Langkawi and wound up overflying it, whoever was at the controls continued to maneuver after that point as well, turning sharply right at VAMPI waypoint, then left again at GIVAL. Such vigorous navigating would have been impossible for unconscious men.'. I think the hero theory is not disproved if we add that perhaps once the plane reached Langkawi the situation with the plane was so adverse that it could not be landed. The pilots then instead placed the plane on autopilot perhaps and soon after lost consciousness from smoke inhalation.

I have previously read of this course change and wondered myself why nobody bothers to examine this?

Early search area were certainly in the sea off Vung Tau, Vietnam.

Claims that the aircraft climbed to 45,000ft have never been withdrawn. I understand that this is currently claimed to be based on radar data from RMAF Butterworth. For a while there was also a false suggestion that this altitude was known from engine data returned through ACARS which was obviously impossible.

For primary radar to know this one would have to observe the aircraft at 490nm distance from Butterworth which places the aircraft at 45,000ft off the Mekong Delta coast.



The sighting by Oil Rig worker Mike McKay refers to an aircraft to his west at high altitude on fire. He noted in a later telephone interview with Bob Woodruff of ABC news that it did not deviate either left or right, as he watched the flames for ten or fifteen seconds before the flames went out. This implies the aircraft flew a westerly course from over the Mekong Delta coast.

If we know the aircraft flew for 7.5 hours with returns from engines to Rolls Royce via INMARSAT we may safely assume the engines continued to run, which then leaves only leaking fuel or electrical fires to account for sightings from the oil rig.

A flight of 7.5 hours does not support fuel leaking. Loss of communication does lean towards electrical problems.

ChesterJohn

AugustusMasonicus

Vasa Croe
Again, seems like the design on these is highly flawed for it to be a true "safety" device. Guessing there will be some revisions on this device coming up if MH370 is ever found and deemed to be a crash.

If I remember correctly on Air France 477, which impacted the ocean at a severe angle of attack and at high rate of speed, did not have any of its ELTs deploy and it can safely assumed that they were destroyed on impact.

If this plane did go the way that Chris Goodfellow says, when it ran out of fuel whether are 5K or 25k the plane would go into a flat spin and throw itself apart. It will not take a direct nose dive as the AirFrance craft did.

the pieces will be large enough to find.

Pilots in the AF477 crash lost awareness of their attitude and airspeed with all sorts of warning horns and believed their aircraft was stalled so began applying violent manouveres which actually precipitated a spin.

The scenario is different. Aircraft in a stall will not enter a spin if wings are level.

Zaphod58
reply to post by ChesterJohn

 

The two cases it happened with had different crash types, but Helios 522 had someone with flight experience trying to save it.

Payne Stewarts' Lear spiralled straight down.

Payne Stewart's aircraft suffered engine flame out and then descended in a gentle right turn which steepened into a series of aileron rolls. Aileron rolls might be explained by the ailerons being trimmed by the autopilot before disconnect.

Autopilot disconnect occurred after engines ran out of fuel when they suffered voltage drops.

His Lear Jet did not spin.

reply to post by sy.gunson


I didn't say it spun. I said it spiralled. Two different things.

"It's soon to impact the ground; he is in a descending spiral."

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Zaphod58
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

If it is an electrical fire then cutting power is the first step in fighting it. If you don't cut power it keeps arcing and the fire keeps going.

It is also possible however that there was a creeping intermittent voltage drop, which pilots responded to by bringing another generator online in parallel with a failing unit prior to any fire and that this action would inadvertently lead to a deeper crises and confusion in the pilots as to the cause.

Electrical arcing is logically caused by overloaded relays, causing a large voltage differential. Where for example you run more than one generator in parallel and one generator is developing much lower voltage there will be a natural inclination for a DC system to reverse current direction to an underperforming generator.

In the Egyptair Flight 667 incident (on the ground before pushback) electrical arcing burned the co-pilot's oxygen hose which fed a fire. There are an imponderable number of possibilities which could have complicated the situation.

sy.gunson
The sighting by Oil Rig worker Mike McKay refers to an aircraft to his west at high altitude on fire.

Doing some simple geometry with your map image puts McKay 446km away from the aircraft's last known position. Even if he were able to see well beyond the curvature of the earth to where its last know position was reported (which he could not even if the aircraft were at 45,000') it would not appear 'burning at a high altitude' as he claims. Due to his position it would appear low on the horizon. His report is obviously bogus.

AugustusMasonicus

sy.gunson
The sighting by Oil Rig worker Mike McKay refers to an aircraft to his west at high altitude on fire.

Doing some simple geometry with your map image puts McKay 446km away from the aircraft's last known position. Even if he were able to see well beyond the curvature of the earth to where its last know position was reported (which he could not even if the aircraft were at 45,000') it would not appear 'burning at a high altitude' as he claims. Due to his position it would appear low on the horizon. His report is obviously bogus.

What you don't take into account is that Malaysian authorities when they first admitted an unidentified aircraft wandered back over their airspace and flew about the northern Straits of Malacca first showed up on military radar east of Malaysia at 2:40am.

They later altered the timeline and claimed that it departed the Straits of Malacca westwards at 2:15am without accounting for the time difference.

The source of the claim which insisted MH370 climbed to 45,000ft was radar sightings from RMAF Base Butterworth. For any primary radar to detect MH370 at 45,000ft it would have to detect it at a range of 490-500nm which places MH370 at the Mekong Delta Coast.

What you refer to is waypoint IGARI the last point of known radio contact with Malaysian ATC.

reply to post by sy.gunson


Except that early in the flight they couldn't get to 45,000. They were too heavy.

reply to post by sy.gunson


As has been pointed out the aircraft and McKay both would have to be defying physics for this to occur.

Theory is a lot better and closer to anything I've heard thus far in the whole incident. Though I still do have in the back of my mind that this plane disappearing as it has , seems to be all tied in with a major false flag of proportions hard to imagine, with the incidents in the Ukraine, the high unrest with Israel and Iran, then with the Syrian issues, just so many things to look at. I understand the fact of the human lives involved and sympathize with the families. First we have the actions in Ukraine,,,at the start that's all you heard on the news...the plane incident...all news of the possible war vanishes from media and now all we hear for the last 3 weeks is Flight 370...something dont fit together right or am I thinking to much conspiracy? Something ,somewhere just is not right and something is being hidden. And I do think that its no big secret that a war is desired in certain circles...and I believe it will begin with Syria. But then again what do I know....I've read and heard some outlandish stories and comments since I've been a member of ATS....so why not another.