Why was the Malaysian plane flying over a known trouble spot anyway?

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Jim stone reports that other carriers has stopped flying that route right from the start of the troubles there. One such line is Australia's Qantas.

So why was this plane flying over a known trouble spot anyway? Had not the airline considered the possibility of in inadvertent shoot down?

Surely the Malaysian Airlines would ask what would happen if the transponders went off while flying over the Ukraine considering their recent occurrence of this event with a plane that went missing only a few months ago.
edit on 18-7-2014 by learnatic because: typo
edit on 18-7-2014 by learnatic because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Because some people do not have brains that work.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   
An attempt to save on additional fuel costs that result from flying a different route ..



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: learnatic

You know, in all the fuss over the event, I hadn't even asked this most basic of questions. I can't really give an answer but I thank you for the train of though.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I have read report's on the net the flight was diverted ? by a fighter plane from the original flight path



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Expat888

I don't think that planes get to chose their own flight paths, I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure air traffic control tells them what the flight path should be.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: learnatic

Can't remember what source I got it from but the no-fly zone extended as high as 32,000 ft and the Malaysian Airlines plane was flying at 33,000 ft. Still weird though how they just didn't stop flying over altogether, oh to have the magic of hindsight.

I'm also guessing, but I don't think Malaysian Airlines finances were all that great before the disaster, obviously as they "lost" one of the aircraft previously, cheaper to fly in a straight line than to go around? Possibly.
edit on 18-7-2014 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: learnatic


Because money.


Airlines always want to fly the shortest path possible to save fuel. Profits are marginal in the business, a few hundred miles can matter!

I will bet you that EVERY airline with a route from Amsterdam to Asia would have flown that way until the downing of flight MH17 - and accentually several airlines STILL fly that route according to Fligtradar24 (and comfirmed by Finnair via Twitter).
edit on 18-7-2014 by DupontDeux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   
I'd say it probably falls in the realm of planes that flew totally unmolested into the twin towers. It just doesn't add up. You can use excuses like "They were just cheap on gas" so that the mentally challenged would proxy his automobile fueling practices into an jet full of passengers and experienced pilots. Doesn't make sense though.

In today's computer flown aircraft could false coordinates been fed to the plane so they flew right into the trouble thinking they were flying around it? Hell, if I was flying that plane and somebody told me they were going to redirect me right over the top of a war zone I'd be screaming over my radio like a raped nun. I tend to fly the one finger salute when I feel somebody greasing my cheeks though.

But come on, what remotely intelligent pilot is going to fly his people right over the top of a war zone? A duped pilot I'm thinking.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: jaws1975
Its also the easiest flight path (most direct) from europe to asia .. forgot to put in initial reply ..



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: jaws1975
a reply to: Expat888

I don't think that planes get to chose their own flight paths, I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure air traffic control tells them what the flight path should be.


True that. Plus international equivalent of FAA hadn't declared that air space as off limits yet. I heard about 30 airlines were still using that airspace for flight paths. It's been declared off limits now.

Des



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Basically they didn't care.
The region was approved by Eurocontrol. Who approves flight paths. They were to avoid the more southern zone. This one was well with " the rules" , so why would a big corporation care? It's just wrong. I bet there was some doubting Thomas' on board who might have said hey this route isn't safe and got the eyes roll look.

This airline was already in financial trouble before mh370 , some have speculated they were too cheap to put more fuel in, in order to take a less risky route.
edit on 18-7-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I see people blaming Russia and Ukrainians getting mad.
But not asking this question simple question, Yes I can understand this is the main flight path, BUT why do they have to risk life's flying over that area in the first place. when they new the risks from previous planes been shot down in that area.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   
I question the pilots own discretion also. Why would he/she?



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Well, here is Malaysia Airlines official statement




1. Flight plan MH17’s flight plan was approved by Eurocontrol, who are solely responsible for determining civil aircraft flight paths over European airspace. Eurocontrol is the air navigation service provider for Europe and is governed under ICAO rules. The route over Ukrainian airspace where the incident occurred is commonly used for Europe to Asia flights. A flight from a different carrier was on the same route at the time of the MH17 incident, as were a number of other flights from other carriers in the days and weeks before. Eurocontrol maintains records of all flights across European airspace, including those across Ukraine. In April, the International Civil Aviation Organization identified an area over the Crimean peninsula as risky. At no point did MH17 fly into, or request to fly into, this area. At all times, MH17 was in airspace approved by the ICAO.

2. Altitude
MH17 filed a flight plan requesting to fly at 35,000ft throughout Ukrainian airspace. This is close to the ‘optimum’ altitude. However, an aircraft’s altitude in flight is determined by air traffic control on the ground. Upon entering Ukrainian airspace, MH17 was instructed by Ukrainian air traffic control to fly at 33,000ft.
edit on 18-7-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-7-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-7-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   
The other explanation given was weather relayed. Lightning storm. Perhaps they descended to fly below the storm? Then were targeted by mistake.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

Right Down Destiny's alley ...
( i.e. interesting ... "clues" )


Spanish Air Controller:
Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing #MH17


AND

Rebel leader gives bizarre account of plane crash

The pro-rebel website Russkaya Vesna on Friday quoted Igor Girkin as saying he was told by people at the crash site that "a significant number of the bodies weren't fresh," adding that he was told they were drained of blood and reeked of decomposition.

...

He claimed that a large amount of blood serum and medications were found in the wreckage.

AND

Some "GRUESOME" Video

THEN ... ( if all that wasn't enough? )

Reports that Putin flew similar route as MH17

-
OPINION: An Investigator's ... Challenge ???
( i.e. Investigator DES ... Now "At-Work" )
.
edit on 18-7-2014 by FarleyWayne because: Just how close was ... shtf?



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Apollumi
In today's computer flown aircraft could false coordinates been fed to the plane so they flew right into the trouble thinking they were flying around it? Hell, if I was flying that plane and somebody told me they were going to redirect me right over the top of a war zone I'd be screaming over my radio like a raped nun. I tend to fly the one finger salute when I feel somebody greasing my cheeks though.

But come on, what remotely intelligent pilot is going to fly his people right over the top of a war zone? A duped pilot I'm thinking.


You bring up a very good point and one that was bantered back and forth concerning MH370. It's interesting that both planes were Malaysian Airlines and both are Boeing 777's with leased Rolls Royce engines with the GPS tracking systems. Boeing probably has the redirection codes and this flight path recoding is in place for hijackings and other criminal eventualities. Could those codes include turning the passenger aircraft alert transponder off? Could the NSA have passed these codes to the CIA or one of their evil little associate organizations?

Seems a bit odd. If I remember right the passenger plane's transponder notifies AIMS and SAMS that it is a passenger plane and the AIM or SAM decouples from the target. The only way to get around that is to either mess with the AIM or SAM guidance (manually turn off transponder recognition or hack it in the AIM/SAM) or turn off the plan's transponder.

The Russian rebels are thugs not hackers, good with a gun and close combat, but they would probably use a screwdriver to program a computer. Probably the same for the Ukraine military. That leaves the Russians, the US and any other other power that has the motive and ability to get a hold of those plane recoding codes. We do know the Israeli's do a lot of spying in the US and they have their little Mossad instigators and sleepers all over. It's also interesting that MH-17 goes down and the Gaza invasion begins.

Could the Russian rebels use the Israeli's as a diversion for the Ukraine situation? Unlikely. Could the Israeli's take advantage of possibly gathered national security secrets and use the Russian rebels as a distraction? Very possibly.

Hmmmm, speculation, almost part specul-um and part anticip-ation.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 7/18.2014 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Expat888
An attempt to save on additional fuel costs that result from flying a different route ..


If they were wanting to save fuel, why where they shipping 1300kg of lithium batteries? Wouldn't it be cheaper sending them by land transport?

This bit I don't understand - lithium batteries are shipped from Malaysia to China, but they are also shipped from Europe to Malaysia. Why?



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Right up until the time of the shoot down, several airliners were tracked flying over the region. A number of them belonged to carriers that had publicly said, weeks ago, that they were no longer flying over the area.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join