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.

 

Emirates chief Tim Clark reveals suspicions over true fate of missing flight MH370

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: douglas5

He also claims it caused the Sukhoi SuperJet crash in Indonesia, Air France 447, and several others IIRC.

There isn't a shred of evidence it exists on any plane. You can't tell me that the people that install it, maintain it, and operate it, along with the crews ALL think that an autopilot that can take over any plane from the ground, and can't be stopped from crashing said plane, because the operator just found out his wife left and snapped, is a GREAT idea, and have all kept quiet about it.




posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
To summarize Sir Clark's concerns:

The plane did not crash in the Southern Indian Ocean.

The plane was not on auto-pilot or being controlled remotely.

The electronic hand-shake creating the Northern and Southern Arcs is false.

There was a person(s) of interest onboard the aircraft.

The cargo was of primary importance.

There is a deliberate cover-up.



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Every time I read a MH370 headline, I just flash forward a few years in my mind to some crappily-produced 'documentary' in which an ex-Star Trek cast member gazes mysteriously at a camera on a painfully cheap set and intones about 'Mystery' and 'WE MAY NEVER KNOW!' as creepy music plays over irrelevant stock footage...

OH GOD! PLEASE SOMEONE HURRY UP AND FIND SOMETHING AND SAVE US ALL FROM THAT!!!



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAllNext

(Especially if the thing that they find is that it was Aliens... Or the Illuminati... Or the people who REALLY killed Kennedy...

That would be kinda cool)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Malaysia authorities announce 99.99% likelihood of finding MH370

www.theweek.co.uk...

How could they possibly be so sure?

Because it's already been found? And not in the Southern Indian Ocean (yet).

Sir Tim Clark says it didn't crash in the Southern Indian Ocean.

INMARSAT has reneged on the certainty of their conclusions.

But Malaysia is 99.99% POSITIVE!

Hmmm?

Could it be that the remains of MH370 are already in the holds of the two huge "search vessels", the Fugro Discovery and the Go Phoenix, which are on their way to Tony Abbott's new "crash site"?

I guess we'll know with the next announcement from Hishammuddin Hussein.

The only problem I see with the plan is reassembling the collected debris into an intact airplane so as to maintain the
'Not a single piece of floating debris 'cause the plane is still in one piece' fantasy.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Like numerous other world events across history, I cannot help but believe far more is known about the fate of MH370 within the highest echelons of governments and intelligence services across the globe.

The fact that the gentleman in question from Emirates has chosen to publicly voice his concerns in this regard only reaffirms this belief.

I am not, and certainly would not claim to be, an aviation expert, and as such I would struggle to offer an exact hypothesis as to the fate of the aircraft and those on board. However, be it mechanical or pilot error, pilot suicide, an accidental missile strike or any other theory, I simply cannot shake the feeling we are being fed either a half-truth or a complete fabrication.

That's just my two cents. I just hope someday the truth will out.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Agree the whole thing is highly suspicious. It's good to hear people going on record saying there is more to this than meets the eye and what we have been told. I get the feeling though that the whole episode is history now. They may 'find' some wreckage one day and an 'expert' will be able to say ahhh the engine cowling fell off after being hit by an overly large seagull, case closed...



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: twentyeight
Agree the whole thing is highly suspicious. It's good to hear people going on record saying there is more to this than meets the eye and what we have been told. I get the feeling though that the whole episode is history now. They may 'find' some wreckage one day and an 'expert' will be able to say ahhh the engine cowling fell off after being hit by an overly large seagull, case closed...


That's not possible.

We already know the plane was deliberately diverted.

The case is not closed, much as TPTB would like to make it so.

Prepare for the next lie.

I say it will be the FALSE discovery of pieces of the plane in the Southern Indian Ocean, exactly where Sir Clark says it can't possibly be.



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Yes...I was not literally saying the case is closed. I was saying that the 'authorities' could possibly trot out this scenario sometime in the future if they wish.

Then again...they may not need to bother as sadly MH370 is ancient history to most people.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: twentyeight
Yes...I was not literally saying the case is closed. I was saying that the 'authorities' could possibly trot out this scenario sometime in the future if they wish.

Then again...they may not need to bother as sadly MH370 is ancient history to most people.


"Case is closed"

"The whole episode is history"

Seriously, did you just join ATS to declare the MH370 tragedy unsolvable?

We will eventually learn the truth, despite efforts by many to make it seem unknowable and a waste of time.





posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 12:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ivar_Karlsen
a reply to: douglas5

No civilian airliner have ever been remote controllable, period.

When and if that happens you're gonna read about it in every newspaper all over, not just on conspiracy websites.

And btw:




and enable air traffic controllers to take over a distressed aircraft and land it by remote control.


ATC don't fly airplanes, pilots do.


1952 ivar they were flying jets by r/c



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: douglas5

If it was just the patent issue as motivation, people have died for less. If they wanted the team dead then why not just blow the plane up and make it all official? With Mores law still running around I would not be surprised if the team is still working away on the next version, in some deep dark hole with a gun to their head.

Maybe they are all dead and all this mystery just compounds the confusion and uncertainty. Personally if I went to all the trouble to make a plane disappear then I would try to capitalize on the investment as much as I could.


well new info

"This is the third apparent loss of a Malaysia based large passenger jet this year following the unexplained disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 in March and the Ukrainian military shoot down of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 17 in July over Eastern Ukraine."

crimesofempire.

Who might be targeting Malaysia?

MOSSAD BUSY IN MALAYSIA? / CIA'S NEXT TARGET - MALAYSIA / MALAYSIAN AIRLINES MH370 - INSIDE JOB


On QZ8501, the only British passenger Chi Man Choi (above) was the managing director at Alstom Power, a large energy company which operates in Indonesia.

"Alstom is involved in semiconductor patents."

MH370 was carrying 20 engineers from Freescale Semiconductor Ltd.

Air Asia Flight QZ8501

Alstom is a French company. Alstom to pay record $772 million to settle bribery charges with US - 22 Dec 2014

The AirAsia boss Tony Fernandes dumped 944,800 shares in Tune Insurance Holdings Bhd, the organization that provides travel insurance for AirAsia passengers, just days before the disappearance of Flight QZ8501.

In the fortnight before AirAsia Flight QZ8501 went missing, a mysterious user of the Chinese social media network Weibo, in dozens of posts, warned Chinese nationals not to use AirAsia.

He warned: "Do not become another victim of MH370".

He reported that AirAsia was about to be targeted by 'powerful' forces which he referred to as the 'black hand'.




the little brother chip aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk...



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: douglas5

They were flying them in WWII. But go back and read what he said. No CIVILIAN airliner has ever been remote controllable. Not "they can't do it".



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: douglas5

They were flying them in WWII. But go back and read what he said. No CIVILIAN airliner has ever been remote controllable. Not "they can't do it".


On December 4th of 2006, it was announced that Boeing had won a patent on an uninterruptible autopilot system for use in commercial aircraft. This was the first public acknowledgment by Boeing about the existence of such an autopilot system.

The Flight Global news wire goes on to report that the uninterruptible autopilot system was designed for increased security in the event of a manual hijacking situation, as Boeing itself describes the feature as a preventative measure, keeping unauthorized persons out of a cockpit, setting the stage for an industry wide safety protocol:

“Diagrams: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners,” Croft outlines the clandestine oversight that government has with respect to the uninterruptible autopilot, making note of the auto-land function of the system and stating that the technology has its own power supply self-sufficient of any electrical systems on the plane:

In 1984 and 1986, Honeywell had two very important patents pertaining to the modernization of Flight Management System technology, both helping with the integration of automated flight digital data processing and in 1995, Boeing filed a patent for an “alternate destination planner,” to be used in conjunction with other Honeywell patents.

In 1995, Boeing and Honeywell participated in the Category III-b flight test conducted at NASA’s Wallops Island, Virginia, using a Boeing 757 completing a number of automated landings. The functionality of automated flight returns benefited greatly from the realization of global positioning systems (GPS) around that time.


Hacking planes - UK researchers developing plans to stop 'flight cyberjacking'

Though modern airplanes have integrated systems, connecting difference pieces of the network architecture using a bus, which might allow hackers to move around a plane’s network to cause trouble, MH370’s on-flight communications were more segregated.

“If we talk about MH370 that certainly didn’t have this level of integration at all,” he explains. “But with the A320 and A350 and 787 [different models of airplane] we have got this level of integration.”

conference.hitb.org...

how to remotely attack and take full control of an aircraft, exposing some of the results of my three years research on the aviation security field.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: douglas5

Yes, and it's even installed on Sukhoi, Airbus, and every other plane in the world apparently from all the crashes it's supposedly caused. We already went over the supposedly uninteruptible autopilot. It's right up at the top of the page.

It was patented in 2006, and in 8 years, the at least hundreds of people that have worked on it have all agreed that it's a beautiful idea to be able to take over any plane in the world and fly it wherever you want to, and the crew can't do anything about it.

To hack a plane you have to have access to the computer system. There is no outside access to the computer on a plane, except to basic systems that can't affect the plane. Even on the new planes there isn't the access required to affect the plane. They've been saying that fly by wire is hackable since it was first used, and yet, it's never once been proven.
edit on 1/5/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/5/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/5/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 11:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sparky63

originally posted by: bigx001
a reply to: voyger2

you land parallel to the waves not perpendicular and it is possible to do so with the plane not breaking apart. the stall speed is somewhere around 120 kts with full flaps and nothing else extended and remember it didn't have any fuel so that weight is out of the equation.

otherwise where is the debris

a water landing is not out of the question, especially if you practice in a simulator


That's an interesting scenario. I just wonder though what motivation a suicidal pilot would have to go to such great lengths to hide the wreckage and keep the plane from being tracked. A guy who wants to off himself by jumping off a bridge doesn't concern himself with hiding his car so that no one can find it. The suicidal pilot idea just doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how anyone can come to that conclusion based on the efforts the pilot would have to take to pull this off. If he wanted to kill himself by crashing into the ocean why would he care where he ditched the plane?

Maybe I've just seen too many Mission Impossible movies.


if we eliminate all possibilities, no matter how improbable. then what is left has to be the truth.

crash on land - no crash site, fire, smoke plume. nsa/mil/cia satellites monitor the globe and no indication of explosion or flash from any of these sources. crash on land unlikely.

crash at sea - no floating debris, oil slick, zero to date. even on empty tanks there are several gallons of jet fuel that is is unusable, jet fuel does't evaporate that fast and the slick would have been visible for days afterward. crash at sea unlikely

flown to diego garcia - at 5K feet jet engines consume large quantities of fuel compared 35K feet, since we know it was down this low, it would have a much shorter range than at 35K, unlikely it had the fuel to make it that far at 5K - landed, crashed at diego garcia unlikely

shot down - see crash at see above - shot down unlikely

landed on the ocean, sank in tact to the bottom - leaves no debris, oil and fuel that are left, seep out and only make puddle size oil sheen. there was a sonar pick-up of an underwater explosion shortly after the time of the last acars transmission handshake happened. implosion of the cabin due to water pressure? that would fit. can this be ruled out? is it improbable?

all the other possibilities leave very visible and clear evidence, the likes that would have been discovered by now

suicide / mass murder doesn't always have to be a catastrophic event, after all jones town was just cool aid



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: douglas5

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: douglas5




the little brother chip aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk...


what is this chip supposed to be?



posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: bigx001

And then what?

This masterful pilot who performed a feat of airmanship that makes Sully Sullenberger's heroic act look amateurish in comparison, goes down with his ship?

Uhrm, I don't think so.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigx001

originally posted by: douglas5

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: douglas5




the little brother chip aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk...


what is this chip supposed to be?


According to those in the know it is a game changer when used in the weapons market ,



posted on Jan, 12 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic
a reply to: bigx001

And then what?

This masterful pilot who performed a feat of airmanship that makes Sully Sullenberger's heroic act look amateurish in comparison, goes down with his ship?

Uhrm, I don't think so.


so your conclusion is no conclusion then?



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join