Beijing-bound MAS plane carrying 239 people missing as of 20 mins ago.

reply to post by Leonidas


Leo, you're getting a little aggressive. Maybe you should have a quick tea and relax.

Also, yes passport rings happen. How many of these passports are used for travel?

Yes, it is PROBABLY NOTHING, but lets not make the jump into saying it's DEFINITELY NOTHING. You seem to dismiss this possibility entirely. I'm going to wait until the identify these individuals and look at their living situation/check them for components residues.

My own opinion is that the plane went down, or landed in one piece. There is a ton of stuff on a plane that floats: clothes, bags, papers, bodies, empty bottles, etc., etc...

If the plane broke apart we would probably be able to see debris pretty easily. Don't you agree?

Bilk22The use of stolen passports, sold by an airline that allegedly received a threat of terrorism, is irrelevant? Really? It's pretty much the only information we can believe at this point is known to be true.

What good is that info at this point in helping to locate the plane?

Once the plane is found then we can speculate if those two folks with the stolen passports had anything to do with it crashing.. Right now total conjecture about who they were and what they were doing. Although I bet the authorities have a better picture today then they did yesterday

roadgravel

UnBreakable

Battlefresh
I might as well throw out my crazy theory.

Terrorists hijacked the plane, possibly by an explosive on the pilot cabin door, giving them no time for a distress call. They then immediately dropped in altitude until they were below the radar operating line, flew to a remote airfield that had been prepared. The passengers are all being held hostage somewhere. The plane is being prepared to be used as either a missile, or as a bomb delivery device. The terrorists will make a public announcement once everything is in place.

edit on 10-3-2014 by Battlefresh because: (no reason given)

I wouldn't discount this scenario. It sounds just as plausible, if not more, than some other theories on here.

Hopefully they save as much fuel as possible. Can't go to the corner station and get some jet fuel.

Now if some event with missing fuel happens, this gets moved up a notch with me.

(Don't the powers keep a watchful eye on that type of fuel?)

do you have to log kerosine or naphtha purchases? apparently the triple 7 uses jet a or jet a1 which is a kerosine type fuel. i know the camp i went to as a kid had a big tank of kerosine for both use in lamps and things as well as to refuel aircraft if needed (it was a rather remote camp). so i would say no they don't keep a watch on that type of fuel.

they have even run a triple 7 on "biofuel" made from plant sugars.

Our renewable jet fuel was used in a demonstration flight this weekend in Abu Dhabi. An Etihad Airways Boeing 777 flew on a blend of biojet fuel produced from plant sugars. As previously announced, Amyris and Total have partnered to develop an alternative aviation jet fuel made with a sustainably-sourced hydrocarbon using Amyris's proprietary biotechnology platform. The fuel is nearing ASTM validation, and this demonstration flight, the third for Amyris, underscores the readiness of this renewable jet for for the aviation industry.

www.amyris.com...

reply to post by EnderMEM


Unfortunately bodies tend to float for a day or so then sink then rise after 3-4 days

reply to post by generik


interesting info. given it would be a one time flight, might be an angle.

I still think the idea of the plane disintegrating at altitude is the most logic. If it was out of radar range then maybe a crashing into the ocean, otherwise this is should detected.

The answer making the lease assumptions usually is true.

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by watchesfromwall

 

I was a little confused with the first question!
Are you referring to a crash site and dark spots relating to plane size?
I could be well off there!

I have searched extensively and cannot find anything about a Korean flight going off radar in recent days, it may well be stuck under the countless searches that pop up with the MA missing flight, but I did quite try hard to keep the keywords specific to Korean flights & radar problems!

The Oil slicks were determined to have been from Boats in the area!
So far I haven't come across a story from Vietnam or otherwise regarding smoke in the ocean!

A true mystery at the moment WFW!!!

Peace!

Sorry about that - I was thinking you all were all mind readers, lolz

When I spoke of "dark spots" I was referring to the remarks made by a former pilot for United, etc. speaking on AJAM. He flew for 50 years, and he declared that there are dark spots as far as communication that occur in the area in question (along with similar areas in parts of Africa and S. America). He said that in the Vietnam area, pilots often have to resort to the radio communication methods he trained on 50 years ago despite modern technology?

Is there veracity to his statements?

With respect to the Korea jet - it was not identified as either commercial or military - but I distinctly remember it reported that it went off the radar early on, in the morning hours of Saturday am CST. Same with reports of smoke on the water.

So no other known reports that anyone has heard?

*vanished without a trace, I'm praying for safety*

Elathan
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Could the plane have landed somewhere under the radar? Passengers be held as hostages?

We would've heard something from the hijackers by now if that were the case... not to mention the beacon on the plane would've been picked up by now if it was on land.

54 pages is too much even for me. Have any plausible theories been presented or has it been personal attacks all the way through?

I had dismissed this as a crash caused by human error or terrorism until hearing the latest news. The oil slick found in the South China Sea was determined to be marine grade rather than aviation grade, meaning it could not have come from the plane.
Here's the real kicker: family members of 19 different crash victims have signed an affadavit stating they have been able to make a conneciton (and get multiple rings) to the vicitm's cell phone after the flight went missing. Apparently the phones would ring a few times and then appear to hang up.

www.fastcompany.com...

Very interesting details about this incident are coming out today. This needs to stay on the front page of ATS.

reply to post by ugie1028


You assume the hijackers would be following the same old ransom plan. What if they wanted to use the plane for something?

ugie1028

Elathan
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Could the plane have landed somewhere under the radar? Passengers be held as hostages?

We would've heard something from the hijackers by now if that were the case... not to mention the beacon on the plane would've been picked up by now if it was on land.

if it just about hostages they should have been heard from. but how can we be sure that China or Malaysia (the two most likely targets), would actually tell everyone about it? on the other hand if they want the aircraft for some reason they would wait until either the aircraft is gone or doing whatever they want with it, or the hostages are taken somewhere away from the aircraft, before putting the word out. it all depends on what the purposes of the mission would be.

as for the "beacon", that can be turned on and off at will. and the "crash beacons" only activate in a "crash situation"

If the plane crashed, wouldn't the Flight Data Recorders (black boxes) be emitting a signal? (assuming they survived any impact/explosion)

And does anyone know the survival rate of FDR's in accidents (at least to the point of being able to emit a signal)?

How rare is it that neither FDR is able to emit a signal?

reply to post by OpenMindedRealist


i didnt even realize that question was asked on page 48. oops. I need to catch up.

back on topic.

well he said they'd take them as hostages... hostages are usually held for ransom. Also taking the plane wasn't part of the question.

Could it be that one authority knows exactly where it is but will not say in fear of divulging there abilities or military secrets

MRuss
reply to post by Leonidas

 

I just think it's hard to compare this to the Air France crash.

That crash was way the heck out there near the equator in the South Atlantic Ocean in the middle of nowhere--literally. The water was incredibly deep and the area was known for the worst weather imaginable.

This "disappearance" on the other hand is in a more defined region, much more shallow water abounds compared to where the Air France flight crashed. Land masses are nearby.

Still a needle in a haystack, but a much smaller haystack which makes the needle even bigger.

Agreed that the 2 shouldn't be compared for the reasons you point out.

Also, In the AF crash, I think they knew at least the "what happened" but not the "why/where" scenarios.

DOES anyone have a similar Boeing accident that would serve worthy of comparison???

reply to post by onefellswoop

How rare is it that neither FDR is able to emit a signal?

I don't think any one knows if they are or are not. Maybe no one is close enough to detect it.

reply to post by Bilk22


Yes, because if you had read carefully, the airline that sold the tickets is NOT the airline that allegedly received the threat to the airport.

From your previous post:

China Airlines said it received the warning from a caller who claimed to work for an anti-terrorist organization in France.

The caller first spoke in French but as the switchboard operator could not understand him, he then switched to Mandarin Chinese, the airline said.

The reported call came just after an attack March 1 in a train station in Kunming, China, in which more than 30 people were killed.

From the news sources:

Beijing: The tickets to the holders of the stolen Austrian and Italian passports were sold by China Southern Airlines, which has a code share agreement with Malaysia Airlines, according to China Southern’s account on Sina Weibo, the Chinese microblog platform.

gulfnews.com...

China and China Southern are completely different airlines and have nothing to do with each other.

In fact China Airlines is actually from Taiwan, not China.

CNN is reporting the tickets were purchased for the two individuals by a well known Iranian who has had a number of purchases from the same travel agency.

reply to post by onefellswoop


Most FDR/CVRs survive. But the signal they transmit is short ranged. They use a sonar pinger for under water, and a short range radio signal for on land.

reply to post by onefellswoop


The way I hear aviation experts talking, the only way the beacons could possibly be out of range is if they were on the bottom of the deep Pacific or Atlantic Ocean. The South China Sea is nowhere near deep enough.

From what I understand, the emergency beacons are activated automatically by impact or catastrophic systems failure. The transponder, however, can be turned off by the pilot. If it is intact on the ground and the transponder is off, we would not be able to spot it with radar or ATC tracking.

DOES anyone have a similar Boeing accident that would serve worthy of comparison???

On 23 June 1985 Air India Flight 182 Emperor Kanishka a Boeing 747-237B (registered VT-EFO) was blown up in mid-air, mid-flight by a suitcase-bomb planted by Babbar Khalsa Terrorists allegedly as revenge for the Indian Government's operation on the Golden Temple on June 1984. The flight was on the first leg on its Montreal-London-Delhi-Bombay flight when it exploded off the coast of Cork, Ireland. The plane crashed into the Atlantic Ocean. All 307 passengers and 22 crew on board died.

Wiki