There is NO SUCH THING As a Dissapearing Plane in the 21st Century.

Malaysia’s former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad has questioned whether flight MH370 crashed into the southern Indian Ocean and has blamed Boeing, the plane’s maker, for its disappearance.
Dr Mahathir, who maintains a powerful influence in his country’s ruling party, also suggested

“The loss of the plane is due to the makers, Boeing. How can Boeing produce a plane that is so easily disabled?” he said.

Read more: www.smh.com.au...

Mahathir said in an era where passenger planes can be tracked on mobile phone, and spy satellites operated by some countries can photograph and identify a person on the ground, Boeing must explain how all these means of tracking the plane “can be disabled, can fail”.
“Either Boeing technology is poor, or it is not fail-safe,” he said.
“I would not like to fly in a Boeing aircraft unless Boeing can explain how all its system can fail or be disabled.”
Dr Mahathir said Boeing, a multinational corporation based in Chicago, must “demonstrate possible ways for the communication system to be disabled”.
“Boeing must accept responsibility for building an aircraft that can disappear in mid-air so completely,” he said.
Boeing has sent experts to Kuala Lumpur to work with Malaysian and international aviation experts investigating the disappearance of the Boeing 777 with 239 people on board during a scheduled flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8.
Boeing has not responded to Dr Mahathir's comments which were first published in his personal blog and then republished in several Malaysian news outllet

www.smh.com.au...

Im just reporting here i don't know...

I was always under the impression, and maybe its incorrect, that these planes are tracked by satellites. IE radio signals beamed back and forth between the aircraft and a satellite, for navigational purposes. I guess on some levels this is true, I believe I read that engine run time data is sent to a satellite periodically so the companies know how many hours are on a planes engines for maintenance purposes. But I always assumed that they would have something on a plane to allow it to be located. My god if you can do this with a smart phone, it cant be done with a plane?

a reply to: openminded2011

Lots of systems had to be disabled for this to have happened.

This plane was also said to have flown between two major US air bases. Deigo Garcia, and Xmouth. I won't even mention Rottnest down by Perth Australia.

a reply to: Danbones

He has no idea what he's talking about. All aircraft can have the systems disabled, it's a safety thing. It doesn't matter if it's Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, or anyone else.

a reply to: openminded2011

You're correct, to a point. The satellite that tracks them is the transponder. If it's disabled, the primary tracking method is disabled.

a reply to: Donkey_Dean

There is no long range radar on Diego Garcia that could have seen them go by.

originally posted by: GeminiSky
a reply to: skunkape23

I would really like to know what other forum members here think. This reminds me very very much of the 9/11 scenario. Where we spend billions of dollars on air defense, have surface to air missiles, and the most sophisticated radars, and yet somehow conveniently let an unresponsive, radio silent airliner, slowly fly around for an hour, after 2 other airliners ALREADY HIT the twin towers, then let it hit the pentagon, one of the most guarded buildings in the country. So so convenient.

Why do you think that the Pentagon was one of the most guarded buildings in the country? It wasn't. Are you one of those people that believed that the Pentagon had surface to air missiles deployed or had its own air defence system capable of bringing down a large airliner? Apart from physical security such as security guards there was no other security measures employed at the Pentagon. No ring of medium or long range SAMs.

In regards to Flight 77 the first information passed from the FAA to the military that this flight was missing was at 09:34. No one at FAA headquarters ever asked for military assistance for Flight 77. Approximately 4 minutes later Flight 77 struck the Pentagon.

a reply to: GeminiSky

yes i think you are the only one who has that theory, what possible connection culd you see between the two?

originally posted by: BeReasonable
a reply to: GeminiSky

yes i think you are the only one who has that theory, what possible connection culd you see between the two?

What theory? Does this make me unique?

GS

my feeling this plane landed Sri Lanka maybe they have an airport on their west coast that can land any size aircraft and it was in their flight path after they turned. just a thought.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
Good thread. Congrats to the OP for digging up the reference to the Malaysian Airlines' maintenance deal with Rolls Royce. It appears that even that element of tracking availability was present in this case, yet no plane found.

What element of tracking? Did the Malaysians eventually buy the full package, or opt for a GPS facility? It appears not.

But New Scientist understands that the maker of the missing Boeing 777's Trent 800 engines, Rolls Royce, received two data reports from flight MH370 at its global engine health monitoring centre in Derby, UK, where it keeps real-time tabs on its engines in use. One was broadcast as MH370 took off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport, the other during the 777's climb out towards Beijing.

www.newscientist.com...

After ACARS was switched off that was it as far as any further engine data going back to Rolls-Royce in Derby. The only thing left was the handshakes - 6 complete handshakes took place.

I gotta admit, I'm too lazy to start a new thread, and I apologize up front for this drift, and I promise I'll not discuss it further in this thread, but I was noticing on the tv that Obama is hanging out in.....none other than.....Kuala Lampur, Malaysia!

I don't think this plane crashed where 'they' say it crashed.

I don't think it's 'missing' or 'disappeared' either. I myself don't know where it is, but if someone DOES know where it is, then it's not 'missing'.

I also don't think 'facts' can be 'facts' simply as a result of being reported by any media outlet, tv, web, radio, word of mouth, etc.

Where's Sherlock when you need him.

a reply to: Donkey_Dean

I won't even mention Rottnest down by Perth Australia

Good, because there is no US airbase at Rottnest, nor a naval base.

Same for Exmouth.

originally posted by: GeminiSky

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: GeminiSky

/quote]

Am I the only one who feels that the sunken ferry had something to do with the airliner??

That kind of reminds me of Cabin In The Woods
This could all be linked to Satanism?...

originally posted by: FinalCountdown

originally posted by: GeminiSky

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: GeminiSky

Am I the only one who feels that the sunken ferry had something to do with the airliner??

That kind of reminds me of Cabin In The Woods
This could all be linked to Satanism?...

Im sorry I dont think you are quoting me, I never wrote this statement...

GS

a reply to: GeminiSky

Did you not suggest that you suspected some connection between the Ferry Sinking and the plane dissapearance?

And if you did, then what led you to that idea?

There have been several credible reports that I had hoped might offer explanation or should at least be exhaustively examined, which have been unceremoniously dropped by the msm, and I'll summarize but I have forgotten some of the details so if I err, please do correct me. Also, I don't watch TV news, except clips on the Internet, so maybe things were covered that I never saw.

First, another pilot flying near 370 was radioed immediately after 370 went missing, and asked to contact the 370 cockpit. I forget if this pilot was ahead or behind 370 and hence whether he could see the plane ahead of him, but he did reach someone but there seemed to be a lot of hubbub. I don't watch tv news so I don't know if they ever released the tape of his conversation, but I never heard it.

Then there was the guy on an oil rig who saw an explosion in the sky at about the time that 370 went missing, and in a place that the 370 could plausibly be. Being the wee hours of the morning, he was the only witness, but his employer vouched for him as a credible guy. There was a cursory investigation and the matter was dropped. I never heard about any search being conducted in that area.

Then, there were reports of a plane flying very low over (IIRC) the Maldives and some other locations. Wouldn't people who were outdoors watch the plane to see where it went? Were their reports taken seriously?

Let's not forget that as soon as the plane crossed into Vietnamese airspace and failed to communicate, it was considered missing and the aviation community was on high alert. Once they hear that a plane is missing, they are looking at radar, they are looking at the sky with binoculars, other pilots are looking for out of the ordinary things, ships are looking for wreckage. It was dark at first, but apparently the plane was still flying for hours after the sun rose.

All this puzzling stuff was happening, and the US kept insisting on the least likely scenarios: an electrical fire caused a crash, or pilot suicide. I knew something was up by their stubborn refusal to consider other scenarios.

Of course the US and other superpowers have amazing intelligence and probably knew where the plane was, or could have released satellite images to piece the mystery together. But the sad fact is they can't, at least not openly. I remember hearing a story of a suspected terrorist. While under surveilllance, he killed his daughter, and the listeners knew it was happening and couldn't come to her aid lest they blow a larger investigation. Still, I would hope that the agencies could share intelligence discreetly, leaking information to point searchers in the right direction. Failure to do so tells me they don't want that information out.

I wondered if maybe my suspicions were ill-founded when they heard pings. I was skeptical that they would find the plane, and so far I haven't been wrong. But I was willing to consider that maybe this totally nonsensical thing happened, where the pilot deftly changes course and evades radar for hours, onlyl to crash in the ocean to kill himself and 238 others, when there was already plenty of ocean he could have crashed a few hours ago if he wanted to commit suicide. If the plane really was in the water west of Australia, assuming he didn't intend on running out of fuel, then where was he going? I can't help thinking, Antarctica. The most remote place on the planet, especially in the colder months (remember this is the Southern Hemisphere so their March is our September).

I don't think they will find the plane, at least not where they are looking.

originally posted by: lindalinda
There have been several credible reports that I had hoped might offer explanation or should at least be exhaustively examined, which have been unceremoniously dropped by the msm, and I'll summarize but I have forgotten some of the details so if I err, please do correct me. Also, I don't watch TV news, except clips on the Internet, so maybe things were covered that I never saw.

First, another pilot flying near 370 was radioed immediately after 370 went missing, and asked to contact the 370 cockpit. I forget if this pilot was ahead or behind 370 and hence whether he could see the plane ahead of him, but he did reach someone but there seemed to be a lot of hubbub. I don't watch tv news so I don't know if they ever released the tape of his conversation, but I never heard it.

Then there was the guy on an oil rig who saw an explosion in the sky at about the time that 370 went missing, and in a place that the 370 could plausibly be. Being the wee hours of the morning, he was the only witness, but his employer vouched for him as a credible guy. There was a cursory investigation and the matter was dropped. I never heard about any search being conducted in that area.

Then, there were reports of a plane flying very low over (IIRC) the Maldives and some other locations. Wouldn't people who were outdoors watch the plane to see where it went? Were their reports taken seriously?

Let's not forget that as soon as the plane crossed into Vietnamese airspace and failed to communicate, it was considered missing and the aviation community was on high alert. Once they hear that a plane is missing, they are looking at radar, they are looking at the sky with binoculars, other pilots are looking for out of the ordinary things, ships are looking for wreckage. It was dark at first, but apparently the plane was still flying for hours after the sun rose.

All this puzzling stuff was happening, and the US kept insisting on the least likely scenarios: an electrical fire caused a crash, or pilot suicide. I knew something was up by their stubborn refusal to consider other scenarios.

Of course the US and other superpowers have amazing intelligence and probably knew where the plane was, or could have released satellite images to piece the mystery together. But the sad fact is they can't, at least not openly. I remember hearing a story of a suspected terrorist. While under surveilllance, he killed his daughter, and the listeners knew it was happening and couldn't come to her aid lest they blow a larger investigation. Still, I would hope that the agencies could share intelligence discreetly, leaking information to point searchers in the right direction. Failure to do so tells me they don't want that information out.

I wondered if maybe my suspicions were ill-founded when they heard pings. I was skeptical that they would find the plane, and so far I haven't been wrong. But I was willing to consider that maybe this totally nonsensical thing happened, where the pilot deftly changes course and evades radar for hours, onlyl to crash in the ocean to kill himself and 238 others, when there was already plenty of ocean he could have crashed a few hours ago if he wanted to commit suicide. If the plane really was in the water west of Australia, assuming he didn't intend on running out of fuel, then where was he going? I can't help thinking, Antarctica. The most remote place on the planet, especially in the colder months (remember this is the Southern Hemisphere so their March is our September).

I don't think they will find the plane, at least not where they are looking.

Interesting take on things, I agree with most of your post....Perhaps this plane was never meant to be found??

GS

originally posted by: BeReasonable
a reply to: GeminiSky

Did you not suggest that you suspected some connection between the Ferry Sinking and the plane dissapearance?

And if you did, then what led you to that idea?

My suspicion arose from the plane and ferry incidents being in relatively same general areas and the timing is bit suspect as well...of course it could all simply be a coincidence...

GS

a reply to: skunkape23

given only that choice i would say lies. incompetence really couldn't cut it. this event was stage-managed in my opinion. a show.