• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Malaysia Airlines MH370 "Lost Contact"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,800
We still don't know whether the transponder was deliberately turned off or not. We know it went off, but not how.

Seems rather convenient that it stopped broadcasting don't you think, they're ultra reliable they have hardly ever been known to break.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
Seems rather convenient that it stopped broadcasting don't you think, they're ultra reliable they have hardly ever been known to break.

I think that you're making assumptions, as is everyone. It's human nature to try and make sense of situations but at the moment we know very, very little about what happened, and everyone is assuming that because the transponder went off it must have been deliberate. We don't, and until the wreckage is found, we can't assume that.
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,800
I think that you're making assumptions, as is everyone. It's human nature to try and make sense of situations but at the moment we know very, very little about what happened, and everyone is assuming that because the transponder went off it must have been deliberate. We don't, and until the wreckage is found, we can't assume that.

Well the unless the plane is on the ground somewhere which is possible but unlikely the transponder will never be found, but if it simply stopped working I would be very surprised.

Every expert I've heard on t.v has said it was switched off.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,668
It was said the other day that he had no substantial life insurance, and if he did they would never pay out as there are too many things that can't be confirmed.

The Chinese are now demanding that Malaya gives them concrete satellite proof that it was even in that area at all.

That squashes that point then. But i still thought suicide was unlikely anyway.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
Malaya is now saying they know it's gone down in the Indian Ocean by using "calculations never before used" with no physical proof at all.

Nobody surely still thinks the truth is being told, The Chinese certainly don't

Well that information is from a British satellite company working with the British AAIB, so unless they are both in cahoots with the Malaysian Government in some sinister global conspiracy, I think we can count their information as pretty accurate.

The satellite firm has no reason to lie, their systems are not designed or really intended to track the plane and the software was turned off so they have no responsibility or liability for the incident.

Just been reading the story of the affair concerning Aerolines Itavia flight 870 as an adjunct to the mystery that currently surrounds the plane in this current thread, but I cannot believe that the Australian government would have taken any such dramatic action.

For it to be near Australia it must have already flown way off course so it would be a strange compound incident if that happened. It was routed over sensitive airspace in the seas near Vietnam which could have been responsible for an accidental shoot-down, but the evidence points away from this.

It was said the other day that he had no substantial life insurance, and if he did they would never pay out as there are too many things that can't be confirmed.

I think if it was a life insurance fraud, he could have done things very differently. Better to set up a crash that looked like an accident than go missing when potentially the insurers might never pay out.

If it was suicide I would guess that it was purely for emotive purposes, we all know on this railway forum how people in a bad emotional state can do things that would seem utterly irrational to others.
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,528
Location
Liskeard
I think the retired pilot's theory (quoted several pages back here) that he turned to head for nearest airstrip long enough to accommodate the plane due to an emergency situation is seeming more likely now.
The locations Inmersat are reporting are on a straight line (auto pilot likely) from where it would have turned and on the bearing of the airstrip that was reportedly the closest with space for a 777.
Pilot turned and headed towards mentioned runway and become overrun with smoke or lack of oxygen knocked unconscious and autopilot continued with no body conscious on the plane.
If this was the case the pilot could be deemed a hero turning the place away from large land masses, as the airstrip reported to be able to accommodate the 777.
The things I question whether Malaysia were aware of the issue, and that is what they are failing to release.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
The locations Inmersat are reporting are on a straight line (auto pilot likely) from where it would have turned and on the bearing of the airstrip that was reportedly the closest with space for a 777.
Pilot turned and headed towards mentioned runway and become overrun with smoke or lack of oxygen knocked unconscious and autopilot continued with no body conscious on the plane.

Although as has been mentioned, this theory failed to account for subsequent course changes detected by radar and the fact that the satellite communications system was put into stand-by mode but not completely de-activated (something not possible from the flight deck) - if a fire was destroying the electronics and it must have done to disable the transponder too, it would have completely destroyed the circuits for the satellite device, plus probably the autopilot and in fact the plane itself long before the seven hours of flying it still had ahead of it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-26640114

I can't really see Malaysian Airlines hiding a known fault with the plane - someone would know and leak this information as they have throughout the story. Plus it would leave them liable if any other planes suffered this same fault if it was proven they did not inform Boeing.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
17,849
Location
Epsom
Although as has been mentioned, this theory failed to account for subsequent course changes detected by radar and the fact that the satellite communications system was put into stand-by mode but not completely de-activated (something not possible from the flight deck) - if a fire was destroying the electronics and it must have done to disable the transponder too, it would have completely destroyed the circuits for the satellite device, plus probably the autopilot and in fact the plane itself long before the seven hours of flying it still had ahead of it.

A nose gear fire would not neccesarily do more than fill the aircraft with highly toxic smoke and knock out only those wiring circuits that were particularly close to the nose gear bay. It would not necessarily spread through the aircraft.

If the autopilot was set on a compass heading instead of aiming at a waypoint ( can this be done? ), then as it flew further south the magnetic heading would change, resulting in automatic course corrections. the more noticable turns early on could well be waypoint settings up to the point at which the long relatively straight flightpath south appears to have started.
 

Temple Meads

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2010
Messages
2,283
Location
Devon
Could toxic fumes or similar have been drawn into the cabin thereby disabling the people, but not the plane?
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,528
Location
Liskeard
Could toxic fumes or similar have been drawn into the cabin thereby disabling the people, but not the plane?

It is definitely possible, from a undercarriage fire for example - on the outside of the plane but giving off fumes.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
Although in incidents before where this has happened, the crew have had good warning and were able to radio distress calls. Given that some of the communication equipment had gone offline before the last radio message, it is unlikely a fire could cause this damage without being detected.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria_Airways_Flight_2120
 

Jonny

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,577
Seems rather convenient that it stopped broadcasting don't you think, they're ultra reliable they have hardly ever been known to break.

That's as maybe, but it's only ever as reliable as its power supply - as is any electronics.

As a slight aside, well, my Dad's theory - that I agree with - is that the Chinese want to get their hands on the satellite records for the technology, in order to copy it.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,453
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
There now seems to be a number of ocean-going vessels heading out into the area and hopefully, they will be able to recover some of the multi-image debris that was reported yesterday, with the aid of aircraft directional assistance, in the hope that clarification of whatsoever this debris is an be evaluated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top