Malaysia Airlines 777 loses contact...not found

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Now now, don't apply sense to a conspiracy theory

He he. Well, it just seems to me that if the Pakistani military, or elements thereof, wanted an airliner, they'd get one, and without a Rube Goldberg type plot. It's not like the organization has no idea how to get hardware. If they can come up with nuclear weapons, surely they can come up with an airliner without engaging in farce. All one needs is the money, after all. Heck, even stealing it from a Pakistani airline would minimize the international storm.

 

[morepwr]

What a bummer to find out that debris that was spotted was old fishing gear. I had really hoped that it would be parts of the plane just to help end this story. I am not saying that to be cold or mean towards the families who had people on board that plane, but I find it very doubtful they are still alive and some closure would be nice.

 

[Blaze]

I would imagine this is like throwing an air-soft BB in the middle of Lake Michigan and trying to find it with a row boat.

 

[Smokescreen]

This entire thread is based on speculation at this point, despite all efforts nothing has been proven. So one theory is as valid as any other IMO. Human history with all its complete craziness, quest for power and astounding cowardice means there are a myriad of possibilities, everything from the tin foil hat explanations to the simplicity of it landing into the ocean. Too many strange things occurred to discount anything.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Now now, don't apply sense to a conspiracy theory

He he. Well, it just seems to me that if the Pakistani military, or elements thereof, wanted an airliner, they'd get one, and without a Rube Goldberg type plot. It's not like the organization has no idea how to get hardware. If they can come up with nuclear weapons, surely they can come up with an airliner without engaging in farce. All one needs is the money, after all. Heck, even stealing it from a Pakistani airline would minimize the international storm.


State owned Pakistan International Airlines owns several 747-300 and 777 aircraft. They ordered five more 777-300ER with delivery starting in 2015.

Yup, no Rube Goldberg/Tom Clancy plot needed.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
Too many strange things occurred to discount anything.

That's true, but the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. The oceans have plenty of wreckage in them that has never been discovered and likely never will.

The conspiracy people, however, have not (and cannot) sufficiently explain why the U.S., Pakistan, India, and China (all of whom have their beefs with each other) would be in on some nefarious plot over something as mundane as an airliner.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
This entire thread is based on speculation at this point, despite all efforts nothing has been proven. So one theory is as valid as any other IMO. Human history with all its complete craziness, quest for power and astounding cowardice means there are a myriad of possibilities, everything from the tin foil hat explanations to the simplicity of it landing into the ocean. Too many strange things occurred to discount anything.

I see your point but certainly don't agree with it. We don't know what happened, but that does not make one theory as valid as another.

 

[Hokiefyd]

The only thing I find curious about the southern route is that they have "confirmed" positional data points just south of Vietnam, then turning west and flying over the Malay penninsula. Possibly with a little north-then-back-west corkscrew thrown in. If a person had intended on heading straight south #to somewhere#, why not simply fly straight south after you turn the transponder off? Why waste fuel flying west over the penninsula just to later turn south?

 

[Astro14]

Not all theories are equally valid. The "Black Hole" theory was predicated on a child's understanding of physics...not a valid theory...just wild speculation serving only to fill time on a "news" show.

Some explanations are more likely than others, in the absence of more facts, none can be proven.

But, as of right now, mechanical failure, including electrical fire, and weather are very unlikely.

For the questions asked:

DITCHING: OK, this hasn't been done yet with an airliner the size of a 777. It is possible, as Sully proved recently, to successfully ditch an jet airliner... The sea state is the principal consideration. Wind matters, but waves and swell matter more. You want the airplane to contact the water evenly, with the aft fuselage, flying as slow as possible so that it decelerates and stays in one piece. This isn't easy if there are big swells or sharp waves. Hit an engine or wingtip before the fuselage, and the airplane tumbles, breaking it apart before it stops. While you could ditch a 777, the Southern Ocean is perhaps the worst possible place for a successful outcome, because of the swell and waves. If it were successfully ditched, it would likely sink after a while, as Sully's plane started to do as it floated down the Hudson. An unsuccessful ditching is called a "crash"...and that has happened with a 767, which is almost the size of a 777, when hijackers forced an airplane to run out of fuel (and as CNN so perceptively put it, in a laughable understatement of the obvious: it's a struggle for a 777 to stay in the air after the fuel is exhausted...)

More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

FORMATION FLIGHT (HIDING in FLIGHT): This is theoretically possible, but as a practical matter, extremely difficult. Flying formation at night, from below, is next to impossible because the reference lighting just isn't there. The pilot needs to be able to see the airframe of the lead aircraft (in this theory, the Singapore Airlines flight) and you would have to be very close to avoid military radar detection. Civilian ATC radar is generally not looking for primary (non-transponder) targets, so, if lucky, an airplane with the transponder off might not be seen if it's quite close to another big airplane. Military pilots do this, we fly fighters close enough to appear as one target, but not with big airplanes like the 777 and not without visual reference. This is extremely unlikely unless the pilot flying had formation experience.

HIDING a 777 on the ground: I've already discussed this in a previous post. Point is, you need more than just 5,000 feet of runway on which to land this thing. Those requirements really limit the possible landing locations.

 

[Blaze]

Astro,,, lets assume all on board are dead and the plane is at 35,000ft on auto-pilot and runs out of fuel...In what profile does this plane hit the water? Thanks

 

[Trajan]

The Ethiopian crash.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Blaze
Astro,,, lets assume all on board are dead and the plane is at 35,000ft on auto-pilot and runs out of fuel...In what profile does this plane hit the water? Thanks


On the 777, I honestly don't know. The answer depends on whether or not the autopilot stays on (it would be powered by batteries) and the flight controls stay engaged by the autopilot (with hydraulics provided by the Ram Air Turbine).

If the engines flame out at different times, in another airplane, that would cause a roll that might induce a spin, or at least a bank, but the 777 flight controls counter the thrust asymmetry, so, it might hold the wings level.

Autopilot would likely trim the airplane for a relatively fast speed (if it stayed on at all) and so, I would expect the airplane to hit the water nose down, going fast, no chance of survival. Worse if the autopilot kicks off, then we're talking in a bank, wing down, nose down, even faster...

Not even close to survivable in either case...and broken up on impact. But I don't know the exact parameters...if it were to have a dual engine flameout with no pilot to continue flying...

 

[Mystic]

I realize it is a very large ocean out there. My uncle served in WWII on an aircraft carrier. But they don't have to search the entire Indian Ocean. They only have to search the arc that the airliner supposedly flew south until it crashed. And most of that arc can be disregarded until we come to the end of the arc, unless the airliner turned around. So although that is a huge area, it is relatively small compared to the entire Indian Ocean.

With all of the search aircraft and ships involved it seems to me there should have been some wreckage spotted by now. Yes, it is a big ocean. But they have searched thousands of square miles. With satellites and large numbers of people volunteering to search the photos. With aircraft. With ships. Whenever anybody says where is the wreckage somebody immediately says 'Well, it is a large ocean.' Well, thousands of square miles have been searched-by a lot of people.

This airliner should have produced some wreckage. If it went into the ocean nose first at high speed there would be less wreckage, but ti still seems that there should be some. But nothing but trash has been found. Trash that did not come from the airliner.

If they do not find some wreckage before very much longer I think we need to take another look at the northern route. And maybe consider other possibilities and search other areas.

Sure this leads to speculation. But people have to speculate to try to come up with possibilities about what happened. For example, has anybody even considered the possibility that maybe this airliner landed at some field in Malaysia? It flew back over Malaysia, and people cannot explain how it was able to escape radar detection near Singapore. Perhaps there might be some abandoned airfield such as an old WWII base.

Speculation or no speculation, I think we need to consider other possibilities. Unless an airliner crashing nose first at high speed into the ocean produces no wreckage floating on the surface.

 

[Astro14]

Thousand of square miles is like looking at a few square feet....and leaving the rest of the football field unsearched. Most of the wreckage would be waterlogged and sunk after three weeks, and thanks to a multitude of sources, our oceans are full of debris....complicating a search.

 

[Mystic]

When they had that earthquake off Japan and tsunami there was wreckage that floated all the way across the Pacific Ocean to the Americas. There was even a fishing boat that floated by itself all the way across the ocean. Of course, there was a lot of debris from that compared to an airliner. Maybe if an airliner goes nose first at very high speed into the ocean there will not be much debris. But I think there will be some.

I think in the very least they should be able to reduce the size of the search area. According to the satellite people this aircraft followed an arc down into the south Indian Ocean. How far it went depends on how much fuel there was and how high it was and at what speed it flew. And after it ran out of fuel the aircraft could have been dived straight into the ocean or it could have been turned any direction and go about 100 miles. It seems to me that very careful reasoning should be able to reduce the search area to some thousands of square miles, instead of 100,000 square miles. If they could reduce the search area with such careful reasoning it might make it possible to find the aircraft on the ocean floor. But expecting people to find the aircraft on the ocean floor if they have something like 100,000 square miles to search is completely unreasonable. It could take several years and the aircraft wreckage might never be found. When the black boxes are still sending out signals they have to come to within about one mile to detect the signal. They can search about 50-150 square miles a day. And they have something like six days of battery life left and after that no signal.

After that it involves mapping the ocean floor with side scan sonar and if they have to map 100,000 square miles of ocean floor it could easily take many years.

 

[dave1251]

Mystic this is what I can tell you this about the Oceans.

A person falls overboard on ship on a clear day. We can know by GPS where the ship was when the person fell overboard within a few feet. A life ring is thrown near said Sailor seconds after the Sailor fell in. The ship is never more than a nautical mile from the life ring and doubles back to the life ring within minutes. Lookouts never lose sight of the life ring, the ship returns to the vicinity of the life ring.

Guess what happens next? The Sailor is never found. Keep in mind this scenario takes only 10 minutes at the most from when the man is overboard to when the ship returns to the area when the person fell overboard. Information like near exact location, near exact time, current, wind speeds is well known and the first responder is on the scene within minutes literally. But no trace of the Sailor can be found.

Imagine trying to find wreckage in the Indian Ocean where at best there is only a very uniformed guess at a possible flight path of an airliner could be and this is literally weeks later. It is not a easy task at all.

 

[Astro14]

Folks, like you Dave, who have spent some time on the ocean, and some time trying to search the ocean, have a fundamental appreciation for how big it is, and how hard things are to find in it...

For everyone else, the size and difficulty are theoretical, and almost impossible to appreciate.

 

[Smokescreen]

Not a chance on discovering the truth when the only words we had to go off of from the plane...were not accurate. Now we start over with the new words reportedly coming from the pilot:

"Good night Malaysian three-seven-zero"


LOL..pretty funny responses to my "every theory is valid" comment, I wouldn't discount anything that has enough steam to make it on the news, especially military comments. They usually have some background information that while might not be 100% accurate has some validity from previous encounters, secret missions or foiled plans of the past. What goes on in the military is widely unknown. While there are a few experts here who have great knowledge, we generally have no idea what operations occur in the military, they generally do what they do so that we can sleep at night, or so they suppose.

 

[morepwr]

Taking off from LAX several times put it in perspective for me. Taking off over the water at nowhere near cruising altitude yet when you look out the window and see a commercial fishing boat. Probably a 60ft or better sized craft and it looks like a dot. Yet when on a boat of that size it doesn't feel so small. Add the fact that the ocean doesn't just sit there flat with all the swells and chop from wind and if you are looking from an angle it would be hard to see small objects even if the were brightly colored.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Blaze
Astro,,, lets assume all on board are dead and the plane is at 35,000ft on auto-pilot and runs out of fuel...In what profile does this plane hit the water? Thanks


From a very limited knowledge of flight physics, I'd imagine that as the plane loses forward momentum, the auto pilot would try to pitch the aircraft higher and higher to maintain altitude. After a short while, it would stall and probably flat spin or otherwise lose altitude uncontrollably until it hit the water.