Malaysia Jet missing-Officials conclude crash in Indian ocean/all lives presumed lost

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by nik-

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comment...flight/cg2uht6

Interesting amateur sleuthing on Reddit regarding the plane trailing another. I think it's a little fantastic to be true ... but who knows anymore.

I actually really like this theory, especially since they're saying that whoever was flying the plane was following the established waypoints that jets use over that area to stay on course and not crash into each other. There's no way it could have gone undetected on some random route over India, but if it was following these way points and managed to get behind another flight (that's an extremely busy air corridor, especially at that time) its possible it could have stayed hidden.

[browna]

Originally Posted by edslunch

This is an awesome theory but the first question would be why???

As has been mentioned, basically to go undetected to wherever they planned on landing, the radar thinking that the Singapore Airlines 777 and the Malaysian 777 were one in the same as it crosses into different airspace, along that generally traveled route.

And then, I would assume (tin foil hat time), quickly dive off that path and land it somewhere pre-planned in a place like Turkmenistan, where people waiting to start stage 2 of the operations plan are waiting.

Whoever planning all of this could specifically want to hijack some of the cargo, or passengers (semiconductor company employees) or, plane itself for future dubious use, and want it intact and on the ground to be able to do whatever they're planning on.

[nik-]

This image from the New York Times shows why the "two corridor" theory exists.

Spoiler'd for size

Spoiler!

A satellite orbiting 22,250 miles over the middle of the Indian Ocean received the transmission that, based on the angle from which the plane sent it, came from somewhere along one of the two arcs. One arc runs from the southern border of Kazakhstan in Central Asia to northern Thailand, passing over some hot spots of global insurgency and highly militarized areas. The other arc runs from near Jakarta to the Indian Ocean, roughly 1,000 miles off the west coast of Australia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/wo...flight.html?hp

[ken0042]

Could two planes fly close enough together to be seen as the same blip on the radar?

I ask, because Top Gun has taught me otherwise.
(And also have seen them look into jetwash as a cause on Mayday.)

[nik-]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Could two planes fly close enough together to be seen as the same blip on the radar?

I ask, because Top Gun has taught me otherwise.
(And also have seen them look into jetwash as a cause on Mayday.)

I would assume they could, but I would assume the more likely scenario is they fly close enough for the operator to assume it's a glitch. Although 30 miles or whatever the distance in that theory is seems like way too much to fool anyone.

[JonDuke]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Could two planes fly close enough together to be seen as the same blip on the radar?

I ask, because Top Gun has taught me otherwise.
(And also have seen them look into jetwash as a cause on Mayday.)

Yes, apparently...if they are at different altitudes, they could appear as the same blip.

Alternatively, I've read that a single plane sometimes looks like two blips as well.

Also, here's another radar related theory: http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comment...flight/cg2tg1x

[FlameOn]

If MH370 following SQ68 theory is true that would require immense planning, knowledge of aviation equipment, radar and flight paths. Numerous pilots in the area have commented on the difficulty of pulling off something like disabling all the points of communication on the aircraft. What would be the goal here? There have got to be easier ways to steal aircraft and terrorists would have announced something by now.

[nik-]

Didn't fly over India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...w/32091364.cms

[Acey]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Could two planes fly close enough together to be seen as the same blip on the radar?

Yes. Source: my line of work.

Been years since I listened to the 9/11 tapes so I did again this morning, just to depress myself. What a cluster for ATC trying to figure out where people are when they just have a primary target. Nothing to go off of.

[jeffman]

If two airliners are flying close enough together wouldnt that set off a collision warning radar of some sort

[STeeLy]

Originally Posted by jeffman

If two airliners are flying close enough together wouldnt that set off a collision warning radar of some sort

Tied into the transponder. If transponder is off, the systems don't detect it

At least from what I've understood what most people have said about TCAS/ACAS anyway

[Acey]

Yeah it all goes out the window if somebody's transponder is off. No idea how their systems work over there... a flock of birds within a few miles of an aircraft could set off alarms if it just went off primary targets.

[gonzo29]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

If MH370 following SQ68 theory is true that would require immense planning, knowledge of aviation equipment, radar and flight paths. Numerous pilots in the area have commented on the difficulty of pulling off something like disabling all the points of communication on the aircraft. What would be the goal here? There have got to be easier ways to steal aircraft and terrorists would have announced something by now.

I'm not sure if there would be an easier way to steal an aircraft. I think any scenario in which a 777 is being stolen would include a great deal of planning and expertise.

Also, why would terrorists announce something at this point, if it indeed was stolen? Their end goal wouldn't be to just steal a plane and that's that, then take credit. They'd keep a low profile while readying the plane for it's next task.

[Acey]

A potentially easier option would be to find a stored aircraft, rehab it under the cover of darkness, then fly it out.

Originally Posted by STeeLy

At least from what I've understood what most people have said about TCAS/ACAS anyway

Yeah basically the two transponders communicate and arrive at a resolution; such is the goodness of this system that aircraft should obey TCAS resolution advisories over air traffic control (this mid-air crash happened when somebody listened to TCAS, and the other guy didn't). 2 planes heading straight at each other, one will get "climb, climb" and "increase climb" if he's not going up fast enough, and the other "descend, descend".

Not sure if jeffman was talking about alarms going off on the ATC side of things if two targets are too close together. Answer is yes. But again, if one of those targets are only primary... things are very much complicated. Radar can't tell if the primary is going to present a conflict for the secondary.

[jeffman]

I was talking about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic...oidance_System
which should be independent of ATC, but I suppose it relies on the transponder of other aircraft

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

Only thing for me that points away from the pilots is the lack of a plan. So hijack a 777 with 8 hours of range, then head into the Indian Ocean?

I think this is a hijacker who entered the cabin somehow, then threatened the pilots asking them to fly somewhere. Pilots refuse and maybe there is a struggle back and forth, explaining altitude changes and the course changes. Finally pilots are killed? And the plane is on autopilot headed to nowhere?

That's the interesting part to me too.

My thinking was that perhaps you've got a hijacker who has a plan for the aircraft - flying it into the Petronas towers, let's say - and knows enough to force the pilots to turn off the transponder & kill communications so as to avoid alerting anyone to the plane's new course. The pilots then appear to comply by abruptly changing course back to Malaysia, but head out over the Indian Ocean to prevent the plane from being crashed into anything but water. The hijackers finally get wise to this, force the pilot to change course North or South again ostensibly to go back to Malaysia, but again the pilots only appear to be heading back the way they came when in fact they're continuing to fly away from the intended target. Eventually there's a struggle for control of the plane or in runs out of fuel and disappears into the sea.

Is this plausible? I've no idea. But thinking the various scenarios through and knowing nothing about how the equipment works, once the comms systems are all down, what instruments would someone in that cockpit have to figure out their location? Would they still have gps? Wouldn't that be trackable somehow if they did?

[Ryan Coke]

Yeah, the general theory is somewhat plausible, though it relies on severely limited knowledge on the part f the hijackers. But yes the aircraft would likely have still had their own navigation ability (GPS and IRS....inertial navigation), and no that is not trackable on its own.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Yeah, the general theory is somewhat plausible, though it relies on severely limited knowledge on the part f the hijackers. But yes the aircraft would likely have still had their own navigation ability (GPS and IRS....inertial navigation), and no that is not trackable on its own.

And why would the hijackers have such limited knowledge about actually navigating the plane when it would seem they were quite well researched in the area of disabling the transponder and ACARS. I read a news article that said most pilots wouldn't know how to disabled the ACARS. IMO it would be a bit odd for hijackers to have expertise knowledge about the tracking systems but then not brush up on actually navigating the plane to where you want it to go.

[flylock shox]

I figured disabling the transponder is basic enough - looks a lot like turning off a radio. But if it would take specialized knowledge to disable ACARS and the plane is fully capable of navigating without those systems, then that theory goes down the drain: no one who knows to turn off ACARS would fail to see where the plane was being navigated.

And I guess if the plane's gps isn't trackable, then neither is the gps on any passenger devices - things that might work even absent a cell signal.

All of which tends to suggest a rogue pilot or an aviation trained hijacker.

I can't fathom that the objective was to steal the plane (surely there's an easier way to acquire one) which suggests the plan was always to ditch it. And if that was the plan, then it probably wasn't a terrorist group, as they'd be claiming responsibility. So it seems most likely to have been one or two wingnuts on a frolic if their own.

Who knows though. At this juncture, I doubt we'll ever have an answer.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

I think cabins need to be made so that the pilots have no reason to open the doors at any time. Make it a luxury suite for all I care but their doors should never open in flight.

Tell that to the victims of Helios 522. If flight attendant Andreas Prodromou was able to get into the cabin earlier, he may have been able to save the plane and passengers.

The 9/11 changes that introduced a bullet proof cockpit door made it so that nobody was able to get in soon enough and save the plane when the pilots were out due to oxygen deprivation.

Prodromou was somehow able to get into the cockpit eventually and the fighter pilots saw him getting inside with bottle of oxygen, sit down, and try to save the plane but he was an hour too late as the plane ran out of fuel and crashed into a mountain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522