MH370: Malaysian Airlines Flight to Beijing carrying 239 people is lost over sea.

  • Thread starter Furinkazen
  • 1,507 comments
  • 80,569 views
ULTRAVIOLENZZ
Of course if you want to bury a smelly corpse you should dig deep cover it with stones, rocks, twigs, gravel etc. not just a shallow hole covered with soil or...hack it to pieces and "feed" to the "animals". My theory is they would use this issue to declare ADIZ in South China Sea and a "bit" (as stated my post above) part of Indian Ocean. Like you I'm calling this stupid and nonsense because I wish its not true and thankfully there's a very high chance that I'm wrong. My only concern is that I hope they don't use this to raise more tension in the SCS.
Click to expand...

Again, geography.

Do you realize how far the location is from China?
txu-oclc-264266980-world_pol_2008-2.jpg

This would be like the UK trying to annex the Black Sea or the middle of the Sahara desert to protect its territorial waters.

This won't have any effect at all on the South China Sea claim, and China doesn't stand to gain anything.
 
Shush about the Black Sea thing, we're moving very sneakily ;)

On-topic: More ships trying to pick up the ELT-consistent signal in order to get a "fix" (where they get two bearings to it from different directions, for those who never held a real map :D ), time is critical though.

And the conspiracy theories have started in earnest :D
 
Someone has been playing a lot of those military first person shooter lately, next thing you know is that the Russians will invade all of Europe, simultaneously with a big convoluted plan involving mind control and underwater experimental radio facilities. Is possible in some ways, but in no way rational.



OT, some mention a few days ago the pacific garbage patch, now I'm wonder if light debris might have joined some of the currents leading to the southern Indian patch, supposedly there is a cold current flowing from the Indian ocean which then leads to Australian western coast (supposedly where the pings are being located), which makes me think hat the plane might have disintegrated, I'm not sure if the black box has buoyancy (I suppose it was, unless it gets really really damaged).

Following a quick timeline the search thus far has been like this:

MH370-latest_map_WEB.svg


A trajectory that seems to coincide with the south Indian current, and the west Australian current:

Leeuwin%20current.gif


Now, one of the main issues in that region is the complex system of currents and oceanic activity, debris might have actually spread out in large regions and then split up and sunk, and the dragged by different circulating regions around the area.

With the Air France plane they did found once of the stabilizers, which gave a huge clue as to where to find the black box and determine what happen. With this though ... it would be one of the greatest feats if they manage to locate the box, then retrieve it and then found what happened.

I'm still more shocked by the fact that the plane is actually shaping out to be that out of course, which I still don't understand given that planes have satellite tracking, about a dozen ATC passing information through, other planes relating information to each other in air corridors, air defence systems that cover regional areas (specially coastal and international waters), and the transponders which have the ability to be turned off on the ground to avoid cluttering to local ATCs and in case of a malfunction with the system.
 
niky
Again, geography.

Do you realize how far the location is from China?
txu-oclc-264266980-world_pol_2008-2.jpg

This would be like the UK trying to annex the Black Sea or the middle of the Sahara desert to protect its territorial waters.

This won't have any effect at all on the South China Sea claim, and China doesn't stand to gain anything.
Click to expand...
In my theory, the location of the crash site means nothing, just a diversion. The path of flight is. They will say that in order for the incident to not happen again they must declare ADIZ in SCS because their "people" (that's why it took time to reveal the plane's location to anger their citizens) wanted to "since" its their territory to protect their planes, ships etc from terrorist etc etc etc...Its a "conspiracy theory". Guys...don't get serious. I already called my theory stupid. The likeliness of this theory happening is very low up to zero but declaring ADIZ is always a possibility. I'm just linking them declaring ADIZ in SCS using this incident. That is all. Smile. :)

And of course guys, just remember not all things in this world is what they seem to be. I would rather trust my imagination than trusting someone that...you know...feeding you a chopped up carcass...:D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ULTRAVIOLENZZ
In my theory, the location of the crash site means nothing, just a diversion. The path of flight is. They will say that in order for the incident to not happen again they must declare ADIZ in SCS because their "people" (that's why it took time to reveal the plane's location to anger their citizens) wanted to "since" its their territory to protect their planes, ships etc from terrorist etc etc etc...Its a "conspiracy theory". Guys...don't get serious. I already called my theory stupid. The likeliness of this theory happening is very low up to zero but declaring ADIZ is always a possibility. I'm just linking them declaring ADIZ in SCS using this incident. That is all. Smile. :)

And of course guys, just remember not all things in this world is what they seem to be. I would rather trust my imagination than trusting someone that...you know...feeding you a chopped up carcass...:D
Click to expand...
You have a crackpot theory, you even admit it's a crackpot theory, yet you keep pushing it. Why?
 
BobK
You have a crackpot theory, you even admit it's a crackpot theory, yet you keep pushing it. Why?
Click to expand...

The key word is "crackpot".

@ULTRAVIOLENZZ, there's a system that will be on stream on all passenger airliners from 2015 that will make a hijacking "like this one" impossible with no need for additional ADIZ-type defences. That said, the countries in the region you describe are very well prepared in that regard either through their own efforts or via "friendly" sponsorship. That doesn't alter the fact that they're clearly not monitoring the stations as well as they might, obviously :)
 
BobK
You have a crackpot theory, you even admit it's a crackpot theory, yet you keep pushing it. Why?
Click to expand...
I'm not pushing it. I'm just telling them how my crackpot theory works to know for myself why it wouldn't work based on their replies and majority of them including me accepts that my crackpot theory is a crackpot theory. Is it wrong to share what's on my mind? Crackpot or not? I'm gonna stop now. Peace! :D
 
BobK
You have a crackpot theory, you even admit it's a crackpot theory, yet you keep pushing it. Why?
Click to expand...
TenEightyOne
The key word is "crackpot".

@ULTRAVIOLENZZ, there's a system that will be on stream on all passenger airliners from 2015 that will make a hijacking "like this one" impossible with no need for additional ADIZ-type defences. That said, the countries in the region you describe are very well prepared in that regard either through their own efforts or via "friendly" sponsorship. That doesn't alter the fact that they're clearly not monitoring the stations as well as they might, obviously :)
Click to expand...
Don't say "impossible". The reason we have the systems we do today is because crazier things have happened. But they're still not enough. There is always going to be a way for something crazier to happen.
 
Keef
Don't say "impossible"...crazier things have happened. But they're still not enough. There is always going to be a way for something crazier to happen.
Click to expand...

Definitely true. I know from studies of aviation accident reports that sometimes the strangest coincidences or weirdest events just line up together to create flight failures... generally with a lot of human error or misjudgement. When you add wilful terrorism to the list of human factors then pretty much anything could be done.

If we ever find out what happened to this flight I'm sure the circumstances leading up to the 'crash' will be as unprecedented as the aftermath.

So far I think my theories evolved to; plane is hijacked, pilot is given divert instructions to fly into a major city (Hong Kong?), he and the copilot decide to fly out to sea. By the time the hijackers realise the plane can never be flown back to land. If any of my other theories turn out to be right I'm still claiming them too :)
 
AMSA are reporting that four more pings have been detected, but they won't put the underwater vehicle out until they know more, largely because the batteries are past their use-by date, so they want to get as much as they can.
 
This is a line from ninemsn about the so called co-pilot calling someone.

"A 'reattachment' does not necessarily mean that a call was made. It can also be the result of the phone being switched on again."
 
Or simply coming back into range of a transmitter despite having been on all the time?

News this morning repeating the story that the pings are thought to be fading. The chances of finding the wreckage based on the ELT are diminishing rapidly. That doesn't mean that the wreckage will never be found but it will be a long and expensive submersible search for Boeing, the airline and the insurers.
 
At least the search area is now quite a bit smaller than the Indian Ocean. Still a huge area but they now have a rough indication where to look.

I still find it very strange that they haven't found a single piece of wreckage floating around...
 
But even the Air France flight had some wreckage floating.

This is why there are those "theories" that the plane landed some where and the passengers were killed.
 
Dennisch
Wat.

That aluminium tube will explode on impact when it goes nose first at speed.
Click to expand...

Not really, in the real world things dont explode all the time.
If it were Hollywood world yes, there would have been a small nuclear blast from the crash
 
Grayfox
Not really, in the real world things dont explode all the time.
Click to expand...

You do realize that water becomes pretty tough stuff when you hit it at speed, right?
Ever bellyflopped from a high diving board?
 
Grayfox
But even the Air France flight had some wreckage floating.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was thinking this, they are so sure this is the area yet not found one piece of wreckage. Even something tiny would have surely been floating. I think even with the Hudson landing pieces were floating even after the plane pretty much landed intact...
 
Robin.
Yeah I was thinking this, they are so sure this is the area yet not found one piece of wreckage.
Click to expand...


That crash site was found in 5 days. Quite a difference with this situation. But there should be something floating out there. But they need to follow the currents for that.
 
Dennisch
That aluminium tube will explode on impact when it goes nose first at speed.
Click to expand...
How is it going to explode when it has no fuel to ignite?

If it was going nose-first into concrete, maybe. But the surface of the ocean has less tension than earth, and so a streamlined object travelling at speed could penetrate the top layer of the ocean, at which point it proceeded to sink.

Robin.
Yeah I was thinking this, they are so sure this is the area yet not found one piece of wreckage. Even something tiny would have surely been floating. I think even with the Hudson landing pieces were floating even after the plane pretty much landed intact...
Click to expand...
Remember, it took them at least three weeks to narrow down the search area to the southern Indian Ocean. It was a few more days before they further narrowed down the current area, which is a thousand kilometres off the coast of Exmouth and Shark Bay. Assuming that the plane crashed there, and assuming that it stayed there, then any debris that came loose would have landed in the primary ocean current - and in that area, the currents go predominantly to the west. Any debris has had thirty days to drift towards Africa.
 
prisonermonkeys
Any debris has had thirty days to drift towards Africa.
Click to expand...

Pretty much that.

If we're lucky, they might spot the wreckage in a few weeks. If not, they might not find anything till the end of the year (and even then, we'd be lucky.)

-

Also, yes, the plane would take a lot of damage hitting the water at speed (if it did hit the water in a nose dive), but most of it should remain intact. If the middle and rear of the plane stay intact, all those bouyant seat cushions and people would go down with it.

If it ruptured after a shallower landing, there might be even less chance of finding debris.
 
And the area where it is believed to have crashed is five kilometres underwater - the pressure there is five hundred atmospheres. The sheer weight of the water would likely crush the fuselage, preventing any debris from surfacing.
 
prisonermonkeys
And the area where it is believed to have crashed is five kilometres underwater - the pressure there is five hundred atmospheres. The sheer weight of the water would likely crush the fuselage, preventing any debris from surfacing.
Click to expand...
There is no way in hell the fuselage would have maintained airtight/watertight integrity after hitting the water unless the pilot pulled off a Hudson River-type landing, so water pressure would not have crushed the fuselage.

We have no idea how fast or at what angle the plane hit the water, assuming for sake of argument it did in fact hit the water. It may have shattered into a bunch of tiny pieces; as @Dennisch says, water is pretty dang hard if you hit it fast enough. It may have broken into a handful of large pieces.
 
prisonermonkeys
How is it going to explode when it has no fuel to ignite?

If it was going nose-first into concrete, maybe. But the surface of the ocean has less tension than earth, and so a streamlined object travelling at speed could penetrate the top layer of the ocean, at which point it proceeded to sink.
Click to expand...
I'm doubtful of that. In air, aircraft like this are near the speed at which they're structurally vulnerable. Part of it is because they're in the transonic regime where forces become very non linear, but water is near 1000 times the density of the air. Subsonic to supersonic is no where near a 1000 times jump in force.
 
prisonermonkeys
The sheer weight of the water would likely crush the fuselage, preventing any debris from surfacing.
Click to expand...

It would if the plane was a water tight sub.

But the impact would have caused damage and water would leak in and pressure would equalize.
 

Latest Posts

Back