On Sunday, March 30, 2014 4:19:56 PM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
We're both doing it now. You're selecting information which favors the
hijack theory and I am selecting information that confirms to the fire
theory.
I don't believe I'm selecting data. I'm using the data that's out there,
that has remained pretty much unchanged for the last 10 days or so.
It all fits with either the pilots or a knowledgable hijacker being in
control of the airplane. Pilot being the more likely of those, I'd say.
It's you who's ignoring very key and established pieces of information
that don't fit with the fire theory. Examples:
They did not head to the nearest airport, Kota Bahru, which was just
25 mins away. Instead the plane flies across Malaysia to the Straits,
does a zig-zag there and winds up on a heading consistent with the
air routes of that area to India/Mid East.
The biggest "hole" I've heard in the nut pilot theory is that the
plane didn't just crash in a sudden dive on it's usual flight path,
but instead went off to the middle of nowhere. That can be accounted
for by the fact that if you're nuts enough to commit suicide and
take 240 people with you, then who knows what reasoning that person
would have. Maybe they wanted it to remain a Amelia Earhart mystery
to be talked about for 100 years. That's perfectly plausible in
ny world.
It's no surprise we're at an impasse. There's nothing that can be
proved further without the wreckage and the cockpit recorders.
I disagree. We know very little about the dynamics in the pilots
lives. There are reports that Shah's family moved out of his house
just the day before. Another interview with someone who is supposed
to know him, says that in the days before the flight he thought he
was unfit to fly. There is another report out that he was related to
the former deputy PM that was just convicted/sentenced hours before
the flight. IDK where all that will bottom out, but the point
is we don't know much about any of that at this point.
Same thing with the two mysterious Iranians. Soon as it looked like
they were using stolen passports to get into Europe, everyone just lost
interest, like they are just some Mexicans crossing the border into the
USA. Have you heard anything from any of their friends, families, who
the hell they and that guy Ali who disappeared are? That could lead
somewhere. There are lots of avenues that could still provide useful
information. Just because they were not in anyone's terrorist database
doesn't mean they couldn't be that.
If the wreck
is deep enough, there might be bodies that reveal smoke inhalation,
explosion damage, asphyxia and more. There might be enough of the cabin to
be salvageable and that could tell us very quickly if there was a fire.
Nothing short of that can. Even worse for the hijack theory is that the
crucial moments when the plane turned are very likely to be written over
*unless* a fire interrupted power to those devices as well.
True for the CVR, the FDR will have data for the entire flight.
I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the fire theory fits
with the behavior we already know the plane took. It made many
turns, obviously flying in a controlled fashion, not a damaged,
uncontrollable plane, an hour and a half after the alleged fire
and then flew apparently perfectly fine to Australia.
We're basically
arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of pin. It's all blue
sky hypothecation so we get to choose which theory we like the best.
No, it's that I can fit a nut pilot or a hijact to the data that's
available. The fire theory, almost nothing fits.
Since I first read this post I've been reading MH370 stories with an eye
to
whether news organizations make it clear that what they are reporting are
not necessarily facts, but the best "guesses" we have available from the
people in a position to know something about the situation. That's why I
give reports like Chris Goodfellow's (that there was a fire) much greater
credence than some turkey in the Malaysian government. Goodfellow's a
pilot who's "been there, done that" whereas a defense minister hasn't and
worse, yet, probably has some pretty good reasons *not* to tell the whole
truth.
The problem with Goodfellow's fire theory is that it doesn't conform
at all to most of the facts we have.
I contend we don't have many *real* facts but a lot of theories and
suppositions masquerading as facts.
If you're going to discard the basic facts, eg, that if made a left
turn, flew at various altitudes, wound up aligned perfectly with the
flight paths to India over the Straits, etc, then what's better? Just
make up stuff and chuck out what's out there and call it a fire?
Good grief.
I don't just take someone's conclusion because they are a pilot. We'll
get to his pilot credentials later,
but there are more commercial pilots in fact who are saying they too believe
deliberate criminal human action was the likely cause.
If I have to choose between a Malaysian Defense Minister's opinion about
what happened v. a guy who's actually flown a plane, I'm going with the
latter.
Sure, a guy who apparently is only a private pilot with an IFR rating.
Apparently no jet experience, no commercial flying experience. Use him
as an authority on a 777 commericial flight. I've already seen commercial
pilots debunk his nonsense, starting with his claim that the crew would not
put on oxygen masks if they had a fire.
Especially since the MDM has backtracked on so many things. That's
my courtroom background. I consider him impeached and his testimony to be
worthless.
That makes it easy for me to dismiss any facts he proffers.
Fine, so then you don't have any facts to base anything on,
so why all the fire nonsense, if it's not based on anything based
in fact?
Our
difference lies in your willingness to accept some of his statements as
factual, and they well may be. For me, he's in the realm of "if you say it,
something ELSE has to back your claims."
In the case of the left turn, flying not to the nearest airport,
but to the Straits and last seen on the flight paths to India, that
has been seen by NTSB and the US manufacturer of the radar eqpt.
Thailand also reported seeing the plane on it's radar. You would
surely think that if it was bogus, someone would be saying it by
now. So, no what? Just chuck that and stick to the fire theory
because some guy with private pilots license says so? I don't
think that guy even bothered to follow the facts as they've
emerged. He just ignored what we know and went with almost
pure speculation.
I've asked you these points before and I'll ask them again regarding
what Goodfellow is claiming:
"When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he
was heading for an airport. He was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi,
a 13,000-foot airstrip with an approach over water and no obstacles. The
captain did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000-foot
ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier toward Langkawi, which
also was closer."
When they made that left turn, the airport at Kota Bahru, with an 8000ft
runway, perectly capable of landing a 777, was about 140 miles away. It's
right on the coast. Yet they chose to fly a burning plane 175 miles
farther,
all the way across Malaysia to the other coast? He just picks that
Palau Langkawi airport because it happens to be near where the plane went
by,
on the other side of Malaysia.
No response that your "fire" source is so dumb that he didn't
even know that the nearest airport was Kota Bahru? Instead, he
looks where the plane winded up, the Straits, finds an airport that's
somewhat near there, and says "I instantly knew they were headed to
that airport" Sure, fly the flamning plane, 175 miles farther.
And then no indication at all that they even where headed exactly
to that airport, it's just in that general area. What an idiot that guy is.
I think it was all over very quickly in that plane. That's especially if,
as the EgyptAir fire suggests, they had an oxygen fed fire, perhaps started
by the lithium battery cargo. It might have been an explosion in the cargo
hold or it could have been an electrical fire.
Then the plane would be off Kota Bahru. It would not be flying, making
precision turns, over the straits, and then yet at least another left
turn to get to Australia. Good grief. There are only two ways for that
to happen. Either someone was flying it by hand or those waypoints were
in the autopilot. Either one points to a nut pilot or hijack, not a
fire. Unless it was a magical fire that managed to result not only
in loss of VHF radio, ACARS, transponder, etc, just at the point in
flight where it would be idea to go missing, but also so magical
that it somehow made the plane fly 8 more hours, making precise turns.
It wasn't until the Valuejet
cockpit recorder was recovered that they could read the distinctive signs of
an on-board explosion (a "bup" on the CVR and a sharp rise in internal air
pressure).
They knew it was a fire because the pilots made a mayday call,
like any sane pilots would do in that situation. SwissAir did the
same thing. There's probably one a week somewhere in the world,
where they smell smoke, think they see smoke and make a call to
ATC to head to the nearest airport. And if it was the sudden raging
inferno in the cockpit, which you've also advanced, that killed
everyone, then the plane would be in the ocean off Kota Bahru, not
Australia.
Most bizarre of all is your attempt to blame the ValuJEt crash
on them making a mayday call. Read the NTSB report. The fire
resulted in destruction of the flight control systems and left
the plane uncontrollable. Those pilots did everything right,
starting with the mayday call.
We don't have any of that information but we do know an oxygen-fed fire can
destroy a cabin within 17 seconds.
There we have it, the inferno theory again, that leaves the plane
making precise manuvers, aligning with the flight paths, etc an hour
and a half later and flying to Australia. Good grief.
My theory, which explains even your
facts, is that the plane caught fire, the pilots tried to pull busses to
kill the fire and to get it to safety but it was all over (for them, not the
plane) in seconds. Once the on-board fire suppression system kicked, the
people were already dead, and the plane stabilized and flew on auto-pilot
until it ran out of gas and crashed.
And how the hell is it that the autopilot took it to the Straits,
made a precise zig=zag there, aligning with paths to India? And
how did the autopilot make the reported altitude changes along
the way? And then how did the autopilot take it to Australia?
Answer: No way, unless someone put those waypoints into it.
Is that what you'd do in a fire? Enter bizarre waypoints instead
of doing the simple, obvious thing, which is declare an emergency
and ask for immediate vectors to the nearest airport? You
could do the latter with a 15 sec push of the mike button on
the controls. It's what every other pilot does. You don't
have to screw with the autopilot and enter a route to Australia.
Oh, and note that the plane didn't land there, or pass close to it,
instead it made a precise zig-zag to waypoints that left in perfectly
aligned with the flight path to India/Middle East at 29,500 ft. It was
on radar contact hundreds of miles
This is all based on data from the Malaysian government, isn't it? Ptui!
Sure, better to make up the fire theory and then make up whatever
you need to go with it. If you're not going to use what data there
is then you can just make up any crap, which is what your pilot
reference guy apparently did too. The flight radar data referenced
above has been seen by NTSB, the radar manufacturer. IDK who all
else. It's also consistent with Inmarsat. Are they lying?
Good grief. Either use what's available and reasonably vetted
at this point, or else you have *nothing* but wild conjecture.
It's not worth anything because they've not been straight with the public on
so many things. If that's what happened, who can say whether the auto-pilot
did it?
It doesn't matter if the autopilot did it or the pilots hand flew
it. It didn't go to the nearest airport. It didn't go near the
nearest airport. Even if the autopilot was flying it, who put
the flight waypoints to the Straits, to Australia into the autopilot?
Martians? Magical fire that rages throught the plane, taking out
radios, transponders, ACARS, and just damaging the autopilot so
that it now has some bizarre route and flies it? That's probable,
more probable than one of the pilots did it? Good grief, you're
making less sense every post.
Didn't we see the same segment on CNN that explains how the AP
would "fill in" way points if nothing was entered in time?
IDK what you saw. I never saw any such thing or anyone ever talk
about an autopilot putting in waypoints to the straits, to Australia,
etc on it's own. That's pretty nutty.
The pilots could
have mis-entered course data as the cabin filled with smoke or they behaved
erratically as the oxygen ran out.
If they had just contacted ATC with the radio that was working
perfectly fine 2 mins before, they could have just dialed the
autopilot knob to a heading, which is far simpler than entering
waypoints to Australia. And it does have the benefit of clearing
out the airspace ahead of you so you don't run into a 747 at night.
About now it's time for the old:
aviate
navigate
communicate
Except in your world, you just apparently go back and forth
between 1 and 2, totally ignoring 3. And in #1, I guess aviating
doesn't include making sure you don't fly into a 747 on your
course choice of your own. And even #2, they wouldn't
have to navigate if they issued a mayday call and request for
vectoring to Kota Bahru. In 15 secs they'd have a response
to turn left, heading 275, any flight level, your discretion. Then they
turn the autopilot knob to 275. Seems a lot simpler, safer, and
easier than entering coordinates to the straits and then onto
australia.
Somewhere on YouTube there must be
videos of people passing out from anoxia. They get *very* punchy before
they pass out.
It's probably a video of the pilot with the fire theory while
he was writing that nonsense.
Maybe you can point me to way-point and radar data I find credible, but my
last recollection was that the MGov recanted their claims about way points
and the times of radio and transponder transmissions.
AFAIK, they only recanted that they knew the waypoints had been
entered into the autopilot a considerable time before the plane
first made it's left turn and went missing. There is no excuse for
that confusion, they should have known one way of the other.
What more radar data do you need or want? The plane could have
landed at Kota Bahru. It flew to the Straits. It was headed toward
India. It wound up at Australia. How does a fire, everyone dead,
the autopilot did it explain even that? Of course it doesn't.
But the nut pilot theory fits just fine.
Here's a good description of some of what came out:
http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-...370-flown-deli
http://www.thewire.com/global/2014/0...so-far/359355/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A2D0DG20140314
The MGov got enough stuff wrong enough times to be deemed very
untrustworthy. The Inmarsat Doppler analysis, however, I find much more
credible but I am not aware that it could discriminate motion finely enough
to determine if the plane was "hitting standard waypoints." So my position
is that the way point data is inconclusive at best. If someone *was* at the
controls, why did it eventually just fly in a straight line into the middle
of the Indian Ocean? That's big damn hole in the human intervention theory.
Why in the world is that a big hole? A nutty pilot has taken at least
two similar planes and put them into the ocean, committing suicide,
killing everyone aboard.
Who says another one couldn't choose to put it into the hardest spot
to ever figure out, to leave the world with a mystery? As far
as flying a straight line,
AFAIK, no one has said what route they
think it flew after last radar contact was lost over the Straits.
They only have circles of where it could be once an hour. It's
probably pretty much a straight line, but so what? Nut pilot could
be sitting there, getting loaded on scotch, popping pills, praying
to Allah or jerking off, or have killed himself already with the
plane on autopilotwhat. What difference does a straight line make?
Those recorders are going to stop pinging soon - they're running out of time
to find them. If they don't get them soon, it could easily take more than
the two years it took to find AirFrance's BB's. At least they knew where
that plane went down.
--
Bobby G.
They aren't going to find them via pinging. More likely you'd win
the Mega millions jackpot, because as you point out, the potential
area to search is huge and the process is slow.