"trader_4" wrote in message
news:9d892f83-15e7-4fd1-9229-
On Tuesday, April 1, 2014 11:48:20 AM UTC-4, wrote:
A FA could have gained access to the cockpit, capped the pilots and
done the rudimentary "video game:" flying necessary to fly a plane out
over the ocean then just waited for it to run out of fuel.
Maybe that explains the radical movements in the early part of the
takeover too. (S)he may have had a little learning curve.

The part that doesn't fit with that is disabling ACARS.
Depending on who you believe, it's either done via the diplay/keyboard
or by pulling a breaker that's apperently not readily identifiable.

At a recent DoD social event I attended with my wife, a retired special ops
type said some things I haven't yet run down but were intriguing
nonetheless. Apparently, while not generally known, that model airplane has
a number of emergency locator beacons along the fuselage that activate only
during a normal crash landing and not a deliberate nose dive into the ocean
at 500mph. Maybe you heard something about that since you've followed the
case closely on CNN. (BTW, the simulator "expert" they used got fired for
portraying his company in a bad light!)

More importantly, though, he said that although that plane *could* land on a
very short runway, not very many of the alternates proposed as landing sites
would actually accommodate that model of plane without collapsing the
landing gear. All airstrips, apparently, have a rating that indicates how
much weight they can support.

This guy, an ex-SEAL, went on to postulate that it *was* the pilot who was
so unhappy with the jailing of his friend that he took the plane hostage and
radioed a demand for his friend's release to authorities, threatening to
crash the plane if they didn't. While that might seem far-fetched, it does
raise an interesting question about why they got the handoff transmission so
completely wrong in the first transcript. The transmissions from the plane
were the pilot's negotiations with authorities who (wrongly) called his
bluff and now want to cover up any trace of their complicity.

It sort of fits in with my gut feeling that the Malaysian government doesn't
(and didn't) ever want to find that planes wreckage and the revelation that
they didn't believe the pilot would actually kill himself and all the
passengers. Plus, it provides a pretty strong motive for what seemed until
now to be a crime without a motive. The problem I see is that even if the
wreckage is found, if there was back-and-forth "hostage negotiation" taking
place, it got wiped out by the CVR recording over old material every two
hours.

--
Bobby G.

On Friday, April 25, 2014 3:29:22 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

news:9d892f83-15e7-4fd1-9229-

On Tuesday, April 1, 2014 11:48:20 AM UTC-4, wrote:

A FA could have gained access to the cockpit, capped the pilots and

done the rudimentary "video game:" flying necessary to fly a plane out

over the ocean then just waited for it to run out of fuel.

Maybe that explains the radical movements in the early part of the

takeover too. (S)he may have had a little learning curve.



The part that doesn't fit with that is disabling ACARS.

Depending on who you believe, it's either done via the diplay/keyboard

or by pulling a breaker that's apperently not readily identifiable.



At a recent DoD social event I attended with my wife, a retired special ops

type said some things I haven't yet run down but were intriguing

nonetheless. Apparently, while not generally known, that model airplane has

a number of emergency locator beacons along the fuselage that activate only

during a normal crash landing and not a deliberate nose dive into the ocean

at 500mph. Maybe you heard something about that since you've followed the

case closely on CNN. (BTW, the simulator "expert" they used got fired for

portraying his company in a bad light!)



Yes, those are the EPIRBs and that issue has been discussed in
the media. Similar to the AirFrance crash off Brazil, where the
EPRIBs were of no use, because the plane went straight into the sea.





More importantly, though, he said that although that plane *could* land on a

very short runway, not very many of the alternates proposed as landing sites

would actually accommodate that model of plane without collapsing the

landing gear. All airstrips, apparently, have a rating that indicates how

much weight they can support.



That's true and one of the big problems with the theory that some
terrorists flew it off to some remote landing strip in the desert.
It has to be long enough and strong enough to land the plane. But it's
a major problem for the fire theory, because Kota Bahru had a suitable
runway, they passed right by it 140 miles before contact with ATC was lost
and it was the logical place to divert to for a sudden extreme emergency.



This guy, an ex-SEAL, went on to postulate that it *was* the pilot who was

so unhappy with the jailing of his friend that he took the plane hostage and

radioed a demand for his friend's release to authorities, threatening to

crash the plane if they didn't. While that might seem far-fetched, it does

raise an interesting question about why they got the handoff transmission so

completely wrong in the first transcript. The transmissions from the plane

were the pilot's negotiations with authorities who (wrongly) called his

bluff and now want to cover up any trace of their complicity.



I'd put the odds of that very low, because it doesn't fit very well.
The part of the communication they got wrong was just the last few
words of MH370 saying goodbye to Malaysian ATC. I don't see how them
getting that right or wrong has anything to do with with some negotiation
theory. In fact, the negotiation would have to have come after that
point, not before it. And logically, if someone was demanding a ransom,
why would the plane be flying off to Australia? A pilot demanding
a ransom would know that it would take hours for anyone to be able
to act on such a demand, one way of the other. The plane would most
likely be circling, or remain somewhere in the Malaysi area, not be making
a route to Autralia. The other huge problem with this crazy idea is
how in the world do you land the plane, deliver the passengers, collect
the ransom and get away with it?




It sort of fits in with my gut feeling that the Malaysian government doesn't

(and didn't) ever want to find that planes wreckage and the revelation that

they didn't believe the pilot would actually kill himself and all the

passengers. Plus, it provides a pretty strong motive for what seemed until

now to be a crime without a motive.

That theory makes sense to you? You're going to hijack a plane with
250 people on it, hold them for ransom, collect it somehow and just live
happily ever after? That makes sense compared to say just a suicidal pilot?




The problem I see is that even if the

wreckage is found, if there was back-and-forth "hostage negotiation" taking

place, it got wiped out by the CVR recording over old material every two

hours.


There have been leaks all over the place on this thing. It would
really be something for this extended negotiation scene to have
played out and not one person has leaked it to the media.

Last I heard, they were 80%+ done with the search area where the
pings were heard. And they said if they didn't find anything in the
remaining area, they were going to bring in more powerful sonar eqpt.
that could penetrate deeper into the floor.
I still haven't heard anything about what the bottom is like there.
There was some speculation that it could be many feet of silt into
which the debris could sink. I wonder if anyone thought of the idea
of finding out what the bottom is like? Maybe dropping a couple of
test objects of different weights/densities, then using the existing
sonar to see if they show up, how deep into the floor they go, etc.
If the test objects are easily found, then it would pretty much tell
you that it's not a problem of the debris having sunk into 20 ft of
silt.

"trader_4" wrote in message
news:6255a7fa-6db9-47d1-b318-
On Friday, April 25, 2014 3:29:22 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:

At a recent DoD social event I attended with my wife, a retired special
ops
type said some things I haven't yet run down but were intriguing
nonetheless. Apparently, while not generally known, that model airplane
has
a number of emergency locator beacons along the fuselage that activate
only
during a normal crash landing and not a deliberate nose dive into the
ocean
at 500mph. Maybe you heard something about that since you've followed
the
case closely on CNN. (BTW, the simulator "expert" they used got fired
for
portraying his company in a bad light!)

Yes, those are the EPIRBs and that issue has been discussed in
the media. Similar to the AirFrance crash off Brazil, where the
EPRIBs were of no use, because the plane went straight into the sea.

So that gives us another little clue to the puzzle and strongly implies a
very quick terminal event. It also suggests that airlines need to rethink
their technology quite a bit because when these events occur, millions of
dollars are wasted in huge search efforts. I am not sure how the MH370
crash will percolate through the system, but I hope that at least
long/lat/altitude will eventually be reported every 10 minutes or so to
satellites or ground stations.

Today CBS has been reporting that a possible wreck has been found in the Bay
of Bengal, which is on the southern route.

Australian land and sea survey company GeoResonance said in a statement
sent Tuesday to CBS News that it had discovered materials "believed to be
the wreckage of a commercial airliner" about 100 miles south of Bangladesh
in the Bay of Bengal using proprietary technology which scans vast areas for
specific metals or minerals.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia...irliner-found/

You will recall that route had been decided to be unlikely based on Doppler
analysis. You'll just love this error:

When the decision to focus on the southern Indian Ocean was made, CBS
News' Pegues reported that Inmarsat had also contributed one more piece of
evidence which helped guide the move: the so-called Doppler effect.

By measuring the sound waves from the plane's final pings, engineers from
Inmarsat were able to determine the aircraft's location relative to the
satellite; it's the same effect that makes an approaching vehicle sound
different to the human ear than one moving away. The analysis of this data
from Inmarsat suggested the plane had travelled south, reported Pegues.

Sound waves? Unsound reporting is more like it.

More importantly, though, he said that although that plane *could* land
on a
very short runway, not very many of the alternates proposed as landing
sites
would actually accommodate that model of plane without collapsing the
landing gear. All airstrips, apparently, have a rating that indicates
how
much weight they can support.

That's true and one of the big problems with the theory that some
terrorists flew it off to some remote landing strip in the desert.
It has to be long enough and strong enough to land the plane. But it's
a major problem for the fire theory, because Kota Bahru had a suitable
runway, they passed right by it 140 miles before contact with ATC was lost
and it was the logical place to divert to for a sudden extreme emergency.

Not if you believe that everyone aboard was already dead from asphyxiation .
.. . I think the intent was to put the aircraft down at Kora Bahru but when
the plane got there, no one was left alive to do it. That's based on there
being all these altitude and course changes within a very short span of time
and then nothing. Just a long, lazy flight to nowhere.

In the years I spent as a reporter, one of the worst things that can happen
to people is to lose a loved one amid such uncertainty, whether it's a
combat MIA, a mine collapse, a missing person or a crash victim.

I remember seeing a video piece about a woman whose son was killed on the
Lockerbie flight. She spent hours each day sitting in his football jacket
out in the woodworking shop he had built behind the house, crying. I can't
imagine how the parents of all those kids killed on the Korean ferry feel.
I know I choked up when I saw a piece about the recovered cell phone videos
and one kid saying "Mom, this looks like the end of me." I wonder if any of
the cell phones on the Malaysia flight have recoverable data and what that
data would say?

When "stuff goes down" nowadays everyone whips out their cell phone to make
a video. Recently, when someone fell onto the subway tracks, the platform
was full of people holding their phones over theirs heads trying to get a
video. Fortunately one man jumped onto the tracks and saved the person that
fell.

--
Bobby G.

On Friday, May 2, 2014 12:34:22 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

news:6255a7fa-6db9-47d1-b318-

On Friday, April 25, 2014 3:29:22 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:



At a recent DoD social event I attended with my wife, a retired special

ops

type said some things I haven't yet run down but were intriguing

nonetheless. Apparently, while not generally known, that model airplane

has

a number of emergency locator beacons along the fuselage that activate

only

during a normal crash landing and not a deliberate nose dive into the

ocean

at 500mph. Maybe you heard something about that since you've followed

the

case closely on CNN. (BTW, the simulator "expert" they used got fired

for

portraying his company in a bad light!)



Yes, those are the EPIRBs and that issue has been discussed in

the media. Similar to the AirFrance crash off Brazil, where the

EPRIBs were of no use, because the plane went straight into the sea.



So that gives us another little clue to the puzzle and strongly implies a

very quick terminal event. It also suggests that airlines need to rethink

their technology quite a bit because when these events occur, millions of

dollars are wasted in huge search efforts. I am not sure how the MH370

crash will percolate through the system, but I hope that at least

long/lat/altitude will eventually be reported every 10 minutes or so to

satellites or ground stations.



Today CBS has been reporting that a possible wreck has been found in the Bay

of Bengal, which is on the southern route.



You mean northern route. I don't put much faith in this new report.
All they have is some image using some exotic new method from space
of something on the ocean floor. It's curious though that if this new
search method has merit, that we didn't hear about it before, it wasn't
used right away, etc.



Australian land and sea survey company GeoResonance said in a statement

sent Tuesday to CBS News that it had discovered materials "believed to be

the wreckage of a commercial airliner" about 100 miles south of Bangladesh

in the Bay of Bengal using proprietary technology which scans vast areas for

specific metals or minerals.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia...irliner-found/



You will recall that route had been decided to be unlikely based on Doppler

analysis. You'll just love this error:



When the decision to focus on the southern Indian Ocean was made, CBS

News' Pegues reported that Inmarsat had also contributed one more piece of

evidence which helped guide the move: the so-called Doppler effect.



By measuring the sound waves from the plane's final pings, engineers from

Inmarsat were able to determine the aircraft's location relative to the

satellite; it's the same effect that makes an approaching vehicle sound

different to the human ear than one moving away. The analysis of this data

from Inmarsat suggested the plane had travelled south, reported Pegues.



Sound waves? Unsound reporting is more like it.


Yes, they were talking about the sound effect of cars and got it
confused with the radio waves, where the same effect applies.





More importantly, though, he said that although that plane *could* land

on a

very short runway, not very many of the alternates proposed as landing

sites

would actually accommodate that model of plane without collapsing the

landing gear. All airstrips, apparently, have a rating that indicates

how

much weight they can support.



That's true and one of the big problems with the theory that some

terrorists flew it off to some remote landing strip in the desert.

It has to be long enough and strong enough to land the plane. But it's

a major problem for the fire theory, because Kota Bahru had a suitable

runway, they passed right by it 140 miles before contact with ATC was lost

and it was the logical place to divert to for a sudden extreme emergency.



Not if you believe that everyone aboard was already dead from asphyxiation .

. . I think the intent was to put the aircraft down at Kora Bahru but when

the plane got there, no one was left alive to do it. That's based on there

being all these altitude and course changes within a very short span of time

and then nothing. Just a long, lazy flight to nowhere.

But those altitude and heading changes continued long after it had
passed the closest it ever got to Kota Bahru. And it didn't head
for Kota Bahru, it passed well to the north of it. Worst of all, there
was no distress call. I don't know of a commercial airplane that ever
just showed up an an airport for an emergency landing without contact
with ATC. Nor one that had a such a major mechanical problem or fire
that resulted in the loss of VHF radios, ACARS, transponders, yet left
the plane capable of flying for another 7 hours. You're in the very small minority that still thinks this was some mechanical problem.

"trader_4" wrote in message
news:b74654aa-5c54-414f-bf99-

stuff snipped

Today CBS has been reporting that a possible wreck has been found in the
Bay
of Bengal, which is on the southern route.

You mean northern route.

Whoops. Yes.

I don't put much faith in this new report.
All they have is some image using some exotic new method from space
of something on the ocean floor. It's curious though that if this new
search method has merit, that we didn't hear about it before, it wasn't
used right away, etc.

If they're right it will be a black eye for Inmarsat and the doppler
"boffins" that chose the wrong pathway. I'm not very sanguine about it, but
anything's possible at this point. We're down to surveying every square
foot of the ocean and if the plane slid under deep ocean silt, the Bluefin
could scan all day and never see it. Considering all the wildly false leads
we've already had, the officials would be remiss not to check it out. They
seem to have a pretty good fix on the alleged position of the wreck.

stuff snipped

. . I think the intent was to put the aircraft down at Kora Bahru but
when
the plane got there, no one was left alive to do it. That's based on
there
being all these altitude and course changes within a very short span of
time
and then nothing. Just a long, lazy flight to nowhere.

But those altitude and heading changes continued long after it had
passed the closest it ever got to Kota Bahru. And it didn't head
for Kota Bahru, it passed well to the north of it. Worst of all, there
was no distress call. I don't know of a commercial airplane that ever
just showed up an an airport for an emergency landing without contact
with ATC. Nor one that had a such a major mechanical problem or fire
that resulted in the loss of VHF radios, ACARS, transponders, yet left
the plane capable of flying for another 7 hours. You're in the very small
minority that still thinks this
was some mechanical problem.

My opinion is based on two major points. One is that that model plane
already had had a serious oxygen-fed cabin fire on the ground that would
have been fatal to the entire plane if airborne. The second is that Boeing
had issued a repair order for the oxygen hoses and I don't believe that Air
Malaysia has any records indicating the fixes had been made.

In addition, there's some serious debate about whether the black boxes had
been replaced at the proper intervals. While the FAA and its European
equivalent make sure that such serious hazards are remediated in a
mostly-timely fashion (AF 440's pitot tubes being a notable and
crash-causing exception) I wonder if the Malaysians are as attentive to
details. The failure to replace the pinger batteries on time (if true)
could indicate lax maintainence. So I find it entirely credible that an
oxygen fed-fire raced through the cabin (where the hoses are routed) and
killed the air crew and perhaps everyone else on board.

While I may be in the minority, the fire theory is one that can be proved or
disproved pretty easily when and if the wreckage is found. Other theories
are going to be pretty hard to prove if the voice recorder recorded over the
critical moments when the plane turned. I've read recently that the CVR and
FDR can both stop recording if their busses are pulled or power to the units
are interrupted for some reason. The batteries only power the pingers, not
the recording functions. If true, the CVR could provide a lot of answers if
it's ever found and it stopped recording shortly after the "big turn."

The suicide theory bothers me because most suiciders don't dawdle. Why take
seven extra hours to kill yourself? I still think the scenario of the pilot
hoping to force the government to release his buddy and let him leave the
country was the "ransom" demand, if any. That could account for a seven
hour delay in the crash - giving the government enough time to release the
pilot's friend and for him to radio the all clear from wherever he sought
asylum. And when he didn't, the pilot made good on his threat. The worst
case scenario for the MG would be for anyone to find the plane and the CVR
if this was a hostage negotiation gone wrong. Would they deliberately
mislead searchers in hopes the wreckage would become waterlogged and sink?

I just get the strong sense the MG has been tailoring its responses to match
any hard evidence that comes out outside of its control.

I'd really like to know how that company generated those images of the item
in the Bay of Bengal.

--
Bobby G.

On Friday, May 2, 2014 3:00:06 PM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

news:b74654aa-5c54-414f-bf99-



stuff snipped



Today CBS has been reporting that a possible wreck has been found in the

Bay

of Bengal, which is on the southern route.



You mean northern route.



Whoops. Yes.



I don't put much faith in this new report.

All they have is some image using some exotic new method from space

of something on the ocean floor. It's curious though that if this new

search method has merit, that we didn't hear about it before, it wasn't

used right away, etc.



If they're right it will be a black eye for Inmarsat and the doppler

"boffins" that chose the wrong pathway. I'm not very sanguine about it, but

anything's possible at this point. We're down to surveying every square

foot of the ocean and if the plane slid under deep ocean silt, the Bluefin

could scan all day and never see it. Considering all the wildly false leads

we've already had, the officials would be remiss not to check it out. They

seem to have a pretty good fix on the alleged position of the wreck.



stuff snipped



. . I think the intent was to put the aircraft down at Kora Bahru but

when

the plane got there, no one was left alive to do it. That's based on

there

being all these altitude and course changes within a very short span of

time

and then nothing. Just a long, lazy flight to nowhere.



But those altitude and heading changes continued long after it had

passed the closest it ever got to Kota Bahru. And it didn't head

for Kota Bahru, it passed well to the north of it. Worst of all, there

was no distress call. I don't know of a commercial airplane that ever

just showed up an an airport for an emergency landing without contact

with ATC. Nor one that had a such a major mechanical problem or fire

that resulted in the loss of VHF radios, ACARS, transponders, yet left

the plane capable of flying for another 7 hours. You're in the very small

minority that still thinks this

was some mechanical problem.



My opinion is based on two major points. One is that that model plane

already had had a serious oxygen-fed cabin fire on the ground that would

have been fatal to the entire plane if airborne. The second is that Boeing

had issued a repair order for the oxygen hoses and I don't believe that Air

Malaysia has any records indicating the fixes had been made.



A massive cockpit fire fatal to the entire plane would have the
place in the China Sea, where contact was lost, not flying in
controlled fashion, making precision turns and going to Australia.





In addition, there's some serious debate about whether the black boxes had

been replaced at the proper intervals. While the FAA and its European

equivalent make sure that such serious hazards are remediated in a

mostly-timely fashion (AF 440's pitot tubes being a notable and

crash-causing exception) I wonder if the Malaysians are as attentive to

details. The failure to replace the pinger batteries on time (if true)

could indicate lax maintainence. So I find it entirely credible that an

oxygen fed-fire raced through the cabin (where the hoses are routed) and

killed the air crew and perhaps everyone else on board.



Then the plane would be off Kota Bahru, not flying for another 7 hours.



While I may be in the minority, the fire theory is one that can be proved or

disproved pretty easily when and if the wreckage is found. Other theories

are going to be pretty hard to prove if the voice recorder recorded over the

critical moments when the plane turned. I've read recently that the CVR and

FDR can both stop recording if their busses are pulled or power to the units

are interrupted for some reason. The batteries only power the pingers, not

the recording functions. If true, the CVR could provide a lot of answers if

it's ever found and it stopped recording shortly after the "big turn."



The suicide theory bothers me because most suiciders don't dawdle. Why take

seven extra hours to kill yourself?

You're trying to apply rational thought process to someone with a
deranged and unstable mind. Plus, if it was a suicidal pilot, how
do you know when he died? He could have taken a bottle of sedatives
after leaving the Straits and having put the plane on a course to
Australia.




I still think the scenario of the pilot

hoping to force the government to release his buddy and let him leave the

country was the "ransom" demand, if any. That could account for a seven

hour delay in the crash - giving the government enough time to release the

pilot's friend and for him to radio the all clear from wherever he sought

asylum. And when he didn't, the pilot made good on his threat.

And no other aircraft heard any of all this communication? No one
involved has called up TMZ and leaked it all? And if he was waiting for
Malaysia to give him something, why was the plane on it's way to
Australian no-man's land, instead of circling Malaysia? This is just
bizarre speculation along the lines of Elvis being alive.



The worst

case scenario for the MG would be for anyone to find the plane and the CVR

if this was a hostage negotiation gone wrong. Would they deliberately

mislead searchers in hopes the wreckage would become waterlogged and sink?




The Malaysians aren't the ones telling the world where the plane went
down. Inmarsat, a British company is. Are they in on the conspiracy too?
The NTSB? FBI? FAA?


I just get the strong sense the MG has been tailoring its responses to match

any hard evidence that comes out outside of its control.



I'd really like to know how that company generated those images of the item

in the Bay of Bengal.



--

Bobby G.