Forget hypoxia. The problem with the 45,000 feet story, as I understand it, is it wouldn't matter if the pilots or anyone else had access to oxygen or not. Depressurizing the aircraft at that altitude your starting to get into blood boiling territory. It'd be almost a suicidal tactic at that point.
Missing Airliner
- Thread starter P220
- Start date
Forget hypoxia. The problem with the 45,000 feet story, as I understand it, is it wouldn't matter if the pilots or anyone else had access to oxygen or not. Depressurizing the aircraft at that altitude your starting to get into blood boiling territory. It'd be almost a suicidal tactic at that point.
kwselke
Member
The term boiling of the blood comes from the bends or decompression sickness. My knowledge of it comes from my days as a scuba instructor. I seriously doubt a pilot would have a kill switch that would totally depressurize a passenger jet at altitude. I can see him having some regulation over the pressure in the cabin. I can also envision how flying above the service ceiling of a passenger jet may overwhelm the pressurization system and reduce the partial pressure of O2 in the cabin enough to incapacitate people. If nothing else a few degrees nose up makes it more difficult to storm the cockpit door. All speculation on my part.
GF
Member
ChuckS1
US Veteran
Hmm, pilots with Muslim-sounding names...I'm guessing it could've gone to Pakistan, but I would think India would have picked it up on radar. I'm beginning to like the alien abduction theory... 
Steely Dan
Member
Everyone has a theory, here is mine
The pilots are involved
It was a elaborate plan (transponders shut off, diverted before it hit Vietnam Airspace)
Diverted intentionally (kind of like back tracking to throw off the "scent")
It is in Pakistan or Iran
It is in a hangar
It is being retro fitted or packed with a "dirty bomb"......aka nuclear
It will be used in a horrific terrorist attack
It will either hit its mark, or be shot down before it does
If it is Iran and it hits a Israeli or US target, Iran will be targeted possibly triggering a huge war
God only knows the condition of the passengers
Could be held or killed
A Radical theory but I am a pessimist at heart and always expect the worse.
The pilots are involved
It was a elaborate plan (transponders shut off, diverted before it hit Vietnam Airspace)
Diverted intentionally (kind of like back tracking to throw off the "scent")
It is in Pakistan or Iran
It is in a hangar
It is being retro fitted or packed with a "dirty bomb"......aka nuclear
It will be used in a horrific terrorist attack
It will either hit its mark, or be shot down before it does
If it is Iran and it hits a Israeli or US target, Iran will be targeted possibly triggering a huge war
God only knows the condition of the passengers
Could be held or killed
A Radical theory but I am a pessimist at heart and always expect the worse.
Pulling the main cabin pressure system circuit breaker would do the trick. Which is located in the cockpit.
It would be tuff but not impossible to set it down somewhere and hide it for the above scenario. However Im more inclined to lean towards the splatted in the middle of the Indian ocean somewhere. There is a lot of water and space out there.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
I pretty much agree with steely dan. If terrorists wanted to use hostages as some sort of bargaining chips they would have by now. One thing with this senerio that puzzles me though is as well as this seems to have been planned out, why not just buy or steal a empty airliner? About a year ago a pilot killed his girl friend in denver and rode a motorcycle to st. george utah. He attempted to steal his company's airliner. He hit the airport in the wee hours, airport was closed. He climbed a fence, got in and fired it up started taxing it but damaged a wing on the building. Then he shot himself. I asked a pilot for the same airline could he have actually have taken off by himself or wouldn't he need the help of a co pilot? He said he could fly it with no help. That case is still a mystery as to where he planned to fly it. The pilot I talked to about it said had he been working the guy would have hit his car that night as the plane plowed through some parked cars where he always parks.
These terrorists would either have to kill all aboard or have a fairly large numbered group to guard and handle them on the ground. They would have to have a remote uncontrolled strip of 7,000 ft hard runway. It would take quite a large group to actually pull all that off. Some day, some where, with that many people involved someone will leak info. I suppose the pilots could keep pressurization for themselves and suffocate the people in the cabin. I hadn't thought about it, read it elsewhere, but they also could fly with a nose up, tail down angle to prevent passengers trying to storm the cockpit while they starved them of air. Also hurry the job by flying high as they could get.
There are large groups big enough and knowledgeable enough to do it. 9-11 proved that. Unfortunately, if there are no demands for ransom or no bragging for credit, I have to agree with steely dan as to the reason to steal the airliner!
It will be interesting to see what effect this has on air travel especially in that part of the world. I believe our country has to be highly concerned with this as they no doubt fear a possible attack with that airliner against us or more likely, Israel. Our country will put more money into solving this than the rest of the world combined because high up officials must be looking at this like this.
These terrorists would either have to kill all aboard or have a fairly large numbered group to guard and handle them on the ground. They would have to have a remote uncontrolled strip of 7,000 ft hard runway. It would take quite a large group to actually pull all that off. Some day, some where, with that many people involved someone will leak info. I suppose the pilots could keep pressurization for themselves and suffocate the people in the cabin. I hadn't thought about it, read it elsewhere, but they also could fly with a nose up, tail down angle to prevent passengers trying to storm the cockpit while they starved them of air. Also hurry the job by flying high as they could get.
There are large groups big enough and knowledgeable enough to do it. 9-11 proved that. Unfortunately, if there are no demands for ransom or no bragging for credit, I have to agree with steely dan as to the reason to steal the airliner!
It will be interesting to see what effect this has on air travel especially in that part of the world. I believe our country has to be highly concerned with this as they no doubt fear a possible attack with that airliner against us or more likely, Israel. Our country will put more money into solving this than the rest of the world combined because high up officials must be looking at this like this.
I think it's interesting that the captain had a simulator at home.Has he been practicing short field landings and/or ditching in water?What was in the cargo hold?Seems like he was burning off fuel to lighten the load.
I said essentially this on a different forum and was jokingly called "Occam" because it's the most simple realistic outcome.
While the "jetliner as secret bomber" scenario is possible, there are easier ways to get a plane for that use. Especially if you are have the complicity of a nation-state. Taking a plane full of people just complicates matters. Not that the terrorists would have compunction about killing those innocent people. After all that's what they do.
I just think that this is an overly complicated way to go about it.
Even if a nation-state did want to get involved and tried to hide their complicity by using another nations airline, it would be hard to hide. Not impossible, but hard.
While the "jetliner as secret bomber" scenario is possible, there are easier ways to get a plane for that use. Especially if you are have the complicity of a nation-state. Taking a plane full of people just complicates matters. Not that the terrorists would have compunction about killing those innocent people. After all that's what they do.
I just think that this is an overly complicated way to go about it.
Even if a nation-state did want to get involved and tried to hide their complicity by using another nations airline, it would be hard to hide. Not impossible, but hard.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
On 9-11 hijacked airliners full of passengers were also used. Al Qaeda didn't buy or steal empty airliners for the job. Maybe they dont have or want to spend that much money. They try to do more with less. These people obviously dont think like us.
Except that those planes were immediately used for their attack. Those planes were selected because they were full of fuel for a cross country flight and it was expected that they wouldn't be fully booked with passengers.
Al Qaeda has plenty of money, it's financed by some oil rich nations and lots of donations from true believers.
Al Qaeda has plenty of money, it's financed by some oil rich nations and lots of donations from true believers.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
Lets say the plane was hijacked, landed intact at a Al Qaeda controlled strip.
Passengers are dead, plane is repainted and given phony tail numbers and PW. and a load of dangerous cargo and suicide willing pilots. First where could that plane land to refuel unchallenged to reach the U.S.? And then how good is our intelligence as far as that plane getting in our airspace unchallenged as to its new phony tail numbers and order of business? Can any foreign plane actually approach the U.S. without us first knowing who they are and how well is incoming planes origins and cargo ascertained before being allowed in our airspace to land? How well is the paperwork looked at before getting clearances to come here? Obviously a north Korean marked airplane is going to be challenged but how about a phony documented English plane? Could it fall through the cracks?
Passengers are dead, plane is repainted and given phony tail numbers and PW. and a load of dangerous cargo and suicide willing pilots. First where could that plane land to refuel unchallenged to reach the U.S.? And then how good is our intelligence as far as that plane getting in our airspace unchallenged as to its new phony tail numbers and order of business? Can any foreign plane actually approach the U.S. without us first knowing who they are and how well is incoming planes origins and cargo ascertained before being allowed in our airspace to land? How well is the paperwork looked at before getting clearances to come here? Obviously a north Korean marked airplane is going to be challenged but how about a phony documented English plane? Could it fall through the cracks?
LVSteve
Member
Very common in Malaysia.
kwselke
Member
Apparently the pilot was very political. He attended the sentencing of his opposition party leader, on questionable charges, five hours before the flight. In the first picture of him I saw he had on a t-shirt which read Democracy is Dead. He could have declared an emergency, flown back to Kuala Lumpur and crashed The Petronas Towers if terrorism was what he wanted. Crossing back across Malaysia on military radar without the scrambling of interceptors and making the plane disappear? My bet is he wanted to make his government look inept. If the plane or wreckage is ever found, I bet he had also pulled the plugs on the cockpit voice and flight data recorders.
I am waiting for your next command......................
I'm still having a hard time choking down no red flags for Maylaysian officials when the airliner lost the transponder and ACARS. It makes no sense.
You lose the transponder, you lose ACARS, you have a sign off conversation between the aircraft and Malaysian ATC that doesn't address either issue KNOWING they're entering another ATC zone invisible, with the obvious risks that would entail. You supposedly have the Malaysian military radar track the airplane back toward and over the Malaysian coast. Yet no military response. None. Not even a quick take one up for a look/see.
What WOULD constitute a potential threat to these people? A squadron of Zero's screaming Tora Tora Tora? This story just doesn't add up, at least if common sense is part of the equation.
I'll tell you another thing that bugs me. This whole "satellite ping" thing. The northern limits on the northern track and the southern limits on the southern track are there because of the assumed amount of fuel on board. Fine, I get that. But you also can connect the southern end of the northern track and the northern end of the southern track to form a contiguous arc to show where the plane might be, and guess what. That covers the area where the plane "disappeared". The only information we have that puts the plane outside those parameters is from the Malaysian military and their radar operators, who somehow didn't deem this aircraft a threat. The "red zone" would also encompass the reciprocal course the plane may have flown to get back to the Malaysian mainland instead of the left turn being proposed by, guess who......the Malaysian military.
Inept is a word I've heard used when describing the Malaysian response. Complicit may be one we should also consider. If there was a "conspiracy" to steal this airplane, for whatever reason, I think one of the easiest ways to that end would be to fly it back to familiar territory, rather than challenge foreign air defenses, with the help of select individuals within the military who can plausibly distract those that may be curious. Think about where the Malaysian military have been suggesting to search, and compare that to where logic and later technical data have told us was more likely. They really don't overlap. Inept, or complicit?
You lose the transponder, you lose ACARS, you have a sign off conversation between the aircraft and Malaysian ATC that doesn't address either issue KNOWING they're entering another ATC zone invisible, with the obvious risks that would entail. You supposedly have the Malaysian military radar track the airplane back toward and over the Malaysian coast. Yet no military response. None. Not even a quick take one up for a look/see.
What WOULD constitute a potential threat to these people? A squadron of Zero's screaming Tora Tora Tora? This story just doesn't add up, at least if common sense is part of the equation.
I'll tell you another thing that bugs me. This whole "satellite ping" thing. The northern limits on the northern track and the southern limits on the southern track are there because of the assumed amount of fuel on board. Fine, I get that. But you also can connect the southern end of the northern track and the northern end of the southern track to form a contiguous arc to show where the plane might be, and guess what. That covers the area where the plane "disappeared". The only information we have that puts the plane outside those parameters is from the Malaysian military and their radar operators, who somehow didn't deem this aircraft a threat. The "red zone" would also encompass the reciprocal course the plane may have flown to get back to the Malaysian mainland instead of the left turn being proposed by, guess who......the Malaysian military.
Inept is a word I've heard used when describing the Malaysian response. Complicit may be one we should also consider. If there was a "conspiracy" to steal this airplane, for whatever reason, I think one of the easiest ways to that end would be to fly it back to familiar territory, rather than challenge foreign air defenses, with the help of select individuals within the military who can plausibly distract those that may be curious. Think about where the Malaysian military have been suggesting to search, and compare that to where logic and later technical data have told us was more likely. They really don't overlap. Inept, or complicit?
Last edited:
BigBill
Absent Comrade
Does the word kamakazi ring a bell?
What's the target, where's the target?
Here comes another sequel to 9/11 right?
Someone that has the "bomb" has there delivery system now.
I always thought we had eyes watching the skies 24/7. Before 9/11 I thought we were protected too.
I'm fresh out of gut feelings on this one. But I did get the short landing strip right. If this is correct the plane is being repainted to the American airlines paint scheme. Think about it an under cover delivery system right under the world's eye.
What's the target, where's the target?
Here comes another sequel to 9/11 right?
Someone that has the "bomb" has there delivery system now.
I always thought we had eyes watching the skies 24/7. Before 9/11 I thought we were protected too.
I'm fresh out of gut feelings on this one. But I did get the short landing strip right. If this is correct the plane is being repainted to the American airlines paint scheme. Think about it an under cover delivery system right under the world's eye.
Last edited:
kwselke
Member
The timing of turning off the transponder once Malaysian ATC says they are no longer monitoring you indicates to me someone in the cockpit was waiting for that moment to make their move. The flight should have made contact with Vietnamese ATC at that point and they did not. Thus no one is really monitoring you.
It is my understanding the ACARS data is sent to the airlines not ATC, so it is only in hindsight that we know both systems were shut off about the same time. It has come out that they really do not know the time the ACARS system was turned off because they were scheduled at half hour intervals.
You are correct Malaysian air defense should have been alerted and scrambled a plane or two. I read they have F-5s and F-18s on alert for that purpose. I'm assuming they were either asleep or did not feel the plane was on a course that would be a threat. Their is no excuse for them not having put eyes in the sky in my opinion.
It is my understanding the ACARS data is sent to the airlines not ATC, so it is only in hindsight that we know both systems were shut off about the same time. It has come out that they really do not know the time the ACARS system was turned off because they were scheduled at half hour intervals.
You are correct Malaysian air defense should have been alerted and scrambled a plane or two. I read they have F-5s and F-18s on alert for that purpose. I'm assuming they were either asleep or did not feel the plane was on a course that would be a threat. Their is no excuse for them not having put eyes in the sky in my opinion.
Then they should have waited a bit longer. The conversation with ATC happened shortly after the transponder was disabled. If that in fact is true, it should have been discussed, it wasn't. And, even though it may not have been available info to Malaysian ATC at the time, for the record, ACARS may have gone down up to 14 minutes prior to that.
Comprehensive timeline: Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 DAY 9 : news
kwselke
Member
From PBS' website.
The last signal from the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) was received 12 minutes before the co-pilot's final words.
The plane's transponder -- which relays the plane's location -- was switched off just two minutes after he spoke, and a few minutes later the aircraft turned back on its flight path.
Yahya said it was not clear precisely when the ACARS system, which sends a signal every 30 minutes, was disabled. Officials had previously maintained it was manually turned off before the final cockpit message.
This just came out in the last 24 hours or so. More egg on Malaysian govt. faces.
Similar threads
- Locked
