• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Malaysian Airline Flight MH370

bigdoublezero said:
You guys aren't thinking like a terrorist. If the goal is the plane, not hostages, why not just throw on some gas masks in the cockpit and gas everyone in the cabin? Then wgaf about cellphones. Gives the terrorists free rein to go below deck to futz with the communications equipment.
Click to expand...

Good point. "Walter White" the passengers.
 
KitchinDeac said:
Most sensible theory I have read: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
Click to expand...

The flaw here is that the plane flew on. You have to believe that the plane flew several hours after the transponder went off. If it did then I have a hard time understanding how the 236 people and crew were unable to get off a single distress call. The article suggests the captain was coherent enough to seek out the nearest airport for an emergency landing. I imagine the passengers were not incapacitated all at once. Why were they unable to send a single distress signal?
 
awaken said:
Clearlly there was a gremlin on the wing, but only one man could see it
Gremlins-020B.jpg
Click to expand...

Beaten by a week.

bym051d said:
Or...

rDyyj2g.jpg
Click to expand...
 
GoDeacsGo said:
They did fly up to 45,000 feet and could have depressurized the cabin. I now there are masks that are supposed to drop down but maybe there is an over ride the pilot can switch to prevent that from happening. No oxygen, no passengers.
Click to expand...

this is actually a really good hypothesis, and there are precedents for this sort of things happening on accident (search ghost plane; here is one result http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-409703/Ghost-flight-horror-crash-blamed-pilots.html).

ascent and depressurization could have happened without the passengers or even crew knowing anything was wrong...right up until depressurization, and by then it's too late, at -70c outside, and i doubt you get very good phone reception. This hypothesis seems even more credible if the cockpit can also be heated independently of the cabin, as whoever was piloting would have the aforementioned oxygen supplies but would lose the use of their hands quickly if not for aux. heat.
 
maybe the pilot tipped the nose up just a few too many degrees and they flew into space
 
KitchinDeac said:
Most sensible theory I have read: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/
Click to expand...

this is an excellent theory, but i would imagine searching forward of their last known trajectory would also be an obvious priority for experienced search and rescue teams.

Also, a fire that gave them no chance to even declare an emergency would likely have had to have been large enough to cause a near simultaneous failure of critical systems while somehow never being heard, seen, or (most strangely) smelled until those failures occurred. Also, did the original traffic controllers (or anyone) actually observe the plane as it lifted off? if so, if a tire had lit, they would have seen it due to the extreme wind flare and night conditions.

Also, if the ascent to 45,000 happened after the plane went dark, that's not really consistent with a fire, where i'd imagine you'd be wanting to maintain alt then start your descent ASAP (i don't know this for sure though, and there could have been extenuating circumstances where they anticipated they would need the extra altitude as the article mentions--or maybe with no instrumentation they just got disoriented.) Going that high to try to slow the fire and buy some time, as the article asserts, seems plausible, but any rapid descent would likely be due to a stall, not an attempt to blow out the flames, as without instruments that would be a great way to over speed and rip your plane apart.

rubber creates a thick, noxious smoke which i'm having trouble wouldn't have worked its way in trace amounts into the cockpit and/or cabin and been detected, allowing for some message to the tower. if the smoke didn't circulate at all in the plane then the fire was contained and should have put itself out before burning much of the tire (again that's a guess, but seems like common sense). also a burning tire implies a fire well on it's way, not some smoldering ticking time catastrophe, so how did the plane get as far as it did w/o problem.

also a fire would have the plane veer off course and crash before the fuel was exhausted, whereas the linked article hypothesizes the plane continued on a constant heading until crashing into the indian ocean (after speculating about a fire...the author isn't being consistent.)

Those are the questions that jumped into my mind but it's still a very good hypothesis, just still relies on a lot of assumptions and the more i think about it, having seen nearly every air crash documentary, doesn't make sense as is and will need some modifications.
 
Last edited:
MSNBC had an NTSB guy on who said that the 45,000 feet data point is probably apocryphal and just a story that someone who didn't understand radar ran with. The pilot in the story above says the same thing about it being unlikely that the plane ever went to 45,000 feet.
 
Indiana-Jones-Last-Crusade.png


has this been explored?


this is seriously the strangest news piece I can recall, ever - at least of this magnitude.
 
lbE08 said:
Indiana-Jones-Last-Crusade.png


has this been explored?


this is seriously the strangest news piece I can recall, ever - at least of this magnitude.
Click to expand...

It's just as likely as Sean Connery shooting the tail off by accident.
 
BiffTannen said:
MSNBC had an NTSB guy on who said that the 45,000 feet data point is probably apocryphal and just a story that someone who didn't understand radar ran with. The pilot in the story above says the same thing about it being unlikely that the plane ever went to 45,000 feet.
Click to expand...

indeed, 45,000 feet only makes sense if you're trying to incapacitate everyone (someone with an agenda) or if you know for some reason you're gonna need the extra 10,000ft, for what reason idk.
 
Here's where I start to wonder: almost every historical example of similar missing plane incidents would point to this being an accident (in some way, shape or form).

The homeland security quote unequivocally said that "we know" this is not an accident.

Speculation always runs rampant until wreckage is found, but it sure seems like (even U.S. intelligence) is treating this one different. We might not know why, but something is going on behind the scenes that is stranger than fiction.
 
vtwhat etc said:
Here's where I start to wonder: almost every historical example of similar missing plane incidents would point to this being an accident (in some way, shape or form).

The homeland security quote unequivocally said that "we know" this is not an accident.

Speculation always runs rampant until wreckage is found, but it sure seems like (even U.S. intelligence) is treating this one different. We might not know why, but something is going on behind the scenes that is stranger than fiction.
Click to expand...

They're here
 
That theory makes a lot of sense to me too. It also jives with what the Aussie or New Zealendar reported that appears on one of the earlier pages of this thread.
 
Last edited:
I read the wired column and felt pretty good about it until Knight's bro started posting in the comments saying the author was basically full of SHIT. I don't know who to believe!
 
There's just way too much shady shit going on for me to believe it was an accident. No governments cooperating, stories are changed every day and some interesting passengers onboard.
 
Has it been confirmed by the press/any government that 20 of the passengers worked for a company that had DoD contracts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top