Malaysia Airlines B777 contact lost

Now there is speculation that the plane was stolen... to be used as a bomb later. It's just speculation on the part of some investigators, but it confirms my suspicion all along that the plane was hijacked (stolen), and diverted away from its intended course. Also the theory that the plane ascended to 45,000 feet, then descended to about 27,000 feet seems to me that the intent was to eliminate all on board, (de-compression)... but still, NO ONE KNOWS. How the bloody hell does one loose an aircraft as big as a Boeing 777? Well Malaysia Airlines did, so I reckon it's possible to do.

Full Story Here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...e-landed-in-southeast-asia-for-use-as-weapon/

BB686
 
I never bought into the story of the aircraft turning south or southwest and flying for 7 hours so the aircraft could be crashed into the ocean, that simply makes no sense. It is far more logical and the body of the evidence, at least what little is available and being released by the government of Malaysia, that the aircraft was turned northwest and flow over land. Maybe it is somewhere in China, but it might be in Iran. The purpose? Could be someone wanted the electronics geniuses who were on the aircraft. These guys were working on systems that would make aircraft pretty much disappear from tracking systems. Converting the aircraft into a flying bomb is also a distinct possibility.
 
If you want to make a statement by hijacking a jet and finally crashing it with pax aboard, why do it anonymously? It's been over a week now and no serious or reputable public statement or claim has been made about who did it.

Malaysia has for years said they do not tolerate Muslim extremism in their country - this incident may nullify that position. These pilots were employees of a state-owned airline - IOW state employees - which legally speaking makes the state responsible for the deaths. Interesting position.

If you remove the baggage and pax from the aircraft and fully fuel it - or at least fuel it so it can reach, on a one-way flight, the target of your choice - this aircraft should be able to operate from a rather remote location with a runway shorter than normally required to launch it. What is the fuel tankage for a B777-200, and how many fuel tank trucks would be required to fill it?

Damage to landing gear on takeoff is of no real importance if you're not planning on landing it again - so there is another reason why it could be operated from a more remote, less-prepared airstrip.

If this thing has been coverted into the world's largest cruise missile, there is one logical target well within range - Israel. The IAF can not conduct an intercept over Jordanian or Saudi Arabian airspace, so visual identification would happen so shortly before impact on an Israeli target as to be superfluous. Why would you completely circle Israel to come in from the sea? A low-level approach over Jordan or Saudi Arabia, or a masked approach using ID from a legitimate airline is a likelihood. AA missile defenses would bear the brunt of the defense for Israel. They will have commercial air traffic ID veritifcation procedures in place and published through NOTAMs. To not follow them to the letter could have very serious consequences.

The thing that hasn't been mentioned so far is - what cargo would this aircraft be carrying if it were to be used again?
 
I have a theory of my own.

I think whoever stole the plane was after something on it and they had to land it to retrieve the goods. My thought is Banda Aceh which is an odd and remote place but has a runway big enough. Once you've touched down and removed the goods, the plane and everything else is just evidence you need to dispose of.

Very logical to take off and let the plane proceed out into the southern ocean at low level until it runs out of fuel.
 
Maybe something hot .....


Code: 
<code>http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-20/raaf-en-route-to-possible-debris-from-mh370-in-indian-ocean/5334314</code>
5334826-4x3-940x705.jpg

Prime Minister Tony Abbott told Parliament this afternoon that he had spoken with his Malaysian counterpart but warned the objects might not be related to the search.
However, Mr Young says the satellite images are the most promising lead authorities have.
Click to expand...
 
Much to do has been made about how "hard" it is to disable the ACARS. According to the T7's FCOM, it is so difficult that it actually takes six keystrokes on the FMC to turn off ACARS... :pop4:
 
Even easier, pull the satcom circuit breaker on the overhead panel. Other comments about the need to program the FMC to turn the plane. Actually easy as any flight simmer would know.... Heading select and turn the knob!

a lot of info not being released, for instance how much fuel was on the plane? The flight planned fuel would be known, even if tank wring, and he fuel vendor receipts and log would be available. Fuel is expensive in China, so tankering might be a likely scenario. I would be surprised if the plane at its weight could get to FL450, a loss of control there would be likely and result in a great altitude loss. Having flown at this altitude numerous times, even at lighter weights, you really are close to coffin corner.

T
 
A question for Tom (fliger747). Is it possible for the transponder to go off, mechanical/electrical failure, and the flight crew does not realise that it is off?
 
Unless they recover the black box (Flight Data Recorder)... folks will theorize about what happened. My thing... stay away from the Network News, as these reports are often inaccurate and incomplete.

BB686
 
Something to consider that no one has mentioned...the plane was only loaded with enough fuel to fly a few thousand miles. How far can you fly it below 10,000 feet? At lower altitudes, aircraft burn fuel very rapidly. Especially very heavy ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top