Missing Malaysia Airlines jet carrying 239 triggers Southeast Asia search

[hawker9000]

I'm not a pilot, but pilots on this thread can tell me whether a plane might have been ditched, with as little structural damage as possible, in the following manner: maneuver down close to sea level, as if ditching at sea to save passengers, except in this scenario, saving passengers is not the goal (they may already be dead, anyway). When close to touching down, point the nose up, thereby slowing the craft even more. That's a similar maneuver to some modern fighter planes which suddenly point their noses up, in order to slow dramatically, and thereby force closely pursuing craft to pass it. Granted, 777's maneuver more cumbersomely than fighter jets, but the concept is similar.

When slowed as much as possible, the commercial craft falls in to the sea - thereby causing least amount of structural damage. If the pilot was intending to ditch in as inaccessible a region as possible, he was successful. Furthermore, he may plausibly have been planning to cause as little floating debris as possible. If so, this too was a success. In sum, I allege he committed suicide/mass murder, with the intent of leaving as small a 'footprint' as possible - and was successful.

No. And explained already.

[P45Mustang]

I'm not a pilot, but pilots on this thread can tell me whether a plane might have been ditched, with as little structural damage as possible, in the following manner: maneuver down close to sea level, as if ditching at sea to save passengers, except in this scenario, saving passengers is not the goal (they may already be dead, anyway). When close to touching down, point the nose up, thereby slowing the craft even more. That's a similar maneuver to some modern fighter planes which suddenly point their noses up, in order to slow dramatically, and thereby force closely pursuing craft to pass it. Granted, 777's maneuver more cumbersomely than fighter jets, but the concept is similar.

When slowed as much as possible, the commercial craft falls in to the sea - thereby causing least amount of structural damage. If the pilot was intending to ditch in as inaccessible a region as possible, he was successful. Furthermore, he may plausibly have been planning to cause as little floating debris as possible. If so, this too was a success. In sum, I allege he committed suicide/mass murder, with the intent of leaving as small a 'footprint' as possible - and was successful.

Or somebody else did?

[P45Mustang]

The US has stealth subs that are nuclear powered and very, very good at listening. I've wondered why there aren't a couple in the water. But the listening devices that are being towed by the Aussies are US made.

I just hope they've really found the spot for closure for the friends and families.

...and other future travellers.

I'm in KL on Sunday.

Btw. KL airport security is slack.

Edited April 10, 2014 by P45Mustang

[boomerangutang]

I'm not a pilot, but pilots on this thread can tell me whether a plane might have been ditched, with as little structural damage as possible, in the following manner: maneuver down close to sea level, as if ditching at sea to save passengers, except in this scenario, saving passengers is not the goal (they may already be dead, anyway). When close to touching down, point the nose up, thereby slowing the craft even more. That's a similar maneuver to some modern fighter planes which suddenly point their noses up, in order to slow dramatically, and thereby force closely pursuing craft to pass it. Granted, 777's maneuver more cumbersomely than fighter jets, but the concept is similar.

When slowed as much as possible, the commercial craft falls in to the sea - thereby causing least amount of structural damage. If the pilot was intending to ditch in as inaccessible a region as possible, he was successful. Furthermore, he may plausibly have been planning to cause as little floating debris as possible. If so, this too was a success. In sum, I allege he committed suicide/mass murder, with the intent of leaving as small a 'footprint' as possible - and was successful.

No. And explained already.

I've been following this entire thread, and may have missed a prior explanation. Please tell us why 'no'.

[Tywais]

I'm not a pilot, but pilots on this thread can tell me whether a plane might have been ditched, with as little structural damage as possible, in the following manner: maneuver down close to sea level, as if ditching at sea to save passengers, except in this scenario, saving passengers is not the goal (they may already be dead, anyway). When close to touching down, point the nose up, thereby slowing the craft even more. That's a similar maneuver to some modern fighter planes which suddenly point their noses up, in order to slow dramatically, and thereby force closely pursuing craft to pass it. Granted, 777's maneuver more cumbersomely than fighter jets, but the concept is similar.

When slowed as much as possible, the commercial craft falls in to the sea - thereby causing least amount of structural damage. If the pilot was intending to ditch in as inaccessible a region as possible, he was successful. Furthermore, he may plausibly have been planning to cause as little floating debris as possible. If so, this too was a success. In sum, I allege he committed suicide/mass murder, with the intent of leaving as small a 'footprint' as possible - and was successful.

If a commercial airliner 'falls in to the sea' I guarantee that will not be the least amount of structural damage. Have you ever belly flopped jumping into water?

A controlled water landing requires plane configuration of minimum descent rate, gear up, flaps at maximum and at minimum controllable airspeed. I've never had to do one but have been trained for the proper configuration and practiced the maneuver.

[NeverSure]

I'm not a pilot, but pilots on this thread can tell me whether a plane might have been ditched, with as little structural damage as possible, in the following manner: maneuver down close to sea level, as if ditching at sea to save passengers, except in this scenario, saving passengers is not the goal (they may already be dead, anyway). When close to touching down, point the nose up, thereby slowing the craft even more. That's a similar maneuver to some modern fighter planes which suddenly point their noses up, in order to slow dramatically, and thereby force closely pursuing craft to pass it. Granted, 777's maneuver more cumbersomely than fighter jets, but the concept is similar.

When slowed as much as possible, the commercial craft falls in to the sea - thereby causing least amount of structural damage. If the pilot was intending to ditch in as inaccessible a region as possible, he was successful. Furthermore, he may plausibly have been planning to cause as little floating debris as possible. If so, this too was a success. In sum, I allege he committed suicide/mass murder, with the intent of leaving as small a 'footprint' as possible - and was successful.

You're almost there. What you're describing is stalling the aircraft (going too slow or at to high an angle of attack for the wings to maintain lift) and having the plane fall suddenly into the water. The problem with that is that the plane still has a forward speed of whatever its stall speed is, which might be around 150 mph. The fall is damaging and the forward speed is damaging and the plane would break.

What you do is what you describe, but you touch down a bit nose high just before the wings stall so that the plane "slides" in instead of falling in. You glide the plane down safely above stall speed, getting your speed from descending, level off and wait for the speed to bleed off to just above stall speed, and with your nose a little high let it touch down.

With a lot of luck, you perhaps tear the wings off but keep the fuselage intact.

[Chicog]

<deleted> It's a Boeing 777 not a Pitts Special.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[P45Mustang]

Experts give reasons for lack of debris from Flight MH370

EXPERTS inside the Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 370 Joint Agency Coordination Centre believe there are just two possible explanations for the lack of debris on the ocean surface from the downed jet.

The wide-bodied Boeing 777 was either flown under control into the ocean, largely intact and sank to the bottom in one piece or its wreckage was scattered by a cyclone that passed through the search area soon after the search began.

In late March there were fears that Cyclone Gillian, which set off a cyclone warning in the southern corridor, could hamper search and rescue operations.

More here - news.com.au

Personal note: From the photos in the link, the seas in that area appear to be very calm and smooth so their statement of flown in is plausible.

+1

Or am I missing the pit stop?

[Chicog]

http://m.travelweekly.co.uk/Article.aspx?cat=news&id=47617

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Overandout]

The US has stealth subs that are nuclear powered and very, very good at listening. I've wondered why there aren't a couple in the water. But the listening devices that are being towed by the Aussies are US made.

I just hope they've really found the spot for closure for the friends and families.

...and other future travellers.

I'm in KL on Sunday.

Btw. KL airport security is slack.

I travel to KL regularly and have noticed a higher security awareness recently.

Up until recently I had never had my fingerprints taken by those scanners that have always been on the counter at immigration (I had always actually wondered why the person in front of me always had to do it but I didn't), but on my last trip they scanned mine on the way in and out.

Also, the guard at the entrance to the gate took quite a long look at my photo in the passport and then at me. Much more attentive than pre-MH370.

[P45Mustang]

The US has stealth subs that are nuclear powered and very, very good at listening. I've wondered why there aren't a couple in the water. But the listening devices that are being towed by the Aussies are US made.

I just hope they've really found the spot for closure for the friends and families.

...and other future travellers.

I'm in KL on Sunday.

Btw. KL airport security is slack.

I travel to KL regularly and have noticed a higher security awareness recently.

Up until recently I had never had my fingerprints taken by those scanners that have always been on the counter at immigration (I had always actually wondered why the person in front of me always had to do it but I didn't), but on my last trip they scanned mine on the way in and out.

Also, the guard at the entrance to the gate took quite a long look at my photo in the passport and then at me. Much more attentive than pre-MH370.

Good news.

I travel to KL regularly.

If I wanted to do something dodgy, KL airport would be close to the top of my list.

[P45Mustang]

http://m.travelweekly.co.uk/Article.aspx?cat=news&id=47617

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Interesting.

Funny how it was a Malaysian 747 and not another carrier flying the proven "Queen of the Skies"

[3NUMBAS]

quote

But the deep ocean is a very noisy place, prompting Australia this week to deploy a World War II-era technology, the sonobuoy, to help the TPL search for the black box recorders. All 84 sonobuoys are equipped with a hydrophone listening device, which is dangled some 1,000 feet (305 metres) below the surface and can transmit data to search aircraft via radio signals.

Crucially, the sonobuoys are quiet where higher-tech search planes and ships might interfere with the delicate task.

"That does provide a lot of sensors in the vicinity of the Ocean Shield without having a ship there to produce the background noise," said Commodore Peter Leavy, the operational head of the Australian search, referring to an Australian Naval vessel helping in the search

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/low-tech-takes-centre-stage-malaysia-airlines-search-080951947--sector.html#G727uMF

[P45Mustang]

quote

But the deep ocean is a very noisy place, prompting Australia this week to deploy a World War II-era technology, the sonobuoy, to help the TPL search for the black box recorders. All 84 sonobuoys are equipped with a hydrophone listening device, which is dangled some 1,000 feet (305 metres) below the surface and can transmit data to search aircraft via radio signals.

Crucially, the sonobuoys are quiet where higher-tech search planes and ships might interfere with the delicate task.

"That does provide a lot of sensors in the vicinity of the Ocean Shield without having a ship there to produce the background noise," said Commodore Peter Leavy, the operational head of the Australian search, referring to an Australian Naval vessel helping in the search

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/low-tech-takes-centre-stage-malaysia-airlines-search-080951947--sector.html#G727uMF

Yep.

Doesn't take rocket science for an Aussie to find a can of beer at 6000 metres.

Onwards and downwards mate.

[khaosai]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

[SOTIRIOS]

...complete and utter fabrication.......

[P45Mustang]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

The best description of flight path I have seen is this one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141

[tigermonkey]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

The best description of flight path I have seen is this one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141

It's a good summary, yes but has many assumptions to 'fill in the gaps'. The truth is that we really DO NO KNOW. The assumptions start with the Malaysian military primary radar, when MH370 turned west and started to head back over the peninsula. I know that the Vietnamese military radar also reported a turn, but there is no way to be sure that this was MH370 that they were tracking, especially given the intermittent track of the Malaysian radar.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around the fuel and weight issues. MH370 left the gate with 19,100 kg of fuel which is about right for a fully loaded T7 to get to Beijing with considerable safety margin. Malaysian has never announced the take-off weight or the complete cargo manifest - only walkie -talkies, mangosteens and baggage. However, the fight departed with 50 empty seats, which is usually done to compensate for heavy cargo ( ie fully loaded), and the walkie-talkies should have flown out of Penang,

The calculations and recalculations of the Inmarsat .plots, getting further and further north are really straining credibility concerning fuel consumption. Of course we are only observers, and have no need to know.

[P45Mustang]

@ tigermonkey. Your logic is tortuous.

At the moment the flight path based on available data is as good as it gets.

Questioning the credibility of UK Inmsarsat is pointless at best, deflectionary at worst.

If the Aussies ain't looking in the right place they won't find it.

Lack of information from Malaysia about important things like weight and cargo ( I am assuming you are correct when you say the information is not available) is not at all helpful is it.

So if you are correct in your assumption, somebody is not telling the truth, the whole truth and nbt.

The Co-ordinated search/rescue team should have as much data on the target object as they can get.

Basic stuff like fuel load and take off weight should be readily available.

If they are not looking in the right place they will not find it. I remain confident.

Full details of flight path will only be known if they find the box. Point accepted.

[P45Mustang]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

The best description of flight path I have seen is this one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141

It's a good summary, yes but has many assumptions to 'fill in the gaps'. The truth is that we really DO NO KNOW. The assumptions start with the Malaysian military primary radar, when MH370 turned west and started to head back over the peninsula. I know that the Vietnamese military radar also reported a turn, but there is no way to be sure that this was MH370 that they were tracking, especially given the intermittent track of the Malaysian radar.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around the fuel and weight issues. MH370 left the gate with 19,100 kg of fuel which is about right for a fully loaded T7 to get to Beijing with considerable safety margin. Malaysian has never announced the take-off weight or the complete cargo manifest - only walkie -talkies, mangosteens and baggage. However, the fight departed with 50 empty seats, which is usually done to compensate for heavy cargo ( ie fully loaded), and the walkie-talkies should have flown out of Penang,

The calculations and recalculations of the Inmarsat .plots, getting further and further north are really straining credibility concerning fuel consumption. Of course we are only observers, and have no need to know.

BTW. Planes often leave with empty seats because they haven't sold enough tickets.

Well that's how it works on planes coming out of LHR at least.

[P45Mustang]

We are all aware I take it that Malaysian Airlines is possibly doing an aviation fuel scam with or without PRC involvement, or they are carrying cargo on passenger planes over and above passengers baggage.

But at the moment, that conjecture doesn't really help much in the search/rescue mission.

Presumably somebody somewhere is asking questions.

[retell]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

The best description of flight path I have seen is this one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141

It's a good summary, yes but has many assumptions to 'fill in the gaps'. The truth is that we really DO NO KNOW. The assumptions start with the Malaysian military primary radar, when MH370 turned west and started to head back over the peninsula. I know that the Vietnamese military radar also reported a turn, but there is no way to be sure that this was MH370 that they were tracking, especially given the intermittent track of the Malaysian radar.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around the fuel and weight issues. MH370 left the gate with 19,100 kg of fuel which is about right for a fully loaded T7 to get to Beijing with considerable safety margin. Malaysian has never announced the take-off weight or the complete cargo manifest - only walkie -talkies, mangosteens and baggage. However, the fight departed with 50 empty seats, which is usually done to compensate for heavy cargo ( ie fully loaded), and the walkie-talkies should have flown out of Penang,

The calculations and recalculations of the Inmarsat .plots, getting further and further north are really straining credibility concerning fuel consumption. Of course we are only observers, and have no need to know.

Lets hope the people that make the calculations have the data of fuel and weight

No real need to give us that info

No need at al ,reading through this whole thread i think there is at least 1 million hours flight experience as captain of similar plane ,or not their main but flew bigger ones

Some owners of airlines , ex owners of airlines , technical aviation experts , and a few trolls and goblins

Send with Commodore 64 using Thaivisa Connect Mobile App

[P45Mustang]

And passengers with a brain.

[tigermonkey]

Hi,

Still no definitive information on whether the aircraft flew back across the Malaysian peninsula then North West bound or immediately turned South from the Vietnamese boundary.

A North West route then turning Southbound would be more likely deliberate action. The other scenario which would take it directly over Indonesia could possibly be multiple uncontrollable failures leading to loss of control.

If the aircraft had hit the ocean at high speed I would still expect debris to be visible somewhere by someone.

The best description of flight path I have seen is this one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26503141

It's a good summary, yes but has many assumptions to 'fill in the gaps'. The truth is that we really DO NO KNOW. The assumptions start with the Malaysian military primary radar, when MH370 turned west and started to head back over the peninsula. I know that the Vietnamese military radar also reported a turn, but there is no way to be sure that this was MH370 that they were tracking, especially given the intermittent track of the Malaysian radar.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around the fuel and weight issues. MH370 left the gate with 19,100 kg of fuel which is about right for a fully loaded T7 to get to Beijing with considerable safety margin. Malaysian has never announced the take-off weight or the complete cargo manifest - only walkie -talkies, mangosteens and baggage. However, the fight departed with 50 empty seats, which is usually done to compensate for heavy cargo ( ie fully loaded), and the walkie-talkies should have flown out of Penang,

The calculations and recalculations of the Inmarsat .plots, getting further and further north are really straining credibility concerning fuel consumption. Of course we are only observers, and have no need to know.

BTW. Planes often leave with empty seats because they haven't sold enough tickets.

Well that's how it works on planes coming out of LHR at least.

Sometimes airlines will block off some tickets from sales due to other issues such as excess weight. That was the case with MH370 which flew with 50 empty seats - if the four "no shows" had arrived and boarded, the standbys would not have gotten on board.

[P45Mustang]

Still doesn't preclude the fuel scam or the mystery cargo though does it.

[retell]

Still doesn't preclude the fuel scam or the mystery cargo though does it.

Elaborate share

Send with Commodore 64 using Thaivisa Connect Mobile App

[sandyf]

The US has stealth subs that are nuclear powered and very, very good at listening. I've wondered why there aren't a couple in the water. But the listening devices that are being towed by the Aussies are US made.

I just hope they've really found the spot for closure for the friends and families.

...and other future travellers.

I'm in KL on Sunday.

Btw. KL airport security is slack.

I travel to KL regularly and have noticed a higher security awareness recently.

Up until recently I had never had my fingerprints taken by those scanners that have always been on the counter at immigration (I had always actually wondered why the person in front of me always had to do it but I didn't), but on my last trip they scanned mine on the way in and out.

Also, the guard at the entrance to the gate took quite a long look at my photo in the passport and then at me. Much more attentive than pre-MH370.

Was passport dependant. I went about a year ago and they took my wife's fingerprints but not mine. Same as UK.

[Tywais]

Malaysia plane MH370: Possible new signal in search

A plane searching for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has detected a possible new signal in the southern Indian Ocean, Australian officials say.

An Australian P-3 Orion aircraft picked up the signal in the same area where an Australian vessel detected audio pings earlier this week, officials said.

The signal would require further analysis, but could have been from a "man-made source", officials said.

Flight MH370 vanished on 8 March, with 239 people on board.

The search zone was tightened on Thursday after a US navy "towed pinger locator" picked up audio signals in the area, sparking hopes that the plane's black box was in the area.

Australian vessel Ocean Shield picked up four acoustic signals in the area, twice over the weekend and twice on Tuesday.

More here - BBC

[Tywais]

Malaysia Airlines MH370: New possible 'pings' detected in jet search

If confirmed, underwater signal is 5th picked up during Indian Ocean hunt for jet

An Australian aircraft Thursday detected what may be the fifth signal coming from a man-made device deep in the Indian Ocean, adding to hopes that searchers will soon pinpoint the object's location and send down a robotic vehicle to confirm if it is a black box from the missing Malaysian jet.

The Australian air force P-3 Orion, which has been dropping sound-locating buoys into the water near where the original sounds were heard, picked up a "possible signal" that may be from a man-made source, said Angus Houston, who is coordinating the search off Australia's west coast.

More here - cbc.ca

[P45Mustang]

Looking forward to the black box being found asap.

And the cargo.