How It's Possible to Lose an Airplane in 2014

An interesting article on NPR/PRI this morning addressed the future possibility of placing the black-box function in a remote or centralized location.

Most of the ideas for the future which are being floated by the press and the knowledgable talking heads on TV have high costs to implement, and that seems to have been the impediment in the past.

There are monitoring systems in place which have the capability which should have been able to find this aircraft if there were a catastrophic accident. I am having a hard time comprehending how we just don't know where this aircraft is unless an accident hasn't in-fact occurred.

A scenario in my mind (very far-fetched) is that someone onboard the aircraft initiated the communications blackout and piloted the plane through the back-alleys of radar-free zones to an unknown location. This plan would be nefarious at best, and is the least-likely answer. I would like to think that modern day pirates aren't that intelligent.

I'm leaning towards the well planned theft of the plane theory as well.

Maybe, but for what purpose?

Usually there are two scenarios. One is to hijack the aircraft for transit to a different location. The destination for a 777 would need to be a large airport, so that would broadcast the event to the world.

The second is to destroy the aircraft, but the reason to do that is usually to create a news sensation and no one with any credibility has come forward with that claim.

A third scenario would be a catastrophic event on the aircraft that prevented the aircraft from broadcasting a mayday. It appears that the aircraft veered west (for a few hundred miles), off course, but I don't know the exact coordinates of the procedure turn or if that maneuver would be consistent with a divert for an emergency landing.

I suspect that the aircraft went down and went down somewhere off the expected course - which is why nothing has been spotted as far as wreckage so far.

But a catastrophic event would still likely leave debris. If I recall correctly even the Air France flight that went down in open ocean showed debris within a few days. The Straits of Malacca are supposed to be heavy shipping lanes. One would think it would show up fairly quickly.

Strange indeed.

True. We just don't know where. The plane was alleged to have taken a westward track for several hundreds of miles, so all the initial SAR activities were apparently in the wrong place.

At this point there are four possible causes; catastrophic mechanical or electrical faults, weather, pilot error, or manmade (i.e., criminal, terrorism, military).

Pilot error and weather probably are not likely factors. The weather was good and they were at cruising altitude, which gives time for pilots to react to events and report them.

I am still thinking it was a sudden catastrophic event. However, why the westward course (if true)?

I do remember Payne Stewart died (along with all hands) due to a private jet explosive decompression at altitude. The aircraft continued on autopilot until fuel ran out and it fell from the sky.

That might be a possible cause and one of the pilots could have engaged the autopilot before losing consciousness, setting the aircraft on a westward course.

How long the aircraft would continue before exhausting its fuel, I don't know.

However, it takes longer to find a plane when it is not where it is expected to be.

Right now governments are reviewing satellite data to see if they can spot the event.

I seem to recall that an autopilot system will proceed to a destination then circle the airport until turned off or, worst case, the plane runs out of fuel. With the change in course, it's curious as to where the pilot may have set the destination and it may have run out of fuel before even getting close.

It's a testament to avionics & aircraft systems design quality, engineering, mil-spec parts and redundancies, that this sort of incident is so rare, especially with thousands of flights each day.

Not necessarily. Autopilot simply follows a preset course or follow a preset number of waypoints. It depends what you program it to do or what was already programmed if it wasn't changed.

I am still thinking it was a sudden catastrophic event.

Press Release - Flight 370 Rescued, Safe in the Hands of Galactic Ship
LightWeb News

March 18, 2014, High Falls, NY. A comprehensive announcement describing the rescue of Flight 370 has been recorded by LightWeb News. The plane was suffering hydraulic failure, was in an uncontrolled state, at risk of imminent destruction. Whisked out of the air in mid-flight, it was taken aboard an enormous spacecraft from Sirius, claimed to be part of the Federation fleet under the Ashtar Command, whose full report is available from LightWeb News.

Radar pictures confirm the appearance of alien craft and the sudden disappearance of Flight 370. Confusion reigns in the search and rescue efforts because of the astonishing anomaly which points directly to extremely advanced technological intervention.

Read the full explanation from this source, which cites the connection between sightings of cigar-shaped UFO's in the skies over conflict areas (recently the Ukraine), the capture and safety of the passengers, and a new demand for countries around the globe to participate in initiating NESARA law.

Commander Ashtar claims responsibility for the rescue and for the demands, in cooperation with the passengers, who have offered to act as "hostages" to bring about immediate world peace. The entire interview can be obtained by contacting Dr. Kathryn E. May at kemay@aol.com.

I really hope and pray that this isn't a hijacking and a hostage scenario will unfold...

...but the other scenarios which end in a crash are just as horrific, and we just haven't found the remains yet.

"The destination for a 777 would need to be a large airport, so that would broadcast the event to the world."

Didn't a pair of pilots just a few months ago prove that larger aircraft can be landed in a surprisingly small airport and be flown out as well?

The most likly scenario is that the plan broke in half originating from the previous damage it sustained in China.

It just went into a tumble leaving no chance for the pilots to react! Systems down.

There will be a way a plane can break knocking out all systems. The crew of the plane that tried to contact them last was talking of interferences. Plenty of options why no call came out.

Two parts sink and leave almost no debris. It is there, it went down, it will be found eventually.

RIP

Is the 777 a composite, or is that the later Boeing, stresses from a fall after breaking in two would tear the plane up, not to mention hitting the water

No way, no how!

A wingtip was damaged on the ground, that's all that this aircraft has as history.

Planes don't break in half and fall out of the sky.

If a plane crashes after "falling out of the sky" they explode and leave debris everywhere.

Only a slow, controlled ditch MIGHT result in an intact aircraft sinking without a trace, except for the fuel and other liquids that float to the surface.

phoenix911, the 777 is conventional, aluminum construction.

The how will be provided when they find the wreck.

My reasoning is not coming from technical knowledge of planes but from a excluding everything that is irrelevant (Stolen Passports). Somebody said terror is only good if you can spread it. A missing plane is not terror. I highly doubt any willfulness was part of the disappearance. It all points towards a catastrophic accident.

All we currently have is a plane missing without a trace? Following the news the experts exclude explosions with a missing debris field (this might prove wrong in case we are currently looking at the wrong area!).

All they say and I jump on the bandwagon: it was more or less intact (maybe it made a slow controlled landing!) and sunk afterwards.

I feel sorry for everyone on board and more sorry for the ones left behind. We had two employees on board of the craft of which ones just joined the company.

Question: What happens to a Boing 777 when the wing breaks off? Overlooked damage at the root of the wing might be contributing factor.

I tend to agree... sheared-off wing would explain all. No warning, no time to react.

And no evidence or debris?

A sheared off wing does not instantly render an aircraft inoperable. Does not make communication impossible.

We'll see, I suppose.

The aircraft are piloted by humans at 30000ft. Imagine a pilot sees a wing come adrift....huge shock and stunned silence maybe ? Possibly !#@!$#!, but a Mayday is not guaranteed.

A sheared wing would likely put you are in a high G spin.

didn't a French Airline go down in 2006 ????? over the ocean, it was over a year before they found it.......... I don't know about the debris.

The detail is on Wiki.

2009, 2 years to raise the black boxes....Pilot error with help from frozen Pitot tubes.....

that right frozen Pitot tubes...... thanks.

sheared-off wing would explain all. No warning, no time to react.

if that was the case......... time didn't matter....... they would not have been able to do anything, anyways with the forces involved.

That's a relief, then its the later models, I thought they started with carbon fiver on the 777

LOL!!

Fiber!!!

HEY,...... mayve, by 'v' key is vroken

http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/24382/Missing-Reward-210-Foot-328-Ton-Airliner

It is IATS's fault. They should advise each airline to incorporate a distinct signal from blackbox so that for at least a week sea/land/air mounted radars can detect its location.

It is IATS's fault. They should advise each airline to incorporate a distinct signal from blackbox so that for at least a week sea/land/air mounted radars can detect its location.

It does and it can, but it has only a 30 mile radius under water I believe.

Also, the "authorities" are not that "clever" out there I feel......maybe they don't even have the equipment either.....

Remind me not to take an aircraft in the far east anymore......

30 mile radius under water...

Where is that docuemented? Is the info available online? I have been curious to find out what the exact performance specs are.

I believe it is mentioned in the Wiki article on the Air France accident.

Sound travels well underwater, a dropped spanner (wrench) can be heard by a sub up to 100 miles away even in the 60's, if not further! (Its a secret!!)

30 mile radius is really nothing.....

I know it's not a secret... and it was in the 50's.

I was looking for actual documentation which stated the performance characteristics of the acoustic pinger.

I did find this:-

Britain launches massive submarine that can hear a ship from across the Atlantic

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-460753/Britain-launches-massive-submarine-hear-ship-Atlantic.html#ixzz2wF4e7KsN
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

I think that article is slightly jaded. Largest and deadliest hunter-killer ever built? Pssht...hardly.

The Russian Typhoon class displaces over 24,000 tons compare to the Astute's 7,400. A comparable Russian SSGN would be the Oscar at over 19,000 tons..

An American SSGN displaces over 16,000 tons and is a might sight quieter than that Astute. A 12-week patrol for an American boat would barely be an underway.

Of course...the Brits, Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, etc. do not use submarines for long-range passive searches. The Astute would have to "lie in place" in order for her passive sonar to work so well. As the old saying goes, a submarine that isn't moving isn't a submarine...it's a target.

Quiet as a baby dolphin, eh? I can say...in honor of St. Patrick's Day...that's a bunch of blarney.

Obviously you are not fully up to date on the Russian Navy amongst other things.

The Russian Navy has to build its ships and boats super large for two reasons, one to impress some simple people, the other is because the level of trained personnel on-board does not always allow substantial repair at sea, so there is a great deal of extra hardware built in to allow "replacement". Whole electrical switchboards, doubled up pumps and motors and and and. It was always so....

On-board USN & RN boats, there is a far more highly trained crew that can repair to almost Dockyard level for many things.....been there and done just that!!!

As to who "hears" best, you make yourself look silly as:-

WHO WOULD HAVE TOLD YOU THIS?

WHO WOULD REALLY KNOW ENOUGH TO TELL YOU SO YOU CAN "BLAB" ON CR4?

At best you are a dangerous security risk if true......I do not believe its true as a security checkup would have "outed" you BEFORE you got to know anything important!!!

The answer to who REALLY knows is a very small band of spooks, ones that would not give you the time of day (me neither!!).....unnamed top spy brass....

I doubt if there are even 5 people in the world today that even THINK they know the best from all 3 Navies....its still mostly guesswork.

A war will be the only place to find out for certain!!

The RN does not tell anywhere near the whole true truth, neither does the USN either.....and they don't tell you or me either......The Russians are the same....

You have simply been taken in by someone, or you are very inventive........!!! Not my fault, so don't try blaming me!!!!

Technology changes almost daily, usually the newest ship/boat will have the latest technology. But the "lead-in" time for a ship or a boat build, usually means that some of the technology is years old.......especially the really big stuff!!!

Of course, relatively minor improvements will be integrated before launch, but major ones require docking and often months of work.

Its not like cars on a production line......

Many do not understand this........

Dude, you need to take a chill pill. The info I presented was from wikipedia. It's essentially the same info that Jane's has and you can buy a subscription to that site. It's not that difficult to find correct data.

Hell...I didn't even go into the Chinese boats!

I just had my security clearance renewed two years ago. The NSA checks me out just fine, thank you for your concern.

You really over-value what information is presented. The key to all of the information that is available (especially on the internet) is how it is put together, and how (if at all) it is put to use.

I work with two Crown Navies and the US Navy. We share lots of information, as do the other two Crown Navies. That's why it's called five eyes...again...from Wikipedia.

Facts is facts, and that article making a statement about a little British boat being soooo big is patently incorrect.

Yikes, you make a lot of assumptions about the net content of someone's mind when they post two or three facts.

You get spun up too easy.

Actually you appear to be another (far ruder) Big Mouth Snowden if what you say is true.....

I do not approve of what or how he (Snowden) acts......its a petty stab in the back for the USA.....surely you would not like to be thought of as similar to him????

Although Astute has had her share of design problems, nowhere can I find anything like what you appear to "know". So please be so kind as to point to any online sources that you have quoted. Thanks in advance.

It would be great to get the NSA involved in this blog as well, to confirm or deny your posts, therefore should I mention you in an email to the NSA? No problem for me.....I am pretty sure that they would not want anyone passing/bandying top secret infos on CR4......what do you think?

By the way, I was unable to find anything in what you say about HMS Astute on Wiki, could you post the link you are talking about? Thanks in advance.

My knowledge on UK subs is old, very old, probably over 50 years old, but its still accurate for then, but not secret anymore and do not forget that we don't tell foreigners just how good we are.....its still better information than yours as anyone here can see.......

My official Secrets qualifications expired MANY years ago!!!.

Snowden is an ex-US citizen, not UK!!! But we could get a UK version as well, sadly...

But do please answer my all my questions fully, thanks in advance.

Also, please be so kind in the future, to stay friendly and factual here, or not only will I contact the NSA, but I will also complain to CR4 Admin.

Its a breach of good manners on your part......enough is enough!!

Straight up...no need to contact the NSA. The government monitors everything I do on the computer I usually use when I post to CR4. For all I know you are a foreign spy...why would I help you?

Comparing me to Snowden is low. He's a commie-pinko-traitor-asshole.

I may only come off as rude to you because I may not agree with what you say, and I have backed up my assertions with facts. If I am wrong about something I stay on topic, don't mislead through redirection, and generally don't make personal attacks. I will acknowlege shortcomings based on lack of information and knowledge, but on this subject I am pretty strong.

BTW...

Here is the statement I (and every other DoD asset user) signed (sized for space constraints):

<sub><sup>USER AGREEMENT - STANDARD MANDATORY NOTICE AND CONSENT PROVISION
By signing this document, you acknowledge and consent that when you access Department of Defense (DoD) information systems:
- You are accessing a U.S. Government (USG) information system (IS) (which includes any device attached to this information system) that is provided for U.S. Government-authorized use only.
- You consent to the following conditions:

The U.S. Government routinely intercepts and monitors communications on this information system for purposes including, but not limited to, penetration testing, communications security (COMSEC) monitoring, network operations and defense, personnel misconduct (PM), law enforcement (LE) and counterintelligence (CI) investigations.

At any time, the U.S. Government may inspect and seize data stored on this information system.

Communications using, or data stored on, this information system are not private, are subject to routine monitoring, interception, and search, and may be disclosed or used for any U.S. Government-authorized purpose.

This information system includes security measures (e.g., authentication and access controls) to protect U.S. Government interests--not for your personal benefit or privacy.

Notwithstanding the above, using an information system does not constitute consent to personnel misconduct, law enforcement, or counterintelligence investigative searching or monitoring of the content of privileged communications or data (including work product) that are related to personal representation or services by attorneys, psychotherapists, or clergy, and their assistants. Under these
circumstances, such communications and work product are private and confidential, as further explained below:
-
Nothing in this User Agreement shall be interpreted to limit the user's consent to, or in any other way restrict or affect, any U.S. Government actions for purposes of network administration, operation, protection, or defense, or for communications security. This includes all communications and data on an information system, regardless of any applicable privilege or
confidentiality.
-
The user consents to interception/capture and seizure of ALL communications and data for any authorized purpose (including personnel misconduct, law enforcement, or counterintelligence investigation). However, consent to interception/capture or seizure of communications and data is not consent to the use of privileged communications or data for personnel misconduct, law enforcement, or counterintelligence investigation against any party and does not negate any applicable privilege or confidentiality that otherwise applies.
-
Whether any particular communication or data qualifies for the protection of a privilege, or is covered by a duty of confidentiality, is determined in accordance with established legal standards and DoD policy. Users are strongly encouraged to seek personal legal counsel on such matters prior to using an information system if the user intends to rely on the
protections of a privilege or confidentiality.
-
Users should take reasonable steps to identify such communications or data that the user asserts are protected by any such privilege or confidentiality. However, the user's identification or assertion of a privilege or confidentiality is not sufficient to
create such protection where none exists under established legal standards and DoD policy.
-
A user's failure to take reasonable steps to identify such communications or data as privileged or confidential does not waive the privilege or confidentiality if such protections otherwise exist under established legal standards and DoD policy. However, in such cases the U.S. Government is authorized to take reasonable actions to identify such communication or data as being subject to a privilege or confidentiality, and such actions do not negate any applicable privilege or confidentiality.
-
These conditions preserve the confidentiality of the communication or data, and the legal protections regarding the use and disclosure of privileged information, and thus such communications and data are private and confidential. Further, the U.S. Government shall take all reasonable measures to protect the content of captured/seized privileged communications and data to ensure they are appropriately protected.

In cases when the user has consented to content searching or monitoring of communications or data for personnel misconduct, law enforcement, or counterintelligence investigative searching, (i.e., for all communications and data other than privileged communications or data that are related to personal representation or services by attorneys, psychotherapists, or clergy, and their assistants), the U.S. Government may, solely at its discretion and in accordance with DoD policy, elect to apply a privilege or other restriction on the U.S. Government's otherwise-authorized use or disclosure of such information.

All of the above conditions apply regardless of whether the access or use of an information system includes the display of a Notice and Consent Banner ("banner"). When a banner is used, the banner functions to remind the user of the conditions that are set forth in this User Agreement, regardless of whether the banner describes these conditions in full detail or provides a summary of such
conditions, and regardless of whether the banner expressly references this User Agreement.</sup></sub>

CR4 holds no responsibility for maintaining the safety of the US Government's IA infrastructure, but knock yourself out.

If you really feel the need, I provide this link: FBI--Report Threats and Crime.

Furthermore, the information I provided in earlier posts is referenced from the internet.

I haven't noticed any trigraphs on anything I have ever found on the internet, unless it was declassified and redacted.

You really should learn how to use the internet better. It's to your advantage.

Here, allow me to search the internet for you (I realize that it's oh so hard...):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon_submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute_submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Ohio_(SSGN-726)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar-class_submarine

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

Post 234 had links.

Read.

Will you two stop arguing about who doesn't know the most and help find the airplane!!!

Submarines, except for the ones with vertical launch tubes are designed to hunt for other subs. Surface ships are pretty easy to find, you just follow their miles long wake.

Maybe Clive Cussler could help out, he's found everything else ever lost on the bottom of the oceans!

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

ADMIN: Deleted Post

Abuse/Attack: This post was deleted because it was an attack on another user. Please review the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

I just donged the thread to admin. This is not worth people falling out over. I've not lost my lunch over it, but this has gone from human disaster to an embarrassing scrap. I thought CR4 was better than that.

Good

They needed a third opinion.

CR4 ADMIN: Deleted Post

Vulgar/Rude/Improper Behavior: This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

Stepping in here on declassified CR4 moderator business, and this goes for all users:

Personal arguments will not be tolerated in discussion threads. If you have that much off-topic content to exchange, send a PM.

If you continue to post in this thread, it may only be in regards to missing aircraft/search operations for Flight 370, with very mild exception. Belligerence will result in administrative action.

YES. 100% Agreement!

If US can live telecast space missions(interior of space craft where astrounauts move, talk,do experiments,communicate with earth station)why can't each passenger aircraft be equipped with some video cameras(in passenger areas,entrance to pilot's cock pit,inside cockpit etc) transmitting live telecast to airline/port control room so that they can monitor/detect any wrong doers & sound an alarm and armed security personnel in plain clothes inside air craft culprits could be easily detected. Passengers always risk their lives,lose valuable time(even 12hrs) due to missed flights,served meals not suitable for each person etc,IATA shouls see that when a seat is booked in a flight,meals suitable to passenger's taste/health is served instead throwing more than 50% of food served.

You are being ridiculous, unreasonable and argumentative.

Par for the course.

With a million + people in the air at any one time on any given day, it just isn't as simple as you may think.

Each air line can record similar to black box,not millions of passengers but only those use their aircrafts.It is pessimism/racism to ridicule good ideas.

"IATA shouls see that when a seat is booked in a flight,meals suitable to passenger's taste/health is served "

Show us a good idea. So far, you have none!

Everybody wants free wifi everywhere they go, too.

This may be possible some day, but it would be extremely expensive and cumbersome to manage. Since the FAA would regulate it in the US, all of the costs would be passed on to the taxpayers.

Human error, followed by a cover-up: Viet Nam military aircraft shoots the plane down by accident. Local military deploy their ships and planes to "search" the actual crash site in order to keep others looking else where. The Viet Nam authorities are racking their brains trying to figure out how to explain shooting down a plane full of Chinese citizens. Maybe trying to recover any evidence of a missile strike before "discovering" the wreckage?

Or, time rift. Everyone is fine. They are all going to walk out of a corn field 300 years from now, confused and a little hungry.

-A-

Viet Nam military aircraft shoots the plane down by accident.

Possible, but Vietnam has a lot riding on foreign investors in their country......... yes that would have been a Big oops

Velly velly bad, and so solly!

If it went down in the water, why hasn't the ELT (ultrasonic beacon) started pinging to alert the searchers? Aren't there TWO of those beacons required in each aircraft? There is something just completely out of whack with this story.

Only the boats have sonar to detect such signals/ pinging. Aircraft have only radio frequencies, and radar.

Nobody even knows where to begin looking.

If only the Black Box had it's life jacket on...

For those of you who wonder how it's possible to lose an aircraft in this day and age it's not all that difficult.

My company lost a Beechcraft King Air twin turboprop over Guyana a couple of years ago. It was equipped with all the latest gps and emergency locator equipment. Unfortunately it went down on a mineral searching mission over triple tiered jungle. For anybody who has been in that environment (I have been in Vietnam) they will know that electronic equipment signals have an extraordinarily difficult time penetrating through the tiers.

We could, at times, locate elt signals coming out of the jungle at various holes in the jungle canopy. We would then drop rescuers into those holes to search but they were all false positive indications. Because of the nature of our business we were also able to employ some advanced sensor equipment to aid in the search but had to abandon the effort after about 6 months. To this day the plane, the pilots, and mission operator remain missing.

Now that may not be the case with this 777 as all indications so far seem to indicate that it disappeared over open ocean. My point with this message is just to indicate that one cannot put complete faith in our electronic systems to resolve these issues.

Until more information is garnered we may just as well speculate that the aircraft was abducted by aliens or that it flew through a dimensional rift.

Hooker

Is there clear evidence that the plane took off, or is it a cock-up of flight numbers and we are looking for a plane that did not exist in the first place ?

I'd say that given the number of family members waiting anxiously for news, it's a real flight.

It's the highly unusual circumstances that are perplexing.

These AirBus aircraft usually have an automatic "call home" function when something goes wrong, even something quite small, just like ET.

But the Air France aircraft had it and it, the messages were received, but it still took 2 years to find & raise the black boxes.....and MOST of the passengers and crew. Over 70 are still unaccounted for.....

Wiki has a good site for that accident....here:-

Air_France_Atlantic_accident

Air France has an abysmal safety record, due to being too slow to make recommended changes, the Concord accident was exactly the same, Air France saving money at the expense of safety.....

Air France blamed the stall Klaxon for going off and on.........but it was Pilot failure after the Pitots iced up and gave wrong infos to the onboard electronics.....they were highly recommended to have been replaced, months before the accident.....but were not!

Don't fly Air France!!!

This new accident could easily take as long to locate (I hope not!) as that one did........if not longer, for the passengers it does not matter anymore, sadly. Only for their next of kin.....

This is a Boeing aircraft.

Of course it is, "my bad".....but hopefully they have something similar....

I remember, we discussed Air France accident at a length here.

This may not have anything to do with what happen to MH flt. 370, but the FAA, (U.S.) issued an Airworthiness Directive on March 5, 2014 for cracking around the SATCOM antenna mount, located on top of the fuselage, just aft of the main wings. I remember the Aloha Airlines flt. 243 and the catastrophic failure of the skin.

But, you should still see a debris field unless it was over a heavily forested area.

My gut feeling is that MH flt. 370 was commandeered, flown below radar and possibly hit a mountain while crossing over the jungles of Malaysian peninsula.

According to the directive the plane would loose all satellite communication. It also would not be able to be tracked with advanced Radar technology. Common radar would pick it up in a 100 miles radius.

Further the directive points out that the plane could lose structural integrity.

No if the pilot lost communication and decided to fly back they might have made some miles before disintegrating. If the ability to navigate went with the satellite they might have gone off to a point where we have not looked yet.

I think the plot is thickening. Lets see what the Chinese know. They seem to have some satellite images that could be a wreck.

Interesting.

But, they could still communicate by radio.

I believe somebody is hiding vital information,who & why?. On February 13th 1983 another aircraft which left Kualalumpur went missing.

Whenever they release/announce a finding they should disclose the source like which radar picked up the message or signal,why they didn't they inform dependents and IATA in time,what is the reason for hiding information etc. Will anybody trust IATA and Airlines hereafter?.

I've been watching the news too and if these pieces are as large as they estimate them to be, they're to large to be from B-777x.

The original Jet Airliner, the Comet, suffered with explosive decompression due to the design of certain openings and the thinness of the outer skin.

But an aircraft today should never ever suffer again if the development was properly carried out.....

We need to offer our condolences to all the relatives waiting patiently, and in hope.

I think the air authorities clutched at any info. regarding the whereabouts and the military
came to the rescue with what little info. they had, about an unknown aircraft.

What is distressing is that aircraft are likely, and do, come down at sea, and yet there
does not appear to be any of the signalling markers mandated for these aircraft?
Small dingies have marker buoys, some even with transmitters, to signal their position.

While the oceans are deep, a simple coil of nylon cord with an automatically released
(e.g. at say 5 metres underwater) flotation marker buoy, preferably carrying a small
signalling transmitter, would save many weeks of fruitless search, countless man hours
(and the associated risks) and, potentially save many lives simply by the prompt arrival
by a successful search party. (to the marker/signal)

It is anticipated there "will be" another aircraft lost at sea and, a great deal is spent
on "black boxes" etc.. so why not spend a little thought upon the remote recovery?
A manufacturer could get "marker" equipment mandatory for all public passenger aircraft.
Maybe a strong "dye" just to colour the water would be better than nothing? Or,
an orange flotation blanket to support any survivers?

jt.

A man was standing on the top of a hill and another man in a hot air balloon came
low enough to shout to him, he said 'I am lost, can you tell me where I am?'

The man on the ground replied with his exact latitude and longitude, to which
the man in the balloon responded: 'You're an engineer aren't you?'

To which the man on the ground replied 'Yes, but how did you know?'

The man in the balloon responded 'You answered my question exactly and
precisely, but I'm just as lost now as I was before.'

The man on the ground then asked the balloonist 'You are a manager aren't you?'

He answered 'Yes, but how did you know?'

The engineer answered 'You are no more lost now than you were before you
spoke to me, but now, somehow, it is my fault!'

Or they could install something like this? But at the same time, you have to be realistic. Every additional once added to the weight of the aircraft, adds additional costs to operate and maintain. And airlines will fight tooth and nail to avoid spending any money. Too many years around airlines to know how they operate, and that's as cheap as possible.

To my knowledge there is no ballistic recovery devices certified for commercial jet aircraft.

I know, just a dream

HMS Romney aground off the Texel in 1804. In Richard Corbould's print, Romney's blue ensign at the stern is shown inverted, as a sign of distress

The mystery deepens.
According to latest WSj report, tHe plane actually flew for 4 hrs after vanishing from radar. 2/3 of passengers are Chinese.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/lost-mh370-flew-on-for-hours-after-vanishing-from-radar-reports-wsj
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/police-search-home-of-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-crew-as-part-of-investig
http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=242901:the-uighur-connection-who-is-passenger-no-84-on-flight-mh370?&Itemid=2

I am puzzled why there are no reports of passengers trying to make calls on their mobile phones.

Probably no service because of lack of cell towers................ and there is no service when flying... at least for me.