Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China - Flight MH370

[Exadios]

I have heard about this missing plane for some time and have a question regarding TCAS, if TCAS was left on it could aid the hijackers in ya know not hitting other planes, but if other planes were in its path wouldn't those planes TCAS log that a MH370 is in proximity or would it just log as an unknown plane? just wondering cos if thats a possibility then it could be used to get a good idea of where the plane was heading and possibly where it is. i fly on fsx occasionly not on a regular basis but occasionally i have little knowledge regarding TCAS but if any off you guys have any info on this subject i would be happy to hear.

TCAS uses that same air to air data link (i.e. that same transmitter) as Mode S and ADS-B. Turning off this data link turns off these three systems. Presumably this is what happened.

[Mike]

Can anybody explain... why black box save all the important data within it and after any incident like this we have to wait until we can search and explore it... now since technology is so advance then why black box can not pass all the data in it's ground facility in real time?and if any incident happen authority has to check its data server only....why this technology still they don't adopt?

Transmitting data over distances and in bad covered areas is really a challenge so it's not an option. Apart from this the black box is often in very bad shape after the crash and days or weeks of job could be needed to recover the information from the boxes. That is why instead there is a emergency transmitter onboard that is dedicated to just send an emergency ping in case of a crash, to help find the aircraft. I think this emergency transmitter normally activates on energy above 5G and it looks like it has not been activated so there are 2 options in this case.

1) soft landing below 5G
2) too hard landing so the transmitter was destroyed

BTW I think it's possible for the pilot to switch the black box off, so we will see if there is any data to recover once the black box has been found.

[peterhr]

What are the possibilities that the aircraft made a ordinary landing somewhere, and is now un-remarkably parked on an airfield somewhere (possibly showing a different registration) or under a camouflage net.

[bhavlobhuro]

Clue of Mistery on the Ground of KLIA

Hi guys,

After more than one week of missing MH370 now there is conclusion that MH370 possibly not crashed and its act of somehow piracy or terrorism, it not crashed on land...if it crashed on land somewhere somebody must knew it, plane was flying till 08:11 AM UTC.

Malaysian authority and media reports now concentrating on passengers and crew since Malaysian prime minister told in his press conference that now our focus is on passengers manifest and crew.

What are you thinking on it?

As per my opinion... on basis of logic that as per radar records transponder and other communication equipments were shut down separately…then the way plane took turn and maneuvering its path is work of experienced pilot etc.
Now am on conclusion that agreed with all these outcome of inquiries…do you believe that this is single person’s handiwork?
On passenger manifest more than 25 percent passenger age is 60+, the two passenger of stolen passport are cleared by Interpol, many are women with their life partners, many are artists, as per friend of pilot says he is good person. So who did this?

Possible and logic answer is….

In Boeing 777 as per Malaysia Airline, they accommodate total 282 passengers as per its seat capacity, with Business class 35 and in Economy class 247 passengers (See Attachment)

As per manifest there are 227 passengers on board and 12 crew. Means 55 seats were empty.

Who knows it was really empty?

May be there was some persons inside before plane arrive at its gate for passengers, may be ground staff facilitate these peoples other than passengers. They didn't even pass through routine security or immigration checking or anything,they can easily bring weapons also.

Otherwise to keep quiet 227 passengers + 12 crew by single person (pilot or co pilot as they suspecting) is impossible, and this matter is now not only for few hours, it’s more than a week now. this is well planned with multiple peoples involvement.

So as per my opinion if plane is not crashed then they still can get passengers safely if they will investigate ground staff of Malaysia Airline or KLIA, surely they will find clue from KLIA ground only.

Please share your opinion also…Thanks.

seat.jpg1368434785578.jpg

[dejw]

Is it possible that the airplane has somehow been fueled up with more fuel than expected/planned before take off and therefor may have a greater range of reach then assumed?

[Speed Daemon]

Is it possible that the airplane has somehow been fueled up with more fuel than expected/planned before take off and therefor may have a greater range of reach then assumed?

According to the latest news reports, the Malaysian authorities are claiming that the plane had NO extra fuel. That claim is dubious because carrying extra fuel is mandatory, so the plane has enough fuel in case of unexpected headwinds, a need to divert to a different airport or any situation that requires the aircraft to remain aloft for longer than normal or burn fuel faster than normal.

The flight crew, FBO and airline would all be aware of how much fuel is on board. If one of the pilots ordered more fuel for some sort of suicide flight, then the FBO and airline would notice the unusual expense, and raise an alarm. So it's not likely that it would go unnoticed at this late date. Same thing if a hijacker bribed the FBO to load more fuel than ordered. Too many checks and balances. Too many bean counters watching their purse strings to allow it to go unnoticed.

A plane's range is dependent on the amount of fuel loaded onto it. So while a 777-200ER has nearly 50% more potential range than a regular 777-200, the only way to realize that potential is to take off with full tanks. It's doubtful that the plane had more fuel than necessary to get to Beijing, plus the hour or so of mandatory extra fuel.

Because of the cost of petroleum, planes like the 777 are designed to operate as efficiently as possible by default. There's not much that can be done to extend its range by a significant amount. It's possible that a hijacker-pilot attempted to save fuel by flying higher than the plane's certified service ceiling, which could explain the data suggesting that it was spotted at 45,000 feet. OTOH the lack of primary RADAR returns suggest that the plane may have been flown at low altitudes, which would have increased fuel consumption, and decreased range. Anything is possible at this point.

[pipistro]

Weird, whatever...

“Time to take to the next level of simulation," wrote Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, "Looking for buddies to share this passion.”

Deleted the pic (possible fake)

[RAFF]

According to the latest news reports, the Malaysian authorities are claiming that the plane had NO extra fuel. That claim is dubious because carrying extra fuel is mandatory, so the plane has enough fuel in case of unexpected headwinds, a need to divert to a different airport or any situation that requires the aircraft to remain aloft for longer than normal or burn fuel faster than normal.

The flight crew, FBO and airline would all be aware of how much fuel is on board. If one of the pilots ordered more fuel for some sort of suicide flight, then the FBO and airline would notice the unusual expense, and raise an alarm. So it's not likely that it would go unnoticed at this late date. Same thing if a hijacker bribed the FBO to load more fuel than ordered. Too many checks and balances. Too many bean counters watching their purse strings to allow it to go unnoticed.

A plane's range is dependent on the amount of fuel loaded onto it. So while a 777-200ER has nearly 50% more potential range than a regular 777-200, the only way to realize that potential is to take off with full tanks. It's doubtful that the plane had more fuel than necessary to get to Beijing, plus the hour or so of mandatory extra fuel.

Because of the cost of petroleum, planes like the 777 are designed to operate as efficiently as possible by default. There's not much that can be done to extend its range by a significant amount. It's possible that a hijacker-pilot attempted to save fuel by flying higher than the plane's certified service ceiling, which could explain the data suggesting that it was spotted at 45,000 feet. OTOH the lack of primary RADAR returns suggest that the plane may have been flown at low altitudes, which would have increased fuel consumption, and decreased range. Anything is possible at this point.

If it is possible to seemingly disappear off the face of the earth with something the size of a 777-200 with full compliment of crew and passengers, with no trace, then I wouldn't discount anything. 'Checks and balances' should have meant the plane landed in Beijing last week as planned....but it didn't?

[cjl570]

Of course Im new here and some of you might have noticed this but can you explain this to me.
Registration numbers.....whats the difference between registration number 75008F and 75008D....The plane that took off and went missing was 75008F...shortly after I found 75008D flight some distance away and they were both listed as a Malaysian airline 777....can anyone explain this? Could this be the same plane?

[Speed Daemon]

Please share your opinion also…Thanks.

The pet scenario that I came up with ~24 hours after the plane went missing is that it may have been landed on some disused airstrip built during the Vietnam War. During that war the US bad a massive military and CIA presence in the area, so when a plane goes missing so close to the part of Vietnam that was US occupied from 1958 to 1974 (the CIA's infamous "Air America" began operations in 1950), I believe that there must be quite a few serviceable airstrips all around the area that have been long forgotten by the authorities in the region. While jungle vegetation would have completely obscured abandoned landing strips from aerial view, a group of criminals wishing to rehabilitate one of those fields could return it to operation. If this was a criminal or terrorist plot with conspirators on the ground, something like that would be the best way to get the plane on the ground without having armies hot on their heels.

According to 777 pilots, a lightly loaded plane can be landed on as little as 3000 feet of runway. Let's say that this plane had some valuable cargo, or perhaps a passenger carrying a king's ransom in diamonds. If you wanted to steal the valuables and get away before anyone could call for help, how would you do it? First off, the idea of bailing out of an airliner in flight is pure fiction; it's not an option. And landing at a regularly used airport lessens the possibility of getting away. But if they hijacked the plane and forced the pilot to make a risky landing on a short strip in the middle of nowhere, that means that the thieves could take the loot and disappear into the jungle, and it might be days before the crew or passengers could make contact with civilization.

Landing on a remote airstrip where there are no local inhabitants with phone service means that there are few outside witnesses, and if there are, that it might take days for them to report what they saw. And without cell service, the passengers are also cut off. Landing on a short strip means that the plane can land safely, but cannot take off. So it's possible that everyone is still alive, and waiting to be discovered! While the plane itself has radios, they aren't very effective on the ground, so they could have been calling "Mayday" all along, but nobody picked up their transmission because everyone has been over the ocean.

The one hole in this theory is the INMARSAT radio that was reportedly been transmitting for hours after the plane disappeared. If the plane landed safely, then why couldn't the crew send a message to the airline? My answer to that is that if the supposed hijackers were sophisticated enough to plan such an elaborate caper, it's not unreasonable to think that they damaged all radio gear beyond the possibility of repair. Even personal electronics with radios (cellphones, tablets etc.) could have been confiscated by the thieves.

So this might be the "great plane robbery" of the 21st century.

ADDENDUM:

Now am on conclusion that agreed with all these outcome of inquiries…do you believe that this is single person’s handiwork?
On passenger manifest more than 25 percent passenger age is 60+, the two passenger of stolen passport are cleared by Interpol, many are women with their life partners, many are artists, as per friend of pilot says he is good person. So who did this?

Even an elderly person with a handgun could take control of an aircraft in flight. In fact, the less of a perceived threat a person is, the more likely they are to get access to the cockpit.

Let's say that someone made it to the plane's cockpit, and either killed the pilots where they sat or convinced them to leave their chairs, and put the hijacker in control of the plane. As long as the autopilot is engaged, it takes no feats of strength or excessive knowledge to do things like turn off the transponders or alter the plane's course and/or altitude. All of the knobs, switches and buttons are clearly labeled, and I managed to download a major airline's manual to their 777-200 aircraft that includes a listing of what each and every knob, switch and dial does.

For an untrained pilot to take command of a commercial aircraft in flight, they would need to understand the rudiments of aviation flight and navigation, and have some familiarity with a 777 cockpit. I'm not an airline pilot, but I've often noted that I've learned enough to be able to operate many aircraft systems just from visiting the cockpit as a child, reading books and other materials that are available to practically anyone. Discounting my actual pilot training, I think that I could easily walk onto the flight deck of a 777, turn off the transponders, change course, even fly to a certain destination with ease. I'd probably crash if I tried to land the plane by hand, but up until that point I'd probably do OK.

In the past there have been successful hijackings made by people who falsely claimed to have a bomb, including the famous "DB Cooper" incident. I think it's quite plausible to think that one person could have done this. When it comes to things like disabling ACARS and satcom radios, that single person would have to have specialist knowledge. But it's not out of the realm of possibility.

[Speed Daemon]

If it is possible to seemingly disappear off the face of the earth with something the size of a 777-200 with full compliment of crew and passengers, with no trace, then I wouldn't discount anything.

I think it's important to remember that there's not really something like "NO trace". It's the amount of the trace, not whether or not it exists. Many people are thinking "a 777 is HUGE, how could anyone possibly hide it?!?!?" While it may be huge from the perspective of a person standing next to it, if you compare it to the area of the earth that it could possibly fly to, it's pretty tiny in that comparison.

The first official (and news media) theory that the plane must have had a catastrophic failure and crashed into the ocean has been mostly disproved by 9 days of SAR flights over the last place where verbal radio contact was made. Other theories that rely on the same catastrophic failure and crash, but in a completely different place are just plain ridiculous. I think that people who take communications technology for granted are absolutely clueless as to how easy (and ordinary) it really is to be out of communications in many parts of the world.

'Checks and balances' should have meant the plane landed in Beijing last week as planned....but it didn't?

No. The fact that all of the involved parties are going to allow many tons of costly jet fuel to go unaccounted for is not related to the plane not landing as planned. The fuel matter happens on the ground, where there are lots of people and businesses involved. The progress of the flight in the air is reliant on only two people. Once airborne, there are no comparable "checks and balances".

[Speed Daemon]

Of course Im new here and some of you might have noticed this but can you explain this to me.
Registration numbers.....whats the difference between registration number 75008F and 75008D....The plane that took off and went missing was 75008F...shortly after I found 75008D flight some distance away and they were both listed as a Malaysian airline 777....can anyone explain this? Could this be the same plane?

Could it be the same plane? No, the number is different. "Close" may count in horseshoes and hand grenades, but not with ICAO 24-bit address codes. The 75008D code obviously belongs to another plane.

The missing plane, tail number 9M-MRO, has the 24-bit serial number 75008F. Another Malaysia Airlines 777, tail number 9M-MRM and ICAO S/N 75008D, is still in operation.

Did you think that there's only one 777 ever made, or that Malaysia Airlines only has one aircraft? 'Cause that's not the case.

[jrich52804]

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/03/16/Missing-MH370-Online-map-site-Tomnod-expands-to-Straits-of-Malacca-and-the-Indian-Ocean/

Tomnod's search area covered 24,000 sq km of the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea. Now, 14,000 sq km of the area west of Peninsular Malaysia has been added to the online service

[professorm]

I was watching the playback for the 48 hours following the departure of MH370, and for some reason from 02:00-03:00 on 3-9-14 just shows the period from 01:00-02:00. I've tried MANY times, from multiple computers. This could correspond to approximately the very last hour MH370 could have been flying. Does anybody know anything about this? Can anyone else watch that hour?

[professorm]

Has anyone been following activity at Christmas Island? It's on the southern satellite track that is one of the corridors that MH370 is supposed to have used, and it only gets four flights a week, and has a asylum-seeking detention center. I have seen a GLEX circling above it.