Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

my.news.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 118 posts

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#81

Post by yongjik »

geuis wrote: post #27

Honest question. Would it have been possible for the plane to make it to North Korea?

China is pretty much the only (reluctant) sponsor of the abomination that is NK. They wouldn't kidnap a plane with 100+ Chinese citizens. Frankly, I think they'd rather try to nuke Seoul first. (Just my two cents.)

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#82

Post by sardonicbryan »

[deleted] wrote: post #73
zaroth wrote: post #55

Would have to be a pretty hardened pilot to take a 777 down to FL 50 and keep her there anywhere except approach. "Experts said flying a Boeing 777 in such a way would be dangerous, stressing the airframe and possibly causing those on board to be air sick and suffer from spatial disorientation." This truly meets the definition of incredible. How could you be that good, but then end up crashing the plane? If you are t…

[deleted]

The reason pilot suicide is a theory is because of Egypt Air 990.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#83

Post by sgift »

001sky wrote: post #74
jonah wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Russian media.

And the vote in a public referendum?

Ignoring for a moment the aspect of "going to vote against invaders under the watch of invaders": 93% - Eastern bloc polls always had this good results, probably because their leaders were so beloved that people kicked them out the moment they got the chance.

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#85

Post by lutusp »

cookingrobot wrote: post #84

Why would it be hard to fly at an altitude of 1.5km over the ocean?

It's not a question of hard, it's just not an efficient way to fly such a big jet and it uses up fuel at a high rate. But various sources suggest that the plane really did fly this low, in order to evade radar, and the confusion surrounding this particular article is resolved elsewhere to mean "descended to 1500m" at least for a while.

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#86

Post by nashequilibrium »

zaroth wrote: post #55

Would have to be a pretty hardened pilot to take a 777 down to FL 50 and keep her there anywhere except approach. "Experts said flying a Boeing 777 in such a way would be dangerous, stressing the airframe and possibly causing those on board to be air sick and suffer from spatial disorientation." This truly meets the definition of incredible. How could you be that good, but then end up crashing the plane? If you are t…

After all this, what do you do with about 240 people including 2 infants?

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#87

Post by devindotcom »

agwa wrote: post #54
pizza wrote: post #12

> Today, Reuters reports that the last words from the cockpit of missing MH370 – "all right, good night" – were uttered after someone on board had already begun disabling one of the plane's automatic tracking systems.

> Both the timing and informal nature of the phrase, spoken to air traffic controllers as the plane was leaving Malaysian-run airspace could further heighten suspicions of hijacking or sabotage, it said. I've listened to a fair amount of air traffic control[1] and a phrase like that, especially when signing off of a frequency, is not at all unusual so I don't know why they're focusing on its informality. [1] thanks t…

I think they mean that because this casual phrase came after the deactivation of the ACARS system, it implies the guy who said "good night" knew it was disabled and likely had done it himself and concealed the fact.

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#89

Post by plorg »

agwa wrote: post #54
pizza wrote: post #12

> Today, Reuters reports that the last words from the cockpit of missing MH370 – "all right, good night" – were uttered after someone on board had already begun disabling one of the plane's automatic tracking systems.

> Both the timing and informal nature of the phrase, spoken to air traffic controllers as the plane was leaving Malaysian-run airspace could further heighten suspicions of hijacking or sabotage, it said. I've listened to a fair amount of air traffic control[1] and a phrase like that, especially when signing off of a frequency, is not at all unusual so I don't know why they're focusing on its informality. [1] thanks t…

I was under the impression that this was supposed to imply that, because the transponders were off, the pilot would likely be aware of _something_ being awry (if even just that the transponders were acting up). Thus, an informal, nonchalant response might suggest that the transponders were intentionally disabled, and that would feed a suspicion of foul-play.

Re: MH370 flew as low as 1,500m to avoid detection, says paper

#90

Post by confluence »

l33tbro wrote: post #33
confluence wrote: post #15

I'd still bet on ocean crash. Flying low or not, heading across the Bay of Bengal towards land, and you're going to get pinged with military radar.

Getting rather bored with folks around me who seem to be treating this like it's another HBO boxset. I agree with you - and I think a lot of people just really seem to enjoy the experience of speculating and entertaining these fantastical, mysterious theories. The reality is that it probably landed in the drink some time ago.

It would make for a great HBO boxset though :)

As for the fantastical, mysterious theories, there are plenty of real conspiracies hanging around with verifiable support, that we don't need to make up bullshit ones.

As for whether or not this one is a conspiracy, we must refrain from pontificating until we get more evidence. The default belief must be disbelief.

Post reply on HN