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

Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

keithledgerwood.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 397 posts

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#91

Post by emeidi »

robmcm wrote: post #41
houseofshards wrote: post #19

An aviation noob here. I have a question: If the flight starts another journey from wherever it is, will it be possible to track it via radar ?

Apparently the rolls royce engines have a remote debugging ability that was not enabled on this flight, however it was still pinging home which is how they first noticed the course change. They had disabled all the other trackers, so if they were watching the news the chances are they have disabled these too. [EDIT] ACARS - http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/16/satcom-acars-explained/

If the plane is parked in working condition somewhere on this planet, thanks to the media coverage the hijackers now know that the jet engines will phone home the moment they start them.

But then again, this is hypothetical nonsense. The plane most probably crashed into the ocean.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#92

Post by viraptor »

redbad wrote: post #2

This is almost exactly how a plot device in Neal Stephenson's REAMDE plays out. In almost exactly the same part of the world. Bizarre.

I had the same reaction. Actually, first it's disk encrypting malware which requests payment in bitcoin, now this, what next is going to come true?

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#93

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

zmb_ wrote: post #64
pavlov wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on what groups might be able to orchestrate such a complicated hijacking? A rogue state like North Korea would have the capability, but they don't really have the motive since they can acquire passenger airplanes by other means. (North Korea's national airline has 27 planes -- if they wanted to make a nuclear kamikaze plane, they'd just use one of those.)

Maybe they didn't want the plane, but someone on the plane. For example, those 20 Freescale Semiconductor employees. North Korea has a history of abducting foreigners, including a South Korean movie director kidnapped by Kim Jong-il to produce films for him.

There's an easier way of getting people. If you want 20 people taking an additional 200 people and an airliner with them seems overly complex compared to, say, hitting them on the back of the head as they're walking home and bundling them in a van.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#94

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #77

I am not enthusiastic about jumping into speculation land, but I would be interested in knowing if the possibility of this being a accident followed by auto pilot is possible or totally disproven My default assumption was they took off, an accident occurred that damaged cockpit and forced a turnaround, the damage was so great that the crew were unable to survive and turned on autopilot to stop an immediate crash, whi…

Planes have flown for hours without any human intervention. That part of it is entirely feasible.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#95

Post by justincormack »

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #82
Shivetya wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

time to figure out who was on that flight, perhaps it was someone so important that taking a plane full of passengers was worth the cost.

A team of freescale chip engineers for one. Also, the answer might well be "what" instead of who. Many people have pointed out that the cargo manifest hasn't been published, and that the airline declared 50 less seats as available for boarding than the plane had. This means it had several tons of cargo on board.

Gold? needs to be something worth stealing a plane for.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#96

Post by rolux »

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #68
ckozlowski wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that the plane was taken up to 45,000, far above it's recommended limit, bothers me in this regard. What would the effects be on the passengers? Would this have been orchestrated in order to somehow incapacitate them? I have no idea if the cockpit is pressurized separately from the rest of the plane, or if there's any way to tamper with the deployment of the plane's oxygen masks. It's all speculation on my p…

The cockpit isn't airtight - it would be at the same pressure as the rest of the cabin. The recommended limit around 43,100 ft. 45,000 ft isn't that far above it so it's possible that there may be no impact on passengers at that level (if you're saying 43,100ft is safe, you're going to have a margin for error, it's not going to depressurize at 43,101 ft). Certainly if it was part of your plan to incapacitate the pass…

There are huge safety margins in aviation.

Ascending to 45,000 ft or above is an aerodynamics issue, not a pressurization issue. Pressurization ("cabin altitude") will adjust automatically.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#97

Post by mittermayr »

gadders wrote: post #89

Just a quick question, but I'd have thought the number of airports where a plane the size of MH370 could land would be quite small. Is it not possible to work out the number of airports within it's range, and examine those?

here you go: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/03/15/mh370_the_...

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#98

Post by pedalpete »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #77

I am not enthusiastic about jumping into speculation land, but I would be interested in knowing if the possibility of this being a accident followed by auto pilot is possible or totally disproven My default assumption was they took off, an accident occurred that damaged cockpit and forced a turnaround, the damage was so great that the crew were unable to survive and turned on autopilot to stop an immediate crash, whi…

I'm not familiar with the inner workings of planes, but from what I've gathered, the timing of disabling the two tracking systems, which are on either end of the plane, is just about the same time it takes to get from one end of the plane to the other, and disable the 2nd tracking system (blackbox).

Therefore, it would be a great coincidence that both of these tracking systems would be disabled at the same time. It seems therefore that the most logical explanation is foul play.

I thought/hoped the same as you, that some sort of failure resulted in the tracking systems failing as well, and then the plane crashed, but it sadly doesn't seem as likely given the timing of events.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#99

Post by 001sky »

final_approach wrote: post #53
houseofshards wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> A ransom demand would have been made by now. That is exactly what I am scared of. That the intent was never to demand a ransom. Obviously they were after the plane - to use it as a weapon. Or use it as a carrier of some weapon.

In that case, it'd be much less suspicious to purchase a small private jet. No reason to hijack a big airplane everyone would be looking for.

What you get with this plane is huge fuel and cargo capacity not to mention unsupported range.

Re: Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)?

#100

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

libria wrote: post #67
k-mcgrady wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Not all terrorists are religious 2. Not all terrorists are after Americans 3. Religious terrorists can find a way to justify anything using their book of choice.

Agree w/ 3. Regarding 1 & 2, I may be somewhat provincial, but is there a non-religious group who has it in for the Chinese? edit: ... especially one that is capable of this operation and not interested in publicizing their involvement in doing so.

The Tibetans.

This is a plot by a group of violent fundamentalist Buddhist terrorists.

Post reply on HN