This seems like a simpler explanation.
MH370: A different point of view
plus.google.com
MH370: A different point of view
1–10 of 224 posts
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#2The big thing that's been bothering me about the hijacking hypothesis is that there's no clear logical motive behind it. This indeed makes more sense than anything else I've read so far.
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#3The big thing that's been bothering me about the hijacking hypothesis is that there's no clear logical motive behind it. This indeed makes more sense than anything else I've read so far.
Sadly logic isn't required in the media. "Cabin fire" isn't nearly as exciting as "Eight days after Flight MH370 vanished, Malaysian authorities are seeking diplomatic permission to investigate a theory that the Boeing 777 may have been flown under the radar to Taliban-controlled bases on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan"
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#4MH370 might have entered into a blackhole and come back as a dove.
What's with all this speculation?!?
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#5this is actually a not that bad theory. The question is: have they already scanned that area?
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#6this is actually a not that bad theory. The question is: have they already scanned that area?
According to the author, the plane may have continued on auto-pilot after the crew had been killed by smoke inhalation. It's a large area to search.
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#7The big thing that's been bothering me about the hijacking hypothesis is that there's no clear logical motive behind it. This indeed makes more sense than anything else I've read so far.
I agree. And the fact that this article's author is also a pilot ("We old pilots were always drilled...") makes his thesis even more trustable.
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#8This doesn't explain the zigzagging trajectory of the plane after its disappearance:
Indeed, soon after MH370 disappeared, reports emerged that recordings of Malaysian military radar returns showed an unidentified track that could correspond to the flight turning left onto a westward course and descending. At the time it was difficult to assess the validity of that claim. It’s been bolstered, however, by a Reuters report earlier Friday stating that Malaysian military radar showed the flight following a course westward over the Malay peninsula and then heading out over the Indian Ocean, passing specific navigational waypoints as it went.
According to the report, this latter portion of the flight followed an unusual zigzag trajectory as it worked its way toward the north and west. This is a very inefficient way to get from one place to another, but it had some consequences that may have been useful for whoever was in control of the airplane. For one thing, by navigating between well-traveled waypoints, the plane would have seemed to military radar operators to look just like all the other well-behaved commercial traffic traveling over that stretch of ocean. “That’s going to seem like unsuspicious traffic,” says Maarten Uijt de Haag, a professor of electrical engineering at Ohio University. Had the plane left the well-traveled routes and struck out on its own, it would have been far more conspicuous.
Another consequence of the zigzagging trajectory is that, like a fox crossing back and forth over a stream to eluding a pack of hounds, it obscured where exactly it might be heading.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/03/14/mh370_dis...
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#9this is actually a not that bad theory. The question is: have they already scanned that area?
According to the author, the plane may have continued on auto-pilot after the crew had been killed by smoke inhalation. It's a large area to search.
This could also explain the climb to 45,000 feet if the plane was on auto pilot and the fire was messing with the instruments.
Re: MH370: A different point of view
#10One big hole in this theory is that its been widely reported [1] that a transponder was switched off before the pilots last radio contact. The pilots would have had no reason to pull the breakers before the last communication if they weren't already aware of a fire.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/world/asia/malaysia-airlin...