Live data from Hacker News

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

keithledgerwood.tumblr.com

131–140 of 397 posts

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

#131
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one in their right mind would attempt to transport 25 tons of gold on a commercial passenger flight.

How do you transport 25 tons of gold across land and sea? My guess is air freight is the safest method, does it matter if it goes on a DHL 777 or a Commercial 777? Either way, the plane could be hijacked. But I suspect you'd have somebody with an insurance claim for $1 billion in gold, and an insurance company going bankrupt as a result.

Yes, but Malaysia PM said there's only mangosteens in the cargo.

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

#132
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.

Which I've just finally gotten to reading in the past week or so, not realizing the parallels until I ran across them in the story. Pretty bizarre.

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

#133
post #52

A theory is that the cargo area of the plane contained valuable goods: gold, silver, diamonds, etc and that's what the hijackers were after. From this: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-15/missing-malaysian-f... the 777 can have up to 25 tons worth of cargo payload. 25 tons of gold is worth ~ $1B, that's quite a bit more than the value of the plane itself.

agree, something very valuable was on that flight, whether it was a person/people or the cargo.

the 50 blocked-out seats indicate a heavy and/or oddly distributed cargo.

let's get real here - this is definitely not the work of hijackers, this is some intelligence service stealing a plane with something _very_ valuable on it. there are far too many what-ifs for even a large criminal or terrorist organization.

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

#134
post #112
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what the twenty Freescale employees have to do with anything and I keep seeing this fact mentioned in every discussion about MH370. How could they be important/valuable/dangerous enough to justify the hijacking or destruction of a commercial airliner containing hundreds of passengers? That sounds completely insane to me.

It's a bit Bond/cyberpunk-esque, but one could imagine a scenario where an evil villain could short a company's stock and then kill off 20 extremely valuable employees of said company. Not saying that's what happened here, but 20 of the right employees of a company could be very significant.

It's a bit Bond/cyberpunk-esque, but one could imagine a scenario where an evil villain could short a company's stock and then kill off 20 extremely valuable employees of said company

When was the last time you heard of 20 employees of a company being murdered?

To do so by killing 220+ other people makes such a theory even more absurd.

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

#135
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything is possible, but my guess is that if they were hijacked, they had a plan that went wrong. It's far more likely, and it's happened before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

What i don't get: The aforementioned link to the Ethiopian water landing says: "The incident is the only true water landing of a widebody airliner with survivors." But: Wikipedia on water landing (ditching) shows a high survival rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ditching#Passenger_airplane_wat... I'm confused.

Most of those are not "widebody airliner". The smaller the plane, the better the chances.

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

#136
post #10

All these theories... It's obviously at the bottom of the ocean. If not, it's here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y

> It's obviously at the bottom of the ocean.

That's the default expectation in this kind of situation, but in this case it's actually slightly hard to see how it could have happened. The evidence suggests that when it first "disappeared", and likely for hours afterwards, the plane was under controlled flight by someone with at least some idea of what they were doing. Whoever was flying the plane could easily deliberately crash it at any time while flying over the ocean, of course, but if their intention was just to crash the plane somewhere non-specific, why not just do it right away or soon afterwards? So they very probably had other intentions.

And an airplane in a controlled cruise over the ocean is unlikely to just happen to crash into it by accident. It will obviously run out of fuel at some point, but the people flying the plane almost certainly planned to do something interesting with it before that happened: the likely candidates are a) land it or b) crash it into something notable. They probably had the ability to read the fuel gauge and/or an a priori idea of what the available range was, too. Now there are all sorts of ways their plan could have gone wrong, or could have succeeded by crashing the plane, but they nearly all involve the plane landing and/or crashing on land, or relatively near a coastline on the approach to land instead of the deep ocean. AFAICS it's easier to list ways in which the plane could be lost in the deep ocean:

1) A Flight 93-style battle for the cockpit erupts while 370 is over the ocean

2) The person flying the plane is a terrorist/hijacker/pirate who lacks real airliner flying expertise but has been equipped with a cheat sheet telling him in detail exactly what to do. Everything goes fairly well for a long time until something unexpected happens and/or he messes up one of his scheduled actions. At this point he likely panics and maybe does something rash

3) The people in control attempt a controlled ditch somewhere in the ocean, probably in order to rendezvous with one or more speedboats and transfer themselves and some or all passengers. This could very easily go wrong, but succeed or fail the plane will probably end up sinking either way

4) The people in control attempt to strike out across the ocean for some distant target which they guess is near the limit of their range. But they miscalculate, and by the time they realise it they're trapped over the ocean with no path back near land in time

Scenarios 3 and 4 are fairly unlikely if you believe the radar interpretations suggesting that the plane went west across Malaysia and then north, though.

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

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Mangosteens

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

#138
post #88
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only one vague point of interest among many, but there were twenty Freescale employees on board flight 370. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/09/malaysia-airlines-...

I don't understand what the twenty Freescale employees have to do with anything and I keep seeing this fact mentioned in every discussion about MH370. How could they be important/valuable/dangerous enough to justify the hijacking or destruction of a commercial airliner containing hundreds of passengers? That sounds completely insane to me.

It would be much much easier to get to any of the passengers while they were still on the ground. Hijacking the aircraft and stealthily landing it somewhere is such a complex plan that it's just too ridiculous.

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

#139
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sadly, I feel like whatever happened, the amount of sophistication involved increasingly points toward the involvement of one or more state actors. If that's the case, I'm starting to doubt that we'll ever find out what happened to this plane... Indeed. And not just the "what", but the "why" as well.

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.

It would be much easier to get a person on the ground instead of hijacking a large aircraft and then magically landing it somewhere without being noticed.

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

#140
post #110

Anybody else noticed that "Keith Ledgerwood" has exactly one post on his Tumbler blog? Conspiracy theorist looking for five seconds of Internet fame?

Found his Twitter here: https://twitter.com/keithledgerwood

he just need some space to write and tumblr was his choice

Post reply on HN