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

MH370: A different point of view

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 224 posts

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#31

Post by chris_wot »

davidw wrote: post #26
DrJokepu wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it definitely won't be bloggers and armchair investigators who figure it out. Unfounded speculation is irresponsible and immature behaviour the very least.

Some people seem to enjoy it as a sort of creative challenge, it seems, which I guess doesn't really hurt anyone (I don't envision the victims' families reading these threads). That's fine as far as it goes, although these threads always seem to branch out into bizarro conspiracy theories about the Mossad trying to smuggle the Reptilians' sacred crystals into Liechtenstein and wondering about why the "all-powerful, a…

I guess that does answer my question. I have no real beef with the speculation, it is somewhat darkly amusing, given that real people died and are totally missing, leaving behind distraught family and friends.

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#32

Post by nl »

cornholio wrote: post #21
johnw wrote: post #10

One 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...

Another massive hole is that the closest airport ,at the point where communication was lost, was Sultan Mahmud in Kuala Terengganu. Long runway, approach directly from sea, can accommodate a 747 according to Wikipedia. There is no justification to go to Langkawi which is on the other side of the Malay Peninsula.

It's quite possible to think of reasons why they decided on that course of action. I'm no expert, but here's some based on previous incidents:

They wanted to burn off fuel.

There was a fault with the rudder

There was a fault with the control system

They pilots were dead, and the autopilot was doing something off.

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#33

Post by mmcnickle »

nl wrote: post #24
Implicated wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or the climb to 45k

Plenty of weird reasons to climb like that[1]. I think people dramatically underestimate how mechanical and/or electronic system failure combines with human misjudgement to make things operate in entirely unpredictable ways. I've never been involved in an air crash investigation, but I have done many system outage investigations. The majority of them[2] involve a failure of a hardware/software system, followed by man…

Completely agree. I'm surprised that, especially on HN, the large number of people who won't apply Occam's Razer to the situation.

I imagine that most air accident investigations begin like this; confused, competing information from numerous sources of varying reliability. Just with the internet and 24h news, everyone is following along with each revelation (see also the Pistorius trial).

Give it some time, let the investigators work and report their findings. I'd be very surprised if it's not a combination of system failure and human error in reacting to the failure.

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#34

Post by mh370 »

cornholio wrote: post #21
johnw wrote: post #10

One 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...

Another massive hole is that the closest airport ,at the point where communication was lost, was Sultan Mahmud in Kuala Terengganu. Long runway, approach directly from sea, can accommodate a 747 according to Wikipedia. There is no justification to go to Langkawi which is on the other side of the Malay Peninsula.

Yeah: http://findmh370.tumblr.com/post/79861358803/closer-airport-...

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#35

Post by jebus989 »

keepontruckin wrote: post #23

I took a flight on a 777 from Dulles to London a couple years ago. A few hours into the flight the captain announced a suspected cabin fire and the smell of smoke in the cockpit. The crew shut off all the circuits they didn't need to fly the plane, the captain took a left turn, and we made an emergency landing at Reykjavik. Just sayin'.

Sure. But a gas leak recently brought down two buildings in Harlem and that's akin to someone posting, "we had a gas leak and I just called the gas company, they switched it off. Just sayin".

Point is: things don't always go to plan, and successfully avoiding disaster once does not necessarily set a precedent.

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#36

Post by jpalomaki »

jebus989 wrote: post #35
keepontruckin wrote: post #23

I took a flight on a 777 from Dulles to London a couple years ago. A few hours into the flight the captain announced a suspected cabin fire and the smell of smoke in the cockpit. The crew shut off all the circuits they didn't need to fly the plane, the captain took a left turn, and we made an emergency landing at Reykjavik. Just sayin'.

Sure. But a gas leak recently brought down two buildings in Harlem and that's akin to someone posting, "we had a gas leak and I just called the gas company, they switched it off. Just sayin". Point is: things don't always go to plan, and successfully avoiding disaster once does not necessarily set a precedent.

I guess the point was that turning off transponders and other things could have been the crew's reaction to suspected fire. Obviously the radio messages do not go along well with this theory. On the other hand I'm at least a little bit confused about what pieces of information about the case have been confirmed and what is just from "anonymous sources".

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#37

Post by [deleted] »

Implicated wrote: post #13
wikiburner wrote: post #8

This 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 re…

or the climb to 45k

[deleted]

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#38

Post by [deleted] »

jpalomaki wrote: post #36
jebus989 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. But a gas leak recently brought down two buildings in Harlem and that's akin to someone posting, "we had a gas leak and I just called the gas company, they switched it off. Just sayin". Point is: things don't always go to plan, and successfully avoiding disaster once does not necessarily set a precedent.

I guess the point was that turning off transponders and other things could have been the crew's reaction to suspected fire. Obviously the radio messages do not go along well with this theory. On the other hand I'm at least a little bit confused about what pieces of information about the case have been confirmed and what is just from "anonymous sources".

[deleted]

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#39

Post by cornholio »

nl wrote: post #32
cornholio wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another massive hole is that the closest airport ,at the point where communication was lost, was Sultan Mahmud in Kuala Terengganu. Long runway, approach directly from sea, can accommodate a 747 according to Wikipedia. There is no justification to go to Langkawi which is on the other side of the Malay Peninsula.

It's quite possible to think of reasons why they decided on that course of action. I'm no expert, but here's some based on previous incidents: They wanted to burn off fuel. There was a fault with the rudder There was a fault with the control system They pilots were dead, and the autopilot was doing something off.

In an emergency, the safest way to burn fuel is to reach the closest airport and then circle it. Not head to a more distant airport which you might not reach because of the very emergency.

All hypotheses will invalidate the major premise: that the pilots chose that particular heading not randomly, but in a calculated attempt to reach the nearest airport because of an emergency. Basically, no matter where the plane would have turned, if you draw a long enough line you will find an airport. But that does not explain anything.

Re: MH370: A different point of view

#40

Post by username42 »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #29
hauget wrote: post #2

The 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.

What do you mean? There's plenty of motive for hijacking, just as always. Especially a flight filled with Chinese civilians headed to China. There has been a rash of terrorist attacks within China recently from Xinjiang separatists, including several different mass stabbing attacks just this year which have claimed dozens of lives. One might hypothesize that terrorists managed to take control of the airplane and dive…

I had the same idea. This remains the most plausible theory (IMHO) I have heard since the beginning.
Post reply on HN