Live data from Hacker News

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

keithledgerwood.tumblr.com

201–210 of 397 posts

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

#201
post #61

There is a realistic possibility that those piloting the plane used this and/or other stealth techniques and landed intact. There are lots of groups around the world that would love to have a working $250M aircraft. Maybe there is a massive airplane chop shop that this went to, or someone wants to load it up with explosives and fly it to some country they disagree with. Unfortunately, whether it landed or not, the od…

Why would you need a 777 when you can probably pick up old Russian cargo planes much easier and for a fraction of the cost and without needing super skilled pilots?

It's one thing to have a big airplane.

It's another thing to have a big invisible airplane.

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

#202
post #180

The folks over at airliners.net have pointed out that the 777's collision avoidance system only works if both planes' transponders are turned on. That doesn't mean this scenario is impossible, but it does raise the level of sophistication required. 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…

"points toward the involvement of one or more state actors" I agree ... and so I think it's become useful to identify the skills and knowledge of each of the jet's passengers. You have to assume that, in this case, the plane was hijacked in order to obtain one of the passengers. Terrorism simply doesn't make sense!

20 freescale semiconductor employees on board.

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

#203
post #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 delibera…

1. Is unlikely as door is very secure now. Passengers can't get in.

4. Seems a possibility.

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

#204
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you say the pilot does not have switches in the cockpit to turn equipment on or off? They have to WALK through the whole plane to turn devices on or off?! Bollocks.

The black box is in the tail of the plane, it doesn't make any sense to wire it through the whole plane so the pilot can switch it off from the cockpit. I have no problem with your questioning my logic and my response, as I'm not expert, but keep your bollocks to yourself.

Why are you referring to the black box at all? ACARS and the Transponder signal the plane's position to the ground, not the black box.

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

#205

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…

There would have been calls/texts/tweets/facebook posts from the passengers if they were aware that something terrible was happening whether accidental or intentional.

Do they have satellite phones? Over the ocean there is no cell reception.

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

#206

Isn't it possible that one passenger may have left his cell phone on? Maybe if you get all of the passengers numbers and check if any of the phones connected to a tower you could locate it?

Cell phone signals can be jammed fairly easily. It's illegal to do-so in the states, but the devices are pretty easily obtained from what I've read. I'd imagine even easier in other countries.

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

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you're wrong. If a state was involved that would mean that boarding a plane is extremely dangerous from now on. This case is really suspicious but I still think this was just an accident.

Yeah, because states were never behind any deliberate downing of a civilian aircraft, either through external hit or from within the aircraft.

Why is this being downvoted? Are people really so naive as to not be aware of this?

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

#208
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would have been calls/texts/tweets/facebook posts from the passengers if they were aware that something terrible was happening whether accidental or intentional.

Do they have satellite phones? Over the ocean there is no cell reception.

If there was indication that something was awry the passengers would have had plenty of time before reaching the open ocean to use various forms of communication.

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

#209
post #174
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Really? I don't see any sign yet that the flight 370 hijacking involved unusual danger, difficulty or expense for the culprits: so far, as best we can see, it looks like stealing candy from a baby. Obviously to get people off it alive you'd need manpower and infrastructure, but either a dusty old Soviet-era airbase in metaphorical or literal Kazakhstan, or a ship to pick people up after a ditching in calm water somew…

Yes, really. You are looking at it after the fact. Paying off a pilot who is skilled enough to fly the aircraft evading all radar and land it unassisted at night or early dawn on some remote airbase would be a major expense. Paying someone to kill off the rest of the 220 passengers would be a big challenge as well. And everybody involved would know that and the additional risk and thus demand much more money. You would have to find such an airbase. And you would have people at the airbase to take care of everything, including hiding the jet from satellites. And the airbase would have to be unused and remote. Ditching the aircraft safely into calm waters is even more unrealistic. First of all AFAIK it has never been successfully done with a wide-body aircraft and even in a small-body aircraft it would be a major risk. It would require perfect weather and calm ocean. And it would have happened at night!

There are a ton of risks involved in all of this. How could they hijackers have known that the Malaysian air force wasn't properly looking at its radar? They could have scrambled jets at that point and all of this complicated plan would have been for nothing. What if the flight they allegedly used for the radar shadow would have been delayed or they would have been delayed? What if there had been a military ship with their own radar on an exercise or patrol? After all they flew over one of the busiest water lanes in the world with an active piracy problem. What if ...

You are looking at it after the fact and not from the perspective of someone who had to come up with the plan and evaluate all the risks.

I'm not saying that kidnapping or killing a handful of people on the ground would be easy. But compared to such an unprecedented and skilled aircraft hijacking plan it seems like a piece of cake. Not to forget all the attention that MH370 gets.

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

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, because states were never behind any deliberate downing of a civilian aircraft, either through external hit or from within the aircraft.

Why is this being downvoted? Are people really so naive as to not be aware of this?

Arguments and supporting evidence is much more highly regarded than pithy sarcasm with nothing to back it up.
Post reply on HN