Did Malaysian Airlines 370 disappear using SIA68/SQ68 (another 777)? • Hacker News Board

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

#321

Post by rasz_pl » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 5:55 PM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #115

emeidi wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, hijackers would have threatened passengers to give them their mobile phones. If the plane indeed was landed on a remote airport with the passengers alive, the hijackers would have stripped the passengers of their clothes to ensure nobody could bring weapons or devices with them. By now, most mobile phones (even the Nokia developing world ones) would have been out of battery.

I find it a little disturbing that the passengers would be so docile, especially after 9/11.

You dont know Asian culture then. Standing up to an Authority FigureIts is almost unheard of in Asia. People get yelled at and lied to on a daily basis in Asia by everyone above their station and they take it up the ass like a little yellow troopers. Mianzi is more important than truth.

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

#322

Post by CatMtKing » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 5:55 PM UTC

porsupah wrote: post #215

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #82

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.

While I believe the full manifest has not been published, we do know that there were a few tons of mangosteens present in the cargo. http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/03/17/missing-mh3...

Mangosteen is delicious, I'll give them that.

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

#323

Post by philwelch » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 5:55 PM UTC

thenmar wrote: post #319

madaxe_again wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm looking at Russia, and thinking that it would be very convenient for them for Ukraine to drop off the news... which it largely did when this broke. Now what could cause that - perhaps a good mystery. Everyone likes a good mystery. Baikonur is a pretty f'ing good place to hide something like a 777, and is very proximal to the last possible position. Been there. Middle of nowhere. Airstrip is high security, remote,…

Wait, you don't seriously think that Russia disappeared a Malaysian airliner (and hundreds of international citizens) to distract the world (?) from Crimea. That's just fucking absurd.

The USA bombed Yugoslavia to distract the world from Bill Clinton fooling around with an intern. Putin plays to win and if he doesn't get caught, what's a couple hundred airline passengers to him?

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

#324

Post by pizza » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 5:56 PM UTC

rajbala wrote: post #208

Buge wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

source?

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

#325

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 5:59 PM UTC

simias wrote: post #88

leoc wrote: 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.

Because a lot of the people talking about the Freescale engineers are themselves one kind of engineer or another, and THEY are important, so ergo the Freescale employees have to be important.

It's like in other disasters where lots of people get killed but the news focuses on the two Americans standing nearby.

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

#326

Post by nostrademons » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 6:05 PM UTC

mattgibson wrote: post #167

rolux wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This theory keeps coming up, but it doesn't make much sense. If your goal is to acquire a working Boeing 777, on a secret airfield somewhere in Western China or Eastern Kazakhstan (see this map for orientation: http://www.airliners.net/uf/109874/phpnIOEWi.jpeg ), then you don't have to be particularly smart or rational to realize that hijacking a commercial flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, with 240 people on boar…

This leads me to wonder if maybe the cargo was the target. We already heard that the manifest has not been released and that they left 50 seats empty to compensate for the weight.

They just said the cargo was 3-4 tons of mangosteen:

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/no-hazar...

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

#327

Post by notahacker » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 6:06 PM UTC

arethuza wrote: post #90

stef25 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Extreme long range? It was a 777-200ER (Enhanced Range) - that model holds records for distance flying: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777#777-200ER

Trust me, you can get an aircraft with enough range to get anywhere in the world in a couple of hops for much less than the cost of organizing a highly sophisticated hijacking operation. And your range is much longer when your aircraft is operated by an apparently legitimate charter service that has permission to fly into most countries and don't have to worry about hiding from radar.

By contrast, the effective range of a suspicious phantom plane against fighter jets on high alert is zero.

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

#328

Post by morbius » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 6:08 PM UTC

appreneur wrote: post #109

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…

We are almost on the same page: here's my theory purely based on what I read! 1.Something happened like explosive decompression, Explosive decompression occurs at a rate swifter than that at which air can escape from the lungs, typically in less than 0.1 to 0.5 seconds.Everybody onboard(including pilots) would have died in less than a second due to castrophic mechanical failure which caused explosive decompression. 2…

Nearly half of your "theory" (which isn't based off of any sort of clinically proven fact, btw) is incorrect.

First, the 777 is not an "old" plane. It's a very reliable and advanced aircraft with tons of redundancy; things don't just fail nowadays like they used to. Despite its age, there is absolutely zero reason why there should be a structural or mechanical failure. These aircraft aren't Chevrolets, they're built to stand up to daily abuse that they will likely never experience during their lifetime. Tell that to UPS and FedEx, which are still using 727s from the 70s.

Explosive decompression, even if it did happen, does not kill instantly. See also: Aloha Flight 243. Again, the 777 has very advanced pressurization systems. No reason that it should have killed everyone immediately.

Disintegration should have left debris. There was none.

Also, your statement about the 787 is irrelevant and misleading. The cracks found in the wings are hairline, and are caused by its composite construction. Things like this occur during the birth of an aircraft and get ironed out over the years, just like software. The 787 has nothing to do with the 777, which is a tried-and-true metal aircraft, and as I've reiterated before, age is irrelevant in these types of things. There has not been a single 777 fatality to date except the SFO Asiana disaster last year, which was caused by pilot error. The 777 seems to be a fairly bulletproof aircraft.

Conspiracy theories aren't really the best approach to anything. Boeing has proven itself with the 777, and the 787 is a revolutionary design that will have some problems, just like the first jet engines did in the 50s.

Let's leave the speculation to the NTSB and just tell who we love we love them. It's no use twisting around old evidence or constructing conspiracy theories at this point.

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

#329

Post by gamblor956 » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 6:19 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #323

thenmar wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, you don't seriously think that Russia disappeared a Malaysian airliner (and hundreds of international citizens) to distract the world (?) from Crimea. That's just fucking absurd.

The USA bombed Yugoslavia to distract the world from Bill Clinton fooling around with an intern. Putin plays to win and if he doesn't get caught, what's a couple hundred airline passengers to him?

The US bombed Yugoslavia pursuant to its commitments to NATO, which voted to intervene in the conflict.

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

#330

Post by rajbala » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 6:24 PM UTC

LoganCale wrote: post #255

rajbala wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It is very unlikely (but has occasionally happened) that a cellphone would get reception at 35,000 feet.

The plane reportedly flew under the radar after turning away from Kuala Lumpur.