What happened to (where is) the missing Malaysian Airline?

This is turning out to be quite the mystery. My instinct tells me they are not going to find this plane any time soon, if at all. It may show up many years later when someone discovers it by accident. And I suspect we will never really know what happened or why, although many theories will be floated for years to come.
 
I found it typical of the entire situation that yesterday the NY Times reported:

SEPANG, Malaysia — A signaling system was disabled on the missing Malaysia Airlines jet before a pilot spoke to air traffic control without mentioning any trouble, a senior Malaysian official said Sunday, reinforcing theories that one or both of the pilots may have been involved in diverting the plane and adding urgency to the investigation of their pasts and possible motivations.

​
But that was a misinterpretation of the data (BBC):

Officials say the sign-off to air traffic controllers came at 01:19 as it left Malaysian airspace.


The last transmission from the plane's Aircraft and Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) was received at 01:07.


"We don't know when the ACARS was switched off after that," Mr Ahmad Jauhari said. "It was supposed to transmit 30 minutes from there, but that transmission did not come through."


The plane disappeared from air traffic controllers' screens at 01:21, when it was over the South China Sea.
​
 
So far the initial non-response and search for the souls on board makes the Keystone Kops look well oiled, highly efficient and competent.

From my days of flying as fare in single engine helicopters and small planes over open ocean in Alaska, all pilots on departure communicating with the tower, before advising of the next waypoint always referred to number of souls on bord.

It is not the aircraft but the people on board that counts. Voltaire, in Candide has a method for motivating generals. Actually the reference is to Admirals, what's good for the goose.....
 
Last edited:
I like the theory that the plane made an emergency turn towards the runway at Pulau Langkawi based on its reasonableness and simplicity, but question how well it fits the evidence. The article seems to blend two completely different scenarios of (1) being on autopilot until running out of fuel and (2) being under manual control of a pilot who was making drastic changes in elevation. I also question whether an autopilot programmed to head towards Pulau Langkawi is consistent with the possible location of the plane as determined by the final satellite communication. It looks to me as if a course towards Pulau Langkawi would be headed in the general direction of the southern tip of Africa. If the crew were incapacitated and the plane continued on this route until running out of fuel, it seems to me that it would have ended up quite a bit farther west than the satellite data would allow.
 
sheehs1 said:
I agree HFWR. Sounds very plausible.
Click to expand...
It does sound reasonable but how does one explain that the last ping from the aircraft was somewhere along one of those arcs? How would the aircraft change course again, to the north or south? I guess the big question is, was this course change accidental or not.
 
karluk said:
I like the theory that the plane made an emergency turn towards the runway at Pulau Langkawi based on its reasonableness and simplicity, but question how well it fits the evidence. The article seems to blend two completely different scenarios of (1) being on autopilot until running out of fuel and (2) being under manual control of a pilot who was making drastic changes in elevation. I also question whether an autopilot programmed to head towards Pulau Langkawi is consistent with the possible location of the plane as determined by the final satellite communication. It looks to me as if a course towards Pulau Langkawi would be headed in the general direction of the southern tip of Africa. If the crew were incapacitated and the plane continued on this route until running out of fuel, it seems to me that it would have ended up quite a bit farther west than the satellite data would allow.
Click to expand...

Granted, I haven't been following the story very closely, but so many theories have been floated, including some that appear to have originated from Uranus...
 
Here's an interesting question. In the old days, couldn't it happen that the flight crew was incapacitated, and a stewardess or knowledgeable passenger could go into the cockpit and pick up the radio and say "Help Help"?

But nowadays, the cockpit door is locked, right?
 
CaliforniaMan said:
It does sound reasonable but how does one explain that the last ping from the aircraft was somewhere along one of those arcs? How would the aircraft change course again, to the north or south? I guess the big question is, was this course change accidental or not.
Click to expand...

Well...at this point I am not certain about anything. Not even certain the powers that be have the pings right.

And from my perspective, I think the eyewitness account from the guy on the oil rig carries a lot of weight. After all, no one else has said any other plane was on fire have they?
 
Watching a discussion from CBS This Morning news. There's a good change the plane and passengers will never be found as the search area is so vast and if the plane is under water, the battery that runs the beacon for sonar only operates for 30 days.
 
HFWR said:
Not a pilot, but this theory seems at least as good as others I've heard...

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet | Autopia | Wired.com
Click to expand...


My initial thought was highjacking. land the plane on an old abandoned air strip somewhere in SE Asia. Kill or ransom the passengers. Fill the plane with explosives then take out the other Twin Towers in Kuala Lampur.

However, I must say a electrical fire which got out of control makes a lot more sense.
 
Last edited:
I have heard so many theories. The only one I have not heard now is a zombie infection where the pilot was trying to save humanity by ditching the plane in such a deep unknown area that the infection would not be spread by rescuers.
 
WhoDaresWins said:
This also sounds the most plausible to me...electrical fire and pilot diversion to the nearest suitable airfield. The terrorist/pilot intrigue theories don't seem to have any supporting links based on all the investigations so far.
Click to expand...

I don't see the terrorist theory as why would the terrorists want to make the event anonymous instead of go for a big scene.
 
MRG said:
Courtney Love thinks she knows where it's at. :(
MRG


http://music.yahoo.com/news/courtne...issing-malaysian-201504477-rolling-stone.html
Click to expand...
I saw that article. My first reaction was to laugh, but after thinking about it I decided that Courtney Love's opinion is neither better nor worse than anybody contributing to this thread. We can make speculative guesses that turn out to be wrong and nobody notices, but she bears the burden of her fame, so everybody hears about her mistakes and makes fun.
 
Gee I just wrote a quick rebuttal was denied posting rights.

Take two.

The startlingly simple solution has a few problems.

1. The timeline for transponders going offline has been revised back to post last voice comm.

2. Going to 45000 has benefits to hija*kers etc. At that altitude a depressurization via whatever method instantly renders any cabin crew or passanger meddling impossible.

3. Setting course to a large unobstructed commercial airport give the apperance of emergency response by the aircrew.
 
Last edited:
ls99 said:
Gee I just wrote a quick rebuttal was denied posting rights.

Take two.

The startlingly simple solution has a few problems.

1. The timeline for transponders going offline has been revised back to post last voice comm.

2. Going to 45000 has benefits to hija*kers etc. At that altitude a depressurization via whatever method instantly renders any cabin crew or passanger meddling impossible.

3. Setting course to alarge unobstructed commercial airport give the apperance of emergency response by the aircrew.
Click to expand...
IMHO the only thing this startlingly simple solution has going for it is the improbability of the alternatives. It requires a fire so catastrophic as to disable all communication equipment and probably render the passengers and crew unconscious or dead, yet so harmless that it allowed the plane to continue flying on autopilot for another seven hours or so. What kind of fire selectively damages only communication equipment but not the plane's flying capability? It makes no sense to me, but I acknowledge the attractiveness of the proposal in view of the difficulty in believing the alternatives.
 


​
"There is always a well-known solution to every human problem--neat, plausible, and wrong."​
​
H. L. Mencken, Prejudices: Second Series, 1920
​
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

street
What has been your act of Kindness Lately
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
TickTock
T
S
Anyone else here grow up on a farm?
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Gallaher
G
JoeWras
Solensia: miracle drug for OA pain, in cats
Replies
6
Views
524
djsander
D
B
Amazon raises free shipping min to $35 for non prime
Replies
0
Views
681
badatmath
B
S
Reconciling micro observations with macro trends? (is the economy really doing well?)
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Koolau
Koolau

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom