Flight Malaysia MH370

Chestnut

Glorianny

Chestnut

Okay, I will watch it, although I have seen a two part documentary already which went into great detail. I can't see how they will ever know for sure because the evidence is at the bottom of a very deep and enormous ocean. My theory is that the pilot wanted to create the biggest aviation mystery ever known to man, and if so then he succeeded in that.

None of the staff who worked with him believe that the pilot would behave in such a way. What exactly is your theory based on? It was at one point seen as an easy solution- to blame the pilot.

As I said:
When you look at the flight path, first avoiding the radar and then turning towards the open sea, there is no other conclusion. No-one would fly in that direction by accident, literally into the middle of nowhere.
How can you (or anyone) explain that very deliberate flight path? No-one knows what is going on inside someone else's head so friends and family might not have a clue what he was thinking or intending.

Chestnut the idea assumes so much
Firstly that someone who had no prior signs intended not only to commit suicide but to murder over 200 people to create a mystery.
Secondly that the plane was still being flown by the airline pilot when it turned off course.

When does a theory morph into a conspiracy theory?

Secondly that the plane was still being flown by the airline pilot when it turned off course.
The plane took a very unexpected turn at exactly the moment it was between two countries, so one country's air traffic control had not handed over to the second at that point. Therefore the flight could turn and skim along this 'no contact' corridor and escape detection until further south. Only the pilot could have calculated this very clever manoeuvre.

I don’t think a chestnut is going to change her fixed opinion. It’s what makes discussions on this site sooooo rewarding - not. I was on the verge of quitting, and have now decided to go as I can no longer tolerate such people. For all those willing to proper discuss, farewell.

ExperiencedNotOld

I don’t think a chestnut is going to change her fixed opinion. It’s what makes discussions on this site sooooo rewarding - not. I was on the verge of quitting, and have now decided to go as I can no longer tolerate such people. For all those willing to proper discuss, farewell.

Oh dear, I thought discussion was about giving your opinion, so what's the problem? Happy to change my opinion if there is evidence to prove it wrong.

Blame the pilot.?

There is no other way that the known track changing at the beginning of the incident other than the pilot or some other person deliberately changing course. After flying west for some time changed course to south and flew on most likely on autopilot, until fuel was gone.

We will never know exactly the chain of events, other than someone deliberately flew MH370 into the ocean

I’m watching it now - nothing else interesting on terrestrial TV

Chestnut

^Secondly that the plane was still being flown by the airline pilot when it turned off course.^
The plane took a very unexpected turn at exactly the moment it was between two countries, so one country's air traffic control had not handed over to the second at that point. Therefore the flight could turn and skim along this 'no contact' corridor and escape detection until further south. Only the pilot could have calculated this very clever manoeuvre.

Presumably anyone with experience of flying commercial aircraft would be just as aware of this as the two pilots assigned to the plane and would certainly know that the pilot had ceased contact when he said "Good night" to them.
Then there is the jamming theory which stopped all contact.
Blaming the pilot is just too simple. If he had problems there might be a possibility but he hadn't.

I thought there were far too many talking egos and the time given to them got in the way of a proper measured overview. I didn't think there was enough credible evidence presented to say where the plane ended up and whether the wreckage was definitely from that plane.
A lot of the theories failed the "why would you" test. Even if you could fly the plane from under the floor etc.....

It was probably planned to be the “Marie Celeste” of aviation total disappearance, trying to avoid tracking radar the aiming for a deep remote part of the ocean, whoever was in control carefully planned it.

Have you watched the programme Katie59? I didn't think any of the "planned by...." explanations were really convincing. I would like to have known more about hypoxia and possible systems failure. Also wonder if we have heard the full story about the lithium batteries?

Exactly my thoughts Katie59. To me it seems planned and deliberate. It's no good trying to ascertain someone's mental state because anyone planning this would keep their thoughts deeply hidden. I've always thought they wanted to create the biggest aviation mystery of all time, and that is certainly what it is. That's just my opinion but I've seen nothing to prove otherwise.

Chestnut Have you watched the programme yet?

I've always thought they wanted to create the biggest aviation mystery of all time, and that is certainly what it is. That's just my opinion but I've seen nothing to prove otherwise.

Where is the evidence for this? What do you base this on?
It's just a wild theory.

Events don't have to be "proven otherwise" ... they have to be proven in the first place.

Sparklefizz

Chestnut Have you watched the programme yet?

As I said, last year I watched two very detailed programmes about this (or was it three?) which went into everything. Obviously if new evidence has arisen since then which proves what actually happened then fair enough. But I don't think anything is proven. I will try and watch the programme tonight and I just hope it has something new because I feel like this will be groundhog day if I'm watching the same stuff all over again.

Wasn’t there something about a trap-door that led down into an ‘engine room’ ?

Chestnut I watched some previous programmes on this topic only recently, but the NF documentaries cover more facts and go into more detail.

PS. Chestnut You don't have to watch it, obviously, but at the moment you are arguing about a programme you haven't actually seen.

Yes, sorry, I suppose you could say that. It's just that I've heard so much about it before in these other programmes, all the various experts talking, all the families talking, people scouring the beaches looking for parts, etc. etc. and all very detailed.

I had seen detailed programmes too Chestnut, but lithium batteries, hidden compartment under the floor, destination Khazakstan etc etc were new to me. Not saying I was convinced by them, but keeping an open mind.
The one thing I was not convinced by was the man turning up in Réunion and being filmed finding "debris" so quickly.

Chestnut

^Secondly that the plane was still being flown by the airline pilot when it turned off course.^
The plane took a very unexpected turn at exactly the moment it was between two countries, so one country's air traffic control had not handed over to the second at that point. Therefore the flight could turn and skim along this 'no contact' corridor and escape detection until further south. Only the pilot could have calculated this very clever manoeuvre.

When one air traffic control centre (ATCC 1) is handing over control of an aircraft to another (ATCC 2), the procedure goes as follows. ATCC 1 contacts ATCC 2 and passes over all the details of the aircraft, such as position, height, heading, speed, and the SSR Code which highlights the aircraft on both ATCCs' radar screens. Once ATCC 2 are happy that they have identified the aircraft on their radar screens, they will inform ATCC 1 about the radio frequency on which they wish to talk to the aircraft. ATCC 1 then ask the aircraft to call ATCC 2 on that frequency. The aircraft will acknowledge the frequency to ATCC 1, and will then call ATCC 2 on that frequency. Once the aircraft is talking to ATCC 2, then control officially passes. So the aircraft is never in a 'black hole' during the handover/takeover process, and I am mystified as to why the Vietnamese ATCC did not contact their Malaysian colleagues when MH370 failed to call them on the new frequency and disappeared off radar... Or , more likely they did, but that was not covered in the TV programme's narrative, which gave the impression that the alarm was raised some time later.

Hypoxia has been mentioned. On all airliners the flight crew have control of cabin pressurization, they can depressurize in flight. The emergency oxygen in the cabin lasts around 10 mins, the flight deck has a separate system, lasting much longer, maybe 1 hour plus.
Loss of cabin pressure is rehearsed in simulators routinely, emergency would have been declared.
Most likely one pilot left the flight deck, the cabin was depressurized at altitude only the pilot flying was left alive with his oxygen mask on, he set the final course on auto pilot and died himself when oxygen ran out

Nothing complicated, no evidence to say it didn't happen just like that.

Bodach

Chestnut

Secondly that the plane was still being flown by the airline pilot when it turned off course.
The plane took a very unexpected turn at exactly the moment it was between two countries, so one country's air traffic control had not handed over to the second at that point. Therefore the flight could turn and skim along this 'no contact' corridor and escape detection until further south. Only the pilot could have calculated this very clever manoeuvre.

When one air traffic control centre (ATCC 1) is handing over control of an aircraft to another (ATCC 2), the procedure goes as follows. ATCC 1 contacts ATCC 2 and passes over all the details of the aircraft, such as position, height, heading, speed, and the SSR Code which highlights the aircraft on both ATCCs' radar screens. Once ATCC 2 are happy that they have identified the aircraft on their radar screens, they will inform ATCC 1 about the radio frequency on which they wish to talk to the aircraft. ATCC 1 then ask the aircraft to call ATCC 2 on that frequency. The aircraft will acknowledge the frequency to ATCC 1, and will then call ATCC 2 on that frequency. Once the aircraft is talking to ATCC 2, then control officially passes. So the aircraft is never in a 'black hole' during the handover/takeover process, and I am mystified as to why the Vietnamese ATCC did not contact their Malaysian colleagues when MH370 failed to call them on the new frequency and disappeared off radar... Or , more likely they did, but that was not covered in the TV programme's narrative, which gave the impression that the alarm was raised some time later.

That would seem then to point towards the jamming by AWACs theory.

"That would seem then to point towards the jamming by AWACs theory."
No. Jamming doesn't work like that, and anyway, the whole idea of US Armed Forces cold-bloodedly shooting down a Malaysian airliner with innocent 239 souls on board is unthinkable. Wouldn't happen.

Bodach

"That would seem then to point towards the jamming by AWACs theory."
No. Jamming doesn't work like that, and anyway, the whole idea of US Armed Forces cold-bloodedly shooting down a Malaysian airliner with innocent 239 souls on board is unthinkable. Wouldn't happen.

Nor would the stupid theory of Russians shooting it down over Kazakhstan, even if they did it would not go unnoticed. The plane could have hijacked and hidden somewhere in SE Asia but we know it wasn't because it continued flying for 7 hours after it changed course