Support NeoGAF

[Megasoum]

Posted?



http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/mh370-flew-as-low-as-1500m-to-avoid-detection-says-paper#scpshrtu

So huh...does Malaysia has a special forces group?

 

[Uhyve]

Absolutely not. However, it would occur much faster. This has been theorized as one possible reasons why he went to that height.

Ah, that makes sense. Couldn't be good for fuel consumption though, especially when combined with the new "terrain masking" news.

 

[Psychological Intellect]

I dunno, this redditor is a contender. He wrote this days after it went missing.

 

[luoapp]

Somehow, this gif makes the dog even more awesome!

 

[crozier]

why are some of you guys saying the passengers would be incapacitated due to hypoxia at 45000ft? Even though the 777 isn't rated to fly that high, I'd expect the cabin pressure to not be compromised, regardless of altitude.

This guy seems to confirm it:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngog...ngers-have-survived-777-ascent-to-45000-feet/

The passengers would be fine assuming the cabin is pressurized. If it were depressurized, though, manually or otherwise, they would quickly go unconscious and die due to lack of oxygen.

EDIT: The air is also much thinner at 45,000 feet than 35,000 feet. It would take far longer to incapacitate and kill those in the cabin at 35,000 feet. And with an extremely limited oxygen supply (emergency oxygen in the cabin only lasts 15 min), it would be in the pilot's best interest to get it over with as fast as possible: i.e. at maximum altitude.

 

[Mysterious]

I still cannot believe this is a thing in 2014. God damn.

 

[numble]

I think at this point most people in this thread would appreciate it if not just news channels but their sources were quoted in every new development. A name and position holds way more weight than simply "An official close to the investigation speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to share this information"

Of course it holds more weight, but they can only talk about it anonymously or they'll be cut off from the investigation for leaking info.

 

[Incognito]

Posted?



http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/mh370-flew-as-low-as-1500m-to-avoid-detection-says-paper#scpshrtu

So nap of the earth flying.. Seems interesting, and this hypothsis has been posited befofe . However, depending on speed youre going to burn a lot of fuel so if this is true, he went 7 hrs very slowly equaling a short distance

 

[Falk]

I still cannot believe this is a thing in 2014. God damn.

What if it was 2013? How much more believable (in percentage of current believability status) would that be?

edit: even a ballpark figure would be fine.

 

[AtomicShroom]

Posted?



http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/mh370-flew-as-low-as-1500m-to-avoid-detection-says-paper#scpshrtu

The NST quoting sources said the probe would now focus on regions with disused airports equipped with long runways capable of handling a plane like the Boeing 777.

Well it's about time! I said they should focus on possible landing locations based on an estimated 7-hour flight time radius the second it was known to be intentional... It's not like there are many unmonitored/unused places where you could land a 777 and not get noticed by locals and whatnot.

 

[BlackCloud7]

I'm scared now. Plane still not found, now it's highjacked? Man what if they try to use it to hit some place? Man This is crazy! I can't take this!

 

[Deleted member 8095]

This story is so fascinating. Remember how hours after the plane went missing there were reports that it landed safely in China? So fucking weird.

 

[Falk]

This story is so fascinating. Remember how hours after the plane went missing there were reports that it landed safely in China? So fucking weird.

How is this weird? That's just the median in journalism for you nowadays. Everyone wants to be the first to report news on the smallest of leads, fuck verifying anything, so that if they're actually right they get to claim 'ha we were first'.

 

[breakfuss]

What if it was 2013? How much more believable (in percentage of current believability status) would that be?

edit: even a ballpark figure would be fine.

Mmkay? Surely this seems odd to you in a wired world. All the recent talks of NSA spying combined with the ever increasing reach of stuff like google convinced me no corner of the globe was untraceable. Clearly isn't the case, though.

 

[AtomicShroom]

It's starting to be very obvious by this point that this flight didn't crash anywhere. The pilot had a very clear, meticulously planned agenda down to most minute details. To have executed all of this so flawlessly is a testament to his expert skills.

He avoided all suspicion, turned the plane invisible in the best possible window to do so, disabled any possible resistance by killing off everyone in the passenger cabin as efficiently as possible, programmed the autopilot to follow paths he knew would pass as standard air traffic, flew low to avoid detection towards his final destination. It's crazily unlikely that he would have merely crashed the plane after all of this. He made it to wherever he was supposed to deliver the plane to, he's now a very rich man, and a terrorist organization is in possession of a 777 to use as they please.

 

[Deleted member 8095]

How is this weird? That's just the median in journalism for you nowadays. Everyone wants to be the first to report news on the smallest of leads, fuck verifying anything, so that if they're actually right they get to claim 'ha we were first'.

Sadly, so very true.

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

It's starting to be very obvious by this point that this flight didn't crash anywhere. The pilot had a very clear, meticulously planned agenda down to most minute details. To have executed all of this so flawlessly is a testament to his expert skills.

He avoided all suspicion, turned the plane invisible in the best possible window to do so, disabled any possible resistance by killing off everyone in the passenger cabin as efficiently as possible, programmed the autopilot to follow paths he knew would pass as standard air traffic, flew low to avoid detection towards his final destination. It's crazily unlikely that he would have merely crashed the plane after all of this. He made it to wherever he was supposed to deliver the plane to, he's now a very rich man, and a terrorist organization is in possession of a 777 to use as they please.

That's a lot of jumping to conclusions though. It's still possible the plan crashed at some point in the Southern Indian Ocean after being tracked by the satellite or tons of other things.

 

[Forsete]

Doesn't the NSA or CIA have som high resolution spy satellite stuff in orbit? If the plane landed somewhere start scanning the runways (not all can take on a huge heavy aircraft).
Time is ticking.

 

[Falk]

Revisiting the discussion about Anwar, here's a well-written (albeit you could make the argument it's pro-opposition biased) article that pretty much sums up the situation in Malaysia prior to this event.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...pported_anwar_ibrahim_was_he_a_terrorist.html

edit:

Mmkay? Surely this seems odd to you in a wired world. All the recent talks of NSA spying combined with the ever increasing reach of stuff like google convinced me no corner of the globe was untraceable. Clearly isn't the case, though.

I was joking, calm down.

 

[TimeEffect]

So, what can a Boeing do, under the hands of terrorists? I mean, why take it? What is the most devastating thing possible? Carry a massive bomb on it and explode it somewhere in the world? Or can you do that without a Boeing?

 

[AtomicShroom]

That's a lot of jumping to conclusions though. It's still possible the plan crashed at some point in the Southern Indian Ocean after being tracked by the satellite or tons of other things.

But why? Why crash the plane into the sea? He didn't need to turn invisible to do so. He didn't need to follow the most untraceable paths to do so. He didn't need to avoid detection to do so.

What the pilot did is consistent with someone wanting to buy as much time as possible before being found out, derailing investigations, which is all but useless if the plan was merely to crash the plane in the middle of nowhere. What sounds more likely to you? That he simply wanted to crash the plane, or that he had a plan to deliver it somewhere undetected? Which of these two outcomes most requires him to plan something so incredibly elaborate, to go invisible, to elude investigation, and to buy as much time as possible?

 

[Ecotic]

I'm under the impression that whatever they tried to do they failed, and the group responsible is too embarrassed to take credit for it now. Maybe it crashed somewhere before it got to its intended destination, be it an airport or running it into a building.

 

[KHarvey16]

But why? Why crash the plane into the sea? He didn't need to turn invisible to do so. He didn't need to follow the most untraceable paths to do so. He didn't need to avoid detection to do so.

What the pilot did is consistent with someone wanting to buy as much time as possible before being found out, derailing investigations, which is all but useless if the plan was merely to crash the plane in the middle of nowhere. What sounds more likely to you? That he simply wanted to crash the plane, or that he had a plan to deliver it somewhere? Which of these two outcomes most requires him to plan something so incredibly elaborate, to go invisible, to elude investigation, and to buy as much time as possible?

Why is it assumed that because something was planned it was a success? I'm sure we all wish everything we planned happened the way we planned it. My getting to work on time plan doesn't always pan out, never mind a complicated plot to hijack, hide and land a 777.

 

[Freaky Fred]

But why? Why crash the plane into the sea? He didn't need to turn invisible to do so. He didn't need to follow the most untraceable paths to do so. He didn't need to avoid detection to do so.

What the pilot did is consistent with someone wanting to buy as much time as possible before being found out, derailing investigations, which is all but useless if the plan was merely to crash the plane in the middle of nowhere. What sounds more likely to you? That he simply wanted to crash the plane, or that he had a plan to deliver it somewhere? Which of these two outcomes most requires him to plan something so incredibly elaborate, to go invisible, to elude investigation, and to buy as much time as possible?

If the plane crashed in the ocean, I doubt it was intentional. Maybe there was a struggle in the cockpit or something.

 

[crozier]

We don't know whether the "plan" (whatever it was) was successful or not, but every indication is that the pilot/hijacker wanted the plane to disappear and be presumed crashed.

 

[AtomicShroom]

If the plane crashed in the ocean, I doubt it was intentional. Maybe there was a struggle in the cockpit or something.

The thing flew (or was powered on) for 7 hours. Why would have conflict erupted in the cockpit after 7 hours without any problems? Why are people favouring the most unlikely conclusions?

 

[AstroLad]

Why is it assumed that because something was planned it was a success? I'm sure we all wish everything we planned happened the way we planned it. My getting to work on time plan doesn't always pan out, never mind a complicated plot to hijack, hide and land a 777.

Because Occam's Razor is boring.

 

[crozier]

Because Occam's Razor is boring.

Occam's Razor failed me no less than 10 times over the course of this investigation....and that's just so far.

 

[AtomicShroom]

We don't know whether the "plan" (whatever it was) was successful or not, but every indication is that the pilot/hijacker wanted the plane to disappear and be presumed crashed.

At this point I think we can safely rule out that anyone other than the pilot or co-pilot is responsible. All the actions that took place in the cockpit were meticulously planned and executed at very strategic timeframes. This wasn't improvised on a whim.

 

[CitizenVectron]

Okay, so the Malaysian government is now looking into the possibility that the jet was hijacked and then flown under the radar to a location in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and that the last satellite signal could have been from when the plane was on the ground?


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-engineers-and-crew-investigated-9195320.html

Eight days after Flight MH370 vanished, Malaysian authorities are seeking diplomatic permission to investigate a theory that the Boeing 777 may have been flown under the radar to Taliban-controlled bases on the border of Afghanistan and North West Pakistan, The Independent has learnt.

Seems far-fetched.

 

[Anticitizen One]

If it landed in Pakistan there is going to be a shitstorm

 

[crozier]

At this point I think we can safely rule out that anyone other than the pilot or co-pilot is responsible. All the actions that took place in the cockpit were meticulously planned and executed at very strategic timeframes. This wasn't improvised on a whim.

I completely agree. And given that the goal of the pilot(s) appears to have been to make it look like a crash, and given that we have no evidence for a crash, I have no reason to lean towards a crash. I think it's quite likely the plane landed somewhere.

 

[AtomicShroom]

Why is it assumed that because something was planned it was a success? I'm sure we all wish everything we planned happened the way we planned it. My getting to work on time plan doesn't always pan out, never mind a complicated plot to hijack, hide and land a 777.

Because it seems unlikely that such an experienced pilot managed to crash the plane. That'd be like a professional race driver crashing his car while cruising normally in a straight line after successfully completing a perfect 30-second drift in a snow curve.

 

[Totakeke]

At this point I think we can safely rule out that anyone other than the pilot or co-pilot is responsible. All the actions that took place in the cockpit were meticulously planned and executed at very strategic timeframes. This wasn't improvised on a whim.

Eh, that's based on the assumption of no one else in the passenger is capable of obtaining such knowledge. While they have said foreign intelligence agencies have cleared all the passengers backgrounds, it's still something they're looking into.

 

[duckroll]

The thing flew (or was powered on) for 7 hours. Why would have conflict erupted in the cockpit after 7 hours without any problems? Why are people favouring the most unlikely conclusions?

At this point I think we can safely rule out that anyone other than the pilot or co-pilot is responsible. All the actions that took place in the cockpit were meticulously planned and executed at very strategic timeframes. This wasn't improvised on a whim.

You're making a lot of assumptions based on circumstantial data which doesn't paint a complete or detailed picture. Right now we don't know that there were no problems for 7 hours, we also know that investigators are not ruling out any of the things you are seem so confident of ruling out. There is also no indication that any of the actions detected so far were meticulously planned or that they were executed based on strategic timeframes.

It's normal to want to feel that the picture is really clear based on a limited amount of info if that info seems to connect "naturally" in your mind. It can seem "obvious" once you've thought about that same idea enough times. But that doesn't mean it's what actually happened. It's simply a case of feeling led by the evidence. It's something professional investigators are very careful to avoid.

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

But why? Why crash the plane into the sea? He didn't need to turn invisible to do so. He didn't need to follow the most untraceable paths to do so. He didn't need to avoid detection to do so.

What the pilot did is consistent with someone wanting to buy as much time as possible before being found out, derailing investigations, which is all but useless if the plan was merely to crash the plane in the middle of nowhere. What sounds more likely to you? That he simply wanted to crash the plane, or that he had a plan to deliver it somewhere undetected? Which of these two outcomes most requires him to plan something so incredibly elaborate, to go invisible, to elude investigation, and to buy as much time as possible?

Because for all we know, there could have been an incident that rendered the pilot/co-pilot unable to fly and maybe a passenger was trying to fly the plane by way of the auto-pilot and crashed.

This is all pure speculation and nothing is conclusive.

 

[crozier]

The auto pilot waypoints coupled with the fact no one had it on radar to me suggests careful planning.

 

[AtomicShroom]

You're making a lot of assumptions based on circumstantial data which doesn't paint a complete or detailed picture. Right now we don't know that there were no problems for 7 hours, we also know that investigators are not ruling out any of the things you are seem so confident of ruling out. There is also no indication that any of the actions detected so far were meticulously planned or that they were executed based on strategic timeframes.

It's normal to want to feel that the picture is really clear based on a limited amount of info if that info seems to connect "naturally" in your mind. It can seem "obvious" once you've thought about that same idea enough times. But that doesn't mean it's what actually happened. It's simply a case of feeling led by the evidence. It's something professional investigators are very careful to avoid.

Oh I understand what you're saying and I agree, I'm totally jumping to conclusions. But the conclusion I'm jumping to still remains the most plausible one given the facts we have available. It's like everyone wants that plane to have crashed...

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

Oh I understand what you're saying and I agree, I'm totally jumping to conclusions. But the conclusion I'm jumping to still remains the most plausible one given the facts we have available. It's like everyone wants that plane to have crashed...

I don't want it to have crashed, but almost any conclusion is the right conclusion as long as it doesn't ignore any data that's been given.

 

[ChainedMaster]

Because for all we know, there could have been an incident that rendered the pilot/co-pilot unable to fly and maybe a passenger was trying to fly the plane by way of the auto-pilot and crashed..

If you honestly believe this there's no way you've been keeping up. And why would a passenger fly by reprogramming the autopilot instead taking the wheel? Again, makes no sense.

 

[kaiju]

Okay, so the Malaysian government is now looking into the possibility that the jet was hijacked and then flown under the radar to a location in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and that the last satellite signal could have been from when the plane was on the ground?


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-engineers-and-crew-investigated-9195320.html



Seems far-fetched.

Fucking batshit crazy operation going on if that's what happened.

Also: What's this news I'm hearing about one of the pilot's wife and three children moving out of the family home the day before the flight? WTF?

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

If you honestly believe this there's no way you've been keeping up. And why would a passenger fly by reprogramming the autopilot instead taking the wheel? Again, makes no sense.

Because they had no choice?

And besides, I just said it was was within the realm of possibility. I didn't say it was the end-all-be-all of conclusions of what happened. Anything could have happened up there and we know very little is my point.

 

[Slurpy2k20]

It's starting to be very obvious by this point that this flight didn't crash anywhere. The pilot had a very clear, meticulously planned agenda down to most minute details. To have executed all of this so flawlessly is a testament to his expert skills.

He avoided all suspicion, turned the plane invisible in the best possible window to do so, disabled any possible resistance by killing off everyone in the passenger cabin as efficiently as possible, programmed the autopilot to follow paths he knew would pass as standard air traffic, flew low to avoid detection towards his final destination. It's crazily unlikely that he would have merely crashed the plane after all of this. He made it to wherever he was supposed to deliver the plane to, he's now a very rich man, and a terrorist organization is in possession of a 777 to use as they please.

Or, you know- it fucking crashed. A much more realistic scenario than the near impossible series of events you just described.

 

[crozier]

Because they had no choice?

And besides, I just said it was was within the realm of possibility. I didn't say it was the end-all-be-all of conclusions of what happened. Anything could have happened up there and we know very little is my point.

I'll have to find the article, but a pilot with several hours of 777 training couldn't even replicate the autopilot sequence. It's just a knob to actually start it, but programming the course is something only an experienced pilot could do.

 

[ChainedMaster]

Because they had no choice?

And besides, I just said it was was within the realm of possibility. I didn't say it was the end-all-be-all of conclusions of what happened. Anything could have happened up there and we know very little is my point.

We don't know exactly what happened, but we do know what your post consists of did not happen.

I'll have to find the article, but a pilot with several hours of 777 training couldn't even replicate the autopilot sequence. It's just a knob to actually start it, but programming the course is something only an experienced pilot could do.

I posted it 2 pages ago.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/14/opinion/goyer-malaysia-flight/index.html

 

[davepoobond]

Maybe they are taking it apart but not so they can reassemble it. So they can hide it. And the sell the parts on the black market

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

We don't know exactly what happened, but we do know what your post consists of did not happen.
]

Anything could have happened up there and we know very little is my point.

I'm just saying that people are jumping to conclusions and to not do so. As I've said before, I don't know what happened up there. I just know what information we have. Some people have basically jump to their own conclusions because it's what's suits them.

 

[numble]

What if it was 2013? How much more believable (in percentage of current believability status) would that be?

edit: even a ballpark figure would be fine.

It's just a colloquial phrase not meant to be taken literally, with the year meant to mean the modern age.

 

[Falk]

Eh, that's based on the assumption of no one else in the passenger is capable of obtaining such knowledge. While they have said foreign intelligence agencies have cleared all the passengers backgrounds, it's still something they're looking into.

Possible correction: I'm re-listening to yesterday's Press Conference and I'm convinced that when the Inspector General (Khalid Abu Bakar) refered to "intelligence agencies cleared all the passengers" he may have meant "cleared all THEIR passengers".

This is almost confirmed later on when he re-iterates his answer in Malay in response to another question:

Saya kata bukan semua. Ada "Intelligence Agency" luar negara yang telahpun memberi clearance kepada semua passenger. Tapi kita masih lagi menunggu lain-lain agency lagi dan juga sekuriti ataupun polis daripada beberapa buah negara yang masih belum memberi respon terhadap permintaan kita untuk membuat respon check. (question about which countries) Antaranya Cina sudah <...> Antaranya Cina, India sudah.

Translated that says "I said, not all. There are some foreign intelligence agencies that have given clearance to all (/their) passengers. But we are still waiting on other agencies and security/police of a few countries that haven't responded to our request for response(?) checks. China and India already have done so,"

It's probably something slightly lost in translation. Bottom line, as of yesterday's presser, not ALL passengers were cleared. China and India, however, have been cleared, possibly among others.

edit

It's just a colloquial phrase not meant to be taken literally, with the year meant to mean the modern age.

Okay, I'm beginning to regret bringing my sense of humor into this thread. :|

 

[AtomicShroom]

Or, you know- it fucking crashed. A much more realistic scenario than the near impossible series of events you just described.

Except all the events I described, minus the landing and anything that comes afterwards, have been pretty much confirmed. So what is more realistic, that an experienced pilot landed the plane successfully, or that he crashed it in the middle of nowhere for no reason?