First of all, my apologies if my question is just plain wrong or absurd, I'm no pilot just a lowly atco.
Broadly speaking the two concievable scenarios are either some sort of combined mechanical failure or intentional misdirection of the plane. In the former scenario a constant magnetic heading has been proposed as an explanation of why the plane should have ended close to Australia.
If the latter scenario is correct the method could be the same but it also allows for a conscious and able person piloting the plane. In that case the logic for crashing the plane in the southern indic ocean would be to severely difficult any recovery efforts.
The last two search areas have been calculated from a series of automatic signals with several assumptions about constant direction, speed and altitude, I believe.
However, if there was somebody piloting the plane who knew about these signals and could not disconnect them like the ACARS and the transponder then these assumptions might not be correct.
For example, if after about 5 hours of flight the pilot would simply turn 180 degrees, fly that track for half an hour, turn 180 degrees and repeat untill fuel exhausted...
wouldn't the relative angle to the satellite still be about the same?
My point here is that if somebody intentionally made that plane disappear then he might have taken further steps to avoid this plane ever to be found.
