Malaysian Airlines MH370 contact lost
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is limited fuel, a hijacker of any persuasion isn't going to ignore that fact.
Unfortunately not so. Some hijackers have no interest in making a successful landing, Ethiopian B767, for example or, more obviously 9/11.
Others have shown no realistic appraisal of an aircraft's range capability, ordering crews of short haul B737 over Europe to fly direct to the Middle East and been unable to comprehend that a landing for refuelling would be necessary.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Helena
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two things
Just wondering two things:
1. Would shutting down one engine extend the range? If so, by how much?
2. Also thought it was a pretty strange that on day one the US sent only one ship to the area. Maybe they knew that there was nothing to find.
1. Would shutting down one engine extend the range? If so, by how much?
2. Also thought it was a pretty strange that on day one the US sent only one ship to the area. Maybe they knew that there was nothing to find.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malaysian PM - Plane was Hijacked
EDITED actual wording
Flight 370's movements are consistent with 'deliberate' action 'by someone on the plane' - Malaysian Prime Minister
EDITED actual wording
Flight 370's movements are consistent with 'deliberate' action 'by someone on the plane' - Malaysian Prime Minister
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see why there's so little concerning the pilot(s) having done this. After all they're trained and have access to the FD. Even if a would be hijacker was trained, then they'd still need access to the flight deck. Is there evidence we're not hearing about which the investigators are more convinced it was a passenger who did this and not the crew?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So after 7 days of telling us there was no doubt the aircraft crashed at a little after 1am in the Gulf of Thailand, and no other option, Malaysia are now they admitting "credible evidence" days ago about the aircraft being tracked over the Straits of Malaca, now they admitting raw SATCOM data tracked the aircraft over the Straits of Malacca and to either Kazakstan or Southern Indian Ocean (i.e. off Australia)!
So seems they HAVE been lying the whole time, and other reports are in fact true!
So seems they HAVE been lying the whole time, and other reports are in fact true!
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Bangkok
Age: 60
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow.
This is a hell of a press conference.
The last CONFIRMED contact with satellite was at 8.11am local. That is 7.5 hours after take off, which would be at the extreme of suggested range, based on fuel suggested fuel load.
The last CONFIRMED contact with satellite was at 8.11am local. That is 7.5 hours after take off, which would be at the extreme of suggested range, based on fuel suggested fuel load.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malaysian PM - Based on new data MH370 could be in the northern corridor (Thailand - Kazakhstan) or southern corridor (Indonesia southwards)
"PM: Nothern corridor between Kazachstan & Turkmenistan to northern Thailand OR Malaysia to Southern Indian Ocean"
"PM: Nothern corridor between Kazachstan & Turkmenistan to northern Thailand OR Malaysia to Southern Indian Ocean"
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Helen_D
That is exactly what the Chinese, in there traditionally oblique way, are suggesting.
If the theory is that the aircraft crashed into the sea, deliberately or otherwise, wouldn't the "impact" have been picked up by the various sonar/SOSUS/seismic recorders?
That is exactly what the Chinese, in there traditionally oblique way, are suggesting.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Age: 46
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Age: 64
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last CONFIRMED contact with satellite was at 8.11am local. That is 7.5 hours after take off, which would be at the extreme of suggested range, based on fuel suggested fuel load.
Or have we ever gotten an accurate accounting of just how much fuel was on board when they initially took off?
This whole thing seems to be planned too well to cut it that close on fuel. That would be taking a big chance with unfavorable winds, etc.
