Transponder was off, so TCAS wouldn't know it was there.

Let's back track.

Transponder turned off.

ATC ask aircraft flying ahead to try to make contact on the emergency frequency.

This was achieved. But I have seen no transcript even from memory of what was said. Just that communication was difficult because of static.

But the other Malaysian pilot said he was confident it sounded like the voice of the pilot or co pilot.

Then this avenue of communication stopped as well.

It would be very interesting to know the time line of the erratic flight levels.

Could that call up on the emergency frequency have alerted the innocent pilot to what the other was up to eg switching off the transponder. And a struggle eschewed???

It seems that some sort of conversation happened. If everything was kosher and you were in control of an aircraft and you are contacted on an emergency frequency saying that your transponder is off and ATC have lost you - that would be be more than a casual chat.

And finally what indication if any would appear on the flight deck that the transponder had been turned off. Would there be on screen messages? Alarms.

Specifically would a co-pilot know if a driver in the other seat had disabled these?

Is the conflicting information coming from the various agencies (Malaysia, USA - even China) quite deliberate?

If we suppose the aircraft has possibly landed somewhere it would make sense for the authorities to keep giving an appearance of confusion and lack of knowledge whilst getting all the ducks in a row to deal with the perpetrators when they make their next move.

SIA68 would only know MH370 was there through visual means, not on radar since transponder and acars were off

playing for max confusion and time.....
 

The more one sees , and the more one reads, especially regarding the route being flown and the timing of dropping off of all comms, the more this looks like a very carefully planned and executed operation. The choice of when to go "missing" and then large changes of heading to throw off any searchers ( radar or otherwise ) .....

Looks like an insider job now from where I'm sitting , but sadly I've been wrong many times in the past, so.....:confused:

sneaking up on SIA
 

To 'sneak up' on SIA they would have had to be able to fly significantly faster than SIA or fly some sort of lateral intercept maneuver. SIA was also a T7.... I think we're in fighter/interceptor territory here, not what a T7 is built to do.

hoppy
 

You are missing the point.

A senior captain with that much experience and presumably access to a whole library of company and Boeng manuals is not likely to need a homebuilt flight sim to find out how to switch off, or disable various functions.

Yes, the police should investigate everything, but with limited resources they need to prioritise the most likely areas first.

A flight sim in the captain's home and discussed on a number of enthusiast forums and YouTube is not really that suspicious.

Just my tuppence worth. The latest reports seem to indicate a plane flying along airways and my first thought was - bearing in mind their transponder was off and they weren't talking to anyone - thank goodness they didn't collide with another plane.

Some have suggested that an explosive decompression or even a slow decompression for that matter could have been the cause, losing communications - but surely anything disrupting the comms / transponder would also impact their ability to navigate?

Others suggest that some event - explosive decompression with failed oxygen would lead to hypoxia and this could have impaired their ability but how could they be so hypoxic as not to be able to enter the correct altitude in the autopilot but able to enter the details into a flight management system for a totally different set of co-ordinates?

Some are stating the pilot turned the transponder off as a precursor in a bid to commit suicide but then I recall hearing about the altitude change - if I pilot wanted to commit suicide, why not "go out in a blaze of glory" and charge along an airway toward oncoming traffic with ATC unaware what's going on? Surely, anyone intent on committing suicide isn't "rational" enough to switch from FL350 down to a level which would avoid any other traffic flying according to the Hemispherical rule.

Then why FL295? Because they were possibly transiting an area where the Quadrangal rule is in effect and they wanted to be sure that they didn't hit anything coming the other way, because this is in effect up to FL290 (see the Malaysian AIP). So why not fly at FL355? Possible because other planes flying at FL340 - 360 could see them pass relatively close under them and advise ATC of a "near miss"?

So when you add this all up together, I'm tending to think that this was a deliberate change of course, maybe a member of the crew had ulterior motives and had intended to divert elsewhere, for reasons unknown - who knows, maybe coercion of some sort or other? However he could only do this once his fellow (non involved) flight crew had actually left the cabin, for example for a toilet break, but what happened if he had miscalculated the fuel required to reach this new destination due to high level winds, due to the fact that he couldn't start his new flight because his co-crew didn't go for their break early enough, that the plane then was forced to ditch elsewhere?

I don't subscribe to the theory of someone else hijacking the plane by overpowering the crew because by now the backgrounds of all those on board would have been examined and anyone without a pilot's licence who would have been learning to operate a 737's navigational and comms system would be suspicious and I don't believe that an amateur, reliant on flight sims alone, would be able to adequately program a 737's FMS...

In post 3233 The flightpath suggests transponder was disabled exactly at igari waypoint. If this is correct you could think the flightplan was already in the FMS beforehand and whoever was in control wanted tot hide the deviation from the filed flightplan exactly when reaching igari by turning off the transponder.

If you wanted to ensure that any AD people awake were not made edgy by your aircraft you would follow a standard route at a standard altitude and look like any other westbound. If you want to alert AD fly off route on a direct heading through procedural airspace. This also confirms the taken by someone who knows and has planned what they are doing. Anyone still pushing the decompression after a bomb, fuselage failure or oxygen bottle theories should abandon them.

You wouldn't go out in a blaze of glory because if it were apparent that it was a deliberate act, your insurance will not pay out, not to mention the shame your family would live with. Whereas going into stealth mode, flying South West into very deep sea miles from where people are looking means there's a good chance you'll never be found.

Quote:
"The more one sees , and the more one reads, especially regarding the route being flown and the timing of dropping off of all comms, the more this looks like a very carefully planned and executed operation. The choice of when to go "missing" and then large changes of heading to throw off any searchers ( radar or otherwise ) .....

I am actually very eager to find out if this is a very carefully planned and executed operation, I am kind of hoping it is and all the passengers and crews are still being held hostage somewhere, all alive! But oh well, if this is actually the case, this hijack would be one hell of a job"

Let's assume its a hijack.

To control and subdue 200+ souls you need more than 1 pilot flying.

Just in the air alone you'd need at least 6 heavily armed hijackers just in the cabin. In light of 9/11 probably more.

I just don't see that many suspicious sleepers in the passenger list.

To me it looks like an individual going postal. But if that is the case why the precise flight path to destination unknown.

Someone mentioned significant USA military footprint nearby??

Steve6443 don't subscribe to the theory of someone else hijacking the plane by overpowering the crew.

Agree, the pilots could have got a call out or just held open the mic. Also they would ave to be pretty quick to disable all the comms, especially the SAT phones to stop anyone in the cabin making a call on the seat telephone.

They would also have to be knowledgeable of the DATA comms system and disable the ADS CPDLC SAT HF and VHF data link.

The pilots could do this in a matter of seconds, also best to switch off the ADS CPDLC and transponder when transiting from one sector to another. This would not arouse any immediate suspicion as one sector would think the other was still in 'control'.

It would take several minutes for the controllers to be aware something was amiss and by that time the plane would be well out of the area and so difficult to spot on primary radar. It would also take time to alert an operator of a primary radar set (military), that the aircraft was lost.

Where would it have landed?
 

Where would MH370 have been headed, if the latest confirmed or unconfirmed rumors hold any real information? The rumors point to the region of the andaman islands group.

What place could it land there?

I would put my bet on great coco island, i posted a reference few posts earlier, here is a better reference.

Wikimapia - Let's describe the whole world!)

1.400 meters could be enough after fuel has been used? That would explain the flighttime to use up the fuel as much as possible. By an able and trained crew i think so. Could it land unobserved? Nobody was looking there from the orbit, when the search started to concentrate to the east of Malaysia. It is a remote place, only around a thousand people there on the whole island. The airport seems to be off limits due to military presence. Could it have been refueld there? There is probably fuel available or could be made available. Could it take off again? I dont know, what do the experts say after removing all load with some fuel to get to its next destination, be it another landing place or an eternal wet grave?

But what would be the motivation for such an act? To answer that, we would have to be willing to discuss the "chinese question", they are the housekeepers on this airport. Do they have motive, ability and will to commence such a deed? What can they gain?

Think about their part in the search until now, could the satellite images have been a diversion, when the focus of the search changed suddenly to the west of malaysia?

This is my third post on this thread and it is highly speculative and probably political sensitive. I´m well aware that this post might disapear in short time by the mods- no pun intended, you guys do a great job here-, but it is worth a try.

mrbigbird, if the hijacker(s) gained access to the cockpit, the number of passengers in the cabin is totally irrelevant, so even a lone hijacker could carry out the takeover (although two to four would be more likely).

The doors between cockpit and cabin fitted to all wide body (and most narrow body) airliners after 2001 make it impossible for the pax to gain access to the cockpit - and, given the hour of the day that these events took place, it's quite possible that no one in the cabin, perhaps not even the First Class cabin crew, would even be aware that anything was amiss for quite some time - until just before the aircraft landed or ditched.

Mention has been made that although the flight was not full (with 50 or more unoccupied seats) there were passengers who flew standby. The reason given for this in this thread was that cargo uplift may have limited passenger capacity.

Question - how often does routine cargo on a passenger flight displace this much passenger uplift capacity?

If it was revealed that the cargo included a heavy valuable substance weighing as much as 50 passengers and their baggage, how many reading this thread would change their mind as to likely cause?

About the passengers: it's the Midnight to Dawn flight to Beijing. Guessing most passengers intended to sleep the flight away.

About Malaysian Air Force scrambling fighters (response to poster ETOPS):

Not trying to give the Malaysians the needle here, but why would one assume they are on alert 30 or alert 15 at midnight? I have no insight into what "DEFCON" condition Malaysia maintains, but they don't have a large Air Force, and it's the late shift. The flight profile as described, heading west, may very well NOT match a given threat profile they use to scramble fighters.

My KISS principle applied to that is that it isn't a surprise that nobody launched an alert fighter section.

Reported by Singapore Today on Twitter
"This is latest and most accurate flight path and the reason why the search is now where it is"
https://twitter.com/sgify


Looking at this track I think is beggars belief that the Malaysian military radar was unable to see this aircraft. If not in real time on the night then surely on review of the tapes.

And anyone who looks at these very precise changes of headings at recognised way points can only come to the one conclusion that the aircraft was not critically damaged and was under the command of a professionally trained pilot.

So I would suggest the leaders of almost all countries involved have known for many days that we are not dealing with a disaster caused by either mechanical or Structual defect.

This is something else entirely. Something I need not put into words.

We have been told specifically, almost from day one, in briefings that there are some things the Malaysians can tell us. And some things they can't.

It seems clear to me that this is what they were talking about. Or rather refusing to talk about.

It is possible to estimate the trip fuel & therefore reserves etc. but the final fuel load would be the Crew's decision. It could have carried plenty more than the minimum required to get to ZBAA.

The only ones to know for sure are those in possession of the ground copy of the loadsheet. That would show minimum required fuel plus any extra.

Info
 

If the plane has crashed, could passengers have been saved if all the information had been made available to all resources from day 1?

Should there not be a central authority that oversees searches? I find it bad that Boeing would be prohibited from officially announcing anything because they are required to pass that information on to the country overseeing the current state of affairs.

Wherever the plane is found will suddenly be the overseeing country of the case. Just sounds like too much red tape when there is an emergency.