This assumes that the Malaysian Air Force maintains an interceptor on a 15 minute alert. From the time of the turn back it would have taken only about 15 minutes before the target was back overland. It would take almost as much time to determine that a scramble was necessary.

Once the aircraft is overland the interceptor probably has no chance of catching it up because, as you point out, it is fuel limited.

What other aircraft could have been used? As you say, a turbo prop would be too slow. You also assume that one was on standby.

The highest alert for a patrol aircraft is usually no more than 60 minutes and more likely 2 hours. Even more likely is that no standby is maintained at night and 3-4 hours being a more likely reaction time.

Fatigue
 

Yep, it is possible that with fatigue (and short temperateness, he could have made a monumental mistake by deciding to do something to the flight (and pax). A spur of the moment act thought through from 9:30pm to midnight?

This begs the question as to what he did with FO and pax? Further, what was the ultimate end of MH370 according to the captain's spur of the moment plan?

Re: "Astana is 3800 Miles or so. Kerguelen Island is 4000 'ish miles on a rough extrapolation of the Southern arc. Is is feasible? Vallee des Sables would be a lovely quiet place to put down?"

With various altitudes and maneuvers of course affecting it, CNN meterologist Chad Myers today has suggested that destinations up to 3000 miles away are the most reasonable realm of possibility, based upon available fuel.

Spoofing/faking another flight
 

I'm sorry if this has been touched upon before, but a search in this thread for "fake flight plan " doesn't return any hits. So:

Could whoever piloted MH370 have filed a "fake" IFR flight plan for "Whatever flight XXX/Private XXX" in advance and then, when the aircraft had been disappeared over the ocean in an area without ATC and radar coverage, simply present himself as "Whatever flight XXX/Private XXX" in accordance with the filed flight plan to ATC when entering controlled airspace, set the ACs transponder to the designated squawk and then all of a sudden be a legit flight being able to travel in controlled airspace without anyone including military types noticing (for the time being at least)?

Or would ATC know in advance that "Whatever flight XXX/Private XXX" had in fact never taken off from it's filed origin and therefore flag it as trouble? Does - or rather must - the ATC handing the aircraft off into uncontrolled airspace advise the ATC in the other end that "Whatever flight XXX/Private XXX" is approaching in accordance with filed flight plan?

(With a Mode S XPDR I guess you really can't unless ATC doesn't couple the transponders ID with the ICAO database or doesn't notice the discrepancy, but can the pilot of a 777 toggle the transponders mode and run in ie mode A/C?)

((Asking because I'm trying to weed out a conspiracy that's pretty much off the top))

Pressure breathing equipment is not standard in airliners. It would have had to get on there somehow, and not in a carry on: An O2 tank of sufficient size would cause all sorts of alarms, considering what happened to me and my spinlock life vest on my last transpacific flight! It's got a 20 gram CO2 cartridge in it which made the doozies lose their plots, knickers their twists and all such things.

Having said that, climbing to FL450, depressurising, waiting until you're almost out of O2 yourself (~30-45min?), then descending to a manageable FL295 on a low O2 flow to maximise range sounds like an awesome plan - but not a if you think about it in detail. Out of your 23x specimens in the back, there are at least 10 or so that will come back without permanent damage. Altitude tolerance is extremely individual. I don't think that's a risk I'd take.

I think I like my theory still the best: A spook sliced them open near where contact lost, that might have well resulted in the reported altitude excursion, crew and pax out etc, and subsequent fireball into the ocean. The PSR target then was the spook making its way out of the area, apparently not fully disabled at that stage.

Then why did the plane clearly turn right just after the waypoint IGARI?
If the original flight plan had been changed and a new waypoint West of IGARI had been inserted before 1:07 (in order to be allegedly reported in the last ACARS log), supposedly VAMPI, then why do we clearly see the aircraft turning right as per original flight plan indicating he's headed for BITOD, as any other MAS 370 (now MAS 318) did before and after March 8, 2014, before it disappears from secondary radar?

I never saw an aircraft, which is following the flight plan stored in the FMC, turning right when the next point clearly requires a left turn.

Can anyone please care to explain me this?

The disapearance of MH370 was either caused by cascading technical failures followed by a crash or it was a deliberate act, like it is the comunicated official version at the moment. And it is fair to say that we meanwhile see it as the most probable event as well.

A deliberate act to prevent MH370 from reaching its planned destination can only be executed from within the aircraft, from one or more passengers, from one or more crew members, or a combination of both, one single passenger being the most unlikely one in my humble opinion. All passengers and all of the crew are suspects at the moment.

A deliberate act could be a single persons deed like suicide or some kind of personal vandetta, or it could be an outside job with the acting people on board being the mercenaries. A suicide or personal vandetta could be straight forward, get the aircraft and do something weird with it, thereby killing yourself and doing whatever damage you intend to do. I'm no shrink, but i can't see a person with a suicide will go to such detailed planning and execution and missing the final big bang glory, to let everybody know what he did.

That leaves the outside job, from a group with resources, money and motive.

Could that group be some political motivated group from inside or outside malaysia to make some statement and do some damage (terror), or a criminal group with the intent to make money from the load and aircraft (crime)?

If it is some terror scheme, then their aim may be reached by making aircraft and load disappear without trace ( crash it in deep water),or by crashing it in 911 style which did not happen. Other option would be landing it somewhere for the purpose of using its load or / and the aircraft for a later purpose (terror or crime). Landing it in the water would be not an planned option for that last intention, too many unknown risks for the aircraft and the load would be involved. Imagine unloading some tons of gold in the middle of the ocean from a sinking aircraft by hand from the hold. If the load was of interest, the number of suspects is limited to the circle in the know of the shipment, in the first line being the sender and the recepient, as only those both would have the detailed insight about the kind of shipment, the size, the weight, the look alike, the value of the shipment and the planned timing.

Landing the aircraft somewhere on land (normal or crashlanding) needs lots of preparation and logistcs to make sure the place is suitable, the place is deserted at landing time and the infrastructure for the getaway is safe and managable. Furthermore the place must be remote enough that actvities raise no suspicion and remain unobserved from legal forces like military, police and third country survailance systems like satelites. Furthermore, to not get caught later with such a crime all evidence has to disappear somehow pretty soon after landing and stay hidden for quite some time, the best forever.

Such a plot could only be pulled off with the help from powerfull organisations or with the tolerance and assistance of a whole state. Such help would bare great risk in case of failure, therefore the prize to be gained must be worth it in the long term or they don't have to loose anything.

What am i getting at?

1. The disappearance of MH370 was most probably a deliberate act.

2. MH370 was crashed on purpose if it was a personal act.

3. MH370 would have been crashed 911 style or similar, if some terror group wanted to make a statement

4. MH370 could have been hijacked with the intention to land it somewhere, for its load or for criminal or unknown political reasons.

5. Planning for such a landing needs wealthy, influential and powerfull asistance, only states or state organizations can provide.

Now look for somebody along the suspected flightpath with the power, the ability, the will and the reclessness for such a plan.

Question:
If the plane really is intact someplace, what could you DO with it :confused:
No one is going to buy it.
No one is going to buy the parts either.
If you want to do a kamikaze attack, all the sleepy air defense operations are sure as hell awake and looking NOW.

Just don't get it...............

shot down
 

Acars turned off - Transponder turned off - Acars transmitters would have still pinged satellites hence the ping from the aircraft - Most likely scenario is that it has been shot down for not responding, military radar picked up an unknown aircraft, military jets would have been dispatched to intercept, why is there no mention of this? Now how do the governments tell people and families we had to shoot it down...

Depends where in the FMS flight plan the new waypoint was entered and then made the active waypoint which was in the ACARS message. It could have been entered after BITOD.

GF

Reuters March 14:

"The military track suggests it then turned sharply westwards, heading towards a waypoint called "Vampi", northeast of Indonesia's Aceh province and a navigational point used for planes following route N571 to the Middle East."

...not sure where poster suggesting right turn at IGARI got their info?

(PS. Last confirmed position before military radar blip (to the left), was 1:21 at IGARI... no right turn I have seen reported.)

510orbust

So, someone onboard took the various actions, documented by independent sources, like the ACARS shutdown and the transponder disabled, while being intercepted and shot down. Is that you're idea?

GF

...human error at the ATC...
 

You can't rule out human error for working guys at an ATC station....or at a primary military radar.....
Let me tell you a short story, when I served in GAF in the mid 80s. I was a normal soldier which worked shift on a radio support station (GAF) in the upper Bavaria. This station was remote from civilisation, but on a good location where you can operate radio on GHz waves. Our station was also a relay for data channels for example from CRC Freising to Ramstein Air Base, also the former Alpha Jet base (GAF) JbG 49 at Furstenfeldbruck was connected.
Due to the remote location, we had to call the guard post from JbG 49 twice a night, to know them, whether we're allright. During a nightshift at weekend, I did my first call before midnight and all was o.k. . When I made my second call in the next early morning, my call to the guard station failed. Finally I woke up the sergeant and told him what happened. He also didn't get a contact to them. So we decided to phone the local police station, because we didn't know what really happened. So the police went out to air base and found the complete guard soldiers drunken in the barracs, don't ask me what happened with these guys afterwards.....

You see, things happen.... . As a government, I would feel uneasy to admit, that my radar isn't operted well by human error without losing the face :\....

turned off
 

The authorities are now saying that both systems were turned off, the jet turned off the intended route, was then picked up by military radar, jets would have been sent to intercept, if no response from the flight deck with the aircraft not obeying or trying to communicate with the military jets they would have taken action in my opinion to stop the aircraft being used as a missile. Its much more plausible then the governments saying we just dont know where it is....

Backseat Dane. That, from an avionics standpoint is doable. You could go A/C on the transponder, or it could be re-strapped in the air to a new ICAO code. I won't go into details on re-strapping it but it would only take 5 min top for an avionics guy. But I would want a test set to make sure I didn't screw up the code.


Maybe we should be playing the ball (the aircraft) and not the player (what happened)

777 drivers. Assuming your running on fumes, 230 pax and luggage, what is the minimum you would need to land and do a full stop? No safety margin or book approved field distance, just assume 0 Kts wind. And assuming you offloaded the pax and luggage, how much to take off again with say 3 hours fuel.

Is there any area in the northern track that would meet the requirements? Abandoned airstrips from WW2, dry lakebeds, etc.

"MH370 would have been crashed 911 style or similar, if some terror group wanted to make a statement"


And after 9/11 reinforced cockpit doors were introduced to shore up the vulnerability of the cockpit from terrorist threats from the passenger cabin.


As I see it today, if the threat comes from within the cockpit we now have an argument against the use of secure doors.

I don't find this that surprising. I remember an analysis of the Bin Laden raid, and one of the reasons the US felt they could sneak in, is that Pakistan did not have much western-facing military radar; India is their only real foe in the region (discounting the US presence in Afghanistan) so most of, and the best, radar assets are pointed east.

I suspect India's strategy is much the same. They don't fear anyone coming in from the east -- most of their assets are directed at Pakistan and to a lesser degree China -- so the military radar there is likely to be inferior and coverage more spotty. The fact that nobody was paying attention to a low-risk area is an embarrassment for India, but not that surprising to me.

Mickjoebill

Crew O2 has 2 setting continuous flow or on demand. How long it last is relative to how hard you breath and the setting selected. And each individual is different. If there is a decompression in in the cabin. One of the priority of the flight crew besides putting on their O2 mass is to reduce their altitude as fast as they can to get to an altitude where they do not need to depend on having oxygen. Believe me the 1800psi do not last as long as you think if you are breathing fast and hard. (how fast does your 32psi tyre deflate?)

The pax cabin has 12 to 16, (depending on configuration) 1800 psi bottle all connected together to feed the whole pax cabin. It only supply O2 when the mask is pulled towards you and not when it is just hanging down. How long is last is relative too. A fully loaded aircraft will use the O2 faster. So they are relying on the flight crew to get it down to a breathable altitude asap.

Could a four-year-old thriller unlock the mystery of flight MH370?