Flight MH370 Speculation

[Jason]

I can't get why some people think it was so impossible

No one is stating "it's so impossible", any theories involving this flight could be possible, but it's purely speculation at this time. There are dozens of theories involving what could've happened to this flight, ranging from bat crazy aliens, to suicide, to hijacking, to cockpit fire. No one will know for sure what happened until they discover they flight recorder... Thats all people here are trying to say here. You also need to be open minded and accept the fact that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs or lack of beliefs until the ALL the evidence is in...

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

ranging from bat crazy aliens, to suicide, to hijacking, to cockpit fire.

suicide? wouldn't be performed this way as it really doesn't make any sense, cockpit fire...wouldn't cause the plane to do the path it did, aliens...well it's on par with the first two...hijack is possible by another person but I put most probability to Captain for reasons described

 

[Mick West]

suicide? wouldn't be performed this way as it really doesn't make any sense

You have no way of knowing that, so you can't eliminate the possibility.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

I'm just applying some common sense, suicidal people usually perform the act quickly, why doing so much advanced piloting, meanwhile risking to get seen or jets scrambled just to ditch it? It just doesn't add up for me and I can't see any valid reason why it would be done that way, but I'm open to hear it. This is all evaluating speculations anyway.

 

[Mick West]

Rather pointless speculation really. You know next to nothing about him. You have no idea about his state of mind. And you can't apply generalities to an exceptional incident.

 

[Jason]

I'm just applying some common sense, suicidal people usually perform the act quickly, why doing so much advanced piloting, meanwhile risking to get seen or jets scrambled just to ditch it? It just doesn't add up for me and I can't see any valid reason why it would be done that way, but I'm open to hear it. This is all evaluating speculations anyway.

Mick hit the nail on the head Stevan. You know next to nothing about the pilot. What you or any of us have learned about this pilot has mainly come via the "news", which we all know isn't the most accurate way to learn about an individual. If one network wants to paint him as a terrorist, then they will cherry pick incidents from his past to commandeer that motive. The same can be said if they want to portray him as a hijacker, or suicidal or what have you. Sometimes we need to take a step back and evaluate whats being printed in the news, and question their intentions before agreeing with their conclusions....

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

It is not most accurate but I remember I have put some malaysian forums on google translate and although some of the posters there might be shills(there are some on every forum) I think I got the general picture which is admittedly not precise but enough to draw a conclusion, for me at least.

Again I do not state it's exactly or nearly what happened, just trying to put some logic into the problem...

 

[Jason]

Again I do not state it's exactly or nearly what happened, just trying to put some logic into the problem...

Thats what everyone does after an inexplicable tragedy. It's only natural to draw conclusions and in some cases people usually rush to conclusions before waying all the evidence. I would much rather everyone in the media say, "I haven't the faintest idea what happened to that plane, or why it went missing", but unfortunately all the media has done in the past few months is shape the coverage according to their ratings.

 

[Hama Neggs]

...might be shills(there are some on every forum)

No, there are not "shills" on every forum. What a paranoid notion.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

OK that was a bit exaggerated

 

[zebra100]

I'm just applying some common sense, suicidal people usually perform the act quickly, why doing so much advanced piloting, meanwhile risking to get seen or jets scrambled just to ditch it? It just doesn't add up for me and I can't see any valid reason why it would be done that way, but I'm open to hear it. This is all evaluating speculations anyway.

Not correct. Suicidal people are very unpredictable and vary in every case. Recent US cases of shooting proved it again and again. Besides, your assumption of pilot fly to Australia for political asylum is very remote to say at least provided his knowledge and experience of flying that he knew there was no way he could make it. If it is suicidal flight, he did it this way on a purpose: because he didn't want to anyone to know it due to that would be a murder case, his reputation would be destroyed and his relatives could not collect insurance and bear the burden of his act-- this is very logical.
Besides, we even don't know if this is a accidental (by the way, smothering fire at certain content can keep plane flying for hours) or this is a murder/sabotage act.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

Not correct. Suicidal people are very unpredictable and vary in every case. Recent US cases of shooting proved it again and again. Besides, your assumption of pilot fly to Australia for political asylum is very remote to say at least provided his knowledge and experience of flying that he knew there was no way he could make it. If it is suicidal flight, he did it this way on a purpose: because he didn't want to anyone to know it due to that would be a murder case, his reputation would be destroyed and his relatives could not collect insurance and bear the burden of his act-- this is very logical.
Besides, we even don't know if this is a accidental (by the way, smothering fire at certain content can keep plane flying for hours) or this is a murder/sabotage act.

1. Maybe there was an in-flight conflict that had the flight path changed and more fuel spent than needed. Or a technical problem or something.
2. Not the type of person interested in money especially when he is dead. Also there were flights bound to ME(and other destinations) where he could do the same without any risk of flying above radars. Doesn't make sense however you put it.
3. Fires don't make planes evade radars.
4. Time will tell.

 

[zebra100]

1. Maybe there was an in-flight conflict that had the flight path changed and more fuel spent than needed. Or a technical problem or something.
2. Not the type of person interested in money especially when he is dead. Also there were flights bound to ME(and other destinations) where he could do the same without any risk of flying above radars. Doesn't make sense however you put it.
3. Fires don't make planes evade radars.
4. Time will tell.

A suicidal person might not care about himself but would still care about his family; and we don't know if the "avoiding radar" theroy is valid as many experts pointed out; thirdly, there was even no evidence that if it was intentional, the guy behind it died as the rest of the crew and passengers--do not forget there is Mr "D.B. Cooper"

 

[Jason]

A suicidal person might not care about himself but would still care about his family; and we do know if the "avoiding radar" theroy is valid as many experts pointed out; thirdly, there was even no evidence that if it was intentional, the guy behind it died as the rest of the crew and passengers--do not forget there is Mr "D.B. Cooper"

This is what I don't understand, in order for the plane to have avoided radar it would've had to flown below 5000 ft, Right? But in doing so, wouldn't that have dramatically decreased it's available fuel, cutting down it's total flight time? Just a question, is it possible to hack into Inmarsat data to create handshakes that never existed in the first place. Someone proposed this question to me and I haven't the faintest idea.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

A suicidal person might not care about himself but would still care about his family; and we don't know if the "avoiding radar" theroy is valid as many experts pointed out; thirdly, there was even no evidence that if it was intentional, the guy behind it died as the rest of the crew and passengers--do not forget there is Mr "D.B. Cooper"

suicide for insurance is just not asian mentality, I can't remember any case at least(although there might have been some), it's possibly also due to their insurance regulations

there is nothing about being valid or not, if it was for insurance he would choose another flight without having to cross any land and risk getting caught/seen, also he would point the plane further of Australia not closer to SE if "wanting to disappear" was the point

if this was a suicide I couldn't find any reason except whoever had flown the plane had gone completely mental

This is what I don't understand, in order for the plane to have avoided radar it would've had to flown below 5000 ft, Right? But in doing so, wouldn't that have dramatically decreased it's available fuel, cutting down it's total flight time? Just a question, is it possible to hack into Inmarsat data to create handshakes that never existed in the first place. Someone proposed this question to me and I haven't the faintest idea.

it would, which at the end would cause a huge miscalculation

 

[zebra100]

suicide for insurance is just not asian mentality, I can't remember any case at least(although there might have been some), it's possibly also due to their insurance regulations
there is nothing about being valid or not, if it fowas r insurance he would choose another flight without having to cross any land and risk getting caught/seen, also he would point the plane further of Australia not closer to SE if "wanting to disappear" was the point

if this was a suicide I couldn't find any reason except whoever had flown the plane had gone completely mental



it would, which at the end would cause a huge miscalculation

"suicide for insurance is just not asian mentality"-- you have the conclusion too soon, I know for fact there are a lot of cases in Asia that really happened;

"if it fowasr insurance he would choose another flight without having to cross any land and risk getting caught/seen" Are you sure about that? Are you a pilot? Same thing, you have your conclusion too
soon.

 

[NoParty]

suicide for insurance is just not asian mentality

As my uncle Cliven always says, "I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Oriental..."

 

[zebra100]

Actually, according to Malaysia government and Inmarsat, MH370 flight pattern seemed very strange: at first stage was very alive, it made almost 90 degree turn; it changed flight height dramatically; it crossed Malaysia using several waypoints; then at the second stage, it used a constant flight path and speed like zombie flying; certainly that also because we didn't have any radar tractions after first stage-only reached that conclusion by a bunch of arcs further from the satellite by the time intervals. But if this was the case, it might be:

1, mechanical failure (including caused by fire or sabotage: small bomb, laser weapon, EW weapon) which impair the whole communication system and manual piloting system and/or pilots, making flight piloting can only be made partially through automatic waypoint system or actually non-piloting;

2, the whole flight was carefully planned and executed and it might even not be a suicidal mission: some one turned off the communication system, flew to 34,000 ft to put out all crew and passengers; lower altitude while crossing Malaysia Peninsula and using auto piloting with waypoints not only to avoid detection but mainly to free himself for a "D.B. Cooper jump". And the following flight of MH370 became a doomed ghost zombie mission.

 

[derwoodii]

"D.B. Cooper jump"

now that a scenario i not considered,, hmm wondering now if possible to set controls over the peninsula exit a door at night

there may have been comms with ground,, pay up or i will and this kept out of media

 

[Jason]

2, the whole flight was carefully planned and executed and it might even not be a suicidal mission: some one turned off the communication system, flew to 34,000 ft to put out all crew and passengers; lower altitude while crossing Malaysia Peninsula and using auto piloting with waypoints not only to avoid detection but mainly to free himself for a "D.B. Cooper jump". And the following flight of MH370 became a doomed ghost zombie mission.

I'm with derwoodii, I haven't even considered that or heard of that one. It might be plausible, but I don't know if he could've survived a jump from that size plane. If he jumped and they never found the plane he could've planned this to get half of his insurance money if he had a sizeable life insurance policy. Someone should look into that to see if any changes have been made to his life insurance policy.

 

[jonnyH]

if this was a suicide I couldn't find any reason except whoever had flown the plane had gone completely mental

To my mind, in your scenario the pilot would have to have gone completely mental.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

as I have already said people have done much more "mental" things in name of ideology friendship or whatever, that scenario is simply a divert with turning communications off if you look at it a bit better

also D.B. Cooper Jump is an interesting thinking, however he would need a parachute and pilots are also screened at the airport so I guess security would notice the parachute and it would raise their attention, they would let him through as parachute is of course allowed but they would notice authorities after all this happened

 

[WeedWhacker]

also D.B. Cooper Jump is an interesting thinking, however he would need a parachute

Not only that, but the D.B. Cooper situation involved a Boeing 727 which was equipped with an aft airstair exit. The rear door could be opened once the cabin was depressurized (door opened inwards), and the stairs dropped to provide an exit.

Boeing 777 has no such means of egress, in flight. Here's a typical B-777 cabin door (R1):


Although it's hard to see there, the door (when closed) acts like a "plug" (so it gets tighter as the cabin pressure increases). When opened sections retract, and it can move outward, but then swings parallel and forward....so in flight, it is impossible to move the door to the open position against the wind flow.

A video:


(That is a training device, since all crew must receive continual training on door operation)

Here it is from inside:


Alternately, there are two hatches in the forward fuselage belly, accessible to maintenance from outside, when on the ground...but access to the lower electronics bay from inside is usually gained from outside the flight deck (cockpit).

 

[jonnyH]

people have done much more "mental" things in name of ideology friendship or whatever

Those people would probably be considered to be "completely mental" which is my point. Are there any particular examples that you think are relevant here?

If we can't even determine from the pilots actions in what name, ideology, friendship or whatever he was acting then it seems fair to conclude that his actions were not very well chosen with regards to furthering his cause.

If he is motivated by Anwar Ibrahim's situation why not wait and see how the appeal goes?

As part of his overturned acquittal on 4 March 2014, Anwar has been sentenced to five years in jail, but remains free on bail while he appeals the verdict

Content from External Source

I don't see how hijacking a plane in Anwar's name would help him, I mean he's still apparently free and able to speak in public:
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/m...ing-johor-sultan-over-housing-bill-anwar-says

that scenario is simply a divert with turning communications off if you look at it a bit better

its not though is it? Its a pointless meandering diversion, a cut in communications, an inexplicable accidental exhaustion of fuel and a ditching at sea hundreds of miles from the intended destination.

I agree with you on the parachute though.

 

[zebra100]

as I have already said people have done much more "mental" things in name of ideology friendship or whatever, that scenario is simply a divert with turning communications off if you look at it a bit better

also D.B. Cooper Jump is an interesting thinking, however he would need a parachute and pilots are also screened at the airport so I guess security would notice the parachute and it would raise their attention, they would let him through as parachute is of course allowed but they would notice authorities after all this happened

Unfortunately, metal detector can not detect parachute and airport security usually lapse with crew members especially pilots as I personally witnessed often. By the way, modern parachutes are not that big: it can be easily squeezed into a carry-on wheeler as we often see the crew members walking with and with vacuum it would be even smaller.

 

[WeedWhacker]

Unfortunately, metal detector can not detect parachute and airport security usually lapse with crew members especially pilots as I personally witnessed often. By the way, modern parachutes are not that big: it can be easily squeezed into a carry-on wheeler as we often see the crew members walking with and with vacuum it would be even smaller.

This is interesting, but rampant "speculation" in the extreme....sorry.

Oh, and security "lapses" with crew members? I won't elaborate, but in most cases we are treated just as poorly as passengers. However, standards around the World do vary.....

 

[Jason]

This is interesting, but rampant "speculation" in the extreme....sorry.

Oh, and security "lapses" with crew members? I won't elaborate, but in most cases we are treated just as poorly as passengers. However, standards around the World do vary.....

But this is niether here nor there because you noted above that it would be impossible to open the only door on the plane, because it opens outward and its in the aft of the plane. So unless there is another way out of the plane, its really irrelevant. Just wondering, when a pilot plots a course, can the pilot put in several way points at once or do they have to wait until they arrive at a way point before entering the next way point. ie, can they plot a course for A-B-C-D, or do can they only do A-B, and once they arrive at B they can enter C...

Is there any other way out of a plane once its airborne, like through the landing gear?

 

[zebra100]

Not only that, but the D.B. Cooper situation involved a Boeing 727 which was equipped with an aft airstair exit. The rear door could be opened once the cabin was depressurized (door opened inwards), and the stairs dropped to provide an exit.
Although it's hard to see there, the door (when closed) acts like a "plug" (so it gets tighter as the cabin pressure increases). When opened sections retract, and it can move outward, but then swings parallel and forward....so in flight, it is impossible to move the door to the open position against the wind flow.
Alternately, there are two hatches in the forward fuselage belly, accessible to maintenance from outside, when on the ground...but access to the lower electronics bay from inside is usually gained from outside the flight deck (cockpit).

Actually, it happened before:http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...-plane-door-not-properly-locked/1/325031.html

Also, we all agree if it was a sinister act, the whole cabin was depressurized already to put out the whole passengers and crew and the emergency exits at the 777 body all open inward first and at a low altitude over Malaysia Peninsular (The missing Malaysia Airlines plane could have flown as low as 5,000ft (1,500 metres) see here) it would be easy for anyone with normal strength to open the hatch and----jump

this is 777-200 body and you can see all the exits to escape, especially the rear ones for a Cooper Jump:

 

[WeedWhacker]

Actually, it happened before:http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...-plane-door-not-properly-locked/1/325031.html

THAT was a B-747....different door design. But in any case, the cabin (and this INCLUDES the cockpit/Flight Deck) will not pressurize properly.
(AND, there should have been warning lights in the cockpit/Flight Deck to alert the pilots to a door not properly secured...however....some airlines might not have proper maintenance, etc...)

The article cited has multiple errors (typical of news media). In essence, the door (R2, apparently) was not properly secured, and usually that side is accessed by the catering companies. As the article states, though, the door opened inward, and the photo shows its position. It is, simply, physically impossible for that door to open outward, and then forward (as it is designed to do, on the ground) when in flight.

Also, we all agree if it was a sinister act, the whole cabin was depressurized already to put out the whole passengers and crew and the emergency exits at the 777 body all open inward first and at a low altitude over Malaysia Peninsular (The missing Malaysia Airlines plane could have flown as low as 5,000ft (1,500 metres) see here) it would be easy for anyone with normal strength to open the hatch and----jump

NO.....just.....NO!

I already explained previously that ALL the doors....(refer to your diagram)....open firstly outwards, THEN forwards. THAT is the design.

Even the "aft-most" doors (4L and 4R) are the same configuration.

EDIT: Perhaps I was unclear on the terminology. "4L" means "number 4, left side".

Conversely, "4R" means "number 4 door, right side". Hope that is clear....we start at the nose (front) of the airplane, and number the doors going aft. Left/Right, well that seems obvious.

 

[zebra100]

THAT was a B-747....different door design. But in any case, the cabin (and this INCLUDES the cockpit/Flight Deck) will not pressurize properly.
(AND, there should have been warning lights in the cockpit/Flight Deck to alert the pilots to a door not properly secured...however....some airlines might not have proper maintenance, etc...)

The article cited has multiple errors (typical of news media). In essence, the door (R2, apparently) was not properly secured, and usually that side is accessed by the catering companies. As the article states, though, the door opened inward, and the photo shows its position. It is, simply, physically impossible for that door to open outward, and then forward (as it is designed to do, on the ground) when in flight.

Conversely, "4R" means "number 4 door, right side". Hope that is clear....we start at the nose (front) of the airplane, and number the doors going aft. Left/Right, well that seems obvious.

I think you are right--777 not like 747 the emergency doors open outward a bit, then slide to front, but that doesn't mean a person can not open it with a depressurized cabin at 1500 m altitude maybe with help of some tools and bail out. Everyone thought D.B. Cooper jump was impossible at the time--but he did it.

 

[zebra100]

Two of the most fascinating mysteries in aviation history were "D.B. Cooper" case and Amelia Earhart case. Will MH370 becomes one of those? But the previous two only involve one (in Cooper case) or two (in Earhart case) and MH370 involved a whole of 239 people and the society has the responsibility to check every possible speculations out until they are found.

 

[Jason]

THAT was a B-747....different door design. But in any case, the cabin (and this INCLUDES the cockpit/Flight Deck) will not pressurize properly.
(AND, there should have been warning lights in the cockpit/Flight Deck to alert the pilots to a door not properly secured...however....some airlines might not have proper maintenance, etc...)

The article cited has multiple errors (typical of news media). In essence, the door (R2, apparently) was not properly secured, and usually that side is accessed by the catering companies. As the article states, though, the door opened inward, and the photo shows its position. It is, simply, physically impossible for that door to open outward, and then forward (as it is designed to do, on the ground) when in flight.




NO.....just.....NO!

I already explained previously that ALL the doors....(refer to your diagram)....open firstly outwards, THEN forwards. THAT is the design.

Even the "aft-most" doors (4L and 4R) are the same configuration.

EDIT: Perhaps I was unclear on the terminology. "4L" means "number 4, left side".

Conversely, "4R" means "number 4 door, right side". Hope that is clear....we start at the nose (front) of the airplane, and number the doors going aft. Left/Right, well that seems obvious.

So TJ, it's "impossible" for the doors to be opened on that plane regardless of being pressurized or not. Correct? Is there any other way to exit the plane while in flight, like perhaps through the landing gear?

 

[WeedWhacker]

So TJ, it's "impossible" for the doors to be opened on that plane regardless of being pressurized or not. Correct? Is there any other way to exit the plane while in flight, like perhaps through the landing gear?

On the B-777, ALL 8 doors at the cabin level MUST translate out, and forward, per the design. In-flight, this is unlikely to be possible (which is WHY they were designed that way, BTW).

No, there is NO access to the landing gear bays from inside the airplane (Hollywood fictional movies and TV are largely responsible for that trope).

SOME jets, like the B-747, do have access to the cargo areas, but this varies greatly and is part of whether of not a buyer chose that option (for the "Lower Galleys", as example...these extended down into the Cargo area, and there were elevators and such for the Flight Attendants to access these).

EDIT: Also, some customers (airlines, leasing companies, etc) who buy airliners opt for crew rest areas down "below"...again, this takes up "valuable" cargo area, so most opt for crew bunks either on the main cabin level (which means fewer passenger seats), or up in the "attic"...the space above the main cabin.

 

[zebra100]

Though very unlikely, anything could be done with a careful plan and if this was the case, our man had been proved very resourceful:
Unlock the emergency door at rear, power up the cabin pressure again -- bang - the door flew outward - Never under estimate the criminal mind if there is one.

 

[WeedWhacker]

Unlock the emergency door at rear, power up the cabin pressure again -- bang - the door flew outward - Never under estimate the criminal mind if there is one.

You are forgetting the primary hypothesis....and anyways, diverging into such speculation that is (sorry) absurd.

 

[zebra100]

Now i know the real answer: all the Boeing 777 emergency doors are plug doors: they all open INWARD first to pass the plug tab then go outward

http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/403244-plug-doors.html

 

[zebra100]

You are forgetting the primary hypothesis....and anyways, diverging into such speculation that is (sorry) absurd.

This threat is called "speculation." And no speculations is absurd until you can prove it wrong by fact. So please don't call anyone else "absurd" except yourself.

And I believe you are not allowed to use this kind of language here towards others.

 

[WeedWhacker]

Now i know the real answer: all the Boeing 777 emergency doors are plug doors: they all open INWARD

Yeah, well I mentioned that in post #953. Actually, they move slightly inward, then an internal mechanism retracts (top and bottom) which allows the door to then move OUTWARD and translate on the hinges, forward to the "OPEN" position.

ALSO, all airliner Entry/Egress doors are "plug" doors. AND, no, the B777 doesn't really have "emergency doors"....OR you can consider them ALL to be "emergency doors" once they are closed, locked & armed and the girt bars engaged.

I should note that on the B737NG, the over-wing window exits are different....they have locking pins, and are not "plug type", as compared to earlier versions of the B737. Still, on the B737NG, the locking pins are controlled by the Air/Ground sensing logic.

 

[TWCobra]

I am not sure if you could actually open the door even if depressurised. Still air in the cabin versus moving air outside? There would be a pressure differential. Even 0.1 PSI over the entire area of the door adds up. Just speculation on my part, I don't really know.

 

[TWCobra]

With regards to the Air India incident, my money would be on a faulty air seal creating a loud (so loud you wouldn't believe it) air noise as the aircraft began pressurising. I very much doubt the door came open.