Jeff Wise's new MH370 theory

[derwoodii]

Its a long ramble and hard to follow skip to the end the plane ended up auto landing in Kazakhstan because them Russians wanted it yet without any plausible motive.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/02/jeff-wise-mh370-theory.html

The unsettling oddness was there from the first moment, on March 8, when Malaysia Airlines announced that a plane from Kuala Lumpur bound for Beijing, Flight 370, had disappeared over the South China Sea in the middle of the night. There had been no bad weather, no distress call, no wreckage, no eyewitness accounts of a fireball in the sky—just a plane that said good-bye to one air-traffic controller and, two minutes later, failed to say hello to the next. And the crash, if it was a crash, got stranger from there.

summed up here

Whether the plane went to Baikonur or elsewhere in Kazakhstan, my suspicion fell on Russia. With technically advanced satellite, avionics, and aircraft-manufacturing industries, Russia was a paranoid fantasist’s dream.24 (The Russians, or at least Russian-backed militia, were also suspected in the downing of Malaysia Flight 17 in July.) Why, exactly, would Putin want to steal a Malaysian passenger plane? I had no idea. Maybe he wanted to demonstrate to the United States, which had imposed the first punitive sanctions on Russia the day before, that he could hurt the West and its allies anywhere in the world. Maybe what he was really after were the secrets of one of the plane’s passengers.25 Maybe there was something strategically crucial in the hold. Or maybe he wanted the plane to show up unexpectedly somewhere someday, packed with explosives. There’s no way to know. That’s the thing about MH370 theory-making: It’s hard to come up with a plausible motive for an act that has no apparent beneficiaries.

Content from external source

 

[Auldy]

If I could just focus on this one thought:

...Maybe he wanted to demonstrate to the United States, which had imposed the first punitive sanctions on Russia the day before, that he could hurt the West and its allies anywhere in the world. ...

Content from external source

There have been plenty of more sanctions levelled at Putin's Russia since then, many more severe than the asset freeze originally set. So if MH370 was meant to be Russia's deterrent/retribution, there should have been dozens of more shows of plane stealing power.

PS. I don't remember ever seeing anything about the metal orbs found in the Maldives during the original search, was that a thing? Its mentioned in the articles fig 5, but I don't see it actually mentioned in the article itself.

 

[derwoodii]

PS. I don't remember ever seeing anything about the metal orbs found in the Maldives during the original search, was that a thing? Its mentioned in the articles fig 5, but I don't see it actually mentioned in the article itself.

sorry dont know not seen that orb thing either I just came across the article but found it to hard to debunk as it kind does its self that honor or bother research for facts as i'm a bit time poor atm more of fyi post for other to ponder

 

[Whitebeard]

Am I wrong but is that whole rambling article just sayng 'The Russians did it, the Ukrainians helped and the plane is in Kazakhstan, but we don't why, where or how?' with nothing to back up the claims. If not can someone show me what I missed and if it is can I have the half hour I spent reading it back?

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

I got really shocked today when I found out this "person" is actually connected to CNN and is everywhere quoted as an aviation expert! What credentials he has for such claim? To me he just sounds as a typical CTer without ounce of real knowledge.

 

[derwoodii]

I got really shocked today when I found out this "person" is actually connected to CNN and is everywhere quoted as an aviation expert! What credentials he has for such claim? To me he just sounds as a typical CTer without ounce of real knowledge.

yes that's why i tagged his name a quick look over his articles had me wondering motivation

 

[Mick West]

http://jeffwise.net/about-the-author/

Jeff Wise is a science writer and author of Extreme Fear: The Science of Your Mind in Danger. A contributing editor at Travel + Leisure, he’s also written for Time, Businessweek, The New York Times, New York, Men’s Health, Men’s Journal, Psychology Today, Reader’s Digest, and many others.

A lifelong science enthusiast, he majored in evolutionary biology at Harvard, where studied with noted ethologist Bert Holldobler and ichthyologist Karel Liem. In his subsequent 25-year writing career, Wise’s brief expanded to include adventure, technology, and psychology. For nine years he wrote Popular Mechanics’ “I’ll Try Anything” column, which required him to pilot a Zeppelin, scuba dive under Arctic ice, endure wilderness survival training, fly loops in a WWII fighter plane, explore the endless dark of the deep ocean, drive a tank over a Ford sedan, and spend the night in an igloo he built himself.

In 2009 he published Extreme Fear: The Science of Your Mind in Danger, a book that explores this powerful emotion through a mixture of neuroscience and real-life narrative. Fear, Wise argues, is something that we all have to deal with every day; understanding the brain circuits that help a hiker survive a mountain lion attack can also help us deal with day-to-day crises like public speaking and workplace confrontations.

Since Extreme Fear’s publication Wise has moonlighted as a television presenter, appearing on shows for History, the Discovery Channel, the National Geographic Channel, and others. Since 2014 he has appeared as Aviation Analyst on CNN.

His blog posts for Slate, Gizmodo, Huffington Post, Popular Mechanics, Men’s Journal and Psychology Today have collectively received more than five million page views. His Popular Mechanics story about the doomed airliner Air France 447 was chosen as one of the 10 Best Longreads of 2011 by Longreads.com. In 2012 he broke the news on Gizmodo that tech guru-turned-fugitive John McAfee was wanted for murder, a story that triggered an international media furor. Wise’s Popular Mechanics story “How Not to Die” was named one of NextIssue’s 32 favorite stories of 2013.

He lives in New York City with his wife and two sons. In his spare time flies small airplanes and gliders.

Content from external source

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

"In his spare time flies small airplanes and gliders."

and that apparently makes him an aviation expert? I'm baffled.

 

[Pete Tar]

Maybe he's writing an article 'here's how you can take an event and invent a narrative around it and rationalise your investigation', but isn't actually saying to take his theory seriously?
I don't understand how that plane is supposed to have gotten into that non-existent building, there's no road leading straight into it or anything.

 

[BombDr]

Maybe he wanted to demonstrate to the United States, which had imposed the first punitive sanctions on Russia the day before, that he could hurt the West and its allies anywhere in the world.

Content from external source

Punishment only has value of you are trying to deliver a message.

An anonymous punishment serves no purpose.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

a 3yo kid could come up with a more plausible theory

 

[Jimmy Kumana]

The key flaw in Jeff's hypothesis is the lack of a plausible motive. Clearly, all the evidence points to a hijack by very sophisticated means - which rules out pretty much all but State actors - viz. the USA, Russia, Israel, and possibly China. I think we can all agree on that. Now to the question of possible motives: I read a theory long ago that the Afghan Taliban, rogue Pakistani ISI agents, or possibly Iraqi insurgents had captured highly secret and sensitive US military weaponry that was beyond their capacity to use. They put it up for sale on the black market. China bought it, and was secretly transporting it back to Beijing. Now the theory diverges:
(a) The US stole it back from them, with or without Israeli connivance, landed the plane at Diego Garcia to unload the cargo, killed the passengers, dismantled the plane, and disposed of all evidence by scattering it in a wide swathe under the Indian ocean.
(b) The Russians stole the plane and cargo to get their hands on the high-technology weaponry, landed it in Kazakhstan as Jeff proposes, and disposed of the evidence.

 

[Mick West]

Clearly, all the evidence points to a hijack by very sophisticated means

This is hardly clear at all. Clear to who? Certainly not clear to me.

 

[Mick West]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/02/jeff-wise-mh370-theory.html

Using the BTO data set alone, I was able to chart the plane’s speed and general path, which happened to fall along national borders.Fig. 21 Flying along borders, a military navigator told me, is a good way to avoid being spotted on radar. A Russian intelligence plane nearly collided with a Swedish airliner while doing it over the Baltic Sea in December. If I was right, it would have wound up in Kazakhstan, just as search officials recognized early on.

Content from external source

This makes no sense at all. You'd have four times as much radar on the borders. You'd have ATC on both sides, and then military radar on both sides specifically looking for border incursions.

 

[BombDr]

Clearly, all the evidence points to a hijack by very sophisticated means

No evidence suggests that it was hijacked: No-one has made any demands, no-one knows where it is.

I think we can all agree on that.

Nope

I read a theory long ago that the Afghan Taliban, rogue Pakistani ISI agents, or possibly Iraqi insurgents had captured highly secret and sensitive US military weaponry that was beyond their capacity to use.

Such as?

(a) The US stole it back from them, with or without Israeli connivance, landed the plane at Diego Garcia to unload the cargo, killed the passengers, dismantled the plane, and disposed of all evidence by scattering it in a wide swathe under the Indian ocean.

Diego Garcia has a few thousand people living there, and it is a British piece of property. Why Israel? How exactly do you land a plane without any of the data that it emits tracking it, and how do you remove a couple of hundred people, kill them and dispose of a plane without anyone noticing? Are you suggesting that several hundred people are now sworn to secrecy?

(b) The Russians stole the plane and cargo to get their hands on the high-technology weaponry, landed it in Kazakhstan as Jeff proposes, and disposed of the evidence.

Again, how do you get around the tracking problem? Who is doing all this killing and disposing of bodies and planes?

 

[jaydeehess]

Maybe he's writing an article 'here's how you can take an event and invent a narrative around it and rationalise your investigation', but isn't actually saying to take his theory seriously?
I don't understand how that plane is supposed to have gotten into that non-existent building, there's no road leading straight into it or anything.

I was wondering about the lack of any hardtop track that could support an aircraft that size as well.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

This is hardly clear at all. Clear to who? Certainly not clear to me.

what's the probability that it would randomly skim thailandese border and go right around indonesian FIR if we are to believe official radar data and Inmarsat pings? Close to 0 I'd say, just no viable way for that to happen. All theories not involving human factor are full of holes.

 

[Mick West]

what's the probability that it would randomly skim thailandese border and go right around indonesian FIR if we are to believe official radar data and Inmarsat pings? Close to 0 I'd say, just no viable way for that to happen. All theories not involving human factor are full of holes.

How does that imply "a hijack by very sophisticated means"?

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

ah OK sorry, overlooked that

 

[MikeC]

what's the probability that it would randomly skim thailandese border and go right around indonesian FIR if we are to believe official radar data and Inmarsat pings? Close to 0 I'd say, just no viable way for that to happen. All theories not involving human factor are full of holes.

chance is irrelevant in the real world - things happen for reasons, not chance.

Often we cannot know the reasons and we use chance as a surrogate, but to ask "what are the chances...?" is to set up a strawman.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

OK then, unless supernatural I can't see any valid reason why would that happen without human intervention.

 

[NoParty]

OK then, unless supernatural I can't see any valid reason why would that happen without human intervention.

Clearly, all the evidence points to a hijack by very sophisticated supernatural means -
which rules out pretty much all but State actors...I think we can all agree on that.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

I'd still hold to a human cause theory, humans can sometimes react in a very unpredictable manner.

 

[jaydeehess]

Delete
Changed my mind
........

 

[Pete Tar]

I'd still hold to a human cause theory, humans can sometimes react in a very unpredictable manner.

I think that ended up being the working theory, unexplained suicide run by pilot. As puzzling and unsatisfying as that is as an answer, it's less complicated and more likely than hijacking by secret agencies for unknown purposes.

On 23 June, an official Malaysian police investigation into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight 370 identified the captain as the prime suspect if it is proven human intervention was involved.[30] Contradicting an earlier statement about data from Capt. Shah's flight simulator, The Sunday Times reported that among deleted flight paths performed on the flight simulator investigators found a flight path into the Southern Ocean where a simulated landing was made on an island with a small runway.[165][168][169] Investigators noted strange behaviour by Capt. Shah from conducting 170 interviews—namely, that the captain had made no social or professional plans for after 8 March, when Flight 370 disappeared.[169] News reports about the captain's lack of social plans and flight simulator exercises cite results of the police enquiry into the pilots, which have been shared with some of the investigation team but haven't been released publicly.[169]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370#Possible_causes_of_disappearance

Content from external source

Flight MH370 may have been deliberately flown off course by someone in the cockpit, a new documentary claims.

Aviation disaster experts have analysed satellite data from the lost Malaysian Airlines flight and discovered that the plane flew on for hours after losing contact.

Careful examination of the evidence has revealed that MH370 made three turns after the last radio call, first a turn to the left, then two more, taking the plane west, then south towards Antarctica.

According to Malcolm Brenner, a world's leading expert in the causes of aviation disasters, those turns 'strongly suggest' someone in the cockpit deliberately flew MH370 off course.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-ANTARCTICA-experts-tell-new-documentary.html

Content from external source

There's an AMA with Jeff on Gawker.
http://gawker.com/jeff-wise-is-here-to-chat-about-his-flight-mh370-disapp-1687728609

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

I think that ended up being the working theory, unexplained suicide run by pilot. As puzzling and unsatisfying as that is as an answer, it's less complicated and more likely than hijacking by secret agencies for unknown purposes.

I doubt it was the suicide run, actually I'm 99% sure it wasn't original plan(but that decision could be brought during the flight). He could just go to the Pacific without overflying any land and sink it there in much calmer waters if it was his intention.

 

[Trailblazer]

Maybe he's writing an article 'here's how you can take an event and invent a narrative around it and rationalise your investigation', but isn't actually saying to take his theory seriously?
I don't understand how that plane is supposed to have gotten into that non-existent building, there's no road leading straight into it or anything.

Especially as the building was demolished before MH370 disappeared. If you're trying to hide a large airliner, I'd say a freshly bulldozed smooth rectangle of dirt is a pretty useless place to do it.

 

[Whitebeard]

I doubt it was the suicide run, actually I'm 99% sure it wasn't original plan(but that decision could be brought during the flight). He could just go to the Pacific without overflying any land and sink it there in much calmer waters if it was his intention.

Why would calmer waters make a difference if the pilot was going to top himself?

Besides MH370 didn't have enough fuel to reach the Pacific from point of last contact, South China Sea was the most it could have gone in that direction, and that would involve flying through and across major air corridors and shipping lanes and near lots of land masses.



If you wanted to commit suicide and loose the plane without trace (maybe so any life insurance is still valid and dependents are not left wanting) far better to fly it to the middle of the Indian Ocean away from transport routes and the sea is far deeper.

But as has often been said, until hard evidence in the form of wreckage etc turns up it is all speculation.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

hmm I'm not that good with geography but if I look at the oceans map it could reach it (or East China Sea at the very least), the thing is if you sink it there will be (almost) no debris, if you crash it (and if it's where they are looking for it is crashed no doubt, roaring forties etc.) there will be a lot of debris and something will eventually wash out on shores and the fact nothing yet has washed out makes me believe it sunk in northern part of IO closer to the Indonesia

but you are right there is a lot less traffic in IO

 

[jaydeehess]

I like my purely speculative, fictional theory best.
It was a hijack ala 9/11. Communications were cut off but at least one pilot was left alive. The target was Perth but navigating over open ocean required the real pilot to be kept at the controls until the plane was over land again. He would then be killed and replaced with a suicide pilot.
However, the airline pilot understood the plan and deliberatly and courageously headed into the southern ocean knowing that if he got far enough there would be no way to be able to reach Australia by turning around thus saving lives on the ground by sacrificing his passengers and himself.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

you need a team of few well trained terrorists to execute something like that and nothing points out that they were present on board, biographies of all passengers have been thoroughly checked out

 

[TWCobra]

and once again we are into mindless speculation....

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

Well the officials are too, got a better idea?

 

[Landru]

Well the officials are too, got a better idea?

Wait until additional evidence is produced.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

Wait until additional evidence is produced.

it's been a year...tough chance you'll get any more evidence

 

[jaydeehess]

and once again we are into mindless speculation....

Yep, and my mindless speculation is at least the equal of the various other mindless speculations,, and a dang sight better than the brainless forms of speculation such as the above, Russians did it, and DA Joos did it, fictions.

 

[TWCobra]

Well the officials are too, got a better idea?

I have already stated my most likely scenario. There was a documentary screened here last month that concurred.

Being the most likely scenario doesn't mean it actually happened that way.

Further speculation without extra evidence is pretty pointless. I wasted 10 minutes of my life 3 days ago where alien abduction was being seriously considered on breakfast television.

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

maybe I'm just too much optimist but I'll always put more probability on a scenario which had an airfield as its planned destination, I mean if it already fits the available data

blindly sticking to "it had to be constant speed and/or direction and/or altitude" assumption before reviewing logic behind is what I can't fathom, not at all

 

[WeedWhacker]

Its a long ramble and hard to follow skip to the end the plane ended up auto landing...

I realize (or 'realise') that I might be a bit late into this discussion, on the segment/aspect that I singled out, from the OP...but:

No....although YES a Boeing 777 (among other airplanes) is capable of 'Auto-Land', it is a procedure that not only involves the airplane's Auto-Pilot(s), ...three, usually... (only TWO on a B-737)...but specific Human interaction IN the cockpit (what we now refer to as the 'Flight Deck'...for gender neutrality** purposes ).

(**)Off-color and OLD misogynistic joke....the 'realm' of pilots was usually (and historically) male-dominated (there were exceptions, of course...but I'm referring to AIRLINE pilots here), but then women began to prove their worthiness as capable pilots too. Some scoffed, and suggested the term "box-office" to replace the term "cockpit". I know, I know.....pilots can be cruel wits.

Getting BACK to my point, in this post: 'Auto-Land' is bandied about by those unfamiliar with the actual procedures that an "Auto-Land" actually entails.

My Two Cents....

Editing on the topic of a suggested 'Auto-land' of MH 370? I will present this video. It depicts an actual B-777, here Air France, conducting a CAT III ('Category III') instrument approach and AutoLand. Please note that the F/O flies....in the beginning. The Captain has the FINAL authority and decision to continue, or to reject (a "Go-Around", or rejected landing). The Captain 'follows' on the controls, and ultimately takes-over after 50 feet. Point I wish to make is....tossing "auto-land" doesn't do justice to the actual skill and procedure and training involved:


They are doing an 'Auto-Land' practice in clear weather....which is often encouraged, as a training thing. At about 2:47 you will hear a male voice in English say "1,000"....this is the GPWS, or "Ground Proximity Warning System" computer. At about 3:35 you hear the GPWS calling out height above terrain. EVERY airline has a different protocol, this happens to be Air Frances' choice...so be it....

This is REAL life....not Hollywood, nor CT-World stuff. BTW? IF you speak French, then you will understand some of the communications. OF COURSE the "rule" in aviation in Air Traffic Control communication is that English is the "primary" language....(try telling that to the French!! LOL). (In German airspace? They all speak English...in Latin America? Mostly Spanish....eh, this is why we have to pay attention, every time!!!).

 

[sharpnfuzzy]

Yeah speaking of "autoland", this excerpt from the article caught my attention because I don't know whether it is intentionally misleading or just a symptom of the "TL ; DR journalism" style exhibited here.

Fig. 23: To the best of my knowledge, this airstrip is the only one in the world built specifically for self-landing airplanes. The 777, which was developed in the ’90s, has the ability to autoland. From a hijacking perspective, this feature allows people who don’t have commercial-piloting experience to abscond with an airplane and get it safely on the ground, so long as they know what autopilot settings to input.

It literally takes a few minutes to find out that yes the airstrip was used for automated landings (or landing as there was only one in 1988) of the Soviet Union's short lived Buran space shuttle. But it is and was an airstrip for general purpose and logistical use for launching space craft. It's like saying that the author's brain was specifically built for storing about 2.25 lbs. of water. Also it's fairly easy to find out that almost every major airport in the world has the capability that allows for the "autolanding" of airplanes and 777's (and all modern airliners) "autoland" themselves all over the world all the time.