MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

[Happy Trails]

Agreed re Military, but as for the other have you forgotten the past 6 years?

Yes, I'd completely forgotten about Iraq and children overboard.
Maybe we shouldn't be rushing to judge the Indonesians then.

Edit: Meant to say 'Malaysian' not 'Indonesian'.
Shows what can happen sometimes when you rush to comment.

 

[prozac]

Yes, I'd completely forgotten about Iraq and children overboard.
Maybe we shouldn't be rushing to judge the Indonesians then.

Please, where have I ever judged the Indonesians...or Malays for that matter.

 

[Warks]

Theory #2389B but it sounds more technically sound than others I've read. It would seem to point to a flaw in the 777 though which you'd think would have been addressed by now if it were an issue.

Was there a problem with the MH370 Boeing 777-200 aircraft? | Lowyat.NET

 

[amaroo]

Yes, I'd completely forgotten about Iraq and children overboard.
Maybe we shouldn't be rushing to judge the Indonesians then.

Dunno. The Indos breakout in a sweat to judge us

 

[Happy Trails]

Please, where have I ever judged the Indonesians...or Malays for that matter.

Sorry, it wasn't directed at you particularly, I used 'we' in the collective sense.
And I should have said 'Malaysians' not 'Indonesians'.

 

[DC3]

The only consistent thing in all this is whatever the Malaysian authorities say first is wrong. Then the second thing is also wrong.

and today, another:

'.... Air force chief General Rodzali Daud was this morning quoted by Malaysian media as saying that radar had last detected the plane over the Strait of Malacca off western Malaysia. That location would have indicated the flight had banked far to the west of its intended flight path over the South China Sea. But Mr Rodzali says he "did not make any such statements," and that newspaper Berita Harian published "what is clearly an inaccurate and incorrect report ...'.

Malaysia Airlines MH370: Military denies missing plane detected on radar far from flight path - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[jlien]

Theory #2389B but it sounds more technically sound than others I've read. It would seem to point to a flaw in the 777 though which you'd think would have been addressed by now if it were an issue.

Was there a problem with the MH370 Boeing 777-200 aircraft? | Lowyat.NET

Wow, a very interesting read.
Quite plausible, but would create shockwaves for airlines around the world if it is true.

 

[markis10]

Wow, a very interesting read.
Quite plausible, but would create shockwaves for airlines around the world if it is true.

I dont think its plausible at all, ADs are generally circulated to all airlines and manufacturers for compliance. Had there been an inflight breakup I am positive we would now have the evidence in the form of a very large debris trail stretching into the 100kms. I believe the aircraft has impacted water intact, at least as far as its cabin goes.

 

[Daver6]

You too can help with the search - Tomnod

 

[Jack_OC]

I dont think its plausible at all, ADs are generally circulated to all airlines and manufacturers for compliance.

I'm speaking with no expertise here, but the article says "this AD only applies to the 120 777 planes under the FAA" (and therefore not airlines based outside of the US), plus it was only issued a few weeks ago. Presumably the airlines are given some time to implement the corrective action?

Had there been an inflight breakup I am positive we would now have the evidence in the form of a very large debris trail stretching into the 100kms. I believe the aircraft has impacted water intact, at least as far as its cabin goes.

But isn't that exactly what this article is suggesting? "The plane had enough fuel to continue flying on autopilot deep into the Indian Ocean" ........ "possible for the plane to continue flying on autopilot hours into its disappearance until it ran out of fuel (and possibly glide a further distance)" .......

 

[ts911993]

Whilst going OT, they can not deny entry to an AU citizen... That said, there is nothing which says they can't hold you for as long as it takes for them to verify that you are a citizen of this country.

My Brother lost his passport in LA a few weeks back. US immigration didn't seem to mind and the only caveat was the airline would allow him boarding privileges. He used his Drivers Licence for ID. When he arrived in Sydney they took him from the Immigration queue to a room on the side, they ascertained his ID from his Drivers license, and let him on his way.

 

[Bundy Bear]

Theory #2389B but it sounds more technically sound than others I've read. It would seem to point to a flaw in the 777 though which you'd think would have been addressed by now if it were an issue.

Was there a problem with the MH370 Boeing 777-200 aircraft? | Lowyat.NET

Some of this story sounds like the best, if in fact the last sighting was over the Straits of Malacca, a problem had been detected and the plane had turned around.

 

[markis10]

I'm speaking with no expertise here, but the article says "this AD only applies to the 120 777 planes under the FAA" (and therefore not airlines based outside of the US), plus it was only issued a few weeks ago. Presumably the airlines are given some time to implement the corrective action?

FAA ADs are mandatory only to US registered aircraft, that does not mean other airlines and MROs ignore them. Given it was raised in June last year, it would have been incorporated in any subsequent inspection. This aircraft had one in Feb.

But isn't that exactly what this article is suggesting? "The plane had enough fuel to continue flying on autopilot deep into the Indian Ocean" ........ "possible for the plane to continue flying on autopilot hours into its disappearance until it ran out of fuel (and possibly glide a further distance)" .......

A loss of cabin integrity at the location thats being suggested would have resulted in airframe failure, it would not have been flyable. And just because the sat com antenna was gone does not mean the SSR was down, two different systems and the aircraft was in SSR range.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Some of this story sounds like the best, if in fact the last sighting was over the Straits of Malacca, a problem had been detected and the plane had turned around.

The problem with this is that it didn't turn back towards KUL. And that the radar transponder appears to have been turned off. Someone didn't want the authorities to know where was the aircraft was.

 

[DrA]

FAA ADs are mandatory only to US registered aircraft, that does not mean other airlines and MROs ignore them. Given it was raised in June last year, it would have been incorporated in any subsequent inspection. This aircraft had one in Feb.



A loss of cabin integrity at the location thats being suggested would have resulted in airframe failure, it would not have been flyable. And just because the sat com antenna was gone does not mean the SSR was down, two different systems and the aircraft was in SSR range.

Forgive my ignorance, but my understanding was that the military had the capability to detect explosions mid-air and that they'd already ruled this out due to nothing showing up on their detection systems? If there was an "explosive loss of pressure" as the linked article indicates, wouldn't that have been detected?

 

[Warks]

Forgive my ignorance, but my understanding was that the military had the capability to detect explosions mid-air and that they'd already ruled this out due to nothing showing up on their detection systems? If there was an "explosive loss of pressure" as the linked article indicates, wouldn't that have been detected?

Maybe they haven't looked at west of the Malay peninsula?

 

[markis10]

Maybe they haven't looked at west of the Malay peninsula?

Thats been part of the search areas since Day 2 (based on what we are told).

 

[Jack_OC]

FAA ADs are mandatory only to US registered aircraft, that does not mean other airlines and MROs ignore them. Given it was raised in June last year, it would have been incorporated in any subsequent inspection. This aircraft had one in Feb.



A loss of cabin integrity at the location thats being suggested would have resulted in airframe failure, it would not have been flyable. And just because the sat com antenna was gone does not mean the SSR was down, two different systems and the aircraft was in SSR range.

Thanks for the clarification. As I said, I know more or less nothing about this stuff so I have no idea what might be plausible or not! One point of clarification though, the article claims that the AD was approved on February 18th 2014, which was less than 3 weeks before this incident.

 

[markis10]

Thanks for the clarification. As I said, I know more or less nothing about this stuff so I have no idea what might be plausible or not! One point of clarification though, the article claims that the AD was approved on February 18th 2014, which was less than 3 weeks before this incident.

AD approval means the date it becomes mandatory, irrelevant in this context. MROs would already have it in their schedule, not to mention that date is two weeks before the servicing of the aircraft in question anyway.

 

[drron]

Yes both the US and the nuclear test ban treaty organisation say no evidence of an explosion.
Also if the plane went into the water intact it really should have shown up on the tsunami warning systems that are quite numerous now around that area particularly the west coast of Malaysia.