Missing MH370 thread cont...

[Pennies]

Old thread here

New thread here.

We don't know if the perpetrator/s were deliberately targeting Chinese people, or just wanted a night flight out of KL for some other reason.

AchyFox I think the problem is where you could land it without being noticed, not how to hide it once it's down...

Sorry, now not know.

US is involved because of its citizens on the plane (like the authorities of all other passengers' nations) and because Boeing is a US company (UK involved because of RR).

"It seems to me it's very likely to have succeeded (ie landed)."

I could ask the same question about why you think it's succeeded?

I'm just speculating. Like everyone else. But I don't think the US would be using their assets to look in the water if they didn't think they'd find something (the USS Kidd, the P-3 orions and the P-8A Poseidon).

It may have landed. But the number of places you could land an aeroplane that big - 300 tonnes - without being noticed or be able to stop the news leaking out is very, very limited. 777s need big, strong runways. Trying to land on anything else will simply tear off the landing gear and the plane won't be usable again, to say the very least.

Could a 777 land in rough terrain (e.g. scrubland / an old road / desert)?

"there are Americans on board the plane"

There are Americans with specialist defence knowledge aboard the plane.

Just to clarify for Was and others ... A lot of people think devices with GPS transmit their location to the satellites. Not so, they merely receive GPS data from space. If they have the correct software installed, each device can then work out where it is from the data received.

The devices can't broadcast any information without a phone, internet or radio connection. If the plane's on land, maybe some of the passengers' devices 'know' their location but, without communication services, they can't 'tell' anyone.

X post there, Goldie - you just answered my question.

If that's the case they may have landed it somewhere that may damage the plane, but if it's the cargo they're after then they wouldn't care. Bit of a risk that you're going to die when the plane gets damaged but hijacking is risky enough anyway and they wouldn't nec care about the passengers' welfare.

"just wanted a night flight out of KL for some other reason."

I speculated on just that on the other thread. A night flight out of KL with a relatively high fuel load would allow you to fly under cover of darkness westbound for a very long period... Remember those of you who've traveled from Asia that if you leave at midnight, you get into Europe at 5 in the morning - darkness all the way. It adds credence to the theory that someone was trying to 'steal' the plane.

It's just that, after the Chinese attack in the rail station, the timing seemed quite a big coincidence.

It was only a gut feeling at the time of the disappearance.

oh,so the passengers are 'of interest'....I see...

"Could a 777 land in rough terrain (e.g. scrubland / an old road / desert)?"

Land? No. Crash? Yes.

"If that's the case they may have landed it somewhere that may damage the plane, but if it's the cargo they're after then they wouldn't care"

Well they would because if the landing gear collapses at the 160-odd mph landing speed, the entire cargo bay gets crushed and you couldn't get into it to get at whatever itis you're trying to get at!

Ah OK - I don't know anything about planes so that's clearly not an option.

Shouldn't that be 'US citizens who work for a large company some of whose products have military applications"?

And OK, their flights might have been booked well in advance, but the timelines for planning an operation to take over a plane (requiring expertise, skilled personnel and a plan (which may have gone wrong) such that those experts believed would survive it, or have undergone the lengthy indoctrination period to be suicide terrorists just isn't compatible with targeting individuals.

And it's also a whole different league of operational planning (and keeping the plan covert) than a massed knife attack.

Which is why I tend to keep coming back to Indonesia, as it's a destination on the southerly suspect corridor, where AQ (who can do operational planning to that level) are known to exist, and who share a language with Malaysia (minor point, but handy if impersonating a Malaysian national).

If it did go north, it seems incredible that there isn't information about where it went - especially if it was flying directly towards specialist signals intelligence and radar tracking bases owned by China and India. If it was shot down by a government that isn't the US, the US must have a fair idea that's what happened but not be able to say since it would create a major diplomatic incident, to say the least.... Either way, surely getting up across the Andamans towards a -Stan land destination is unlikely, given the military capability in that region of the main global powers?

If it went south, maybe into the (deep) Indian ocean because of intentional sabotage of cargo/pilot suicide/pilot heroically sabotaging hijack plans/running out of fuel, after 7 days how traceable would it be? This seems to me to be the likeliest outcome at the moment....

I could ask the same question about why you think it's succeeded?

Largely because I believe satellite imaging is very advanced and that US military will have picked up a crash site/ debris field if one existed (yes in contradiction to the hulabaloo of the last 7 days).

Given the absence of this and the hijackers very extensive apparent expertise in doing the 1st, hard part of the plan, it now seems very likely they succeeded in the easier 2nd half too.

And yes I still suspect the US know a great deal more and may well be in communication with the hijackers.

Click here to see what happens when you try to land a 777-200ER on grass.

This one shows how you couldn't get into the cargo holds as you've squashed them!

"And OK, their flights might have been booked well in advance, but the timelines for planning an operation to take over a plane ..."

I'm pretty sure it would be easy to target a certain flight on a certain day for a certain reason. You only have to have soemone who knows how to watch the GDS.

"Shouldn't that be 'US citizens who work for a large company some of whose products have military applications"?"

I'm not sure that's really so different, is it?

"And it's also a whole different league of operational planning (and keeping the plan covert) than a massed knife attack"

Completely agree. Like I said, gut instinct, timing conicdence and all that.

"Which is why I tend to keep coming back to Indonesia,"

Exactly, except that there is a hugely powerful radar system that is know to monitor Indonesia's airspace (that doesn't belong to Indonesia.)

"Largely because I believe satellite imaging is very advanced and that US military will have picked up a crash site/ debris field if one existed (yes in contradiction to the hulabaloo of the last 7 days)."

I'd largely agree but then why wasn't this doen when AF447 went down in the Atlantic?

I have a real sense of the powers that be 'buying time' while they work out how to tell the world what happened or 'adapt' it

If it's landed somewhere then some official body must know where. As David Gunson said, people tend to notice the odd jumbo jet coming or going.

Thank you Goldie for the info on the Air France flight. The information in the press horrified me and I have really struggled when getting on planes since. The thought of just dropping into the ocean and knowing about it petrified me!

About the locked cabin is that all flights with that ability? With the recent hijak in Switzerland I thought he had locked the pilot out or was it something else?

You have been a goldmine of information Goldie

Fascinating discussion and so good to have such knowledgable posters here to help read between the lines in terms of what has been released. I don't doubt for a moment that the powers that be know far more than they're letting on.