Missing Malaysia Air plane MH370 - Part 3

[KenAdams]

Thread 1

Thread 2

I would be surprised if anyone got a 777 into Afghanistan without the NATO forces drones, AWACS and other surveillance picking it up. Not saying it is impossible (I don't know) but it does sound pretty surprising.

"Seems a bit more likely to have landed at a previously unknown airstrip than at an existing airport..."

It's more likely (if this is the scenario at all) that it would be at an abandoned airfield, and I saw a commentator mention there are loads of them in Indonesia and Kazakhstan. Snags: likelihood of being spotted en route to said airfield. Also, whether the runway was ever strong enough for a plane this heavy, and whether it has remained in good condition since last in use. I suspect it's easier to surreptitiously reinforce than build from scratch.

Here's more useful info from the Wall Street Journal via the Guardian as to why it is so hard to pinpoint those pings:

The Wall Street Journal explains why it is impossible to pinpoint those last satellite pings.

'The northern corridor and the southern corridor reflect where the 777 might have been when it sent its final ping, some 7½ hours after leaving the Malaysian capital.

With the search area widening and the potential cause of the vanishing jet narrowing down to the actions of someone on board the aircraft, those briefed on the inquiry gained a better understanding of the unfolding investigation during a week of little public disclosure.

Recent upgrades to the Inmarsat satellite constellation make it capable of receiving detailed position, altitude and speed data embedded in its pings to aircraft flying below.

However, the 12-year-old Boeing jetliner wasn’t configured to broadcast those definitive points of data, people being briefed on the investigation say.

After not receiving new data from the 777 after its automated reporting system was switched off, the automated satellite pings—the digital equivalent of a handshake—originated at a ground stations and was transmitted up to the orbiting satellite high above the Earth’s equator. The satellite relays the ping down to the aircraft below, effectively asking the jet if it is still able to send and receive data. After receiving it, Flight 370 transmitted a return ping back up to Inmarsat, which in turn relayed it to the ground station.

Because the angle and distance of the aircraft relative to the orbiting satellite changed as the jet flew over the Earth’s surface, each ping to Flight 370 gave Malaysian officials, the National Transportation Safety Board, the Federal Aviation Administration and the U.K.’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch enough information to plot the 777’s speed, altitude and changing path.

With the data at hand, investigators were unable to determine if the jet’s pings were north or south of its last known primary radar sighting. Two points on the globe below the satellite, with mirror angles and equal distances from the satellite, left investigators to conclude the jet had sent its final satellite ping in the probable corridors to the north or south.'

Good point meditrina.

I wonder whether someone somewhere in the search mission is looking for recently refurbished airstrips?

Maybe the new terrorism is not 'fly planes into buildings' but 'make planes disappear without trace'. Very effective at frightening people, particularly if repeated.

Loopy, IMHO I think a "state of emergency" is going on behind the scenes at senior diplomatic/security/geopolitical levels, it's just not being released to the media and the people as it's too sensitive. How have the world leaders been appearing/saying lately?

Is anyone able to answer my question above please? Still feeling very unsure about safety here in kl right now

Thanks kale
just wondering what US or UK stance might be it were there. Also, more generally how they would deal with things differently.

I don't think 1 plane going amiss is going to rattle the world leaders. I know it involves a lot of people and a very clever plan, but in the grand scheme of wars and nuclear weapons, it's a POTENTIAL threat, but not one they will have their knickers in a twist over, I suspect. I think they would be a lot more worried if one of them has shot it down, because of the media/ diplomatic repercussions.

I don't think they are trying to do a cover story.

However I do think they know considerably more than they are letting on.

By 'they' I mean 'a government' - not necessarily the Malaysian Government. The Malaysian government may/or may not know where the plane is.

If they DID know where the plane is, they may not want anyone to know for various reasons. Either because they are involved in someway or know it shows massive weaknesses in their own national security (For example if X country became aware that the plane flew their airspace, would they necessarily want the rest of the world to be aware of this? Its possible you have corrupt individuals or groups who allowed it to happen. This could provoke internal unrest or a political crisis AND an international one).

Also if they knew where the plane was - and it is on foreign soil - you have an issue. You have a bunch of hostages to consider. And who has the authority to do anything to get those hostages. There may be contact with the hijackers and negotiations going on. If there isn't contact, they wouldn't want to advertise they knew where it was for fear of what might happen whilst they created a plan. It would put power back in the hands of the hijackers rather than having the element of surprise. And of course you have several nation states involved - Malaysia, China, the country where the plane is and potentially other states who have passengers on the plane. Does the local authority take charge of a storming? Or does Malaysia? Or China? Or someone else? (Or do they have a diplomatic battle over this?) Depending on where the plane is, you also have to ask, would the local government even want to storm a plane and could they being obstructive.

And then there is the wider politics of it. If it IS somewhere like Iran, Afghanistan or Pakistan, then you have something of a problem IF someone is denying it or being obstructive. You can't just DO something on foreign soil, and even if you made it public, you could have an almighty mess on your hands. Something that could blow up to be far more than 239 missing people.

There are loads of reasons which aren't about conspiracies but are legitimate concerns as to why they wouldn't tell the media. They had to tell the media, the plane had been taken, as it was getting to the point that evidence was leaking too much from various sources that couldn't be controlled. At this point, it probably is easier to control any additional information that is known due to it being a more organised process and leaks in the midst of conspiracy theories aren't necessarily as obvious.

I've always taken the attitude of reading between the lines with media... I would watch the actions rather than the words of any country involved.

My inclination is that the plane didn't go in the sea though and do land. And I do think to a certain extent, we need to be open minded about things that we didn't previously think possible - especially since people with expertise keep going "well thats impossible" and then it suddenly becomes apparent, that yes, actually it is. (Weren't we all told a few days ago that cyber attack wasn't possible, then suddenly lots of other experts are saying "hmm well if they did this, then yeah actually it might be" for example).

Don't you feel that the danger has moved elsewhere, Loopy? There are Islamic terror groups all over the place. There were bound to be some in a mainly Muslim country like Malaysia, weren't there?

The US admitted it when the shot down the Iranian plane by mistake. If such had happened again, I can't see whyit would not be admitted, as a non-responsive plane in an odd position could be adjudged a threat.

Does anyone on here in the UK work in a government building? I remember at the time of 9/11 I worked in a govt office (in a very boring, mundane admin department... pensions) and they had security alerts posted at reception about the security status of the day. At 9/11 they went up to red... just wondering if they've recently been elevated and it would give a clue as to how this incident is being regarded behind the scenes?

Um, I expect it has moved elsewhere, but I'd quite like some reassurance from the gov't. As for the terror thing, Malaysia is about as moderate as they come.

Meditrina, whilst US relations with Iran may have be hostile, I doubt they are as afraid of them as they are of the Chinese...

And it could be any number of countries involved... but it was mostly to illustrate what I think world leaders would be more worried about.

From the Telegraph, the Taliban are totally denying it. So where did that come from?

I posted last message by accident after 20 mins of my phone buggering up the order of my post have moved to laptop.

I've been glued to this story for over a week now, read everything i have been able to put my hands on. Lots of incidents of things appearing online and then the story disappearing as if it was never reported.

Anyway, I'm 99% sure this was an act of terrorism, possibly co-pilot or engineer originated. Pilot suicide makes no sense to me because why not just point the nose downward and be done with it? Same with the indian ocean. Why not just stay on the current course?

Before 9-11, nobody (apart from movie screen-writers/ Ian Flemming types) would ever have thought that something like it could happen. But it did. And it was nearly 13 years ago. Does noone else think the AQ would want to 'improve' on the success (for them) that 9-11 was. No act of terror since then has come close to the impact that day. Not even the London underground bombings.

I know there have been some very unconfirmed reports of debris in the Mallacca Strait and I hope to God they are true because, in my eyes, it's the best case scenario at the minute. That or it went north but crashed.

I fear it has landed and that the plan is/was to use it as a weapon, possibly loading it with some sort of bomb. If it managed to fly below radar once, it could do it again.

I know the whole argument about the mobile phones ringing was 'explained' but it only explains it if the plane has gone into the ocean. If the plane landed but all the passengers either had their phones taken off them or were already killed, then they would still ring. I don't know if social networks work the same as mobile networks, but at least one passenger was still shown as logged on to their social media. Surely if the phone was in the sea, this couldn't happen?

Hopefully the plane was damaged during landing and isn't fit for takeoff again.

And if it is terrorism, why not target Bejing or Kuala Lumpur? I fear Europe is/was the target.

Oh no don't bring up the mobile phone thing again let's just leave it in that it wouldn't help. I'm sure with all the expertise they have working on this it is something they would have looked at.

Phones would only ring if they're near a cell phone mast... if they're out in the back of beyond/ flying at 35,000 ft/ flying at 500 mph they just couldn't physically connect to the mobile network. Also, the batteries would be well flat by now and I can't see hijackers providing charging facilities out of the goodness of their hearts.

Lol I know the words 'mobile' and 'phone' are taboo around here. Sorry Goldie!

I know that Kale, but i'm talking about the day they went missing. When the plane would have either crashed or landed. They were ringing then. Plus there's remote and there's REMOTE. It could be as little as a mile away from a built up area for all we know?

The US also bombed a Chinese Embassy by mistake in 1999 and admitted it. OK, different administration now, but the US track record tends towards admissions.

"at least one passenger was still shown as logged on to their social media. Surely if the phone was in the sea, this couldn't happen?"

Yes, if they left their home computer logged on.

That was explained too never they ring to connect to the mobile receiver even though it doesn't go through to the phone itself.

True Meditrina...

I know that it was 'explained' but they didn't say "these mobiles definitely were not ringing properly" is my point.