Missing Malaysia Air plane MH370 - Part 3

[KenAdams]

Thread 1

Thread 2

This was when all of the authorities seemed to be of the opinion that it had crashed into the sea.

I don't understand sorry what do you mean by not ringing properly?

And it's still a red herring the mobile thing. If there was something useful to be gained from it then that would have surely come out by now.

I have a question about the satellite thing.

I have come a bit late into this so apologies if I have this wrong or if it's been answered. From my understanding the co-pilot delivered his last message, stuff got switched off, and then the plane effectively disappeared but was hailed, sort of, by a satellite 7 hours later.

My question is, would the plane have had to be flying for the satellite to have recognised it? Might it have already crashed but whatever machinery/signals the satellite recognises as 'plane' still have been operating?

I seems sort of likely that shortly after his message, the plane just crashed, for whatever reason.

They didn't say "these phones were only ringing because of x, y z" they said "this could be because of x,y, z...".

By ringing properly I mean connected.

"In your opinion, if this had happened in a western country, would a terror alert have been issued?" no. Planes are highjacked for a number of reasons, terrorism could be one of them as happened on 9/11, however the terror threat would be immediate. Once the plane is discovered to have been taken it would be almost impossible to then use it again to attack a target, because once it takes off it will be picked up again by military radar wherever it is.

But planes are generally highjacked in order that the passengers be used as bargaining chips in order to further some kind of agenda, but again, this usually happens fairly soon after the event - in fact usually on the way to whatever airport they plan to land at.

My guess remains as it was almost from the outset - that this was an intended highjacking which went wrong and ended up in the plane crashing somewhere into the ocean. But I actually think there's a chance it'll never be found.

the mobile phones are irrelevant. At the point people were tlking about ringing mobile phones it was three/four days after the plane had disappeared. Even the most soffisticated mobile phones don't have that kind of batter length....

I know the batteries of phones would have died by now. I wasn't saying they could use them now. All I was saying is THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONNECTING on the saturday, sunday, monday after the plane went missing. Sheesh.

@Never, please see my comment upthread... the phones were on international roaming. It wasn't the person's physical handset that was ringing, it was the last known cellphone base station that was trying to connect the call and causing the ringing tone to sound to the person trying to ring in. The calls only connected halfway... the signal wasn't getting through to the handset at the other end. The mobile wouldn't have shown x missed calls at the recipient's end.

At the time the plane went missing, it was at too high an altitude for mobile phones on the plane to make a connection to any land-based tower.

What happened when relatives tried to phone a mobile in the plane, is that the relative's phone generated a calling signal while it was trying to connect to a mobile on the plane.

People on the plane couldn't have called or texted unless the plane was low enough and near a pone tower. If it was a hijack, those mobiles would have been removed/destroyed by the hijackers before then.

I think what possibly might be confusing is that people on the hijacked planes in the 9-11 situation were making calls. But that was because those planes were low enough and they were over an area of the eastern USA where there was a lot of mobile phone coverage.

Psammead - I'm pretty sure I read in the paper that the last Ping could have been from the plane on the land or in the air, but it still only narrows it to that massive north and south area they are searching though unfortunately, so they still wouldn't know how far it went either way.

Or their signals jammed

Meditrina The US shot down an Iranian passenger jet in 1988 killing all 230 aboard and although they eventually reached a repayment settlement with Iran they never accepted full responsibility. The US had mistaken it for a fighter jet.

the US seems to make a national sport out of accidentally killing people.

Psammead, the satellite knows how far a ping has travelled. Since they're saying the plane kept moving, this means the pings were from different distances.

Or their signals jammed - Yes, or that.

Ugh nobody fully understands what I was saying, but no matter. The phones are useless now, regardless.

I see what you mean, Never (I think). The phones are certainly dead now, but if the plane was landed somewhere safely then there would have been a period when they were operating and connecting normally, yes? And possibly that's something that could be ascertained.

Thanks Hmmkay and Garlic - I see, the way I read it was that there was just the one ping and it could not provide an exact location. I didn't realise that there was more than one and that it was apparent from them that the plane had moved in between.

Thanks for clearing that up!

No, Never, the phones were not connecting. If they had done, the authorities would have been able to find out where the plane was!

Hadn't picked this up before:

"The informal hand-off went against standard radio procedures, which would have called for him to read back instructions for contacting the next control centre and include the aircraft's call sign, said Hugh Dibley, a former British Airways pilot and a Fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society."

It is from the Fail though.

That's interesting, Merry. Although I'd have thought that if the co-pilot was speaking under duress, or was planning on hijacking the plane himself, he'd have been more 'by-the-book' - you know? Everything points to the possible hijackers being ever so knowlegdable about flying and regulations, so I think they'd have made sure he did it properly iyswim.

If he was being a bit casual and slapdash, it suggests to me that he thought everything was hunky-dory.

Surely they were just the last words of the hand off and nobody is bothering to report the rather boring technical stuff that was said beforehand?

Haven't read all if the thread, about halfway through, but....

Re the landing gear, do you need it for take off as well? Cos if there is no landing gear and they want to use it again, perhaps they don't intend to LAND it again? :(

(I realise this may be a stupid question btw, but I know nothing about planes!)

Right off to finish reading the thread! I like the Keith thingy theory and also Interesting link, poubella.