'Contact lost' with Malaysia Airlines plane

Someone somewhere knows something and they not telling? :mad:

FACT!
It is 2014 this stuff just dont happen, something is really wrong and whatever
it is, it is so bad the public cannot know! ;)

No way in this world a jumbo jet with 200+ people on board including 200+ mobile phones and a few tablets, just vanishes in this day and age. :rolleyes:

The whole thing stinks! :mad:
 
rubberduck said:
OK, but I don't think you understood my original point. Do you think it is possible that an onboard fire on MH370 was able to incapacitate (or kill) everyone on the plane yet not damage the plane sufficiently so that it was able to fly for many hours after the fire started?
Click to expand...

Maybe.... A fire doesn't have to engulf the whole plane rather it just needs to release enough toxic smoke... supposing the front landing gear did catch fire, eventually it causes electrical problems, smoke passes through to the cockpit, cabin etc... is it a foregone conclusion that the fire will spread rapidly throughout the rest of the plane? Is it possible for a localized fire to occur there and then just burn out...
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
Maybe.... A fire doesn't have to engulf the whole plane rather it just needs to release enough toxic smoke... supposing the front landing gear did catch fire, eventually it causes electrical problems, smoke passes through to the cockpit, cabin etc... is it a foregone conclusion that the fire will spread rapidly throughout the rest of the plane? Is it possible for a localized fire to occur there and then just burn out...
Click to expand...

I have no idea what is possible or not... I just find it REALLY hard to believe that a fire could incapacitate all on board yet not cause the plane to crash in to the ocean within (lets say) 6 hours of the fire starting. Yes, yes, I realise how toxic smoke can be etc. but given all the other factors known in terms of the disabling of communication equipment and adjustment to flight path I would 'eat my hat' if the fire theory proved to be true.
 
How about, small electrical fire, knocks out comms.
Slow depressurisation due to fire causing hole.
Up down that might have been observable due to depressurisation.
At some point before passing out pilot flicks on autopilot.
Plans cruises back up to normal ceiling, all are dead.
Down she sinks ;)


Speculate all we like, but either someone knows something and they are not telling, or there is a whole pile of incompetent asses around that neighbourhood.
I would easily believe the latter, but I thought the Chinese of all countries there might have had military radar having a look around, but complacency is a funny thing.
 
Where is the trail of wreckage over the vast distance then? If it flew on fire with the crew all suffocated and hit the ocean it would have broken up on impact and be visable somewhere along the flight line. At least that theory of smoke and fire and the pilot using his 18k hours and flightsim experience to turn and fly to 45000ft to deprive the fire of oxygen.


But then again they said it flew low and took radar avoidance measures. My favourite one is the hero pilot and him turning fopr that island runway like suggested. They just need to find something along that route to prove it.
 
itchy said:
Someone somewhere knows something and they not telling? :mad:

FACT!
It is 2014 this stuff just dont happen, something is really wrong and whatever
it is, it is so bad the public cannot know! ;)

No way in this world a jumbo jet with 200+ people on board including 200+ mobile phones and a few tablets, just vanishes in this day and age. :rolleyes:

The whole thing stinks! :mad:
Click to expand...

Or it smashed into a remote part of the sea/land, and people are looking in the wrong place.
 
Tefal said:
zero.

maybe 1%

this is the "successful" sea landing only 25 survived



265px-Ditching_of_Ethiopian_Airlines_Flt_961.JPG
Click to expand...

that isn't a successful sea landing.

That is Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961.

Which made a last attempt ditch into the sea whilst being hijacked after running out of fuel.

50 people survived.
 
Hikari Kisugi said:
How about, small electrical fire, knocks out comms.
Slow depressurisation due to fire causing hole..
Click to expand...

I wish people would stop on about fire, when they have zero idea on system layout. How does a small fire knock out comms? It cannot happen.

It wouldn't matter if the fire caused a hole to cause the aircraft to depressurise, the crew would get a cabin altitude warning and decend while on oxygen. Unless they were as incompetent as the Helios pilots.

dowie said:
Maybe.... A fire doesn't have to engulf the whole plane rather it just needs to release enough toxic smoke... supposing the front landing gear did catch fire, eventually it causes electrical problems, smoke passes through to the cockpit, cabin etc... is it a foregone conclusion that the fire will spread rapidly throughout the rest of the plane? Is it possible for a localized fire to occur there and then just burn out...
Click to expand...

How does smoke get from the gear bay into the flight deck. Are you thinking that scene in Commando when he tears a sheet of canvas and climbs onto the gear?

Fire does not spread easily from outside to inside on an aircraft at 37,000ft.

There was no fire that caused the transponder and all comms to go. The systems are too spread out and have redundancy. It would have to be something that took the lot out at once but I don't think that's what happened.
 
Cosimo said:
Any new theories this morning or are we still drawing a blank?
Click to expand...

Abduction or the passengers have been sold off. I've already mentioned both of these and am sticking to them as possibilities.

As for a fire, no. The only reason people believe Chris Goodfellow is because he keeps saying, "I am a pilot. I. Am. A. Pilot." and everyone gets impressed before thinking how ridiculous his ideas are.
 
NathWraith said:
that isn't a successful sea landing.

That is Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961.

Which made a last attempt ditch into the sea whilst being hijacked after running out of fuel.

50 people survived.
Click to expand...

I think the point he was malking was that that is considered a 'successful' sea ditching because people actually made it out alive.
 
"Thailand had radar information about the change of track on day one, but did not share it, because 'they were not asked'."

"Search aircraft are sitting on the ground because governments are reluctant to give over flight permission."

Great! :rolleyes:
 
balky12 said:
and thats during the day...
Click to expand...

And there was an argument just before it landed forcing the plane to turn and the left wing to hit the water... If it had landed straight (ie no fight at landing) it may well have stayed afloat and been the original Hudson river style landing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom