News Malaysia Airlines loses contact with plane carrying 239 people - Page 44

ShowtimeSBMVP · 09:02 AM

Malaysia Airlines says it has lost contact with a plane with 239 aboard enroute from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

The airline said in a statement early Saturday it was attempting to locate the Boeing 777 after it lost contact with Subang Air Traffic Control at 2:40 a.m. It was scheduled to land in Beijing at 6:30 a.m.

China's state-run news agency Xinhua reported the plane was lost in airspace controlled by Vietnam, and did not make contact with Chinese air traffic controllers.

The plane is carrying 227 passengers, including two infants, and 12 crew members. The airline said it is working with authorities to locate the plane.

Boeing said on its Twitter account it is monitoring the situation, and "our thoughts are with everyone on board."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03...ing-23-people/

Malaysian jet probe sharpens focus on passengers, crew as new clues emerge

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03...-indian-ocean/

htismaqe · 03-17-2014, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante84

Damn.

I was hoping it worked like a security camera, where we could just type in the location and time and pull up images.

It's certainly possible that with all the governments involved, you could patch together a few images. It wouldn't be complete.

But therein lies yet another problem - none of these countries want to wholesale share radar and satellite information for fear of compromising their defense secrets.

htismaqe · 03-17-2014, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzz

Watching the news, the extent someone would have to go to turning off all the tracking devices would have to take considerable skill and knowledge. If this plane is sitting on the ground some where, what the heck would they do with all those people?

Trenches.

**alnorth** · 03-17-2014, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by srvy

Best possible explanation I have read so far.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1107...feeds%2Flatest

Thats actually pretty good. Its the first rational explanation I've seen that I'm willing to accept for how the plane could have flown undetected into that northern corridor.

**alnorth** · 03-17-2014, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzz

Watching the news, the extent someone would have to go to turning off all the tracking devices would have to take considerable skill and knowledge. If this plane is sitting on the ground some where, what the heck would they do with all those people?

Those people are dead. They are either in the water, or killed by whoever took the plane. They would not have waited this long if they wanted to ransom them off, its a pain in the ass to care for that many people and make sure none of them fight back or escape.

**Buzz** · 03-17-2014, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Trenches.

I seriously hope not.

**Donger** · 03-17-2014, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

How much data do you think there is? We aren't talking about high-res images or anything. Current VSAT systems could easily handle it.

There's something else preventing them from doing it but it's not bandwidth...

I have no idea what the bandwidth requirements would be for the data and voice recorders.

htismaqe · 03-17-2014, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

I have no idea what the bandwidth requirements would be for the data and voice recorders.

I don't know the specifics on airplanes but I've built management networks to transmit telemetry and diagnostic data for IP networks with tens of thousands of devices. Diagnostic data and one-way audio are very small packet streams in the grand scheme of things.

EDIT: I've also utilized VSAT uplinks of 3 and 5Mbps.

**alnorth** · 03-17-2014, 06:23 PM

Saw a few other articles looking at that flight SIA68 shadowing theory. Most experts first take a moment to praise him for coming up with this very clever idea, but then go about debunking or pointing out serious problems with it. First, it might not be that easy to "break away" as the article says without being noticed. The biggest problem is the runway, a 777 will need about 5,000 feet to land, a way to hide a 200 foot wingspan, and a fully-fueled 777 will need 8,000 feet to take off for whatever evil plans they may have. There are no known runways that large in the area around China to Kazakhstan which are not under government or military control, and you can not land it in the desert without destroying the plane.

The most likely scenario, by far, is a pilot who wanted to kill himself and leave an enduring mystery without anyone finding out about what he did. He probably killed the other pilot, disabled the people in the cabin, and set it down in the 2nd-deepest known region of the oceans west of Australia.

tk13 · 03-17-2014, 06:30 PM

At this point I think all of these theories have holes in them. It's kind of amazing really. It could be anything. We're over a week out and have no idea.

**alnorth** · 03-17-2014, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Not as long as the cabin was still pressurized and O2 was being delivered.

Yeah, so presumably the pilot would depressurize the cabin to fix that. The reason why 45,000 is relevant (people have been saying you could die at lower altitudes than that) is because passenger oxygen masks would still drop if they lost air pressure. However, the cabin oxygen masks apparently do not work at about 40,000 feet, but pilot oxygen is designed to work above 50,000. So, 45k and depressurize is what you'd want to do to kill the cabin.

**Donger** · 03-17-2014, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I don't know the specifics on airplanes but I've built management networks to transmit telemetry and diagnostic data for IP networks with tens of thousands of devices. Diagnostic data and one-way audio are very small packet streams in the grand scheme of things.

EDIT: I've also utilized VSAT uplinks of 3 and 5Mbps.

Whoa, 3 to 5 Mbps uplink over VSAT? Whose terminal?

GloryDayz · 03-17-2014, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

I have no idea what the bandwidth requirements would be for the data and voice recorders.

O shit, here comes the Call Manager vs "all others" argument...

**Donger** · 03-17-2014, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Yeah, so presumably the pilot would depressurize the cabin to fix that. The reason why 45,000 is relevant (people have been saying you could die at lower altitudes than that) is because passenger oxygen masks would still drop if they lost air pressure. However, the cabin oxygen masks apparently do not work at about 40,000 feet, but pilot oxygen is designed to work above 50,000. So, 45k and depressurize is what you'd want to do to kill the cabin.

Do the pilots have the ability to de-pressurize the cabin?

**Donger** · 03-17-2014, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

O shit, here comes the Call Manager vs "all others" argument...

Not from me. I don't even know what that means.

htismaqe · 03-17-2014, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

O shit, here comes the Call Manager vs "all others" argument...

Call manager sucks.

03-07-2014, 07:50 PM
ShowtimeSBMVP Chiefs Join Date: Feb 2009 Casino cash: $3496009	Malaysia Airlines loses contact with plane carrying 239 people Malaysia Airlines says it has lost contact with a plane with 239 aboard enroute from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. The airline said in a statement early Saturday it was attempting to locate the Boeing 777 after it lost contact with Subang Air Traffic Control at 2:40 a.m. It was scheduled to land in Beijing at 6:30 a.m. China's state-run news agency Xinhua reported the plane was lost in airspace controlled by Vietnam, and did not make contact with Chinese air traffic controllers. The plane is carrying 227 passengers, including two infants, and 12 crew members. The airline said it is working with authorities to locate the plane. Boeing said on its Twitter account it is monitoring the situation, and "our thoughts are with everyone on board." http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03...ing-23-people/ Malaysian jet probe sharpens focus on passengers, crew as new clues emerge http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03...-indian-ocean/ Last edited by ShowtimeSBMVP; 03-15-2014 at 09:02 AM..
Posts: 23,755

03-17-2014, 06:23 PM	#653
alnorth . Join Date: Dec 2002 Casino cash: $57166239	Saw a few other articles looking at that flight SIA68 shadowing theory. Most experts first take a moment to praise him for coming up with this very clever idea, but then go about debunking or pointing out serious problems with it. First, it might not be that easy to "break away" as the article says without being noticed. The biggest problem is the runway, a 777 will need about 5,000 feet to land, a way to hide a 200 foot wingspan, and a fully-fueled 777 will need 8,000 feet to take off for whatever evil plans they may have. There are no known runways that large in the area around China to Kazakhstan which are not under government or military control, and you can not land it in the desert without destroying the plane. The most likely scenario, by far, is a pilot who wanted to kill himself and leave an enduring mystery without anyone finding out about what he did. He probably killed the other pilot, disabled the people in the cabin, and set it down in the 2nd-deepest known region of the oceans west of Australia. __________________ how many emo kids does it take to change a lightbulb? HOW MANY?! none they just sit in the dark and cry
Posts: 36,130

03-17-2014, 06:30 PM	#654
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1732500	At this point I think all of these theories have holes in them. It's kind of amazing really. It could be anything. We're over a week out and have no idea.
Posts: 54,991