General Discussion

kpete

(72,013 posts) Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:08 PM Mar 2014

Flight 370-A Simple Theory - Aviate-navigate & lastly-communicate is the mantra in such situations.

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet
BY CHRIS GOODFELLOW03.18.146:30 AM

..........................

The left turn is the key here. Zaharie Ahmad Shah1 was a very experienced senior captain with 18,000 hours of flight time. We old pilots were drilled to know what is the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us, and airports ahead of us. They’re always in our head. Always. If something happens, you don’t want to be thinking about what are you going to do–you already know what you are going to do. When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport. He was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi, a 13,000-foot airstrip with an approach over water and no obstacles. The captain did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000-foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier toward Langkawi, which also was closer.

Take a look at this airport on Google Earth.
https://www.google.com/maps?t=h&ll=6.3283682,99.7329338&spn=0.0985074,0.1321536&output=classic&dg=ntvo
The pilot did all the right things. He was confronted by some major event onboard that made him make an immediate turn to the closest, safest airport.

The loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire.
When I heard this I immediately brought up Google Earth and searched for airports in proximity to the track toward the southwest.

For me, the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire. And there most likely was an electrical fire. In the case of a fire, the first response is to pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses, the plane would go silent. It probably was a serious event and the flight crew was occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, navigate, and lastly, communicate is the mantra in such situations.

the rest from WIRED:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Flight 370-A Simple Theory - Aviate-navigate & lastly-communicate is the mantra in such situations. (Original Post) kpete Mar 2014 OP

Mr. Goodfellow is quite impressed with himself, isn't he? GeorgeGist Mar 2014 #1

Also what made him make that turn left? Iwasthere Mar 2014 #2

There was a meteor reported in the area too. ellisonz Mar 2014 #3

ABC News just reported that cloudbase Mar 2014 #4

Meteor didn't HAVE to be catastrophic Iwasthere Mar 2014 #6

that doesn't explain why they turned the plane. magical thyme Mar 2014 #8

the turn was programmed prior to the final communication and made 12 minutes before signoff magical thyme Mar 2014 #7

And then there is the AWACs Air Force (US) plane theory truedelphi Mar 2014 #5

GeorgeGist

(25,322 posts)

1. Mr. Goodfellow is quite impressed with himself, isn't he?

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:19 PM

Mar 2014

There is no doubt in my mind. That’s the reason for the turn and direct route.

Iwasthere

(3,169 posts)

2. Also what made him make that turn left?

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:26 PM

Mar 2014

The oil rig worker that sightied a burning plane has nearly been forgotten during all these theories. Experienced pilots keep saying, "if it was this plane he saw it would have had to be on the horizon, yet what he saw he said was above him". If what he saw was indeed something burning, and headed in the direction (away from rig) of the plane's turn, what he saw could have been what disabled the plane, imo. Perhaps a meteor or??

ellisonz

(27,711 posts)

3. There was a meteor reported in the area too.

Reply to Iwasthere (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:38 PM

Mar 2014

Could it have been hit by a meteor?
There was a known meteor in the area at takeoff, but this seems to be atop a list of strange conspiracy theories popping up in the absence of empirical data explaining the plane's disappearance. Given what little is known about the flight path, it seems like a long, long shot that a meteor is to blame.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/12/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-15-questions/

cloudbase

(5,524 posts)

4. ABC News just reported that

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:52 PM

Mar 2014

the turn was made prior to the final communication from the plane.

If true, that would rule out some catastrophic event before the turn.

Iwasthere

(3,169 posts)

6. Meteor didn't HAVE to be catastrophic

Reply to cloudbase (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 07:32 PM

Mar 2014

Meteor or whatever else that could have been burning in the sky in that area... could have come near enough to knock out electronics or mess them up at least.

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)

8. that doesn't explain why they turned the plane.

Reply to Iwasthere (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 07:54 PM

Mar 2014

The point is that according to abc(?) and nbc (see link) they turned hard left and 12 minutes later the co-pilot signed off "all right. good night."

that rules out a catastrophic event driving the pilot to turn right to head to the nearest possible landing point.

the communications were lost subsequent to the westward turn and the copilot signing off.

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)

7. the turn was programmed prior to the final communication and made 12 minutes before signoff

Reply to cloudbase (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 07:50 PM

Mar 2014

http://www.nbcnews.com/#/storyline/missing-jet/missing-jets-u-turn-programmed-signoff-sources-say-n56151

"The missing Malaysia Airlines jet's abrupt U-turn was programmed into the on-board computer well before the co-pilot calmly signed off with air traffic controllers, sources tell NBC News.

The change in direction was made at least 12 minutes before co-pilot Fariq Abdul Hamid said "All right, good night," to controllers on the ground, the sources said."

although at this point I suspect all new information. this seems like maybe misreporting. programmed in versus made are 2 very different situations.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)

5. And then there is the AWACs Air Force (US) plane theory

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Tue Mar 18, 2014, 06:55 PM

Mar 2014

With the AWACs radar flying in close proximity to the Flight 377, defeating the civilian radar, but not the military radar.

Reply to this discussion