Lets hear your flight 370 theories

[Fiat Currency]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

The chances of your number coming up due to a plane crash is significantly higher at 1 in 7,229.

Not sure where you got that from - I believe it's closer to one in 11 million in the first world and a little under one in 1 million in the 2nd & 3rd world airlines.

[Chomsky]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...detection.html

777 flew at 5,000 feet to avoid radar.

Neither of the stories from the Daily Mail have been especially credible or corroborated in other news sources. It's a tabloid rag of a publication; I wouldn't give it much credence.

[Woodsman]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Not sure where you got that from - I believe it's closer to one in 11 million in the first world and a little under one in 1 million in the 2nd & 3rd world airlines.

The stats are mostly from the National Safety Foundation and I included the link to an excerpt from their report (behind paywall). They are a pretty reliable outfit and an organization I worked with decades ago relied on their data for some rather sensistive work. Still, it was oh dark thirty when I wrote the post and all errors are mine and mine alone.

[Fiat Currency]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

The stats are mostly from the National Safety Foundation and I included the link to an excerpt from their report (behind paywall). They are a pretty reliable outfit and an organization I worked with decades ago relied on their data for some rather sensistive work. Still, it was oh dark thirty when I wrote the post and all errors are mine and mine alone.

I know a lot about how aircraft are built, and flight simulators too … hence my interest in this thread.

Plane crash odds of roughly 1 in 7,200 doesn't even pass the smell test for me. Taking an average plane load of 200 people - you'd have a plane crashing every 36 flights. I must be missing something, or sorely in need of some more coffee.

[Woodsman]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

I know a lot about how aircraft are built, and flight simulators too … hence my interest in this thread.

Plane crash odds of roughly 1 in 7,200 doesn't even pass the smell test for me. Taking an average plane load of 200 people - you'd have a plane crashing every 36 flights. I must be missing something, or sorely in need of some more coffee.

Coffee would be great and I'm just about to step out for a cup, now that you mention it. I wont dispute your numbers, FC, but to be clear the stats refers to lifetime odds of death in accidents in the US, not the odds of a plane crashing anywhere.

My source was the NSC's 2013 Injury Facts., specifically page 43 in the figure "Lifetime odds of death for selected causes, United States, 2009." The relevant portion reads "Air and space transport accidents 1 in 7,229" and references a table on pp 41-42 of the document. That data is sourced from the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics - Mortality Data for 2009 and also the WHO's ICD-9. The ICD-10 is online, if you're interested.

I too have a lifetime interest in aviation but can only claim a few hours as PIC in the Cessna 150 and 172 and the Piper Cherokee. Time and competing resources always seemed to keep me away from the cockpit long enough to lose proficiency. And before long diminished eyesight and high blood pressure made passing a medical more or less out of the question. I've also been flying a desk via flight sims since my first copy of Flight Simulator on my Apple II in 1980 and have over the past three decades spent stupid amounts of money buying and building PCs to run what is essentially a $60 game. If you're a simmer, you know the sickness of which I speak. Of late, I've been enjoying/struggling with Prepar3D since LMC bought the rights to MS Flight Sim and also enjoy X-Plane.

That said, none of this makes me anything more than an aviation dilettante and qualifies me to do little more than express an opinion.

[Chomsky]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03...ectrical-fire/

[don]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

the definitive answer ?

Courtney Love: 'I searched for signs of an oil slick. I found one and there appeared to be an object nearby.'

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet


http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03...ectrical-fire/

Chomsky, This is not directed to you but the analysis by Mr. Goodfellow is way off base. His main premise is that a nose wheel tire overheated and caught fire. This is impossible. The reason why an airplane might have a tire overheat/fire is due to the brakes overheating but nose wheel tires are not equipped with brakes. Even if the main tires overheated, there is a very reliable warning system to alert the pilots and the response is very simple: Lower the landing gear to snuff out the fire.

Additionally, tires tend to overheat and fail only when an airplane is operating at its heaviest. On a 6 hour flight from KL to Beijing with only 250 people, the 777 is operating at about 2/3rds capacity, so a tire being overstressed is highly unlikely. Finally, the main wheel wells are home to lots of hydraulic components. So, in an uncontrolled tire fire in the wheel wells, problems would first manifest themselves in failures of the hydraulic system not the electrical system. Electrics would operate normally long after the fire was burning uncontrollably as evidenced by the UPS 747 crash in Dubai and the SwissAir MD-11 crash in Halifax. In short, just like so many other hypotheses, this hypothesis is full of holes and does not stand up to analysis .:-(

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Chomsky, This is not directed to you but the analysis by Mr. Goodfellow is way off base. His main premise is that a nose wheel tire overheated and caught fire. This is impossible. The reason why an airplane might have a tire overheat/fire is due to the brakes overheating but nose wheel tires are not equipped with brakes. Even if the main tires overheated, there is a very reliable warning system to alert the pilots and the response is very simple: Lower the landing gear to snuff out the fire.

Additionally, tires tend to overheat and fail only when an airplane is operating at its heaviest. On a 6 hour flight from KL to Beijing with only 250 people, the 777 is operating at about 2/3rds capacity, so a tire being overstressed is highly unlikely. Finally, the main wheel wells are home to lots of hydraulic components. So, in an uncontrolled tire fire in the wheel wells, problems would first manifest themselves in failures of the hydraulic system not the electrical system. Electrics would operate normally long after the fire was burning uncontrollably as evidenced by the UPS 747 crash in Dubai and the SwissAir MD-11 crash in Halifax. In short, just like so many other hypotheses, this hypothesis is full of holes and does not stand up to analysis .:-(

Question for you Greg.

Do you know much about the cockpit fire in the Egyptair 777 on the ground a few years back?

That seemed pretty scary, and I don't recall any press at the time about it.

There were reportedly about 280 airframes with a similar wiring sleeve assembly(or some such) fault.

I'm guessing such a fast moving cockpit fire in the air couldn't possibly explain the reported flight changes made, but a pretty spooky incident none the less.

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Lake, I am only vaguely familiar the Egyptair 777 fire. It had something to do with a short circuit near the copilots oxygen mask. On a separate note: I do know there were some problems with short circuits in the 777 electrical systems a few years ago where parked airplanes caught fire in the are below the cockpit. This is where a lot of electrical components are stored. There was some concern that the system was overtaxed when running all the electrical components on the ground with only electrical generator providing power, sort of like an old house being taxed with a lot of modern electrical components. (This was not a problem while in flight with two engines and two generators providing power) This may have been the problem you allude to found on 280 other airplanes However, this was an issue only on the ground and Boeing supposedly fixed this. But perhaps the problem remained latent in this particular airplane.

I would say a fire, especially in the cockpit, at night and over water is probably every pilots biggest nightmare. And an electrical fire similar to Egyptair while inflight would rank right up there as a worse case scenario. I am just thinking out loud now but this scenario has some merit: Electrical fire in the cockpit, with a possible failure of the electrical supply for the transponder and automatic reporting. The pilots would make an immediate sharp turn in order to divert, but then they were overcome by smoke or fire while the autopilot remained unaffected and dutifully flew on for several hours. This scenario is plausible but even the most intense fire should still allow the pilots some time to make a distress call.

[flintlock]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Part of the problem in this case is that we are forced to rely on sketchy press reports and what the Malaysian government chooses to release. Not sure we have the whole picture and its not exactly the most free and open government. I wouldn't rule out that some sort of face saving antics by the government is why things seem so confusing. The shoot down theory is interesting.

As of now I am slightly leaning towards some sort of catastrophic fire or explosion, or some other reason the plane would fly erratically, lose control and possibly crash(Occam's razor). Not sure if its possible for a 777 to nose dive into the ocean and not find any evidence. Kind of doubt it, especially if the crash occurred between Malaysia and Vietnam. Right now I like the fire scenario as mentioned in Chomsky's link, minus the tire part. A pilot would know if this is true, but if they starting cutting circuit breakers to try and kill a fire, that could explain some things. If autopilot was switched on as a last gesture while trying to deal with the fire, that could explain why no plane has been found, as it could be in the middle of nowhere. Still, how long could a plane possibly fly with a serious fire on board?

Lets say the pilot did steal the plane. Why? Suicide would not require a long flight, just crash the plane. Same with terrorism.
So we are left with theft, be it for ransom or future terror. I am with others who say that would be hard( not impossible) to pull off. Harder to hide a plane in days of satellite coverage. Would have to be a very remote area not to have some goat herder notice a 777 coming in for a landing on some remote plain. It would certainly take a serous effort if the plan was to have the plane take off again. Still seems like a long shot. But one thing is for sure, there is no readily apparent answer that makes any sense given the information we have now.

If, and its a big if, the plane was stolen, its in Pakistan or Iran or at least that region. My first instinct was this is about the Iran-Israel conflict. But I still rate this as a low possibility.

[GRG55]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Suppose the Malaysian air force shot it down? Could the Malaysian navy clean it up before anyone noticed. Might explain the "incompetence" of the gvt. Could they clean it up while people were looking for the downed aircraft. Would pieces, fuel etc continually surface so this would not be possible?

If I remember Air France 447 disappeared from the sky too.

Every airplane that crashes "disappears from the sky" doesn't it?

AF447 debris was found rather quickly and very shortly after that from the examination of the recovered vertical stabilizer it was definitively determined that the aircraft had NOT broken up in flight and hit the ocean intact.

[GRG55]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

B777.jpg

The pilot community is starting to pile on...this from a pilot friend of mine with the caption "Found It"...

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

If, and its a big if, the plane was stolen, its in Pakistan or Iran or at least that region. My first instinct was this is about the Iran-Israel conflict. But I still rate this as a low possibility.

I can confirm it hasn't landed on our dirt strip here in the Afghan wop woos, but it's only big enough to take helos, puddle jumpers, and STOL aircraft.

I watched the India/Pak cricket with a couple of Pakistanis from SWAT/FATA last night……it's not there either, otherwise they would have gotten a text from their cuzzies.

----------

I would think airspace anywhere between Pakistan and India would be next to impossible to penetrate without discovery.

It would possess some of the most dense 24/7 air defense coverage in the world between the two and along decent portions of their borders due to long-term rivalry/tensions.

I would also think Iranian air space would be heavily surveilled by US/GCC assets.

[sunpearl71]

Re: Lets hear your flight 370 theories

Flight MH370 'crashed in south Indian Ocean' - Malaysia PM

Malaysia's prime minister has announced that missing flight MH370 crashed in the southern Indian Ocean.


Najib Razak said this was the conclusion of fresh analysis of satellite data tracking the flight.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26716572