Just saw this...woh...

 

"An al-Qaeda supergrass told a court last week that four to five Malaysian men had been planning to take control of a plane, using a bomb hidden in a shoe to blow open the cockpit door."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700652/Malaysia-Airline-MH370-911-style-terror-allegations-resurface-in-case-of-lost-plane.html

I'm leaning more towards the possibility of the the crew allowing someone in the cockpit. It's been proven the copilot did this before. A bomb would probably take out much more then the door, damaging vital systems needed for flight, Or maybe even rupture the skin of the plane. Plus the crew may have had time to squawk the Hi-Jack code, before the dust settled, and was taken over (If they survived the blast)  Which wouldn't help them in  whatever they have planned. The only other way of course is if one or both of the crew was involved. Based on the record of the pilot, I find that difficult to believe. I'm not sure about the FO though. Of those 2 possibilities, though, I think the former is the most likely. Unfortunately I also think what Robert McDonald posted is also likely. That the plane has landed at a remote location under their control, to be used in some other attack. This is my greatest fear. It wouldn't make sense to just crash it in the Indian Ocean, they could have done that off Malaysia. It also would explain why no one/group has taken credit. (Actually there was a new group who claimed responsibility, but that claim was deemed unlikely) . With a 777-200ER flying without a transponder could pop up anywhere in the world, if they have a fuel supply.

Not necessarily- does Myanmar (ex Burma) have military radar? At night?

 

Don't know  maybe  the military needs to go to sleep at night time.

Don't know maybe the military needs to go to sleep at night time.

Ouch! Was that a pathetic attempt at sarcasm, or cheap and sorry attempt at humour?

 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

I'm leaning more towards the possibility of the the crew allowing someone in the cockpit. It's been proven the copilot did this before. 

 

Did you see those 2?  hot teenage back packers ,hand selected in the terminal and then groomed for a holiday with them. It would be very unlikely they would let in a couple of bricklayers in the middle of the night though.

Any comments from RW pilots here on the last transmission from the aircraft when handed over to Ho Chi Minh control? He is reported as having replied "All right. Good Night".

 

Is this not a little casual? Is it not a breach of SOP with ATC? I was always led to believe, that since several planes are on the same frequency, is is mandatory to append ones flight ID, as in a minimal  "All right. Good Night. Malaysian 370". Otherwise anyone on frequency could have replied. Should that casual reply not have been queried by ATC with a "Say again please?". Or are relationships between pilots and ATC down to such casual levels these days, and is this not a loophole in that case.

 

MY point is that two possibilities come into play here;

 

Someone else with no ATC communication experience was already in control and could only come up with that  short, non-standard reply, hoping to fob off ATC (which unhappily did the trick in this case).

 

OR

 

One of the pilots made the reply, under duress, and was trying to send a coded message to ATC that all was NOT in fact "right", hoping that ATC would pick up that this was a bit too casual a reply and follow up, especially after the next center was not contacted!

 

I also think ATC's role in this should be investigated thoroughly (possibly it is). After not contacting Ho Chi Minh, surely there should have been comms between Ho Chi Minh centre and the Malaysian Centre / Malaysian Airlines, so that within minutes, miltary apparatus was swung into action in both Vietnam and Malaysia (active Radar focussed into that area, fighter planes scrambled into the air to see what was going on). Seems to me some sleeping/slackness was going on here.

 

After this tragic incident I think one thing that will help is some tightening up on ATC hand-over protocol. It seems that areas of hand-over are known by nefarious individuals, who are using precisely these points to re-route planes.

 

I am also rather angry at the media assertion that, because the Captain was an avid Flight Simmer, he is under greater suspicion.

 

This irresponsible piece of media junk from the Telepgraph, Sunday 16th;

 

"The suspicion of Captain Shah, a 53-year-old grandfather and father of three grown up children, was bolstered in profiles of him that highlighted his obsessive passion for aircraft – he even had his own airline flight simulator at home and flew model remote controlled planes as a hobby"

 

I think exactly the opposite! That makes him the kind of pilot I want up front! In South Africa we have a senior airline pilot, who I shall not name, who spends his spare time at airshows and any other event he can possibly fly at, pulling off the most amazing stunts, and is renowned for teaching his squadron of Harvard show pilots to "ski on water", a really dangerous maneuver. Does such enthusiasm and obsession for flying make him a candidate for crazy actions in the cockpit on a commercial flight? Quite the opposite I would argue. That is why he gets trusted with things like flying a brand new Airbus A340-600 at 200ft above a runway, not to far from an amazed crowd of spectators, while talking the crowd through the manuever the whole time.

 

I have a feeling a huge percentage of pilots are obsessed with flying!

 

Rob

Cant seem to quote for some reason....

 

@Mcbellette - Black box data doesn't send real time info, not sure why you would think it ever did? RR & Boeing  have been offering real time monitoring for many years now, the package is expensive and only provides limited data, nothing like the full FDR  from the black boxes. 

 

As always, money is the main factor, to have real time FDR/CVR and as some suggest 'Video feed' would be incredibly costly.

 

@Tooting -  Unfortunately 99% of rubbish on pprune comes from  Flightsimmers   it makes me cringe...      If you think you can do a better job finding this aircraft then good luck to you..

 

 

Rob, I never thought the black boxes provided real-time data. I was asking if it is possible to provide real-time data and if it would have helped track the aircraft.

Black Box or Flight Recorder technology began during WW2, and at that time the concept was astronomically expensive, the technology became standard equipment during the 1970's.

 

Today the concept of a satellite data link recording some or all the flight recorder data may sound expensive, but will most likely become standard equipment very soon, following these recent events as well as other accidents like AF447 or SAA295 over deep oceans.

 

This technology wouldn't replace a black box but I can see how it would be extremely valuable having this information immediately following an incident and before the black boxes can be retrieved. It would also let you know exactly where the incident happened which is very useful for launching SAR.

 

We are learning a lot from MH370 as a lot of the current shortcomings are being exposed. 

It doesn't just 'sound expensive' it is extremely expensive.  It's not going to happen anytime soon, and if it does then be prepared for a huge hike in ticket prices.

 

Regards

It doesn't just 'sound expensive' it is extremely expensive.  It's not going to happen anytime soon, and if it does then be prepared for a huge hike in ticket prices.

 

Regards

 

The first step would be to have it transmit limited information like speed, heading, position and go from there over time. You bet they are going to begin implementing this just as they did with Black Boxes back in the 1970's, which was also a major step at that time.

I think you need to research the cost involved. Who exactly is going to pay for it?

 

Your idea of real time FDR data has been discussed for as long as I can remember, it is a great idea but from a cost standpoint entirely unrealistic to make it mandatory.  Do a bit of research and you will come to the same conclusion.

 

Aircraft already transmit basic data, in this case it was switched off by someone onboard.

 

In the case of MH370,  FDR & CVR circuit breakers could have been pulled, so not much help even if you have a live uplink.

 

 

Regards

Aircraft already transmit basic data, in this case it was switched off.

 

 

And that is what shouldn't be able to happen. Transmitting basic information like Heading, Speed and Position should be transmitted and the system should not be accessible in-flight. When the technology gets better then a lot more can be transmitted.

 

So what you are saying is we are not going to progress forward because of costs and that is laughable as the technology has always moved forward following human events and what we have learned from them. We have the next 10 years to 20 years to 50 years as we move forward and in that time frame this technology will progress.

 

If you want to say it won't then you honestly can't believe that yourself....it doesn't take rocket appliances to figure it out 

I am certainly not saying it will never happen, just that it is a long way off.  hundreds if not thousands of brilliant ideas could be applied to make air travel safer, why are they not applied? Cost! that is the reality we live in.

 

Millions of aircraft take off & land safely each year, the guy's & girls at the top are not going to suddenly force a costly system onto airlines just because less then 1% of aircraft go missing. 

Millions of aircraft take off & land safely each year, the guy's & girls at the top are not going to suddenly force a costly system onto airlines just because less then 1% of aircraft go missing. 

 

I get what you are saying too but it is always the regulators and the insurance companies that drive these changes and force the airlines into it. The Aircraft Manufactures will come up with the technology and profit from it, and the airlines will get regulated into it, and yes it is the consumer that pays for it.

 

Same situation with the Black Boxes 40 years ago. Only this time the general public is asking the regulators 'How can you lose a 300 Million Dollar Aircraft???" 

 

You bet the Regulators are going to make changes.

My opinions:

 

If the person responsible doesn't want MH370 to be found, then most likely it will never, ever be found. Not even debris. MH370 will probably become the modern day Amelia Earhart.

 

As for satellite monitoring, let's say that satellite bandwidth costs will likely increase if regulators mandate continuous monitoring services. People here don't realize that the datalink market is a de-facto duopoly between Inmarsat and Iridium with astronomical barriers of entry. Duopoly = price gouging. With airlines running wafer thin margins on every flight this will be a very tough pill to swallow.

 

Oh and by the way SATCOM doesn't work over the polar regions.

 

 

"The suspicion of Captain Shah, a 53-year-old grandfather and father of three grown up children, was bolstered in profiles of him that highlighted his obsessive passion for aircraft – he even had his own airline flight simulator at home and flew model remote controlled planes as a hobby"

 

This is the most ludicrous argument I have heard yet from the Media. News flash, If it was him, he's already an experienced 777 pilot/trainer! He wouldn't need a simulator to be able to pull something like this off. The media is not using any common sense here!! If it was shown a passenger(s) some how got control, and it turned out he had a simulator, then they would have an argument about sims being involved.