Likely Theories about Missing Malaysian Plane
03-22-2014 | 06:14 AM
#51
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,931
Likes: 701
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
True, but think about this wild theory:
The captain who attended the trial of that jailed opposition leader, wants to bring worldwide attention to what is going on. He decides he's going to hijack his own plane, fly it to a destination that is politically neutral, and make his statements to the world from there, and possibly seek asylum. (This happened a few weeks ago, when the Co-Pilot of an African carrier hijacked his own plane, and flew to northern Europe.) He decides to act on his plan; He then turns off the transponder, reprograms the FMS, and hijacks the aircraft. However, the passengers, and probably the FO, disagree with him. To calm the people down, he tries to put them to sleep by raising the cabin altitude. The captain locks himself in the FD, and puts on his mask, and is breathing O2. Next, the Pax/FO try to retake the plane, and break back into the cockpit. A struggle ensues, and everyone passes out due to lack of oxygen. Eventually the cabin pressure continues up, everyone succumbs to lack of oxygen, and the plane continues to fly till the fuel runs out.
The Malaysian government tries to cover everything up because they don't want attention brought to their ongoing political turmoil.
The captain who attended the trial of that jailed opposition leader, wants to bring worldwide attention to what is going on. He decides he's going to hijack his own plane, fly it to a destination that is politically neutral, and make his statements to the world from there, and possibly seek asylum. (This happened a few weeks ago, when the Co-Pilot of an African carrier hijacked his own plane, and flew to northern Europe.) He decides to act on his plan; He then turns off the transponder, reprograms the FMS, and hijacks the aircraft. However, the passengers, and probably the FO, disagree with him. To calm the people down, he tries to put them to sleep by raising the cabin altitude. The captain locks himself in the FD, and puts on his mask, and is breathing O2. Next, the Pax/FO try to retake the plane, and break back into the cockpit. A struggle ensues, and everyone passes out due to lack of oxygen. Eventually the cabin pressure continues up, everyone succumbs to lack of oxygen, and the plane continues to fly till the fuel runs out.
The Malaysian government tries to cover everything up because they don't want attention brought to their ongoing political turmoil.
03-22-2014 | 03:22 PM
#54
New Hire
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Very difficult to pull off without military radar (or GCI) and high-speed sprint capability. Phenomenal luck would be required just to achieve the intercept and then it would take a skilled pilot (probably with military experience) to stay close enough.
Ledgerwood is not a professional pilot or a military pilot. He may have some experience with video games.
IMO, we are looking at two scenarios, but both with the same ending. The best place to hide a 777 from global scrutiny is the bottom of the ocean...
2. Pilot malign action. Motive? I would guess personal motives, because terrorism is not really served by making the plane vanish over the open ocean.
However it's possible that a malign actor pilot had terror intentions but while attempting to use altitude to disable everyone in the cabin inadvertently disabled himself as well...and the plane flew on. This last is plausible because there are aspects of very-high altitude physiology that the average airline pilot might not understand.
Ledgerwood is not a professional pilot or a military pilot. He may have some experience with video games.
IMO, we are looking at two scenarios, but both with the same ending. The best place to hide a 777 from global scrutiny is the bottom of the ocean...
2. Pilot malign action. Motive? I would guess personal motives, because terrorism is not really served by making the plane vanish over the open ocean.
However it's possible that a malign actor pilot had terror intentions but while attempting to use altitude to disable everyone in the cabin inadvertently disabled himself as well...and the plane flew on. This last is plausible because there are aspects of very-high altitude physiology that the average airline pilot might not understand.
Would it be possible if they were listening to radio contact between flight 68 and ATC? How exactly could they know their position then?
About the 2nd part.
Suicide is what I thought in the beginning. But he wanted to hide it. For whatever reasons he could have had(Insurance, shame,..) turn off tracking/communication systems, reset the AP into the Indian ocean, fly to 45.000 feet and take everyone out. Plane flies until it runs out of fuel. Unfindable.
Malaysian Airlines wasn't signed up to the service Rolls-Royce offered. So maybe the pilot didn't know about it?
03-22-2014 | 04:27 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
From: Body at sea level; heart at 70,000+
Diluter-demand oxygen systems can be used up to 40,000 feet. In a pressure-demand system, oxygen in the mask is above ambient pressure, permitting breathing above 40,000 feet. Because the pressure inside the mask is greater than the pressure around the user’s torso, inhalation is easy, but exhalation requires more effort. Aviators are trained in pressure-demand breathing in altitude chambers.
1. Which system do the 777 pilots have - diluter or pressure demand ?
2. Discounting former military pilots, what % of airline pilots get altitude chamber training and high altitude physiology training ?
3. How big an IAS envelope is there between stall and Mach tuck in a 777 at 45,000 ft ?
My questions don't imply anything - just looking for answers.
1. Which system do the 777 pilots have - diluter or pressure demand ?
2. Discounting former military pilots, what % of airline pilots get altitude chamber training and high altitude physiology training ?
3. How big an IAS envelope is there between stall and Mach tuck in a 777 at 45,000 ft ?
My questions don't imply anything - just looking for answers.
03-22-2014 | 04:39 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,244
Likes: 2
From: Baja Vermont
Diluted Demand masks are airline standard; the reason is just to get down from a RD or give temporary protection from smoke. It isn't a military style system.
Depends on the airline or operator, but a distinct minority. In fact, the latest physiological training is done on a desktop sim where you breathe a reduced oxygenated mask to get hypoxia. Nothing like the old chamber rides to F410 and very rapid decompression.
It probably about 40 knots, but I don't fly the T-7
GF
Depends on the airline or operator, but a distinct minority. In fact, the latest physiological training is done on a desktop sim where you breathe a reduced oxygenated mask to get hypoxia. Nothing like the old chamber rides to F410 and very rapid decompression.
It probably about 40 knots, but I don't fly the T-7
GF
03-22-2014 | 05:13 PM
#57
New Hire
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
I know next to nothing about computers and very much less about the 777. That’s about as plain as I can say it, so please don’t jump down my throat if this is considered an “unprofessional” question.
Over the past several years, cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare have become front page news, and I expect that, while it is definitely a great concern, it’s been over-hyped by the media. However, one theory that I haven’t heard proposed is that the flight might have been “hijacked” electronically by someone on the ground “hacking” the communication and navigation systems, making them inoperable from the aircraft and flying it as far as the fuel would carry it. Could that be considered a possibility?
As to the question of why, I’d propose that, first, the millions of dollars (probably hundreds of millions considering all the nations involved and the loss of the aircraft itself and ensuing litigation) fits neatly under the heading of financial or economic terrorism. I’d also suggest that the unexplained loss of the plane, crew and passengers would, in itself, cause a feeling of terror that the media would be, and has been, more than more than happy to foster in the name of circulation and revenue.
Comments? Thanks.
Over the past several years, cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare have become front page news, and I expect that, while it is definitely a great concern, it’s been over-hyped by the media. However, one theory that I haven’t heard proposed is that the flight might have been “hijacked” electronically by someone on the ground “hacking” the communication and navigation systems, making them inoperable from the aircraft and flying it as far as the fuel would carry it. Could that be considered a possibility?
As to the question of why, I’d propose that, first, the millions of dollars (probably hundreds of millions considering all the nations involved and the loss of the aircraft itself and ensuing litigation) fits neatly under the heading of financial or economic terrorism. I’d also suggest that the unexplained loss of the plane, crew and passengers would, in itself, cause a feeling of terror that the media would be, and has been, more than more than happy to foster in the name of circulation and revenue.
Comments? Thanks.
03-22-2014 | 05:55 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
I know next to nothing about computers and very much less about the 777. That’s about as plain as I can say it, so please don’t jump down my throat if this is considered an “unprofessional” question.
Over the past several years, cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare have become front page news, and I expect that, while it is definitely a great concern, it’s been over-hyped by the media. However, one theory that I haven’t heard proposed is that the flight might have been “hijacked” electronically by someone on the ground “hacking” the communication and navigation systems, making them inoperable from the aircraft and flying it as far as the fuel would carry it. Could that be considered a possibility?
As to the question of why, I’d propose that, first, the millions of dollars (probably hundreds of millions considering all the nations involved and the loss of the aircraft itself and ensuing litigation) fits neatly under the heading of financial or economic terrorism. I’d also suggest that the unexplained loss of the plane, crew and passengers would, in itself, cause a feeling of terror that the media would be, and has been, more than more than happy to foster in the name of circulation and revenue.
Comments? Thanks.
Over the past several years, cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare have become front page news, and I expect that, while it is definitely a great concern, it’s been over-hyped by the media. However, one theory that I haven’t heard proposed is that the flight might have been “hijacked” electronically by someone on the ground “hacking” the communication and navigation systems, making them inoperable from the aircraft and flying it as far as the fuel would carry it. Could that be considered a possibility?
As to the question of why, I’d propose that, first, the millions of dollars (probably hundreds of millions considering all the nations involved and the loss of the aircraft itself and ensuing litigation) fits neatly under the heading of financial or economic terrorism. I’d also suggest that the unexplained loss of the plane, crew and passengers would, in itself, cause a feeling of terror that the media would be, and has been, more than more than happy to foster in the name of circulation and revenue.
Comments? Thanks.
The plane's information output is for ATC, company flight tracking and data collection, and maintenance tracking. We request information, even flight plans from the "ground", but there is nothing that affects the plane without the pilot manually accepting the information and manually entering it into the flight plan.
If it were possible to "hack" the navigation system, all the pilot has to do is disconnect the navigation system from the autopilot and fly it manually.
At this stage of the game the simple answer is no.
03-22-2014 | 07:40 PM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
From: More Drag
I believe the EROS crew masks are certified for cabin altitudes up to 43,000 ft.
There is an EMERGENCY pressure selector, which creates an overpressure, and eliminates condensation and prevents smoke, smell, or ashes from entering the mask.
Pressing this knob generates an overpressure for a few seconds. Turning the knob, in the direction of the arrow, generates a permanent overpressure.
In addition, overpressure supply is automatically started, when cabin altitude exceeds 30,000 feet.
There is an EMERGENCY pressure selector, which creates an overpressure, and eliminates condensation and prevents smoke, smell, or ashes from entering the mask.
Pressing this knob generates an overpressure for a few seconds. Turning the knob, in the direction of the arrow, generates a permanent overpressure.
In addition, overpressure supply is automatically started, when cabin altitude exceeds 30,000 feet.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
