AcousticallyChallenged Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 It was surprising to find that after the Yanks left South-East Asia, they left behind many airstrips that are rarely, if ever, used these days. Many of them are long enough to accommodate modern passenger airliners. This is also the case on a few small Islands in the South-Pacific. There is a list on google Earth. Big mystery. The same goes with the Soviets in Kazakhstan which is within range of where it went walkies. If it's been brought there with the blessing of local militia, the civilians won't shout out due to fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticallyChallenged Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Duplicate due to gremlins from the kremlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 According to The Telegraph, here are the available landing opportunities That's a runway of 5,000ft, although the suggestion is that the range may be longer? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700892/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-plane-crash-live.html If we're still playing the what happened game, I think it was hi-jacked and will become the world's biggest 'dirty-bomb' or a traditional bomb. That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. In the event of the plane being used as a missile, regardless of whether it is shot down or strikes a target, the USA & UK will blame Iran and off we'll go again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticallyChallenged Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 According to The Telegraph, here are the available landing opportunities That's a runway of 5,000ft, although the suggestion is that the range may be longer? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10700892/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-plane-crash-live.html If we're still playing the what happened game, I think it was hi-jacked and will become the world's biggest 'dirty-bomb' or a traditional bomb. That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. In the event of the plane being used as a missile, regardless of whether it is shot down or strikes a target, the USA & UK will blame Iran and off we'll go again. That's what I thought too. If they have the time to prepare it, they can pack it full of stolen nuclear material and then, even if it is shot down, it's going to make a big impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Border Terrier Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 The inmarset plots are odd, as the military radar contact shows it flying west from it's last known civilian radar position yet those arcs shows it either north or south of this position. Remember radar is old hat tech now. It's not changed much since the 60s AFAIK. The big question is whether the plane made contact with the ground voluntarily or not, and either way, where did this occur? Obviously, if the pilots were disabled, landing would be more difficult unless the hijackers could fly 777s, and there's the fact that these planes tend to rely on instrument landing (ILS) where the airport will give the glideslope, or at least, the red and white lights at the side. Both of which an old disused airfield is probably going to lack. > landing would be more difficult unless the hijackers could fly 777s, Agreed, experienced pilots rely on the auto throttles to maintain glide slope and utilise the auto reverse (brakes). Most private pilots (PP) think they'd be of use if Air Transport Pilots became incapacitated, but in simulator tests, it's usually the engine management that lets them down and not the stick and rudder seat of the pants stuff. In most cases the PP, didn't flare correctly on landing as they couldn't judge that the main wheels are dozens of feet below them; the mainwheels were punched up through the fuselage with catastrophic results. So, could someone without experience land a 777 safely...highly unlikely, but not impossible. Alternately, in the case of 9/11, the hi-jackers weren't that concerned with landing. So if you were going to hi-jack, why not 'encourage' the pilot to fly to your destination and let him do the work...much safer. TBT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticallyChallenged Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 In modern airliners, the landing gears are surprisingly strong, the entire thing has to be able to land with only one set of wheels touching the ground, they're individually able to take the landing force of the entire plane, so a rough landing wouldn't do much harm either. Seeing as the pilot owned the flight sim, he could well have previously known the hijackers, even if he didn't know their motives, the training would be beneficial in case the pilots refused to co-operate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 If they switched off all those systems, would they still be able to navigate to some disused airstrip in Kazakhstan or somewhere similar? If it had (for example) turned back towards Kuala Lumpur, perhaps heading for the Petronas Towers, if it was intercepted and shot down over the Malacca Straights, how easily would it be spotted? Would the Malaysian government want to cover that up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticallyChallenged Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 If they switched off all those systems, would they still be able to navigate to some disused airstrip in Kazakhstan or somewhere similar? If it had (for example) turned back towards Kuala Lumpur, perhaps heading for the Petronas Towers, if it was intercepted and shot down over the Malacca Straights, how easily would it be spotted? Would the Malaysian government want to cover that up? I'd imagine it'd be fairly noticeable but the cover up idea is perfectly possible. And yes, all the navigation can be done without tranmission, using systems such as GPS or even VOR beacons which basically tell you whether you're on the right track and once you pass it, you tune to the next one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well Not sure what you mean? Has an organisation claimed responsibility for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well Not sure what you mean? Has an organisation claimed responsibility for it? I think Slim means that as a result of the disappearance of the aircraft pretty much every terrorist organisation will be under investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well I think the point adding credence to this is that nobody has come forward and even said why this has happened. If its hostages they usually give you a clue why hostages have been taken - and for what cause/purpose. But here nothing. Its the coup of the last 10 years and total radio silence. Its almost like they want this to just pop back up on the radar one day with no clue where it came from or what's on board. Very scary. Could easily be sat at a Kazakh airbase being prepared. I really don't like this at all. I'll be staying away from major cities until its found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well I think the point adding credence to this is that nobody has come forward and even said why this has happened. If its hostages they usually give you a clue why hostages have been taken - and for what cause/purpose. But here nothing. Its the coup of the last 10 years and total radio silence. Its almost like they want this to just pop back up on the radar one day with no clue where it came from or what's on board. Very scary. Could easily be sat at a Kazakh airbase being prepared. I really don't like this at all. I'll be staying away from major cities until its found. Wise move. Don't go into Douglas until it's over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I'm staying away from the Laxey wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That would explain why no terrorist group has claimed responsibility, because they are still wanting to keep quiet and not be investigated too closely. That went well Not sure what you mean? Has an organisation claimed responsibility for it? I think Slim means that as a result of the disappearance of the aircraft pretty much every terrorist organisation will be under investigation. But there will be hundreds of them and presumably its people's full time job investigating them all the time, where as if one organisation credibly claimed responsibility they'd be under 100% scrutiny. If it has landed somewhere, then re-appearing at some point in the future could be incredibly dangerous. Hoping its crashed is preferable to it having landed safely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.