Malaysia Airlines loses contact with passenger jet

RedStar · Mar 13, 2014

Catfish said:
No idea. I'm just sharing the most recent information I'm aware of. For all I know, in 20 minutes they'll say the original report was true.

I had to read the correction at the end of the WSJ article twice to understand it, and I still may not be getting it right, but it looks like they're saying they stand by their 4-5 hour estimate, just not the source of the estimate. Whoever is relaying the info clarified that their data is based off a satellite-communication link – and not the Rolls-Royce engines.

Catfish · Mar 13, 2014

RedStar said:
I had to read the correction at the end of the WSJ article twice to understand it, and I still may not be getting it right, but it looks like they're saying they stand by their 4-5 hour estimate, just not the source of the estimate. Whoever is relaying the info clarified that their data is based off a satellite-communication link – and not the Rolls-Royce engines.

Thanks for the link. I hadn't seen that. That article is a little hard to follow. If there were signals picked up by satellites for four hours or more, hopefully they'll figure out some way of tracking them. maybe they already have and just haven't shared that yet. If it is some kind of hijacking, I doubt the would share that info.

2003TIDE · Mar 13, 2014

RedStar said:
I had to read the correction at the end of the WSJ article twice to understand it, and I still may not be getting it right, but it looks like they're saying they stand by their 4-5 hour estimate, just not the source of the estimate. Whoever is relaying the info clarified that their data is based off a satellite-communication link – and not the Rolls-Royce engines.

Yep. I still think hijacking. 4hrs flight time at 560mph would put them to the Indian coast. Heading to Pakistan?

Bama Reb · Mar 13, 2014

2003TIDE said:
Yep. I still think hijacking. 4hrs flight time at 560mph would put them to the Indian coast. Heading to Pakistan?

Possibly, if it was hijacked in order to hold the passengers hostage. But there has been no call for ransom. Otoh, if they wanted the plane, why keep the passengers? Maybe it took them flying around for several hours below radar so that the cabin didn't need to be pressurized. They could open the door and one by one....:eek2:
But again, why?

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

RedStar said:
For some reason you seem pretty determined to ignore the evidence. It might have taken a nosedive as soon as it left radar coverage and plunged directly into the sea. But the chances of that happening have become so increasingly thin that I haven't seen anyone reporting it as still being a legitimate possibility.

There was no distress signal, no debris field, the transponder conveniently (or inconveniently) malfunctioned, the US has reported that the engines were sending data for at least 4 more hours after it disappeared and they're currently looking in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Not to mention the other countries involved are looking in the Adaman Sea and the Strait of Malacca.

Given all the evidence we've seen, and even the amount of misinformation, what in the world makes you think it plunged into the ocean along it's planned route when communication ceased?

1. No , I'm just trying to stick to the few facts known rather than jumping to conclusions.
2. There is NO evidence to support turning left. Just disputed and discounted reports.

RTR91 · Mar 13, 2014

Bamaro said:
1. No , I'm just trying to stick to the few facts known rather than jumping to conclusions.
2. There is NO evidence to support turning left. Just disputed and discounted reports.

Are there any facts in this case?

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

crimsonaudio said:
Well, the US is sending a destroyer to the Indian Ocean to search based on something: http://rt.com/usa/malaysia-airlines-indian-ocean-642/

I dont know but you realize that you are quoting Russian TV about US deployments

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

RTR91 said:
Are there any facts in this case?

There's the rub

2003TIDE · Mar 13, 2014

ABC is reporting that 2 US officials told them the 2 reporting systems the pilots have control over shutdown separately. The data reporting system shut down at 1:07 and the transponder shut down at 1:21 which suggests that it wasn't a catastrophic mechanical failure.

crimsonaudio · Mar 13, 2014

Bamaro said:
I dont know but you realize that you are quoting Russian TV about US deployments

*sigh*

Yes, I realize this.

Does a Reuters article in the Chicago Tribune count for you? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-malaysia-airlines-usa-search-20140313,0,2157045.story

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

crimsonaudio said:
*sigh*

Yes, I realize this.

Does a Reuters article in the Chicago Tribune count for you? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-malaysia-airlines-usa-search-20140313,0,2157045.story

Fine but there is a difference between

"It's my understanding that based on some new information that's not necessarily conclusive, but new information, an additional search area may be opened in the Indian Ocean," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "And we are consulting with international partners about the appropriate assets to deploy."

and

Well, the US is sending a destroyer to the Indian Ocean to search based on something: http://rt.com/usa/malaysia-airlines-indian-ocean-642/

I'm not trying to nit pick but as far as I know at this time we are not searching the Indian Ocean yet

crimsonaudio · Mar 13, 2014

Bamaro said:
I'm not trying to nit pick but as far as I know at this time we are not searching the Indian Ocean yet

It certainly seems as if you are, as the Chicago Tribune article you quoted from clearly states:

The Navy's guided-missile destroyer USS Kidd entered the Strait of Malacca, west of the Malaysian peninsula, and was headed toward the Indian Ocean to continue the search, U.S. defense officials said.

So yah, it appears you're simply trying to bolster your nitpicking instead of actually reading the article.

I mean, it's on the front page of CNN.com.

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

crimsonaudio said:
It certainly seems as if you are, as in the Chicago Tribune article is clearly states:

So yah, it appears you're simply trying to bolster your nitpicking instead of actually reading the article.

I mean, it's on the front page of CNN.com.

I haven't read all these articles and have just been trying to respond to the facts as known

crimsonaudio · Mar 13, 2014

Who knows where this will go, but...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/13/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

New information, U.S. officials told CNN, indicates the missing airplane could have flown for several hours beyond the last transponder reading.

Malaysian authorities believe they have several "pings" from the airliner's service data system, known as ACARS, transmitted to satellites in the four to five hours after the last transponder signal, suggesting the plane flew to the Indian Ocean, a senior U.S. official told CNN. That information combined with known radar data and knowledge of fuel range leads officials to believe the plane may have made it to that ocean, which is in the opposite direction of the plane's original route.

"There is probably a significant likelihood" that the aircraft is now on the bottom of the Indian Ocean, the official said, citing information Malaysia has shared with the United States.

RedStar · Mar 13, 2014

Bamaro said:
I haven't read all these articles and have just been trying to respond to the facts as known

Except there have been no facts suggesting this thing crashed United 93 style, yet you keep pushing that.

Bamaro · Mar 13, 2014

RedStar said:
Except there have been no facts suggesting this thing crashed United 93 style, yet you keep pushing that.

I simply said that with what little is known, that is a plausible explanation.

RedStar · Mar 13, 2014

Bamaro said:
I simply said that with what little is known, that is a plausible explanation.

No it's not. There's been absolutely zero evidence suggesting that's what happened.

Bama Reb · Mar 14, 2014

"There is probably a significant likelihood" that the aircraft is now on the bottom of the Indian Ocean, the official said, citing information Malaysia has shared with the United States.

It's entirely possible that the pilots chose to sit it down onto the ocean instead of letting it crash into it. If this is the case, it's also possible that it did not break apart but rather sank and remained intact.
This might sound cruel, but when compared to a hijacking, this would be the better outcome.

BamaFlum · Mar 14, 2014

Bama Reb said:
It's entirely possible that the pilots chose to sit it down onto the ocean instead of letting it crash into it. If this is the case, it's also possible that it did not break apart but rather sank and remained intact.
This might sound cruel, but when compared to a hijacking, this would be the better outcome.

Possible, but why is still a BIG mystery.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk, so my fat fingers cause misspellings and autocorrect makes my ships into...

Bama Reb · Mar 14, 2014

BamainBoston said:
If that happened there may be people floating in the middle of the Indian Ocean in rafts even as we speak. It is looking more and more like hijacking.

And just how many rafts would you expect an airliner to carry?

Malaysia Airlines loses contact with passenger jet

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

TideFans Legend

Super Moderator

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Administrator

TideFans Legend

Administrator

TideFans Legend

Administrator

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Hall of Fame

Suspended

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!