RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,382
Posts: 5,505,000
Members: 25,126
Currently online: 577
Newest member: Captain Allen

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Lounges & General Chat > Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous Discussion of non-Trek topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 16 2014, 09:06 PM   #151
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Marc wrote: View Post

Then there's the infrastructure to support it get stuff in and out of the aircraft, refuel it (those suckers can carry in excess of 100,000 litres of fuel), fix any problems (say blown tires from landing on a short runway).
The world is a big place. Nothing to say it landed at an island. Some of the reports I heard said that the path was such that it could avoid radar.

Now the reports are that the plane did some rather dramatic changes in altitude, which **may** point to a struggle in a cockpit. More on the violent maneuvers in a bit--

Now I will say this. If I wanted to incapacitate the passengers, I might try to find a way to decompress everything so I and a terrorist co-pilot remain conscious.
This might explain why no cell phone calls went out.

In terms of an accident, there is this:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question...4162158AABlaT8

The scenario takes at worst 5 minutes -

The loss of pressurization is immediate if explosive decompression -
Means that the cabin gets foggy immediately (like when you open a Coca Cola bottle -
The oxygen masks drop for passengers, most are surprised and do not know what to do
At 40,000 feet, time of useful consciousness is about 15-20 seconds - then bye-bye -

While all that happens, the pilots initiate an emergency descent -
Slightly "aerobatic" to the good taste of passengers...! -

1. They first don their oxygen mask -
2. Then bank the airplane some 45º to reduce negative G and avoid any traffic below -
3. They put the nose down for a very steep descent -
4. Maybe they elect to extend the gear (noise) and spoilers (buffet) shaking airplane -

Passengers if still conscious think a crash is... imminent...!

The descent itself takes about 3 or 4 minutes, to about 14,000 feet -
They will descend that low, unless flying in the Himalayas, or across the Andes -

Pilots practice an emergency descent every 6 months in a simulator -

Source:
Retired airline 747 pilot and instructor -

It looks like decompression now...
http://www.newindianexpress.com/worl...e#.UyYDGxgo7cs

US transport officials warned four months ago of a weak spot in Boeing 777s that could lead to rapid decompression and even to the aircraft breaking up in mid-air.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa...ems-2014-03-12

Rather like the situation in the miniseries The Langoliers where a plane is sailing along at the last, and no one aboard is awake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lan...(TV_miniseries)

Although this is probably a bit more apt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airframe_(novel)

The incident seems inexplicable. The N-22 is a plane with an excellent safety record and the pilot is highly trained, making the possibility of human error unlikely...the most likely explanation turns out to be a technical problem that was thought to have been fixed years before...

__________________________________________________ ________________________

So here is the working scenario:

Boeing has some problems with cracking. Some patchwork is done, but doesn't hold. You have decompression which incapacitates the passengers preventing calls out. The crew descends, and tries to make a turn back, and anoxia gets to them.

The plane sails on, the people aboard mercifully asleep, out of radar range to...wherever.
__________________________________________________ ________________________

That's why we need more space based systems like this I should think:
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sbr.htm

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.as...2-7b7fb65dee07

Last edited by publiusr; March 16 2014 at 09:33 PM.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 09:27 PM   #152
J.T.B.
Commodore
 
J.T.B.'s Avatar
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

publiusr wrote: View Post
Marc wrote: View Post
Then there's the infrastructure to support it get stuff in and out of the aircraft, refuel it (those suckers can carry in excess of 100,000 litres of fuel), fix any problems (say blown tires from landing on a short runway).
The world is a big place. Nothing to say it landed at an island. Some of the reports I heard said that the path was such that it could avoid radar.
So, the plan was to hijack an advanced, newer-model aircraft from a major airline, making it the most wanted plane in the world. Then divert it to some airport sophisticated enough to service, maintain and even re-paint a 200-feet long, 60-feet high 777 -- in complete secrecy. Then count on everyone's air traffic control and air defenses just forgetting about the missing airliner that could be used as a 200-ton weapon, and somehow trick them into thinking it's some scheduled flight. That about right?

publiusr wrote: View Post
Rather like the situation in the miniseries The Langoliers where a plane is sailing along at the last, and no one aboard is awake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lan...(TV_miniseries)
Miniseries, hell, it's really happened a number of times, most notably to Payne Stewart.
J.T.B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 09:32 PM   #153
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

I know it reads like something out of THUNDERBALL, but if it was a terror plot, that would be the only explanation for why no one has taken credit. Maybe the pilot just nosed it in--but he could have done that at the very first.

Most likely it was an accident and decompression, and I had a working scenario I just updated my post above. That would explain no calls getting out.

So it probably was an accident after all.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 09:40 PM   #154
Captrek
Rear Admiral
 
Captrek's Avatar
 
Location: second star to the right
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

J.T.B. wrote: View Post
So, the plan was to hijack an advanced, newer-model aircraft from a major airline, making it the most wanted plane in the world. Then divert it to some airport sophisticated enough to service, maintain and even re-paint a 200-feet long, 60-feet high 777 -- in complete secrecy. Then count on everyone's air traffic control and air defenses just forgetting about the missing airliner that could be used as a 200-ton weapon, and somehow trick them into thinking it's some scheduled flight. That about right?
I apologize for once again posting something that sounds like something out of an escapist Hollywood movie. If we had a working theory that resembled normal reality, I'd go with it, but for now we don't.

With that out of the way...

If we don't believe that theft of the aircraft is plausible, it seems to me a logical alternative is that the target was not the aircraft itself, but someone or something on the aircraft. Every flight I take I'm told about the seat cushions that can be used as floatation devices in the event of a water landing. So I assume the aircraft could make a water landing, be met by a boat, and remain afloat long enough to unload people or cargo before being scuttled. Right?
Captrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 09:52 PM   #155
Ugly Sweater
Trekker4747
 
Ugly Sweater's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Decompression is unlikely. Not only hard to do in an airliner but the movements of the plane suggest intentional action and not emergency action.

If it was stolen for future terrorist action it's a poorly thought out plan since a) a missing airliner doesn't go unnoticed, b) many airports struggle to accommodate this plane, and c) any "unknown" plane trying something anywhere is going to draw attention in populated areas controlled by RADAR and other systems.

Not to say it can't happen or what happened just that it'd be a dumb plan. Pilot suicide or action to take down the plane is unlikely because then why these theatrics of evading RADAR and such? Why not just simply crash?

The plane having mechanical failure seems unlikely given radio/computer transmissions don't suggest that. It's just a plane mystery and it seems there's a lot of maybes out there and a lot of reasons for AND against those maybes.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Ugly Sweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 10:42 PM   #156
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

I'm not saying it was a smart plan--but hey, we see dumb criminals who think they are just brilliant. I'm hoping it was diverted and the passengers are still alive--but I doubt it.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 10:49 PM   #157
Scout101
Admiral
 
Scout101's Avatar
 
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Captrek wrote: View Post
Every flight I take I'm told about the seat cushions that can be used as floatation devices in the event of a water landing. So I assume the aircraft could make a water landing, be met by a boat, and remain afloat long enough to unload people or cargo before being scuttled. Right?
No, not really. Or at the very most, only in VERY specific and calm conditions, on purpose, under control by the pilot, and like right after takeoff or aborted landing (like the one in the East River of NYC a couple years ago).

They mostly tell you that crap so you feel better about the whole experience. Unless it's right at the beginning or end of the flight (like aborted takeoff or skidding off the end of the runway), that cushion is doing nothing for you. Life vest may make it nominally easier for the recovery team to find the bodies, though...
__________________
Perhaps, if I am very lucky, the feeble efforts of my lifetime will someday be noticed and maybe, in some small way, they will be acknowledged as the greatest works of genius ever created by man. ~Jack Handey
STO: @JScout33
Scout101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 11:02 PM   #158
Captrek
Rear Admiral
 
Captrek's Avatar
 
Location: second star to the right
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Scout101 wrote: View Post
Captrek wrote: View Post
Every flight I take I'm told about the seat cushions that can be used as floatation devices in the event of a water landing. So I assume the aircraft could make a water landing, be met by a boat, and remain afloat long enough to unload people or cargo before being scuttled. Right?
No, not really. Or at the very most, only in VERY specific and calm conditions, on purpose, under control by the pilot, and like right after takeoff or aborted landing (like the one in the East River of NYC a couple years ago).

They mostly tell you that crap so you feel better about the whole experience. Unless it's right at the beginning or end of the flight (like aborted takeoff or skidding off the end of the runway), that cushion is doing nothing for you. Life vest may make it nominally easier for the recovery team to find the bodies, though...
^ I'm assuming that the water landing is part of the plan all along, not an emergency measure. And any excess fuel weight can be dumped. So it's right at the end of the flight, but not at the end of a solid landing area. Assuming good weather and a fully functional plane, can the pilot make a water landing to offload people and cargo to a boat?
Captrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16 2014, 11:46 PM   #159
Miss Chicken
Little three legged cat with attitude
 
Miss Chicken's Avatar
 
Location: Howrah, Hobart, Tasmania
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

^ I'm assuming that the water landing is part of the plan all along, not an emergency measure. And any excess fuel weight can be dumped. So it's right at the end of the flight, but not at the end of a solid landing area. Assuming good weather and a fully functional plane, can the pilot make a water landing to offload people and cargo to a boat?
It don't think a water landing of a large plane has ever been attempted unless an emergency situation has existed. Nor do I think that there has ever been an emergency landing at sea that hasn't ended with death of at least some of the passengers. The only two attempted emergency landings at sea I can think of are Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961 (which had been hijacked - 125 of the 175 people on board died) and Tuninter Flight 115 (16 of the 39 people on board died). Maybe other people know of other cases.
Miss Chicken is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 12:06 AM   #160
TrekFanHR
Cadet
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

I am confused here??? What really happened?
TrekFanHR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 12:35 AM   #161
Finngle Bells
Vice Admiral
 
Finngle Bells's Avatar
 
Location: Finn
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

^^Doesn't mean that individual wouldn't try. Just because it doesn't make any sense doesn't make it wouldn't happen.
Finngle Bells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 01:36 AM   #162
J.T.B.
Commodore
 
J.T.B.'s Avatar
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

publiusr wrote: View Post
I'm not saying it was a smart plan--but hey, we see dumb criminals who think they are just brilliant.
So they're smart enough to form an elaborate plan that requires a lot of expertise, advanced preparation and meticulous coordination, but at the same time they might just be dumb criminals.

Captrek wrote: View Post
^ I'm assuming that the water landing is part of the plan all along, not an emergency measure. And any excess fuel weight can be dumped. So it's right at the end of the flight, but not at the end of a solid landing area. Assuming good weather and a fully functional plane, can the pilot make a water landing to offload people and cargo to a boat?
"Miracle on the Hudson" notwithstanding, it would be very difficult without glass-calm water, 100% predictable winds, perfect visibility and so on. In the dark you can pretty much forget about it, instruments are not accurate enough to put it down safely without airfield lights and landing aids.

Even if you could get the plane and the boat together at the right place by GPS coordinates, which would be pretty hard for the pilot, the time window for off-loading whatever you're after would be very small without much allowance for bad sea conditions and such. And whatever you want had better be in the passenger compartment, because the cargo doors will be underwater.
J.T.B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 01:57 AM   #163
Ugly Sweater
Trekker4747
 
Ugly Sweater's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

TrekFanHR wrote: View Post
I am confused here??? What really happened?
It's not yet known what really happened. The investigation and search is still going involving multiple nations and agencies.

The most we know is that it seems navigational and computerized computer aids on the plane seemed to have been intentionally shut-off during flight. The plane seemed to be flying a route programed into the craft's flight computer (a device that is difficult to operate without great training, expertise and hands-on use.) The plane seemed to deviate greatly from its intended course and flight plan. And there's limited RADAR and satellite data on where the plane was last known to be. Combining the ring of the "ping" on this satellite and the estimated fuel the plane had available to it at the time of the ping there's a fairly "narrow" but LONG corridor the plane is likely in.

This corridor stretches from China/parts of the Middle East and India down into the Indian Ocean. The northern part of the corridor is over land and tightly controlled airspace by various nations who are unlikely to not notice an unidentified RADAR blip in their airspace. The southern part of the corridor stretches over some land and some remote islands but mostly open ocean. Considering how difficult even a regular plane can be to land, landing an airline of this size on anything but a very large and well equipped runway is unlikely, ruling out -to investigators- the plane being landed in some remote island or location leading them to believe the plane crashed into the ocean in the southern part of this arc.

There's still some sort of conflicting information and information that is hard to read but, by and large, it seems whatever happened here was "deliberate."

This could either mean persons on the plane commandeered it for some reason or another (ether to crash it or to land it and potentially use it in a future attack) or the plane was suffering from some-kind-of catastrophic systems failure that could not be communicated to the ground either by radio or computer systems and simply crashed.

There's probably good argument or weight to both scenarios, or any other scenario as well as there's some "Buts..." for all scenarios. (Like the point of hijacking the plane in such an elaborate manner to just crash it in the middle of nowhere and the likelihood of such a systems failure that wasn't communicated to the ground by the plane's computers or things like the flight computer being programed over a certain course that match designated in-air routes/skylanes.)

In essence, the last couple of days has revealed quite a bit of information but it's only created a lot of questions and head-scratching.

On the "Water landing" front. As said, this type of situation is usually reserved for certain circumstances. This times a plane is most likely to crash is during takeoff or landing so most emergency procedures plan for that.

Planes aren't exactly buoyant so even if a skilled pilot managed to bring one down on water, intact, (which is pretty impossible in of itself) the plane is still going to sink and sink pretty fast especially once the emergency doors are opened to release the emergency slides (which can be used as rafts for "water landings.") Though looking for buoyant debris, like emergency rafts, seat cushions, life preservers, has been one of the things they've been looking for to get clues on where the plane might be.

Though at this point it's likely any buoyant debris is probably pretty far from the "crash site."
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Ugly Sweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 03:36 AM   #164
Captrek
Rear Admiral
 
Captrek's Avatar
 
Location: second star to the right
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Malaysia Airlines MH370 pilot Zaharie Shah under scrutiny by intelligence agencies

Malaysian detectives have now focused their investigation on the captain of the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 plane, Zaharie Shah, a 53-year-old grandfather said to be a keen activist for the country’s opposition party.

Intelligence agencies have cleared the vast majority of passengers on flight MH370, it has been reported, and police have turned their attention on the captain, co-pilot and crew members, and engineers who had contact with the plane.

The captain has apparently taken centre stage for his support of Malaysia’s pro-democracy opposition party.

...

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/03...osition-party/
It doesn't explain how any of this is supposed to advance the cause of Malaysia’s pro-democracy opposition party.
Captrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17 2014, 04:20 AM   #165
Hound of UIster
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Malaysian airliner feared lost..

Maybe to take the plane hostage and to dismiss the recent ruling that tossed out Ibrahim's acquittal.

Another opposing pov from Slate just sees this as a cynical powerplay and blamegame by the government of Indonesia.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...terrorist.html


But, if we are engaging in wild theories—and why not, this is Malaysian politics—then why would unnamed police sources be playing up the pilot’s political beliefs a week after we are no closer to knowing the truth about MH370? Because the Malaysian authorities’ performance during this investigation is a pretty reasonable approximation of what passes for governance in a corrupt, nepotistic regime that long ago lost any purpose besides accumulating wealth and extending its own power. Malaysia has fallen behind its Southeast Asian competitors economically in large part because of its stunted political culture. Acting transportation minister Hishammuddin Hussein’s defensive press conferences and updates, which range from opaque to contradictory, are what you’d expect from government ministers who are seldom expected to answer questions.


So, is it possible that Shah hijacked the Malaysia Airlines flight in some twisted form of protest against the government? Of course—even if it seems a less likely explanation than the half dozen other theories that are being floated. Because, whatever happened on board Flight 370, Shah’s support of Anwar Ibrahim is the one piece of evidence that suggests he had a firm grip on reality, not that he was trying to escape it.
__________________
Lex Luthor is a true American hero.
Hound of UIster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.