gundar: It is plausible that a hostage situation would involve a gag order from the captors.

geocom:

gundar: It is plausible that a hostage situation would involve a gag order from the captors.

That would have to imply that they managed to breach the cabin doors. Cabin doors these days are reinforced with Kevlar. It would also require the captors to know how to turn off all the equipment. In the event that they did tell the captan it stop communication they can still squark the hijacking code these days without the captors knowing.

gundar:

geocom:

gundar: It is plausible that a hostage situation would involve a gag order from the captors.

That would have to imply that they managed to breach the cabin doors. Cabin doors these days are reinforced with Kevlar. It would also require the captors to know how to turn off all the equipment. In the event that they did tell the captan it stop communication they can still squark the hijacking code these days without the captors knowing.

One of the pilots has a record of inviting people into the cabin.

joker97: question is - in a detonation and no debris whatsoever?

if that is possible then that's probably what it was.

if that is not possible then the everybody unconcious and the plane flew on autopilot until it ran out of fuel ... does anyone know where the autopilot would take them? presumably not onto land as someone would have seen it on their radar if it flew unresponsive to beijeng

geocom:

gundar:

geocom:

gundar: It is plausible that a hostage situation would involve a gag order from the captors.

That would have to imply that they managed to breach the cabin doors. Cabin doors these days are reinforced with Kevlar. It would also require the captors to know how to turn off all the equipment. In the event that they did tell the captan it stop communication they can still squark the hijacking code these days without the captors knowing.

One of the pilots has a record of inviting people into the cabin.

Ok so going down that path that they managed to get past the doors what is there motive for this. If it is a terrorist act and they took out the pilots then making a plane vanish is not going to do anywhere near as much as say crashing the plane into a building or the ground right in front of people.

If it is a hijacking to seek asylum they are not going to tell them to turn off all the radio gear and turning back towards the place you came from is highly unlikely.

I just cannot see any reason why a hijacker would tell them to turn off there gear and they would fully comply with the request they know that eventually they will crash. They could likely leave something on to tell of the situation happening in the air leave the mic open and work in the words hijacking into natural conversation even then the pilots are likely to stick close to land so they are more likely to be rescued. The only way I can see for all there gear to turn off and still be related to a hijacking is if something sudden happened like a detonation.

geocom:

joker97: question is - in a detonation and no debris whatsoever?

if that is possible then that's probably what it was.

if that is not possible then the everybody unconcious and the plane flew on autopilot until it ran out of fuel ... does anyone know where the autopilot would take them? presumably not onto land as someone would have seen it on their radar if it flew unresponsive to beijeng

Believe it or not this sort of thing has happened Lookup Helios Airways Flight 522
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

geocom:

joker97: question is - in a detonation and no debris whatsoever?

if that is possible then that's probably what it was.

if that is not possible then the everybody unconcious and the plane flew on autopilot until it ran out of fuel ... does anyone know where the autopilot would take them? presumably not onto land as someone would have seen it on their radar if it flew unresponsive to beijeng

Believe it or not this sort of thing has happened Lookup Helios Airways Flight 522
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

pbgben: Flight path before it dropping connection.
Notice that the next day there is a similar connection drop around the same location? Which reconnects just before making land.


http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/mh370/#2d81a27

Fred99:

pbgben: Flight path before it dropping connection.
Notice that the next day there is a similar connection drop around the same location? Which reconnects just before making land.


http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/mh370/#2d81a27

No - there are some dropouts in the S China Sea (NE of Vietnam) - but it seems continuous in the area where the transponder signal from MH370 was lost.

Flightrader commented that in that area, they lose signal at about 30,000 feet or below.
AFAIK there was no transponder signal on Flightradar indicating descent (if there was cabin depressurisation at 35,000 feet, then for sure they need to get the plane down - fast).
ADS-B data is transmitted twice per second.  FR24 doesn't log it all.  At the time leading up to the disappearance, they say it was logging at 30 second intervals.  There's no log showing a descent - it just disappeared.
Perhaps there are other logs (ie not held by FR24) that show a rapid descent - consistent with a depressurisation incident which didn't result in break-up of the plane.

pbgben:

Fred99:

pbgben: Flight path before it dropping connection.
Notice that the next day there is a similar connection drop around the same location? Which reconnects just before making land.


http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/mh370/#2d81a27

No - there are some dropouts in the S China Sea (NE of Vietnam) - but it seems continuous in the area where the transponder signal from MH370 was lost.

Flightrader commented that in that area, they lose signal at about 30,000 feet or below.
AFAIK there was no transponder signal on Flightradar indicating descent (if there was cabin depressurisation at 35,000 feet, then for sure they need to get the plane down - fast).
ADS-B data is transmitted twice per second.  FR24 doesn't log it all.  At the time leading up to the disappearance, they say it was logging at 30 second intervals.  There's no log showing a descent - it just disappeared.
Perhaps there are other logs (ie not held by FR24) that show a rapid descent - consistent with a depressurisation incident which didn't result in break-up of the plane.

Ahhh, ok.

I find it odd that the transponder would just stop, its a self contained unit right? so even if the plane did have a decompression then it should continue to function, unless it was destroyed by an explosion :(

However even in the event of an explosion is there not multiple communications devices at separate locations on the plane? for example the engine management system was communicating with rolls Royce :/