Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 vanishes without trace

[Sunray]

On past performance, they have found crashed planes in the sea in less than 24 hours, usually a few hours. The debris from a crashed plane is substantial and it floats. Those seas are generally calm and the longer it went on the more it would disperse and be more and more obvious. All the luggage, cushions and clothes and bodies float, 200+ dead bodies doesn't need

that much hardware to detect.

If it had crashed into the ground, the plume of smoke and wreckage would have been noticed by someone. Its quite a populated area, but even in the remotest areas, a massive plume of smoke visible for miles would be have been noticed instantly by quite a few people.

Occam's Razor suggests its been stolen, if it has and the Boeing data is correct at a 5 hour flight, no chance of finding it. If it has then its heist of the century.

 

[Barking_Mad]

On past performance, they have found crashed planes in the sea in less than 24 hours, usually a few hours. The debris from a crashed plane is substantial and it floats. Those seas are generally calm and the longer it went on the more it would disperse and be more and more obvious. All the luggage, cushions and clothes and bodies float, 200+ dead bodies doesn't need

that much hardware to detect.

If it had crashed into the ground, the plume of smoke and wreckage would have been noticed by someone. Its quite a populated area, but even in the remotest areas, a massive plume of smoke visible for miles would be have been noticed instantly by quite a few people.

Occam's Razor suggests its been stolen, if it has and the Boeing data is correct at a 5 hour flight, no chance of finding it. If it has then its heist of the century.

What if it crash landed on the sea in more or less one piece and then sank?

 

[Indeliblelink]

A Boeing 727 was stolen from Angola in 2003, it's never been found.

 

[Crispy]

What if it crash landed on the sea in more or less one piece and then sank?

A "crash landing" on the sea means complete destruction of the plane. The sea may as well be solid at those speeds. A controlled landing on the sea is kinda just possible, with a skilled pilot and calm water. But that would have meant survivors.

 

[existentialist]

On past performance, they have found crashed planes in the sea in less than 24 hours, usually a few hours. The debris from a crashed plane is substantial and it floats. Those seas are generally calm and the longer it went on the more it would disperse and be more and more obvious. All the luggage, cushions and clothes and bodies float, 200+ dead bodies doesn't need

that much hardware to detect.

If it had crashed into the ground, the plume of smoke and wreckage would have been noticed by someone. Its quite a populated area, but even in the remotest areas, a massive plume of smoke visible for miles would be have been noticed instantly by quite a few people.

Occam's Razor suggests its been stolen, if it has and the Boeing data is correct at a 5 hour flight, no chance of finding it. If it has then its heist of the century.

I think you may be narrowing the options unnecessarily finely before applying your razor.

I imagine that the plane, if it crashed into the sea in a ditching fashion rather than plummeting in, could well have done so without major damage, and then sunk intact.

And that's a pretty damn remote part of the world, much of it covered in jungle. I think it would be quite conceivable that a place could crash into the jungle and remain undetected for a very long time, too.

To be honest, the idea that someone would steal an airliner without it showing up in one of the pretty limited number of places you could land one (and it will have to have landed somewhere) comes a long way behind all kinds of other alternatives, not least of which is that Malaysia's strange behaviour seems to suggest that something iffy could be going on with them, remote as that possibility is, too.

 

[existentialist]

A "crash landing" on the sea means complete destruction of the plane. The sea may as well be solid at those speeds. A controlled landing on the sea is kinda just possible, with a skilled pilot and calm water. But that would have meant survivors.

I wouldn't want to get into all kinds of Jazzzed up hypothetical scenarios as to how you could not only ditch a plane in the ocean but prevent anyone from getting out, but the Hudson River crash shows that it is certainly possible for a plane to crash into water and not break up. Admittedly, that was a river and not the ocean, but I think the idea that it's sitting on a runway in the middle of the jungle is a lot less likely...

 

[Pickman's model]

I think you may be narrowing the options unnecessarily finely before applying your razor.

I imagine that the plane, if it crashed into the sea in a ditching fashion rather than plummeting in, could well have done so without major damage, and then sunk intact.

And that's a pretty damn remote part of the world, much of it covered in jungle. I think it would be quite conceivable that a place could crash into the jungle and remain undetected for a very long time, too.

To be honest, the idea that someone would steal an airliner without it showing up in one of the pretty limited number of places you could land one (and it will have to have landed somewhere) comes a long way behind all kinds of other alternatives, not least of which is that Malaysia's strange behaviour seems to suggest that something iffy could be going on with them, remote as that possibility is, too.

my money's still on the max fenig scenario albeit with more advanced aliens who don't crash the plane

 

[Barking_Mad]

A "crash landing" on the sea means complete destruction of the plane. The sea may as well be solid at those speeds. A controlled landing on the sea is kinda just possible, with a skilled pilot and calm water. But that would have meant survivors.

Im just playing devils advocate - There could be a difference between a plane plummeting straight down from 35,000 feet with no engine power and one that a pilot tries to land with limited/some engine function. One would result in the complete destruction of the plane, the other might result in the plane breaking up into big pieces and sinking very quickly?

edit: what Existentialist said

 

[2hats]

doesn't need that much hardware to detect.

Oh I don't know. Almost straight in (imagine, for example, a cabin fire, cabin crew and passengers asphyxiate, flight crew manage to put it in the water pretty much intact but then it sinks very quickly and takes them with it) anywhere in 20 million+ square km of ocean from 50 odd metres up to several km deep with absolutely no indication of where to start looking. It could take a lot more assets than that.

 

[Pickman's model]

On past performance, they have found crashed planes in the sea in less than 24 hours, usually a few hours. The debris from a crashed plane is substantial and it floats. Those seas are generally calm and the longer it went on the more it would disperse and be more and more obvious. All the luggage, cushions and clothes and bodies float, 200+ dead bodies doesn't need

that much hardware to detect.

If it had crashed into the ground, the plume of smoke and wreckage would have been noticed by someone. Its quite a populated area, but even in the remotest areas, a massive plume of smoke visible for miles would be have been noticed instantly by quite a few people.

Occam's Razor suggests its been stolen, if it has and the Boeing data is correct at a 5 hour flight, no chance of finding it. If it has then its heist of the century.

what's the difference between the various versions of the P-3 orion?

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...

Occam's Razor suggests its been stolen, if it has and the Boeing data is correct at a 5 hour flight, no chance of finding it. If it has then its heist of the century.

Why would anyone steal it? To flog on ebay?

Only just catching up with this story TBH.

 

[Pickman's model]

Why would anyone steal it? To flog on ebay?

Only just catching up with this story TBH.

let's wait till the aliens put in their demands, eh.

 

[2hats]

it is certainly possible for a plane to crash into water and not break up. Admittedly, that was a river and not the ocean

Open ocean wave dynamics would make it a lot harder and more likely to lead to structural failure, particularly if the airframe had already been weakened by a fire or other event. Also, factor in that any ditching would quite likely have been at night.

 

[DotCommunist]

Why would anyone steal it? To flog on ebay?

Only just catching up with this story TBH.

you could use it to haul heroin, slaves or rent it to mercs. All kindsof badness that don't beear thinking about

 

[Stanley Edwards]

let's wait till the aliens put in their demands, eh.

Aliens! I thought you said airlines initially. That would make sense.

 

[Stanley Edwards]

you could use it to haul heroin, slaves or rent it to mercs. All kindsof badness that don't beear thinking about

I guess with it's super radar avoidance system it could be useful.

 

[Pickman's model]

Aliens! I thought you said airlines initially. That would make sense.

airlines are run by aliens. do you think michael o'leary out of ryanair originated on this planet?

 

[2hats]

what's the difference between the various versions of the P-3 orion?

Differing avionics, roles (ELINT, anti sub warfare, SAR, remote sensing/oceanographic tasking, etc). Some can even be armed.

 

[2hats]

Why would anyone steal it? To flog on ebay?

Easier for someone with a bit of loot to just buy one second hand from the various boneyards. If you just wanted an aircraft alone.

 

[existentialist]

Open ocean wave dynamics would make it a lot harder and more likely to lead to structural failure, particularly if the airframe had already been weakened by a fire or other event. Also, factor in that any ditching would quite likely have been at night.

Yeah, it'd have to be vanishingly unlikely to have happened. OTOH, more unlikely than that the plane was nabbed and landed safely in some jungle airstrip?

I imagine that we'll eventually find out that it DID crash somewhere, but - as that WSJ graphic demonstrates - there's a lot of places to look, and we just haven't found it yet.

Although it's a totally unrelated kind of incident, and almost certainly nothing to do with this flight, I do keep remembering the plane that crashed into the sea following a hijack because the hijackers simply didn't believe the captain when he said he didn't have enough fuel to get to where they said they wanted to go...

This one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

 

[Stanley Edwards]

Easier for someone with a bit of loot to just buy one second hand from the various boneyards. If you just wanted an aircraft alone.

I do actually know someone who sells refurbished Boeings.

 

[2hats]

I do keep remembering the plane that crashed into the sea following a hijack because the hijackers simply didn't believe the captain when he said he didn't have enough fuel to get to where they said they wanted to go...

Most of the passengers who could have survived in that event drowned due to prematurely inflating their life vests in the cabin prior to evacuation, wedging themselves and others in the sinking remains of the aircraft.

e2a: happened in daylight and within relatively easy reach of potential rescuers (like the Hudson River ditching) as well. It makes a huge difference to survivability as to whether people can get help within minutes to an hour of the event. If you dig through the official reports of PA103 you will find that at least one, ISTR three people survived - were found still alive on the ground but could not be reached by/get to adequate medical help at the time (though most likely they were beyond the reach of medical tech as was 25+ years ago, maybe even today, we'll never know).

 

[Barking_Mad]

From CNN

Kit Darby, a longtime pilot, said Tuesday it was not clear whether the transponder was turned off intentionally. A power failure would have turned off the main transponder and its backup, and the plane could have flown for more than an hour with such a power failure, the president of Aviation Information Resources told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

But Nance expressed doubt that that could have been the case. The electrical system aboard the plane is so robust and the transponder draws so little power that it would be one of the last pieces of equipment to go dark, even after a catastrophic event like an engine explosion or a breach of the cabin and rapid decompression, he said.

"I'm in a head-scratching mode," Nance said. "The most likely probability is that a human hand turned that off. Then you get into the logic tree of who and why and there aren't that many channels in that tree."

He added, "This is beginning to look very, very much like a hijacking."

A former Federal Aviation Administration safety inspector agreed. David Soucie, author of "Why Planes Crash," cited the redundant electrical, charging, battery and communications systems on Boeing 777s. Much had to go wrong for the aircraft to lose its transponder and then to veer off course, he said, adding that it stands to reason "that someone forced those pilots to take control of the aircraft and take it off course."

Turning off a transponder requires a deliberative process, said Peter Goelz, former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board. "If someone did that in the cockpit, they were doing it to disguise the route of the plane," he told CNN. "There might still be mechanical explanations on what was going on, but those mechanical explanations are narrowing quickly."

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/12/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-transponder/

 

[existentialist]

Most of the passengers who could have survived in that event drowned due to prematurely inflating their life vests in the cabin prior to evacuation, wedging themselves and others in the sinking remains of the aircraft.

Yeah. I remember the announcements about not inflating your lifejacket while inside the cabin coming in - I was still sufficiently new to flying that I paid great attention to the safety briefings, and I do remember wondering what idiot WOULD inflate a lifejacket while they were still inside...

 

[2hats]

what idiot WOULD inflate a lifejacket while they were still inside...

Someone in a blind panic, under extreme stress?

 

[existentialist]

Someone in a blind panic, under extreme stress?

Well, yeah. I was more judgemental then

 

[existentialist]

Most of the passengers who could have survived in that event drowned due to prematurely inflating their life vests in the cabin prior to evacuation, wedging themselves and others in the sinking remains of the aircraft.

e2a: happened in daylight and within relatively easy reach of potential rescuers (like the Hudson River ditching) as well. It makes a huge difference to survivability as to whether people can get help within minutes to an hour of the event. If you dig through the official reports of PA103 you will find that at least one, ISTR three people survived - were found still alive on the ground but could not be reached by/get to adequate medical help at the time (though most likely they were beyond the reach of medical tech as was 25+ years ago, maybe even today, we'll never know).

Oh, I was only citing the Hudson River thing as an example of a situation where a plane was able to ditch (mostly) intact on water. I didn't mean to suggest that such an accident, in the ocean, at night, in uncertain weather, of a much larger aircraft, etc., etc., was necessarily survivable.

It was more of a rhetorical point to highlight how much less likely I thought that the idea of the plane being stolen and remaining intact somewhere was.

 

[DotCommunist]

and now thanks to al queda you wouldn't even have so much as a pair of nail scissors to pop them with

 

[Barking_Mad]

Here's one for you. This is from a Flightaware iPhone app giiving locations of the plane. Note how the 4th from last one appears to show the plane re-appearing 2 hours later.

The location?

Hong Kong.

You can check the locations using this website: http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html

Enter the lat/long into the decimal section. Image below shows first and last of those last four entries.

 

[2hats]

US (ABC report) suggesting the flight came down in the Indian Ocean. Convinced sufficiently to redeploy a destroyer there to investigate.