Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 vanishes without trace

Like I said, let's hear it then. What are the unanswered questions, and what do you think might have happened planetgeli?

I wonder why a search was carried out for three days (more?) in the south China sea when the (Malaysian?) authorities already knew a 180 had been performed by the aircraft, taking it away from any such search area. I wonder if this was some kind of deliberate delaying tactic in order to further confuse the exact whereabouts of the aircraft. I wonder if the exact search area is being searched and why it might have been removed hundreds of miles away from where originally was searched in the southern Indian ocean. I wonder if this was all to make finding the aircraft deliberately difficult/impossible. I wonder if a catastrophic fire didn't break out like happened on a similar Boeing plane on the ground at Heathrow (?) in 2007 and to which it is reported no modifications were made. I wonder if the (catastrophic) consequences for this for Boeing, which would involve crippling losses, are not being covered up.

No lizards anywhere. Just genuine questions in what is, to me and many, a very rare (in relation to the circumstances surrounding it) catastrophic event.
 
Sorry I hadn't realised you were infinitely familiar with sarcasm.

The flaperon is indeed encrusted with barnacles. Goose barnacles suggesting, as you say, some sort of buoyancy just below the surface. And I don't think you are any the more aware of the variables you suggest than I am, which may well be explaining factors, but that doesn't stop you from putting forward your own theories regarding scattered material across SE Africa does it? Difference is you won't be seeing any sarcastic retorts from me with belittling guesses at your own expertise or knowledge of aviation physics or oceanology.

I think the circumstances of these parts now showing up are interesting and deserve further explanation, which we may or may not get. But it's easier for Urban to characterise me as suggesting I'm someone saying "the lizards did it". Pardon me for asking questions when the Guardian starts producing nice diagrams with Chris Morris type arrows showing the 'definite' ocean drifts leading to the inevitability of finding stuff on Reunion when for two years they did nothing of the sort.

As for Pickmans and his little Facebook 'likes' obsession (60,000! I must be doing something right!)....sad wankers will always be sad wankers. Still no real friends eh?
as i pointed out on the thread from which you quote i don't goout and seek likes. don't mean so much to me, they seem to mean rather more to you.
 
I wonder why a search was carried out for three days (more?) in the south China sea when the (Malaysian?) authorities already knew a 180 had been performed by the aircraft, taking it away from any such search area. I wonder if this was some kind of deliberate delaying tactic in order to further confuse the exact whereabouts of the aircraft. I wonder if the exact search area is being searched and why it might have been removed hundreds of miles away from where originally was searched in the southern Indian ocean. I wonder if this was all to make finding the aircraft deliberately difficult/impossible. I wonder if a catastrophic fire didn't break out like happened on a similar Boeing plane on the ground at Heathrow (?) in 2007 and to which it is reported no modifications were made. I wonder if the (catastrophic) consequences for this for Boeing, which would involve crippling losses, are not being covered up.

No lizards anywhere. Just genuine questions in what is, to me and many, a very rare (in relation to the circumstances surrounding it) catastrophic event.
no lizards. and no explanation either.
 
no lizards. and no explanation either.

Er...Lynne asked me "what do you think might have happened?"

To which, I replied.

What part of reading comprehension skills would you like help with oh real life friendless one?

(Hey, you got another like! 60001!)

Later, Geoffrey. Gotta go to bed. Work early. Work. You know that word oh proletarian hero one?
 
Er...Lynne asked me "what do you think might have happened?"

To which, I replied.

What part of reading comprehension skills would you like help with oh real life friendless one?

(Hey, you got another like! 60001!)

Later, Geoffrey. Gotta go to bed. Work early. Work. You know that word oh proletarian hero one?
you promised an explanation. where is it?
 
Just genuine questions

There are genuine answers (to all those questions) in the thread above, if you can be bothered to make the effort to read them.

In summary: Politics/national security sensitivities. No - lack of timely information/communication breakdown. Don't attribute to malice that which can easily be explained by incompetence. No. No. The crippling losses were visited upon MAS.
 
Love those Guardian arrows pointing direct to Reunion. And just in case, we'll have some pointing direct to Mozambique too. There. That's solved that. Even though Reunion is a speck in the ocean and two parts of roughly 3,464,534 parts turning up direct on Mozambique (to be found by the same person?) is roughly
10 trillion to 1.

Maybe not so hyperbolic then. (Go, point out I said Mozambique when I meant Reunion - in reference to the same bloke finding two parts).

MH370: debris found on Reunion 'unlikely' to be from missing plane
 
Which are nothing to the crippling losses which would be visited upon Boeing if they were found criminally negligent. Just. Saying.

They'd stand it. Too big to fail. Chinese lives are pretty cheap. Even reputational loss would be minimal given how few players there are in the plane building business. I can't imagine it would add up to enough to warrant an elaborate conspiracy to hide the evidence that would get them in much more trouble if it was rumbled.
 
Nor does the disproving of one bit of wreckage suggest at anything that contradicts the explanation for what happened to the flight. Nor give any credence to the theory of a 'cover-up' that's been hinted at.
 
Maybe not so hyperbolic then. (Go, point out I said Mozambique when I meant Reunion - in reference to the same bloke finding two parts).

MH370: debris found on Reunion 'unlikely' to be from missing plane
Still hyperbolic. Not surprising that there is a lot of debris from a vast array of sources turning up in that region when one looks at the circulation patterns previously highlighted. There is one definite piece and two more promising candidates awaiting identification...
Which are nothing to the crippling losses which would be visited upon Boeing if they were found criminally negligent. Just. Saying.
What exactly is the alleged negligence on Boeing's part?
 
And even supposing there were some negligence on Boeing's part, how would they be able to conceal, or conspire to conceal, the evidence of a crashed plane? :confused:
 
What exactly is the alleged negligence on Boeing's part?

Not just negligence on Boeing's part, but criminal negligence. Like they sneaked in to KLIA and undone some bolts holding the engines on or something.

Planes have been crashing since the very start of aviation, shit goes wrong, we investigate, we learn from it and hopefully make sure the same thing doesn't go wrong again.

So just what did Boeing do that is so bad that the normal run of things would need covering up planetgeli? Call Airbus's mum a slag or something?
 
Not just negligence on Boeing's part, but criminal negligence. Like they sneaked in to KLIA and undone some bolts holding the engines on or something.

Planes have been crashing since the very start of aviation, shit goes wrong, we investigate, we learn from it and hopefully make sure the same thing doesn't go wrong again.

So just what did Boeing do that is so bad that the normal run of things would need covering up planetgeli? Call Airbus's mum a slag or something?

You are almost as big a prat as your Geoffrey Howe mate. Haven't you got a woman to go bully?
 
Regular fires in the avionics bays (17 alleged since 2010 and a major one on a United Airlines plane on the ground at Heathrow in 2007) and cockpits of B777's and a refusal to install fire-extinguishing equipment in the main equipment centre.

Aviation Today :: The Fire Next Time
Where's the evidence of any fire in this incident? What have occasional fires (which occur across airliners of all models) got to do with the disappearance of MH370?

Planes on fire don't make discrete altitude and course changes, flying a route skirting international borders. They don't continue in controlled, level flight for some seven more hours; you get down on the ground (or ditch) within 15 minutes if you want to have any hope of walking away (this rule of thumb has been pointed out before in this thread, but clearly you've not bothered reading any of it). Otherwise you burn and crash (a modern airliner with a fire on board inside the pressure hull hasn't lasted for more than 35 minutes in the air; the typical time is about 17 minutes). Pilots call mayday and descend immediately for the closest airport (not the case here).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom