Skip to main content

With today's admission from the Malaysian Air Force that a heavy airliner deviated from its filed flight plan, switched off its transponder and completely overflew the Malaysian peninsula at random altitudes, might we finally understand why the fate of MH 370 has been so hard to determine?

Is it because the guys in charge of defending Malaysian airspace the morning of March 8th were asleep at their radar scopes and their superiors have been scrambling to save face?

Or is it something worse?

Let's pretend what we now know happened in Malaysia that night happened in the Gulf of Mexico and we'll see if the US Air Force wants anyone to know how things went down:

1) A jumbo jet loaded to 600,000 lbs leaves Houston, bound for Puerto Rico. We'll call it flight DK222.

2) About 50 minutes into the journey, flying at 35,000 roughly 100 miles south of Mobile, AL and outside the US Air Defence Identification Zone, the pilots cease speaking to ATC, switch off their transponder (making themselves largely unreadable on ATC's radar scopes) and make a dramatic 180 degree turn, descending to 32,000 and headed back toward Houston.

3) Concerned by the loss of a radar target, civilian ATC repeatedly hails the pilots of DK222. Unable to raise them, they ask the pilot of a nearby jet to hail DK222 on the emergency frequency monitored by all trans-oceanic aircraft. The pilot of that nearby jet makes contact with DK222 and says its pilots were "mumbling."

4) DK222 continues flying, transponder off and radio silent, right back through the US ADIZ, right back into the airspace of the contiguous US and ends up disappearing forever at high altitude over Shreveport, Louisiana.

The above scenario, which I chose carefully as a licensed pilot with many contacts in commercial aviation, would result in a number of questions in the minds of US citizens, foremost among them would be, I should think, the following:

How can it be that an airliner deviated from its flight plan and then, in classic 9/11 style, turned off its transponder, went radio silent and flew through our nation's air defenses without someone in the Air Force scrambling some jets to go up and take a peek?

Malaysians must be asking that question today. But they'll be asking more painful questions than that. If I were a Malaysian - especially one who lost a friend or family member on that flight - today I'd be asking this:

How on Earth could our Military allow valuable search assets to be wasted for two days in and over the waters East of the peninsula when they knew all along that MH270 disintegrated over the Malacca Strait?

I mean, a "senior officer" told Reuters that the plane disappeared over the island of Pulau Perak in the Malacca Strait. That senior officer was then likely outed (or outed himself) in an NPR story as General Tan Sri Rodzali Daud, chief of Malaysia's Air Force. If we make the assumption that the general is the one talking to Reuters, we can infer that the top Air Force Official in all of Malaysia just admitted that his forces were powerless to intercept a rogue airliner.

Let that sink in: The head of the Royal Malaysian Air Force just admitted that he failed to intercept a rogue airliner that wandered around his airspace for 45 minutes.

He admitted it, but no one seems to be reporting that way. Take a look at this preposterous HuffingtonPost front page:

See the part that reads "Last Known Location??" Well, as of this morning, that is not the last known location. There should be no confusion whatsoever about the last known location of MH370 because, as explained by the Chief of the RMAF to Reuters today, the plane disappeared off of military radar (meaning: ceased to exist as an object in the sky, or disintegrated) near the island of Pulau Perak in the Malacca Strait.

The media should be reporting that. Why aren't they?

There is no more mystery about the flight path of MH370 or where it disintegrated. A beautiful, fully functional Boeing 777 with 239 people inside it ceased to exist over a tiny island west of Malaysia. And yet there are search boats 300NM east of the on the wrong side of the country. And yet the media still feels there's some mystery shrouding the whole affair.

Well, I'm sorry to say this but from where I stand, the only remaining mysteries are as follows:

1) Was MH370 hijacked by its passengers or its pilots?

2) Did the RMAF fail to intercept an airliner that wandered its airspace for 70 minutes only to have it disintegrate in midair due to either an aggressive maneuver or a bomb?

3) Or did the RMAF succeed in intercepting a plane that had been wandering its airspace for 70 minutes, shoot it down over the Malacca Strait and then slow-fuck the rollout of the info because they had no idea how to deal with what went down on Saturday morning?

The longer this utterly false sense of "mystery" surrounds an otherwise simple hijacking story, the more inclined I am to believe option 3.

My heart goes out to the families.

5:35 PM PT: UPDATE:  In the comments, people keep asking where all the debris is if the plane either disintegrated, or was shot down, over the Malacca Strait.

I'm going to quote from the CIA Report on KAL007  which was shot down by the Soviet Union in 1983.

"There were 269 innocent people aboard KAL-007, which was shot down by the Soviets on the night of August 31/September 1, 1983. But as of September 1, 1983, there had never been a crash, at sea, of a Boeing 747 passenger airliner.

No one knew what to expect from a crash at sea of a Boeing 747, in terms of the amount and dispersal of wreckage and debris. Therefore, it may not have seemed too surprising to some, at least then in 1983, that only about 848 unidentifiable, very smashed chunks of metal from an aircraft and some passengers’ cabin articles, were recovered in September and October of 1983.

Reportedly, all but two of these 848 small pieces were unidentifiable and were not positively from KAL-007. The other identifiable debris specifically related to KAL-007 was the identity card of a Canadian passenger, Mary Jane Hendrie, 25 Ottawa, Canada, and some business cards from a Taiwanese passenger.

Moreover, there was a long gap before any debris or body parts were recovered--no debris or body parts were recovered at all until as long as 8 days after KAL-007 went down.


This very low number of small-sized items recovered including of 2 unrecognizable bodies, not identifiable as KAL-007 passengers plus 11 other pieces of unrecognizable human remains.

Thus in sum, only two of these 848 various debris items, and none of the bodies or various human body parts, could ever be specifically identified with either KAL-007 itself, or any specific passenger of KAL-007. And nothing was recovered for the first 8 days.

Therefore not only was there a mystery concerning the dearth of debris from KAL-007, but there was also a mystery concerning both the origins and identity of the very small amount of remains recovered at the time of the KAL-007 incident, and also the lateness of their recovery.

About 772 small debris items, or about 90 per cent of these 848 small items, were recovered by the Japanese, because they were washed up as “flotsam and jetsam” on Hokkaido’s beaches. But to re- emphasize, only two of these items--reportedly a single identity card and a business card--could ever be positively identified as coming from KAL-007, and these two items were reportedly recovered by the Japanese.

On September 8, 1983, the Soviets claimed that they had “recovered” a few pieces of KAL-007 debris, but they claimed that they found all of this debris floating on the surface. On September 26, 1983, the Soviets turned over to an international commission only about 76 of these small items, only less than about 10 per cent of the 848 items of total debris found, none of which were human remains, after apparently having some items of recovered clothing dry-cleaned.

It is significant that none of the debris items or remains turned over by the Soviets could be specifically identified with either KAL-007 itself, or with any of its passengers."


Poll

Was MH370 shot down by the RMAF?

60%70 votes
39%46 votes

| 116 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  My money is on 3... n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tampaedski, GAS, Calamity Jean

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:17:05 AM PDT

    •  Maybe (4+ / 0-)

      Wish maybe had been on the poll.

      I'm willing to believe that any Air Force would shoot down a civilian airliner if they thought they had a reason.

      But what would be the reason?

      If the rouge airliner were closing in on Malaysia's capital city of Kuala Lumpur, which has quite a nice pair of twin towers itself? Hell, I'd shoot at it myself.

      If the plane was sort of wandering around while the beginner pilots worked on their skillz? Not so sure what to do. I'd tend to watch and wait and see if the amateurs crash it into the sea themselves.

      But where was the damn plane when it went down? Going what direction? Looks like it might have been on the Kuala Lumpur side of the peninsular country, where it didn't belong. Still, at this point we don't have enuff info to begin to spin a good conspiracy theory.

      •  I voted to see how others voted (0+ / 0-)

        LOL

        It's a tie.

      •  Then you'd have to establish why (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy

        the RMAF allowed everyone to search the east coast of Malaysia for two full days.

        Embarrassment? Sure. Either they failed to intercept a rogue airliner and keep track of its whereabouts. Or they shot it down. There is no other option, right?

        In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

        by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:54:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  embarrassment and (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy

          it does take time to verify that the unidentified blip was indeed the airliner crossing Malaysia, accounting for all other traffic.

          the military radar would not have registered the object as flight 370.

          Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

          by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:13:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  True. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Wreck Smurfy

            Except that having an airliner handed to you by a civilian controller due to the fact that its transponder ceased to function and lost comms is not exactly an every day event.

            Whoever was on that scope that night was A) handed the target by a civ controller and B) very interested in its headings and altitudes.

            In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

            by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 01:01:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  How about them Cowboys, LOL. (0+ / 0-)

          Don't be obtuse, the water is shallow everyplace anyone is saying the plane could have come down.

          Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

          by oblomov on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:10:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  thought the mumbling thing was debunked (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Woody, AoT, GAS, RandomNonviolence

    the many threads at airlners.net on this incident (13, at last count) seem to say so.

    There's been nothing that says the airliner disintergrated over Palau Penak (which right at this very moment they seem to be walking back!) just that's the last point they saw it on their radar. I haven't even seen consistent reports at the height of the aircraft. I've seen it was at 3000 feet and couldn't have crossed Malaysia at that height (it'd have hit a mountain) or if it was at 29,500 feet at which case it could be anywhere from Malaysia to halfway to Tanzania (however, it'd have passed fairly close to Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the southern tip of India and possibly blipped those radars. IF it was still in the air and IF the turn west actually happened.)

    (If the mumbling and turn west is true, might be a sign the aircraft depressurized due to some catastrophic failure of its systems. In that case it could have flown until it ran out of fuel and then fell from the sky, but everyone would have suffocated long before hand. it's happened at least once before in recent memory on a commercial airliner (in Greece), and at least 2 times on private jets that I can think of.)

    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

    by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:22:10 AM PDT

    •  RMAF General said (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wreck Smurfy

      "lost contact" near Pulau Perak at 32,000'

      What do you think "lost contact" means on an active military radar?

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:30:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Do you think military radars never "lose contact"? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thestructureguy, terrypinder, Portlaw

        There's the notion of range that is relevant to the functioning of radar.  "Lose contact" doesn't have to mean the contact disintegrated.  Unless you want it to.

        Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

        by oblomov on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:40:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not at 60nm (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wreck Smurfy

          on an object the size of 6 Greyhound busses.

          In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

          by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:55:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Where was the radar that it was 60 nm from? (0+ / 0-)

            And what type of radar?

            Recall plane had been flying for 41 minutes (averaging say 400mph).  When the transponder went silent the plane was 100nm from the Malyasian coast.

            http://online.wsj.com/...

            Why don't you just withhold judgment until you have a basis for believing something other than "they're all lying."

            Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

            by oblomov on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:04:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  They're all lying? (0+ / 0-)

              In quotes even?

              Where did I write that?  I even used my "search" function and I can only find three instances of the word lying on this entire webpage.

              And you wrote it first.

              In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

              by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 05:02:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  lost contact (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oblomov

        means it left that radar station's field of view.

        if it had disintergrated at that point, radar most certainly would have picked up brief returns of such an incident as one object became several before it vanished. PanAm103, TWA 800, radar showed both as one object, then several, as the aircraft broke up (one by bomb, the other by centre-fuel tank explosion)

        lost contact, to me, means the aircraft (if the story is true, since the Malaysian gov't seems to be walking it back), continued on its way out into the Indian Ocean.

        Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

        by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:42:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Lost contact (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wreck Smurfy

          at the point at which Daud indicated would mean "picked up by somebody's radar on North Sumatra."

          What is the Indonesian Air Force saying? Anybody asking? These are not great expanses of ocean we're talking about.  A 777 would appear clearly as an uninterrogated target on civilian radar at those ranges.

          If MH370 continued SWbound toward Indonesia, the IAF would (or at least should) be commenting, no?

          In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

          by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:43:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  did daud actually say that? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Wreck Smurfy

            beucase he's released a statement that says he did not say it.

            here is the text in full. it can be widely found in Malaysian media, and at this thread:

            OFFICIAL STATEMENT BY CHIEF OF ROYAL MALAYSIAN AIR FORCE ON BERITA HARIAN NEWS ARTICLE DATED 11th MARCH 2014 ON SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS IN THE STRAITS OF MALACCA

            1. I refer to the Berita Harian news article dated 11th March 2014 on Search and Rescue Operations in the Straits of Malacca which (in Bahasa Malaysia) referred to me as making the following statements:

            The RMAF Chief confirmed that RMAF Butterworth airbase detected the location signal of the airliner as indicating that it turned back from its original heading to the direction of Kota Bahru, Kelantan, and was believed to have pass through the airspace of the East Coast of and Northern Peninsular Malaysia.

            The last time the plane was detected by the air control tower was in the vicinity of Pulau Perak in the Straits of Malacca at 2.40 in the morning before the signal disappeared without any trace, he said.

            2. I wish to state that I did not make any such statements as above, what occurred was that the Berita Harian journalist asked me if such an incident occurred as detailed in their story, however I did not give any answer to the question, instead what I said to the journalist was “Please refer to the statement which I have already made on 9 March 2014, during the press conference with the Chief of Defence Force at the Sama-Sama Hotel, Kuala Lumpur International Airport”.

            3. What I stated during that press conference was,

            The RMAF has not ruled out the possibility of an air turn back on a reciprocal heading before the aircraft vanished from the radar and this resulted in the Search and Rescue Operations being widen to the vicinity of the waters of Pulau Pinang.

            4. I request this misreporting be amended and corrected to prevent further misinterpretations of what is clearly an inaccurate and incorrect report.

            5. Currently the RMAF is examining and analyzing all possibilities as regards to the airliner’s flight paths subsequent to its disappearance. However for the time being, it would not be appropriate for the RMAF to issue any official conclusions as to the aircraft’s flight path until a high amount of certainty and verification is achieved. However all ongoing search operations are at the moment being conducted to cover all possible areas where the aircraft could have gone down in order to ensure no possibility is overlooked.

            6. In addition, I would like to state to the media that all information and developments will be released via official statements and press conferences as soon as possible and when appropriate. Our current efforts are focused upon on finding the aircraft as soon as possible.

            Thank You

            GENERAL TAN SRI DATO’SRI RODZALI BIN DAUD RMAF
            Chief of Royal Malaysian Air Force

            Released On:

            11 March 14
            Kuala Lumpur

             

            you're also assuming the military radar in aceh province has the same range as the one onshore in malaysia. do you know this to be certain?

            Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

            by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:56:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Certain? (0+ / 0-)

              Only a fool is certain about anything. I'm just looking at what is reported (and not reported):

              1) Regardless of what Daud might be trying to either retract or correct in the statement you quote above, a "senior officer" in Malaysia's military very clearly told Reuters that MH370 had made it into the Malacca Strait.

              2) This report by Reuters - sourced from an anonymous military officer - rather strangely mirrors the exact thing reported by Berita Harian, which Daud is now trying to correct.

              3) The actual Berita Harian story (still posted on the internets)  doesn't attribute the Butterworth AB angle to Daud.  Here is what it actually says, translated by Google:  "According to sources, it detected the control tower of the Royal Malaysian Air Force Base (RMAF), Butterworth and several control room aboard the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN), which oversees the safety of the South China Sea as well as the Unit of Air Traffic Control and Surveillance Singapore."

              According to sources. Not Daud.

              What this tells me is that the part he doesn't like - the part about MH370 reaching the center of the strait, the part that is very inconvenient for Malaysia right now - he actually gave to BH off the record.

              Read the quote again. Butterworth, ATC Singapore...that's pretty detailed info.

              So why is he walking back something the actual article attributes to "sources."

              In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

              by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 01:32:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Basically, he doesn't know shit from shinola (0+ / 0-)

              but he is certain someone is lying to make his life interesting.

              Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

              by oblomov on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:12:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  yep (0+ / 0-)

                Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

                by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:28:09 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Typical Ad Hominem (0+ / 0-)

                I wrote a diary. I laid out two possible conclusions to the story of a huge jetliner going rogue for roughly an hour over Malaysia. I lean toward one option. And so do more than half the people who answered the poll.

                You lean toward whatever position casts you as the heroic debunker, which is such a stereotypical role to play here at kos it honestly makes me laugh. You think you're adding perspective, but you insulted me twice in two posts.

                You and your pal pinder are like Statler & Waldorf from the Muppets!

                So do Statler and Waldorf have any curiosity about how the Malaysian Air Force could have no idea for four straight days what the fate of a huge jetliner that rather famously violated its airspace for over an hour?

                (I've been away from the computer for a few hours and, I'll be a sonofabitch if every. fucking. news. outlet. everywhere. isn't. now. reporting. that. the. plane. flew. clear. across. Malaysia. and. disappeared. off. radar. in. the. Strait.

                Gee whiz, Muppets!!)

                In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

                by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 05:20:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  re: adhominem (0+ / 0-)

                  could you, line by line, point out the ad hominem in the post above?

                  Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

                  by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 05:26:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Sure! (0+ / 0-)

                    In his first comment, he calls me obtuse.

                    In his 2nd comment, he says I don't know shit from shinola and that my life is boring.

                    I assert that he's slamming me personally because he doesn't agree with my logical thesis.

                    Want the definition of ad hominem, Waldorf?

                    (Me calling you Waldorf, for example, is textbook ad hominem. But I don't want to make your head explode!)

                    In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

                    by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 06:00:33 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Depressurization (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT, Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy

      is noteworthy theory, however, had the pilots suffered rapid-onset hypoxia, the plane would have continued flying what the FMC had programed into it...meaning onward toward Beijing.

      Had depressurization occurred slowly enough to react, it would account for the turn back to Malaysia, but it would absolutely not account for a descent of only 3000'.  It would have been an emergency descent to 8000'.

      And none of that accounts for the fact that the RMAF allowed everyone to look on the completely WRONG coast for the first two days.

      How do you account for that??

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:34:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Could there have been carbon monoxide? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        terrypinder

        Or some other gas that would first disorient and then know them out?

        And none of that accounts for the fact that the RMAF allowed everyone to look on the completely WRONG coast for the first two days.

        How do you account for that??

        It's the military? Maybe an idiot general knew the info but kept it classified because he thought it should be, or couldn't get the authorization to unclassify it.

        Comparing the situation to how the US military would act seems rather over the top though, we have the best air force in the world, Malaysia doesn't.

        If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

        by AoT on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:45:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm wondering if there wasn't some (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT

          kind of on-board fire, but again i've never heard of a commercial airliner being on fire and continuing to fly more or less at cruising altitude for over an hour.

          (i'm aware there's a conspiracy theory around South African Flight 295 that says it's possible---i've been going through the list of planes that vanish over water like this one has...but other on-board fires mean the plane crashes soon after the fire breaks out.)

          Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

          by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:54:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I can't tell if you're fishing for a conspiracy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eyesbright

        theory or not which is fine. We're all baffled and upset by this.

        However I am fairly convinced that this was an accident, where one technical thing cascaded into another, and then another, and then another, and THEN human error was introduced and then we have a catastrophic accident. It's a paradox of how safe flying has become, that when we do have large-scale accidents

        At the time the aircraft allegedly crossed the Malaysian west coast there were no less than six other commercial flights moving through the upper straits according to FlightRadar24.com. Not to mention all the boats below both military and civillian. Let's start with the most mundane solutions first before we delve into what I think you're hinting at (someone shot the plane down.)

        Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

        by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:50:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  didn't complete my thought (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eyesbright

          "that when we do have large-scale accidents they're a major puzzle, like AF447 for example."

          Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

          by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:51:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Not a conspiracy theorist at all (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy

          As I said in a comment below, my take is more Occam's Razor: all things being equal, the simplest explanation is the most likely one.

          I see a huge number of people in the media and elsewhere tripping all over themselves to avoid reporting the simplest possible explanation and shrouding the whole thing in the sort of "mystery" that sells newspapers and drives ratings and web traffic.

          Show me on reporter who stood up at any of those press events and asked Daud to explain how a transponderless airliner was allowed to wander his airspace for 70 minutes, uninterrupted.

          That's not conspiracy. That's a legitimate pursuit of the simplest possible explanation.

          In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

          by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:39:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  no, it's not (0+ / 0-)

            nefarious shenanigans are not the simplest solution, especially with governments that are generally not totally closed regimes.

            this isn't KAL007 (and the Soviets admitted it, within 2 days).

            your case for a shootdown is weak, and very much a conspiracy theory.

            Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

            by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 01:06:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  How is it weak? (0+ / 0-)

              Every pro pilot I know - and I've talked to plenty of them in the last few days - finds my scenario more plausible than anything mechanical. Whether the jet was shot down or destroyed otherwise is about 50/50 - kind of like the poll in my diary. But we all felt weird about this one.

              In fact, the moment my pilot buddies and I heard the search had been opened up to the west coast of the peninsula, we thought it stunk to high Heaven. Things just simply don't work that way unless proper information is withheld at critical stages.

              What is so strong about your mechanical failure assumption? Do you have any idea what the 777 mechanical fatality rate was prior to Asiana at SFO? Have you ever flown a heavy jet? Do you know of any precedence for such a failure (which you do absolutely nothing to describe)?

              Air France was weather related. The A340 pitot system was prone to freezing in heavy ice. What caused the failure in B777 9M-MRO?

              In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

              by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 05:28:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Depressurization does not account for the (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy, dawgflyer13

        turning off of the transponder

  •  Unfortunately this fits the "facts" we know (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    oblomov, Wreck Smurfy

    Which still places this in the realm of speculation.

    I have one issue, though - that area (Pulau Perak) is not exactly remote.  If an airliner was shot down there wouldn't somebody have noticed?

    •  Try to find Pulau Perak on a map (4+ / 0-)

      It's a blob of rock about 1000' across.

      Dead center in the Strait.

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:28:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And it was 2:40 am (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tampaedski, bear83, Wreck Smurfy

      and roughly six miles in the air

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:28:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a busy shipping lane (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Portlaw

        Between the most populated island of Indonesia and the tourist traps of Malaysia.

        Sure it's a tiny rock, but if there was a bunch of debris in that straight someone would have noticed either the debris field or a military blockade?

        •  very busy (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Portlaw, bear83, AoT

          the navies of at least 4 nations are active because of all the piracy too.

          Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

          by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:43:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Not to mention pirates (the real kind). n/t (0+ / 0-)
        •  From an explosion (0+ / 0-)

          at 32,000'?

          Not necessarily.

          In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

          by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:56:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  you're arguing that no one (0+ / 0-)

            would have seen a bright explosion because it was 32,000 feet up? I'm sorry, that makes no sense. The night was clear, and furthermore, the moon had set.

            Unless everyone was in bed. But there were still airliners over the upper straits! They weren't asleep!

            Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

            by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:06:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sure. And you're arguing (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Wreck Smurfy

              that the Royal Malaysian Air Force not only allowed a rogue airliner to zip around for 70 minutes with its transponder off without sending up an interceptor. Then, having apparently known from minute one that the plane was last seen over the Malacca Strait, allowed many of its assets to be used for search and rescue on the wrong coastline.

              They knew the plane disappeared off of Los Angeles, essentially, and they committed their assets to do a search off the coast of New York.

              And you think that's a more reasonable explanation?

              It's certainly possible that the plane exploded without the help of the RMAF. In fact, I offered that as one of two possible explanations for the disappearance.

              But why are there no major media focusing on the magnitude of Daud's admission today? Why is no one asking him, point blank, the operative question:  

              What were his guys doing for 70 minutes while a 777 wandered through his airspace?

              In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

              by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:55:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If the pilots had been rendered unconscious or (0+ / 0-)

                died because of a rapid/explosive decompression, like the cockpit windows blowing out, wouldn't certain automatic systems like ACARS have reported as they did on the French flight a few years ago? (I'm not knowledgeable about aviation tech, just saw a reference to this in an article).

              •  if the plane was shot down over the straits (0+ / 0-)

                then where is the debris?

                Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

                by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:13:26 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Check the update, Waldorf! (0+ / 0-)

                  In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

                  by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 05:31:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  so you're actually going to compare (0+ / 0-)

                    Indonesia/Malaysia with the Soviet Union and allege that for the last 4 days they've been meticulously picking up the debris and hiding it like the Soviet Union likely did with KAL007? Seriously?

                    In the Straits of Malacca. Where at the time I'm typing this out, there are fifteen commercial flights overflying the region according to FlightAware.com and Flightradar24.com? Where there are hundreds of ships sailing every day according to Marine Traffic.com?  Really?

                    your KAL bit is out of date. I've read the KAL007 page quite a bit. I'm well aware that all the families got back from KAL 007 were the shoes of the passengers. There was even a TV movie about it that aired in the 80s and sometimes replays on television. I've seen it.  Oh, and we got the flight data and cockpit voice recorders back. They turned them over in 1992, so we know they recovered more than just the fragments (and shoes) that they turned over to the US.

                    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

                    by terrypinder on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 06:08:37 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You gotta learn to read more carefully. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sharon Wraight

                      There's nothing in that passage that accuses the Soviets of deliberately picking up and hiding wreckage.

                      Nothing.  

                      If you see it, point it out.

                      What that passage tells you is that debris from a high-altitude shoot down over water ain't what people expect. There's tons less than you think there should be and it takes way longer for it to show up than you think.

                      That's my answer to the total amateur question of "Wheerrrrrrrres tha dubhreeeeee?"

                      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

                      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 07:10:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

  •  It may have lost electrical power . . . (0+ / 0-)

    could have continued to fly for quite a while, but pilots would have been lost. That seems the most likely explanation. No transponders or communication in that event, obviously.

  •  Way too many ships in the Straits to go unnoticed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tampaedski, oblomov, Portlaw

    The Strait of Malacca is the most heavily traveled waterway in the world (it is the western approach to Singapore). Most of the ships travelling through the Straits are not under a Malaysian flag. If something splashed down in the Straits, there would have been multinational eyewitnesses to such an event. Further if something splashed down in the Straits there would have been a debris field that would have been seen by thousands, since on average daily there are more than a thousand ships in the waterway.  The waterway is even shallower than the original search area.

    This looks more and more like a highjacking. There is the potential that the plane was landed on a remote roadway or airstrip. Plane needs about 3500 feet to land. Gives me a slight hope that the passengers are still alive.

    •  Same thing I thought (0+ / 0-)

      The plane has been hijacked and was landed somewhere else; but to that point the question remains why and for what purpose? It's not like a 777 is going to be able to wander aimlessly through the skies without someone taking notice.

      Although, if that is the case, I do think the passengers are no longer alive.  There would be zero point in keeping them.

      You can get animals addicted to a harmful substance, you can dissect their brains, but you throw their own feces back at them, and suddenly you're unprofessional. -Amy Farrah Fowler/The Big Bang Theory -7.50, -5.03

      by dawgflyer13 on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 02:26:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love a good CT. Cheney ordered it shot down. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    207wickedgood

    Disappeared off the radar does not mean it ceased to be an object in the sky or disintegrated. Could it have? Sure. Just as easily could have gone out of radar range.

    If I comply with non-compliance am I complying? Sarcasm is the ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it.

    by thestructureguy on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:35:53 AM PDT

    •  On a military radar (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wreck Smurfy

      at a range of 60nm, yes, that's exactly what it means.

      And nobody has yet explained by the RMAF allowed everyone to search the east coast of Malaysia for two full days before focusing the effort on the point of last known contact.

      I know it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it's actually Occam's razor.

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:52:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Occam's razor only applies to discount some (0+ / 0-)

        kind of grand conspiracy. To many assumptions have to be made to tie in some kind of shoot down or screw up.  Many people involved in suppressing knowledge for two days and then people that shot it down and then finally now they say something when they just had to be silent and no one would know.   Becomes very complicated.  Have no idea what went on here and the story keeps changing with every news bite.  Might be some simple explanation but the unknown always creates wild speculation.  

        If I comply with non-compliance am I complying? Sarcasm is the ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it.

        by thestructureguy on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 03:21:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Someone had to have switched off (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bear83, Portlaw, Wreck Smurfy

    communication. Someone in the plane. That has made me suspicious from the start. No May Day, nothing

    To thine ownself be true

    by Agathena on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:58:26 AM PDT

  •  Maybe instead of hitting the water (0+ / 0-)

    inexperienced hijackers flew it into a mountain in the dark.

    Turning off the transponder makes the whole thing highly suspicious.

    Election Day is Nov 4th, 2014 It's time for the Undo button on the 2010 Election.

    by bear83 on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:01:45 PM PDT

  •  (Written with tongue in cheek) I think the plane (0+ / 0-)

    is in North Korea. Had a lot of intellectual capacity on board and North Korea has kidnapped people with important skills in other countries and takes them to North Korea. But, I am on my medications and think a UFO got them, plane and all.

    (Without tongue in cheek) But, as I feel for the families, I wouldn't trust anything the various governments are saying. I stand with the families, with the only difference being, that my water bottle would have been hard frozen.

    Many times I’ve returned. Never was I the same in any of my guises. I feel inside, my times before, with no memories of each journey. My soul’s shadows haunt all the paths it has traveled.

    by Wendys Wink on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:07:52 PM PDT

  •  Re your comments regarding scrambling (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Portlaw, 207wickedgood

    interceptors.

    Having armed interceptors on strip alert (5-15 min to take off) is not routine for any country absent a perceived airborne threat vector, or, by pure happenstance, there is a proximate military exercise wherein strip alert is part of the order of battle.

    I doubt Malaysia feels the need for strip alert on a routine basis, especially at night. Certain aircraft in their inventory are certainly up to the task of intercepting an airborne aircraft if they know where to look for it, but these same aircraft are fundamentally useless in a sea/ground search mission at night.

    Absent strip alert, it would take at best, 30-60 minutes to arm and launch interceptors, plus transit time. The same is true of the United States, where strip alert is also not routine, though certain post 9/11 precautions may still be in effect.

    •  Fair enough (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Portlaw, valion

      on the readiness of the interceptors.

      That still doesn't address the issue of A) what was the RMAF doing for 70 minutes and B) why is no one demanding to know what they were doing for 70 minutes and C) if the plane went off Malaysian radar SWbound over the strait, what does the Indonesian radar log have to say about that target?

      Notice "Media Fail" in my title.  Somebody should be asking those questions, whether the plane was shot down or not.

      In case it isn't clear, I loathe conservatives.

      by alysheba on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:58:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  WHY NO MAYDAYS?? (0+ / 0-)

    Planes electrical system destroyed by EMF Field.  NO communications possible.

    "AMERICA DID NOT INVENT HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS INVENTED AMERICA"

    by michealallison on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 12:31:45 PM PDT

  •  I think you don't mean off the California coast (0+ / 0-)

    If the plane went from Houston toward Puerto Rico and then turn around 100 mi south of Mobile and come back and explode over Shreveport, I don't see how the coast of California would be involved.

    -9.0, -8.3 "Remember, a writer writes. Always." --Throw Momma from the Train

    by SensibleShoes on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 07:03:10 PM PDT

  •  MH 370 (0+ / 0-)

    How the MH 370 was taken over by terrorists.
    I think terrorists snuck into the baggage compartment then made their way into the control room where they could take over the plane. They showed the control under the passenger cabin on CNN a while ago.
    20 secs · Edited · Like

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site