Stevo985 Posted March 19, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19, 2014 (edited) Yep, like I said. I can see the 747 has more engines now. But I, and I'd wager most other people, wouldn't know that's how you distinguish between the two. And beyond that I can't see an obvious difference. I hardly think a few people in the maldives claiming a plane they saw was a 747 when it's actually a 777 is the most shocking thing to ever happen! They'd have probably just thought "big plane. Probably a 747" Edited March 19, 2014 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 big plane, some considerable distance from the naked eye, first thought isnt I need to be certain this is a 747. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 19, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 19, 2014 big plane, some considerable distance from the naked eye, first thought isnt I need to be certain this is a 747. Especially if its on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 19, 2014 Author Share Posted March 19, 2014 big plane, some considerable distance from the naked eye, first thought isnt I need to be certain this is a 747. it is if you are then going to run around telling everyone you've spotted the missing 777 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I wouldn't know what a 777 looks like and I'm a very very highly intelligent individual. C in Art O level, A in CSE Commerce, cycling proficiency badge holder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Do we have a Timing on the Maldives sighting ? Dawn / Dusk ? Visibility ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 19, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 19, 2014 I wouldn't know what a 777 looks like and I'm a very very highly intelligent individual. C in Art O level, A in CSE Commerce, cycling proficiency badge holder.A 777 looks like most other commercial airliners. A 747 doesn't it has the unmistakeable hump on top for a smaller second floor.You only need to know what a 747 looks like tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I'm a big fan of the Air Crash Investigation show on TV. I've watched all 12 series more than once. So I've a fascination with the chain of events that has to happen to bring an aircraft down. The events of this are very baffling. What seems to crop up in my mind is some kind of mental breakdown by one of the pilots as it's pretty hard hard to picture the chain of events here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 (edited) The other possibility is some kind of system failure which resulted in the loss of ACARS and the transponder. This resulted in the pilots entering into flight computer to head for mainland and nearest airport. If they then lost hydrolics that would explain why it flew low and high almost aimlessly. Pilots would have only engine thrust to try steer the plane. But it would continue to fly parabolic up down pattern until the engines ran out of fuel. I don't know if it's possible for them to lose transponder and radio contact entirely due to a failure. Edited March 19, 2014 by CVByrne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 If ACARS was turned off/failed as it crossed the coast (which apparently it did) then I would suspect the pilots would have been aware of that. To continue a considerable distance and then speak to ATC without informing them seems unlikely in the extreme. For the transponder to then similarly fail without reporting seems even more unlikely , as does the 90 degree plus turn after the last communication. If you've lost ACARS, the transponder and radio comms then the logical action would be to reverse course (assuming that the compass wasn't also broken...), not bank left at the exact time you should be transitioning from one national ATC system to the next. If the pilot(s) had a mental breakdown and wanted to commit suicide then that level of calculated thought seems improbable, and a vertical dive might be the more appealing course - even in such a disturbed state. The whole thing is baffling but I reckon that whatever did happen it was calculated and not the result of mechanical or mental failure. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 The programme on flight 447 AF was a fascinating watch tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Or the plane was shot down by accident after it was picked up on radar by automated defence systems carrying no transponder ID and considered a rogue aircraft/drone/missile No country is going to be in a hurry to own up to killing 200+ people Everything i keep hearing so far reeks of a cover up especially with pilots characters being brought to question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 If ACARS was turned off/failed as it crossed the coast (which apparently it did) then I would suspect the pilots would have been aware of that. To continue a considerable distance and then speak to ATC without informing them seems unlikely in the extreme. For the transponder to then similarly fail without reporting seems even more unlikely , as does the 90 degree plus turn after the last communication. If you've lost ACARS, the transponder and radio comms then the logical action would be to reverse course (assuming that the compass wasn't also broken...), not bank left at the exact time you should be transitioning from one national ATC system to the next. If the pilot(s) had a mental breakdown and wanted to commit suicide then that level of calculated thought seems improbable, and a vertical dive might be the more appealing course - even in such a disturbed state. The whole thing is baffling but I reckon that whatever did happen it was calculated and not the result of mechanical or mental failure. Mental breakdown not suicide. I mean had paranoia delusions and tried to escape with the aircraft to avoid some unknown menace in their mind. It's an explanation for a pilot taking the plane away from land and trying to avoid detection. As for the loss of ACARS, radio and transponder. If they were all lost at the same time. The pilots banking 90 degrees left back towards land and the nearest airport would be the right decision. If the situation escalated further and they lost hydrolics they could have flown pretty much aimlessly until they lost fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnbull Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I'm a big fan of the Air Crash Investigation show on TV. I've watched all 12 series more than once. So I've a fascination with the chain of events that has to happen to bring an aircraft down. The events of this are very baffling. What seems to crop up in my mind is some kind of mental breakdown by one of the pilots as it's pretty hard hard to picture the chain of events here. I used to watch that a lot, until I started flying again! Fascinating programme. Sioux City crash was a brilliant programme to watch., the plane that flew to the airport "landed" with no hydraulics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 If ACARS was turned off/failed as it crossed the coast (which apparently it did) then I would suspect the pilots would have been aware of that. To continue a considerable distance and then speak to ATC without informing them seems unlikely in the extreme. For the transponder to then similarly fail without reporting seems even more unlikely , as does the 90 degree plus turn after the last communication. If you've lost ACARS, the transponder and radio comms then the logical action would be to reverse course (assuming that the compass wasn't also broken...), not bank left at the exact time you should be transitioning from one national ATC system to the next. If the pilot(s) had a mental breakdown and wanted to commit suicide then that level of calculated thought seems improbable, and a vertical dive might be the more appealing course - even in such a disturbed state. The whole thing is baffling but I reckon that whatever did happen it was calculated and not the result of mechanical or mental failure. Mental breakdown not suicide. I mean had paranoia delusions and tried to escape with the aircraft to avoid some unknown menace in their mind. It's an explanation for a pilot taking the plane away from land and trying to avoid detection.As for the loss of ACARS, radio and transponder. If they were all lost at the same time. The pilots banking 90 degrees left back towards land and the nearest airport would be the right decision. If the situation escalated further and they lost hydrolics they could have flown pretty much aimlessly until they lost fuel. In bold: From what I can gather from the news they were not all lost at the same time, with ACARS going down as it crossed the coast, the transponder being turned off just prior from the switch over between ATC authorities and the final communication with ATC coming at that cross over point, immediately before the left turn. The plane then went silent but INMARSAT was picking up the attempts to make electronic handshakes by the onboard systems for a further seven or so hours. None of that explains the failure by the pilot(s) to report the loss of ACARS and/or transponder in that final communication which is why I don't by the theory of mechanical failure at all. Your "gone mental" theory may hold some water, but again the sequence of events suggests a level of calculation that might not support it - imo. Assuming for a minute that there was no mechanical/digital failure AND the pilots were playing with a full deck, the question becomes exactly who or what was on board the aircraft that someone wanted badly enough to go to all of this trouble or couldn't be secured by simpler means? I can't think of a reasonable answer to that either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 There was one with Japanese 747 that flew up and down for hours before crashing into a mountain after losing hydraulics. They tried to steer with engines. I'm wondering if the beginning was loss of all comms then they turned back towards mainland and then the situation got worse. It the high altitude and low altitude pings to satellite which make me think of the loss of control. The plane will dive pick up speed and lift then naturally climb lose speed then dive etc.. One they were out over the ocean they would have tried turn the plane with engines alone and headed south and ended up crashing into the ocean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crumpet Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Or the plane was shot down by accident after it was picked up on radar by automated defence systems carrying no transponder ID and considered a rogue aircraft/drone/missile No country is going to be in a hurry to own up to killing 200+ people Everything i keep hearing so far reeks of a cover up especially with pilots characters being brought to question Agree. Is there the possibility that it was in fact shot down by Malaysian Army/Navy who had the radar signals? An unidentified aircraft who was unresponsive flying over. May have thought it was a drone. Get people searching for almost a week in the wrong location, giving debris time to scatter? Even writing this I know I sound like a crackpot conspiracy theorist but at this stage anything could have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 In all likelihood given the calculated nature of the direction change just after the handover to Vietnam ATC. Disabled transponder and ACARS. Added to the fact the course change was so exact it was most likely entered into the navigation computer. Someone was doing this and given the time between the last communication and the actions it is more than likely the pilots. But if there was a reason why they did this it would have surfaced by now. It's baffling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meath_Villan Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 It's possible the two pilots were blackmailed into diverting the aircraft. Possibly threats on their families lives unless they plotted a route to xyz. I just don't understand why the pilots would want to lose their lives though and kill all passengers. I suppose we'll likely never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts