Meath_Villan Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 China have located and are in the process of retrieving 2 "objects" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 24, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 24, 2014 Breaking news on the BBC saying a text has been sent to the families of the passengers saying the flight has been "lost" and there are no survivors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Well that escalated fast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 Bummer really hoped they would have found it in some Robinson Crusoe type scenario on a desert Island but alas it's not to be ... still a great mystery as to what happened but I hope the truth comes out at some point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted March 24, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 24, 2014 A version of the truth will be out very soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Still doesn't explain why it was so far off course or the loss of comms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Still doesn't explain why it was so far off course or the loss of comms or the failure to release the cargo manifest, or the eye witnesses in the Maldives or the NZ oil rig worker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 Still doesn't explain why it was so far off course or the loss of comms there was talk that the flight had Lithium batteries in the cargo hold .. could have been something similar to the UPS flight that crashed in Dubai with smoke in the cockpit ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMilnereatsnails Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Wouldn't they be better off searching the area with submarines rather than planes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Nothing so far explains the "Alright, good night" AFTER the change of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 So it crashed into the sea as we all knew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Wouldn't they be better off searching the area with submarines rather than planes? Not while it is in theory, still a search and rescue mission. People using a wing for a raft, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted March 24, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 24, 2014 Still doesn't explain why it was so far off course or the loss of comms or the failure to release the cargo manifest, or the eye witnesses in the Maldives or the NZ oil rig worker or the lack of a mayday call or the pirates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Still doesn't explain why it was so far off course or the loss of comms there was talk that the flight had Lithium batteries in the cargo hold .. could have been something similar to the UPS flight that crashed in Dubai with smoke in the cockpit ? Yes, it did have batteries on board. We were told that this couldn't be so, because batteries are exported from China, not imported there.Someone explained that there have previously been fires caused by these batteries, and that a fire of a large consignment of them could easily burn through the floor of an aircraft hold. Someone else clarified that this cargo would only be dangerous under certain very unusual conditions. I think the latest account is that batteries were on board, but they were safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Even if the batteries did cause a fire / smoke in the cockpit it doesn't explain why the comms / trackers were all switched off ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Even if the batteries did cause a fire / smoke in the cockpit it doesn't explain why the comms / trackers were all switched off ? The explanation given by some commenters is that in the event of a fire, procedure is to remove all circuit breakers in order to isolate the fault. I have no idea if that alone would disable the trackers, but the point has been made many times that there is a need for pilots to be able to switch this stuff off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 24, 2014 Moderator Share Posted March 24, 2014 Many Li-Ion batteries are Class 9 cargo and are forbidden to be transported on passenger aircraft (cargo aircraft only). They are and can be a danger, particularly wrt fire. Re CBs for systems, yes, it's normal for there to be crew accessible CBs to kill systems where there is a hazardous electrical fault suspected. But it wouldn't be a indiscriminate thing "remove (i.e. pull) all circuit breakers" - anyone claiming that is not correct It would be zonal and informed by where the fire is or what system is thought to be at fault. There are Flight Reference cards for the crew telling them what to do. They wouldn't simply kill everything on the chance that... Also, electrical circuits will be on seperate busbars - essential, non-essential and so on. This is so if there's a generator(s)failure, vital equipment remains powered from the aircraft batteries and non-essential kit is simply load shed (unpowered) giving as great an endurance as possible for things like flight control computers, Nav kit, Comms, hydraulics, IFF/SSR and so on. Obviously fire is a possibility and could cause an aircraft to be damaged or disabled, but the chances are incredibly slim for it to be asa result of a technical failure of the aircraft. Malicious action or a cargo problem is less unlikely, but it seems to me not that likely that such and event without further "input" from people would cause what seems to have happened. You'd expect mayday messages change of course towards land and such like. Not 7 hours of hidden flight into the beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 I'm starting to think there's some mileage in the theory that goes MV Maersk Alabama, 2 navy seals guarding cargo murdered, cargo transfers to MH 370, intercepted and taken to Diego Garcia, airport shut for 72 hours, US and Chinese weapons specialists flown in, followed by large unexplained explosion in New Mexico desert as something nasty is destroyed. I can barely wait for the first mention of tinfoil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 I'm starting to think there's some mileage in the theory that goes MV Maersk Alabama, 2 navy seals guarding cargo murdered, cargo transfers to MH 370, intercepted and taken to Diego Garcia, airport shut for 72 hours, US and Chinese weapons specialists flown in, followed by large unexplained explosion in New Mexico desert as something nasty is destroyed. I can barely wait for the first mention of tinfoil. Would make a great film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Liam Neeson in the lead role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts