Via flyertalk:

I thought there was a big to do about ACARS and transponder being shut off at separate times. This could mean they were shut off at the same time.

That makes the last transmission part less useful because the entire plan/malfunction now likely began after the transmission when the transponder went off.

http://keithledgerwood.tumblr.com/po...ar-using-sia68

See this theory is doing the rounds. Hard to know how likely it could be done? Interesting nonetheless.

i don't know if this is a dumb question:

if this actually has been hijacked to be used in a future terrorist attack, wouldn't it just have made a lot more sense to hijack a plane near whatever the target is and instantly use it?

If you're meeting new members of crew every time you fly, I'd say it's not unreasonable to assume that you're not going to remember every face from the briefing by the time you're halfway through the flight. Would you even notice that you didn't recognise a member of crew when you see them on the plane, when they're going about their job, bringing you your coffee etc? Or would you just think "oh that's another member of crew that I haven't met before"?

My friend said it was a video link on their planes, not a peep-hole. Maybe different airlines/planes are different?

Is the procedure vigilantly adhered to? It seems that there are many things that are correct procedure that aren't always (or sometimes are rarely) followed. Example from this flight would be the sign-off to ATC from the pilot.

Is it normal in-flight for crew members to request access to the cockpit? Do they serve you your food and drink? Would you think twice about just opening the door if you looked through your peep-hole and saw a man dressed in crew uniform standing there with a nice steaming cup of coffee?

I'm just trying to work out how easy it would be for a passenger to smuggle a crew uniform onto the plane, change into it, then pose as crew and gain access to the cockpit. In your opinion, how possible would this be on a scale of 0-10 (0 = no chance of it ever happening/10 = easy to do with hardly any planning). Fwiw I'm talking about how possible it would be, not how likely it is that it happened on this particular flight.

Easier to load a ton of explosives/chemicals onto a plane you have complete access to.

Seems that way but maybe there are reasons this particular plane was easier to get (inside man in the crew or airport, laxer security measures, ...)?

MAS CEO saying cargo was tons of mangosteens (fruits) and there was nothing hazardous

They should install those prison-style food serving door slots!

I think it's very interesting, would love to hear W0X0F's take.

My theory is that the plane is somewhere near the red marker.



It was Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah who flew off the edge and decided that this was the way he was to commit suicide.

Maybe you should get in touch with the Malaysian authorities. I'm sure they'll be very interested to hear your detailed expert analysis. Wait there I'll just go get their number.....

If we never find this plane, I'm going to be so upset. Wtf man? Wtf???

Quite possibly.

There are really only two situations in which a flight attendant is going to enter the cockpit during flight: to bring us a meal or to replace a pilot who exits the cockpit to use the lav. It's not like we get random requests.

For the meals, the lead flight attendant (whose name we know) calls to ask if we're ready for our meal. When a flight attendant calls us, they always identify themselves (e.g. "This is Cheryl up front" or "This is Dick in the rear"). For the lav break, we initiate the call and we go from there. The idea of a random call and access to the cockpit just doesn't happen, at least where I work.

I guess I can't put the chance at zero, but it's less than 1 on your scale. So I'll call the chance X as X—>0. (Cue the Dumb and Dumber meme.)

what does the -- in X-->0 mean ? Or is that an arrow ( still don't get what it means ). Tending towards?

Sounds like something right out of a Tom Clancy novel. At the risk of throwing fuel on the conspiracy fire, I'll say that it's my understanding that you could fly formation close to another plane and thus escape detection. In military formation flying in the U.S., I'm pretty sure that it's standard for all but the lead plane to have the transponder off. This is probably just to de-clutter the controller's screen.

What I don't know is how close the two aircraft have to be so that they present as one target.

Last week I read that cell phone signals were going through to phones of the victims. Isn't this a pretty big indicator that the plane is on land? The times I've called someone abroad and their phone has been turned off I've been directly roated to voice mail.

Also, I personally find the suicide in the middle of the ocean unlikely. What about the co-pilot? Would have to take him out first. Then that the pilot had a flight sim at his home. Hasn't anyone else thought that this seems strange? Who brings extra work home for fun? I mean sure if this was his passion in life but to me it almost seems like he was practicing a difficult flight like flying low or an approach and landing on a small air field?

Yes, it is just supposed to be an arrow. It means "X, as X approaches zero."

ty

I assume Australia has a navy, I wonder why they are not searching this southern corridor to their west.

Do you mean a flight attendant needs to be in the cockpit while one of the pilots is in the bathroom?

Flying planes isn't your regular 9 to 5 job, those guys live by flying. Not much to see here. I'm not saying the pilot isn't in on it but so far, I haven't been convinced at all by all the dirt medias have thrown at us (the political and religious thing, the sim simulator...).

Australia has just joined the search effort in this area afaik. They hadn't done previously because the area off their western coast wasn't considered as a necessary area to search until a few days ago.

The phones were ringing from the sender end, but was shown that in some places this is normal while the network tries to connect and nothing should be thought of it.

The pilot was an electronics "'geek" who had vids on YouTube about fixing air conditioners. Other pilots also have sims, I don't really think it's suspicious, but is of course worth checking (which is happening now).

Nothing is really likely, so suicide in ocean is still a highly probable option of those remaining. Could have taken out co-pilot and all others on board by means of cutting off oxygen (after having co-pilot leave cockpit briefly).

Now that the transponder and messaging system may very well have shut off at the same time, the possibility of major disaster on the plane, followed by some attempts at controlling it, and then everyone dying and autopilot taking over cannot be ruled out as another option.

The father of a childhood friend of mine was a pilot and he always had the latest sim installed and was constantly playing when i came over to play with my friend. I wouldn't read too much into it.