That theory housenuts posted does not fit with the facts at all.

For one thing, the "all right, good night" was at 1:19 and then two minutes later the transponder went off and, under this theory, the pilots were apparently unable to declare emergency to ATC. The antennas/transponder are on the top of the plane and the controls and electronics for them are in the cockpit. Under what scenario is no smoke or fire visible at 1:19 and then at 1:21 comms systems are all gone?

Secondly, this is the path tracked by the plane after the transponder went dead:



And this is where it ended up according to the Inmarsat data:



It's pretty obvious that it had to continue making turns, so this theory about just cruising on autopilot is a nonstarter. Not to mention that planes on fire don't just merrily continue flying for 6 hours, they crash.

and the pilots flying to the nearest airport is probably the first thing the investigators thought of as well

So are you saying that there is no way a human could have planned to make the change at the right time? 'Cause highjackers be crazy?

If they knew where the waypoints were and executed a turn onto the exact right new heading that is no different to the flight computer being reprogrammed in terms of proving a knowledgeable pilot was at the helm. But obviously the computer being used is massively more likely.

That's not obvious at all. My source is an actual pilot (WOXOF) what's yours?

Not possible with the 406 ELTs since they broadcast an encoded signal to satellites. Most of the newer units also send the GPS coordinates with the distress signal. Here's a comparison of the old 121.5 technology to the 406 technology.

That's true for the 406 signals. Coverage is worldwide.

It's the old frequency and is not picked up by satellites.

Again, the 406 ELTs do just that when activated.

Yeah it is interesting how quickly the media completely dropped all mention of the Iranian students with stolen passports, and yet, with no real evidence, have been running non-stop with the pilot/co-pilot theory.

To me it sounds like somebody that knows what he's talking about but doesn't really know how to evaluate probabilities.

I've listed them before, but here they are again:

* The timing of when the pilots stopped responding to ATC
* The complete failure of all systems that transmit information about the plane.
* The continued flight time, indicating a lack of failure of a large number of other systems.
* The lack of radar information showing the plane along the continued path that he advocates searching if the plane remained on autopilot

It's not enough to just come up with a scenario where the pilots are innocent.

Wat? When did woxof ever say it wasn't likely the turns were executed using the flight computer?

My source is US investigators who have access to a ton more data than we do and for the media the turns were made using the flight computer.

the "fire" explanation is a simple but very odd one. the oddest part being about a plane on fire flying for 6 hours on autopilot

Wouldn't the theory be that comms went out because the pilots were pulling circuit breakers so they could isolate the cause of the fire? It definitely looks like they could have been heading for Pulau Langkawi. The north west turn after that is inexplicable though, plus it must have made more turns after to end up somewhere on the satellite trajectory. Is there any info on the altitude of the plane at last radar contact?

How does a plane with an incapacitated crew continue to fly for hours after a fire, with an incapacitated crew and perform several turns?

About an electrical fire, it seems like there are a number of system failures that would result in the plane crashing w/o human intervention or at least the autopilot disengaging. Things like an air speed indicator failing. If that's true then the accident scenario seems even more unlikely since these systems didn't fail.

It also just seems unlikely that a fire producing enough smoke to kill/incapacitate the crew wouldn't also bring down the plane within 4-6 hours of doing that. Pictures of planes that were on fire on the ground often show almost nothing left.

W0X0F might be able to better shed light on how many systems actually need to keep running in order for the autopilot to work.

http://keithledgerwood.tumblr.com/po...ing-sia68-sq68

That's one of the clues that its a poorly thought out article. He starts with saying tire fire with crew pulling circuits to explain comms going dead, but then later changes to the idea that it was an electrical fire in those sub systems to explain how the crew radioed Malaysia after the ACARS died (not that we're confident thats what actually happened).

Like I said, it sounds like he knows some good stuff (like his talking about radar errors that just make it look like the plane went to 45K feet). I just don't think its a really well thought out consistent theory.

This is a fire that is totally invisible, suddenly strikes at exactly ATC handover time, two minutes later has wiped out VHF, the transponder and ACARS, yet given another 7 hours to work with never disables SATCOM or crashes the plane. Some sort of ninja fire. Not to mention the theory doesn't explain turns we know from radar the plane made after overshooting the supposed destination airport, the fact that it looked like they were made with the flight computer, and is completely wrong about where the plane should have ended up.

If I had to bet that theory or aliens, I'm taking aliens.

Al Quada and Taliban have denied any involvement so i fail to see what other terrorist groups would be involved?

The extreme rise in altitude and dropping hard, sharp changes of course and turning off the transponders does sound like someone hijacked the plane though. Amateur? Nutcase? Who eventually crashed it after being intercepted by pilots/crew/passengers?

Its said the plane flew on for another 6 hours because of the satellite ping. Presumably pings cant be detected from an underwater plane right?

And we know they always tell the truth.

True actually. I suppose if their 'mission' isnt complete, i.e fly the plane into city with bombs then they would wait until that happens before admitting, but still, 11 days now and not a sign!?

Starting to really believe now its at the bottom of the sea

+1 aliens is more likely. Please stop discussing electrical fire theory as only a moron would believe it

There's also the possibility that their plan failed for whatever reason, in which case you might as well keep quiet. Either for reputation or to try whatever you did before again.

Wonder if the co-pilot saying "All right, good night" knew it would be the last words recorded from anyone on the flight.

Meh. Even if failed they still could claim they stole a plane and killed 239 people.

If anything Taliban denying it makes it slightly more likely it was them. Note: I don't think it was them.

Hypothetically, if their purpose was to hijack a plane to demand release of some of their prisoners or create a standoff situation in which they kill any Westerners or Christians on the plane with the world watching, or even crash the plane into some symbol which represents their moral enemy (say Bangkok or the Singapore skyline), then the last thing they'd want to do was tell the world that their plan went to hell, the plane crashed, and everybody died without purpose. They are trying to achieve political goals in their region, even if repressive and misguided, not win a prize as the mass murderers of the century.

I agree. Even if the plane was hijacked and taken somewhere undetected, you still have to have food and water for 300 people.