Wired article fans,

Not sure if this slate one has been posted yet: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_te..._langkawi.html

And here's one from some pilot's blog I thought was pretty good: http://jethead.wordpress.com/2014/03...he-land-of-oz/

It was going to Beijing not Shanghai.

I was able to find 2 flights today by the same airline on the same route, I assume it was no different for most other days.

link

Why? Do you think this is the only plane terrorists could possibly get access to? The threat would be of a plane flying into us airspace loaded with bombs; but not specifically this plane.
Especially since intelligence points to this plane being underwater.

It flew the very next day

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=22975958

I think the plane was stolen, the government basically knows what happened, but can't divulge for natl security reasons.

Wow if this is true they should find the plane in a few days I'd imagine

That seems like huge news, yet CNN is headlining with 4 reports of different possible (probably not real) eyewitness accounts!

This is a bit misleading. I saw the documentary (it was actually really interesting, the reconstructed the entire thing) he fashioned a sort of make shift "parachute" from some of the suit jackets of some people killed, and while neither alone would have been enough to save him, the combination of the slower free fall from the increased drag of his chute and the upward momentum of his jump is what saved him. They also said its practically impossible to do alone and is basically luck, because you have to time your jump perfectly, you have a window of only a few tenths of a second, and at the speed you are falling its basically a crap shoot if you jump at the right time as our eye/brain cant process the information of the approaching ground fast enough.

I dont believe this for a second. If it really was stolen in a terrorist plot the fear mongers in charge would be blasting the news far and wide and using it as an excuse to take even more of our freedoms away, and making damn sure we know that its up to them to protect us and keep us safe so that these kinds of plots can be stopped. Stuff like this is why we need to collect phone data and have constant surveillance!!!!

^ i actually don't see how you can jump. like there's nothing to exert downward force on to create an upwards lift.

newton's third law imo

They did a mention of it on their cable channel, but quickly went to more "interesting" human interest stories.

I'm not sure exactly what they did, but I did hear the Malaysian Air only subscribed to a cheaper version of the satellite connection with Inmarsat, so maybe they were able to unlock more info about the plane besides just the direction of the pings.

It took the Australian immigration department 3 tries to link my passport and permanent resident status in their systems correctly a few years ago despite them telling me it had been done after speaking to me about my lack of a visa the first 2 times .

I have seen numerous examples of how to survive an airplane crash by stepping out of the plane at the last second. They used to air these instructional videos on Saturday morning television in the US.

just need to jump out on an inflatable raft a la Indiana Jones. Mythbusters proved it could be done.

If the plane, for whatever reason, attempted a Hudson River type landing in the ocean, is it possible the plane stayed intact? If so, how long before the whole thing just sank? A few hours maybe? In that case, there may not be much to see on the water.

Of course, there are problems even with this idea. With such a "soft" landing on water you'd think people would open the doors and get out, with life rafts and life vests and stuff that would very much float. Anyway, just speculatin' a little.

its been said a bunch in this thread, that no wide body jet has ever made a successful water landing, its also supposed to be impossible. So it would break up and sink very rapidly. So basically if they hit they water, they are all dead

I was just watching CNN discussing the Swiss Air tragedy and how this current mystery could mimic this one. Apparently the aircraft had too much fuel on board to conduct a safe landing. The pilot then turned the plane around and attempted to dump fuel into the ocean. I was unaware of this landing restriction. Perhaps MH370 was under the same sort of duress initially started by a cockpit fire or a fire very close to it.

If this was an inside job by one of the pilots or an even crazier plot I do not see how there wouldn't be any sort of evidence on one of their computers or any electronic device other than the similulator of the main pilot.

While a wide body jet will not itself survive a water landing, people on board can (e.g. Ethiopian 961).

The problem of course is that 1) I doubt the pilot, if he was even conscious at this point (might have elected to kill himself via hypoxia) intended to put the plane down softly, he probably planned to obliterate it and 2) even in the unlikely event there were survivors, they're obviously dead by now.

I think if I was betting, I still think it's the captain. I was a bit puzzled about when he would have had the chance to reprogram the flight path without the co-pilot noticing, but the ACARS message that alerted investigators that the flight path was altered is a standard message which contains current location and the next two destination waypoints. So it's not until the plane got close to the intended deviation that it would start showing up on ACARS. This means the flight path could have been reprogrammed at any point in the flight, even well before takeoff potentially. Also, being the captain, he could order the co-pilot out of the cockpit on whatever pretext he liked, while the reverse is less likely. And how well planned this was - trying to mimic commercial routes etc - points to someone experienced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swissair_Flight_111

The wiki on Swiss Air is worth a read. The aircraft broke into over 2 million pieces when it impacted the ocean.

Link to this documentary please?

Having watched CNN fairly non-stop since this news first broke, I'm finding it harder and harder to take seriously the experts (especially the guy with the 70's porn mustache) who are still insisting that this is all because of some electrical fire or the like. To me, it's like they are staunchly refusing to consider some other possibility, and every piece of new evidence that comes out they try to come up with some convoluted explanation as to how it could still be because of a fire.