Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370-Updates and Discussion

«134567…132

Comments

  • #2
    Zonda999
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Zonda999


    Very worrying, a B777-200ER

    http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/6013265/


  • #3
    Schorpio
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭Schorpio


    Hopefully it's just a technical glitch, and everyone's alright. Fingers crossed.


  • #4
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    SEPANG:Malaysia Airlines (MAS) confirms that flight MH370 has lost contact with Subang Air Traffic Control at 2.40am, Saturday.

    In a statement issued by MAS, Flight MH370, operated on the B777-200 aircraft, departed Kuala Lumpur at 12.41am on 8 March 2014. MH370 was expected to land in Beijing at 6.30am the same day.

    The flight was carrying a total number of 227 passengers (including 2 infants), 12 crewmembers.

    Malaysia Airlines is currently working with the authorities who have activated their Search and Rescue team to locate the aircraft.


  • #5
    arbour
    Registered Users Posts: 127 ✭✭arbour


    They were due to land 2 hours 15 mins ago and lost contact over 4 hours ago. This does not look good.


  • #6
    Highflyer13
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Highflyer13


    Fearing the worst here. Aircraft appears to have been missing for some hours and news is only reaching the media now.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    owenc
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    Oh dear


  • #8
    highlydebased
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,470 ✭✭✭highlydebased


    Aircraft was 9M-MRO.


  • #9
    nkay1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    You'd have to fear the worst at this stage.


  • #10
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Look's like it did not get far from Kuala Lumpur, FR24 detected it as landed 39 mins after departure and have a look at this flightaware picture - http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/MAS370

    The flight if still airborne would have out-flown Beijing by 2hrs 45mins now, well outside reserves.

    It looks like the worst has happened. :(

    MH370 never entered China Airspace, nor made Contact with Beijing.


  • #11
    EI-DOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 570 ✭✭✭EI-DOR


    9M-MRO wouldn't be the oldest in their fleet. Only 12 years old!


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    EI-DOR wrote: »
    9M-MRO wouldn't be the oldest in their fleet. Only 12 years old!

    Indeed, quite young I believe It was involved in incident with a China Airlines flight a few years back, both aircraft contacted each other taxiing.

    FlightAware have said the last recorded information shows the aircraft at 35,000ft and 468kts, information was then lost, approx 20 minutes after departure from KUL.


  • #13
    Razor44
    Registered Users Posts: 658 ✭✭✭Razor44


    really doesnt look good at this stage. young aircraft too. hope the worst hasnt happened


  • #14
    EI-DOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 570 ✭✭✭EI-DOR


    My god, does not sound good. Here's hoping folks!


  • #15
    sparrowcar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,872 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    Social media starting to come alive on this now. One would have to expect the worst possible outcome at this stage.


  • #16
    jescart
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭jescart


    I know the cause of complete hull losses and fatal air tragedies can depends on a huge number of factors, but would I be correct in saying they would be one of the safer airlines to fly with?


  • #17
    fussyonion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,821 ✭✭✭fussyonion


    jescart wrote: »
    I know the cause of complete hull losses and fatal air tragedies can depends on a huge number of factors, but would I be correct in saying they would be one of the safer airlines to fly with?

    As opposed to who?


  • #18
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    fussyonion wrote: »
    As opposed to who?

    I would assume he is referring to the appalling safety records of airlines in Indonesia, however Malaysia Airlines have a very good safety record - A very well established reputable airline.


  • #19
    jescart
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭jescart


    fussyonion wrote: »
    As opposed to who?

    Smart ass :rolleyes: are you implying that all airlines in the world have maintained identical safety records (hull loss incidents, fatalities, etc ) throughout history? Of course there's the concept of an unsafe airline, a simple Google search will give you the names


  • #20
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    I don't want to throw this out there as confirmed, but it is promising, a Malaysian journo has tweeted, ''Landed in Nan Ming - cockpit electronics malfunction''

    Let's hope to god this is true!

    Update - Malaysia Airlines have begun informing families that there is almost no hope for those on board. Devastating news. :(


  • #21
    Bsal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,776 ✭✭✭Bsal


    Journalists and aviation just don't mix :mad:


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    jescart
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭jescart


    http://malaysiandigest.com/frontpage/282-main-tile/492200-mas-kl-beijing-flight-missing.html

    Edit - untrustworthy source


  • #23
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    FR24 have posted the last recorded image over the Gulf of Thailand - Radar contact was then lost at 17:19 UTC at that position, they didn't release this information for quite a long period, which may sound unusual but is understandable unfortunately.


  • #24
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    9:30am - (UNOFFICIAL) Flight MH370 has resurfaced and landed safely in Nanming, China. Early reports say that the aircraft had experienced a cockpit electronics malfunction.

    As of this moment, the flight crew and all 239 passengers onboard are believed to be unharmed as some of the crew has already informed their families of their safety.

    More updates to come.


  • #25
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,459 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Could not have landed by that last radar reading


  • #26
    irishmover
    Registered Users Posts: 4,746 ✭✭✭irishmover


    It was over land. Inside china when it went missing. Don't mind flight radar.


  • #27
    owenc
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    This is so annoying.

    One minute its landed and the next its missing.

    And even if it did land why did it take six hours to get there???


  • #28
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Please remember after an Embraer Regional jet went missing a few years back we had reports of it landing safely, it crashed - People are using new sources frankly I wouldn't allow research a birthday date and then putting it out as clear fact, everything is unconfirmed and as I tried to do and as should everyone is state that it is unconfirmed, don't state something which even the AIRLINE does not know.


  • #29
    Thrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,485 ✭✭✭Thrill


    Chinese official confirm that MH370 never entered Chinese airspace


  • #30
    jescart
    Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭jescart


    Malaysian digest seems to be the only site reporting the landing, strange how they (and passengers families apparently) would know before the airline itself. Absolutely sick, disgusting joke if it's false info


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    The MD of Malaysia Airlines has apparently told the press, reports of it landing are untrue, has said Chinese Authorities would have confirmed this as the aircraft has been missing for over 8 hours now, he said Chinese Authorities did not pick it up on radar after Vietnamese ATC contacted them notifying them of the missing aircraft. 13 different nationalities on-board.

    Airline has said it wants families to contact them as they will have immediate information and are disappointed to see recent media speculation.

    As has been said, journo's and aviation do not mix. :(


  • #32
    Thrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,485 ✭✭✭Thrill


    Malaysia Airlines VP says missing plane had enough fuel for 7hrs; would've run out of fuel over 1hr ago.


  • #33
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Confirmed now by Nan Ming Airport, no aircraft belonging to Malaysian Airlines has landed at the airport.


    As has been pointed out above the flight would have been airborne for approx 10hrs now, with 7hrs fuel, it seems there is only one outcome, doesn't bare thinking about. :(


  • #34
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Press conference any minute now by Malaysian Airlines - Keep an eye on Sky News

    Update - MAL have said they will being conference just after 3 UTC


  • #35
    EI-DOR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 570 ✭✭✭EI-DOR


    Another 15 mins until the Press Conference!


  • #36
    irishmover
    Registered Users Posts: 4,746 ✭✭✭irishmover


    Contact was lost over Vietnam airspace. Not Chinese. My bad.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Thrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,485 ✭✭✭Thrill


    Malaysia Airlines VP tells CNN no distress call or problems reported from MH370 before disappearance, plane was at 35K ft.


  • #38
    AlanMcC23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 112 ✭✭AlanMcC23


    This isnt looking good at all


  • #39
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    No Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) detected, and Vietnamese ATC say the aircraft was lost in there airspace, in a good radar coverage area - Altitude dropped from 35,000ft to 0ft and then disappeared from radar, location would have been just after contacting Vietnam in the Gulf of Thailand.


  • #40
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Don't want to confirm this, but one of my friends in the ''know'' who gave me correct information about AF447 in 2009 just text me saying the track of the aircraft changed from 024 degrees to 333 degrees and the change in attitude from 35,000ft to 0ft in the space of a minute coupled with the change in track signifies a rapid uncontrolled descent - I really don't want to get into speculating what caused this but I thought I'd share the information, have to say it's devastating news - I really don't want to believe it frankly. :(


  • #41
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,459 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Kavs8 wrote: »
    Don't want to confirm this, but one of my friends in the ''know'' who gave me correct information about AF447 in 2009 just text me saying the track of the aircraft changed from 024 degrees to 333 degrees and the change in attitude from 35,000ft to 0ft in the space of a minute coupled with the change in track signifies a rapid uncontrolled descent - I really don't want to get into speculating what caused this but I thought I'd share the information, have to say it's devastating news - I really don't want to believe it frankly. :(


    It that possible


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    irishmover
    Registered Users Posts: 4,746 ✭✭✭irishmover


    Australians were on board.

    This is a common enough route for Irish coming from Ireland to Australia.


  • #43
    Cessna_Pilot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 703 ✭✭✭Cessna_Pilot


    Change of track of around 50 degrees and rapid descent would suggest to me a depressurization or emergency situation leading to an emergency descent.

    35000 to 0 in a minute would not be possible.


  • #44
    Thrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,485 ✭✭✭Thrill


    irishmover wrote: »
    Australians were on board.

    160 Chinese nationals also.


  • #45
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    Cessna_Pilot wrote: »
    Change of track of around 50 degrees and rapid descent would suggest to me a depressurization or emergency situation leading to an emergency descent.

    35000 to 0 in a minute would not be possible.

    Just to add the crash of SilkAir Flight 185, was also at 35,000ft it crashed less then one minute after the pilot downed the aircraft, I'm not going to say if it is possible or not, but consider the aircraft is a 777-200 laden with fuel and only an hour into it's flight, it's going to descend very quickly.


  • #46
    Cessna_Pilot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 703 ✭✭✭Cessna_Pilot


    Kavs8 wrote: »
    Just to add the crash of SilkAir Flight 185, was also at 35,000ft it crashed less then one minute after the pilot downed the aircraft, I'm not going to say if it is possible or not, but consider the aircraft is a 777-200 laden with fuel and only an hour into it's flight, it's going to descend very quickly.

    thats a very good point re the weight.


  • #47
    cuterob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭cuterob


    I know it's quite far fetched and nearly 100% unlikey but hope it's not something like this below:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303824204579420623335971350


  • #48
    irishmover
    Registered Users Posts: 4,746 ✭✭✭irishmover


    2 incidents in entire 777 history.


  • #49
    Kavs8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 168 ✭✭Kavs8


    cuterob wrote: »
    I know it's quite far fetched but hope it's not something like this below:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303824204579420623335971350

    The aircraft hadn't even reached Vietnam, I think it's safe to say that can be ruled out.


  • #50
    irishmover
    Registered Users Posts: 4,746 ✭✭✭irishmover


    No Irish on board. Thank god!

    Ukraine (2)
    China (152+1 infant)
    New Zealand (2)
    Malaysia (38)
    Indonesia (12)
    Australia (7)
    France (3)
    USA (3+1 infant)
    Canada (2)
    Russia (1)
    Netherlands (1)
    Austria (1)
    Italy (1)
    Taiwan (1)


  • #51
    cuterob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭cuterob


    Kavs8 wrote: »
    The aircraft hadn't even reached Vietnam, I think it's safe to say that can be ruled out.

    oh thats ok so, its just i saw a cnn video on youtube where they were showing the plane over china


  • Advertisement
Advertisement