Malaysian Airlines flight lost MOD WARNING: NO JOKES!

donegal__road · 09-03-2014 01:52PM

its 4 stolen passports now.. and it looks as if the plane tried to turn back.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/asia-pacific/missing-jet-terrorism-fears-over-four-mystery-passengers-30076104.html

.

The_Gatsby · 09-03-2014 01:54PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

Not necessarily. It's a relatively common occurrence in that part of the world by all accounts.

Yes but the fact that there was no mayday issued means that whatever happened was unexpected, like a bomb going off or something.

The only thing I find strange is that if it was a terrorist attack no group has claimed responsibility yet. What's the point in blowing up a plane anonymously?

Peregrine · 09-03-2014 02:04PM

the_monkey wrote: »

Certainly points to something fishy tho

http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/transport/two-victims-of-air-india-express-disaster-used-fake-passports

The_Gatsby wrote: »

The only thing I find strange is that if it was a terrorist attack no group has claimed responsibility yet. What's the point in blowing up a plane anonymously?

Did Gaddafi claim responsblity for the Lockerbie disaster?

What about the Itavia crash in 1980?

I could find numerous crashes where nobody claimed responsiblity.

Actually, maybe someone did claim responsiblity but they just never released the info because it wasn't credible or they're still investigating it?

The_Gatsby wrote: »

Yes but the fact that there was no mayday issued means that whatever happened was unexpected, like a bomb going off or something.

Air France 447 never made a Mayday call. And, that was what? A blocked pitot tube?

We could all sit here and speculate but there would be a counter argument for everything since there's no concrete evidence so what's the point?

geckovision · 09-03-2014 02:04PM

Kirby wrote: »

And before you insist on posting your outrage why is it more outrageous when 200 people die in a plane crash as opposed to 2,000 dying of starvation or AIDS or malaria at the same time? They didn't get their time on the news either. Nobody in here cared enough to post about them not getting news time yesterday. But this is more shocking and "sexier" than that. We are a fairly disgusting race when you think about it.

This argument is ridiculous.

You're comparing a plane crash - a rare enough occurance - under mysterious circumstances to a problem the whole world is aware of and has been ongoing for many, many years.

What, they're going to bring up starvation and malaria in Africa at every news broadcast?

International flight safety is something that effects pretty much everyone in Western society. And if it the terrorism murmurs ring true then that's quite important too.

Duiske · 09-03-2014 02:14PM

the_monkey wrote: »

Certainly points to something fishy tho

Seen a post on the aviation forum about some guy from Interpol saying that stolen/fake/invalid passports account for roughly 1% of all passports used. That may sound quite high when you think in terms of European or US air travel, but it seems to be a more common problem in Asia. Therefore, considering the figures of 1% of passports being stolen/fake/invalid and being more likely to be used in Asia, it's not all that surprising to find that 2 (or even more) of the 227 passengers on Flight MH370 had dodgy passports.

the_monkey · 09-03-2014 03:13PM

Yeah I know it's quite common in Asia
But I was thinking cos they were stolen months apart and then used on the same flight it was suspicious - but if course doesn't matter when they were stolen if they end up in the same pool.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero · 09-03-2014 03:34PM

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

2 stolen passports make you think it's a terrorist attack? Without any evidence, not even the wreckage of the plane?

Why speculate when there's no evidence?

2 passports stolen over a year apart used on the same flight sounds a bit suspicious, add in the fact that the pilot - who has over 30 years flying experience - was not able to make a distress signal and there was no reported weather problems nor were there any reasons to suggest that the plane was in any way faulty. I'm not the only one speculating either "Malaysia Airlines officials said at a press conference earlier on Sunday that terrorism was one line of inquiry in their investigations." There is obviously nothing concrete to suggest it was or wasn't a terrorist attack, but considering the recent problems in China it is certainly a possibility, and I don't see why it shouldn't be mentioned here as such.

asteroth · 09-03-2014 03:46PM

thelad95 wrote: »

I just hope this doesn't remain a mystery forever. The fact that no debris has been spotted or no oil in the water is worrying. If this had happened to someone I knew I would want closure of some sort.

"closure" .... What wanker (and on what insipid talk show) came up with that crappy term?

asteroth · 09-03-2014 03:52PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Huh? There's nothing disgusting or race-based about it; if Chinese people didn't hear much about a missing plane in the Atlantic, I wouldn't expect them to devote lots of attention to it. There were news reports yesterday morning here, then it fizzled out because there was nothing more to report; now it's in the news again.

that's because news outlets are now becoming entertainment spouts for amnesias. 72 hours ago we were on the brink of nuclear war over Ukraine. That seems to have dried up too.

Amirani · 09-03-2014 05:22PM

THFC wrote: »

2 passports stolen over a year apart used on the same flight sounds a bit suspicious

Why would the fact that they were stolen over a year apart make it suspicious?

Duiske · 09-03-2014 08:19PM

asteroth wrote: »

that's because news outlets are now becoming entertainment spouts for amnesias. 72 hours ago we were on the brink of nuclear war over Ukraine. That seems to have dried up too.

We were on the brink of nuclear war ? Anyway, for stories that have seemingly "dried up", they still appear to be up there on the main news sites.

CNN (Top 2 stories)

Reuters (Top 2 stories)

BBC News (Top 2 stories)

AndonHandon · 09-03-2014 11:47PM

I would have thought that big, commercial planes have their location known accurately and at all times. Obviously they don't. The lack of information being released is intriguing.

Peregrine · 09-03-2014 11:51PM

AndonHandon wrote: »

I would have thought that big, commercial planes have their location known accurately and at all times. Obviously they don't. The lack of information being released is intriguing.

Mar 8th 2014 17:21:03 GMT
Lat: 6.97
Lon: 103.63
Alt: 35000
Speed: 471 knots
Heading: 40

Amirani · 10-03-2014 12:00AM

AndonHandon wrote: »

I would have thought that big, commercial planes have their location known accurately and at all times. Obviously they don't.

They do - provided they haven't exploded.

vicwatson · 10-03-2014 12:03AM

Duiske wrote: »

Seen a post on the aviation forum about some guy from Interpol saying that stolen/fake/invalid passports account for roughly 1% of all passports used. That may sound quite high when you think in terms of European or US air travel, but it seems to be a more common problem in Asia. Therefore, considering the figures of 1% of passports being stolen/fake/invalid and being more likely to be used in Asia, it's not all that surprising to find that 2 (or even more) of the 227 passengers on Flight MH370 had dodgy passports.

There are 40 million passports on the stolen interpol list apparentely

asteroth · 10-03-2014 03:12AM

THFC wrote: »

Starting to look increasingly like a terrorist attack, 2 passports stolen 18 months apart in the same area and both used to buy tickets at the same time. Plane (for some reason) was also returning to Kuala Lumpar at the time.

I'm not so sure. These passports have only come to light because this plane went missing/crashed/whatever. Let's just say the plane didn't go missing and that it arrived at it's destination as planned. Let's just also say that the holders of the bogus passports cleared immigration or entry checks or whatever and went on their way. There would never have been anything more about it. If they were caught we'd have never heard about it anyway. It's probably safe to assume that at this point in time someone, somewhere in the world is being detained for trying to cross a border on fake documents. It's a regular occurence.

The point I'm making is this. There is every possibility that the holders of these two passports have used them before successfully to board planes and make it to their destinations unmolested or undetected and that they have nothing to do with terrorism or anything other than being unlawful migrants...maybe even drug mules. There is also every possibility that they are completely unknown to each other. There is also every possibility that the flight from Malaysia to Beijing that flew 5 days ago or a week ago or a month ago or from Malaysia to Jakarta or Thailand to Manila or wherever had 1 or 3 or none or 5 fake passport holders on board who made it through. Passengers with fake or stolen passports could be a fairly common thing and the only reason that these two came to light is because the authorities released the names of those on board as potentially dead and two persons popped up and said "HEY! I'm not dead. I'm very much alive. Please tell my folks!"

We are always so swift to scream terrorism at the slightest impropriety when something bad happens.

Imagine the scenario a neighbourhood apartment block with families living in the units. One saturday afternoon one of the tenants throws a party and invites others in the building to attend. His geeky cousin from Istanbul is over to see him and his wife for a week and they have a session, with loads of beer and cook kebabs and everyone has a great time. Nothing innocuous there.

Re-run the tape only this time there's a gas leak in the building and a massive explosion rips through the block wrecking apartments and killing and injuring dozens. There's no immediate explanation for the blast pending an investigation but news starts to leak out that there was a Miiddle Eastern couple living in the building who recently had a family member visit the country alone. He was believed to be studying electronics in Turkey.

Immediately everyone just screams TERRORISM!!!!

asteroth · 10-03-2014 03:25AM

The_Gatsby wrote: »

Yes but the fact that there was no mayday issued means that whatever happened was unexpected, like a bomb going off or something.

The only thing I find strange is that if it was a terrorist attack no group has claimed responsibility yet. What's the point in blowing up a plane anonymously?

Maybe to make it look like a terrorist attack.

Has a crime ever been committed but made to look like something else? Of course.

Can planes come apart in mid-air in a split second without anyone having time to report that something has gone horribly wrong? A bad batch of rivets can't be responsible for the whole thing just disintegrating.

jescart · 10-03-2014 03:32AM

asteroth wrote: »

that's because news outlets are now becoming entertainment spouts for amnesias. 72 hours ago we were on the brink of nuclear war over Ukraine. That seems to have dried up too.

Don't even get me started on north korea, the media seem to have given up on that story the last few weeks

asteroth · 10-03-2014 03:36AM

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/transport/two-victims-of-air-india-express-disaster-used-fake-passports

Did Gaddafi claim responsblity for the Lockerbie disaster?

What about the Itavia crash in 1980?

I could find numerous crashes where nobody claimed responsiblity.

Actually, maybe someone did claim responsiblity but they just never released the info because it wasn't credible or they're still investigating it?

Air France 447 never made a Mayday call. And, that was what? A blocked pitot tube?

We could all sit here and speculate but there would be a counter argument for everything since there's no concrete evidence so what's the point?

He didn't claim responsibility because he wasn't responsible.

http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2009/09/pilger-megrahi-justice

asteroth · 10-03-2014 03:45AM

the_monkey wrote: »

Yeah I know it's quite common in Asia
But I was thinking cos they were stolen months apart and then used on the same flight it was suspicious - but if course doesn't matter when they were stolen if they end up in the same pool.

I would hazard that hundreds of passports are lost/stolen in Thailand each year. How many pissheads descend on the place only to lose their belongings or get mugged. Whoever steals or finds the documents sells them on to criminal gangs or individuals who want or need them for various purposes. The whole details behine the dates and locations where the passports were stolen are completely random. Nothing out of the ordinary.

asteroth · 10-03-2014 04:02AM

Just thinking about the whole terrorism thing.

Why would anybody blow up an airliner to make a political point? It makes zero sense to me.

You want to kill a few hundred innocent people just blow up a train. You'd never be detected and probably never caught.

Sunglasses Ron · 10-03-2014 10:35AM

asteroth wrote: »

Just thinking about the whole terrorism thing.

Why would anybody blow up an airliner to make a political point? It makes zero sense to me.

You want to kill a few hundred innocent people just blow up a train. You'd never be detected and probably never caught.

Attempted hijacking to fly the plane to a ground destination to make demands perhaps?

As to my knowledge there has never been a successful "seize and demand" hijacking post 9/11. Primarily because no airline crew/ passengers trust a hijack team would be doing it to make demands as opposed to use the plane as a weapon, as happened on 9/11.

Wibbs · 10-03-2014 11:33AM

asteroth wrote: »

Can planes come apart in mid-air in a split second without anyone having time to report that something has gone horribly wrong? A bad batch of rivets can't be responsible for the whole thing just disintegrating.

Yep, it's rare, but it can and has happened. One example that springs to mind is the US 747 flight where the midline fuel tank built up vapour and exploded because of dodgy wiring sparking. One minute it was flying along, the next it was falling into the atlantic in fiery pieces. No mayday. A bomb was suspected in that case until the investigation got underway.

Another example where there was no mid air breakup, but also no mayday was the air France fight from Brazil where the pilots stalled the thing all the way into the ocean. Too busy flying the computer that flies the plane, rather than using old fashioned stick and rudder stuff. In subsequent investigations the French sat air force pilots into a simulator, ran the scenario and each one recovered long before it got into danger. Modern flight systems have made aircraft so much safer than ever*, but there can sometimes be the danger of pilots over relying on them and forgetting/not using piloting skills.

*you are a magnitude more likely to die in twisted metal driving to the airport than you are in the plane itself. That's when you're about as safe as you can be. I'd reckon statistically speaking walking down the street is more dangerous.

irishmover · 10-03-2014 11:37AM

China Airlines 611 is another example of a plane disintegrating mid air. Happened over a slack maintenance job of a panel at the rear of the plane which clipped the runway in a dodgy landing 22 years prior to the crash in 2002.

homerjay2005 · 10-03-2014 11:54AM

irishmover wrote: »

China Airlines 611 is another example of a plane disintegrating mid air. Happened over a slack maintenance job of a panel at the rear of the plane which clipped the runway in a dodgy landing 22 years prior to the crash in 2002.

while the cause can be anything, the chances of this accident being related to the previous clash with another plane are pretty high. this plane below up in midair....a dodgy part igniting the fuel tank is highly likely and considering the accident before impacted the wing, this is the first and most logical explanation.

also, there was another incident on a Mal B777 in 2005 which involved dodgy software and a close to stall scenario, this cannot be ignored either, though the fact it more than likely blew up in the air, may rule this out.

irishmover · 10-03-2014 12:01PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

while the cause can be anything, the chances of this accident being related to the previous clash with another plane are pretty high. this plane below up in midair....a dodgy part igniting the fuel tank is highly likely and considering the accident before impacted the wing, this is the first and most logical explanation.

also, there was another incident on a Mal B777 in 2005 which involved dodgy software and a close to stall scenario, this cannot be ignored either, though the fact it more than likely blew up in the air, may rule this out.

I'm not quite sure if you're saying the China Air crash in 2002 was as a result of a part igniting afuel tank or not, but on that particular crash it wasn't.

See below.

The final investigation report found that the accident was the result of metal fatigue caused by inadequate maintenance after a previous incident. The report finds that on 7 February 1980, the accident aircraft suffered damage from a tailstrike accident while landing in Hong Kong. The aircraft was then ferried back to Taiwan on the same day de-pressurized, and a temporary repair done the day after. A permanent repair was conducted by a team from China Airlines from 23 May through 26 May 1980. However, the permanent repair of the tail strike was not carried out in accordance with the Boeing SRM (Structural Repair Manual). The area of damaged skin in Section 46 was not removed (trimmed) and the repair doubler which was supposed to cover in excess of 30% of the damaged area did not extend beyond the entire damaged area enough to restore the overall structural strength. Consequently, after repeated cycles of depressurization and pressurization during flight, the weakened hull gradually started to crack and finally broke open in mid-flight on 25 May 2002, exactly 22 years to the day after the faulty repair was made upon the damaged tail. An explosive decompression of the aircraft occurred once the crack opened up, causing the complete disintegration of the aircraft in mid-air. This was not the first time, though, that an aircraft had crashed because of a faulty repair following a tailstrike. On 12 August 1985 (17 years earlier), Japan Airlines Flight 123 crashed after losing its tail and hydraulic systems. That crash had been attributed to a faulty repair to the rear bulkhead, which had been damaged in 1978 in a tailstrike incident.

http://www.tailstrike.com/250502.htm

the_monkey · 10-03-2014 12:04PM

I wonder could it have been a dry run for some terrorist group ?

and the bigger target is a western or Isreali plane ?

Hence no one taking responsibility

Oranage2 · 10-03-2014 12:15PM

Mr Azharuddin also confirmed reports that five passengers who had purchased tickets and checked baggage did not make the flight.
He said Malaysia Airlines had removed those passengers' baggage once it learned they did not board the plane, in accordance with standard procedure.

I wonder if this is significant. 5 very lucky people if not.

sReq | uTeK · 10-03-2014 12:43PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

while the cause can be anything, the chances of this accident being related to the previous clash with another plane are pretty high. this plane below up in midair....a dodgy part igniting the fuel tank is highly likely and considering the accident before impacted the wing, this is the first and most logical explanation.

also, there was another incident on a Mal B777 in 2005 which involved dodgy software and a close to stall scenario, this cannot be ignored either, though the fact it more than likely blew up in the air, may rule this out.

ED.....Please teach me how to get over my fear of flying

bear1 · 10-03-2014 12:51PM

I don't think terrorism is involved in this at all. I can't see the sense of it, I would bet a mechanical failure of some kind.
I just hope that no one suffered when it happened.

Malaysian Airlines flight lost MOD WARNING: NO JOKES!

Comments