But installed next to each other on the plane, and are probably close to each other in the wreckage.
Let’s hope this is it, anyway - there are some CNN anchors who need a shower and some sleep.
What is the maximum separation that the two boxes have been found from each other following a crash? Could they have entered the water near each other and due to different angles of entry or whatever have wound up miles apart?
The pilots are not flying the plane. It’s flying itself. They’re inputting the information into the FMS as needed.
If something happened to the plane (fire, explosion) the pilots would set the plane toward the nearest airport and then attempt to mitigate the crisis.
It depends on what the flight computer does with a loss of engine power. Someone would have to try it in a simulator to see what it does. If it disengages then the plane is going to bank to one side eventually hitting Vne which is the never-exceed speed. It comes apart in flight.
If both engines quite and the computer attempts to maintain level course and airspeed then it descends into the ocean and breaks apart on impact.
And there’s some little kids that would like their toy planes back.
There’s no need to expand the recording capacity if they can just stream the data captured by the black boxes. I don’t know how hard that will be or how long it will take to make it happen, but that seems like the preferred solution.
Here’s one possible failure mode.
But at that altitude consciousness time is measured in seconds. Communication was normal aprox. 15 minutes after FL450, just before it disappeared, so the plane had to be at least partly pressurized.
I was questioning that a sudden crisis that doesn’t involve a distress signal of some sort but doesn’t bring down the plane would happen in the short ATC handoff window where evading detection has maximal chances. Very coincidental.
I guess burning a hole through the fuselage can be considered a pressurization failure mode. A bomb too. I was thinking more along the lines of valve partial failure.
So here’s what we know:
The plane reached FL350 cruising altitude uneventfuly, as far as we know. It survived the more dangerous (relatively speaking) climbing phase of the flight.
It’s NOT an established fact that ACARS was disabled before last radio communication was established.
Pilots checked out with Kuala Lumpur ATC. Should have checked in with Vietnamese ATC, didn’t.
The plane diverted from planned flight path without any distress signal.
No debris (like a control surface or cargo bay door) found at this point. Not very significant, it could easily have sunk, but worth mentioning.
We have an unreliable (IMO) sighting of a plane on fire at this point.
Transponder was disabled. ACARS switched off, meaning the PHY works but no communication channel is established.
The plane ascended close to it’s operating altitude ceiling at some point, followed by an “uneven descent”.
It seems to have flown along preestablished navigational waypoints.
It seems to have followed a route designed to avoid detection, if you assume maximum operating range. Specifically it seems to have avoided Indonesian primary radar.
Passed close to IGREX waypoint, in the Andaman Sea, then turned sharply south to the southern Indian Ocean.
Flight terminated along the southern arc where the last satellite “ping” occured.
Seems to have made a ditching or controlled flight into the ocean, as evidenced by the lack of debris found so far.
I’m struggling to come up with a coherent accident sequence that fits with these pieces.
Seems to fit a determined, pre-planned, well-executed scheme to make the plane disappear with the least chance of interception, detection or discovery after a crash.
Yes, that’s it. Nothing else makes sense, but that does.
Please note that the “plane on fire” sighting wasn’t even over the right ocean, and would look very much like a meteor anyway. You can take that off the list.
Shit, at this point I wouldn’t even take “alien abduction” or “raptured into heaven” off the list.
Cthulhu.
Seems to be the most logical. Why, though? What motive is there for making a plane disappear, as opposed to destroying it (bombs, terrorism, etc), or using it as a weapon (9/11)?
Aye, there’s the rub. But will you grant that someone intent on suicide won’t be thinking in what we call a “rational manner”?
Insurance might be one reason; policies won’t pay if it’s suicide, but will if it’s an accident. That alone seems to explain the Fedex hijack attempt. The desire to create a mystery or cause havoc is an unfathomable reason that seems to guide some otherwise inexplicable actions like virus creators (before the profit motive took over). It may be the reason behind the Voynich Manuscript, for example.
Or, if you’re going to have your 15 minutes of fame, even posthumously, why not make it big?
Suicide isn’t a very rational act, if that’s what it was, but if someone is intent on doing that while murdering so many people disappearing without evidence or some grandiose statement seems logical to me.
The whole thing points to a high level of aviation knowledge and pre-planning. Zero leads for hijacking.
I’m expecting more bad news after they are done investigating Zaharie’s finances, in addition to unconfirmed media reports of marriage problems and behaviour changes.
Yes, this was not a casual pilot – I doubt if the 9/11 hijackers, who were able to fly a plane (barely), had that much knowledge of routes, waypoints, radar coverage, etc. that this incident seems to suggest the pilot used. One of them even pressed the wrong button, sending his internal announcement to the external controllers and almost giving the game away.
I hope there’s something real behind focusing on the captain and not the FO (if that’s what’s happening), and not that the Malaysian authorities picked him due to his outspoken political opposition to the regime there.
Fair point.