Yes, you can see the trailer for the film in my post #1604.
There have been two of these Malaysia Airlines crashes and these things usually happen in threes.
If so, it figures to be about time for the third one now. I have no idea why these things are happening. But it just feels like more than just an accident or a coincidence.
There is no evidence that I know of. But it sure does leave me with a feeling like someone has something against this airline.
Uh, what?
Can you name a single instance of any airline (other than American Airlines in 2001) suffering three hull-losses with significant fatalities in, say, a year’s time?
Spoiler alert: no. And even people who subscribe to stupid bullshit like “celebrities die in threes!” wouldn’t cheat enough to talk about events spread over five months.
The notion that disasters, celebrity deaths etc “happen in threes” is complete and utter bullshit. The New York Times carried a good refutation of this weird belief.
Utter bullcrap.
Summary: the next phase of the search is about to start and could take nearly a year to complete.
IMHO, the more time that passes without a single piece of debris from the plane, the more likely that it sank intact, or nearly so. What does that suggest? A controlled (and lucky) landing at nearly stall speed, then sinking without breakup? Maybe there was one person alive at the very end, in the pilot’s seat.
It’s statistically unlikely that a modern 2 engine plane would settle gently into rolling ocean waves without wadding up in a twisted pile of aluminum scrap metal that immediately sinks. Any floating debris would quickly disperse and most of that would sink after it’s waterlogged over time.
So…are you saying that it could have sunk without breaking up or not? Could it wad up and sink without breaking up much?
I guess I’m considering the chance of an uncontrolled, random drop into the ocean with no human control after running out of fuel at a high altitude. That seems more likely to produce a wide debris field than a controlled landing, even though a controlled landing on water under the most ideal conditions would be far from perfect.
Since not a single piece has yet been found, I’m leaning towards the controlled landing rather than the uncontrolled, high speed crash. I regret to say that the lack of debris lends credence to the “landing at an airport and spirited away” theories, too.
It’s not possible it sank intact. It’s possible it landed flat and it’s happened more than once that a small plane has settled gently onto a flat surface. It’s also possible as was the case in Air France that the plane stalls into a flat spin and pancakes into the sea. It produced enough floating debris to locate it but it was also a plane that transmitted it’s position,
But if it slammed into the sea in any kind of flight trajectory the engines will dig in first and rip the wings off and then the fuselage is ripped open. It’s just been sooooo long since the incident that it’s difficult to say how much debris would still be floating.
I’m watching the NOVA program right now about this flight. They’re talking about systems that can’t be turned off and there is concern from crews that they need control of these in order to deal with problems. While I agree with this I think they can add an additional tracking device that is independent of the crew and does nothing but report it’s position.
I thought the NOVA documentary was sad, scary and fascinating.
I’m still amazed that it wasn’t picked up by advanced radar systems scattered around the globe. And they spent all this time looking at the ping signal and not a word about looking for contrails with weather satellites. At some point those contrails would be illuminated by the rising sun and if it truly went south it would be about the only one out there.
It’s been about 1 year since the disappearance. I’m still hoping the search finds MH370. I’m such an airplane enthusiast, and this lack of an airplane discovery is so nagging.
Did you read that wacky article in New York Magazine?
The self-effacing “OK I might be crazy but I just can’t stop” thing is fun at first, but then it goes overboard, trying to frame Putin (!) and the Kazakhs and whatnot.
An additional report has come out, with this little nugget:
Beacon battery expired a year before Malaysia Flight 370 disappeared
So all that search for “pings” to find the wreckage may have been for naught. The battery that powered the pinger was supposed to have been replaced in December 2012, more than a year before the plane went down.
Nor did they find anything pointing to the pilot or co-pilot having any reason to down the flight intentionally:
This is the one that’s curious to me:2003 Angola Boeing 727 disappearance - Wikipedia
It doesn’t necessarily mean that the battery didn’t work, just that it was past it’s best before date.
The pinger activates when the data recorder enters the water, so until then the battery is not used.
Yes, the media is making quite a deal about that, but really, the way aviation conservative approach applies even a year past “replace by” date the battery most likely would still work.
It’s still sloppy maintenance.