in the Atlantic (the name of the magazine not the ocean)
Interesting article on flight 370
- Thread starter Obliviax
- Start date
ha, I read your post and was thinking, wait what, someone thinks it ended up in the Atlantic?
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Fascinating. And terrible. It's an incredible event to imagine but after reading I have to agree the senior pilot was most likely responsible; a swan song that took the lives of hundreds of innocents. Will be interesting to see if more about his motives come to light.
What's sad, is that we are still in the same shape of knowing where these plans are as we were then. No one has upgraded to allow continuous knowledge of all overseas flights let alone domestic flights. Another one could be hijacked today by a rogue captain and flown over the ocean without specific location technology being used. Shame on the FAA.
This incident, the German pilot who deliberately flew into the mountain and the Egyptian guy who dove into the Mediterranean. It’s scary to think how many more pilots maybe battling demons and still in the cockpit.
The article states there was a lack of communication between the Malaysian and Vietnamese air traffic systems. There was also apathy and incompetence galore. I'm not sure exactly how the FAA could have changed that since it has no authority over Malaysia or Vietnam.
I'd like to think flights under the umbrella of US air traffic control would be watched by a system which is more professional and competent than what we saw with MH370.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
I wonder if at some point it would be possible to have to request manual control of the plane from ATC before authorizing. I get that in an emergency you would like for a pilot to be able to react immediately, but with this kind of incident (and others) it's clear that identifying pilots with some kind of personal issues is not easy. Maybe make it so more than one pilot has to initiate a manual release request? So one pilot with a deathwish isn't able to sink a whole plane?
It should be a prerequisite that one has to post regularly on this forum for a year before being considered emotionally “fit” to fly an airplane. We flush out all of “The Zanies” around here!
I believe that is happening. They are putting in a new system
There are places in the world I would like to see if possible, but after this and the pilot who flew a jet into the Alps several years ago, I would never put mine or any of my families lives in the hands of a pilot of an airline outside of the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525
Super interesting article. Makes a pretty good case. I don't know how you prove it, but there's enough weirdness about the captain that the circumstantial case seems pretty strong.
Sounds very problematic to try to have a system where controllers could take control of the plane from a renegade pilot determined to commit murder-suicide. Even if the computer systems could be overridden, there are enough mechanical shutoffs and writing that it would be extremely difficult to prevent a determined pilot from downing the plane. You'd probably have to redesign the cockpit from the bottom up to make it pilot-proof.
Heck, just trying to build in a guard against low-altitude stalls was too much of a challenge for Boeing and brought down two planes -- and those pilots were doing everything they could to keep the planes in the air.
It's a little like the driverless car problem. You can design cars for drivers, or you can design driverless cars. But it is extremely difficult, maybe impossible, to design a safe car that can be driven and at the same time driverless. The transitions are crazy complicated, maybe too hard to manage.
It is probably easier to design a 777 that flies completely by itself than design a pilot-controlled 777 that can override a renegade pilot.
Sounds very problematic to try to have a system where controllers could take control of the plane from a renegade pilot determined to commit murder-suicide. Even if the computer systems could be overridden, there are enough mechanical shutoffs and writing that it would be extremely difficult to prevent a determined pilot from downing the plane. You'd probably have to redesign the cockpit from the bottom up to make it pilot-proof.
Heck, just trying to build in a guard against low-altitude stalls was too much of a challenge for Boeing and brought down two planes -- and those pilots were doing everything they could to keep the planes in the air.
It's a little like the driverless car problem. You can design cars for drivers, or you can design driverless cars. But it is extremely difficult, maybe impossible, to design a safe car that can be driven and at the same time driverless. The transitions are crazy complicated, maybe too hard to manage.
It is probably easier to design a 777 that flies completely by itself than design a pilot-controlled 777 that can override a renegade pilot.
I read this late last night, a gripping article. Wonder what news will come out in the years ahead.
You should probably not let them out of the house either
The FAA sets most standards that are used in airplane construction today. They sure as hell could install tracking devices and the entire world would follow.
Tracking devices like that cost a lot of money. Airlines don't want to spend extra money on something that likely never would be needed and aren't required for any certification
Last edited:
Thanks...but that flight is way too suspicious other than a highjacking, pilot or someone else. It turns at the best possible time, between two counties' airspace. Then turns again until it runs out of fuel. My guess is that one of the pilots killed the other and then killed himself while the plane was on autopilot. But that's just a guess.
It should be a prerequisite that one has to post regularly on this forum for a year before being considered emotionally “fit” to fly an airplane. We flush out all of “The Zanies” around here!
I think being a regular on this board is cause enough to deem someone unfit to fly an airplane.
It should be a prerequisite that one has to post regularly on this forum for a year before being considered emotionally “fit” to fly an airplane. We flush out all of “The Zanies” around here!
Let’s see. WE. ARE.
...1. Football coaches
2. Lawyers
3. Criminal psychologists
What have I missed?
Experts on garage door openers.Let’s see. WE. ARE.
1. Football coaches
2. Lawyers
3. Criminal psychologists
What have I missed?
Travel, food and beverage experts.Let’s see. WE. ARE.
1. Football coaches
2. Lawyers
3. Criminal psychologists
What have I missed?
After reading this, is it possible the plane depressurized for some other reason? That's why they turned turned left and headed toward the best emergency landing airport. Only they ran out of oxygen, everyone died and the plane continued to fly itself until running out of fuel. This doesn't explain the lack of communications. But maybe whatever caused the depressurization also knocked out all communications? Interesting reads -- both articles.
And grills.
We really are #BLESSED.
to have so many experts gathered in one place. This is the best place on the interwebs.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
The final paragraph in that article says 'Of course, there have always been aviation industry interests that were all too ready to believe that the pilots did it. That would let everybody else off the hook.' Who exactly is 'everybody else'? Like most things, the obvious answer is probably the right one - one of the pilots, for whatever reason, dove the plane into the sea. It's either that, or what - an alien laser beam grabbed the plane, depressurized it, and flew it for a bit before crashing it? Like with Joe - what is more likely? A guy who built a lifetime career out of doing the right thing suddenly sabotages his reputation, career, and life's work to protect the immoral predilections of a coach he barely liked in his later years? Or he was duped like everyone else?
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Not 'take control' but disable manual override if something unusual occurs; assume the plane would be put back on it's correct flight path after.
who knows, really. But anyone else, who survived, would have taken credit (if it was some kind of terrorist). If it was someone other than a pilot, why fly the plane for 8 hours and out of fuel? I feel it is likely the pilot killed the other person in the cockpit, put it on autopilot and killed themself. Passengers wouldn't know where they were flying, on a redeye, to know any better. Just my theory.
Would have been difficult to kill the copilot without any sort of transmission going out/no struggle. I think the theory from the Atlantic about locking him out of the cockpit is more likely than a 53 year old man quickly killing a 26 year old man with his bare hands.
Knife? A quick sucker punch, when the other doesn't know it is coming, is good enough to put someone out to kill them.
Pilots still go through security so a knife is unlikely. And getting off a quick, fatal sucker punch from the pilots chair isn't happening.
This article by Clive Irving attacks the Atlantic piece, ignoring some of the key facts and playing up parts that were speculative. I think it is a terrible rebuttal and does no service to the truth....
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/atlantic-dusts-off-discredited-conspiracy-184036492.html
Maybe I am missing something. For those that think it was someone other than one of the pilots, how would you explain the controlled flight track? If it was a suicide hijacker, how do you explain the radio silence and breach of the cockpit door? Irving doesn't dispute the pilots marital problems, nor his affairs, isolation, etc. He just doesn't mention it.
The most likely scenario is that it went down just as speculated within the Atlantic article -- a copycat suicide -- whether palatable or not. And I don't by that, as implied by Irving, a rogue pilot would leave the authorities off the hook. This is one of the worst case scenarios for their national airline. This was a corrupt regime. They would have immediately stormed the pilot's home to secure and control evidence, whether their was or was not suspicion of guilt.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/atlantic-dusts-off-discredited-conspiracy-184036492.html
Maybe I am missing something. For those that think it was someone other than one of the pilots, how would you explain the controlled flight track? If it was a suicide hijacker, how do you explain the radio silence and breach of the cockpit door? Irving doesn't dispute the pilots marital problems, nor his affairs, isolation, etc. He just doesn't mention it.
The most likely scenario is that it went down just as speculated within the Atlantic article -- a copycat suicide -- whether palatable or not. And I don't by that, as implied by Irving, a rogue pilot would leave the authorities off the hook. This is one of the worst case scenarios for their national airline. This was a corrupt regime. They would have immediately stormed the pilot's home to secure and control evidence, whether their was or was not suspicion of guilt.
I'm glad to see someone poking holes in the Atlantic's article which is chock full of speculation and jumping to possible, but not necessarily true or likely, conclusions.
How is it not necessarily "likely?" If the flight path and radio history are factual, then there is absolutely no other scenario that fits. Can you even suggest one?
I am not glad to see a poor rebuttal. This is how matters get confused -- by "analysis" that lacks depth. If written at all, a rebuttal should have questioned what seems factual based on the purported data analysis. Otherwise this does nothing to advance correcting the problem.
^ ^ THIS
He probably tried to fly it as far into the ocean as possible, kept it over water and hoped that it would not be found, so far it has proven successful.
Horrifying. I never understood the suicidal person that took others with them. I had a family friend that was the murder victim of a murder/suicide, it is horrible and heart breaking.
