New Information On MH 370

JOhnH;1412510 They could have brought in barrels of Jet fuel in fishing boats a few at a time with nobody noticing anything. A couple of hand trucks and a manual pump and some strong backs and you have a full 777.[/QUOTE said:
47,000 gallons worth? That's a lot of 55 gallon drums. :yes:
Click to expand...
 
Lindberg said:
Yeah, and the fuel-truck driver didn't notice that the plane wasn't empty, but full of dead people. And he just hasn't yet realized that he refueled the plane that everyone in the world is looking for. :no:

Oh, and the controllers weren't the least bit suspicious of a 777 arriving and departing VFR.
Click to expand...
:rofl::lol:
 
JOhnH said:
If this was a piracy, as I believe it was, they didn't just do it on the spur of the moment. They have probably been planning this for years. They could have brought in barrels of Jet fuel in fishing boats a few at a time with nobody noticing anything. A couple of hand trucks and a manual pump and some strong backs and you have a full 777.
Click to expand...

Won't turbines run on most anything for a while? The point is, they don't need jet fuel. Just something that the engines will run on for 10 hours or whatever their next "leg" requires.
 
Piloto said:
A plane on a ferry flight to an MRO for maintenance does not need to stop at a gate for dropping passengers, just at the ramp waiting to be refueled. It happens every day and is not on a flight schedule.

José
Click to expand...

Or........ Turn it into a freight dog....

Go to Home Depot and..

1- Buy 50 gallons of cheap ,white latex paint...

2- Buy 20 gallons of cheap, orange latex paint...

3- Buy 20 gallons of cheap , purple latex paint.

make it look like a Fed Ex freighter and..... poof...

They are off on their usual late night, in the dark, package run and no one will be the wiser till the damage is done...:hairraise:...:eek:...:yikes:.....
 
Lindberg said:
Yeah, and the fuel-truck driver didn't notice that the plane wasn't empty, but full of dead people. And he just hasn't yet realized that he refueled the plane that everyone in the world is looking for. :no:

Oh, and the controllers weren't the least bit suspicious of a 777 arriving and departing VFR.
Click to expand...
I doubt those guys are following Visual Flight Rules, or any other rules! If you just stole an airliner, are you going to call for flight following? I'm sure they spent years locating and outfitting the most out-of-the-way place they could find. They could have brought in about a dozen barrels of fuel a day for a couple of years. And it wouldn't take a genius to figure out how get the fuel from the barrels to the jet's tanks.
 
Maybe they just went to the self service pump to get discount price.

José
 
Art VanDelay said:
Xpndr,comms and datalink are all in a large compartment right underneath the cockpit. You do the math.
Click to expand...


I thought a little aft, just aft of the flight deck door. But let's not quibble. I don't recall a bank of breakers in that compartment; my recollection was that all the breakers for all the avionics were in the flight deck overhead. Then again, it has been a while ...

Jim
 
JOhnH said:
If this was a piracy, as I believe it was, they didn't just do it on the spur of the moment. They have probably been planning this for years. They could have brought in barrels of Jet fuel in fishing boats a few at a time with nobody noticing anything. A couple of hand trucks and a manual pump and some strong backs and you have a full 777.
Click to expand...

Again, somebody check me for wrong, but I don't remember the triple-7 having a gravity fueling option ... pressure feed from the bottom is the only one I remember and that sure as hell isn't going to happen from 55 gallon barrels and a strongarm pump from below.

Jim
 
JOhnH said:
I doubt those guys are following Visual Flight Rules, or any other rules! If you just stole an airliner, are you going to call for flight following? I'm sure they spent years locating and outfitting the most out-of-the-way place they could find. They could have brought in about a dozen barrels of fuel a day for a couple of years. And it wouldn't take a genius to figure out how get the fuel from the barrels to the jet's tanks.
Click to expand...

The 777 can't do over wing fueling - got have a fuel truck.
 
weirdjim said:
I thought a little aft, just aft of the flight deck door. But let's not quibble. I don't recall a bank of breakers in that compartment; my recollection was that all the breakers for all the avionics were in the flight deck overhead. Then again, it has been a while ...

Jim
Click to expand...

The hatch is aft of the cockpit door but it goes way forward. Think of where the external door is for it - right behind the nose gear and it goes to the same huge compartment.

As for the breakers, there's no way they could put all the breakers up in the cockpit. There are some in the E&E compartment and also one or two back by the APU IIRC. Also a handful of them in each galley as well but that's for galley stuff of course.
 
Art VanDelay said:
The 777 can't do over wing fueling - got have a fuel truck.
Click to expand...
OK, so how hard would it be for an organization like AlQueda to obtain a fuel truck? Like I said, they probably didn't do this on the spur of the moment. I imagine they took years of planning and preparation. They didn't steal an airliner to fly somewhere and then land and say "oops, I never thought we would need fuel", and a way to get it in there.

I'm surprised nobody jumped on me when I joked that they could have stretched the time aloft by running LOP, but now they are speculating the thing flew almost 8 hours rather than the original 4-5 hour estimate.

I don't understand why people are so quick to say something can't be done.
 
Lindberg said:
What makes you think they crashed in same place?
Click to expand...

What makes you think I think it crashed? A triple seven has a 9000 mile range. In other words, it's now probably within striking distance of your nearest nuclear reactor.

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
What makes you think I think it crashed? A triple seven has a 9000 mile range. In other words, it's now probably within striking distance of your nearest nuclear reactor.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Meh. I have to believe that it's highly unlikely that a jet would penetrate the exterior containment structure much less the interior reactor vessel which is also fortified. And, even if ithe fuselage did make it through the containment structure, the wings (and fuel) would likely remain outside so that's where the fire would be.

That's true of reactors near me. Other countries that were myopic enough to build unfortified reactors may have a price to pay.
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Meh. I have to believe that it's highly unlikely that a jet would penetrate the exterior containment structure much less the interior reactor vessel which is also fortified.
Click to expand...
"Unlikely"? Even if it's loaded with explosives?

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
"Unlikely"? Even if it's loaded with explosives?

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Well, that's a different story, still...

...ain't no way an airliner is getting to the heartland of the US for such an attack. Folks on the coasts may have cause to worry but those of us living in the "fly over states" know that such a beast would have to traverse many "shoot down states" before getting to us.
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Well, that's a different story still...

...ain't no way an airliner is getting to the heartland of the US for such an attack. Folks on the coasts may have cause to worry but those of us living in the "fly over states" know that such a beast would have to traverse many "shoot down states" before getting to us.
Click to expand...

I'm posting this within 5 miles downwind of a nuclear powerplant on the northern border of the USA. It's right on the great circle route of the missing 777's northern flight path too, as is anywhere east of the Mississippi. So, if such an attack were planned, I wonder how could it defeat our air defenses?

dtuuri
 
Fearless Tower said:
:thumbsup:

I hear it has great frequent flyer points!
Click to expand...

If it were to happen and a group like AlQuaeda were behind it, I would suspect it could be fueled in multiple locations in Africa with cash or fuel that has been stolen in the Gulf of Guinea. It could also have been done on some deserted Indian Ocean island with an airstrip.
 
dtuuri said:
... A triple seven has a 9000 mile range...
Click to expand...

A triple seven scheduled to fly to Beijing has enough fuel to fly to Beijing, they don't top off the tanks and carry a bunch of fuel they aren't going to use.
 
Silvaire said:
A triple seven scheduled to fly to Beijing has enough fuel to fly to Beijing, they don't top off the tanks and carry a bunch of fuel they aren't going to use.
Click to expand...

The captain loaded at least an additional two hours of fuel beyond the required.
 
Silvaire said:
A triple seven scheduled to fly to Beijing has enough fuel to fly to Beijing, they don't top off the tanks and carry a bunch of fuel they aren't going to use.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course. It's the next leg I was talking about.

dtuuri
 
JOhnH said:
OK, so how hard would it be for an organization like AlQueda to obtain a fuel truck? Like I said, they probably didn't do this on the spur of the moment. I imagine they took years of planning and preparation. They didn't steal an airliner to fly somewhere and then land and say "oops, I never thought we would need fuel", and a way to get it in there.

I'm surprised nobody jumped on me when I joked that they could have stretched the time aloft by running LOP, but now they are speculating the thing flew almost 8 hours rather than the original 4-5 hour estimate.

I don't understand why people are so quick to say something can't be done.
Click to expand...

They have access to hundreds of tanker trucks, tanker ships both coastal and deep sea, and simplest of all all, barges and tugs from which they can get fuel trailers to anywhere on earth.
 
dtuuri said:
I'm posting this within 5 miles downwind of a nuclear powerplant on the northern border of the USA. It's right on the great circle route of the missing 777's northern flight path too, as is anywhere east of the Mississippi.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you guys on/near the coasts. The north coast in your case! :)
 
Now the Daily Mail (yeah, I know -- take it with a grain of salt) is reporting that MH370's captain was a "fanatical supporter" of a Malaysian political opposition leader, who was imprisoned earlier in the day.
 
Last edited:
Art VanDelay said:
The hatch is aft of the cockpit door but it goes way forward. Think of where the external door is for it - right behind the nose gear and it goes to the same huge compartment.

As for the breakers, there's no way they could put all the breakers up in the cockpit. There are some in the E&E compartment and also one or two back by the APU IIRC. Also a handful of them in each galley as well but that's for galley stuff of course.
Click to expand...

Reports are that ACARS transmissions ceased before audio communications ended with ATC. That would seem to support the theory of a slowly expanding fire progressively eating through wires/equipment and argue against a deliberate act by the pilot. In the case of a deliberate act he'd first have to find and throw the breaker (or a hijacker would somehow have to sneak into the compartment without the pilot or anyone else knowing!) after which one would think he'd not bother with further audio communication. Plus, I can see none of the D.C. "spooks" has explained the alleged garbled static laden last communication on 121.5 with another airliner. It was described as muffled, which could be consistent with the pilot or copilot talking with an oxygen mask on.
 
If this thing did go into the water, how far would stuff have drifted by now and how spread out would it be?

Potentially, months from now, an identifiable part could wash ashore somewhere?
 
Pilawt said:
Now the Daily Mail (yeah, I know -- take it with a grain of salt) is reporting that MH370's captain was a "fanatical supporter" of a Malaysian political opposition leader, who was imprisoned earlier in the day.
Click to expand...

If the daily mail reported that water boils at 212F, I would not believe it. It is one of those rags only good to lap up extra grease dripping off your fish&chips.
 
dtuuri said:
What makes you think I think it crashed? A triple seven has a 9000 mile range. In other words, it's now probably within striking distance of your nearest nuclear reactor.
Click to expand...
That's why I'm posting this from under my bed. :yikes:

"The simpler explanation is generally the correct one." -- Ockham

The more spectacular the assumptions are that support your theory, the less likely it is to be true. Planes crash. :yes:
 
Jim Logajan said:
Reports are that ACARS transmissions ceased before audio communications ended with ATC. That would seem to support the theory of a slowly expanding fire progressively eating through wires/equipment and argue against a deliberate act by the pilot. In the case of a deliberate act he'd first have to find and throw the breaker (or a hijacker would somehow have to sneak into the compartment without the pilot or anyone else knowing!) after which one would think he'd not bother with further audio communication. Plus, I can see none of the D.C. "spooks" has explained the alleged garbled static laden last communication on 121.5 with another airliner. It was described as muffled, which could be consistent with the pilot or copilot talking with an oxygen mask on.
Click to expand...


In this part of the world the Chinese use 121.5 for all sorts of communications.

The "muffled" transmission may have been Chinese or anyone else for that matter
 
Lindberg said:
That's why I'm posting this from under my bed. :yikes:

"The simpler explanation is generally the correct one." -- Ockham

The more spectacular the assumptions are that support your theory, the less likely it is to be true. Planes crash. :yes:
Click to expand...

I'm not a philosopher I'm a pilot. It isn't just "my" theory either. Sounds like he'd agree with me on this, since it's simpler to steal an airplane than crash it according to the known facts.

dtuuri
 
Lindberg said:
That's why I'm posting this from under my bed. :yikes:

"The simpler explanation is generally the correct one." -- Ockham

The more spectacular the assumptions are that support your theory, the less likely it is to be true. Planes crash. :yes:
Click to expand...
I will agree with that. My theory is simply that; a theory in place of actual facts or evidence. It is a possibility. But I think it is a good possibility.

A veterinary analogy that mirrors your observations says: "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras". In our part of the world horses are much more common than zebras and if you guess horses, as dull as that may sound, you will be right more often. Many newly graduated veterinarians are always looking for zebras.
 
ARFlyer said:
The captain loaded at least an additional two hours of fuel beyond the required.
Click to expand...

Ahhh are you aware of ICAO alternate fuel requirements for Flag carriers ? But hey I don't want to jinx your fantasy.

P.S.
What do you think happened to cause TWA 800 to explode ? (I have a pretty good idea what your answer is gonna be)
 
Jim Logajan said:
Reports are that ACARS transmissions ceased before audio communications ended with ATC. That would seem to support the theory of a slowly expanding fire progressively eating through wires/equipment and argue against a deliberate act by the pilot. In the case of a deliberate act he'd first have to find and throw the breaker (or a hijacker would somehow have to sneak into the compartment without the pilot or anyone else knowing!) after which one would think he'd not bother with further audio communication. Plus, I can see none of the D.C. "spooks" has explained the alleged garbled static laden last communication on 121.5 with another airliner. It was described as muffled, which could be consistent with the pilot or copilot talking with an oxygen mask on.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind too that if I had a nickel for every time my ACARS lost datalink I'd be able to afford a Cessna Mustang ! ACARS drops offline all the time all by itself. Why it do I don't know maybe it's a stray homoetron in there ?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Ahhh are you aware of ICAO alternate fuel requirements for Flag carriers ? But hey I don't want to jinx your fantasy.

P.S.
What do you think happened to cause TWA 800 to explode ? (I have a pretty good idea what your answer is gonna be)
Click to expand...

Weapons trial for new shoulder launch heat seeker...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top