Malaysia Airlines plane crashes in South China Sea with 239 people aboard

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
If they were able to hijack a 777....and successfully land it with all occupants aboard alive,. Who is to say they cannot repaint the plane and use it as a weapon??

I said "if"...there is no proof only conjecture that it was hijacked....
 
Last edited:

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,600
24,834
136
A pilot who flew for Qantas for 15 years told me there are >300 landing strips on various islands, and in remote coastline areas, in that region.

Yeah but not nearly that many that are big enough for a 777. Take off run at MTOW for a 777-200ER is 11,000 feet. Minimum distance was quoted as 8,000 feet on one site. That would be for a very lightly loaded plane. Minimum landing distance is quoted as a mile roughly.

Maybe someone is trying to pull off a real life version of Airport 77....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_'77
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
642
126
If they were able to hijack a 777....and successfully land it with all occupants aboard alive,. Who is to say they cannot repaint the plane and use it as a weapon??
Yesterday evening there was talk that taking the plane up to 45,000 feet would have killed the passengers from hypoxia. Whomever was flying the plane could have turned off cabin pressure in the passenger portion of the plane too.

I would be amazed if any passengers that were aboard are alive.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,600
24,834
136
Yesterday evening there was talk that taking the plane up to 45,000 feet would have killed the passengers from hypoxia. Whomever was flying the plane could have turned off cabin pressure in the passenger portion of the plane too.

I would be amazed if any passengers that were aboard are alive.

I agree unfortunately.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
Yesterday evening there was talk that taking the plane up to 45,000 feet would have killed the passengers from hypoxia. Whomever was flying the plane could have turned off cabin pressure in the passenger portion of the plane too.

I would be amazed if any passengers that were aboard are alive.
agreed!!
 

cyclohexane

Platinum Member
Feb 12, 2005
2,837
19
81
If they were able to hijack a 777....and successfully land it with all occupants aboard alive,. Who is to say they cannot repaint the plane and use it as a weapon??

I said "if"...there is no proof only conjecture that it was hijacked....

if they had that many resources, they would just set up a shady company overseas and buy a plane. Way less trouble than hijacking a plane...
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
Yesterday evening there was talk that taking the plane up to 45,000 feet would have killed the passengers from hypoxia. Whomever was flying the plane could have turned off cabin pressure in the passenger portion of the plane too.

I would be amazed if any passengers that were aboard are alive.

"IF" this situation is true, then they (the one(s) that took the plane) better have a lot of help to carry the bodies out of the plane. Over 200 folks in that 777. Horrible smell.

What do you think the price tag on a 777 is?

IIRC, a new 777 is about $250 million USD and up, not including upgrades and other extra stuffs.
 
Last edited:

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Yesterday evening there was talk that taking the plane up to 45,000 feet would have killed the passengers from hypoxia. Whomever was flying the plane could have turned off cabin pressure in the passenger portion of the plane too.

I would be amazed if any passengers that were aboard are alive.

Unless the pilot/s were wearing pressurized oxygen masks they would have died from hypoxia as well.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
642
126
"IF" this situation is true, then they (the one(s) that took the plane) better have a lot of help to carry the bodies out of the plane. Over 200 folks in that 777. Horrible smell.
Oh yeah. I'd have flown low and slow and thrown them out over water. Still, the cabin would reek. But if your intention was to gut the plane afterwards anyway, who cares?
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
642
126
I'm not familiar with your posting history. But I am going to explain something to you and then you are on your own.

The OP has been banned from the forums for making up post titles that were not, in the opinion of the powers that be, reflective of the article he was using for the basis of his post. Consequently, he has made a very concerted effort to use the title of the article as the title of the post. He even made some comments about doing that solely to please the powers that be and from my recollection was disciplined or at the least publicly called out by one of the staff here for going too far in pointing it out. So, he is very cognizant of matching up the title of the post to the title of the article.

If what you see now following his link is not what his title says, and which title also matches what he put in his post, it is because the title of the article was changed to suit the ongoing investigation.

Take it to Moderator Discussions if you're still unhappy.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
Even if it was hijacked, 95% chance it still crashed. It's just not a simple thing to make a 777 disappear. Most likely the pilot is crazy in some way and tried to hijack it, was successful for some period, and then something went down and the plane crashed.



IF they were successful, they didn't steal the plane to sell it. They obviously didn't steal it for political reasons otherwise we'd know what happened to it. I think that in the unlikely event they did steal it they did it because there was something or someone very important on that plane, or they plan to use it to blow something up.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
if they had that many resources, they would just set up a shady company overseas and buy a plane. Way less trouble than hijacking a plane...
not really.....Malaysia is known for not having very good security and such mainly because Malaysia has no enemies to speak of....I was listening to the radio last night and a security expert said that if he was going to hi-jack a palne and try to use it as a weapon that Malaysia would be his first choice...also this way the hijackers did not need to buy the plane...

In Europe too many things could go wrong....
 

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
I'm not familiar with your posting history. But I am going to explain something to you and then you are on your own.

The OP has been banned from the forums for making up post titles that were not, in the opinion of the powers that be, reflective of the article he was using for the basis of his post. Consequently, he has made a very concerted effort to use the title of the article as the title of the post. He even made some comments about doing that solely to please the powers that be and from my recollection was disciplined or at the least publicly called out by one of the staff here for going too far in pointing it out. So, he is very cognizant of matching up the title of the post to the title of the article.

If what you see now following his link is not what his title says, and which title also matches what he put in his post, it is because the title of the article was changed to suit the ongoing investigation.

Take it to Moderator Discussions if you're still unhappy.



So you agree, the thread title is misleading and needs to be changed to reflect the story. Let's not argue anymore and be PM buddies instead. :wub:
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
not really.....Malaysia is known for not having very good security and such mainly because Malaysia has no enemies to speak of....I was listening to the radio last night and a security expert said that if he was going to hi-jack a palne and try to use it as a weapon that Malaysia would be his first choice...also this way the hijackers did not need to buy the plane...

In Europe too many things could go wrong....

Unless something has changed recently in Malaysia as their security is far more stringent than the TSA performs in the states. A person and their baggage* has to pass through metal detector just to enter the check in hall, then again after clearing immigration prior to heading to the gates, and finally once more at the gate prior to entering the waiting area.

*After getting boarding passes all checked baggage is security checked prior to be placed on the luggage belt heading to the planes.
 

cyclohexane

Platinum Member
Feb 12, 2005
2,837
19
81
not really.....Malaysia is known for not having very good security and such mainly because Malaysia has no enemies to speak of....I was listening to the radio last night and a security expert said that if he was going to hi-jack a palne and try to use it as a weapon that Malaysia would be his first choice...also this way the hijackers did not need to buy the plane...

In Europe too many things could go wrong....

Really, "too many things can go wrong"? You're telling me buying a used aircraft through a shell company is more risky than hijacking an international flight with 200+ passengers? Really?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
Darwin's been talking more about an SOS type transmission. No extra bandwidth needed on routine flights, but a burst at impact. Alternately, a burst when instruments record significant problems or programmed deviations from flight plan - although that last would require some programming and interface costs. If programmed to send a burst at impact it might not work, but would surely be cheap as it could use an acceleration sensor. A more expensive system could be tied into the databus for failures or unacceptable parameters. A burst of ID plus latitude and longitude at minimum safe height without landing gear deployed could also work, although besides the databus it would need some sort of mapping or radar ability given that landing at Miami would be a significant crater at Denver. Just using the aircraft's height reading would probably work 99+%.

But surely a ruggedized black box transmitter tied into GPS coordinates and using an acceleration sensor could get off a burst with just latitude and longitude before failing in most accidents, without costing millions of dollars. And not being used in normal flight operations, there would be no reason to have a cut-off accessible from within the plane. For that matter, making it a beeper which squawks ID plus latitude and longitude every few minutes if the normal power or transponder output fails/gets shut off surely wouldn't add that much cost either.

Exactly. Its not needed for "normal" plane crashes because they usually happen at takeoff or landing. Its only needed when catastrophic failure occurs mid-flight. If you and I could design something that would do just that for fairly cheap I assume actual aerospace engineers can make something far better.

Especially the last one, how expensive could it possibly be to put in something that squawks lat and long every 5 minutes that can not be turned off by anyone? Put a battery on the damn thing in case all power fails and bam, we are talking an amount of data that can be sent with a single SMS. No huge overhead, no huge technological requirements, absurdly small infrastructure requirements and it prevents the insane costs of searching for a plane. How much gas alone has been spent so far?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
I'd say it's in a hanger somewhere in a country that hates us which doesn't narrow it down much. That's under the assumption that it's to be ultimately used as a weapon. It could be used against any country, but we're still the rotten SOB's of the world as far as I know.

Who is "us"? Malaysia?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,565
7,618
136
Some chinese newspaper claim it is suicide as headline front page, fake?

Possible, as they're now looking at the pilot being the one who hijacked it. Some media reports towards that idea, I'll probably wait 24-72 hours before giving them any credit. Too many reports on this subject have been false.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |