If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Anchorage Daily News)   The disappearance of the Malaysian jetliner is starting to sound more and more like something out of LOST everyday now   (adn.com) divider line 210
    More: Followup, Malaysian jetliner, Malaysia Airlines, pilot error  
•       •       •

7665 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Mar 2014 at 7:05 AM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



210 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-12 04:31:59 PM
If the transponder is the only reliable way of tracking commercial airliners, why in the fark is there an OFF switch on them?

Is there any legitimate reason that you wouldn't want to be trackable (unless you're taking that 777 for a ride to visit your mistress?)
 
2014-03-12 04:44:08 PM

ummhima2: all this talk about the plane reappearing somewhere suddenly and something just went boom in new york


I think New York was feeling left out of the tragedy loop for a couple days, and just blew up a couple buildings for attention. A building in San Francisco burned down? We're New York! Blow up two!
 
2014-03-12 05:21:16 PM

JSTACAT: WxGuy1:

"......I'm shocked that large commercial jets aren't tracked in real-time now. It's 2014 for crying out loud, but we can't find a way to put satellite-based communications on aircraft to allow it to report real-time flight data? ....."


The thing i hate about aircraft & the people that run that show is the scrimping of nickles and dimes when so many lives are bet upon perfect conditions.
Planes could easily be tracked, weigh 20% more, have ejection capsules, stronger components etc.
Ticket prices could triple and pretty much the same number of people would fly...

The way it is now, almost any minor flaw out of thousands of possible failures can doom everyone on board, sometimes while on or near the ground.
Maybe its time we mark up the cost of air travel and pay for a few simple safety features.
 There is no reason a cabin full of people should have to die because the engines quit.

Airlines currently saving a few bucks on black boxes and realtime tracking is stupid,
just look at the money being spent now, because of  airline corporate greed.
All the airlines should be tolled for the costs of the searches, and passengers should be tolled for the costs of improvements.

The cabin could be outfitted as a detachable re-entry vehicle, parachutes, etc.
No one is even working on solutions like that, which is why my idea sounds preposterous.
 Humans have no business flying if they refuse to solve these simple problems.


No, your idea sounds preposterous because it is preposterous. Even if it stopped every single fatality (which it won't) you're talking close to a billion dollars per life saved. That is not in any way shape or form a worthwhile investment.
 
2014-03-12 05:41:11 PM

Clemkadidlefark: [www.adultswimalternative.com image 275x153]


Indeed.
 
2014-03-12 07:11:55 PM

ummhima2: Cerebral Ballsy: ummhima2: Cerebral Ballsy: italie: Dansker: Cerebral Ballsy:
Since I've seen every episode of Air Crash Investigation, my answer is: fire brought on by shorted out wiring. Fire wipes out a plane with alarming speed and will knock out multiple systems at once, and could have prevented the pilots from radioing mayday.

Yup.

If the guys story rings true, it's down to the logical now.


Scenario 1) Plane is disabled by fire/explosion. Crew is alive and flying what is left to fly. Radio is dead, transponder dead, flying by visual. Run out of gas before they find a point to land.

Scenario 2) Plane is disabled by fire/explosion. Crew is dead from smoke inhalation/hypoxia. Plane continues on flying with the auto pilot on until it runs out of gas.

When a plane catches fire, it goes down in flames within minutes.

Have you ever seen a structure fire? I have. It take a few minutes to destroy a room or a car. A plane doesn't last an hour on fire. There's no cruising on autopilot while the passengers and crew's corpses lie dead from smoke inhalation. The crew's oxygen drops down and they either navigate safely to a landing site or the plane disintegrates in the air while the crew tries to control it. Fire moves fast.

Payne Stewart 1999

Why do you guys keep referring to the Payne Stewart Learjet? I have no idea how a Learjet functions but a 777 has an alarm that sounds in the cockpit when there is cabin depressurization.

I was talking about fire. Hypoxia is a whole other issue and not likely to have occurred. Besides the audible alarm, the crew's oxygen masks would have deployed. It's almost impossible for hypoxia to be the cause.

if your read the accident report the oxygen masks did drop but there was no delivery of oxygen to the masks so hypoxia and yes most planes have a fire alarm warning light thingy with audio similar to "fire in left engine, fire in left engine"

http://planecrashinfo.com/1999/1999-60.htm

it also veered off course in a similar way


If you want to see a more relevant case, there's an actual commercial flight this occurred on. But it's very unlikely, far less common than fire.
 
2014-03-12 07:17:00 PM

WxGuy1: italie: Dansker: Cerebral Ballsy:
Since I've seen every episode of Air Crash Investigation, my answer is: fire brought on by shorted out wiring. Fire wipes out a plane with alarming speed and will knock out multiple systems at once, and could have prevented the pilots from radioing mayday.

Yup.

If the guys story rings true, it's down to the logical now.


Scenario 1) Plane is disabled by fire/explosion. Crew is alive and flying what is left to fly. Radio is dead, transponder dead, flying by visual. Run out of gas before they find a point to land.

Scenario 2) Plane is disabled by fire/explosion. Crew is dead from smoke inhalation/hypoxia. Plane continues on flying with the auto pilot on until it runs out of gas.

My problem with the "electronics went out, and the pilots had to fly using visuals only" is that a lot of people have smartphones now, and nearly every smartphone I know of has GPS. Of the 239 people on the plane, someone would have a smartphone with GPS with an offline mapping software (Google Maps cache even). If nothing else, there's likely to have been dozens and dozens of GPS-enabled phones that would have been able to at least give the flight crew lat/lon coordinates to direct their flight (there are many GPS apps that just give lat/lon/altitude information without needing access to the internet or needing cell service).  As such, the crew should have been able to get the plane to an airport if flight controls were not significantly compromised.

If the plane did indeed change course by nearly 150 degrees as the Malaysian military suggested happened, that implies to me that it was deliberate. It's possible ,of course, that the crew was disabled, and someone somehow changed the autopilot path, but that seems no more likely than several other hypotheses.  Heck, I've come across several reports that say that the last known location according to military radar was over the Strait of Malacca at an altitude of 32,000', which means that the plane may NOT have dropped in altitude when it was flying back to the southwest.  That's second-hand or third-hand information, though.

I'm shocked that large commercial jets aren't tracked in real-time now. It's 2014 for crying out loud, but we can't find a way to put satellite-based communications on aircraft to allow it to report real-time flight data? Heck, if there are questions about the logistics of handling so much flight data from the global fleet of commercial jets, just put in a system that would only transmit the most important flight information (lat/lon, altitude, heading, speed, etc.) when the flight deviates appreciably from the flight plan.  This really doesn't sound like rocket science here...


When controls go out on a commercial aircraft, there is a backup generator and occasionally a backup to the backup wind-powered generator. Without a root cause, like, say, an engine explosion, equipment is really unlikely to just fail.


I haven't kept up in the last few days.. If the plane didn't turn around like they're claiming then all bets are off. It really could be anything.
 
2014-03-12 07:27:08 PM

TerminalEchoes: SpdrJay: So it makes no sense and insults your intelligence?

That's typically what low IQ people say about Lost. Perhaps you should stick to watching procedural cop shows and Dance Moms. That might be more your speed.


I have a high IQ. Lost sucked ass. Is that what high IQ people normally say about Lost?

WTF attacking people because they don't like your show? What a stupid thing to get mad at someone about.
 
2014-03-12 10:08:37 PM

taoistlumberjak: I've seen the theory that Best Korea stole it.  That's both an insane theory and completely frightening all at the same time.
I would hope that hijacking and hiding a commercial airliner would be grounds for termination these days.


It couldn't get to North Korea without being detected by radar in South Korea and China.
 
2014-03-13 12:00:19 AM

You Are All Sheep: at first I was thinking shot down because of the sudden disappearance, but because of what radar is like in that area, and it can take quite a while between updates, is it possible to have rerouted the jet and landed it quickly somewhere?


... somewhere large enough for a 777, the largest twin-engine aircraft, to land, yet isolated enough that they are unable to make contact with the rest of the world for nearly a week? I don't think there is such a place.
 
2014-03-13 09:11:46 AM

Goatspunk: Stolen from Reddit.

[i.imgur.com image 800x500]


ror!
 
Displayed 10 of 210 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report