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.

(CNN)   China believes they have identified the wreckage of missing Malaysian plane at sea   (cnn.com) divider line 177
    More: Followup, Michael Goldfarb, Malaysia, Malaysia Airlines, Brooke Baldwin, Gulf of Thailand, Air France Flight 447, Conde Nast Traveler, flights  
•       •       •

11407 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Mar 2014 at 8:19 PM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-12 08:55:25 PM  

Turfshoe: Sure, but an hour later China will just want to find another plane.


sadly, this.
 
2014-03-12 08:56:01 PM  
Read between the lines people!!! China shot the plane down using their spy satellite! We can't let them think they can get away with this! We need to use one of our spy satellites to shoot down a plane full of Americans to teach them a lesson.

/I need to tell Alex Jones about this...
//seriously, I wish they would find something just so the passengers families can start healing.
 
2014-03-12 08:56:03 PM  

uncleacid: I once pinged a black box.


/rimshot
//rimshot?
 
2014-03-12 08:56:05 PM  

ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.


The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage
 
2014-03-12 08:57:27 PM  
I don't watch CNN, is this Wolf he's talking to in kindergarten?
 
2014-03-12 08:58:09 PM  

sanriosucks: Yeah, but they also believe that MSG is good for you, so...


MSG is good for proprietors of Chinese food restaurants in America.
 
2014-03-12 08:58:11 PM  

guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage


Origami
 
2014-03-12 08:58:11 PM  

costermonger: Or it's a raft of smaller crap.

No individual peice, but I suspect there are lots of ways to get those dimensions to fit into the smashed hulk of a 777.


Absolutely.  There's an awful lot of wiring bundles and cables and whatnot (aviation term) that would tether wreckage together.
 
2014-03-12 08:59:01 PM  
if the chinese are wrong...then this is disorienting...
 
2014-03-12 08:59:33 PM  

guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage


Where the hell do you get the idea that they are "square"? Because two dimensions were given?
 
2014-03-12 08:59:51 PM  

Skunkwolf: I was having fun with my theory that the plane was stolen. Everybody was in some bumfark airport in the middle of the jungle, safe and reasonably sound. Plane was off in Dubai or mainland China getting some new docs and paint.


Been saying this to people for a couple days. It would be nice if it was true.
 
2014-03-12 09:00:59 PM  
China should know where the plane is because, they shot it down.
 
2014-03-12 09:01:14 PM  
WAAAAAAAAAARRRRTT!
 
2014-03-12 09:01:44 PM  
If nekom's image above is the 79' x 72' piece, that's certainly consistent with the tail section dimensions of a 777.  And it's certainly not square.
 
2014-03-12 09:01:55 PM  

LasersHurt: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Where the hell do you get the idea that they are "square"? Because two dimensions were given?


That's what I'm wondering. Also pixels.
 
2014-03-12 09:02:02 PM  
science1.nasa.gov
 
2014-03-12 09:04:25 PM  
we need to get there before the Chinese. Otherwise this tech will fall into their hands

img2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-03-12 09:05:04 PM  

guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage


Square?
 
2014-03-12 09:05:30 PM  

LasersHurt: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Where the hell do you get the idea that they are "square"? Because two dimensions were given?


I got the idea from reading the article asshat. I think it was the part that said they were fairly square and large.
 
2014-03-12 09:06:01 PM  

lifeboat: If nekom's image above is the 79' x 72' piece, that's certainly consistent with the tail section dimensions of a 777.  And it's certainly not square.


As 'grainy as hell satellite shot' images go, yeah, looks about right to me.

And a half-way recognizable tail section is about the only part of the aircraft you could expect to be half-way recognizable if not a peep was heard from an ELT.
 
2014-03-12 09:06:27 PM  

ISO15693: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Square?


Do you people even read the articles. Yes square.
 
2014-03-12 09:06:29 PM  
Since they shot it down I'm pretty sure they have a good idea where to find the wreckage.
 
2014-03-12 09:08:21 PM  

guywhore: LasersHurt: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Where the hell do you get the idea that they are "square"? Because two dimensions were given?

I got the idea from reading the article asshat. I think it was the part that said they were fairly square and large.


A conde-naste editor said they were square. Your own eyes can tell you they are not.
 
2014-03-12 09:09:08 PM  
They took a photo of a search plane.
 
2014-03-12 09:09:09 PM  
They shoulda went with the pro...
i1079.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-12 09:10:16 PM  

guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Square?

Do you people even read the articles. Yes square.


You know how when the media reports on something you're intimately familiar with, they get a lot (sometimes most) of the details wrong?

It's best to assume they're always like that, even if you don't know for sure.
 
2014-03-12 09:11:00 PM  

GWSuperfan: MFAWG: They've known this since Monday?

I'm starting to think something is fishy.

Yeah, no state has EVER taken the time to make sure they knew what they were talking about before releasing information.


*insert Benghazi joke here*
 
2014-03-12 09:14:08 PM  

guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Square?

Do you people even read the articles. Yes square.


I see where you went wrong.  You are quoting a Conde Nast Traveler editor's words.  The article doesn't say anything about it being "square" besides that guy.  Keep up the good work at getting mad at everyone.
 
2014-03-12 09:15:32 PM  

LasersHurt: guywhore: LasersHurt: guywhore: ISO15693: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

A part with both a body section and a wing section.

The sections are square in shape. That plane can't produce a 79'x72' square piece of wreckage

Where the hell do you get the idea that they are "square"? Because two dimensions were given?

I got the idea from reading the article asshat. I think it was the part that said they were fairly square and large.

A conde-naste editor said they were square. Your own eyes can tell you they are not.


I haven't seen pictures well enough and neither have you
 
2014-03-12 09:16:08 PM  

guywhore: I haven't seen pictures well enough and neither have you


I can see the one in the thread, right here. Can you see it?
 
2014-03-12 09:19:43 PM  
A disintegration would have a large debris field, and that debris isn't going to stay together for an extended period of time like this.  Currents, waves, etc are going to scatter pieces over time.

There have been way too many boats, planes, satellites and other things looking for this plane.


The more time that passes, the more I think the fuselage is damn near intact and on the ocean floor.
 
2014-03-12 09:23:15 PM  

lindalouwho: Old Man Winter: China just wants attention.

Most of the people on that plane are, alive or dead, Chinese.


At this point, they're mostly dead.
 
2014-03-12 09:24:50 PM  

Skunkwolf: I was having fun with my theory that the plane was stolen. Everybody was in some bumfark airport in the middle of the jungle, safe and reasonably sound. Plane was off in Dubai or mainland China getting some new docs and paint.


I was thinking somali pirates expanded operations and decided to grab a plane. I pictured the plane, wings chopped off, tucked into some back ally in Mogadishu while the pirates get around to making a ransom video.
 
2014-03-12 09:24:58 PM  

lifeboat: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

The tail wingspan is about 71', so it's possible that's what they're looking at - tail wingspan and rear fuselage.


Realistically, I think not. While the size is feasible, a part of that size still being floating well over 24 hours later when they made the satellite pass is not. And while the sea in that area is quite shallow, it's not shallow enough to see man-made objects sitting on the bottom with standard photography.
 
2014-03-12 09:25:05 PM  
The debris is along the normal flight path, but we're told the plane was a couple hundred miles off course.

Am I the only one kinda hoping they don't find it? Makes for a hell of a story.
 
2014-03-12 09:25:12 PM  

MyRandomName: They tracked their missile to where it also disappeared?


Yes, China shot down a plane that was about 2/3rds full of their own citizens.

img3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-03-12 09:25:33 PM  
Hey, remember "Airport '77" where the plane crashed and ended up mostly intact underwater?

They're dead in their 777 flying coffin.
 
2014-03-12 09:26:33 PM  

MyRandomName: They tracked their missile to where it also disappeared?


Was going to say... they shot it down, of course they know where it went.  "Oh hey guys, what's THIS over HERE???"
 
2014-03-12 09:27:13 PM  

LasersHurt: guywhore: I haven't seen pictures well enough and neither have you

I can see the one in the thread, right here. Can you see it?


Yes and it's square! I'm right. I'm always right. The faster you learn this the better for everyone
 
2014-03-12 09:28:04 PM  
Wessoman:
What's funny will be seeing how the American right-wing echochamber will spin this development as being Obama's fault somehow.

That's the first I've seen of that sort of thing.  Tell us more about what those right wingers are going to do.
 
2014-03-12 09:28:13 PM  

Pick13: China should know where the plane is because, they shot it down.


moto-geek: Since they shot it down I'm pretty sure they have a good idea where to find the wreckage.


grumpfuff: Yes, China shot down a plane that was about 2/3rds full of their own citizens.

[img3.wikia.nocookie.net image 555x417]

 
2014-03-12 09:29:22 PM  
"This is not the end. This is not the beginning of the end. It is the end of the beginning."
 
2014-03-12 09:31:50 PM  

MFAWG: They've known this since Monday?

I'm starting to think something is fishy.


Remember, this is in contrast to the Malaysians who have decided to speak about every possible outcome and have looked like utter morons chasing their tail.

I think they thought it was best to be patient and verify the findings as best they could, as well as wait a few more days for the Malaysians to tire themselves out from changing their story every three hours. Even something like this could get lost in the public eye if another country involved is still flailing their arms all about.
 
2014-03-12 09:34:01 PM  

nekom: [i897.photobucket.com image 850x566]
That's what's there.

http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014/map/4894


Out of curiosity: what are you using to sync up the tomnod maps with Lat/Lon coordinates? I did not see any indication of coordinates and the map numbers don't seem to have any (obvious) relationship.
 
2014-03-12 09:36:54 PM  
The fact that the images were captured Sunday does not mean they were analyzed the same day.  It unlikely that this picture is the only one they captured on that day.
 
2014-03-12 09:37:00 PM  

Mouser: [science1.nasa.gov image 255x215]


I see a butt.
 
2014-03-12 09:38:33 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Last line of article: "What is a transponder?"

Maybe you should have looked that up before you started writing an article about a missing airplane, CNN.


That's a link to a page that explains what a transponder is....
 
2014-03-12 09:38:54 PM  

Gyrfalcon: lindalouwho: Old Man Winter: China just wants attention.

Most of the people on that plane are, alive or dead, Chinese.

At this point, they're mostly dead.


media.tumblr.com
 
2014-03-12 09:39:59 PM  

gweilo8888: lifeboat: guywhore: What part of a 777 would produce a piece of wreckage 79x72?

The tail wingspan is about 71', so it's possible that's what they're looking at - tail wingspan and rear fuselage.

Realistically, I think not. While the size is feasible, a part of that size still being floating well over 24 hours later when they made the satellite pass is not. And while the sea in that area is quite shallow, it's not shallow enough to see man-made objects sitting on the bottom with standard photography.


It may not be all that deep there, and something fairly big and white would show up to a pretty good depth - depending on sea state.  Probably not much for visible pollution that far from shore.
 
2014-03-12 09:43:53 PM  
I don't think it would float , what with it's cargo hold full of Bitcoins ...
 
Displayed 50 of 177 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report