It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
There are at least two other credible possibilities -
A failed hijack (or perhaps successful, depending on the motives and whether the hijacker/s were on a one-way trip) by third parties.
A cockpit fire and failed attempt to turn back to an airport, leaving the plane just barely flyable but without most electrical power.
For the second possibility, it's worth looking at the two Egyptair cockpit fires, the first in a 777 on the ground in Cairo and the second in an A320 over the Mediterranean - both have potential parallels.
There are also some coincidences with flight MH17, but whether they're at the level of more than just coincidence is difficult to tell.
And if there is a link that would require a big conspiracy, and I don't generally believe in conspiracy theories...
This site is worth a look, if you have time - http://jeffwise.net . Wise himself is a conspiracy theorist, but there is a very large amount of third-party information and discussion there too.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.
lt's everything in one place, with just enough depth to get an overview of what went on.
Have a look at ICBM's link above if it's tweaked your interest.
The EgyptAir A320 which definitely did have a fire in either the cockpit or avionics bay also turned off the airway immediately and made no communication until it crashed. I’m always more inclined to believe an accidental cause rather than deliberate until proven otherwise. Air accidents can be very complex, and just because an *identical* accident has never happened before doesn’t rule out something quite similar.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
The flight sim is a big coincidence too, along with the fact that he skipped ahead during the running of the simulation. The Malaysian government painting a perfect image of the captain is also very sketchy.
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2019/06/WEL_MH370_MapInsetWithLetters/2ee9d76af.jpg
If there was fire why was the plane flown for hours in the wrong direction? Was the plane taken off course for other reasons and then a fire caused the crash? It just makes little sense.
The flight sim just backs up that this probably was the captain succumbing to mental illness of some kind.
The fire in EgyptAir flight 667 on the ground involved an oxygen tube as well, and burned so rapidly that the crew barely had time to get out of the cockpit. It then burned through the skin of the fuselage, which obviously would cause immediate depressurisation if it happened in flight. This was the same type of aircraft as MH370, a Boeing 777-200ER.
The similarities between both these cases and MH370 make me think it's unwise to rule out a fire, since there is a plausible - if very specific - chain of events that could fit.
If they'd pulled most of the electrical systems in order to try to stop the fire, they may have then had very few options for getting the plane down safely, especially if a large part of the cockpit was also fire-damaged. Continuing to fly while trying to get enough working again to control the plane would be the only option. If they managed to get some of it powered up again after Penang, that would explain the re-log-on which produced the Inmarsat data. The question then would be, if they were flying an aircraft with no means of communication, no means of landing, and probably with all the passengers dead, what would they do?
I don't know. But any other scenario is also unlikely too - the captain doing it as a suicide is the easiest to explain technically, but hard to rationalise with a motive. I'm not certain whether the flight simulator evidence has been proven one way or the other, I'm fairly sure someone has questioned whether the data points are all from the same simulated flight. It could be another odd coincidence, of which there are many...
It really is a very deep mystery, and unless the plane is ever found is likely to remain so - maybe even if it is.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Offset "(Emp) - a little heavy on the hyperbole."
Offset "(Emp) - a little heavy on the hyperbole."
But I reckon they'd have protection in place for that reason.. I dunno.
And as you say, it's a very deep mystery, so we may never know what really happened.
I don't know if the truth will ever be known about what did actually happen. Until then the easiest answer, and not an implausible one, is that it was pilot hijack. That theory raises questions of its own, though.
There is no 'H' in Aych, you know that don't you? ~ Wife
Turns out there is an H in Haych! ~ Sporky
Bit of trading feedback here.
A couple of other things that might fit:
The captain's odd repeat of the flight level to air traffic control - if strange instrument readings due to an electrical fault were beginning and he was distracted trying to work out what was going on, before they realised it was a fire.
The eyewitness on an oil rig who claimed to have seen a bright light in the sky at the time and place MH370 turned off the air lane - an oxygen-fed fire burning through the side of an aluminium fuselage is going to be pretty bright, probably visible from many miles away at night.
This is what the EgyptAir 777 looked like, and that's given that the firefighters arrived within minutes...
(By another odd coincidence, I have been on that aircraft! Long before the fire of course - going to Egypt in 1997. I remember it well, I was very interested since the 777 was brand new in service at that time.)
If you think the fire theory requires a lot of holes in the Swiss cheese to line up at the same time, try Jeff Wise's Russian hijack theory. He believes that the aircraft was hijacked by Russian special agents on board, went north to Kazakhstan, the Russians spoofed the Inmarsat data, and the debris found in the Indian Ocean was planted, mostly by Blaine Gibson... he thinks that the reason the plane hasn't been found in the search area is because it isn't there.
But bear in mind the sheer vastness and darkness of the deep Indian Ocean. Someone likened looking for the plane down there to trying to find a crashed aircraft somewhere in Germany, searching only on a dark night, using a bicycle and a torch. If the plane was outside the search area by only a few metres they would have missed it. It's also possible that it was within the search area but missed - they couldn't cover some of the rougher seafloor terrain.
On the other hand if the captain did hijack it and intentionally flew as far as possible, gliding to a semi-controlled ditching, it may well be well outside the search area anyway. If I was looking for a place to hide an airliner for ever, that part of the ocean would be right at the top of the list...
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
The pilot hijack looks like the one that best fits the known facts, and if I had to put a fiver on it that's the one I'd chose.
You can make an argument for a fire, but it needs a lot more "if"s IMHO.