Motive for MH370 diverted route (academic discussion)

mnm77

Salam...

After reading the article below (quoted), i think this is the best possible explanation so far, as a new lead, in order to find the missing MH370

Previously it was thought that MH370 crashed in the South China Sea, but later that lead was considered false after the conclusive study from military radar has been considered.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

There has been a lot of speculation about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. Terrorism, hijacking, meteors. I cannot believe the analysis on CNN; it’s almost disturbing. I tend to look for a simpler explanation, and I find it with the 13,000-foot runway at Pulau Langkawi.

We know the story of MH370: A loaded Boeing 777 departs at midnight from Kuala Lampur, headed to Beijing. A hot night. A heavy aircraft. About an hour out, across the gulf toward Vietnam, the plane goes dark, meaning the transponder and secondary radar tracking go off. Two days later we hear reports that Malaysian military radar (which is a primary radar, meaning the plane is tracked by reflection rather than by transponder interrogation response) has tracked the plane on a southwesterly course back across the Malay Peninsula into the Strait of Malacca.

Read more:
How the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet Could Have Been Hijacked
Inside the Nearly Impossible Task of Finding an Airplane in the Ocean
How It's Possible to Lose an Airplane in 2014

The left turn is the key here. Zaharie Ahmad Shah1 was a very experienced senior captain with 18,000 hours of flight time. We old pilots were drilled to know what is the closest airport of safe harbor while in cruise. Airports behind us, airports abeam us, and airports ahead of us. They’re always in our head. Always. If something happens, you don’t want to be thinking about what are you going to do–you already know what you are going to do. When I saw that left turn with a direct heading, I instinctively knew he was heading for an airport. He was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi, a 13,000-foot airstrip with an approach over water and no obstacles. The captain did not turn back to Kuala Lampur because he knew he had 8,000-foot ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier toward Langkawi, which also was closer.

Take a look at this airport on Google Earth. The pilot did all the right things. He was confronted by some major event onboard that made him make an immediate turn to the closest, safest airport.
The loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire.

When I heard this I immediately brought up Google Earth and searched for airports in proximity to the track toward the southwest.

For me, the loss of transponders and communications makes perfect sense in a fire. And there most likely was an electrical fire. In the case of a fire, the first response is to pull the main busses and restore circuits one by one until you have isolated the bad one. If they pulled the busses, the plane would go silent. It probably was a serious event and the flight crew was occupied with controlling the plane and trying to fight the fire. Aviate, navigate, and lastly, communicate is the mantra in such situations.

There are two types of fires. An electrical fire might not be as fast and furious, and there may or may not be incapacitating smoke. However there is the possibility, given the timeline, that there was an overheat on one of the front landing gear tires, it blew on takeoff and started slowly burning. Yes, this happens with underinflated tires. Remember: Heavy plane, hot night, sea level, long-run takeoff. There was a well known accident in Nigeria of a DC8 that had a landing gear fire on takeoff. Once going, a tire fire would produce horrific, incapacitating smoke. Yes, pilots have access to oxygen masks, but this is a no-no with fire. Most have access to a smoke hood with a filter, but this will last only a few minutes depending on the smoke level. (I used to carry one in my flight bag, and I still carry one in my briefcase when I fly.)

What I think happened is the flight crew was overcome by smoke and the plane continued on the heading, probably on George (autopilot), until it ran out of fuel or the fire destroyed the control surfaces and it crashed. You will find it along that route–looking elsewhere is pointless.

lang-660

Ongoing speculation of a hijacking and/or murder-suicide and that there was a flight engineer on board does not sway me in favor of foul play until I am presented with evidence of foul play.

We know there was a last voice transmission that, from a pilot’s point of view, was entirely normal. “Good night” is customary on a hand-off to a new air traffic control. The “good night” also strongly indicates to me that all was OK on the flight deck. Remember, there are many ways a pilot can communicate distress. A hijack code or even transponder code off by one digit would alert ATC that something was wrong. Every good pilot knows keying an SOS over the mike always is an option. Even three short clicks would raise an alert. So I conclude that at the point of voice transmission all was perceived as well on the flight deck by the pilots.

But things could have been in the process of going wrong, unknown to the pilots.

Evidently the ACARS went inoperative some time before. Disabling the ACARS is not easy, as pointed out. This leads me to believe more in an electrical problem or an electrical fire than a manual shutdown. I suggest the pilots probably were not aware ACARS was not transmitting.

As for the reports of altitude fluctuations, given that this was not transponder-generated data but primary radar at maybe 200 miles, the azimuth readings can be affected by a lot of atmospherics and I would not have high confidence in this being totally reliable. But let’s accept for a minute that the pilot may have ascended to 45,000 feet in a last-ditch effort to quell a fire by seeking the lowest level of oxygen. That is an acceptable scenario. At 45,000 feet, it would be tough to keep this aircraft stable, as the flight envelope is very narrow and loss of control in a stall is entirely possible. The aircraft is at the top of its operational ceiling. The reported rapid rates of descent could have been generated by a stall, followed by a recovery at 25,000 feet. The pilot may even have been diving to extinguish flames.

But going to 45,000 feet in a hijack scenario doesn’t make any good sense to me.

Regarding the additional flying time: On departing Kuala Lampur, Flight 370 would have had fuel for Beijing and an alternate destination, probably Shanghai, plus 45 minutes–say, 8 hours. Maybe more. He burned 20-25 percent in the first hour with takeoff and the climb to cruise. So when the turn was made toward Langkawi, he would have had six hours or more hours worth of fuel. This correlates nicely with the Inmarsat data pings being received until fuel exhaustion.
Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible.

The now known continued flight until time to fuel exhaustion only confirms to me that the crew was incapacitated and the flight continued on deep into the south Indian ocean.

There is no point speculating further until more evidence surfaces, but in the meantime it serves no purpose to malign pilots who well may have been in a struggle to save this aircraft from a fire or other serious mechanical issue. Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah was a hero struggling with an impossible situation trying to get that plane to Langkawi. There is no doubt in my mind. That’s the reason for the turn and direct route. A hijacking would not have made that deliberate left turn with a direct heading for Langkawi. It probably would have weaved around a bit until the hijackers decided where they were taking it.

Surprisingly, none of the reporters, officials, or other pilots interviewed have looked at this from the pilot’s viewpoint: If something went wrong, where would he go? Thanks to Google Earth I spotted Langkawi in about 30 seconds, zoomed in and saw how long the runway was and I just instinctively knew this pilot knew this airport. He had probably flown there many times.

Fire in an aircraft demands one thing: Get the machine on the ground as soon as possible. There are two well-remembered experiences in my memory. The AirCanada DC9 which landed, I believe, in Columbus, Ohio in the 1980s. That pilot delayed descent and bypassed several airports. He didn’t instinctively know the closest airports. He got it on the ground eventually, but lost 30-odd souls. The 1998 crash of Swissair DC-10 off Nova Scotia was another example of heroic pilots. They were 15 minutes out of Halifax but the fire overcame them and they had to ditch in the ocean. They simply ran out of time. That fire incidentally started when the aircraft was about an hour out of Kennedy. Guess what? The transponders and communications were shut off as they pulled the busses.

Get on Google Earth and type in Pulau Langkawi and then look at it in relation to the radar track heading. Two plus two equals four. For me, that is the simple explanation why it turned and headed in that direction. Smart pilot. He just didn’t have the time.

Chris Goodfellow has 20 years experience as a Canadian Class-1 instrumented-rated pilot for multi-engine planes. His theory on what happened to MH370 first appeared on Google+. We’ve copyedited it with his permission.

There can be many questions that can be raised through speculations, but if we were to consider the above explanation fits what was happening to MH370, then we can say YES the pilot was DELIBERATELY diverting the flying path.

Now, if the aircraft keep flying for about another 6 to 7 hours (immarsat satellite) is true , next important questions are:

1.  Where did it go or intended to go?
2.  Why keep flying as long as possible?
3.  Why flying at low altitude? Is it to avoid radar, as speculated?

berancuk

tapi sang kancil dengan semut merah cakap laennnnnnn

mnm77

1.  Where did it go or intended to go?

In theory, my simple explanation would be:

1. It will go to the nearest airport to land the aircraft as soon as possible. However, the chosen airport should NOT be the busy ones, since the pilots cannot make contacts with ground tower due to  communication system (ACARS and transponder) was down. The pilots have to see the runway, and the runway should be clear in order to land the aircraft. Remember, in the dark of the night, without communication with ground tower, the possibility to crash landed the aircraft is very high if really true the aircraft was on fire.

2.  Why keep flying as long as possible?

It could be that the pilots were running the aircraft 'blindly' due to communication system was down, plus at night the visibility is very limited. To tackle the fire and if possible re-programming the aircraft flying through commercial waypoints could be the safest effort to maintain aircraft flying as long as possible, rather than crashing into mountains in the dark of the night

3.  Why flying at low altitude? Is it to avoid radar, as speculated?

Since the communications are lost, the pilot could be flying low for several important reasons:
-so that anyone on ground could witness the aircraft as having trouble and as if preparing for landing. This is one kind of emergency message.
-as an early preparation for landing if there is airport with clear runway
-to prevent crew and passengers suffering oxygen deprivation if the cabin was depressurised

mnm77

berancuk posted on 19-3-2014 11:31 PM
tapi sang kancil dengan semut merah cakap laennnnnnn

In order to find the aircraft, we have to understand the motive whereabout the aircraft was diverted to.

One of the US resource suspected the motive was 'pilot suicide', hence they were saying MH370 possibly crashed in Indian Ocean. If really suicide is the motive, why the pilot has to make laborious effort turning back and flying at low altitude? Could it be easier for the pilot if really to commit suicide by directing the plane straight away to the Indian Ocean if he decided to crash there?

The investigators are clueless about the motives.... no groups ever claim hijacking, no demands, no news...

In my opinion, searching on the land or in the ocean, with possible direction towards any airport, could be the new lead...

hijau_serindit

mnm77 posted on 20-3-2014 12:08 AM
In order to find the aircraft, we have to understand the motive whereabout the aircraft was divert ...

Agreed. Maybe they need to search for abandon/old/private airport...

Allah knows best..

Dzulqarnain

From my undestanding...

As per the writer said,

We need the data on the take-off/pre-flight inspection/maintenance video/photo to prove that the front tires are causing the fire
- if this is true, the fire destroyed the control surfaces and it crashed en-route.
(still consider as a possibility even the SAR team couldn't find any trace on the original route - neglecting the u-turn)

Also the data of maintenance records on electronic/electrical schedule (failed/replacement components) to cause short-circuit
- if this is true, it could probably be extinguished and could still deploy the landing gears manually unless the navigation/control system failed entirely.

Plus the data of cargo security check records for flammable items
- if in-cargo got short-circuit, it might also be extinguished with high percentage of faulty on landing equipments that could lead to crash landing.

(The above is based on eyewitnesses reports locally and offshore which they saw low altitude plane caught on FIRE - not to include another witness on the island of Maldives)


The simplest explanation (considering the fire was fully extinguished)...

1.  Where did it go or intended to go?

- To the nearest airport capable where it could land immediately, safely.

2.  Why keep flying as long as possible?

- Difficulties deploying faulty landing gears and/or rectifying other necessary landing equipments en-route for emergency landing.
- If the fire caused the navigation/control system to have critical damage (mechanical), then it is not possible to land at any airport airstrip required but any runway that seems suitable/possible accordance to its limited navigation/control abilities.

3.  Why flying at low altitude? Is it to avoid radar, as speculated?

- to land safely anywhere (runway) as soon as all landing equipments and emergency procedures at its best for landing.


p/s: Ofkos, the first priority is to search for the missing MH370 and we still waiting for more data/info regarding its tracks...

naq_j

teori ni aku boleh terima.

ana_una

kagum dgn ustaz.....

tak tau nak mencelah apa tp berminat nak tau...

berancuk

nak mencelah, speaking sokmo

mnm77

berancuk posted on 26-3-2014 08:36 PM
nak mencelah, speaking sokmo

Tulis dalam Bahasa Melayu pun takpa, tapi saya cuba tulis dalam Bahasa Inggeris dalam bebenang ni... mana tau kalau ada orang luar yang berminat yang masuk bincang sama.... isu ni dah jadi isu antarabangsa...

mnm77

Still no trace of MH370....

Could it be INMARSAT made mistakes in their calculations?

mnm77

Any possibility near Spratly Islands?

Dzulqarnain

No tracks...so far.

But one of the most likely be the motive (speculated) is Kinetis KL-02




p/s: Still...

Dzulqarnain

Latest tract...

Both the US and the UK will doubtless try to shift attention away from the small Indian Ocean atoll. In return for leasing the island to the US, the UK receives a 5 percent reduction in research and development costs linked to the US owned Trident nuclear missile program, which the UK uses. A new lease for the island must be negotiated by December.
- RT

mnm77

Dzulqarnain posted on 14-7-2014 10:55 AM
Latest tract...

Meaning??

mbhcsf

so, any updates on this  subject matter?

mnm77

mbhcsf posted on 10-10-2014 08:12 AM
so, any updates on this  subject matter?

Sadly, still hanging.... no updates

mbhcsf

mnm77 posted on 10-10-2014 08:35 AM
Sadly, still hanging.... no updates

oh okay. even in journals?

hmm...that should be interesting.

mnm77

mbhcsf posted on 10-10-2014 10:08 AM
oh okay. even in journals?

hmm...that should be interesting.

Not sure about journals...has anyone come up in any journals with proof & evidence?

mbhcsf

mnm77 posted on 10-10-2014 10:41 AM
Not sure about journals...has anyone come up in any journals with proof & evidence?

It's 3.43 am...hmm..u asking me that?haha..i am trying to sleep, just got back from my office.

Well surely not with MH 370 's tails or wings but i kinda hope that any journal would have published certain mathematical models on ...dispersion? Trajectory pattern and what not?

If this is possible i mean