이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
종료
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료
Back to Squawk list
  • 8

Lockerbie expert says crew were trying to save plane

제출됨
 
Malaysia Airlines flight not hijacked says Lockerbie expert (www.telegraph.co.uk) 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


MMPilot
MMPilot 1
Isn't it a crying shame what so called experts babble to the public to catch attention ? The "smoke theory" is absolute nonsense.

Disregarding an explosion neither fire nor smoke developes so rapidly that pilots would be unable to press the mike button to inform ATC , or set code 7700 and initiate a rapid descend to the nearest airfield, instead of cruising more than houndred miles westbound away from original track with an intermediate climb to level 450, as primary radar data indicates. Even with zero visibility in the cockpit it would be possible to grasp the power levers to steer the A/C down at altitudes enabling to open the cockpit windows blowing out the smoke.

But if it would have been an explosion distroying electronic equipment like radio, transponder and ACARS simultaneously then the probability that other A/C controls keeping the continous westbound track remained functional is pretty close to nothing. In that case the unsteerable plane would have crashed pretty close to the flight planned track.
OZAIR
OZAIR 1
I am almost 100% sure Malaysia airlines would be doing and looking for anything in the hope that it would drag the blame away from the airline company in a desperate act to avoid class legal action that would surely send them broke.
avihais
Every expert" pops out of the wood purporting theories to explain what might have happened. So far an airliner has stopped broadcasting its transponder signal on civilian radar. The media has published everything from the pilots to a crude windows 98 line drawing. And a repeat question A transponder is turned off on the ground (Imagine LA ground traffic. Maintenance or electrical systems and emergency situations in the cockpit.
vanstaalduinenj
What did they skimp on?

completeaerogeek
The Telegraph article author does not seem credible.

When Swissair 111 had a catastrophic inflight fire in the cockpit the pilots were able to maintain contacts for quite a while. Plus any malfunctions would have beer reported by ACARS automatically.

Speculation of this kind is very unhelpful...
dpyett
Hi Folks...
Was that the truth, or did you read it in the Telegraph? Murdoch's "Terrorgraph" cannot be taken seriously.
OZAIR
OZAIR 1
I still stand firm on my belief it was due to some sort of failure causing loss of control.
Malaysia Airlines skimp on a cheap upgrade that would have helped track Flight MH370 !
What else did they skimp on ?
They are good at not telling the truth so I take everything they say as possible 10% true and 90% BS.
completeaerogeek
OZAIR that is the kind of speculation that doesn't help.

You have no basis for that hypothesis. MAS maintenance is as good as anyone else's these days and the B-777 is a robust and reliable aircraft..

If there was a MX problem ACARS would have spat out multiple messages as it did on AF 447 and would have described the problem in detail to MX Control in KL..

ADS-B is mandatory and is a MEL item. As far as I am aware no jurisdiction allows an RPT aircraft (particularly a mainline one) to depart with inoperative ADS-B.

We will all have to wait and see when the CVR/DFDR are recovered to know what has happened.
kiwiav8a
kiwiav8a 1
As you rightly pointed out, speculation of this (ed. any) kind is very unhelpful. You might take note of your own point! Stick to what your know rather than what you think you know!
completeaerogeek
Do you have corrective information you are willing to share?

로그인

계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!