Air Malaysia missing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goingbush

I thought the only way there would be no wreckage is if the pilot did a textbook controlled gear up landing .

heres another possibility.

Mathematicians think they've worked out what happened to Flight MH370 - ScienceAlert

I still think they landed on diego garcia !

---

Rebuttal:
MH370 gets another dose of bad science and poor reporting | Plane Talking

It's more likely they landed on Diego Garcia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The southern Indian Ocean is very large, and has little traffic. Furthermore, many of the coastlines are very sparsely populated, and much of them are very uninviting for beachcombing.

Even if some wreckage has come ashore, it is quite possible nobody has ever seen it, let alone recognised it. AF 447 was lost in a far more accessible area of the globe, where there is a lot more traffic and much better weather. And it took a long time to find.

John

---

While that is the case normally, there has been a lot of activity in that region recently. A lot of search aircraft and ships, as well as those deliberately looking for anything that washes ashore...whether or not it resembles aircraft wreckage. And while it is possible that items have washed ashore and not been found, the sheer amount that should be out there just defies logic.

If the aircraft had managed a perfect controlled and executed ditching (similar to the Hudson River Flight 1549 incident) then one would think that emergency life rafts would have been inflated and there would be survivors. I believe that newer versions of life rafts are fitted with EPIRBs. However, even a perfect ditching damages an aircraft. The Hudson River Airbus A320 lost an engine as well as damage to the underside of the aircraft. Logically, there would have to be some indications of what happened.

Either way, something should have been found by now.

Now back to my episodes of "LOST"...

Blaine is a investigator that's doing his own research and he has just returned from Kudahuvadhoo an island in the Maldives, where he interviewed some of the locals about their sighting of a low flying aircraft that matched the description of MH370, ( 06:15 Maldives time (01:15 UTC)) the morning of the night that MH370 went missing.

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...75&oe=5628CF2F
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Rebuttal:
MH370 gets another dose of bad science and poor reporting | Plane Talking

It's more likely they landed on Diego Garcia.

---

[ame]http://www.math.tamu.edu/~gchen/mh370.pdf[/ame]

While I feel for the families, it is appropriate to ask the question - is the massive ongoing cost of this search worthwhile? Remembering that Australia is (to my knowledge) funding the bulk of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orkney 90

While that is the case normally, there has been a lot of activity in that region recently. A lot of search aircraft and ships, as well as those deliberately looking for anything that washes ashore...whether or not it resembles aircraft wreckage. And while it is possible that items have washed ashore and not been found, the sheer amount that should be out there just defies logic.

If the aircraft had managed a perfect controlled and executed ditching (similar to the Hudson River Flight 1549 incident) then one would think that emergency life rafts would have been inflated and there would be survivors. I believe that newer versions of life rafts are fitted with EPIRBs. However, even a perfect ditching damages an aircraft. The Hudson River Airbus A320 lost an engine as well as damage to the underside of the aircraft. Logically, there would have to be some indications of what happened.

Either way, something should have been found by now.

Now back to my episodes of "LOST"...

---

I can easily envisae a situation that would have lead to a fairly intact entrance into the water leaving no debry.

A cabin air event occurs that leaves everyone with hypoxia and passed out, plane on auto pilot runs out of fuel and makes a gliding landing manages to jag the waves and swell so theres no break up and then fills and sinks. the small amount of airframe results in smallish panels and parts that either sing straight off or only flot untill they beome waterlogged and sink.

th reason it was off course can be speculated till the cows come home, my pet theory by way of ockhams razor is a comms bay fire. it accounts for the loss of communications, Hypoxia (plenty of nasties in there that dont mix will with respiratory systems) and changing course to make for an alternate landing location.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

I can easily envisae a situation that would have lead to a fairly intact entrance into the water leaving no debry.

A cabin air event occurs that leaves everyone with hypoxia and passed out, plane on auto pilot runs out of fuel and makes a gliding landing manages to jag the waves and swell so theres no break up and then fills and sinks. the small amount of airframe results in smallish panels and parts that either sing straight off or only flot untill they beome waterlogged and sink.

th reason it was off course can be speculated till the cows come home, my pet theory by way of ockhams razor is a comms bay fire. it accounts for the loss of communications, Hypoxia (plenty of nasties in there that dont mix will with respiratory systems) and changing course to make for an alternate landing location.

---

Sorry, but the chances of fuel starvation leading to an autopilot control successful ditching would be almost not at all. Generally when the engines fail the autopilot system will drop offline. That's ok, because it is fly by wire so will in general keep itself upright. The boeing FBW system is speed stable, like a conventional airframe. So best case it would have held speed till it hit the water. Even at best glide, or minimum descent speed, the system is not capable of auto landing unless it is told to do so and is on an appropriate approach procedure. So either way it's gunna hit the water real hard. They break apart pretty easily on impact

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VladTepes

While I feel for the families, it is appropriate to ask the question - is the massive ongoing cost of this search worthwhile? Remembering that Australia is (to my knowledge) funding the bulk of it.

---

ok mate mate mate, its a good thing. better we have all that info than the indo's, think about it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBlackDog

Sorry, but the chances of fuel starvation leading to an autopilot control successful ditching would be almost not at all. Generally when the engines fail the autopilot system will drop offline. That's ok, because it is fly by wire so will in general keep itself upright. The boeing FBW system is speed stable, like a conventional airframe. So best case it would have held speed till it hit the water. Even at best glide, or minimum descent speed, the system is not capable of auto landing unless it is told to do so and is on an appropriate approach procedure. So either way it's gunna hit the water real hard. They break apart pretty easily on impact

---

I disagree, the auto pilot will hold straight and level all the way to the deck with just the right kind of luck on hutti g the ocean swells

In anycase (and excuse the poor spelling and grammer in my previos reply) all iy would take for the plane to go without a trace is for the airframe to hold together enough to prevent the tanks from failing or any sig ificantly large bouyant pieces from ripping away from the main body.

The other thing that hasnt been mentioned yet (that i know of) is what if it went down in a debry field (or close enough to one) that its simple been looked at and given "no way man, do you kniw what the idds of that happening would have to be?"

Blknight.aus

Hi Dave a question if I may, Are the people that program the automatic pilots 100% perfect in every way and never make mistakes?

.