Malaysian Airliner missing?

Fearless Tower said:
There is a little bit more to the story.

The US was engaged in hostilities with Iran (the Tanker Wars) at the time. VINCENNES was involved in a running gun battle with IR patrol boats. And was expecting further action from the Iranians. The Airbus took off from a joint use (military/civil) airport and followed a standard comair profile. It was being monitored/tracked due to the origin point and the fact that it was going to overfly the cruiser. As standard procedure, the cruiser attempted to hail the Airbus on IAD (121.5) which was probably not being monitored on the airliner.

Now, as the Airbus continued to climb toward VINCENNES and the ship was still dealing with the patrol boats, people got sloppy in CIC. Internal comms/procedures...etc. Someone on the CIC tape called out 'he's descending!' No track number....nothing. Just that statement. And that statement combined with the track visually heading toward the cruiser and due to the close proximity, the CO ordered the engagement.

It was later determined that the track display readout on the Air Warfare operators screen had swapped to a US fighter jet that was descending to land on the CVN. In other words, he looked at the visual display of the Airbus while reading the speed and altitude information of a different contact that was 'hooked'. Had the CIC watchstanders followed proper procedure and used track numbers in their transmissions regarding contacts, they would have caught the error.

So, yes, as far as the internet is concerned, they 'mistook' an Airbus for an IR F-14, but as with most things, there is a bit more to the story.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that mean he confused it for a US F-14?
 
Fearless Tower said:
There is a little bit more to the story.

<snip>

So, yes, as far as the internet is concerned, they 'mistook' an Airbus for an IR F-14, but as with most things, there is a bit more to the story.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Thanks for that education.
 
ScottM said:
What was the combined hours of the crew on the Asiana flight that crashed at SFO last year?
Click to expand...


I don't know, but this one the captain had ~18,000 total time I believe, and quite a bit of time in type, and the first officer had about 2500. That's a good combination in my book, because you've got an old veteran and a new guy who's probably on the ball.

They were enroute, no weather to speak of I think, so pilot error would seem unlikely to me. :dunno:
 
Two passengers were apparently using stolen passports.

I read that the manifest had an Austrian and an Italian passenger, but both of the true owners of those passports were safe and had reported their passports stolen a long time ago.

I wonder who those two passengers were, and what were they doing on this flight to China. Suicide bombers? Gangsters? Spies?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Some of the Asian airlines have been pushing for a Relief CoPilot position that uses individuals with no actual flying time, just sim time. Wonder if this was one of those deals ?
Click to expand...

Relief crews on a 5.5 hour flight? Seems unlikely.

Henning said:
Flight Aware tracks are often incomplete or erroneous, no conclusions can be made from them.
Click to expand...

A inference can be made if every other MAS370 has radar coverage recorded on FF for that portion but this one doesn't.

Not saying the NTSB will cite FF in their final report...:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
No mayday is very troublesome. That is a very busy corridor, and they had full radar coverage from likely more than one source. Just vaporizing in cruise without a word gives me the willies.
 
docmirror said:
No mayday is very troublesome. That is a very busy corridor, and they had full radar coverage from likely more than one source. Just vaporizing in cruise without a word gives me the willies.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking.
 
docmirror said:
No mayday is very troublesome. That is a very busy corridor, and they had full radar coverage from likely more than one source. Just vaporizing in cruise without a word gives me the willies.
Click to expand...

Over a tough and secretive part of the world.
 
docmirror said:
No mayday is very troublesome. That is a very busy corridor, and they had full radar coverage from likely more than one source. Just vaporizing in cruise without a word gives me the willies.
Click to expand...

If it was a terrorist bombing, the perps appear to be tardy in claiming responsibility. Also interesting that they got an ELT signal - how deep under water can an ELT be and its signal be picked up?
 
Last edited:
There are some reports from another website saying this particular plane was involved in a ground based serious wing strike previously. Unable to located any records, but I haven't searched much so far.
 
There is a unvalidated report out of Thailand that a US listening base picked up a Mayday around 230AM. The call apparently was MH307 reporting disintegration of the fuselage.
 
Jim Logajan said:
If it was a terrorist bombing, the perps appear to be tardy in claiming responsibility. Also interesting that they got an ELT signal - how deep under water can an ELT be and its signal be picked up?
Click to expand...

AQ is like that sometimes.
 
kgruber said:
An airliner with an "ELT?"
Click to expand...

I would imagine it be required. BTW, An ELT will not broadcast from underwater, however it likely floats free when immersed. I would figure for over water ops they would be mounted line a maritime EPIRB version of the same thing and have a hydrostatic release or may be attached to the life rafts.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
I would imagine it be required. BTW, An ELT will not broadcast from underwater, however it likely floats free when immersed. I would figure for over water ops they would be mounted line a maritime EPIRB version of the same thing and have a hydrostatic release or may be attached to the life rafts.
Click to expand...
One of the things that killed me when I transitioned from the merchant marine to the Navy is that on the Destroyer, the EPIRB was mounted in a float free bracket INSIDE of the pilot house. Real effective.
 
Fearless Tower said:
One of the things that killed me when I transitioned from the merchant marine to the Navy is that on the Destroyer, the EPIRB was mounted in a float free bracket INSIDE of the pilot house. Real effective.
Click to expand...

:rofl: Gotta love the Navy.
 
timwinters said:
Only one AFAIK. Military guys in waters they weren't supposed to be in and who couldn't tell the difference between an F14 and an A300.

Brilliance all the way around.
Click to expand...

Iran created a war zone and then send an airliner in to it.

KAL007 was a very different situation.
 
JimNtexas said:
Iran created a war zone and then send an airliner in to it.

KAL007 was a very different situation.
Click to expand...

Yes, KAL007 flew into airspace they had no permission to enter, and after 9/11 it's hard to argue the potential of an airliner being used as a weapon.

OTOH, while Iran may have created a war zone, the war zone they created was with Iraq, not us, we injected ourselves into that war. 'Why' is the interesting question there when in the end, we went to war against Saddam's Iraq as well. Had we not been protecting oil field investments, that ship would not have been in harm's way and that shot would never have been fired.

This flight sounds like they may have had an explosive decompression issue which are more frequently caused by condition and corrosion (Malaysia and SE Pacific as you know are high corrosion environments) than bombs.

Plenty of drug runners and other criminals travel on stolen passports that immediately suspecting a terrorist element is jumping the gun.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
OTOH, while Iran may have created a war zone, the war zone they created was with Iraq, not us, we injected ourselves into that war. 'Why' is the interesting question there when in the end, we went to war against Saddam's Iraq as well. Had we not been protecting oil field investments, that ship would not have been in harm's way and that shot would never have been fired.
Click to expand...
We 'injected' ourselves at the request of the Kuwaiti government becuase the Iranians were attacking Kuwaiti flagged tankers carrying Iraqi oil.


Henning said:
Plenty of drug runners and other criminals travel on stolen passports that immediately suspecting a terrorist element is jumping the gun.
Click to expand...
In a situation like this, you suspect everything and rule out possible causes as you find evidence against them. I wouldn't say terrorism is definitely the cause, but certainly highly suspect considering the suddenness and phase of flight, but that is by no means conclusive. For all we know, it could be another Egypt Air 990.
 
Fearless Tower said:
We 'injected' ourselves at the request of the Kuwaiti government becuase the Iranians were attacking Kuwaiti flagged tankers carrying Iraqi oil.



In a situation like this, you suspect everything and rule out possible causes as you find evidence against them. I wouldn't say terrorism is definitely the cause, but certainly highly suspect considering the suddenness and phase of flight, but that is by no means conclusive. For all we know, it could be another Egypt Air 990.
Click to expand...

I reiterate, we injected ourselves to protect our oil companies' investments there, same reason we attacked Iraq the second time.

It could also be another Aloha Airlines type event, or TWA 800...
 
North Koreans have been known to blow up airliners, though I can't imagine even they would be dumb enough to **** of their last real friend in the region.
 
Back about 2005 I heard a radio transmission on guard in the Gulf from the Navy that went something like, " Aircraft squawking 1234 this is the US Navy. You are entering a restricted zone. Identify yourself immediately or you will be fired upon." An obviously terrified sounding pilot responded, "US Navy this is Iran Air 1234, please do not fire upon us. We are a civilian airliner enroute to ________. Tell us a course you wish us to fly."
 
Blackhawk said:
North Koreans have been known to blow up airliners, though I can't imagine even they would be dumb enough to **** of their last real friend in the region.
Click to expand...

I doubt the N Koreans have missiles with the technology to intercept an an aircraft at that distance.
 
I can't help but wonder if this is connected in any way to an attack at a Chinese railway station a week or so ago where 29 or 30 people were stabbed to death. Could terrorists now be going after China?

Just an off the wall guess.
 
Henning said:
I reiterate, we injected ourselves to protect our oil companies' investments there, same reason we attacked Iraq the second time.
Click to expand...

Except you're wrong about the second time, too, and even a cursory study of the facts and basic logic will quickly expose the fallacy of your conclusion.


JKG
 
According to a former Mechanic buddy of mine, Malaysia is not known for excellent maintenance, specifically corrosion protection issues.

No aircraft that goes unmaintained/poorly maintained will last forever. Even the 747 has had large panels unzip due to Mx practice (taking several rows of seat with it into #3 - although the plane made it back).

My initial opinion, with the very limited data so far is either a structural failure (possibly a catastrophic unzip while in cruise configuration - although the 777 has an excellent safety record), or terrorism (bomb).

The challenge with either of those scenarios is the presence of a cohesive oil slick, it if came apart at FL350 I would not expect even 5 hrs of fuel for a trip-7 to create a noticeable slick - would seem to be more likely with an impact type accident but would then expect maybe some debris.

An AF447 type accident where they essentially flew it from FL410 to the ocean in a deep stall should not be possible in a Boeing product (different control laws).

It is really an interesting and tragic situation. Prayers to familes and friends.

'Gimp
 
Last edited:
Norman said:
I can't help but wonder if this is connected in any way to an attack at a Chinese railway station a week or so ago where 29 or 30 people were stabbed to death. Could terrorists now be going after China?

Just an off the wall guess.
Click to expand...

I've been having the same thoughts.
 
Norman said:
I can't help but wonder if this is connected in any way to an attack at a Chinese railway station a week or so ago where 29 or 30 people were stabbed to death. Could terrorists now be going after China?

Just an off the wall guess.
Click to expand...

If only we banned assault knives these kinds of things wouldn't happen.

If it has a black handle, or serrated blade then it must go! Think of the children!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top