|
Coffee 8:05 Sun Mar 17
Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
|
For any aviation buffs on here, YouTube's excellent MentourPilot channel offers an updated take on the disappearance of MH370. The presenter (and, presumably, writer as well) is a Boeing 737 captain so he does speak with insight and authority. I think this is the first video he's done on this intriguing and tragic topic and it's well worth a watch. Enjoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5K9HBiJpuk
|
|
|
Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
Banjo
9:03 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Very interesting Coffee. Raises the big questions, who and why?
|
Coffee
10:48 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Banjo, good to see you!
Yes, it does raise those questions, though in all likelihood they have already been answered.
|
Sydney_Iron
10:59 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Captain Peacock, in the Cockpit with the Quran?
|
Manuel
11:07 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
I thought it was Moyes's fault?
|
On The Ball
11:21 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Cheers Coffee, I've saved that for later.
I struggle to get past the pilot though.....
|
Coffee
11:27 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
OTB - yep, hard to see beyond him. That's the who. The why remains.
|
Nurse Ratched
2:07 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Frigging hell, Coffee. Over 8 minutes in and he's still chuntering on about a list of different classes of planes the pilot and copilot had flown in the past.
I've given up, because I've a low tolerance for 'content creators' who don't get the feck on with it and wave their hands about in front of the camera. At least he doesn't have plastic false fingernails he is trying to show off, but it's still distracting. Stupid accent, too. I recommend closed captions.
This is why I tend to read instead of watch/listen.
Thanks anyway, Coffee. Did he ever conclude anything or add new info? If so, what was it?
|
Coffee
2:38 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Nurse
:-)
"list of planes the pilots have flown" -- indicative of experience. The captain was fairly senior and trained other pilots, including the First Officer on that day. So he knew what he was doing. The FO was virtually brand new on the aircraft type.
Your "tolerance for content creators" -- indicative more of you being an impatient old moo than anything else. He's hardly Magnus Pike.
"he doesn't have plastic false fingernails" -- true.
"stupid accent" -- he can't help that. He's Swedish, lives in Spain, speaks in English, and works for Ryan Air. Of course he's going to have a stupid accent.
"This is why I tend to read" -- and write/pontificate.
"Did he ever conclude anything or add new info?" -- he added a couple of (what I thought were) interesting observations that, if true, could be significant in understanding what went on in that plane. For example, the difference in the tone of the captain's voice in consecutive reports of his position to ATC. The fellow posits that in one report, his voice sounded regular and unhassled. In the next report a few minutes later (which was unnecessary, because it was simply a repeat of what he'd already reported), the tone of voice was different. It sounded more preoccupied, suggesting the possibility that he'd been away from the radio and that he'd suddenly become busier without a clear and obvious need to be busier. It also suggests (although not stated in the video) that the FO had not been in his seat in the time between the first and second of those reports, because if he had been there would have been no need to repeat the report of their position. What caused the apparent surge in activity? He also urges new searches for the plane based on new calculations.
"By browsing our site you agree to our use of cookies." -- what cookies do you use? Chocolate chip? Lemon and ginger (recommended)?
|
violator
3:04 Sun Mar 17
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Enjoy his videos on Facebook, and the Dutch girl pilot who is very easy on the eye
|
Mike Oxsaw
11:41 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
One of the things that I keep coming back to is that after it turned off all it's comms, it was effectively an unidentified intruder, so why didn't the (Thai and) Malaysian air force scramble to intercept it?
New York is/was not the only city with "Twin Towers".
|
ludo21
2:02 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
'why didn't the (Thai and) Malaysian air force scramble to intercept it?'
I haven't watched this video yet but Isn't the flight supposed to have flow directly over an air force base as it flew West out of Malaysian airspace? I am sure I remember that from a (long) documentary I watched a while back.
Whatever happened to the theory that a cargo was on board that (the Amercans) were desperate didn't fall into the hands of the Chinese?
At the time there was a story that two CIA types had died in relation to this cargo arriving by boat in Malaysia... that cargo was then supposed to have transited to MH370. It seemed to be a credible story / theory at the time... I watched a documentary update about 12 months ago and that theory wasn't mentioned at all?
The inference to that theory was that it was made sure that the cargo / MH370 didn't reach China at all costs.
Has that theory been debunked?
|
Nurse Ratched
3:53 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Coffee!
I did not say he DELIBERATELY has a silly and annoying accent. It's obvious he can't help it. But he DOES have a silly and annoying accent. It sounds like he is talking at the same time as trying to swallow a hot chip.
You might not find his whirling hands distracting (hey, great for you!) but I do. Not sure it's a good idea to have his flapping mitts around all that sensitive instrumentation in the cockpit, but that's not my problem. Hopefully.
Regarding his big reveal: essentially he is making a subjective assumption about Macarie's tone of voice on a transmission and thinks it could be 'something'. Fair enough. He's not the first person to suggest he locked the copilot out of the cabin, but it's a reasonable theory.
I know people make much of the fact that Macarie wasn't showing signs of being suicidal, but the fact is that men in particular often show no warning signs to those close to them that they are going to kill themselves. I don't think it's a leap to think he would want to take people with him. Some people are horrible shitbags. That German Wings pilot did something similar.
|
southbankbornnbred
4:20 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
The reason the Malaysians didn't scramble military jets immediately is because the plane dived below radar and then stayed there.
Which, if the flight took the route it is now believed it took (west, then south for several hours - before crashing into the south Indian Ocean) then it looks like a considered (and skilful) lmove. Most likely by a trained crew member. Didn't they find evidence that the captain had "flown" a similar route to nowhere on his flight simulator at home?
So the flight wasn't easily immediately identifiable. It's record indicated it was heading north, of course, hence all the checks and searches focused on the area where it first came off the radar/trackers.
Conspiracy theories abound. But the more likely/rational explanation is that the plane crashed into the south Indian Ocean after flying for several hours more than people first thought - and stayed below radar the whole time. That's indicative of a sudden loss of cabin pressure (which still requires an explanation of why it didn't crash sooner) - or a trained person keeping it out of trace.
I'm not saying cover-ups etc don't happen. But they're rare and conspiracies generally require quite a few people (protagonists) to know about them - and the co-ordination of a lot of silence. Usually something on that 'breaks' by now in the modern era.
Even Lockerbie was followed by the Brits initially revealing the most likely group behind it (Iranian-backed Palestinians) - before the Yank intelligence mob got to the Brits and the whole story changed to focus on Libya and Megrahi etc. The most likely 'real' story was already out there. It's hard to keep enormous events "that" secret in the modern era.
|
southbankbornnbred
4:23 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
So I don't buy the conspiracy stuff.
It's more likely a pilot (or, at a push, a hijacker) crashed the plane - or there was a bizarre tech breakdown.
|
zico
6:11 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
Watched this and it was interesting to see a take with no opinions that hadn't been proved. One ting I thought though was why on earth would a plane be designed for a pilot to turn off all tracking devices? What gain for the plane or an airline is there for that? Bizarre.
|
Mike Oxsaw
6:57 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
southbankbornnbred 4:20 Mon Mar 18
I hear you - and apparently several people heard the plane as it flew overland and, if I remember correctly, passed comment about it being an unusual time (and place) for such a low flying aircraft; I don't know about other places but where I'm planning to retire is directly under the inbound flight path for Buri Ram airport which, at the moment only handles 3 flights per day and occasional charters when there's an event on in town (generally bike or car races). Even people with very little interest in flying or aviation in general will comment on anything abnormal in the air.
Having spent several years involved in high-value, high tech contract procurement in that part of the world, a more likely explanation for the lack of a response is that the governments bought and paid for state-of-the-art radar systems, but, after everyone had their palms greased, there was only enough left to buy and install an Atari 2600; could never admit that though.
Additionally, defence forces are generally coached to think "outside the box" so the flight doing a U-turn and heading for a strategic target in the vicinity, once it "vanished", should have been higher up the list of initial possibilities. More so if it was carrying (or not) a "cargo of international interest".
However, that's tangential to the main story/explanation, which I still don't 100% buy.
|
Lato
9:20 Mon Mar 18
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
I have watched most of it. What i cant understand is that the Military must have realised it was there and changing course why didnt they send anything up to investigate? Can you imagine the difference if it happened over the UK or US!
|
southbankbornnbred
3:32 Sat Mar 23
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
But it didn’t happen directly over Malaysia, it happened over the sea north of the coast - and almost precisely at the point where it entered another state’s airspace. At that point, it dived below radar and disappeared. Which, again, in retrospect looks like a considered move by somebody who had control of the plane.
Scrambling jets to get to the point where it disappeared would have taken a while - by which time the plane was long gone from that area and heading west (not north, where everybody thought it was going).
Impossible to say exactly what happened in the cockpit - unless the black box ever turns up. But there are enough pieces of the jigsaw to put together a half-decent picture of what happened. And it’s unlikely to involve a mysterious cargo etc.
|
Mike Oxsaw
12:05 Sat Mar 23
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
It turned around well out to sea, but don't forget that was not where people heard a low flying aircraft,
If an aircraft dropping off the radar at a hand-off point wasn't enough of an event to trigger a response, an unidentified intrusion of a nation's air space should have been.
|
goose
12:14 Sat Mar 23
Re: Malaysian MH370 revisited
|
So what happened to the copilot? Did the pilot kill or incapacitate him first?
Unless he’s in on it, there’s no way he would be compliant.
Sick fucking thing to do. If you wanna top yourself just do it, don’t take a couple of hundred ppl with you.
|
|
|
|
