Spyhunter wrote:

Debris fields can be very narrow - look at the Pentagon on 9/11. An aircraft impacting at a steep angle of descent at high speed (the two usually go together of course) behave more like fluids than solids. The wings fold back and you would not expect to see a large debris field.

Pentagon is a solid building on land (in case you forgot). The SIO is thousands of meters deep (in case you forgot) and has strong currents which will spread the debris during their long drift to the seafloor. Implying that the MH370 debris field on the sea floor would be anywhere near as narrow as the Pentagon debris field is almost insane! And then there is the silt and stuff on the seafloor that can hide stuff...

Sorry, 777, we were on different flight paths! I was referring to the SURFACE debris field, where the narrow debris field at the Pentagon is a fair comparison. Your points on the ocean floor debris field are well made, with respect. Water not being compressible a high-speed ocean impact mimics a high-speed building impact. The Pentagon is a solid building, but not much more solid than the ocean surface if you hit it doing 500 knots.

Dutchy: the angle of descent of a shot-down aircraft can be affected by a number of factors. With MH17 the most important was probably the loss of the nose section, which from memory broke away fairly early. This affects the aerodynamics, very obviously, although please don't try it at home.

I suspect that MH17 had power for longer than MH370 - the mere fact that the pilots have been murdered and the cockpit flight controls shot away does not mean that the engines will go to flight idle, although most do. They may remain at their last commanded power setting, at least for some time.

Fuel supply is another factor. The fuel supply to the engines does not appear to have been affected by either missile impact. The AAM was aimed at the upper port cockpit area of MH17, well away from the engines and the fuel lines. The Chinese Buk appears to have detonated fairly close in, in semi-active homing mode. It was closer eg than the Phoenix which took down AF447. Neither engine on 17 appears to have sustained missile damage.

Damage to control surfaces, flight control avionics (the 777 is Fly-By-Wire) and hydraulics are also important factors, of course. 370 may have sustained critical control damage. We are talking different missiles of course - the Fakour-2 (modified Phoenix) has a 135lb warhead, the Chinese HQ-16 Buk 154. However the Fakour may have exploded closer in and may have taken out an engine and one or more hydraulics systems.

I would not be surprised if elevator control was lost in the case of 370, whereas we have a functioning elevator (from memory the 777 has an adjustable stabiliser and elevator rather than a stabilator) in the case of 17.

The two main differences affecting surface debris field as between MH370 and MH17 are the in-flight break-up sequence of 17 and its shallower descent angle.

There is no criticism of either crew. The crew of MH17 were murdered doing their duty before the plane crashed. It impacted the ground whilst out of control. Without specialist training,and with no obvious warning of a missile attack, neither attack was in practice survivable by civilian pilots.

One of my purposes in writing on this site, in Flypast and elsewhere is to make such attacks survivable in the future.

The critical things are to:

(1) exercise firm radar EMCON from the moment that radio and ACARS jamming is observed, in order to prevent or break missile lock. Remember that the incoming will have terminal radar guidance - you have no time to lose. Do not forget your radar altimeters.

(2) go to TOGA power and initiate an immediate powered descent to below FL100, vectoring away from the threat and towards the nearest land if over the ocean and you are facing a sub-launch.

(3) use ACARS, satellite phones or if in radio range cellphones to broadcast a Mayday message and squawk 7700.

(4) secure the cabin for evasive manoeuvring, warning the passengers that the aircraft is about to come under missile attack. Flight attendants should be seated by windows and in easy reach of telephones to warn the flight crew of incoming. Passengers with military backgrounds could be asked to assist.

(5) depressurise as soon as it is safe to do so, and no later than passing FL100.

(6) disregard the 250 knot speed level below FL100 and all airframe speed limits, maintaining manual control. Civilian autopilots are not designed for combat use. The aircraft should be pushed to the point where vibration levels suggests that structural failure is imminent. You are in a combat situation and the normal flight envelope no longer applies. Your first priority is to save your passengers - overstressing the airframe only becomes a major concern if it threatens structural break-up.

(7) Delay your evasive manoeuvres for as long as possible. Remember that the incoming is guided and you are trying to defeat its guidance system. You cannot outrun it, you can only out-turn it.

(8) Remember you have more fuel reserves than the incoming. It will only outrun you for as long as it has fuel. By the time you see it it may already have exhausted 50% of its fuel and

(9) Beware shrapnel damage if the warhead explodes within say 500 feet of your aircraft. An explosion within 150 feet is a hit, not a miss - remember it has a proximity fuse. If you cannot evade keep turning and present the least vulnerable section of the aircraft - the outer wings - to the blast. You will probably have inner ailerons and may retain some turning ability if you lose an outer aileron. What you do not want to lose are your passengers, your fin or rudder, you or your engines.

Well... that seems like an awful lot to do when you discover an imminent missile threat. Especially if you're going to involve passengers.

If the FAs are in their jumpseat to be near an interphone, how are they scanning the sky out of that tiny little window usually found on airliner doors? How do you stop all the FAs on one side of the aircraft jamming the line? Isn't the interphone going off going to REALLY distract the flight crew?

If you discover ACARS jamming, how are you going to use it to send your mayday?

Spyhunter wrote:

The critical things are to:

(1) exercise firm radar EMCON from the moment that radio and ACARS jamming is observed, in order to prevent or break missile lock. Remember that the incoming will have terminal radar guidance - you have no time to lose. Do not forget your radar altimeters.

(2) go to TOGA power and initiate an immediate powered descent to below FL100, vectoring away from the threat and towards the nearest land if over the ocean and you are facing a sub-launch.

(3) use ACARS, satellite phones or if in radio range cellphones to broadcast a Mayday message and squawk 7700.

(4) secure the cabin for evasive manoeuvring, warning the passengers that the aircraft is about to come under missile attack. Flight attendants should be seated by windows and in easy reach of telephones to warn the flight crew of incoming. Passengers with military backgrounds could be asked to assist.

(5) depressurise as soon as it is safe to do so, and no later than passing FL100.

(6) disregard the 250 knot speed level below FL100 and all airframe speed limits, maintaining manual control. Civilian autopilots are not designed for combat use. The aircraft should be pushed to the point where vibration levels suggests that structural failure is imminent. You are in a combat situation and the normal flight envelope no longer applies. Your first priority is to save your passengers - overstressing the airframe only becomes a major concern if it threatens structural break-up.

(7) Delay your evasive manoeuvres for as long as possible. Remember that the incoming is guided and you are trying to defeat its guidance system. You cannot outrun it, you can only out-turn it.

(8) Remember you have more fuel reserves than the incoming. It will only outrun you for as long as it has fuel. By the time you see it it may already have exhausted 50% of its fuel and

(9) Beware shrapnel damage if the warhead explodes within say 500 feet of your aircraft. An explosion within 150 feet is a hit, not a miss - remember it has a proximity fuse. If you cannot evade keep turning and present the least vulnerable section of the aircraft - the outer wings - to the blast. You will probably have inner ailerons and may retain some turning ability if you lose an outer aileron. What you do not want to lose are your passengers, your fin or rudder, you or your engines.

You've won the internet for the day. Or at least my vote

Thank you 9MMPQ! I think!

Yes, it is a lot for the FAs to do but every extra pair of eyes would help. If the ACARS is being jammed then yes, you'll need cell-phones or satellite-phones anything that can communicate.

Michael, did you use your backchannel contacts to get through this Malaysian MP who coincidentally is also a member of Anwar Ibrahim's party?

https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/39955 ... VfzXwkl.99

Not spoken to him, but there were backchannel contacts with Anwar, who I gather is a very nice chap. Malaysian opposition well aware of the specifications of Malaysia's ATC radar, which would have detected MH370 had it flown through Malaysian airspace from the Diversion Point.

Changing topics, disturbing appointment by Theresa May as UK Defence Secretary. It's clearly political - Williamson was Cameron's PPS and is a May loyalist. He has no interest in defence whatsoever. I doubt he could tell the difference between an F-35 and a P-35 (a Severskey ancestor of the storied P-47 Thunderbolt). The only good news is that he's no longer making concessions to Tory rebels on Europe on watering down Brexit. He is known to be strongly opposed to national independence and to want to reverse the referendum result through the sidewind of a Parliamentary vote.

He is opposed to the Military Covenant and obviously thinks our servicemen and women should be treated like dirt. I suspect the Remembrance Sunday parade in Whitehall will be his first such attendance - I doubt you'd see him honouring the War Dead unless he was paid, no offence intended. And yes, I have marched past the Cenotaph, several times in fact.

His appointment has rightly led to outrage on the backbenches. Earl Howe was the obvious successor.

Incidentally Fallon's departure may be related to my case - he was the responsible minister when vital evidence was withheld from the Court of Appeal. Hammond may have to follow. The sexual misconduct alleged against him was not sufficiently serious to be a resigning matter and was probably par for the course for this Cabinet.

Spyhunter wrote:

Thank you 9MMPQ! I think!

Yes, it is a lot for the FAs to do but every extra pair of eyes would help. If the ACARS is being jammed then yes, you'll need cell-phones or satellite-phones anything that can communicate.

You have <20 seconds. ( if you see the plume off the launcher and the exhaust trail.
my guess would be that the flight crew of MH17 was dead without any pre-warning.)

Correct during the day-time, more visible at night, I would respectfully suggest. My analysis is that the Fakour-2 was fired to starboard of track and was first seen by the co-pilot. Radar tracking suggests that MH-17 tried evasive manoeuvres, but of course they would have assumed that the missile was not aimed at them.
I am NOT saying that missile evasion is easy, just that it should be tried.

All gone very quiet! Has everybody finally accepted that MH370 was shot down by the PLA Navy?

Well done to President Trump for recognising the reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It has been since 1948. Britain should follow, and move our Embassy to the capital.

Spyhunter wrote:

All gone very quiet! Has everybody finally accepted that MH370 was shot down by the PLA Navy?

No chance.

Spyhunter wrote:

All gone very quiet! Has everybody finally accepted that MH370 was shot down by the PLA Navy?

Well done to President Trump for recognising the reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It has been since 1948. Britain should follow, and move our Embassy to the capital.

Israel didn't control Jerusalem until after the 1967 war. It officially became the capital, I think, after 1980 legislation.

USA Congress authorized moving embassy to Jerusalem about 1998. All Presidents since then have studied the move and deferred action. My guess is that the same thing will happen this time, unless Congress authorizes spending about $2 billion.

Spyhunter wrote:

Well done to President Trump for recognising the reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It has been since 1948. Britain should follow, and move our Embassy to the capital.

No chance. UN doesn't recognize it.

Spyhunter wrote:

All gone very quiet! Has everybody finally accepted that MH370 was shot down by the PLA Navy?

This post is kind of like a child who has realised the grown ups have stopped paying attention.

I think we just all became collectively bored of humouring you.

Hmm, not sure your's wasn't the more puerile post BlueberryWheats, no offence intended!

UN not involved in embassy location Dutchy! Jerusalem has been Israel's capital since 1948. It is the seat of the Knesset, which I have visited and the is the seat of the Supreme Court and government. Tel Aviv is the commercial capital only, like New York is America's. Clearly the British Embassy should be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

There are no peace negotiations underway. Arafat rejected the two-state solution and it's effectively now off the table. Trump has cut the ground from under Kushner, who is too close to that nice man Henry Kissinger and is on his way out. The reality is that the Trump Administration has now abandoned two-state.

It was an unworkable idea anyway. You can see Israel's east and west borders from the same spot just north of Tel Aviv. The Palestinians would simply use a Palestinian state as a springboard for terrorist attacks on Israel.

The sensible thing now would be to abandon the Oslo accords and dismantle the Palestnian Authority, and boot the UN out of the Occupied Territories. Ideally Israel should leave the UN, as should the UK. It's been a disaster and has had its day.

Where was the UN condemnation when the Chinese shot down MH370? The Secretary-General is not as stupid as he looks, no offence intended. He knows perfectly well the Chinese shot down MH370 and the Chinese and Ukrainians shot down MH17.

Hopefully the new UK government will address both issues. May is finished after caving in to Brussels on regulatory alignment, i.e. single market membership. The draft agreement with the Commission is no more acceptable than the Munich Agreement.

Spyhunter, you disappoint me, we have created a tread especially for you and you want to talk politics? A walrus folding laundry is impressive, but not the thing I was coming to see

Spyhunter wrote:

Where was the UN condemnation when the Chinese shot down MH370?

Where is the proof the Chinese shot down MH370? You continuing to repeat it doesn't make it so.

Moose135 wrote:

Where is the proof the Chinese shot down MH370? You continuing to repeat it doesn't make it so.

Of course there's no proof. Just as there's an equally remarkable lack of proof for all the other crackpot fantasies.

Ah, I thought I had dealt with MH370! Just to recap - the plane did have enough fuel to reach the southernmost 'ping' point, no verified wreckage has been found in the Indian Ocean, just 777 bits which could have been planted, and some 747 bits early on, the proposed track would have had the 777 painted by Malaysian ATC, Indian military, Indonesian military and ATC and Aussie very-long-range radar and it wasn't,

The shoot-down however was caught by the USS Pinckney's radar and from memory we have diesel fuel on the surface of the South China Sea, plus a piece of wreckage ID'd as coming from a 777.

The media are now frightened of this story - you won't see much about as word spreads that it was the Chinese.

Spyhunter wrote:

Ah, I thought I had dealt with MH370!

All you had been doing is giving those who read this thread a good laugh!

Spyhunter wrote:

, no verified wreckage has been found in the Indian Ocean,

Here we go again...

Spyhunter wrote:

from memory we have diesel fuel on the surface of the South China Sea, plus a piece of wreckage ID'd as coming from a 777.

Again, there was not one piece of plane wreckage found on the SCS, let alone a verified piece of 777 wreckage. More than a dozen pieces, some being linked to 9M-MRO, have washed up in various locations on the Western side of the IO.

You have failed to address the lack of any 777 / plane debris around the much smaller & less remote (and thoroughly searched for 2 weeks from day 1) SCS every time when questioned.

We have told you this, time and time again, yet you continue to spew this nonsense.

Spyhunter wrote:

The media are now frightened of this story - you won't see much about as word spreads that it was the Chinese.

The media has not once even mentioned you story (excluding the websites affiliated with you).

Happy Holidays!

The media won't mention my analysis - it's too powerful! It has however been adopted in part by the Malaysian Opposition.

What is truly laughable with respect is the idea that a professional airline pilot would fly a laden wide-body airliner towards Antarctica, with no airfield able to handle her. No verified wreckage of MH370 has been found in the Indian Ocean, nor will it be.

Merry Christmas everyone!

BlueberryWheats wrote:

Spyhunter wrote:

All gone very quiet! Has everybody finally accepted that MH370 was shot down by the PLA Navy?

This post is kind of like a child who has realised the grown ups have stopped paying attention.

I think we just all became collectively bored of humouring you.

Let's be real, post 502 really killed it. Air combat tactics & manoeuvring in a B777

Lesson number 1, never underestimate your readers or take them for granted.

But if your 777 is under missile attack how do you evade it? You're in a combat situation whether you like it or not.

I do not underestimate my readers, but I am trying to get a difficult point across - that the Bad Guys do not respect civil aviation norms and are willing to attack airliners in international airspace. If they attack the plane you happen to be flying you need to know what to do.

The current strategy - of keeping pilots and passengers in the dark - isn't working; Too many planes are being shot down and too many people are dying.

Not enough use is made of FAs in my opinion. At least one FA appreciated which engine needed shutting down in the Kegworth Air Disaster, but did not press the issue, assuming the pilots knew what they were doing, which they didn't, as their instruments were badly-designed and their training on that sub-type inadequate.

The FAs' primary function is safety. Dispensing food and drink comes a bit further down the list.

Distressing seaplane ditching in NSW. Has anybody any thoughts? Pilot error and engine failure seem unlikely. Had it been engine failure the pilot could have made an emergency water landing. Sudden failure of the elevators is one thing running through my mind.

Sydney Seaplanes seem like a well-run outfit. I've been flown in a Beaver seaplane, in Canada (Baxter Seaplanes, out of Vancouver). They're lovely little kites and go on forever if well-maintained, and Sydney Seaplanes seem to maintain their kites according to the book, plus. I doubt that airframe age will be an issue.

Two potential targets on board - one of the dead passengers worked for Open Britain, a pro-EU organisation in Britain. German Intelligence (GO2) organised the murder of a pro-EU MP in Britain last year in the hope that Vote Leave would be blamed. Not impossible that they've repeated the tactic.

I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

Happy New Year everyone and lots of happy landings in 2018.

You are not going to evade it because you will never know it was launched in the first place. You cannot see down from the cockpit at cruise altitude.

Spyhunter wrote:

Happy New Year everyone and lots of happy landings in 2018.

Happy New Year, Spyhunter. And be sure to keep those landing equal to the number of take-offs.

We need another bet, I am afraid, your excellent whisky is gone but was much appreciated by me and my friends.

Spyhunter wrote:

Too many planes are being shot down and too many people are dying.

Not enough use is made of FAs in my opinion. At least one FA appreciated which engine needed shutting down in the Kegworth Air Disaster, but did not press the issue, assuming the pilots knew what they were doing, which they didn't, as their instruments were badly-designed and their training on that sub-type inadequate.

Are you now going to suggest that Kegworth was a shoot-down, or just pointing out how FAs can assist??? Nothing would surprise me...

Spyhunter wrote:

Distressing seaplane ditching in NSW. Has anybody any thoughts? Pilot error and engine failure seem unlikely. Had it been engine failure the pilot could have made an emergency water landing. Sudden failure of the elevators is one thing running through my mind.

Sydney Seaplanes seem like a well-run outfit. I've been flown in a Beaver seaplane, in Canada (Baxter Seaplanes, out of Vancouver). They're lovely little kites and go on forever if well-maintained, and Sydney Seaplanes seem to maintain their kites according to the book, plus. I doubt that airframe age will be an issue.

Two potential targets on board - one of the dead passengers worked for Open Britain, a pro-EU organisation in Britain. German Intelligence (GO2) organised the murder of a pro-EU MP in Britain last year in the hope that Vote Leave would be blamed. Not impossible that they've repeated the tactic.

I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

Happy New Year everyone and lots of happy landings in 2018.

Apparently the aircraft involved was destroyed in a fatal crash more than 20 years ago and the rebuilt. How long until you know if it was shot down???

Anyway, onto MH370... the search will resume shortly. It appears that the Malaysians have confirmed that the FO's cell phone did in fact try to re-connect with a cell phone tower near Penang which was reported very early on but nothing more came of it as this part of the story was somewhat covered-up. The links can be found in google

Well we can safely rule out a shoot-down of the Sydney Beaver! Sabotage, e.g. of the elevator cable, cannot be ruled out at this stage. Two of the dead passengers had political connections, and there is as yet no logical explanation of why the seaplane should suddenly have dived into the Hawkesbury River, which by the way is rather beautiful!

The plane was damaged, but appears to have been competently repaired. The pilot was satisfied she was in an airworthy condition before she took off.

As for cockpit vision downwards, I agree that in most cases it is difficult, not least at night, depending on the cockpit windows design. Some planes have better downward vision than others.

However a missile exhaust is VERY visible at night, and the ChiCom sub was off-track, so the missile was approaching from starboard. I think it would have been visible to the co-pilot, I think it was seen and I think MH370 did take evasive action.

I am not saying it would be easy, just that it should be tried, in circumstances where the alternative is to wait to be blown out of the sky.

Of course the Kegworth 73 wasn't shot down. My point is that the FAs weren't treated as part of a team. They had valuable information but weren't called upon and didn't feel able to offer it. Many FAs are aviation literate and love flying. Some will have limited pilot experience. They are part of the team and safety is their primary responsibility, not serving drinks.

Speaking of drinks, Duthcy, I'm glad you enjoyed the Chivas Regal!

Happy New Year everyone, let's hope all airliners taking off this year land safely!

They are searching for the MH370 again, in an area where Spyhunter is saying it isn't. The interesting part is that they are paying millions to do this search on a no cure no pay basis, so a private company is putting money where his mouth is. Didn't you contact this firm to say don't waste your money, Spyhunter?

No, but I'm going to! On my to-do list! They may of course be being paid around the back and know full well that the plane isn't there. I'll have a better idea after I've talked to them. My sense is that they're good people and are acting in good faith, they just haven't kept up with the literature.

Readers of Airliners.net are better informed of course!

Not happy about this helo crash near Raton, New Mexico. Timing looks suspicious given the change of regime in Zim. Could also linked to currency moves re the Zim dollar, which some people are trying to refloat.

As always, it will be interesting to read about your take on things.

Thank you Dutchy, Raton has a nasty smell about it.

Turning to another aviation mystery, Hess, which has resurfaced in recent days, thanks to the Daily Mail.

There is no doubt that the Deputy Fuhrer was NOT intending to land at the airstrip at the Duke of Hamilton's hunting lodge, as historians have assumed for over 70 years. Pioneering research by John Harris has shown that the airstrip at Dungavel House was far too short to have accommodated an Me 110, which needed about 600 yards to get down safely in still air conditions.

John Harris's research has also ruled out a non-stop flight from Augsburg to Eaglesham. The Messer would have had enough fuel, but not enough oil. No auxiliary oil tank was fitted, ruling out a non-stop flight.

Delighted to say that my fellow author John Harris and I are meeting up next week to discuss Hess.

Dodgy looking crash in Russia, I am discounting the rumour that President Putin was supposed to be on board, but watch out for a chap named Ivanov.

Tried to warn an associate of the company risking shareholder funds on the sully search for MH370 in the Indian Ocean, but got nowhere. He believed what's being said about me on Wikipedia, the fool! I'll extract an apology when the search fails, as I'm sure it will. Either they're well-informed and are being paid round the back or they're muppets, no offence intended.

Spyhunter wrote:

Dodgy looking crash in Russia, I am discounting the rumour that President Putin was supposed to be on board, but watch out for a chap named Ivanov.

I guess you are talking about this...
https://www.snopes.com/uranium-one-vyacheslav-ivanov/

Spyhunter wrote:

Dodgy looking crash in Russia, I am discounting the rumour that President Putin was supposed to be on board, but watch out for a chap named Ivanov.

Why would Putin be onboard a civil flight, he has a fleet of aircraft at his disposal.

scbriml wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Why would Putin be onboard a civil flight, he has a fleet of aircraft at his disposal.

Dutchy, you're making the schoolboy error of applying logic and reason to a conspiracy theory situation.

Did I fall for that one again? Damn.....

Dutchy wrote:

Why would Putin be onboard a civil flight, he has a fleet of aircraft at his disposal.

Dutchy, you're making the schoolboy error of applying logic and reason to a conspiracy theory situation.

Spyhunter wrote:

The Messer would have had enough fuel, but not enough oil.

Bad design. Sounds a bit "unGerman", doesn't it?

Good question re Putin - I didn't say I thought Putin was the target. The rumor is doing the rounds however. I agree - I can't see why he would need to go commercial, but then a late friend of mine once said hello to Clement Attlee on a Tube train, after he'd been chucked out as PM. Odd things sometimes happen.
Sometimes the best security is provided by doing the unexpected.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist BTW - I do intelligence analysis! Conspiracy theorists won;t let the facts stand in the way of their argument, 9/11 being a classic example. The steel didn't need to melt, just lose its strength as it heated up.

I'm pleased to report that John Harris and I had a good meeting. I agree that the need to fit an auxiliary oil tank was a design flaw, but then it wasn't really intended for long range work. The standard oil tanks would cover a flight of 2-3 hours duration, which I imagine most 110 combat flights were.

He and Richard Willbourn have done excellent work, disposing of the theory that Hess flew non-stop from Augsburg to Scotland.

I think they're right about RAF Dundonald being the destination. Looks like Lord Runciman's daughter's house, with an airstrip long enough to take an Anson, was the alternate - it was only a few miles from the crash site. He flew in over Runciman's house on the east coast, which cannot have been a coincidence. Runciman was a friend of Hess and a member of the pro-German element.

I think Hess just ran out of fuel. There was no fire and so far as anyone knows the plane crashed with empty tanks.

I absolutely agree with John Harris re the FuG 10 receiver and the maps - the triangle pre-select channel and the small triangles on Hess's map match up.

It was a very dangerous plan, involving coups in Britain and Germany. The Luftwaffe attack on the Palace of Westminster that night was clearly linked in.

A rerun of that splendid 007 movie You Only Live Twice in the UK this afternoon prompts me to revisit the Mount Fuji Air Disaster, the tragic loss of BOAC Boeing 707-436 G-APFE on 5th March 1966.

What's the connection with 007? Harry Saltzman and Cubby Broccoli, along with other members of the YOLT team were due to board that flight. They cancelled at short notice to see a ninja demo. I suspect it's more likely that Japanese Intelligence arranged the demo to pull them off the flight.

The loss of Flight 911 is anomalous. I have three concerns:

(1) If CAT were such a hazard near Mount Fuji why were civilian aircraft permitted to fly by the mountain and why have there not been more losses? To read the pro-German New York Times or Wikipedia you would think the sides of Mount Fuji were an aircraft graveyard.

(2) If there was a weakness with the vertical stabiliser bolts in the 707/720 series of aircraft why is Flight 911 the only 707 known to have failed in this way? and

(3) Why did Captain Dobson not broadcast a Mayday nor turn away from the CAT? On the Official Version of Events the break-up sequence would have permitted time for at least a brief Mayday call, indeed a Mayday call should have been broadcast once dangerous CAT had been encountered.

I suspect it's more likely that the DVD's Sabotage Section were targeting Brocolli and Saltzman and had replaced the bolts with weakened items. Remember they had Kurt Tank and other brilliant aircraft designers and no doubt metallurgists working for them. The bolts were cracked, but no one dated the cracks or asked why they had not been spotted earlier, nor, so far as I know, was metallurgical analysis on the bolts carried out. The 'accident' investigators assumed the cause of the crash - accident - and worked backwards, as usual.

Time for the British and Japanese governments to re-open the inquiry in the light of modern knowledge about the DVD and its sabotage methods.

Spyhunter wrote:

I suspect it's more likely that the DVD's Sabotage Section

Colour me surprised!!!

Spyhunter wrote:

I'm not a conspiracy theorist BTW

HAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAA


breath



hahahahhhahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahaha

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:

Spyhunter wrote:

I'm not a conspiracy theorist BTW

HAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAA


breath



hahahahhhahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahaha

In spyhunter’s defence: in science a theory is something that has had various peer reviews and thus been proven to be correct (for example theory of gravity, theory of energy conservation). Since Spyhunter keeps spouting BS, you should perhaps better call him a conspiracy hypothesist?

Spyhunter wrote:

I suspect it's more likely that the DVD's Sabotage Section were targeting Brocolli and Saltzman and had replaced the bolts with weakened items.

Why? Was James Bond getting close to uncover the DVD's existence?

Actually, Ian Fleming was aware of the DVD, which he renamed SPECTRE, so there! My book was peer-reviewed BTW, and I have published in peer-reviewed journals.

Spyhunter wrote:

Actually, Ian Fleming was aware of the DVD, which he renamed SPECTRE, so there! My book was peer-reviewed BTW, and I have published in peer-reviewed journals.

The DVD don’t even have a Facebook page or a Wikipedia entry so the chances of them existing are zippo!!

Holy crap. Looked past this thread for 2 years because I didn't want to read another theory. Little did I know this thread was full of so many humorous nuggets! Is this crap for real? Is this one of those complicated "Rick Rolls" and I don't get the joke?

dragon6172 wrote:

Holy crap. Looked past this thread for 2 years because I didn't want to read another theory. Little did I know this thread was full of so many humorous nuggets! Is this crap for real? Is this one of those complicated "Rick Rolls" and I don't get the joke?

Never gonna give you up, never gonna to let you down.

In Ukraine, the pilot died Vladislav Voloshin, who was suspected of involvement in the MH17 catastrophe. The official version is suicide. Accidentally shot from a gun with a filed off identification numbers.

As it happens I was discussing the Voloshin murder with a CIA contact earlier. Most assuredly not suicide!

The timing is interesting, as Russophobe MPs have resurrected the MH17 controversy in relation to GO2's false flag nerve agent attack in Salisbury. As it happens I'm going to the same hospital where the Skripals are being treated tomorrow for sinus surgery. I'll be keeping an eye out for dodgy German anaesthetists and chaps waving aerosol sprays about of course!

Welcome Dragon 6173 to the thread for serious discussion, where intellectual rigour is encouraged! I get rubbished of course, but so did my fellow genius Stephen Hawking, who sadly passed last week. (I hope I have put that with my typical modesty). I disagreed with Stephen over the Space/Time Continuum, a theory of the German spy Albert Einstein, but only courteously (we never met, sadly). I have huge admiration for Stephen's achievements.

Space and Time are two different concepts, as alike as a Nissan and a Cadillac. Time did not begin with Big Bang, as Stephen himself came to acknowledge. There was a time before Big Bang. Not much was happening, but that is true of a Saturday afternoon in Duluth. Time doesn't stop, even in Duluth.

I notice that nobody has grappled with my arguments re the Fuji Air Disaster. The CAT argument really does not up to critical scrutiny, does it? How many first airline owner 707s fell apart in mid-air due to turbulence? I know turbulence can be severe - you'll never see me in an airline seat without my seat belt loosely buckled - but it is usually survivable.

The 007 series has been marvellous for the image of British Intelligence. There has been all sorts of political interference over the years - the forcing out of Sean Connery, then poor old George Lazenby, who was ex Aussie SAS BTW, and so on. Cubby was definitely on the DVD's hitlist, as am I, as it happens! Since their first attempt on me, in 99, failed (by definition, since I am still alive) the have moved to a strategy of income and reputational damage, false criminal allegations and so on.