Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 3

KaiGywer · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:51 am

As the prior thread has gotten long a new thread is being created to continue the conversation.

The previous thread can be found here Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2 (by jetblueguy22 Jul 29 2015 in Civil Aviation)

edmountain · Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:06 am

Quoting flyDTW1992:
Have we not had numerous posts within this thread and the previous one saying exactly the opposite? I've seen at least a few sources saying it is very possible the debris drifted that far in as much time.

The problem arises from the vague terminology of "search area". The wide search area is *huge* extending from 16S to 40S and over a broad range of latitude. The current active search area is "only" 120000km^2 in the southern portions of the larger area.

When people say it could or could not have drifted from the search area they don't specify whether they mean the current active search area or the entire wide search area.

flyingturtle · Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:54 am

Halophila, about the blistering barnacles collecting viruses and thus the route of the flaperon being traced more narrowly - the BEA can be reached at http://www.bea.aero/index.php - I'm sure they do not mind hints from the educated public as long as they don't have to waste time sorting out the conspiracy theories etc.

David

chuchoteur · Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:03 am

It will be interesting to see if additional parts may be found, even though some may not be as readily recognisable. for example seat parts or galley honeycomb structures tend to float well but don't necessarily look aeronautical...

pusserchef · Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:03 am

A few years ago, a couple were rescued from their weather torn (cyclonic weather if i'm correct) sailing boat off the coast of Western Australia, after many months, their insurance company wrote the vessel off and they were paid out. It was about the 15-18 months later it was found floating (albeit not very well, but nonetheless floating) off the coast of eastern Africa. With the description of floating, this doesn't mean actually floating on top of the surface of the water, it may have been buoyant under the surface, as this is the case for many shipping containers that are lost over the side of ships and are not seen buy surface ships/vessels until its too late to avoid, if seen at all. It is well documented that many ships during the wars were never found in the same spot they were initially sunk due to currents etc. It would be nice to see if this does lead to any further explanation of what happened, in the end its about closure for the families.

777Jet · Fri Jul 31, 2015 11:28 am

Quoting chuchoteur (Reply 3):
It will be interesting to see if additional parts may be found, even though some may not be as readily recognisable.

It will be interesting if the black boxes are ever found with recoverable data

enilria · Fri Jul 31, 2015 11:45 am

Don't know if this has been posted in prior threads. Agree or disagree?

The group, led by American Mobile Satellite Corp. co-founder Mike Exner, points to the small amount of damage to the front of the flaperon and the ragged horizontal tear across the back.

The rear damage could have been caused if the airliner had its flaperon down as it went into the ocean, some members of Exner's group wrote in a preliminary assessment after looking at photos and videos of the component.

But the lack of damage to the front makes it more likely the plane was in a high-speed, steep, spiral descent and the part fluttered until it broke off, the group said.

Exner's group -- an informal cadre of aviation experts -- said that if the flaperon were still on the wing when the plane hit water, the front would have been damaged by hitting the part of the wing to which it was attached. And the rear damage looks like it was caused by stress rather than being bent and broken off when the plane hit the water.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/30/world/mh370-debris-investigation/

777Jet · Fri Jul 31, 2015 11:55 am

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
Don't know if this has been posted in prior threads. Agree or disagree?

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
Exner's group -- an informal cadre of aviation experts -- said that if the flaperon were still on the wing when the plane hit water, the front would have been damaged by hitting the part of the wing to which it was attached. And the rear damage looks like it was caused by stress rather than being bent and broken off when the plane hit the water.

If the plane ditched and the flaperon was pulled backwards from the wing upon contact with the water then the front of it would not necessarily have hit "the part of the wing to which it was attached", no?

lancelot07 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:22 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7):
If the plane ditched and the flaperon was pulled backwards from the wing upon contact with the water then the front of it would not necessarily have hit "the part of the wing to which it was attached", no?

It depends.
If the flaperon touched the water later in the crash (highly likely), inertia would keep moving it forward - but this does not automatically mean it has to crash into the wing. Exner's conclusion is not implausible, though it may well be wrong.

skaggs · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:25 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5):
It will be interesting if the black boxes are ever found with recoverable data

If found, they will contain hours of silence and hours of cruise flight ending with fuel exhaustion and water impact. Neither will provide any answers. Everyone on board was dead for hours including the pilot that caused it.

pvjin · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:36 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 9):
If found, they will contain hours of silence and hours of cruise flight ending with fuel exhaustion and water impact. Neither will provide any answers. Everyone on board was dead for hours including the pilot that caused it.

We don't know that for sure. I do think the pilot could have very well re-pressurized the aircraft after everybody else was dead thanks to his longer lasting oxygen supply, then flown the aircraft until the end. I don't believe in a controlled ditching though. Assuming the pilot didn't have a cyanide pill or something similar it wouldn't have been very pleasant to drown to death or die from dehydration after a successful ditch.

flyDTW1992 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:39 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 9):
If found, they will contain hours of silence and hours of cruise flight ending with fuel exhaustion and water impact. Neither will provide any answers. Everyone on board was dead for hours including the pilot that caused it.

......Oh, so you know this for a fact? Please.

GRJGeorge · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:39 pm

CNN keeps talking about Reunion being so remote and wondering if more debris might wash out there and that authorities are now searching along the coast...but what about Mauritius and Madagascar (and going past the islands), won't it be the same currents going past them all? It was mentioned before that because of the currents etc that if debris was initially closer to eachother it could have by now dispersed into hundreds of miles apart.
Surely they can't just work on backtracking from Reunion backwards and focus on that...Mauritius is very close and bigger, and not once have I heard it being mentioned.

KarelXWB · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:41 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 9):
If found, they will contain hours of silence and hours of cruise flight

Quoting pvjin (Reply 10):
We don't know that for sure.

Quoting flyDTW1992 (Reply 11):
......Oh, so you know this for a fact? Please.

The CVR records only the last 60 minutes, hence we will never know what happened in the cockpit shortly after takeoff.

[Edited 2015-07-31 05:55:28]

WarrenPlatts · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:44 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7):
Exner's group -- an informal cadre of aviation experts -- said that if the flaperon were still on the wing when the plane hit water, the front would have been damaged by hitting the part of the wing to which it was attached. And the rear damage looks like it was caused by stress rather than being bent and broken off when the plane hit the water.

Disagree. Cf. Pihero's post above. In a ditching, overall velocity will be lower, engines will hit first, absorbing some more momentum, then the flaperon which will be down will hit the water before the wing, therefore, the shear force relative to the wing will be to the back, and will therefore get ripped off before the wing hits the water. Therefore, there will be no impact between the front of the flaperon and the wing. The rearmost, weakest part of the flaperon will hit first, explaining the damage to the rear portion of the flaperon.

If it were diving, the wing would hit first, and the flaperon would be propelled forward, impacting the wing, and thus damaging the front.

parapente · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:54 pm

Reply 7
If the plane ditched and the flaperon was pulled backwards from the wing upon contact with the water then the front of it would not necessarily have hit "the part of the wing to which it was attached", no?

I tend to agree.
The most plausible description of the whole affair was a documentary I saw.The aircraft's 'turns' over his home town suggested very strongly to the pilot commentator that this was a 'last look'.Everything about the final journey and the actions taken was about not being found - ever.

If (if) this is true the pilot would have thought long and hard how not to leave a debris field (bit of a giveaway!)If the answer to this question is for the plane to sink as one whole body then clearly a 'soft' landing would be the way -no?

If yes then this piece of trailing edge wing being torn off (and unluckily for the pilot) still floated then it would all make (a little) sense - if that is the right word in a senseless mass murder like this.

If true then there may not be much else washed up - and would answer why there was no debris field.

cougar15 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:57 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 10):
We don't know that for sure. I do think the pilot could have very well re-pressurized the aircraft after everybody else was dead thanks to his longer lasting oxygen supply, then flown the aircraft until the end. I don't believe in a controlled ditching though. Assuming the pilot didn't have a cyanide pill or something similar it wouldn't have been very pleasant to drown to death or die from dehydration after a successful ditch.

yes we do, the FDR will only cover the last 60 minutes. what will those 60 minutes offer us except lot´s of silence, no matter what happened! It will no longer cover/offer Explanation for whatever the ´Initial Event/Root cause ´ was.

[Edited 2015-07-31 06:00:58]

pvjin · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:07 pm

Quoting cougar15 (Reply 16):
yes we do, the FDR will only cover the last 60 minutes. what will those 60 minutes offer us except lot´s of silence, no matter what happened! It will no longer cover/offer Explanation for whatever the ´Initial Event/Root cause ´ was.

Those last 60 minutes could offer us data that shows somebody was still actively flying the aircraft either manually or by manipulating autopilot, perhaps even sending it into a last dive.

zeke · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:16 pm

Quoting cougar15 (Reply 16):

Modern CVRs still don't have a long memory, however he DFDR should have all the current flight plus some previous ones.

skaggs · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:17 pm

If the pilot was alive for any length of time after the final heading change, he would have dove the aircraft a la Egypt Air into the ocean not let it run out of gas and glide down. (the lack of catastrophic damage on the flaparon proves it wasn't a pile drive into the sea)

It's pointless spending all this time and $$$ looking for the black boxes. On the 15% chance that they find the wreckage....

It's also pointless arguing about it because we will never really know what happened even if they find it. We just have to go with the most likely scenario..

airbazar · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:25 pm

Quoting GRJGeorge (Reply 12):
Surely they can't just work on backtracking from Reunion backwards and focus on that...Mauritius is very close and bigger, and not once have I heard it being mentioned.

Either way both Reunion and Mauritius are mere dots in the vast ocean. I agree that it's likely that debris would be spread in a very large area encompassing these and other islands such as Madagascar, Seychelles, and the coast of Southeast Africa.

SEPilot · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:30 pm

I got tired of reading all of the conspiracy theories very soon, and have not followed much beyond the first couple of weeks, when it became evident that nobody knew much of anything (and I reject the theory that some of the governments involved know exactly what happened. I did believe that it most likely was deliberate pilot action, though, and then yesterday I encountered this article for the first time, and it makes more sense than anything else I have read. After all, if it was deliberate pilot action, what was his intent? If it was suicide/mass murder why divert and not just crash right there? What threw me off was the transponders being switched off, but this article (by an experienced international airline pilot) has a logical explanation. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/.../malaysia_370_tragic_accident.html

[Edited 2015-07-31 06:36:03]

1010101 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:36 pm

Ditching or diving aren't the only possibilities. I thought the most likely scenario was thought to be fuel starvation, autopilot disconnect. Then the aircraft would naturally pitch down to capture its trimmed speed. I don't remember if there was an authoritative opinion about the descent profile. I would expect the aircraft to porpoise in some fashion while it descends as the speed oscillates around the trimmed speed which would mean a range of possible attitudes at the point of impact.

kurtjeter · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:42 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):
this article (by an experienced international airline pilot) has a logical explanation. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/....html

Interested in reading this, but the link directs me to the headmast of THE THINKER with the notification "this page does no exist."

B777fan · Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:53 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 20):

I got tired of reading all of the conspiracy theories very soon... then yesterday I encountered this article for the first time, and it makes more sense than anything else I have read.

The link was bad so here is another link
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/.../malaysia_370_tragic_accident.html

I think you are better off still ignoring most of the speculation. The article you refer too came out before the immarasat data became available. Although this articles contention may be correct it becomes harder to explain the turn to the SIO and flying for another 7 hours.

[Edited 2015-07-31 06:55:00]

AVLnative · Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:00 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):
this article (by an experienced international airline pilot) has a logical explanation.

Excellent! Thanks for posting.

lancelot07 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:12 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 13):
The CVR records only the last 60 minutes, hence we will never know what happened in the cockpit shortly after takeoff.

When they find the boxes they will also find the fuselage. And that can be examined and will turn up what happened.

PieterBoth · Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:32 pm

Quoting GRJGeorge (Reply 12):
Mauritius is very close and bigger

...to be a bit pedantic, Mauritius is (slightly) smaller than Réunion. But I agree with you, if a piece of debris has reached Réunion, than it's surely possible that debris reaches the shores of the other Mascarene Islands - Mauritius, Rodrigues and Cargados Carajos. These are however in the grand scheme of things, dots on the map.

Also, I would think ships in the area are on the lookout for unusual objects at sea now? It is not that remote (well, for CNN it is; but that's another matter) - there is quite some shipping activity (Asia-Africa lines) - Port Louis is a busy port.

If it is a piece of debris I would think other pieces could have gone straight past the Mascarenes given their small size - whether in a current that sends it back south towards the Southern Ocean, or westwards towards the Malagasy coast.

TXspotter · Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:39 pm

FWIW most B777s have a 2 hour Solid State Flight Data Recorder. So 120 minutes would be more probable.

SEPilot · Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:59 pm

Quoting B777fan (Reply 24):
Although this articles contention may be correct it becomes harder to explain the turn to the SIO and flying for another 7 hours.

If the plane is flying with dead or unconscious pilots and the autopilot off it can do weird things. The turn could have been due to a wind gust; it is somewhat surprising that it would have flown another 6 hours without coming to grief, but civil aircraft are designed with inherent stability and will seek their trimmed speed and maintain it. However, flying for 6 hours would burn off a lot of fuel, making the plane climb as its weight is reduced without a power reduction. It is difficult to believe that it could continue for 6 hours without exceeding its maximum ceiling and stalling.

KarelXWB · Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:02 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):
What threw me off was the transponders being switched off, but this article (by an experienced international airline pilot) has a logical explanation. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/....html

Nice article and I do support a hypoxia theory. However, it does not explain why the transponder was switched off.

CALTECH · Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:19 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 7):
If the plane ditched and the flaperon was pulled backwards from the wing upon contact with the water then the front of it would not necessarily have hit "the part of the wing to which it was attached", no?

Yes. Recently, saw a 737NG with both INBD aft flaps deployed with flaps retracted. Must have been deployed above flap limit speed. Both brackets broken which attached to the flap track for deployment.

Quoting skaggs (Reply 9):
If found, they will contain hours of silence and hours of cruise flight ending with fuel exhaustion and water impact. Neither will provide any answers. Everyone on board was dead for hours including the pilot that caused it.

Why would and where does it say the pilot who caused it was dead for hours ?

Retrieval of the CVR and FDR could show if the perpetrator was alive throughout the deviating flight, or if there was silence on the flightdeck.

lancelot07 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:32 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 30):
Nice article and I do support a hypoxia theory. However, it does not explain why the transponder was switched off.

Actually, it does. From the article:

Quote:
The emergency checklist for smoke requires donning masks and removing electrical power to isolate the problem. That de-powering procedure or whatever was smoldering in the cockpit could account for losing the communications equipment, and probably the autopilot as well.

cat3appr50 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:34 pm

Not that knowledgeable about satellite imagery and associated technical capabilities for specific object location and tracking, so just asking….can an algorithm relative to known physical size, surface reflectivity, etc. of the flaperon found at Reunion Island be placed into a program for the historical satellite records/imagery of the Indian Ocean taken over the past 18 or so months and be able to pick up and track this object across the SIO (assuming it did come from MH370 and was floating at or just below the ocean surface)?

b747400erf · Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:55 pm

I've always thought that there could have been a small cargo fire or decompression type event that caused disorientation, that could have explained the lack of contact, the change of the transponder and course, and then the drifting out to the middle of the ocean. It's too bad the media and experts already so confident of one pilot doing this on purpose. Guilty before any real facts can come out.

gzm · Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:36 pm

In the Swissair accident in 1998 the pilots were in a position to send a mayday call.They were capable of doing so despite the unexpected difficulties they were facing.So why not the pilots of MH 370? Even in the Valujet crash in 1996 where the cargo was loaded in bulk, the pilots were able to contact Miami. Whoever did that was cleverer than we think....If I remember correctly,immediately after last contact MH 370 turned back.

[Edited 2015-07-31 10:08:11]

David L · Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:41 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):

Attempts were made quite early on to pursue that line of thought here. It was apparently decided by a vocal minority that it should not even be considered so that discussion moved elsewhere. Kind of ironic, given some of the lines of argument that have endured throughout the series of threads.

skaggs · Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:43 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 31):
Why would and where does it say the pilot who caused it was dead for hours ?

Retrieval of the CVR and FDR could show if the perpetrator was alive throughout the deviating flight, or if there was silence on the flightdeck.

We already know someone was alive as the aircraft reverse course and flew around the peninsula. The captain spoke to ATC after the plan was initiated. And, the A/C would'nt do that without human intervention. We dont need the FDR to tell us anything. We already know generally where the plane flew. What we need is the CVR recordings from around the time of the deviation. But they don't exist. But then I think he took his mask off and passed out. It is clear he never wanted to be found. He had no idea about the Inmersat data. Im certain that he didn't read his last will and testament and explain why he did this in the last 2 hours of the flight. If he was alive, Im sure he sat there silently.

JetBuddy · Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:52 pm

Quoting gzm (Reply 35):
In the Swissair accident in 1998 the pilots were in a position to send a mayday call.They were capable of doing so despite the unexpected difficulties they were facing.So why not the pilots of MH 370?

They might not have known how serious the situation was until they were incapacitated.

lancelot07 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:53 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 37):
We already know someone was alive as the aircraft reverse course and flew around the peninsula.

Sure. That tells us that something was wrong with the plane. They tried to divert to an airport they knew well.
Nothing sinister or malicous there.

Quote:
The captain spoke to ATC after the plan was initiated.

We don't have any hint about any plan - this is pure conjecture out of thin air of some people with evil imagination or some interesting drugs.

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 38):
They might not have known how serious the situation was until they were incapacitated.

In the Swissair case, smoke and fire started in the wiring of he IFE. If in case of MH370 a short might have taken out the communications, and the transponder - they are located near to each other in the cockpit. But all this has been discussed before in 80 threads.

We are going way off topic here.

[Edited 2015-07-31 09:59:27]

ThirtyEcho · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:06 pm

Complicating this issue is the fact that the MSM has a widespread and serious misunderstanding of what a flaperon is and how it functions. Despite the fact that there have been flaperons in use on every Boeing jetliner since 1958, the press is acting like they just discovered something brand new and totally mysterious, function unknown.

Perhaps the worst misunderstanding was made by "aviation expert" Miles O'Brien, who will telly you with every other word that he is a "pilot" of some kind, with his assertion that the flaperon is conclusive proof that the aircraft struck the water under control, level and at low airspeed.

skaggs · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:06 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 39):
We don't have any hint about any plan - this is pure conjecture out of thin air of some people with evil imagination or some interesting drugs.

US Intelligence Report

AirGAbon · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:08 pm

The part debris is loaded this evening on a Air France B77W RUN to ORY, leaving Reunion at 21:45pm local time and landing at ORY at 06:20am. Then transiting to TLS.

747megatop · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:10 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 39):
Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 38):
They might not have known how serious the situation was until they were incapacitated.

In the Swissair case, smoke and fire started in the wiring of he IFE. If in case of MH370 a short might have taken out the communications, and the transponder - they are located near to each other in the cockpit.

It is hard to imagine that a fire was serious enough to take out communication, the transponder & incapacitate the pilots but left the airplane in perfect shape to fly a controlled flight for 6 to 7 hours. Highly unlikely in my opinion. Loss of cabin pressure leading to a Helios flight 522 kind of situation is more plausible.

CALTECH · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:22 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 37):
But then I think he took his mask off and passed out. It is clear he never wanted to be found. He had no idea about the Inmersat data. Im certain that he didn't read his last will and testament and explain why he did this in the last 2 hours of the flight. If he was alive, Im sure he sat there silently.

It will not be known until the Recorders are recovered, and some questions might be answered and some probably will still remain, some assumptions will be proven and others disproven.

At some point, the aircraft flew at 5,000 feet after the incident, a pilot would not have passed out then. And if the aircraqft continued at a altitude that the perpetrator remianed conscious, they could have been alive all the way till contact with the sea, and then some if a good ditching was performed.

Would like to plot how far that 777 could fly at a altitude (5,000 - 14,000ft )where the perpetrator remianed conscious, and see if the 777 could reach the 'arc.'

Why would you be sure he sat there silently ? For all we know, whoever was responsible for this might have talked about why this event was taking place, and then maybe not. And it could have been complete silence. Might have that answered, and maybe not.

WingedMigrator · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:26 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 33):
historical satellite records/imagery of the Indian Ocean taken over the past 18 or so months

Your question presupposes such records exist. They most probably don't. Satellite imagery, especially of the resolution required to pick out an object as small as a flaperon, is a highly targeted activity that uses scarce and valuable resources (to cite just one, downlink bandwidth). These resources are not typically deployed to monitor vast areas of nothingness such as the Southern Indian Ocean.

Quoting skaggs (Reply 41):
US Intelligence Report

This report supposedly states that the airplane was deliberately flown off-course by someone in the cockpit. People are reading way too much into those words. The wording encompasses all scenarios including technical malfunctions (fire, oxygen bottle explosion, etc.) as a result of which someone in the cockpit would deliberately fly the airplane off-course. And not necessarily with nefarious intent.

lancelot07 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:52 pm

Quoting skaggs (Reply 41):
US Intelligence Report

Nothing in there, "deliberate" does not mean "malicous" in any way.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 43):
It is hard to imagine that a fire was serious enough to take out communication, the transponder & incapacitate the pilots but left the airplane in perfect shape to fly a controlled flight for 6 to 7 hours.

Not so hard to imagine when the controls for these systems are side by side in the cockpit as was shown to us by some who know the cockpit of a 777. And there have been incidents with smoke and fire on 777s before.

SuseJ772 · Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:17 pm

Quoting B777fan (Reply 24):
The link was bad so here is another link
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/....html

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 29):
If the plane is flying with dead or unconscious pilots and the autopilot off it can do weird things.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 29):
It is difficult to believe that it could continue for 6 hours without exceeding its maximum ceiling and stalling.

I think this article is the best thing I have read so far as to what probably happened.

I get VAMPI.

I get the incapacitation of the pilots.

I get the eradicate flying behavior.

What I don't get is how it flew on for 6 hours after AP was disabled. No matter how stable of flight conditions, a plane will not fly for 6+ hours with out any input from a pilot or auto-pilot.

The only thing I can think of is that after donning the masks, but before passing out, the smoke was so bad they couldn't see, but they were able to turn on auto-pilot back on by "feeling it out" hoping the smoke would eventually dissipate before their oxygen ran out, but alas it did not, so it just kept flying. Maybe the smoke wasn't from an "inferno fire" but something less structurally significant and eventually put itself out, but by that time the pilots were incapacitated.

Thanks for posting that write-up. It was helpful with local knowledge angle. Wish I would have read that earlier on.

spyglass · Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:36 pm

Well, as I posted over a yr ago, that airplane was taken.....it didn't ditch or crash. I firmly believe this so-called debris is either a plant or is from something else.
I think the wheelhouse crew was taken out early and one or two knowledgeable individuals were let in by the front cabin crew. Motive is the entire story.....no one or group pulls off something like this unless they ,1) gain something by it or 2) prevent losing something. Looking at pilots, they'd have absolutely nothing to gain by crashing or ditching, n-c'est pas? Now, of course, there will be those who will immediately start with "conspiracy theory"......but anyone who thinks they don't exist is living in a vacuum.

747megatop · Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:43 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 46):
Not so hard to imagine

The hard to imagine part is that the plane flew for 6/7 hours after the so called catastrophic fire.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net