Plus the transponders were manually turned off - there's no way anyone would have done that in the event of a fire. I think your explanation isn't right, Flyer - there are too many mysteries that the scenario doesn't answer. I'm also betting that the debris being looked at off the Australian coast is something else as well - there's no logical reason for the plane still flying, in that direction, for so long.
Its standard procedure to turn off electrical in the event of a fire so that doesn't worry me. Its that last message that makes no sense. The only explanation I can think of why the plane would turn and then sign off as if everything was normal is if they were hijacked or the pilot or co pilot commandeered the plane. Then we get into where the plane is, what its going to be used for or was is shot down? Also, doesn't the us have a base on the west coast? Military radar would have known the exact metre it came down, with or without a transponder.
I would very surprised if no one knew where this plane was ... like flyer says there are other powers that could track it ... better still they could probably see it and read every email on any of the devices onboard
No - you can shut down electrical systems, but for safety and navigation purposes, the transponder stays on, even if the rest of the plane is effectively switched off. Shutting down the transponder manually has only one purpose - to make it very difficult to locate the aircraft. In the event of a fire or other event that threatens the safety of the aircraft, it's the one system that would definately be left on.
What if it was the transponder system causing the fire? The transponder was shut down 14 mins after the data logging. Surely they'd be shut down right after each other if they wanted to be invisible? Theres only one reason for it to be switch off and that's a fire. If they wouldn't switch it off in a fire then they would make it impossible to switch off especially after September 11th. Anyway, I still think I'm leaning towards a hijacking even though I could argue against myself both ways as nothing makes total sense either way!
Everything has been rubbished though. Hijacking now makes the most sense to me after the last sign off was 14 mins after they turned away.
Betty, I think your relationship with Flyer away from this Board is influencing the direction discussions go on here. Look, its none of my business what the nature of your relationship is and I wish you both all the best but there's definitely a conflict of interests here. Am I the only one who has these concerns?
considering satellites are sposed to be able to see the date on a newspaper from squillions of miles away why cant the Chinese and Australian sattelites work out what what is floating in the sea and that's 24m long
Also do not understand....why when the US (and of course other governments) can track planes (fighters/bombers) without transponders to the inch......especially in an area that includes Vietnam/china etc...they cannot spot a plane that "allegedly" flew for 6 hours... And also someone mentioned a major radar tracking center on the NW coast of Australia....Still do not get it. I have read the reports rubbishing the article I put up.... half the rubbish...is rubbish too Truth is till we find the plane...it will be a complete mystery Who was the famous person (Steve Fossett????) was he suppose to have died at the helm of a plane that flew on for hours before crashing...or was that someone else
I have met both Beth and Flyer and the bond between them is beautiful So what they are young and in love More could be said about Roller and 9s they have been married for 23 years If Swords was to show up one day certain someone would shag him
The Americans know exactly where it is but wont say because it will reveal the extent of their radar coverage in Oz. In fact, I saw one report from an intelligence bloke that said they think it landed in pakistan and will be used for a terror attack. No doubt they will link it with a country they want to invade if thats true.