Posted on 03/14/2014 5:04:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
Logistically and strategically, it would have been simpler to obtain a surplus airliner, move it to a remote location near the target. Refurbish it, load it with explosives, then fly it at the target. They would have the advantage of time and would not have to penetrate airport and airline security. Such an operation would also show that airport security is immaterial to protecting the public.
But then what do I know.
I would expect GPS lat/lon and GMT to be included in the engine data for identification purposes. An aircraft has dozens of GPS’s, it is just a chip, and could use an internal antenna. The additional payload of lat/lon and GMT is 12 bytes of data. OTOH, I would expect the engine data to be routed elsewhere to an external antenna. (GPS is receiving, engine data means higher-power transmitting)
It probably did crash, but where? That is the question
Occam's Razor suggests you are correct. Hijacker takes control, turns off transponder, reduces altitude to avoid radar, deviates flight plan direction, fight to regain control ensues (however many minutes later) and plane is driven into land or water along the deviated course. Conjecture, yes, but the most likely explanation is a hijacking followed by a crash.
Incorrect. If you fly low enough you can avoid radar. Hence the term, flying under the radar.
true, but there would be the ‘descending below radar’ stage between that and normal cruising altitude
that would have appeared on radar as well... not just gone.
the early speculation of a missile was dismissed as falling debris would have been seen on radar as a descending cloud of reflective materials... and there was nothing descending
Assuming Iran is behind it, an indication that Iran wants plausible deniability. Wanting their cake and eat it too, they want to kill millions and spread radioactivity, while not getting hit back."-C210NAlso consider how weak this administration appears to Iran and much of the world. If ever there was a 'political-window-of-opportunity', the current occupant of the oval office has handed it to Iran on a silver platter.
It may be that it can't be turned off from within the cockpit. But, I'd bet that it can be turned off on the ground if someone knows what components to look for. For example, if it communicates to a satellite network, there's going to be an antenna whose feedlines can be cut.
Something not mentioned so far is that IF the airplane was flown at low altitude, the range would be decreased substantially. Jets are not very efficient at low altitude. That would change the search area quite a bit.
Taking it a step further...why even use a jetliner?
If somebody wanted to deliver a nuke or even a lot of explosives, wouldn’t an ordinary run of the mill private airplane do the trick? They could just steal one from the local air strip hangar and skip the whole hijacking a jetliner step.
Whatever the government knows it most likely wouldn’t be telling us. For many reasons, the government lies.
courtesy ping
Not according to a New Zealand guy working on an oil rig. He said he saw a burning plane, gave his exact coordinates, time of day, and gave the direction of the line-of-sight. I looked it up on google earth and it made sense that the plane was heading due west when it crashed and burned.
I agree that’s what happened. There is a witness on an oil rig. I am finding it harder and harder to believe that the Malaysians did not have contact with the hijackers.
Well, what if the passengers were kept safe so that they could be boarded again. At that point, let them make all the cell phone calls they want so they can let everybody know they are still alive and coming home. Load the 777 with a nuke and tell the world they will be freed when they land in Israel. The moral dilemma might buy enough time to get into Israeli air space and ..... welll... let’s hope I’m wrong.
Fear factor.
Everyone knows a terrorist attack is coming, they just don’t know when and where.
Maybe another video will upset the hijackers and they will once again “spontaneously” attack like in Benghazi.
Perhaps the terrorist attack will come like the attempted car bomb in NYC in 2010 where the terrorist were so in tune with the news they picked up on the dems talking points comparing the TEA Party to a bunch of Tim McVeigh wannabes and “spontaneously” planned a fertilizer car bomb like Tim McVeigh used.
Maybe it will be like the Kenya mall attack were the terrorist, again being so in tune with the news, picked up on Obama talking about the need for more gun control and “spontaneously” carried out the attack.
Perhaps it will be like the 2012 airline plot were the terrorist, once again being so in tune with the news, picked up on the protest in Florida over Trayvon getting popped and “spontaneously” decided to bomb an airliner.
Oh I’m sorry, my mistake.
It was Obama that sent people to Florida to orchestrate the protest over Trayvon getting popped and the terrorist gave a govt agent the bomb and told him it was up to him to decide on the TIMING of the attack on the plane.
Nothing “spontaneous” about it.
Obama controlled both ends, the protest and the timing of when to announce the airline plot.
Whenever and where the attack comes, I’m sure it will be “spontaneous”.
Or a cargo container--we don't search all of them, AFAIK. A nuke-carrying cargo container in a port with a major amount of LNG storage would create a spectacular disaster.
What if one wants to cut out the middle man?
So some key Malaysian officials kept searchers busy looking in the South China Sea for wreckage while the plane made its getaway toward the Andaman Islands.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.