Missing MH370 plane 'was thrown around like a fighter jet and flown under the radar to avoid detecti - Polidicks

[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2603557/Missing-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-thrown-like-fighter-jet-flown-radar-avoid-detection.html[/url] [QUOTE]The missing Malaysia Airlines plane was 'thrown around like a fighter jet' just after it lost contact with the authorities in a bid to dodge radar, Malaysian military investigators believe. Flight MH370, which disappeared more than a month ago en route to Beijing, is thought to have climbed to heights of 45,000ft - 10,000ft above its normal altitude - before plummeting to just below 5,000ft. The new lead in the investigation comes as the methodical search being carried out in the Indian Ocean continues amid fears that the jet's black box may have run out of battery.[/QUOTE]

[quote]thrown around like a fighter jet[/quote] Fuck does that even mean?

[QUOTE=itisjuly;44536336][quote]thrown around like a fighter jet[/quote] Fuck does that even mean?[/QUOTE] Whoever flew that plane was very bad at Flight Simulator. :v:

What are they even talking about? Are they trying to justify telling us that they missiled that thing or what is this even leading to?

[QUOTE=itisjuly;44536336]Fuck does that even mean?[/QUOTE]trying to fly like Han Solo in an asteroid field

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;44536402]What are they even talking about? Are they trying to justify telling us that they missiled that thing or what is this even leading to?[/QUOTE] In a nutshell: Whoever had control over the plane was trying to fly it in such a way that it would be hard for radar to detect. However, time on the black box's batteries is running out, and they'll soon lose their signal for good, making it that much harder to find them.

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;44536402]What are they even talking about? Are they trying to justify telling us that they missiled that thing or what is this even leading to?[/QUOTE] I'm no expert, but I don't think passenger jets come equipped with missile warning systems. :v: Even if they knew a missile was approaching it would be far too fast for them to evade.

[QUOTE=anis;44536448]I'm no expert, but I don't think passenger jets come equipped with missile warning systems. :v: Even if they knew a missile was approaching it would be far too fast for them to evade.[/QUOTE] I think the implication was that they thought it was a fighter jet so they shot it down

What the mean is that the plane banked really hard after contact was lost, as if somebody flew it like a jet fighter. They did this in order to quickly loose altitude, so the radar won't be able to pick them up.

This screams attempted high-jacking.

Ofcourse the Malaysians are coming up with as many excuses as they can to divert attention away from their horribly managed investigation and fucked up effort at trying to recover the plane. I kind of lost faith in them after they started changing their story every news report. "Its near china in the water!" "terrorists took it to afghanistan" "nvm its under australia"

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;44536432]In a nutshell: Whoever had control over the plane was trying to fly it in such a way that it would be hard for radar to detect. However, time on the black box's batteries is running out, and they'll soon lose their signal for good, making it that much harder to find them.[/QUOTE] If a commercial plane can fly in such a way that it makes it hard for a radar to detect it, you have some really shitty radars.

" is thought to have climbed to heights of 45,000ft - 10,000ft above its normal altitude - before plummeting to just below 5,000ft." If it dived fast enough to drop off primary radar, it probably shredded due to overspeed.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;44536526]I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of hearing about this plane all over the news.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry. That nobody cares.

how the hell can you fly a 777 like a fighter jet and somehow reach the maximum range of the plane? manuvers like that would tear the plane appart, the closest anyone's flown that type of plane to a fighter jet was when they did a barrel roll on the original 707 prototype, and at that if he rolled too fast he would have snapped both wings off

[QUOTE=itisjuly;44536551]If a commercial plane can fly in such a way that it makes it hard for a radar to detect it, you have some really shitty radars.[/QUOTE] If a fucking huge commercial plane can be thrown around like a fighter, then thats one fucking well built commercial plane. [quote]" is thought to have climbed to heights of 45,000ft - 10,000ft above its normal altitude - before plummeting to just below 5,000ft."[/quote] Could have been engine trouble so they raised it to buy themselves more time to try and sort them out before they finally failed.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;44536568]I'm sorry. That nobody cares.[/QUOTE] BOOM ROASTED LOL

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;44536526]I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of hearing about this plane all over the news.[/QUOTE] Oh shit, stop the presses! RenegadeCop is bored of this story

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;44536432]In a nutshell: Whoever had control over the plane was trying to fly it in such a way that it would be hard for radar to detect. However, time on the black box's batteries is running out, and they'll soon lose their signal for good, making it that much harder to find them.[/QUOTE] eh we kinda know where the black boxes are now, to a smallish square, ya itd be better if we could peg it down to a square mile, but at least we know where they are generally, which means we can find them now

[QUOTE=RayvenQ;44536593]If a fucking huge commercial plane can be thrown around like a fighter, then thats one fucking well built commercial plane. Could have been engine trouble so they raised it to buy themselves more time to try and sort them out before they finally failed.[/QUOTE] Doesn't explain the transponder either, and with the amount of glide time you get with a Boeing 777 at 35K Feet. The F/O would start a restart checklist if there was a double engine failure and attempt to raise ATC immediately. IF electronics failed due to power loss, they would have enough time to start the APU and call ATC.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;44536526]I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of hearing about this plane all over the news.[/QUOTE] we should rename the US education system 'flight 370' so CNN might actually pay attention to it

I really wouldn't be surprised if this thing landed somewhere covertly on some abandonned airbase in Australia or Malaysia or elsewhere and by now got dug up or got taken apart or god knows what, god knows by who, god knows why. I just find it hard to believe it avoided all detection apparently on purpose, flew for several hours after losing contact, and then crashed into ocean without a single distinguishable trace.

I can't imagine how terrifying it must be to be in a plane doing that.

[QUOTE=- Livewire -;44536994]I can't imagine how terrifying it must be to be in a plane doing that.[/QUOTE] If the passengers weren't dead by then.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;44536551]If a commercial plane can fly in such a way that it makes it hard for a radar to detect it, you have some really shitty radars.[/QUOTE] hello, person who doesn't have understanding of how radar works they didn't just "fly the plane in such a way that radar magically couldn't detect it", they flew it under 5,000 feet, which is [I]below[/I] radar's range. radars are pointed up - they're meant to be looking for fucking planes, after all. if you fly your plane low, radar won't see it.

Most commercial airliners are extremely maneuverable. You just have to do a YouTube search for an A380 pulling aerobatic maneuvers to see just how agile these machines are. The A380 is a feat of modern engineering sure and the 777 series are a few decades behind the times now but in adverse conditions requiring direct and firm input to the controls, airliners can do some amazing bits of flying. It doesn't surprise me at all that a 777 can be "thrown around". It's an incredibly solid airframe and in the hands of somebody who knew the airplane like the back of their hand, it could become quite the joyride.. Flying an airplane at just below VNE all the way to below 5,000ft is well within the flight envelope of an airliner.

[QUOTE=Erector Beast;44537032]hello, person who doesn't have understanding of how radar works they didn't just "fly the plane in such a way that radar magically couldn't detect it", they flew it under 5,000 feet, which is [I]below[/I] radar's range. radars are pointed up - they're meant to be looking for fucking planes, after all. if you fly your plane low, radar won't see it.[/QUOTE] The military should have radar pointed below this altitude. That's sort of a gapingly idiotic security hole to leave wide open.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;44536525]This screams attempted high-jacking.[/QUOTE] there were a few crashed flights that had damaged control surfaces and ended up doing pretty insane manoeuvres before finally crashing, for example [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_123"]Japan Airlines flight 123[/url] lost its vertical stabiliser, and this is what its flight looked like (in red): [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Japan_Airlines_123_route_English.png/800px-Japan_Airlines_123_route_English.png[/img] it also ended up flying for [I]half an hour[/I] between the loss of the stabiliser and the crash

[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;44537071]there were a few crashed flights that had damaged control surfaces and ended up doing pretty insane manoeuvres before finally crashing, for example [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_123"]Japan Airlines flight 123[/url] lost its vertical stabiliser, and this is what its flight looked like (in red): [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Japan_Airlines_123_route_English.png/800px-Japan_Airlines_123_route_English.png[/img] it also ended up flying for [I]half an hour[/I] between the loss of the stabiliser and the crash[/QUOTE] MH370 flew for what, 5 hours, after loss of contact? Plus it would be a weird damage if they could keep it in the air for 5 hours but at the same time only very low.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;44537069]The military should have radar pointed below this altitude. That's sort of a gapingly idiotic security hole to leave wide open.[/QUOTE] [B]no[/B] radars are pointed below that range. this is standard practice. air traffic controllers need to be able to see flying objects, and flying objects big enough to be detectable by radar are usually above 5,000 feet. commercial airliners fly at 35,000 feet. this isn't a "gaping security hole". it's a huge waste to point radar horizontally - it'll start detecting buildings and mountains. yes, radar isn't magic and it can't detect something on the other side of a huge solid object. radar are always active and they are always pointed toward the sky because that's the whole goddamn point of radar. it's not like somebody saw MH370 drop below 5,000 feet and could have yelled "OH MY GOD SOMEBODY GO OUTSIDE AND TILT THE RADAR DOWNWARD, I THINK THAT PLANE JUST CRASHED." that isn't how radar works. I know Facepunchers like to just assume there's some easy fix to shit, but seriously, learn about something before you comment about it.