Boeing 777 Disappears Near Vietnam

[eyeball]

What do you suggest should change or be done so that this kind of event would never happen again?

I suggest a flight record that's streamed live and starts the moment a plane leaves the gate....to try and account for times when a plane's disappearance is a complete mystery.

Edited April 7, 2014 by eyeball

[On Guard for Thee]

Interesting. What do you suggest should change or be done so that this kind of event would never happen again?

I see Wilber is not online but I can throw my 2 cents worth in on it. Of course we don't yet actually know what happenned so hard to say what's needed to prevent it. However, with regard to tracking the plane, there is one system I am quite familiar with called Skytrack (that's just a brand name) which transmits real time full time position via satellite to a ground based computer. I've used it in war zones where if you spent time out of any type of radio contact and were if you got forced down for any reason you wanted help asap. One simple extra radio and you don't turn it on or off, it comes on as soon as you put power to the main busses. It has a keypad you can makeor receive a phone call on, and more importantly it has alittle red button you press in an emergency and alarms go off, phone calls get maed etc. But if you had a collision with a 747 goign the other way, your position one second before impact would be on that ground based computer. I expect you will see more of this system in the aftermath of MH370.

[WWWTT]

What I see in your posts and a lot of the links are assumptions. Xponder issue for one. Would you agree there are basically 2 reasons why a light goes off in your house: 1 you turn it off, 2 the bulb burns out. Now if I lived a cross the road from you and saw your light go out, I would likely assume you turned it off. But if I'm not IN your house, I,m making an assumption. All these people who claim the xponder was shut off, weren't in that cockpit. Turning off a xponder is as easy as turning off a light. But if it burned out like your light bulb, the effect to the ATC radar would be like me seeing your light go out across the road. The observer would have no idea why it went out. And nor would any CNN reporter.

No I don't agree that there can be only 2 reasons for a light not being on. (power failure, wiring failure, breaker overload not to mention that the bulb itself could have been removed from the fixture).

I will have to agree that turning off the transponder may be as easy as turning a knob or flipping a switch. As well there are not just one, but two transponders that the pilots can use in case the first fails. However the second must be manually switched on.

Keep in mind that this was an international flight travelling through the airspace of at least 3 different sovereign nations, Identification is mandatory or this flight could be refused permission to enter into another countries air space! That is why there is a back up and then there are the other communications system the plane have.

I have provided links for all of this. But it sounds like you are starting to realize that your argument about these facts is not with me.

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

No I don't agree that there can be only 2 reasons for a light not being on. (power failure, wiring failure, breaker overload not to mention that the bulb itself could have been removed from the fixture).

I will have to agree that turning off the transponder may be as easy as turning a knob or flipping a switch. As well there are not just one, but two transponders that the pilots can use in case the first fails. However the second must be manually switched on.

Keep in mind that this was an international flight travelling through the airspace of at least 3 different sovereign nations, Identification is mandatory or this flight could be refused permission to enter into another countries air space! That is why there is a back up and then there are the other communications system the plane have.

I have provided links for all of this. But it sounds like you are starting to realize that your argument about these facts is not with me.

WWWTT

You have your apples and oranges thoroughly mixed up here. First, xponders all have to be switched on or off. They are left off until takeoff so as not to clutter radar unnecesarily. International flights are granted permission to cross borders when their flight plan is approved (that happens before takeoff) Identificaton enroute from the xponder is only for air traffic control, nothing to do with borders. It's what keeps planes from running into each other primarily. Yes and you are absolutely right, wiring failure, power failure, breaker overload would shut off the xponders as well. But again. unles you are in that cockpit, it's nothing more than assumption to say you know which one of those is to blame.

[WWWTT]

You have your apples and oranges thoroughly mixed up here. First, xponders all have to be switched on or off. They are left off until takeoff so as not to clutter radar unnecesarily. International flights are granted permission to cross borders when their flight plan is approved (that happens before takeoff) Identificaton enroute from the xponder is only for air traffic control, nothing to do with borders. It's what keeps planes from running into each other primarily. Yes and you are absolutely right, wiring failure, power failure, breaker overload would shut off the xponders as well. But again. unles you are in that cockpit, it's nothing more than assumption to say you know which one of those is to blame.

Ya you see, this is why I ask for links.

First I provided the link that mentions the transponder having to be shut off to avoid air traffic noise.

And then you try to give us the wiki text book definition for the transponder.

http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVvB1BkJTbGwArkMXFwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByMG04Z2o2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1396864758/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fTransponder_%28aviation%29/RK=0/RS=2vJPvbyjEcfX.IUI42RndX4lJYs-

But the wiki definition isn't really a "one size fits all" one is it?

As we can see from this flight departing YYZ to Warsaw that had to land on Iceland because Norway wouldn't give permission for it to fly through its airspace.

http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjkvBUJTrjUAyMoXFwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByMG04Z2o2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1396864432/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.torontosun.com%2f2013%2f09%2f29%2ftoronto-flight-to-warsaw-forced-to-land-in-iceland/RK=0/RS=Fio42fJQqLP2RrfVJd20UOcuxx0-

My suggestion is that you do more research about commercial flights.

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

You just don't get it do ya? Why didn't Iceland order MH370 to land.

[Wilber]

Interesting. What do you suggest should change or be done so that this kind of event would never happen again?

I would imagine the issue of cockpit security will come to the fore again but other than that, it is hard to come up for a solution to what is still an unknown problem.

[Wilber]

You just don't get it do ya? Why didn't Iceland order MH370 to land.

I guess we could educate him on lost com procedures but if you don't give him a link he will claim they don't exist. Na, can't be bothered.

[On Guard for Thee]

I hear ya. I guess it would take a while to get past 7600 not working in this instance.

[Wilber]

Ya think?

[On Guard for Thee]

Looking like they may have some solid pinger (two) hits now.

[WWWTT]

You just don't get it do ya? Why didn't Iceland order MH370 to land.

I guess we could educate him on lost com procedures but if you don't give him a link he will claim they don't exist. Na, can't be bothered.

So that's your answer as to why Norway did not allow that flight bound for Warsaw permission to use their airspace? Because Iceland didn't order Air Malaysia flight MH370 to land? (I could also add that you didn't add the ? at the end of your question, but MH is the self proclaimed "grammar Nazi here so I'll leave those matters for him to meticulously resolve!)

Man that's something a freekin spun mistake or something I don't know what?

And Wilber, for some reason is completely ignorant of the obvious mistake you made, and uses your sorry riddled comment to somehow school me????

Man you guys are going from bad to worse with your lines of debate here.

Good luck on improving!

WWWTT

[WestCoastRunner]

Let's hope these pings are the real deal.

As to the debate between Wilbur and Guard for thee, it sounded more like a conversation to me. Does every post in this forum need to take on a debating style? Just wondering. I see lots of threads with experience, personal opinions, bias etc thrown in.

[WWWTT]

Let's hope these pings are the real deal.

Why would you hope that the pings are real????

That would mean that everyone on board is dead!

If the plane landed, then there's an opportunity that everyone is safe.

I guess you're rootin for everyone on the flight to be dead.

WWWTT

[guyser]

Let me remind everyone that there is absolutely no evidence that the plane crashed! The relatives/family/friends of those on board, from my understanding, believe that this plane safely landed as it was designed, built and vigorously tested to do just that!

Ok, lets play by the rules here.

Please provide 239 links , one for each passenger, thats clearly shows that all "relatives/family/friends of those on board' beleive the plane landed safely.

If not then this would indicate clearly that you are a conspiracy advocate. (ya know, apart from the laughable idea itsin Diego Garcia)

If they believe that this plane likely safely landed, I am confident that this belief is sound!

WWWTT

Yea....you go on that ridiculous assumption. It looks good.

[WestCoastRunner]

Why would you hope that the pings are real????

That would mean that everyone on board is dead!

If the plane landed, then there's an opportunity that everyone is safe.

I guess you're rootin for everyone on the flight to be dead.

WWWTT

You seriously believe I want those people dead? What an immature response.

[bleeding heart]

No, he doesn't believe it. Because that's silly.

[On Guard for Thee]

So that's your answer as to why Norway did not allow that flight bound for Warsaw permission to use their airspace? Because Iceland didn't order Air Malaysia flight MH370 to land? (I could also add that you didn't add the ? at the end of your question, but MH is the self proclaimed "grammar Nazi here so I'll leave those matters for him to meticulously resolve!)

Man that's something a freekin spun mistake or something I don't know what?

And Wilber, for some reason is completely ignorant of the obvious mistake you made, and uses your sorry riddled comment to somehow school me????

Man you guys are going from bad to worse with your lines of debate here.

Good luck on improving!

WWWTT

I guess you didn't get that my comment re: this Iceland airspace thingy was totally tongue in cheek. What I was trying to point out is that it is pretty hard to order a plane to land or not to enter a certain airspace WHEN IT'S NOT IN COMMUNICATION. Permission to use the airspace, especially on this type of regular scheduled flight, is given when the flight plan is approved and the departure clearance is given. That all happens before departure and you can't take off without it. The typical phraseology on such a clearance will include "via flight planned route" That should be self explanatory. And as well I think it's a bit silly to say someone opining they hope the pings are real is somehow wanting the people all dead. I think most of the families involved have come to that sad conclusion and now just need the solid proof to help them move on. Those pings being real could hasten that.

[WWWTT]

Ok, lets play by the rules here.

Please provide 239 links , one for each passenger, thats clearly shows that all "relatives/family/friends of those on board' beleive the plane landed safely.

If not then this would indicate clearly that you are a conspiracy advocate. (ya know, apart from the laughable idea itsin Diego Garcia)

Yea....you go on that ridiculous assumption. It looks good.

Already posted the link, not up to me for you to check it.

Never said myself that the flight was in Diego Garcia or that was what I believed, only provided links that show that some people feel that it is a possible scenario. bjre also commented about this.

Furthermore, how you may feel is up to you, I bear no responsibility for your "feelings"!

WWWTT

[Rue]

Like I said before, go so the forum rules for more details.

If you don't like the forum rules, then your argument is with the moderators, not me.

As far as your last comment I highlighted goes, no I will not stop debating on a debate forum (your request actually sounds ridiculous when its held up for what it really is). But somehow you believe I'm not debating? I guess you have no other way to debate, so then you resort to making personal attacks (of getting personal)! Kind of low but if you think that you are engaging in some kind of tactful debating style, good luck with that one.

WWWTT

You questioned Wilbur's motives. I just questioned you questioning his motives. I also pointed out that when any of us me included present web-sites to back up our opinions is does not make them automatically valid simply because they exist to be quoted.

As one poster said there are different styles of communication on this forum. Sometimes some of us provide quotes and sites, sometimes we express an opinion which is not sited.

For me anyways, pretty much most of the time I get it when someone is expressing a subjective or objective opinion. For example some of us get into real rockem sockem debates about poltical events and pull out competing sites for our opinions and historic time lines.

On a topic like this one that is not really historical or a political conflict between nations over territory it takes on a different direction.

Quoting conspiracy theories is only that-. a theory is not objective, its just a theory and that was my point.

Your theories don't turn objective because you found them on the internet. That was my point.

I never said stop debating. Knock yourself out.

In this sad matter no one knows what happened. The flotsam on the water proved meaningless.

As for the pings the chance of finding in the sea that deap the black box is less than 1% and it probably ied out by now. The assumption the black box survived intact then could rest at a deep bottom of the ocean and keep working without being compromised by the pressure of the ocean, temperature, duration of battery, etc. is huge.

I personally think like some the plane went down but no one knows where and because of that we will never understand why and how.

One poster asked if pings could be mammals such as dolphins. Its actuall a great question. Sonic signals from whales or dolphins/porpoises can be picked up by ship radar but the chance of it being mistaken for a ship radar, or ship or black box is highly unlikley. Different frequency. I defer to the experts if there are any but my basic knowledge of the brain of these mammals is their signal is easily detectable and is different and is often compromised by ship radar and can actually kill them or drive them insane but black box pings not the same.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Rue

[WWWTT]

You seriously believe I want those people dead? What an immature response.

Than why did you write what you did?

Sorry but I can't read your mind.

Just commenting on what you have written

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

I guess you didn't get that my comment re: this Iceland airspace thingy was totally tongue in cheek. What I was trying to point out is that it is pretty hard to order a plane to land or not to enter a certain airspace WHEN IT'S NOT IN COMMUNICATION. Permission to use the airspace, especially on this type of regular scheduled flight, is given when the flight plan is approved and the departure clearance is given. That all happens before departure and you can't take off without it. The typical phraseology on such a clearance will include "via flight planned route" That should be self explanatory. And as well I think it's a bit silly to say someone opining they hope the pings are real is somehow wanting the people all dead. I think most of the families involved have come to that sad conclusion and now just need the solid proof to help them move on. Those pings being real could hasten that.

Oh I can clearly see that you are just making things up as you go along here.

You don't want to talk about the fact that a planes transponder identifies the plane for other sovereign nations to identify (and probably a host of other parties that have an interest), therefore a crucial part!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

No, he doesn't believe it. Because that's silly.

Never said if "I believe" or "don't believe".

Nor did I use any terms such as wish, hope, anticipate, etc.

I'm actually trying to remain indifferent.

But it seems that most people discussing this believe that this plane IS destroyed, despite the fact there is no evidence of this at all.

When something turns up, obviously that will become the direction of this case.

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

A xponder identifies the plane to Air Traffic Control regardless of what country it's in. But only when it's functioning.

[WWWTT]

Your theories don't turn objective because you found them on the internet. That was my point.

Don't have one single theory, as to what happened to this plane, only posted what others very close to this case believe.

As I said before in another comment that you may have read, I bear no responsibility as to what you may think or feel. I am only responsible for what I write.

WWWTT