MH370 – what happened
mh370lost.tumblr.com
mh370lost.tumblr.com
Another good source for information/speculation is the Airliners Thread, currently at part 12: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/re...
[1] http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com/2014/03/search-for-m...
http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/mh370-mystery-i...
>Even if there was a slow decompression to 13,500 ft cabin altitude, almost no one would be unconscious.
This person's theory claims that the autopilot would /maintain/ the aircraft's altitude. The cabin may slowly depressurise, but the altitude remains the same. TUC at 35,000 feet - normal cruise altitude - is only 30 to 60 seconds (on average!), which is nowhere near the 30 minute mark that it would be at <15,000 feet.
I am not experienced enough to comment on the plausibility of other aspects of this person's theory, but in terms of unconsciousness caused by decompression, it definitely seems plausible.
I agree about detecting hypoxia, it is very hard.
Edit: satellite images are provided for a search: http://www.tomnod.com/nod/challenge/malaysiaairsar2014
Anyone here who is stating categorically 'this' or 'that' cannot/must happen is uWotm8ing you. There is no compendium of mistakes. The systems layers of a modern jumbo jet are so fantastically complex there will be unknown bugs for a long time. The things cannot be flown or landed very well with out a computer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HuGYrbSSP4
The concept of flight is still enigmatic. Like Zicam, it is known only that it works most times. How things fly is still a bit of a mystery.
If we are going to use '70s era analog blackboxes, where are going to keep having these '70s era horror stories. I am completely miffed as to how NSA can gather so much data from a relatively cheap and simple device, but blackbox tech is still where it is at.
If you have the time,look into the US Military's crash record [if you can find data...]. on the face of it, it would appear the war branches of american diplomacy are slamming expensive gear into the ground almost daily. Are their pilots shitty? Are the aircraft obsolete? No and yes, but the second one is super interesting because even in the face of massive obsolescence the wreck rate is relatively low. Also, the more shit you have up in the air, the more likely it becomes that something will hit the ground. No matter the skill of your Operators, if you fly birds constantly you will have constant issues.
If there was one thing that would change this particular situation, it would be telemetry, but the facts of the matter are that there are places on our planet that are unreachable, there are bugs and errors of which we are unaware that we are unaware, and if you use outdated tech you give outdated info.
May be I am wrong, but If the gps failed, how can the autopilot work?
I'm not too familiar with modern autopilots, but afaik the systems are not the magic machines people think they are. All they do is hold course and speed by monitoring sensors such as the pitot tube, air density gauge, gyroscope, and compass.
When the summary says "planned route", they probably mean inputted heading and altitude. The aircraft would carry enough fuel to complete the route from start to finish, so we can infer that he means it will fly in a straight line until it ran out of fuel, not that it would land at the destination airport itself.
I would have imagined it wouldn't be that hard to point some satellites at the search area and look for something on the surface of the water, or a new impact area on land.
Malaysian Military official tells Reuters plane flew for more than an hour after vanishing from air traffic control screens
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/malaysia-airlines-...