Will they find the plane this weekend?

[fatdaddycool]

This is not plausible. Biggest flaw in this theory is that the pilot had many different options to make a distress signal to air traffic controllers and none were made. Instead of making distress signals, various transponders and signal alerts were turned off at different interevals over a period of time. And the plane was redirected and reprogrammed to change the flight pattern. If that could be done, surely a distress signal could have been made as well.....

It is absolutely plausible. How do you know that the pilot had many different options to send a distress signal?

First of all, it is not possible to tell when the radios were turned off. The only thing that would be noticed immediately is the transponder not squawking properly. The radios are powered by the left, center, and right AC bus. In an electrical fire, those are the first electrical buses taken off line. There is one transponder, a right and left flight control computer, and a center. The Flight management system is redundantly powered by the center AC bus and the Aux DC bus. The Acars is redundantly powered by the AC buses. Acars is not a system that anyone cares about if it works or not. Aircraft fly with them inoperative all the time.

So if there is an electrical fire or smoke in the cabin, the most likely cause would be something shorted out on an AC bus. If the bus is shorted that makes everything on it inoperative. It is exactly this reason that the Emergency procedures dictate that these buses be taken off line and reset one by one until the affected short is identified. In other words, in either one of these emergencies, the pilot would have immediately had to take action to land the plane. He could have accomplished this by simply changing the heading on the auto pilot, which is powered by the DC bus also so it would have worked just fine, or reprogram the FMS which is also powered by a DC bus. When you have a fire, emergency procedures dictate that you take actions to put it out long before you worry about contacting center. Now, if the AC buses were the cause of the fire, they would not get their radios back online at any time nor would the get their transponder back on line. Not being a dick but you are dead wrong. It is not only plausible but right now, the most likely. I spent 24 years working on this exact equipment and it makes the absolute most sense to me.
As far as the plane continuing to fly, that also makes sense as smoke inhalation would have incapacitated the pilots. The plane would continue to fly on its programmed flight path without incident.
Sorry man, but it is absolutely the most reasonable explanation and answers far more questions than any other theory.


Hope this helps,
FDC

 

[Lumi]

Small world?.my son is there now.

Great place
I scored Tickets to the Master for all 3 times I was there

 

[LuvThemDogs]

It is absolutely plausible. How do you know that the pilot had many different options to send a distress signal?

First of all, it is not possible to tell when the radios were turned off. The only thing that would be noticed immediately is the transponder not squawking properly. The radios are powered by the left, center, and right AC bus. In an electrical fire, those are the first electrical buses taken off line. There is one transponder, a right and left flight control computer, and a center. The Flight management system is redundantly powered by the center AC bus and the Aux DC bus. The Acars is redundantly powered by the AC buses. Acars is not a system that anyone cares about if it works or not. Aircraft fly with them inoperative all the time.

So if there is an electrical fire or smoke in the cabin, the most likely cause would be something shorted out on an AC bus. If the bus is shorted that makes everything on it inoperative. It is exactly this reason that the Emergency procedures dictate that these buses be taken off line and reset one by one until the affected short is identified. In other words, in either one of these emergencies, the pilot would have immediately had to take action to land the plane. He could have accomplished this by simply changing the heading on the auto pilot, which is powered by the DC bus also so it would have worked just fine, or reprogram the FMS which is also powered by a DC bus. When you have a fire, emergency procedures dictate that you take actions to put it out long before you worry about contacting center. Now, if the AC buses were the cause of the fire, they would not get their radios back online at any time nor would the get their transponder back on line. Not being a dick but you are dead wrong. It is not only plausible but right now, the most likely. I spent 24 years working on this exact equipment and it makes the absolute most sense to me.
As far as the plane continuing to fly, that also makes sense as smoke inhalation would have incapacitated the pilots. The plane would continue to fly on its programmed flight path without incident.
Sorry man, but it is absolutely the most reasonable explanation and answers far more questions than any other theory.


Hope this helps,
FDC

Doesn't really help. And I disagree. First. My good friend flies Boeings for UPS. He said the fire is not probable. Way too many flaws for it to have been a fire. There are several modes/ways to alert air traffic control that there is a may day event.

The plane was "programmed" to make the hard turn. That would have taken time and ability to pull off and a pilot, more than likely had to reprogram the computer to make the change in flight. If they had that kind of capability, they had the capability to relay a distress signal, esp with the amount of time involved.

CNN just said there are several bells and alarms that go off in case of a fire. ACARS would have sent back many alerts to air traffic control. None was sent. A distress signal from the pilot could easily had been sent out. None was sent. CNN also just completely refuted the fire theory. Not one blip of a distress was sent out. Not a button pushed. Not a word.

The plane has more than one transponders and it has been proven that they were all pulled offline at different times and intervals. 3 separate times to be exact. A person had to go into the belly of the plane to turn one of them off. That was done.

It's also been released that the plane went to a very high altitude and then back down to a much lower altitude. Given credence that it was NOT on autopilot. It also did not go in a straight line after making the hard turn.

If the pilots were looking for the nearest air strip, they passed up several and made turns after passing them up. Meaning that someone had control of the plane well after the point at which you think there was a fire.

Not seeing the fire theory. It's a small possibility, but not probable....

 

[yyz]

This is one of the things that I don't understand. Gov'ts and officials providing info and data only to come out the next day and change their statements. Why in the first place would they make statements if they were not sure of the info???

.

Because governments lie when bad things happen, or things that make them look bad. Some government(s) know where this plane is, whether it is at the bottom of the ocean, or in a hangar.

It isn't like there has been one "oops" in the last week! How many have we had now? It would be laughable if there weren't so many lives in the balance.

 

[fatdaddycool]

Doesn't really help. And I disagree. First. My good friend flies Boeings for UPS. He said the fire is not probable. Way too many flaws for it to have been a fire. There are several modes/ways to alert air traffic control that there is a may day event.

The plane was "programmed" to make the hard turn. That would have taken time and ability to pull off and a pilot, more than likely had to reprogram the computer to make the change in flight. If they had that kind of capability, they had the capability to relay a distress signal, esp with the amount of time involved.

CNN just said there are several bells and alarms that go off in case of a fire. ACARS would have sent back many alerts to air traffic control. None was sent. A distress signal from the pilot could easily had been sent out. None was sent. CNN also just completely refuted the fire theory. Not one blip of a distress was sent out. Not a button pushed. Not a word.

The plane has more than one transponders and it has been proven that they were all pulled offline at different times and intervals. 3 separate times to be exact. A person had to go into the belly of the plane to turn one of them off. That was done.

It's also been released that the plane went to a very high altitude and then back down to a much lower altitude. Given credence that it was NOT on autopilot. It also did not go in a straight line after making the hard turn.

If the pilots were looking for the nearest air strip, they passed up several and made turns after passing them up. Meaning that someone had control of the plane well after the point at which you think there was a fire.

Not seeing the fire theory. It's a small possibility, but not probable....

So your friend is a pilot, he says its not probable and suddenly you are telling me, a licensed Avionics and A&P mechanic with 24 years experience on this exact equipment, how things work? Your friend is a pilot, so what, pilots fly airplanes. They don't maintain them. They look at the instruments and rarely hand fly anything anymore, that doesn't mean they know how shit works. I have been staring at a TV screen for 49 years and I don't know how that works.

Also, there are very few, if any, true statements in your post. To "program" a turn or change in direction of the aircraft simply takes a turn of the heading knob, located on the pilot's front panel next to the radio altimeter. You want to fly to heading 175, turn the knob until it says 175. The autopilot then turns the aircraft, it is that simple. Any simpleton can do it. The Flight Control Computer can also be used to accomplish this, you know how you do it? You look on your radar screen, locate the airport or waypoint you want, and type in a three letter designation code such as ORD for Chicago or enter a waypoint and hit enter. That's it. If you can turn on a PS3 you can do it with little effort.

Again, I realize there are several radios and such to alert the tower that you have a mayday event and I know how they work, you don't. If the power was out, they don't work to well. Everyone is making a big deal out of the ACARS when it isn't even used when you are out over the ocean. ACARS would not ever send a signal to anyone if there was smoke or maybe even carbon monoxide in the cockpit. Not now, not ever. It is a paid service and they had only subscribed to the Rolls Royce engine diagnostic service. That is it. It only sends signal to Rolls Royce about the engines. They did not use it for maintenance or for communication. You assume far too much.

There are two transponder control panels on a 777 and two transceivers in the aft E/E bay. On the front of the control panels located on the pilot's center control panels is a two position toggle switch that says IFF ON and the other position says OFF. There is also a pushbutton on the front that says Ident. The OFF position means that it's not on. That is how you turn off the transponders. Not from the E/E bay. Christ!

To change altitude, the pilot turns a knob located on the pilot's eyebrow panel that has a digital read out of the desired altitude, and the auto pilot goes to that altitude and levels off. That simple. The auto pilot was definitely attached. Pilot's RARELY hand fly anywhere or anytime. What do you think stabilizes an aircraft at a particular altitude? If it isn't the autopilot and it is as you think, the pilot, what would be the need for and altitude warning signal? So much wrong with what you stated man.


Umm, the aircraft is missing how the hell would you know if it didn't go in a straight line? If they knew where it went and what turns it made, if any, after the initial turn, they wouldn't be looking for it. The FACT is that they are only positive of the one turn.

Also, you have no idea if anyone went into the E/E bay, nobody does, and that is an utterly ridiculous statement.


So you are wrong about the ACARS sending a signal. You are wrong about the transponders and how they are operated and totally wrong about the actions of the crew. I think I am pretty safe in saying that the chance of smoke/fire or carbon monoxide poisoning is still the most easily plausible explanation.

CNN didn't refute any fire theory whatsoever. Besides that, since when is CNN an authority on truth of any situation?

You are wrong brother, and if your pilot pal said that you have to go into the E/E bay to turn off the Transponder then he's a fucking moron or a liar.


Hope this helps,
FDC

 

[gardenweasel]

i just heard that they now believe that the flight started turning west 12 minutes before(thereby changing the flight pattern) the last verbal communication with the ground(the "alright and goodnight" comment from the co-pilot)....

is there any way that the pilot and co-pilot wouldn`t be aware that the flight was changing course for a full 12 minutes prior to the last contact?.....and if there waa an emergency that caused the course change,why wouldn`t they let ground control know they had a problem?....

unless the timeline they`re reporting is totally bogus?.....the media `s all over the place...

 

[fatdaddycool]

i just heard that they now believe that the flight started turning west 12 minutes before(thereby changing the flight pattern) the last verbal communication with the ground(the "alright and goodnight" comment from the co-pilot)....

is there any way that the pilot and co-pilot wouldn`t be aware that the flight was changing course for a full 12 minutes prior to the last contact?.....and if there waa an emergency that caused the course change,why wouldn`t they let ground control know they had a problem?....

I saw that as well and believe that it is just another case of CNN relying on some very poor and suspect sources. I don't see it reported anywhere else and don't know that it has been verified yet either.
They also initially reported that the Flight Control Computer was programmed to turn from the ground. I would hold off on believing anything from CNN that only they are reporting. Just sayin,

 

[LuvThemDogs]

So your friend is a pilot, he says its not probable and suddenly you are telling me, a licensed Avionics and A&P mechanic with 24 years experience on this exact equipment, how things work? Your friend is a pilot, so what, pilots fly airplanes. They don't maintain them. They look at the instruments and rarely hand fly anything anymore, that doesn't mean they know how shit works. I have been staring at a TV screen for 49 years and I don't know how that works.

Also, there are very few true statements in your post. To "program" a turn or change of direction on the aircraft simply takes a turn of the heading knob. The autopilot then turns the aircraft, it is that simple. Any simpleton can do it. The Flight Control Computer can also be used to accomplish this, you know how you do it? You look on your radar screen and type in a three letter designation code such as ORD for Chicago or enter a waypoint and hit enter. That's it. If you can turn on a PS3 you can do it with little effort.

Again, I realize there are several radios and such to alert the tower that you have a mayday event and I know how they work, you don't. If the power was out, they don't work to well. Everyone is making a big deal out of the ACARS when it isn't even used when you are out over the ocean. ACARS would not ever send a signal to anyone if there was smoke or maybe even carbon monoxide in the cockpit. Not now, not ever. It is a paid service and they had only subscribed to the Rolls Royce engine diagnostic service. That is it. It only sends signal to Rolls Royce about the engines. They did not use it for maintenance of for communication.

There are two transponder control panels on a 777 and two transceivers in the aft E/E bay. On the front of the control panels located on the pilot's eyebrow panels is a two position toggle switch that says IFF on and the other position says OFF. That is how you turn off the transponders. Not from the E/E bay. Christ!

To change altitude, the pilot turns a knob that has a digital read out of the desired altitude, and the auto pilot goes to that altitude and levels off. That simple. The auto pilot was definitely attached. Pilot's RARELY hand fly anywhere or anytime. What do you think stabilizes an aircraft at a particular altitude? If it isn't the autopilot and it is as you think, the pilot, what would be the need for and altitude warning signal? So much wrong with what you stated man.


Umm, the aircraft is missing how the hell would you know if it didn't go in a straight line? If they knew where it went and what turns it made, if any, after the initial turn, they wouldn't be looking for it. The FACT is that they are only positive of the one turn.

Also, you have no idea if anyone went into the E/E bay, nobody does, and that is an utterly ridiculous statement.


So you are wrong about the ACARS sending a signal. You are wrong about the transponders and how they are operated and totally wrong about the actions of the crew. I think I am pretty safe in saying that the chance of smoke/fire or carbon monoxide poisoning is still the most easily plausible explanation.

CNN didn't refute any fire theory whatsoever. Besides that, since when is CNN an authority on truth of any situation?

You are wrong brother, and if your pilot pal said that you have to go into the E/E bay to turn off the Transponder then he's a fucking moron or a liar.


Hope this helps,
FDC

Yeah. Still doesn't help. Gonna still disagree with you on several points. Let's just take the most simplest one for you at this point. The plane was programmed to make the hard left turn and that had to be done by a human being. It is NOT a simple one click. It is several and they went over every step in that process. THEY KNOW IT WAS PROGRAMMED ON THE COMPUTER. Geezus. The plane wouldn't make the hard left turn on its own. The guy who trains for Boeing stated it's more than just one click. It is now reported that the plane was programmed to make that turn, 12 MINUTES before the pilot came on and said, "alright, good night." 12 full minutes went by. Sit in your house for 12 minutes. It's a long friggin' time. There are only 2 reasons the pilot programmed that computer to make the hard left turn. 1. Because the plane is in distress. 2. Because of sabotage. If it was in a distress mode, he had 12 minutes to tell the air traffic control the plane was in some kind of trouble. And instead he says, "alright, good night." Case closed for the fire theory!

And I would sure as fuck trust my friend, who flew F/18's for the navy and now flies Boeings for UPS, over anyone. ANYONE! He did not say someone went into the bay to turn off acars. The news has been saying the acars were turned off manually. Meaning more than likely someone went down into the bay and turned them off. And that if it hadn't been turned off, it would have sent out several alerts about a fire or excess heat that a fire would cause to RR. Even if they weren't subscribed.

Now. Would the plane have been taken to 45k feet had the pilots been knocked unconscious by smoke inhalation on its own? And then back down to 23k feet? Highly unlikely. They have reported the plane making moves and not flying on a straight line. Could that have been done on autopilot? Highly unlikely. The fact that it pinged in different positions from the straight line and the satellite data showed it in different positions, says it didn't fly in a straight line.

 

[smurphy]

The plane never existed to begin with.

 

[LuvThemDogs]

The 12 minute gap was reported by NBC. They didn't just pull that out of thin air. No pun intended.....

 

[dunclock]

something from IE's little funny above ... I am sure all the batteries are dead after 12 days but how could nary a phone be tracked out of 239 people?

 

[fatdaddycool]

Yeah. Still doesn't help. Gonna still disagree with you on several points. Let's just take the most simplest one for you at this point. The plane was programmed to make the hard left turn and that had to be done by a human being. It is NOT a simple one click. It is several and they went over every step in that process. THEY KNOW IT WAS PROGRAMMED ON THE COMPUTER. Geezus. The plane wouldn't make the hard left turn on its own. The guy who trains for Boeing stated it's more than just one click. It is now reported that the plane was programmed to make that turn, 12 MINUTES before the pilot came on and said, "alright, good night." 12 full minutes went by. Sit in your house for 12 minutes. It's a long friggin' time. There are only 2 reasons the pilot programmed that computer to make the hard left turn. 1. Because the plane is in distress. 2. Because of sabotage. If it was in a distress mode, he had 12 minutes to tell the air traffic control the plane was in some kind of trouble. And instead he says, "alright, good night." Case closed for the fire theory!

And I would sure as fuck trust my friend, who flew F/18's for the navy and now flies Boeings for UPS, over anyone. ANYONE! He did not say someone went into the bay to turn off acars. The news has been saying the acars were turned off manually. Meaning more than likely someone went down into the bay and turned them off. And that if it hadn't been turned off, it would have sent out several alerts about a fire or excess heat that a fire would cause to RR. Even if they weren't subscribed.

Now. Would the plane have been taken to 45k feet had the pilots been knocked unconscious by smoke inhalation on its own? And then back down to 23k feet? Highly unlikely. They have reported the plane making moves and not flying on a straight line. Could that have been done on autopilot? Highly unlikely. The fact that it pinged in different positions from the straight line and the satellite data showed it in different positions, says it didn't fly in a straight line.

I am telling you right now that the Boeing 777 will turn to a desired heading with the autopilot engaged simply by entering the desired heading. I am also telling you that there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY IN HELL THAT ANYONE CAN KNOW FOR SURE THAT THE ROUTE WAS MANUALLY ENTERED INTO THE FMC. No fucking way to do it unless someone on the ground had some sort of datalink to that particular aircraft. No fucking way. The media and experts are just speculating that a new flight plan was entered because the airplane continued to fly along direct route after the turn. You don't have any idea what the fuck you are talking about. If there was a fire, such as the nose gear tire, going up to altitude limit would decrease available oxygen and would be the right thing to do in an effort to extinguish the fire. Yes, of course it could have been done by the autopilot, what the fuck do you think happens when every airplane flies with an autopilot? Pilots input the flight plan into the Flight Control Computer and the plane flies itself. Not only does it make turns, it can take off, land, and even deploy the thrust reversers. It handles the throttles, manipulates the flight controls, all kinds of crazy stuff you have absolutely zero idea about.


Tell your friend that says you have to go into the E/E bay to turn off ACARS that he is a fucking moron. Ask him what happens when ACARS goes out unserviceable and is olacarded inop per the MEL? Do you know what that is? That is the Minimum Equipment List as designated by the manufacturer and FAA. When the ACARS malfunctions on an airplane it is placarded INOP and an entry is made in the E-6 logbook. Then the CIRCUIT BREAKER IN THE COCKPIT IS PULLED TO ENSURE THAT THE ACARS IS OFF AND NOT TRANSMITTING.

So tell me again how your pilot friend knows how to fix airplanes. He's a fucking moron if he believes that you have to go in the E/E bay to disable ACARS, and absolute fucking moron.

 

[MadJack]

I am telling you right now that the Boeing 777 will turn to a desired heading with the autopilot engaged simply by entering the desired heading. I am also telling you that there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY IN HELL THAT ANYONE CAN KNOW FOR SURE THAT THE ROUTE WAS MANUALLY ENTERED INTO THE FMC. No fucking way to do it unless someone on the ground had some sort of datalink to that particular aircraft. No fucking way. The media and experts are just speculating that a new flight plan was entered because the airplane continued to fly along direct route after the turn. You don't have any idea what the fuck you are talking about. If there was a fire, such as the nose gear tire, going up to altitude limit would decrease available oxygen and would be the right thing to do in an effort to extinguish the fire. Yes, of course it could have been done by the autopilot, what the fuck do you think happens when every airplane flies with an autopilot? Pilots input the flight plan into the Flight Control Computer and the plane flies itself. Not only does it make turns, it can take off, land, and even deploy the thrust reversers. It handles the throttles, manipulates the flight controls, all kinds of crazy stuff you have absolutely zero idea about.


Tell your friend that says you have to go into the E/E bay to turn off ACARS that he is a fucking moron. Ask him what happens when ACARS goes out unserviceable and is olacarded inop per the MEL? Do you know what that is? That is the Minimum Equipment List as designated by the manufacturer and FAA. When the ACARS malfunctions on an airplane it is placarded INOP and an entry is made in the E-6 logbook. Then the CIRCUIT BREAKER IN THE COCKPIT IS PULLED TO ENSURE THAT THE ACARS IS OFF AND NOT TRANSMITTING.

So tell me again how your pilot friend knows how to fix airplanes. He's a fucking moron if he believes that you have to go in the E/E bay to disable ACARS, and absolute fucking moron.

 

[fatdaddycool]

Here read it for your self.

Commercial aviation pilots tell NPR that they would have no idea how to disable all the systems designed to automatically communicate with ground stations, though they could probably figure it out from checklists and other documentation available aboard an aircraft.

Aircraft such as the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777, which disappeared over the Gulf of Thailand a week ago, are equipped with transponders that give their position to air traffic control. The transponders can be switched off with a flick of a switch. But modern planes like the 777 have two other systems as well: cockpit radios and a text-based system known as aircraft communications addressing and reporting system, or ACARS, which can be used to send messages or information about the plane.

But the plane's transponder appears to have been intentionally shut off and the ACARS may have been shut down as well.

Turning off the radios and ACARS would be more difficult. NPR's Geoff Brumfiel spoke with commercial pilots, including two who have flown Boeing 777s similar to the jet that vanished with 239 people aboard. He says the pilots tell him that those systems are "pretty hard-wired into a modern aircraft.

"They said you'd have to go through big checklists, you'd have to possibly pull circuit breakers if you wanted to deactivate [all the communications equipment]," Brumfiel tells All Things Considered host Melissa Block.

"So, to do this, you'd have to have some degree of premeditation and a lot of knowledge of the aircraft," he says.

Even without those systems, the plane's satellite antenna appears to have kept communicating for at least 5 1/2 hours after Malaysia Air MH370 disappeared from air-traffic controllers' radar.

"That's caused many to speculate that somebody tried to make this plane vanish," Brumfiel says.

"Every hour, [a] satellite would send a signal going, 'Are you still there?' and the plane would send a signal back saying, 'Yep, I'm here,' " he says, adding that for whatever reason ? possibly because Malaysia Airlines hadn't paid a nominal fee to providers, there was apparently no avionics data being relayed from the aircraft.

Even so, he says, "it may be possible that the company that owns the satellite, Inmarsat, might be able to get a sense of where the plane was, where it was moving and what it was doing."

Meanwhile, a U.S. government official who is being updated on progress of the investigation says the working theory remains "air piracy," an umbrella term that could mean either the pilot or someone else commandeered the aircraft.

NPR's Tom Bowman reports that a U.S. official familiar with the investigation says that U.S. government agencies are working with their Indian counterparts to take a close look at radar data to see if the plane flew over the Indian Ocean, as one theory suggests.

Bowman says Malaysia has asked the U.S. Navy to send the destroyer USS Kidd to the Andaman Sea to patrol, and a P-3 Orion anti-submarine plane has searched west of the Malaysian peninsula to roughly the island of Sri Lanka, a distance of about 1,000 linear miles. The Navy is now sending another aircraft, a P-8, which has more surface search radar, to the Bay of Bengal, after Malaysia requested a search in that area



Here is another one that supports exactly what I am saying and showing you that your friend and you are completely ignorant of the facts concerning disabling ACARS and the transponders.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3133662/posts?page=1

 

[smurphy]

So tell me again how great Colin Kaepernick is

Dude, let it go.

 

[Sportsaholic]

Take what Cris said one step further.....What about the maintenance crew being involved, who would look at them....:shrug:

 

[gardenweasel]

Take what Cris said one step further.....What about the maintenance crew being involved, who would look at them....:shrug:

lumi?

 

[LuvThemDogs]

I am telling you right now that the Boeing 777 will turn to a desired heading with the autopilot engaged simply by entering the desired heading. I am also telling you that there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY IN HELL THAT ANYONE CAN KNOW FOR SURE THAT THE ROUTE WAS MANUALLY ENTERED INTO THE FMC. No fucking way to do it unless someone on the ground had some sort of datalink to that particular aircraft. No fucking way. The media and experts are just speculating that a new flight plan was entered because the airplane continued to fly along direct route after the turn. You don't have any idea what the fuck you are talking about. If there was a fire, such as the nose gear tire, going up to altitude limit would decrease available oxygen and would be the right thing to do in an effort to extinguish the fire. Yes, of course it could have been done by the autopilot, what the fuck do you think happens when every airplane flies with an autopilot? Pilots input the flight plan into the Flight Control Computer and the plane flies itself. Not only does it make turns, it can take off, land, and even deploy the thrust reversers. It handles the throttles, manipulates the flight controls, all kinds of crazy stuff you have absolutely zero idea about.


Tell your friend that says you have to go into the E/E bay to turn off ACARS that he is a fucking moron. Ask him what happens when ACARS goes out unserviceable and is olacarded inop per the MEL? Do you know what that is? That is the Minimum Equipment List as designated by the manufacturer and FAA. When the ACARS malfunctions on an airplane it is placarded INOP and an entry is made in the E-6 logbook. Then the CIRCUIT BREAKER IN THE COCKPIT IS PULLED TO ENSURE THAT THE ACARS IS OFF AND NOT TRANSMITTING.

So tell me again how your pilot friend knows how to fix airplanes. He's a fucking moron if he believes that you have to go in the E/E bay to disable ACARS, and absolute fucking moron.

Are you really that fucking stupid? Holy shit. WHat part of, "my friend did NOT say a pilot went into the bay to turn off the Acars, and that the media was reporting that a pilot or someone more than likely did," did you NOT understand? Jesus fucking Christ. Read and comprehend.

We know the plane is programmed to do what it does. We also know it was programmed by someone on the plane to make the hard left turn.The media is going by experts who have said the plane was programmed by the flight computer by someone on the plane 12 minutes before the sign off. Case of fire fucking closed. He had 12 minutes to report a problem and said nothing. And the guy who trains pilots on a simulator for Boeing said it is fairly easy to program the turn, but it's not just a simple click.. They aren't making shit up.

You can go on and on with your theory, and most experts so far have said there more than likely was not a fire. Including my friend, including the pilot on CNN who flies the 777's commercially. Too many flaws in the theory. But let's all believe you because you "work" on them. I'm done arguing with you because I'm sick of reading your bullshit. You love listening to yourself talk way too much.....

 

[fatdaddycool]

No I am not going to calm down. I spent a career working on this shit and the fucking guy is telling me I am wrong. It's fucking insulting. If I thought he would do it I would offer the guy a $1000 wager that I am fucking right, fucking pisses me the fuck off. Either he, his friend or both are complete fucking morons.

 

[LuvThemDogs]

Here read it for your self.

Commercial aviation pilots tell NPR that they would have no idea how to disable all the systems designed to automatically communicate with ground stations, though they could probably figure it out from checklists and other documentation available aboard an aircraft.

Aircraft such as the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777, which disappeared over the Gulf of Thailand a week ago, are equipped with transponders that give their position to air traffic control. The transponders can be switched off with a flick of a switch. But modern planes like the 777 have two other systems as well: cockpit radios and a text-based system known as aircraft communications addressing and reporting system, or ACARS, which can be used to send messages or information about the plane.

But the plane's transponder appears to have been intentionally shut off and the ACARS may have been shut down as well.

Turning off the radios and ACARS would be more difficult. NPR's Geoff Brumfiel spoke with commercial pilots, including two who have flown Boeing 777s similar to the jet that vanished with 239 people aboard. He says the pilots tell him that those systems are "pretty hard-wired into a modern aircraft.

"They said you'd have to go through big checklists, you'd have to possibly pull circuit breakers if you wanted to deactivate [all the communications equipment]," Brumfiel tells All Things Considered host Melissa Block.

"So, to do this, you'd have to have some degree of premeditation and a lot of knowledge of the aircraft," he says.

Even without those systems, the plane's satellite antenna appears to have kept communicating for at least 5 1/2 hours after Malaysia Air MH370 disappeared from air-traffic controllers' radar.

"That's caused many to speculate that somebody tried to make this plane vanish," Brumfiel says.

"Every hour, [a] satellite would send a signal going, 'Are you still there?' and the plane would send a signal back saying, 'Yep, I'm here,' " he says, adding that for whatever reason ? possibly because Malaysia Airlines hadn't paid a nominal fee to providers, there was apparently no avionics data being relayed from the aircraft.

Even so, he says, "it may be possible that the company that owns the satellite, Inmarsat, might be able to get a sense of where the plane was, where it was moving and what it was doing."

Meanwhile, a U.S. government official who is being updated on progress of the investigation says the working theory remains "air piracy," an umbrella term that could mean either the pilot or someone else commandeered the aircraft.

NPR's Tom Bowman reports that a U.S. official familiar with the investigation says that U.S. government agencies are working with their Indian counterparts to take a close look at radar data to see if the plane flew over the Indian Ocean, as one theory suggests.

Bowman says Malaysia has asked the U.S. Navy to send the destroyer USS Kidd to the Andaman Sea to patrol, and a P-3 Orion anti-submarine plane has searched west of the Malaysian peninsula to roughly the island of Sri Lanka, a distance of about 1,000 linear miles. The Navy is now sending another aircraft, a P-8, which has more surface search radar, to the Bay of Bengal, after Malaysia requested a search in that area



Here is another one that supports exactly what I am saying and showing you that your friend and you are completely ignorant of the facts concerning disabling ACARS and the transponders.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3133662/posts?page=1

Yeah. I read it. It says to me.....IT WASN'T A FUCKING FIRE!

Continue to post idiocy like, you and your friend are ignorant on how to disable Acars. You continue to make yourself look like a jackass.....