You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
You can't visit the flightdeck during a flight even if you're a 5 year old that wants to say hi to the pilot so the chances of some randoms getting access to the flightdeck are slim to none. Now if it was a hostage situation and someone had say a knife to a flight crew or passengers neck, the pilots would have radioed for help, asked ATC for the nearest airport to land and still have not opened the door.
The other possible scenario might be is the plane lost all flight controls including backups and the pilots were trying to follow the coastline back to the mainland essentially doing a VFR flight but at night. Flying over large body of water at night will get you disoriented fast without any feedback for altitude and speed. There's so many scenario's if it was indeed a technical problem that brought this plane down.
I see no reason to shoot down a jet that's not communicating over open water. If there's no immediate danger to anyone (like a city or populated area) then why not try to keep communicating until such time that there is a risk to someone? If they refuse to change course or acknowledge and they're getting close to a populated area, then shoot them down at the last minute. In which case the chance it was visible to someone would go way up.
Agree. Not to mention that I'm sure the kill authority would have to come from very high up and those higher ups would have to think of the possible ramifications of needlessly killing a couple hundred citizens of your continent's largest and most-well armed country. Posted via RS Mobile
^
This sort of changes the fantasy idea that the US has so much secret tech that we don't know about. I actually thought the US military would have some super satellite recording where they could track the plane from take off to wherever it went. Or that they would have some kind of eye on everything in the sky.
Or maybe they do, and just haven't released it to the public yet.
Or maybe they do, but haven't released it because shenanigans. #tinfoilhat
But honestly, it looks more like just two ships side to side...
why would there be two ships side by side?
__________________
Sometimes we tend to be in despair when the person we love leaves us, but the truth is, it's not our loss, but theirs, for they left the only person who couldn't give up on them.
Make the effort and take the risk..
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't." - Eleanor Roosevelt
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,651
Thanked 10,382 Times in 3,908 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RRxtar
^
This sort of changes the fantasy idea that the US has so much secret tech that we don't know about. I actually thought the US military would have some super satellite recording where they could track the plane from take off to wherever it went. Or that they would have some kind of eye on everything in the sky.
Or maybe they do, and just haven't released it to the public yet.
Or maybe they do, but haven't released it because shenanigans. #tinfoilhat
They do have high powered imaging satellites that we've seen some imagery from already when the US made their case against Iraq/Afghanistan/North Korea/Iran and the imagery is rumored to be even more capable than what is shown to the public
But obviously they have to aim it at the area to use it which is what I was wondering before, are they willing to use those satellites to search for the airliner? or do they find those resources better utilized where they currently are?
There was also tech showcased last year that the US govt was planning/implementing that would be an 'eye in the sky' that recorded certain regions and if anything ever happened there the govt. could just playback the high resolution video (there was a thread/post in RS about this too I believe)
But I doubt the US had that region under surveillance? or if the tech is even in place (who knows)
US Navy Resupply ship? Watched a Nat Geo documentary on it. They're basically side by side on the open water sending things across via cranes and cables
But honestly, it looks more like just two ships side to side...
The scale doesn't look quite right too
cabin width of a triple is something like 6m, if the scale on the map is true then the object in the picture has a width of more like 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ball.J.Inder
typical stupid revscene question:
If they have so many satellites watching, why can't we see the airplane in highdef under all the clouds on googlemaps?
That under the clouds high def stuff is aerial photography
The thing I don't understand is why you would allow a pilot to override the transmitter beacon? That should be something that shouldn't be able to be turned off, like the blackbox recording.
Someone matched it with another satellite pic at 2:59am..pretty sure it's a boat.
Like Amuro Ray mentioned, the scale and width of it doesn't match a 777 either.
They do have high powered imaging satellites that we've seen some imagery from already when the US made their case against Iraq/Afghanistan/North Korea/Iran and the imagery is rumored to be even more capable than what is shown to the public
But obviously they have to aim it at the area to use it which is what I was wondering before, are they willing to use those satellites to search for the airliner? or do they find those resources better utilized where they currently are?
There was also tech showcased last year that the US govt was planning/implementing that would be an 'eye in the sky' that recorded certain regions and if anything ever happened there the govt. could just playback the high resolution video (there was a thread/post in RS about this too I believe)
But I doubt the US had that region under surveillance? or if the tech is even in place (who knows)
I always dreamed they had a satellite system with uber-mega-giggle pixel cameras with a pair of them HD vision glasses over the lens to record anything anywhere all the time.
The thing I don't understand is why you would allow a pilot to override the transmitter beacon? That should be something that shouldn't be able to be turned off, like the blackbox recording.
__________________ There's a phallic symbol infront of my car
Quote:
MG1: in fact, a new term needs to make its way into the American dictionary. Trump............ he's such a "Trump" = ultimate insult. Like, "yray, you're such a trump."
bcrdukes yray fucked bcrdukes up the nose
dapperfied yraisis
dapperfied yray so waisis
FastAnna you literally talk out your ass
FastAnna i really cant
FastAnna yray i cant stand you
Depending on where it gets shot down though. If it's over the middle of Malaysia, maybe no one.
For reference, Kuala Lumpur is the heavily populated purple zone on West side of the Malaysian peninsula on the left.
Posted via RS Mobile
Wasn't it already west of Malaysia when the military picked it up? Assuming it really was there, and still heading that direction from the last civilian contact, it was going out over what looks to be a very sparsely populated part of Indonesia and then nothing but ocean. If it crashed into that part of Indonesia chances are nobody saw it and it could get sucked up by the jungle like Soundy originally mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seakrait
Agree. Not to mention that I'm sure the kill authority would have to come from very high up and those higher ups would have to think of the possible ramifications of needlessly killing a couple hundred citizens of your continent's largest and most-well armed country. Posted via RS Mobile
That's assuming they were able to contact the plane. If the plane was highjacked without the pilots contacting anyone, but the military was able to contact them then shooting them down makes little sense. If the systems got screwed up all the military would see is a big plane, nowhere near a designated flight path, that won't respond to attempted contact (it's also the middle of the night).
IMO these are the best scenarios right now:
1) Plane highjacked and rerouted, either shot down OR crashed (highjackers could have been planning to attack Kuala Lumpur from the ocean side to avoid detection, passengers fight back resulting in a crash. Or the highjackers were bad pilots?)
edit: And who is to say one (or both?) of the pilots couldn't have highjacked the plane? That would explain them going silent and knowing which systems to shut off.
2) Electrical systems error, pilots attempt to do a 180 but don't get it right, end up flying off into nowhere and crash/run out of fuel OR military sees it not responding, panics and shoots it down
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
You can't visit the flightdeck during a flight even if you're a 5 year old that wants to say hi to the pilot so the chances of some randoms getting access to the flightdeck are slim to none. Now if it was a hostage situation and someone had say a knife to a flight crew or passengers neck, the pilots would have radioed for help, asked ATC for the nearest airport to land and still have not opened the door.
.
was this a recent rule? I remember back in 96-97 flying Canada 3000 from PEK to YVR, I was taken by one of the flight attendant to the cockpit, sat on one of the seats in the cockpit for about 15min, was given a model airplane and some other goodies. I was like 8 or 9 back then.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
