[HN Gopher] Seven years on, what do we know about the disappeara...
___________________________________________________________________
Seven years on, what do we know about the disappearance of flight
MH370? (2021)
Author : pantalaimon
Score : 229 points
Date : 2023-01-24 16:39 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (admiralcloudberg.medium.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (admiralcloudberg.medium.com)
| amatecha wrote:
| If you haven't seen it, this Google Map of all found debris is
| quite interesting:
| https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1Kghrk3iwRInii5qBTG...
| roxgib wrote:
| > They were tracking the plane on the Flight Explorer website,
| which, as they would only realize hours later, simply continued
| to display an aircraft's projected path if its transponder
| stopped broadcasting position information.
|
| Oops
| chs20 wrote:
| I agree that much evidence points towards the pilot intentionally
| crashing. However, it's not proven and constructing a story
| around this theory is a bit distasteful.
|
| Otherwise, the article is quite interesting.
| O__________O wrote:
| Curious, based on actual evidence, is there any reason to believe
| the pilot didn't exit the plane prior to it crashing?
| somat wrote:
| I don't think you can open the door on a 777 in flight.
|
| For comparison the plane that D B Cooper used had a stairway in
| the back(sometimes called airstairs). He was able to override
| the in flight lock and get out that way. My understanding is
| that the db cooper incident is in a large part why they don't
| put airstairs on planes any more.
|
| But now you have me watching videos on 777 doors. they open
| outward than forwards, like most airline doors they probably
| have a interlock to prevent them from opening in flight, if you
| could override that, I don't think you could push them forwards
| against the slipstream.
| jaundicedave wrote:
| what, like he somehow smuggled a parachute onboard and then
| survived a late-night ditch into the middle of the ocean?
| O__________O wrote:
| Might be wrong, but I had heard it was possible to enter a
| pre planed flight path. Plane did a turn back over land
| before heading out to sea.
| williamcotton wrote:
| More like he asphyxiated everyone on the plane, including the
| rich heiress with her priceless jewelry and millions in cash,
| flew over a known location where he had previously towed a
| get-away boat, stole all of the other valuables on the plane,
| and skydived into the perfect crime.
| mindcrime wrote:
| Maybe he was related to D.B. Cooper?
| edfletcher_t137 wrote:
| This is the crux/TL;DR:
|
| "Perhaps the most compelling reason to believe that Zaharie
| hijacked his own plane is its simplicity. It's the only
| explanation that doesn't rely on a series of independently
| improbable events: given a desire to do it, everything else falls
| into place as a reasonable part of the plan. In fact, from the
| timing of the transponder failure to the specific locations of
| the turns to the flight path into the Southern Indian Ocean, it
| would be harder to come up with a better way to make an airliner
| disappear. Why believe that this is a coincidence when it could
| well have been the goal from the very beginning? Furthermore,
| whoever was flying the plane had extensive systems knowledge and
| excellent hand-flying ability. Who else on board had those skills
| but Zaharie? Indeed, it's by far the easiest answer."
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| yellow_lead wrote:
| The part where he had flown the route in a simulator is
| compelling as well. What a long article though
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Except why go through all that trouble to take a very weird
| route to avoid detection and "disappear"? Every other pilot
| suicide has involved just pointing down. Why would the pilot
| need to make his suicide plausibly deniable?
| ak_111 wrote:
| Deciding to end your life by committing mass murder is
| already hugely irrational, trying to analyse any further
| moves such a state of mind had planned out from the
| viewpoint of rationality is nonsensical.
| rainworld wrote:
| Except they made this up and he never flew that route, on his
| simulator or otherwise.
| jefftk wrote:
| Huh? The article has " _In 2014, a leaked Malaysian police
| report revealed that among Zaharie's saved flight simulator
| sessions was a very odd route which ran up the Strait of
| Malacca, turned south after passing Sumatra, and then flew
| straight down into the Southern Indian Ocean before
| terminating in the vicinity of the seventh arc. Not only
| did the track resemble MH370's actual flight path, it also
| contained a number of other intriguing details. For
| example, the track wasn't really a track -- rather, it was
| a series of brief clips lasting no more than a few seconds
| each, indicating that Zaharie had programmed it in advance
| then skipped along it to various points without actually
| playing through the entire hours-long flight. Furthermore,
| although initial reports indicated that the track had been
| intentionally saved by the user, later analysis showed that
| it was kept only in the system files, and certainly was not
| meant to be found. Was this a dry run? It seems too odd to
| be a coincidence._ " -- what part of that do you disagree
| with?
| rainworld wrote:
| They found bits from random savefiles and constructed
| something vaguely resembling a simulator route out of it.
| If even that. "Leak"--the Malaysians are not good faith
| players in this.
|
| Really, I can only point to this:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34509899t. Maybe
| look into the MS Estonia sinking, the cover-up (of the
| unfortunate results of a spy game) is very obvious there.
| jjulius wrote:
| >In 2016, a leaked American document stated that a route
| on the pilot's home flight simulator, which closely
| matched the projected flight over the Indian Ocean, was
| found during the FBI analysis of the flight simulator's
| computer hard drive.[256] _This was later confirmed by
| the [Australian Transportation Safety Bureau]_ , although
| the agency stressed that this did not prove the pilot's
| involvement.[257] The find was similarly confirmed by the
| Malaysian government.[258]
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_37
| 0
| xwdv wrote:
| Simply parroting information that is accused of being
| fake because it appeared in another source isn't an
| argument for its validity.
| jefftk wrote:
| I'm not presenting it as an argument for validity, I'm
| asking which part they're accusing of being fake.
| phlipski wrote:
| Fascinating read but for some REAL fun Jeff Wise's "Russian
| Hijacking Theory" is pretty awesome....
|
| http://jeffwise.net/2019/03/09/the-russian-passengers-aboard...
| InCityDreams wrote:
| >tradition is to brave subzero air temperatures and water
| temperatures of 34 degrees
|
| Good read, but: all that detail and couldn't be bothered
| providing a (bracketed) degree-centigrade comparison.
| nobrains wrote:
| The article doesn't mention the amateur ham radio interference
| pattern research data to figure out the flight path.
|
| See this: https://youtu.be/Jq-d4Kl8Xh4
| digitalsankhara wrote:
| The methodology of using aircraft scatter of radio signals
| encoded in the WSPR protocol is described in [1]. I was so
| sceptical when I heard about this - mainly due to the normally
| mangled reporting in mainstream media - that I really didn't
| think there was any merit in it.
|
| The thought of being able to detect aircraft scatter using very
| low power HF signals over variable ionospheric propagation
| conditions at long range seemed almost impossible to me. The
| use of the WSPR (Weak Signal Propagation Reporting) [2] network
| and its highly efficient protocol is what changed my mind.
|
| I'm much less of a sceptic having read the basis of the paper,
| at it appears there have been proving flights to evidence the
| technique can work. I haven't had time to research other
| workers who have reproduced the results, so would be interested
| if anyone has any links.
|
| [1] https://www.mh370search.com/2022/03/14/mh370-wspr-
| technical-...
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_(amateur_radio_software)
| mannykannot wrote:
| I took a look at this a few months ago, and when I left off,
| I was unsure exactly how they conducted the validation of the
| technique. In particular, there was a test on June 3 2021
| where they attempted to reconstruct the path of a flight from
| Samoa to Australia[1]. Certain phrases in the report leave me
| wondering whether the test simply amounted to looking for
| anomalies in the WSPRnet data in close spatiotemoral
| proximity to where the airplane was known to be:
|
| "There are no WSPRnet anomalies observed at departure. At
| 03:30 UTC there is a drift anomaly _2 minutes behind the
| aircraft_ as well as 5 WSPRnet links _just behind the
| aircraft_ , which may be due to the wake." [my emphasis here
| and below.]
|
| "There is no obvious way to choose whether the aircraft
| turned to port or starboard to execute a 180deg turn back
| towards Australia. I tried out both options and _the best
| fit_ appears to be a turn to starboard. "
|
| And from a comment by someone apparently involved:
|
| "There was one error of note, the initial turn of the
| aircraft after departure was to port and not starboard. Mike
| commented ' _I should have told you_ that aircraft departing
| NSFA on RWY 08 will always turn to port due to terrain
| clearance considerations. _If you'd known that_ then no doubt
| the first part of the route would have been a bit more
| accurate. '"
|
| These quotes seem to imply a detailed knowledge of the
| airplane's track while the WISPRnet data is being searched
| for indications of that track. I would be more than happy to
| update this opinion once I get a clearer picture of how these
| tests are conducted.
|
| [1] https://www.dropbox.com/s/1cox7y91m89sjsv/GDTAA%20V2%20Bl
| ind...
| prova_modena wrote:
| There was a decent size HN discussion about this here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27044995
|
| The person behind this method has a website here:
| https://www.mh370search.com/
|
| I am interested in flight tracking, amateur radio digital modes
| and statistics, so I took the time to read through some of his
| analysis. I actually didn't look at the MH370 work, but instead
| at his case study of OE-FGR
| (https://www.mh370search.com/2022/10/28/oe-fgr-case-study/).
| His site states "The analysis in the report supports our
| previous belief that using WSPRnet data to detect and track
| MH370 together with the Boeing 777-200ER performance data and
| the Inmarsat satellite data provides a reliable method to
| determine the crash location."
|
| After reading through the full report (shared via dropbox on
| the previously linked page), I'm quite skeptical of the
| statistical methods used to support his results. The red flags
| I noticed were:
|
| - claims of "statistical significance", but no actual
| hypothesis tests w/ p-values presented
|
| - no description of the shape of the observed distributions of
| SNR values, seemingly just assuming they will be normal
| (although the words "normal distribution" never appear in the
| study)
|
| - showing a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve where the
| measured data falls within the 95% CI of the diagonal and the
| area under the curve is approx 0.6, but presenting this weak
| evidence as if it supports a relationship between anomalies and
| aircraft position. They also state that the 0.6 area for the
| cruise phase vs 0.55 area for the descent phase shows the
| detection technique is more effective for the cruise phase.
| Again, it seems ill advised to make these statements without an
| actual hypothesis test.
|
| - spending a huge amount of time narrating events and
| highlighting individual data points. When you're making an
| experimental claim like this, I want to understand the sample
| sizes and distribution of observed and expected values, which
| the study does not make easy. In a certain sense, I don't care
| about individual data points. While this isn't necessarily
| wrong and I understand contextually why the authors do this, it
| feels like I'm being directed to a particular narrative.
|
| That said, I'm just a very amateur stats nerd ho spent a lot of
| time in R during undergrad and occasionally likes running
| t-tests and making plots for fun, so I'd love to hear the pros
| opinion.
| bengl3rt wrote:
| "Before Fariq can attempt to get back into the cockpit, Zaharie
| reaches up and flips the pressurization switch, cutting off bleed
| air to the cabin. The airplane rapidly begins to depressurize."
|
| I really want to believe that a single switch doesn't control
| whether people in the back of the plane can breather or not...
| TylerE wrote:
| It won't unless there is some sort of major hull leak. If it
| was off long enough it would start to be a problem. Its
| basically the same same as turning off recirc on your car's
| climate controls. (Also, the pressurization controls are almost
| always on the overhead panels, which contains things that are
| used almost always for startup/shutdown steps so it's not like
| the pilot is going to reach over to adjust a radio or the
| autopilot and hit the bleed air.
|
| Really though there are plenty of switches in any cockpit that
| will result in the death of all aboard if no corrective action
| is taken.
|
| Do you freak out about driving? Plenty of controls in your car
| you could say the same thing about. Yanking the ebrake at
| highway speeds in rush hour traffic isn't gonna end well.
|
| Edit the 5th or so: There are also times when the pilot will
| legitimately and safely depressurize in flight, like when
| descending to the one of the super-high airports that are
| actually at higher altitude than typical cabin atmosphere, like
| La Paz Bolivia (over 13000ft, compared to a typical cabin
| altitude of 5-8000 or so. They do it gradually while
| descending, so they don't make everyones ears go bang all at
| once.
|
| Edit the 6th: Also, there's a big difference between turning
| off bleed air (which is pretty benign) and actually hitting the
| emergency pressure dump control, which is protected by a guard
| that holds the switch in the normal/auto position.
| Ajedi32 wrote:
| I think the difference is that in a car, any action that
| could kill the passengers is nearly as likely to kill the
| driver as well. Obviously you can't stop the pilot from
| crashing the plane and killing everyone, but it's still
| pretty creepy to learn that there's a "kill all passengers
| but leave me alive" switch in every plane, in a locked
| cockpit inaccessible to the people whose lives are affected
| by that switch.
| mlyle wrote:
| It's about that easy. Of course, masks are a-gonna drop, and
| flight attendants are going to put on portable oxygen
| bottles... and of course the crew should descend. But the whole
| plane architecture is built on the idea that you're trusting
| the people in the front with everyone's lives.
| stouset wrote:
| I think the point being that _accidentally_ hitting this
| switch is probably of some concern.
| outworlder wrote:
| That's some accident. The pressurization controls are
| overhead in a not very central location.
| ploum wrote:
| I read a story about the "landing gear down" button being
| close and similar to the "shut off all engines" button in
| some bombers during WW2.
|
| A few of them crashed after very long flights, on approach
| of the runway. Inexplicably, they suddenly felt right when
| they should have deployed landing gears.
|
| So aircraft makers learned from that incident that no
| amount of training can mitigate a bad user interface.
| Especially if the user of your interface is dead tired
| after a 12h flight.
| mlyle wrote:
| Modern aircraft have very good warning systems that warn
| when configuration of the aircraft or systems necessary for
| life are in incorrect states, and the way they're used
| generally afford a decent chunk of time if something goes
| wrong.
| jaywalk wrote:
| It's not going to be accidentally hit. And even if somehow
| it does get hit accidentally, there's a CABIN ALTITUDE
| warning that would go off before it becomes a problem.
| EdwardDiego wrote:
| After a few crashes that bad UX played a part in, I'm
| reasonably confident that in a modern aircraft that switch
| is somewhere hard to press accidentally.
|
| (E.g., fuel selector switches that can enter an unexpected
| state while looking like they're in the correct state,
| take-off/go-around switches that could be triggered by a
| first officer wearing a watch reaching for the speed brake
| lever, attitude indicators with ambiguous backgrounds,
| three-pointer/drum-pointer/counter-pointer altimeters)
| thrashh wrote:
| Well I don't know if I've heard of any incidents and there
| are like hundreds of flights in a day so in all
| practicality, there is zero concern
| DogLover_ wrote:
| You might want to learn about Helios Airways Flight 522 crash
| EamonnMR wrote:
| That one haunts my nightmares.
| threads2 wrote:
| WOW I will never sleep on a plane again.
| rainworld wrote:
| Read Florence de Changy's The Disappearing Act if you want a
| rough idea what actually happened.
| dml2135 wrote:
| Fascinating article. I had a chuckle at this excerpt:
|
| >The Malaysian investigators did look into whether the cargo
| could have started a fire, noting that it consisted mainly of
| ripe mangosteen fruits along with a small number of lithium
| batteries. Extensive attempts by the investigators to get
| mangosteen juice to react with the batteries and trigger a fire
| were unsuccessful.
|
| I'm sure plenty of people here have spent time wracking their
| brain on a hard problem and the image of a bunch of
| transportation investigators dousing batteries with juice in a
| late-night fit of desperation really gets me.
| interestica wrote:
| Investigations have some weird bits. I've always wondered if
| there's a certain title for the person who prepares the
| chickens for the 'chicken gun' in airplane testing.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_gun
| wyager wrote:
| I got to take a tour of SWRI when I was younger, and they
| have one of these chicken guns in one of their testing
| facilities. They also have a locker full of machine guns for
| testing bullet resistance of vehicles etc.
| themodelplumber wrote:
| ChatGPT's answer: "Bird-strike Technician"
|
| "This person is responsible for preparing the birds that are
| used in bird-strike testing. This process typically involves
| obtaining, handling, and preparing the birds for testing,
| which can include things like plucking feathers and filling
| the birds with a material to simulate blood. They also make
| sure that the birds are stored and transported in a humane
| and ethical manner."
| RobRivera wrote:
| Operational Testing Lead Quality Assurance Tester El Pollo
| Hermano
| chanandler_bong wrote:
| Mr. Fring would like to see you in his office. Now.
| TylerE wrote:
| Less fun than Operational Testing Lead Quality Assurance
| Tester Los Pollo Hermanos
| duxup wrote:
| Excuse me sir, it is:
|
| SENIOR OTL-QA-TEPH
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Bird Hit QA engineer
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| After the joke fiasco, and since it's a government job, i'm
| sure there is someone employed there to thaw them first :D
| interestica wrote:
| What joke? was it related to https://cdc.gov/chikungunya
| Daneel_ wrote:
| I believe they're talking about this one:
| https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/catapoultry/
| thriftwy wrote:
| This story has been going around the world for 50 years, and
| in different variations. According to some sources, the first
| time she appeared in a publication in USA in 1958, in the
| professional magazine "Meat and Game" of the California
| Associations of Game Producers (proven fact). The
| authenticity of the story, however, is questionable.
|
| The FAA has at its disposal a unique device for measuring the
| strength of aircraft windshields, in case of a collision with
| birds at high speed (which happens not so rarely). This
| device is a powerful pneumatic cannon that shoots a chicken
| carcass into the windshield of an airplane at a speed
| approaching the cruising speed of a civilian aircraft (for
| jet aircraft, this is approx. 800 km/h, for screw engines in
| the 1950s, this figure was probably smaller, maybe 400-500
| km/h). According to the theory, if the glass can withstand a
| collision with a chicken at such a speed, then it should all
| the more withstand a real collision with a bird in flight.
|
| A certain British engineering company developing high-speed
| trains borrowed this gun from the FAA to test the strength of
| the windshield of its a new high-speed train. The cannon was
| brought to England, installed at the landfill, loaded with a
| chicken carcass and fired at a prototype train.
|
| The result exceeded all expectations: the chicken broke
| through the glass, broke the back of the driver's seat and
| got stuck in the back wall of the cab. The British sent in
| FAA tested the results and asked them if they had done
| everything correctly and if the gun had hit too hard. After
| studying the description and consequences of the test, the
| answer came by telegram immediately: "Next time, defrost the
| chicken."
| karaterobot wrote:
| Good read from a few years ago: Langewiesche's conclusion is that
| the pilot probably crashed the plane on purpose.
|
| https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/07/mh370-m...
| ErikVandeWater wrote:
| According to experts hired by NBC news, the audio between the
| pilots and ATC were edited:
| https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/missing-jet/missing-jet-re...
|
| For whatever reason, this doesn't seem to be widely discussed.
| gabereiser wrote:
| edited for brevity. You can't edit the recordings of the black
| box but you could certainly doctor recordings from either side.
| It mentions that in the article that it doesn't mean anything
| nefarious but rather just a matter of fact. If they were edited
| before release, its probably to cut out silence or something. I
| wouldn't go conspiracy theory here.
| detrites wrote:
| Audio is super cheap, and easy to index. Releasing it all has
| zero downside yet enables better investigation. Even things
| like dead-air pops/hums could potentially offer clues. (And
| an unbroken timeline is important in and of itself.)
|
| Someone once reconstructed an entire helicopter's location
| telemetry just from the dead-air hum recorded by a video
| camera. Don't underestimate the value of any piece of
| information. It's a failure if there's needless withholding.
| Ftuuky wrote:
| Do you know more about that helicopter story?
| ladberg wrote:
| https://www.windytan.com/2014/02/mystery-signal-from-
| helicop...
| david422 wrote:
| That's pretty crazy.
| howenterprisey wrote:
| How?!
| ErikVandeWater wrote:
| Edits should be made clear upon release of the audio
| recording. The investigation is either incompetent or corrupt
| if it is not being forthcoming about edits to information
| released to the public.
| luckylion wrote:
| If you released something of that importance and edited
| beforehand, you'd probably say so and release the unedited
| version as well, wouldn't you?
|
| Sometimes I wonder whether some officials are trolling the
| conspiracy theory people, by editing something without even
| changing anything, just so people can freak out over it. Or
| give overlay specific denials just so people go "aha, they
| only said they never negotiated with Aliens from Mars, not
| that they didn't meet Aliens from Mars, nor that they didn't
| negotiate with Aliens from Pluto".
| MrOwnPut wrote:
| Did you read the article? It seems like it wasn't just
| silence edited out.
|
| "At approximately 1:14 (a minute, 14 seconds into the audio,
| which can be heard here), the tone of the recording change to
| where to me, it sounds like someone is holding a digital
| recorder up to a speaker, so it's a microphone-to-speaker
| transfer of that information. That's a pretty big deal
| because it raises the first red flag about there possibly
| being some editing," he said.
|
| The next part that raises questions is two minutes, six
| seconds in, through two minutes, nine seconds in, he said.
|
| "I can hear noise in the room, along with the increase in the
| noise floor. I can hear a file door being closed, I can hear
| some papers being shuffled. so I'm further convinced that,
| beginning at 1:14 continuing through 2:06 to 2:15, it's a
| digital recorder being held up to a speaker."
|
| "But yet, at 6:17, there's a huge edit because the
| conversation is cut off. It's interrupted. And the tone
| changes again," he said. "The noise floor, when you're
| authenticating a recording from a forensic perspective, is a
| very important part of the process. All of a sudden, we go
| back to the same quality and extremely low noise floor that
| we had at the beginning of the recording."
| type0 wrote:
| I try to think positively. It successfully landed on the beach in
| North Sentinel Island, where all the passengers and the crew
| still live happy lives away from these pesky newfangled life we
| call civilization.
|
| edit: satellite data needs to be bogus though, so my theory makes
| perfect sense
| zxcvbn4038 wrote:
| 4 8 15 16 23 42?
| FeistySkink wrote:
| Guess what happened to the guy who used this number while
| playing lotto?
| kadoban wrote:
| It's been years and this was very famous, so I'm going to
| guess that at least one person who played this number died
| in extremely questionable circumstances. Large numbers and
| probability pretty much guarantee that this is true.
| humanistbot wrote:
| Civilization can be pesky until someone falls and needs
| antibiotics to prevent sepsis.
| postalrat wrote:
| Doesn't seem extremely likely
| JimtheCoder wrote:
| I'm sure this magical island would have some mushroom to deal
| with that. Obviously.
| sopooneo wrote:
| Hearing about all the painstaking analysis of this flight made me
| wonder something: If you look deeply enough, how frequent are
| inexplicable situations? That is, if you took all the info from a
| normal flight, and cut it off at the halfway point and gave it to
| a group of enthusiastic investigators, would they find aspects
| that contradicted or truly did not make sense? My guess is they
| would.
|
| This is not to say MH370 was without incident, only that apparent
| contradiction may be unavoidable if you look closely enough at
| anything.
| TylerE wrote:
| It's unlikely, since about 98% of the Earth has transponder
| coverage, so you at least have position and what the aircraft
| think's it's altitude is, with pretty good precision and sample
| rate. It's only in a few spots in the middle the ocean that
| this doesn't exist.
|
| This was also relevant in that Airbus crash from maybe 15 years
| ago between South America and Africa.
|
| This is not a problem on the main to/from North America routes
| because there are enough populated islands along the way
| (Iceland, Greenland, Hawaii, Guam, etc)
| travisjungroth wrote:
| Even more, I imagine the average flight would look
| extraordinary. You would always hit some rare event if you
| looked hard enough. Rare events are so common! What are the
| odds that this many people on the plane were military /
| government / communists / CEOs / Jews / elderly? Well, pretty
| high if you're looking after-the-fact. And if you look into the
| background of every person and started reaching out a bit it
| would get weirder. You'd have tons of former whatevers,
| brother-in-laws of important people, criminals, all sorts. And
| people would be _absolutely certain_ it meant something.
|
| In the case of MH370, this is why I always found the simulator
| history of the pilot the most relevant. It doesn't require this
| long chain of relationships like some other things. It is the
| most impactful person recently doing something related to the
| event that is _extremely_ weird behavior.
| dinkumthinkum wrote:
| I get what you're saying but I doubt it because air travel now
| is extraordinarily systematic and well understood.
| SethTro wrote:
| Should have [2021]
| kgwgk wrote:
| Relevant book (open access):
|
| Bayesian Methods in the Search for MH370
|
| Authors: Sam Davey , Neil Gordon , Ian Holland , Mark Rutten ,
| Jason Williams
|
| https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-10-0379-0
| ghaff wrote:
| Funnily enough I'm in the process of reading Blind Man's Bluff
| in which similar techniques were employed to locate subs that
| sank.
|
| ADDED: The loss of the Scorpion described in that book reminds
| me of this as well. While some of the details related to what
| exact sort of torpedo failure caused the Scorpion sinking is a
| matter of debate, the betting money is on _some_ sort of
| torpedo failure rather than a Soviet tit-for-tat or other
| complicated scenario for which there 's no real evidence.
| _Adam wrote:
| > ... reaches up and flips the pressurization switch, cutting off
| bleed air to the cabin. The airplane rapidly begins to
| depressurize ...
|
| I cannot believe that a "kill everyone" switch actually exists,
| and if it really does this seems like a bug. Especially because
| _not_ hitting the switch would also kill everyone.
| paranoidrobot wrote:
| Your assumption is that it's a "kill everyone" button.
|
| Yes, used incorrectly or maliciously, in the right
| circumstances, it can do so.
|
| By the same reasoning, a huge percentage of the controls and
| switches in the cockpit can also have the same result.
|
| Just disconnect the fuel to the engines, or push the control
| stick forward.
| maegul wrote:
| I feel like the need for qualified pilots is essentially that
| it'd be easier to identify what isn't effectively a "kill
| everyone" button in the cockpit if used in the wrong way.
|
| It's a fricken giant metal tube flying through the air!
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Being able to rapidly depressurize is fairly critical; the
| doors are prevented from opening in flight by a pressure
| differential and their construction. In an emergency, being
| unable to depressurize would mean being unable to evacuate the
| aircraft.
|
| Passengers would've had their oxygen masks deploy, which works
| in normal circumstances, but they only last 12 minutes;
| intended to give the crew time to descend. When the pilot has
| no intention of taking that measure, you're screwed pretty
| fast, but they could fly into a mountain too if they felt like
| it.
| zxcvbn4038 wrote:
| Better question is what has been done to prevent the next MH370
| and I bet the answer is nothing much, it took a back burner once
| the story was out of the headlines.
|
| There are only a thousand reasons aircraft operators might want
| to know where their planes are and if there are any issues. I'm
| sure that the gps position and black box data could be streamed
| over radio and/or satellite.
| asmor wrote:
| MH370 likely had systems that enable tracking deliberately
| disabled by someone in the cockpit (or they all failed at the
| same time). That's not part of the threat model for good
| reasons.
| twelve40 wrote:
| seems quite addressable if that was the case? just don't let
| humans disable tracking, what's a sane use case for that
| anyway?
| [deleted]
| nradov wrote:
| For safety reasons airliners must have circuit breakers
| that allow disabling every electrical system in case of a
| fire, short circuit, or other dangerous malfunction.
| chem83 wrote:
| Huh? A lot[0,1,2] has been done considering how little we know
| about what has actually happened and a trivial search would
| enlighten you.
|
| Also, real-time streaming of GPS position for the thousands of
| flights in the air at any given time is not a trivial problem
| (but technology is improving and ICAO is pushing for such
| solution[3]).
|
| [0] https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/08/us/mh370-fifth-anniversary-
| ma...
|
| [1] https://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2014-04-10/malaysia-
| airli...
|
| [2] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/malaysia-airlines-
| flight-370-pr...
|
| [3] https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/9/11184544/un-flight-
| trackin...
| geysersam wrote:
| Satellite phone text messages cost about $1 each. Sending one
| every 5th minute seems sufficient. That's $120 for a 10 hour
| flight. Seems technically quite doable with existing
| technology at a reasonable price?
|
| I imagine there are optimization that could be done to reduce
| the cost further. Big customers with constant rate usage can
| probably negotiate a more favorable price etc.
| lxgr wrote:
| Given that the very flight in question had Inmarsat equipment
| on board, I think it's fair to be at least somewhat surprised
| by the lack of periodic location updates.
|
| But technology in aviation moves (generally for very good
| reasons!) at a different pace than in many other industries,
| and in this case it unfortunately meant having an operational
| satellite communications system on board (used for engine
| performance data telemetry transmitted to the manufacturer),
| but not having it wired up to ADS-C, an existing standard
| which allows automated position reporting over that same
| connection.
|
| Inmarsat has modified their offerings [1] since MH370: One
| free ADS-C position report every 15 minutes for planes that
| do support it (implying that transmission cost is a concern
| for not activating the option unless required for air traffic
| control via FANS), and the ability to piggy-back a position
| report onto a "handshake/ping" for those that don't, which
| would presumably have included MH370.
|
| For aircraft not equipped with any Satcom, some satellite
| constellations (including e.g. the latest generation of
| Iridium satellites) include payloads that allow direct
| tracking of ADS-B signals as well.
|
| [1] https://www.icao.int/Meetings/GTM/Documents/Inmarsat.pdf
| XorNot wrote:
| I will say it seems utterly bonkers, given the cost of
| airliners, that we're talking about transmission costs on
| the order of minutes and not doing per-second updates.
|
| Admittedly a lot of this was before our new era of
| satellite constellations, but surely the future should now
| be "per second updates and streaming audio/video via
| satellite"?
| fasthands9 wrote:
| Feel like if we believe this was a pilot suicide then it would
| also be important to try to address that - though I'm not sure
| how unless we fully automated (and people liked that).
|
| There has been a German and Chinese flight since with 100+
| fatalities where this happened. Given how few crashes there are
| on commercial flights its one of the biggest risk factors
| today.
| azalemeth wrote:
| It's still a great shame that there is no recent update on
| the Chinese flight MU-5735. AvHerald last had an update in
| April 2022 and the whole thing has a strong feeling of media
| silence. I do wonder if it is a pilot suicide though -- that
| isn't yet confirmed.
|
| (0) https://avherald.com/h?article=4f64be2f&opt=7680
| ggm wrote:
| Risk has to be put in context. It's one of the biggest risks,
| where all the risks are fantastically low against number of
| flights and passenger/miles. All airline risks are lower than
| driving.
|
| I would have said the 787 lithium battery risk was more
| concerning personally. Or the 737 Max problem.
| coredog64 wrote:
| In '97, there was SilkAir 185. NTSB was fairly certain that
| was pilot suicide. Another one was EgyptAir 990 in '99.
|
| In terms of fatalities and hull losses, pilot suicide is a
| much larger risk than the 737 Max. It's made worse by
| outdated FAA rules that would have pilots grounded for
| seeking treatment.
| idontpost wrote:
| [dead]
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| To be fair, the oft cited "air travel is safer than cars"
| statistic is on a passenger mileage basis. When you pack an
| order of magnitude more people at a time going an order of
| magnitude faster than a cad it looks super safe.
|
| If you compare it on an hourly basis it is still safer but
| not nearly as safe as people would like to think.
| Especially if you add in small commercial/charter planes
| mrguyorama wrote:
| One huge problem for pilots is that any mention of mental
| illness, in any way, can basically result in you being
| grounded. Taking medication for your brain can get you
| grounded.
|
| So fall into a depression and need to talk to a therapist and
| get a pill to help you out while you get back on your
| emotional feet? Well now your airline is going to ground you
| for however long they feel like. They are incentivized to be
| as careful as possible about known issues.
|
| This means pilots feel like they have to bottle up things
| like anxiety or depression or suicidal thoughts, which of
| course means they might not get the help they need.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| More to the point, any history of mental illness or
| treatment at any point in your life can cause you to be
| arbitrarily grounded in the future, at which point you have
| to go through an opaque government process that is months
| long and has no real guidelines as to how to prove
| yourself.
|
| There is plenty of anecdotal evidence indicating that
| pilots will seek treatment under false names, or, worse,
| self medicate with alcohol for what would otherwise be
| treatable and minor conditions.
|
| When I got my medical I was coached by my instructor to
| volunteer absolutely no information that wasn't asked. It
| was strongly hinted that I should not recall ever having
| been treated or diagnosed with any mental condition.
| toast0 wrote:
| > Better question is what has been done to prevent the next
| MH370 and I bet the answer is nothing much, it took a back
| burner once the story was out of the headlines.
|
| Sometimes they retire the flight number. Then it can't happen
| again. Looks like that's the case here [1]
|
| [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-
| way/2014/03/13/289800435...
| klabb3 wrote:
| > I'm sure that the gps position and black box data could be
| streamed over radio and/or satellite.
|
| Find My: Boeing 777
| coolspot wrote:
| 1) hide your AirTag in some airplane
|
| 2) name the AirTag "Boeing 777"
|
| 3) you have your personal Boeing in Find My to show off
| antognini wrote:
| In the US two people must be in the cockpit at all times. If
| one of the pilots needs to use the bathroom, a flight attendant
| has to take their place in the cockpit until the pilot returns.
| This prevents a suicidal pilot from taking down a plane (or
| makes it much harder anyway). This wasn't a requirement on
| Malaysian Airlines at the time. (I don't know if the
| regulations have since been updated.)
| dark-star wrote:
| so this is basically the "take-off-your-shoes" or "remove-
| all-liquid-from-luggage" for pilots? one in a million
| suicidal pilots, yet now every single pilot has to control
| his bladder until some "babysitter" arrives to join them in
| the cockpit?
| asmor wrote:
| That requirement became widespread after Germanwings 9525,
| which happened a year later.
| Quanttek wrote:
| Your question is literally answered in the article:
|
| > Even without finding the plane, a number of lessons have been
| drawn from the disappearance of MH370. Many of the responses to
| the disappearance centered on the fact that in the 21st
| century, commercial airliners should not just disappear. In the
| interest of knowing where every plane is at all times, the
| International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) began
| requiring that all airliners manufactured after the 1st of
| January 2021 include autonomous tracking devices that broadcast
| their location once per minute. To give greater coverage of
| airplanes manufactured before that date, Inmarsat (which
| supplies satellite relays to nearly all commercial airliners)
| changed the frequency of its handshakes from once per hour to
| once every 15 minutes. The European Aviation Safety Agency
| began requiring that the "pingers" on aircraft flight recorders
| last at least 90 days, rather than 30. ICAO also amended its
| guidelines to require that airliner designs approved after 2020
| include cockpit voice recorders that record 25 hours of
| conversations (instead of the current standard of two), and
| that flight data recorders either stream data to a location on
| the ground or be designed to float to the surface after a
| crash. (Like all ICAO regulations, these only come into force
| if adopted by the member states, which may take some time.)
|
| I think now, after another documented murder-suicide, there's
| also been a change in regulations requiring at least 2 people
| to be in the cockpit at all times. Other commenters point to
| additional changes
| EMM_386 wrote:
| Note that none of those things would "prevent the next
| MH370", only be able to locate the wreckage faster.
|
| There isn't much that can be done to "prevent" incidents like
| this.
| wk_end wrote:
| > I think now, after another documented murder-suicide,
| there's also been a change in regulations requiring at
| least 2 people to be in the cockpit at all times. Other
| commenters point to additional changes
|
| This would help prevent a nefarious pilot from taking the
| plane down.
|
| Arguably, many of the things suggested might potentially
| have prevented Zaharie from carrying out his plan, assuming
| the scenario described in the article is true, depending on
| his motives: if the plane could have been intercepted in
| mid-flight, if he would have been found out almost
| instantly, his family wouldn't have been able to collect
| life insurance; if his motive had been less financial for
| his family and more about the intellectual challenge of
| getting away with the perfect crime, this too would have
| made his task more difficult.
|
| But that aside, when we say "prevent the next MH370", it's
| ambiguous: we could interpret that as "prevent a pilot from
| deliberately crashing their plane and killing everyone on
| board", _or_ we could interpret it as "prevent a plane
| from vanishing", which has been devastating to families in
| its own unique and horrible way. In other words: locating
| the wreckage faster - or at all! - has value too, and
| shouldn't be dismissed.
| roxgib wrote:
| At this point the data from his computer, at least the data from
| the flight simulator software, should be released publicly so
| that those with experience can apply their knowledge to
| reconstructing the data. It's entirely possible that someone with
| more knowledge of the software in question, rather than a generic
| computer expert, might have more luck.
| maegul wrote:
| Agreed. Whenever I return to this story I'm always astounded at
| rereading that part of the story (even though I know it's
| coming). I'm also surprised it isn't given more weighting.
|
| Sure it's the biggest reddest flag in all the evidence and
| underemphasised purely because of the political implications of
| a murderous pilot.
|
| The main question about it in my mind is one for aviation
| experts ... why would any pilot plot and practice that course?
| Is there any possible motivation other than wanting to crash a
| plane in the middle of nowhere?
|
| Because if not, it's almost a closed, albeit morbid and
| troubling case and the rest would be details.
|
| It also raises interesting questions about the importance of
| pilot mental health that are maybe uncomfortable for the
| industry, in addition to the fact that aviation tech could
| still completely lose a plane.
| markx2 wrote:
| I can highly recommend reading more of Admiral_Cloudberg's
| writings.
|
| Start at https://old.reddit.com/r/AdmiralCloudberg/
|
| If you wish to skip any comments,
|
| https://old.reddit.com/r/AdmiralCloudberg/comments/e6n80m/pl...
|
| and use the Medium links.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| To me, the most interesting thing about all of this is that
| civilian airports don't really have radar. You can disappear from
| an ATC screen just by turning off a transponder. If they'd had
| radar we would at least of known which way the plane went. A
| curious controller could have asked "unidentified object at
| height X, region Y" who they were and why they were in controlled
| airspace without a transponder on.
|
| The article even implies the controllers themselves did not know
| this:
|
| >Initially, no one noticed the sudden disappearance of the
| airplane. After handing the flight over to Ho Chi Minh control,
| the Malaysian controller looked away from his screen, and when he
| looked back, the plane was gone. He assumed that it had flown out
| of radar range and returned to his duties without a second
| thought.
|
| But there was no radar range limit. There was only a transponder
| range limit (or more likely an edge of the screen).
|
| >In Vietnam, controllers expected the plane to contact them, but
| it did not, and they couldn't find it on radar either.
| Controllers in Ho Chi Minh City began trying to raise the plane
| on radio without success. For 18 minutes, they sent out a series
| of increasingly desperate calls: would MH370 please respond?
| Could any planes in the area contact MH370? The only answer was
| silence.
|
| So even when they were actively looking for it, it was invisible
| to their "radar". True radar would have told them there was a
| plane-sized metal object in their airspace even if it refused
| radio contact and had no transponder...
|
| It turns out you can make an entire plane full of people
| completely invisible by throwing 1 switch. Who knew?
| fosk wrote:
| Radar is not exactly "new" technology, to your point I wonder
| why airports are not equipped with one. Shouldn't break the
| bank.
|
| Plus don't militaries have radar anyways for air defense? How
| is it possible that no radar from multiple countries picked up
| a silent Boeing 777 flying to nowhere?
| lukewrites wrote:
| I think it's most likely that governments with radar in the
| area don't want to admit they have it.
| [deleted]
| hiidrew wrote:
| Just noticing the medium author, this guy posts fantastic
| breakdowns of plane crashes on r/catastrophicfailure
|
| Have to say the simulator part makes me lean heavily towards the
| pilot crashing it purposefully, from the article -
|
| "The most widely reported piece of evidence tying Zaharie to the
| disappearance was a course he had charted on his home flight
| simulator about a month before the crash. Zaharie had a number of
| hobbies, including paragliding and flying model airplanes, but he
| also spent a lot of time at home on his computer playing flight
| simulator games. He sometimes uploaded videos of himself playing
| on his YouTube channel, where he comes off as affable and
| knowledgeable, if a bit socially awkward.
|
| In 2014, a leaked Malaysian police report revealed that among
| Zaharie's saved flight simulator sessions was a very odd route
| which ran up the Strait of Malacca, turned south after passing
| Sumatra, and then flew straight down into the Southern Indian
| Ocean before terminating in the vicinity of the seventh arc. Not
| only did the track resemble MH370's actual flight path, it also
| contained a number of other intriguing details. For example, the
| track wasn't really a track -- rather, it was a series of brief
| clips lasting no more than a few seconds each, indicating that
| Zaharie had programmed it in advance then skipped along it to
| various points without actually playing through the entire hours-
| long flight. Furthermore, although initial reports indicated that
| the track had been intentionally saved by the user, later
| analysis showed that it was kept only in the system files, and
| certainly was not meant to be found. Was this a dry run? It seems
| too odd to be a coincidence."
|
| Also discovering that black box is a misnomer is mildly humorous,
| these are apparently orange! -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_recorder
| Railsify wrote:
| 'Black box' is referring to the lack of visibility inside the
| box and to the fact that you can't tamper with it, what goes in
| stays in.
| LarryMullins wrote:
| Flight recorders are called black boxes because they
| originally were black-colored boxes.
|
| "Black box" in the sense that you are describing is an
| unrelated term.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| Wikipedia agrees!
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_recorder#Terminology
| ignoramous wrote:
| nb: Wikipedia favours _verifiability_ over _truth_ :
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wp:vnt
|
| > _Wikipedia values accuracy, but it requires
| verifiability. Wikipedia does not try to impose "the
| truth" on its readers, and does not ask that they trust
| something just because they read it in Wikipedia. We
| empower our readers. We don't ask for their blind trust._
| wpietri wrote:
| You sound like you have a problem with that, but I can't
| fathom what alternative course you'd rather them pursue.
| moffkalast wrote:
| And Valve would sue them if they called it The Orange Box.
| duxup wrote:
| It is very strange. At the same time I imagine a lot of actions
| in flight simulators are odd choices you might not make in real
| life.
|
| I know I did a lot of poor flying....
| TylerE wrote:
| If you enjoy this sort of thing, I'd encourage you to check out
| this guy.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/user/blancolirio
| pigtailgirl wrote:
| -- adding mentour pilot: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis
| t=PLiNyr6QSO28P2bKMcv2O_... --
| canjobear wrote:
| For reference, Zaharie's Youtube channel:
| https://www.youtube.com/@catalinapby1
| ak_111 wrote:
| Imagine one day all of a sudden a low-quality few seconds
| long video is uploaded to the channel showing only someone
| filming their feet as they stroll on on a beach.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well the found wreckage pieces apparently point to a
| controlled ditching, so it's not entirely impossible for
| the guy to be alive somehow.
| ak_111 wrote:
| As someone who doesn't have intuition about these things: what
| are the chances that an 777 could have crashed and yet many years
| later very very few of its debris showed up or were spotted
| anywhere in the world (also factoring in intense search efforts
| around the most likely places where it crashed)?
|
| Is this one of these 1 in a billion chance thing or is it not as
| crazy as it sounds? Like even if you were intentionally trying
| not to leave a trace, it is so hard to plan the drift and spread
| of debris and get so lucky in them not being spotted.
| civilized wrote:
| There's not much watching the middle of the southern Indian
| Ocean, which in many places is literally more than a thousand
| miles away from any place humans usually inhabit. It's one of
| the most remote, desolate, hostile regions of the planet.
|
| I can see the appeal as a suicide method. You fly out for a
| while, it's quiet and pleasant, and before long there's no
| turning back, no possibility of rescue.
| rippercushions wrote:
| And we also _have_ discovered numerous pieces of MH370
| debris, all in the kinds of places in eastern Africa where
| the simulations said they should end up.
| ak_111 wrote:
| I don't think the amount of debris found is that great, a
| tiny piece of wing...
| civilized wrote:
| I'm kind of surprised anything was found. Most of the
| materials the plane is made of are heavier than water and
| sunk to the bottom of the ocean. A few small floating
| pieces drifted thousands of miles and happened to wash up
| in inhabited areas.
| dan_quixote wrote:
| Major structures of a 777 are aluminum. I wouldn't expect many
| large, easily identifiable, parts to float (for long).
| cdelsolar wrote:
| the ocean is sadly like > 10K feet deep and many miles away
| from any land around where the plane is likely to have hit the
| water
| lamontcg wrote:
| The Earth and the Oceans are really, really big. The amount of
| the plane that we've found feels about right for going down in
| he middle of the Indian Ocean. The bulk of it is going to be
| sunk on the seafloor.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Not at all unlikely. That is one of the loneliest pieces of a
| very large ocean. A lot of the recognizable stuff will sink,
| and the stuff that floats will spend months being broken down
| by seawater or having stuff grow on it. Eventually it will wash
| up on a beach where it will be cleaned up with the literal tons
| of trash that wash up on any beach these days. Or will not be
| cleaned up because it is a place where humans don't go.
|
| If you think of a pristine beach its pristine because it gets
| cleaned up regularly. Any ocean facing beach these days
| accumulates so much trash. I used to do beach cleanup surveys
| on windward coasts, and we would regularly find stuff that
| could have belonged to an airplane (carbon fiber, composite
| honeycomb, etc.) it was almost never worth investigating since
| there was almost no way to know how long it had been in that
| beach and how long it had been floating in the currents before
| that. This was in the Caribbean, so I mostly assumed that all
| that stuff was related to drug smuggling planes. The only time
| we ever got a call back about something we found on the beach
| is when we found a drift buoy from NOAA.
|
| This is the long way of saying that it surprises me not a bit
| that nothing much was found. It's more surprising that anything
| at all was found
| valstu wrote:
| This is 3 years old but still pretty well done explanation of the
| case MH370 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd2KEHvK-q8
| hdesh wrote:
| Fantastic article.
|
| Did the MH370 incident change anything about the communication
| systems used by modern aircrafts?
| jdmichal wrote:
| TFA has an entire paragraph covering your question...
|
| > Even without finding the plane, a number of lessons have been
| drawn from the disappearance of MH370. Many of the responses to
| the disappearance centered on the fact that in the 21st
| century, commercial airliners should not just disappear. In the
| interest of knowing where every plane is at all times, the
| International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) began
| requiring that all airliners manufactured after the 1st of
| January 2021 include autonomous tracking devices that broadcast
| their location once per minute. To give greater coverage of
| airplanes manufactured before that date, Inmarsat (which
| supplies satellite relays to nearly all commercial airliners)
| changed the frequency of its handshakes from once per hour to
| once every 15 minutes. The European Aviation Safety Agency
| began requiring that the "pingers" on aircraft flight recorders
| last at least 90 days, rather than 30. ICAO also amended its
| guidelines to require that airliner designs approved after 2020
| include cockpit voice recorders that record 25 hours of
| conversations (instead of the current standard of two), and
| that flight data recorders either stream data to a location on
| the ground or be designed to float to the surface after a
| crash. (Like all ICAO regulations, these only come into force
| if adopted by the member states, which may take some time.)
| gautamcgoel wrote:
| Can someone TL;DR this please?
| leplen wrote:
| They never found the plane. Most likely the lead pilot crashed
| it intentionally, but we don't really know. The person writing
| this blog post is more certain about that than the Malaysian
| authorities, but bloggers are allowed to speculate more than
| government commissions.
|
| There's some neat math people used to try and find the plane
| that gets alluded to, but not explained in depth, and the post
| is a reasonable summary, but didn't really change my mind much
| and my previous awareness was based on overhearing cable news,
| so it's not really anything new.
|
| It's written well enough to be entertaining, but isn't really
| enlightening.
| olliej wrote:
| And hey if we can't trust random people on the internet, who
| can we trust? :)
| sleton38234234 wrote:
| There seems to be a knee jerk reaction to react negatively to
| anyone who doesn't read the article or doesn't read it in
| depth.
|
| i don't think the comment about TL;DR OR asking chatgpt is
| completely out of line. I could see businesses being built on
| top of chatgpt to create summaries of articles on the internet.
| This is a pretty big use case.
|
| Sometimes, people want a more efficient way to read articles,
| rather than actually reading them. If a service could be
| created that summarizes the main point of an article, I think
| there's value (and a potential business) in it. You might even
| be able to ask chatgpt or a service on top ofit, "has this
| article any new conclusions about the state of Mh370?" without
| actually reading the article.
| lamontcg wrote:
| Particularly when over half the article is Atlantic-style
| lengthy exposition about the history which a lot of us
| already know, and I don't really care if the author is that
| good of a writer or not.
| sdk16420 wrote:
| >Sometimes, people want a more efficient way to read
| articles, rather than actually reading them.
|
| Is it too much to assume that readers have had at least high
| school education and know about lead sentences and summary
| paragraphs?
| dieselgate wrote:
| I agree with you considering parent comment has currently
| been downvoted. This was one of the most fascinating articles
| I've read but it was so long I still didn't finish reading
| the entire thing
| kerpotgh wrote:
| [flagged]
| ak_111 wrote:
| The strangeness of this story - a 777 disappearing into thin air
| in one of the most surveilled and monitored (due to geopolitics)
| places on earth leaving no traces behind - has spooked people so
| much that there is a section on the wikipedia page debunking
| theories related to black holes.
| nerdponx wrote:
| Isn't this how the show _Lost_ starts?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-24 23:00 UTC)