Post: #1

We've heard a bunch of reasons from investigators and observers as to what might have happened to the missing Malaysian plane and those on board(terrorists, suicide,alien attack, government plot, etc). However,Chris Goodfellow(a former pilot )explanation is just the best so far: If you are following story, I'm sure you might agree with me. Here is the link to his post on Google +.

Post: #2

This looks like a reasonable explanation. For people who didn't follow the link, the speculation is this:

• A fire started on the plane
• Since the plane had a fire, the pilot turned everything off to stop anything electric which could have caused the fire, including the transponders
• The pilot then redirects the plane to the closest airport, which is Palau Langkawi (going back to the takeoff airport means clearing 8,000 feet, and the pilot may have to glide down like the Gilmi Glider)
• They don't make it there before the plane was lost, probably at sea
  

Related: One witness claims to have seen what they thought was a burning plane (note: not on the westward path) http://www.thewire.com/global/2014/03/oi...wn/359093/ (8 22 30.23 N 108 42 22.26E cumpass bearing 265 - 275 degrees, distance hard to tell but 50-70 km distant). Here's a Google map link: https://www.google.com/maps/place/8°22'3...8°42'22.3E

Post: #3

But didn't the pilot speak to air traffic control AFTER the transponders were switched off?

Wouldn't he have mentioned the fire to air traffic control???

Post: #4

It seems almost plausible, but my doubts are:

There were primary radar returns all the way to waypoint IGREX, which is a long ways off from someone trying to land at Langkawi.

Had the airplane gone down somewhere between the lost contact and the island airstrip, the waters are very shallow in this region and there's a lot of parts from a 777 which will float. No debris has been found.

Post: #5

This theory definitely does make sense. I'm wondering why are the medias and specially the American ones not mentioning this? It is well known fact hat CNN's first reaction, almost like a by default reflex to most accident is "terrorism". Which is a shame as that bias at times makes them lose precious time in looking for other causes that may be more plausible.

I don't have a twitter account but those who do should tweet this theory above and hopefully they will start looking at that possibility and have their pilot experts provide their feedback on it.

Post: #6

For what it is worth, Waypoint Igari, where the plane has been reported to be, is here:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/6°56'1...3°35'06.0E

I can see that being on the way to Palau Langkawi for a pilot trying desperately to land somewhere, anywhere before the plane burns up.

Of course, waypoint IGREX is to the northwest of Palau Langkawi:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/9°43'2...4°25'00.0E

Could be something as simple as the pilots losing consciousness (like Helios Airways Flight 522) and the plane drifting that direction.

Post: #7

(03-18-2014 10:07 AM)vannigoc Wrote:  We've heard a bunch of reasons from investigators and observers as to what might have happened to the missing Malaysian plane and those on board(terrorists, suicide,alien attack, government plot, etc). However,Chris Goodfellow(a former pilot )explanation is just the best so far: If you are following story, I'm sure you might agree with me. Here is the link to his post on Google +.

good theory, but it makes no realistic sense heres why:

"MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY"

how long did it take you to read that? Thats how long it would have taken the pilot to radio his emergency situation even if he had to shut his radios off immediately afterwards.

Post: #8

OP, why start a new thread?

We already have an active thread dedicated to the Malaysia flight.
That guy's theory seems to be mostly based on gut feeling, and is not consistent with some information that has been released. Worth a post, but hardly thread-worthy in my opinion.

Post: #9

^ What Espresso said, the Everything Else section gets cluttered enough as it is, not to mention all the dupes.

Post: #10

(03-18-2014 02:45 PM)AntiTrace Wrote:  "MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY"

how long did it take you to read that?

How can you be sure he didnt?

"Terrorism" sells more.

Post: #11

There are several famous cases of on-board fires bringing down aircraft , SwissAir Flight 111 for instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swissair_111

The trouble with the fire theory here is that in the known cases:

(1) there was always radio communication where the pilot was able to explain what was happening but there was no communication in the case of MH 370 - seems hard to believe that a fire could stop the pilot from getting out a MAY DAY.

(2) fires bring down planes fast, if a fire is raging the plane usually crashes within 15-30 minutes, but in the case of MH 370, it apparently flew on for up to 7+ hours more!

Post: #12

(03-18-2014 01:49 PM)cardguy Wrote:  But didn't the pilot speak to air traffic control AFTER the transponders were switched off?

Wouldn't he have mentioned the fire to air traffic control???

According to the theory, the fire must have been and the communication chamber...