Th'ump wrote:Soon after the first route deviation, the plane climbed to 45,000ft. To de-pressurize the cabin at that height would hasten death by hypoxia. Dead people don't tend to be too good at texting or social networking.
Ignoring your inappropriate sarcasm, at that point, the plane was within easy reach of populated land masses, so perhaps you could explain why, as the plane headed for space and the oxygen masks deployed, not a single one of these hundreds of passengers made a call, or sent a message? Hypoxia would kill them, sure, but not for at the very least 15 or 20 minutes. I agree that the most likely reason for taking the plane to 45000 ft would be to kill the passengers (on the basis that i cannot think of any other sensible reason for the plane to ascend) but it would not prevent any who had working comms from communicating.
Th'ump wrote:The plane then looks to have taken a route that deliberately seems to avoid radar-heavy locations. Why?
I wouldn't agree. I can see no obvious explanation for the route (so far as it is known) other thhan at some point the autopilot was set for Antarctica and then the plane was just left to its own devices till it ran out of fuel. But that doesn't make much sense.
Th'ump wrote:The plane is believed to have descended to an altitude well below normal cruising height. Why?
Well, "avoiding radar" wouldn't be anywhere near the top of my list. A plane that wanted to "avoid radar" would I presume want to avoid that radar for some reason. I cannot think of a single plausible reason why a pilot bent on suicide having killed all his passengers would have the slightest interest in avoiding radar. I am open of course to suggestions.
The most credible reason to me, by a long chalk, for a passenger jet descending to around 10,000 feet is because that happens to be around the altitude where you can survive without pressurisation. If I was wanting to "hide from radar" then why wouldn't I set the autopilot to (say) 500ft? I mean, the ocean is pretty flat?
Quote:I still say the most credible theory I've heard is that someone on the plane (IMO most likely one or both of the pilots) climbed to 45,000ft, depressurised the cabin to kill passengers & flight attendants, then descended and re-pressurised.
Motive? Theft.
The actions are explained, but the route and the result to me rules out the theory.
Th'ump wrote:Despite requests, the authorities have resolutely refused to release details of the cargo manifest. Note that Kuala Lumpur is home to one of the world's largest diamond bourses. The plane's destination, Beijing, is one of the world's greatest purchaser of diamonds.
Was there a huge shipment of diamonds aboard the plane? Perhaps $500m+?
If I wanted to transport half a billion of diamonds i think I could afford my own plane.
Th'ump wrote:Could the plane have landed at a remote airstrip, deposited the valuable cargo, then taken back off? There's an airstrip at Banda Aceh. It's remote, barely used, and shielded from mainstream radar by a range of 10,000ft high mountains.
No, from what we have been told, there isn't any chance at all that that plane landed anywhere. Anyway, how much would the gang pay a qualified 747 pilot to take off and kill himself?
Th'ump wrote:Or, could the diamonds have been dropped out from the hold? I don't know enough about planes to know the answer, but could, like we've seen countless times in films, some form of cargo bay door be opened mid-flight? With a homing device attached, if the cargo was small enough (like a large consignment of diamonds), could it have been parachuted from the plane near co-ordinates pre-agreed with the other members of the heist team waiting in the Andaman Sea (for instance) in a boat?
No doubt it could. Why then not just either continue to your destination, or land at the nearest airport with a story about a hold door malfunction?
Th'ump wrote:The pilot then programmes the auto pilot to head southwards at a low altitude and speed, then bails out with a parachute.
Leaving aside the inherent improbability, WHY? If there is a way to drop the diamonds - just DROP THE FECKIN DIAMONDS! If as you say there is "an escape hatch" - why not just throw the diamonds out of it??
Th'ump wrote:Why programme it to head south, though? Because the Southern Indian Ocean is widely regarded as amongst the most difficult regions to search for a downed plane, and what better place to hopefully hide/destroy evidence? Not unreasonable to assume that those involved in the heist didn't know Inmarsat would be able to extrapolate from the information the likely route.
Not saying it's right - but it certainly provides hypothetical answers to all of the little mysteries surrounding the actions of the pilot(s).
I think the theories have more holes than a warehouse full of sieves, I'm afraid, but what evidence would you seek to hide? All you did was drop the diamonds. That involved no-one and nothing on the plane. There is no evidence. Let the plane crash from 35000 ft and there will be no evidence of the loss of the diamonds, ever. You don't need to find a quiet patch of remote ocean.
Why would such a heist not simply involve landing at Banda Aceh (or wherever), getting off the plane with the diamonds and taking a small plane somewhere else? Why would you need any of the other cloak and daggers? No, Occam rejects your theory, I'm afraid.