Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Malaysia Airlines: Passengers With Stolen Passports Booked Tickets Together

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/09/malaysia-airlines-missing-plane-investigation-widens-live

There is some confusion over how many passengers are being investigated by Malaysian authorities.

Malaysia’s Transport Minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, initially said at least four names on the flight manifest were suspect but later told the BBC there were in fact only two suspect names.

The BBC also reports that a man falsely using an Italian passport and a man falsely using an Austrian passport purchased tickets at the same time, and were both booked on the same onward flight from Beijing to Europe on Saturday.

Both had purchased their tickets from China Southern Airlines, the BBC reports, which shared the flight with Malaysia Airlines, and they had consecutive ticket numbers. According to reports, the real owners had their passports stolen in Thailand in recent years.

At a press conference in the past two hours, Malaysian Airlines declined to elaborate on its investigations into the passengers, saying only that the names on the passports matched those on the passenger lists.

.......

Developments so far

Before I hand over to my colleagues in London, here are the latest developments on missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, still not found more than 24 hours after it went missing near Vietnamese airspace over the South China Sea:

No wreckage has been found of the Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 which went missing early on Saturday morning.

The U.S. Navy’s 7th fleet has arrived at the last known location of the missing flight to help with search-and-rescue efforts, joining a widened multinational search.

A Malaysian search-and-rescue plane has reportedly spotted oil slicks about 20 nautical miles south of flight MH370’s last point of contact.

Malaysia Airlines has confirmed that the aeroplane appeared to have turned back towards Kuala Lumpur before it disappeared from radar screens.

Two of the passengers are confirmed to have been travelling on stolen passports, but there is some confusion over just how many passengers are being investigated by Malaysian authorities. While Malaysia’s transport minister earlier suggested they were looking at four people, AP says the civil aviation chief later mentioned only two.

China about to get dragged further into an Islamic terrorist war? Is security lax within Asian countries as they don't perceive themselves at risk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I travel frequently in the area so have watched this with interest. IMHO I wouldn't say security is anymore lax than it is in Europe. Some people will always slip through the net. It does look like the potential beginning of a campaign - let us see how the Chinese react. Given they have burned down buildings over uninhabited islands, my guess is not well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I travel frequently in the area so have watched this with interest. IMHO I wouldn't say security is anymore lax than it is in Europe. Some people will always slip through the net. It does look like the potential beginning of a campaign - let us see how the Chinese react. Given they have burned down buildings over uninhabited islands, my guess is not well.

Coming back from the states last year I forgot we'd got some kids drinks in our bags, went straight through the scanner and not picked up. Security is only as good as the person sat watching, fatigue, lack of concentration etc.... One moment is all it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/09/malaysia-airlines-missing-plane-investigation-widens-live

China about to get dragged further into an Islamic terrorist war? Is security lax within Asian countries as they don't perceive themselves at risk?

The only thing that doesn't add up regarding the Islamic (Quigar )terrorist bit is why attack another Moslem Countries airline where there is likely to be a fair bit of sympathy for the Moslem minorities in Western china? Why not target something connected with the oppressors regime - Air China perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most likely something slipped on by an airport employee.

If they can steal from bags, they can insert into bags.

Airport security is a facade covering an unbelievable incompetence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience, Malaysian Airlines and KLIA are comparable to western airports/airlines security wise. I'm sure things occasionally slip through everywhere, but I doubt it happens often enough that any would-be terrorist can guarantee their ability to target a particular flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that doesn't add up regarding the Islamic (Quigar )terrorist bit is why attack another Moslem Countries airline where there is likely to be a fair bit of sympathy for the Moslem minorities in Western china? Why not target something connected with the oppressors regime - Air China perhaps?

On that front a false flag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over analysis before facts are know. People fly on false passports for lots of reasons, not just blow up ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over analysis before facts are know. People fly on false passports for lots of reasons, not just blow up ones.

Our of China maybe.

And tbh if you've traveled on a false passport and your plane disappears then I think doing some basic maths is essential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576641/Terror-fears-missing-777-grow-Identities-ANOTHER-two-passengers-probed-suspicion-falls-four-booked-Chinese-airline.html

Investigators are narrowing the focus of their inquiries on the possibility that the plane disintegrated in mid-flight, a senior source said on Sunday

'The fact that we are unable to find any debris so far appears to indicate that the aircraft is likely to have disintegrated at around 35,000 feet,' said the source, who is involved in the investigations in Malaysia.

Complete structural failure caused by fatigue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What with this and speculation about a serial killer in York, I'm probably acquiring a reputation as a conspiracy theorist, I find something very fishy about the plane not having been found after two full days of searching.

Something strange is going on, definitely. The Telegraph is quoting Malaysian investigators as saying that the inability to find any wreckage indicates a mid-air disintegration of the airframe. As even the BBC's and the UK press's media's usual aviation expert rentaquote (David Learmount - he's been doing the air disaster expert pontification gig since I was a kid in the '80s) points out, that's simply not true: if it disintegrated in mid-air, debris would be scattered thinly over a large area. The fact that no sign has been found of any wreckage, despite the fact that it went down over an area with complete radar coverage and where the sea is only around 100 feet deep, suggests to me one of three things: (a) the Thai and Vietnamese radar coverage were both seriously defective, the plane actually went down in a totally different area and the current search is taking place somewhere that is completely out of the ballpark; (B) it hit the water and sunk largely intact, like AF447, or © some sort of a cover-up is going on. Even going back to the Comet crashes in the 1950s, when planes disintegrate in mid-air, even over the open ocean, the wreckage is usually found within a few hours. With this one, no trace, even after two full days of searching.

As for the "alarm bells" quote in that Malaysian press conference, that's also weird. Planes can and do make unscheduled course changes for perfectly legitimate reasons. From talking to three family members who are pilots, I know that making a course change on is very simple: you dial in the new heading, and press the go button. The more sophisticated autopilots allow you to set extra parameters as well - how steep or shallow a turn you want to make, a climbing or descending turn (in which you can also set the destination altitude as well as heading), and what you want to happen to the airspeed during your turn as well. I'm guessing that on the 777, the autopilot system can be driven by the flight management computer, so that it can be told ("fly at 480 knots bearing 287 degrees magnetic until you intercept VOR waypoint VWXYZ, then turn left to 260 and climb to FL365"), and thus the entire cruise programmed in from the flight plan and under normal circumstances, the pilots don't have to touch anything during the cruise. It's only if there's a change of plan, ordered by ATC or as the result of a decision made in the plane, that a change has to be made. I'm further guessing that if you command the autopilot to do something else and/or disengage it altogether, the computer will generate error messages which may or may not automatically be "phoned home" by ACARS, depending on how airline's procedures and how the software is configured. Presumably what the Malaysian spokesman is suggesting is that if there was an unplanned deviation from the filed flight plan, there should at the very least have been an ACARS "phone home", but that none was received.

Something else strange: the sighting of an "oil slick" was widely reported yesterday. But two things weren't reported: (a) if the plane broke up in mid-air, there wouldn't be one: the fuel would evaporate in the atmosphere; and (B) some marine biology experts (or at least, people claiming to be) posted comments on various aviation websites pointing out that the sighting looked like an algae bloom - cynanobacterium trichodesmium - which apparently is very common in the Gulf of Thailand at this time of year. The mainstream media sites did not pick this up, but within a few hours of these postings on aviation sites were no longer mentioning the "oil slick" in their stories at all, and the Vietnamese navy quote that this was consistent with fuel from a crashed airliner was no longer being reported. Surely the people who live and work around the Gulf of Thailand know about these algae blooms? So if so, why did the Vietnamese navy immediately run to the media claiming that it was jet fuel, without even taking a sample of the stuff and finding out what it was, the minute they found one in the search area?

Something very strange is going on. Without wanting to sound like the scriptwriter of a John Frankenheimer movie, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that something is being covered up. But it's not being covered up very competently, possibly because the authorities in the Asian countries involved simply don't get how easily the Internet enables complete amateurs like me to fact-check their claims (e.g. about mid-air disintegration and algal blooms), sitting at a computer in a country that doesn't have their censorship culture. It's also interesting that the Chinese authorities are saying virtually nothing, preferring to let the Vietnamese and the Malaysians take the full attention of the world's media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Something else strange: the sighting of an "oil slick" was widely reported yesterday. But two things weren't reported: (a) if the plane broke up in mid-air, there wouldn't be one: the fuel would evaporate in the atmosphere

They can also be independent possibilities. Doesn't have to have broken up midair. Doesn't have to be the slick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point you make about mid air disintegration is correct. You would expect a wide debris field.

If you look at Air France flight 447, it took some time to find the debris, and there was not that much because the plane went in largely intact from what I see from Wiki.

If a plane goes in intact then you would expect there to be a mayday call, but there was not one.

The thing I am thinking of is explosive decompression where somehow the oxygen system failed, maybe the in flight electronics as well.

This would cause the crew to go unconcious pretty quickly. The plane might then go on for a few miles before gently ditching in the sea. Or maybe the crew slumped over the controls and put it into a nose dive and it went straight in.

Anyway, I think there are still plenty of plausible explanations. I think the reporting issues are just ignorance on the journalists part. I do science and the way they normally report science issues in the mainstream press is pretty awful, so I wouldn't expect them to be any better with air accidents.

What with this and speculation about a serial killer in York, I'm probably acquiring a reputation as a conspiracy theorist, I find something very fishy about the plane not having been found after two full days of searching.

Something strange is going on, definitely. The Telegraph is quoting Malaysian investigators as saying that the inability to find any wreckage indicates a mid-air disintegration of the airframe. As even the BBC's and the UK press's media's usual aviation expert rentaquote (David Learmount - he's been doing the air disaster expert pontification gig since I was a kid in the '80s) points out, that's simply not true: if it disintegrated in mid-air, debris would be scattered thinly over a large area. The fact that no sign has been found of any wreckage, despite the fact that it went down over an area with complete radar coverage and where the sea is only around 100 feet deep, suggests to me one of three things: (a) the Thai and Vietnamese radar coverage were both seriously defective, the plane actually went down in a totally different area and the current search is taking place somewhere that is completely out of the ballpark; (B) it hit the water and sunk largely intact, like AF447, or © some sort of a cover-up is going on. Even going back to the Comet crashes in the 1950s, when planes disintegrate in mid-air, even over the open ocean, the wreckage is usually found within a few hours. With this one, no trace, even after two full days of searching.

As for the "alarm bells" quote in that Malaysian press conference, that's also weird. Planes can and do make unscheduled course changes for perfectly legitimate reasons. From talking to three family members who are pilots, I know that making a course change on is very simple: you dial in the new heading, and press the go button. The more sophisticated autopilots allow you to set extra parameters as well - how steep or shallow a turn you want to make, a climbing or descending turn (in which you can also set the destination altitude as well as heading), and what you want to happen to the airspeed during your turn as well. I'm guessing that on the 777, the autopilot system can be driven by the flight management computer, so that it can be told ("fly at 480 knots bearing 287 degrees magnetic until you intercept VOR waypoint VWXYZ, then turn left to 260 and climb to FL365"), and thus the entire cruise programmed in from the flight plan and under normal circumstances, the pilots don't have to touch anything during the cruise. It's only if there's a change of plan, ordered by ATC or as the result of a decision made in the plane, that a change has to be made. I'm further guessing that if you command the autopilot to do something else and/or disengage it altogether, the computer will generate error messages which may or may not automatically be "phoned home" by ACARS, depending on how airline's procedures and how the software is configured. Presumably what the Malaysian spokesman is suggesting is that if there was an unplanned deviation from the filed flight plan, there should at the very least have been an ACARS "phone home", but that none was received.

Something else strange: the sighting of an "oil slick" was widely reported yesterday. But two things weren't reported: (a) if the plane broke up in mid-air, there wouldn't be one: the fuel would evaporate in the atmosphere; and (B) some marine biology experts (or at least, people claiming to be) posted comments on various aviation websites pointing out that the sighting looked like an algae bloom - cynanobacterium trichodesmium - which apparently is very common in the Gulf of Thailand at this time of year. The mainstream media sites did not pick this up, but within a few hours of these postings on aviation sites were no longer mentioning the "oil slick" in their stories at all, and the Vietnamese navy quote that this was consistent with fuel from a crashed airliner was no longer being reported. Surely the people who live and work around the Gulf of Thailand know about these algae blooms? So if so, why did the Vietnamese navy immediately run to the media claiming that it was jet fuel, without even taking a sample of the stuff and finding out what it was, the minute they found one in the search area?

Something very strange is going on. Without wanting to sound like the scriptwriter of a John Frankenheimer movie, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that something is being covered up. But it's not being covered up very competently, possibly because the authorities in the Asian countries involved simply don't get how easily the Internet enables complete amateurs like me to fact-check their claims (e.g. about mid-air disintegration and algal blooms), sitting at a computer in a country that doesn't have their censorship culture. It's also interesting that the Chinese authorities are saying virtually nothing, preferring to let the Vietnamese and the Malaysians take the full attention of the world's media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What with this and speculation about a serial killer in York, I'm probably acquiring a reputation as a conspiracy theorist, I find something very fishy about the plane not having been found after two full days of searching.

....snipped....

Something very strange is going on. Without wanting to sound like the scriptwriter of a John Frankenheimer movie, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that something is being covered up. But it's not being covered up very competently, possibly because the authorities in the Asian countries involved simply don't get how easily the Internet enables complete amateurs like me to fact-check their claims (e.g. about mid-air disintegration and algal blooms), sitting at a computer in a country that doesn't have their censorship culture

Or you could just be paranoid or deficient in Vitamin Bs or reading too much cr*p on the internet? :)

Learn to live in the now and stop worrying about all these conspiracy theories as they are just stopping you living. At best you will will waste our life and, at worst, you will waste your life and develop a serious mental health condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it have accidentally been shot down?

Of course, but I would speculate not.

If it were shot down the you would guess that would produce major structural failure, the plane breaking up in mid air and a wide debris field.

If there is no significant debris field it suggests the plane was largely intact if it hit the ground. But if it was largely intact why did the pilot not radio a message during the 35000 foot descent ? Maybe he was not able to (electronics failure, unconcious etc) or maybe he didn't believe he had a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternatively it could have been a deliberate act by the pilot. Murder-suicide crashes have happened before.

The one that sticks in my mind is the russian one where the pilot gave a kid the controls and it crashed.

Anyway, I think there are loads of potential explanations without needing to invoke conspiracy theories. They will find out what happened one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one that sticks in my mind is the russian one where the pilot gave a kid the controls and it crashed.

There was also an Asian one in which the pilot gave his kid the controls and it nearly crashed - these incidents were allegedly the inspiration for a Michael Crichton novel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ayatollah Buggeri's earlier post makes most sense to me, this is looking fishier and fishier by the hour.

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that they've been kidnapped by aliens.

Were there an explosion, or just an AF447-like crash, I'd expect to see some identifiable wreckage by now, rather than just 'yeah, we saw some crap that looks like it could have come from a plane'. Were it hijacked, I'd expect someone to have claimed responsibility (and to have been seen on radar somewhere as it flew away).

It's just very, very odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   215 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.