What Do You Think About This Theory?

[sp1814]

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/mh370-electrical-fire/

[237SJ]

A fire doesn`t explain why the transponder was switched off.

[jno]

a flat tire? As good as any other explanation, I suppose.

[sp1814]

237SJ

Unless...the transponder failed because the lines to the transponder failed because they were destroyed by the heat from the fire (possible fire).

[237SJ]

If there was a fire (and the only fire that I can think of would be one that is in the flight deck and would be very catastrophic and would probably give the flight crew time to give out a Mayday) then they could/would have landed the plane on land or water (20 mins max)

[237SJ]

..and they could still land without a transponder. The transponder is only a means of identification. It has no bearing in a fire.

[ludwig]

I think this theory is being taken seriously because they're looking at the area where it would have come down had it continued to fly on the same heading until it ran out of fuel.

[Canary42]

Sounds plausible, and a lot less daft than some.

[askyourgran]

That is a scary theory sp, but one that makes sense. If it had been terrorism/ hi-jack I keep thinking that someone would have claimed responsibility for it by now.

[chrissa1]

Aren't you missing the point, 237? Of course it can land without a transponder, you just can't find the blooming thing when it Has landed/crashed.

I think it is a good Scenario.

[ChillDoubt]

As it stands there must be at least 20 theories as to what could have happened, each one as possible yet implausible as the last.

Without the black box/cockpit voice recorder, we'll never know.

[ChillDoubt]

Having skip-read through the link again it doesn't explain the lack of a Mayday call, which would have surely been the very first event in any 'actions-on' scenario?

[237SJ]

sp - that still wouldn`t explain why the aircraft flew on for many hours. I`m not sure the lines to the transponder would have burned out. The first sign of that would probably have been a circuit breaker failing which I have smelled a few times (a distinctive metallic smell)

[ChillDoubt]

I recall a programme about this though. One often wonders what cargo may be stored and its potential hazards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ValuJet_Flight_592

[237SJ]

Well there is the situation of a possible breach of carriage of dangerous goods regulations but thatstill wouldn`t explain why the transponder was switched off.

[ChillDoubt]

That's been my question all along 237SJ, the deliberate de-activation of the transponder.
Who is to say the Captain/cockpit crew hasn't had some mental issues and just decided to end it all in a blze of glory?
Like I say, without the CVR and data boxes, we'll never really know I fear.

[237SJ]

Well whoever flew the plane (if they did fly the plane) must have known what they were doing. And they must have overpowered one or both of the flight crew (if it was a hijacker) It would be interesting to know what altitude the aircraft was flying at as well. B777s fly quite high (40,000 ft) so if the altitude wasn`t consistent, then that could indicate a struggle. If it descended very quickly, that could indicate a decompression and if it flew really high (above 41,000ft which the aircraft is licensed to fly) then it could indicate that someone didn`t know what they were doing or that someone wanted to get more milage out of the plane so that they could travel further (the higher you fly, the more fuel effieciency)

[Clanad]

The most important device that is not[i susceptible to any crew action (theories abound) is the ELT. The Emergency Locator Transmitter is installed on [i]all] aircraft here in the U.S., even very small, old airplanes, (like the one I learned to fly in) that have no electrical systems. The ELT is self contained and only activates when a certain, preset "G" level is reached in sudden deceleration.

The ones in small aircraft are about 8 inches long and maybe 4 inches wide and deep. They contain their own battery and can be turned on by the pilot, unlike the 406 MHz emergency beacons installed on commercial aircraft.

The 406MHz variety can also be detected if activated, by certain satellites dedicated to that purpose. Although the satellite detection may not be precise, it would at least the signal.

To date, no such signal has been detected.

I've assisted in investigating a number of aircraft accidents... some of which left the aircraft entirely unrecognizable as such, yet the ELT was still transmitting when the wreckage was found.

Admittedly, scenarios can be imagined where the ELT did not survive impact, such as being at the bottom of a 10,000 foot deep body of water... but in many cases the ELT would survive and transmit.

[237SJ]

Hi Clanad. I was talking to an engineer the other day because I was asking him about the orange box that I found behind a panel down the back of a 747 which said "Locator Beacon" on it. He said "That`s the one they`re all looking for" but he said the signal isn`t very strong. You have to be in the vicinity of a crash to find it. He said that the ELTs that are in the cabin (which are physically activated) have a much stonger signal.

[Booldawg]

I'm sure there are various agencies wordlwide that know exactly where this plane is. Maybe its too politically sensitive to release info at this time?

Maybe the new piece of 'evidence' is a red herring to stop people asking the right questions?