A new theory has emerged from Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss, to explain the disappearance of MH370. The problem is, does anyone trust it?
The suggestion is now made that all crew and passengers had died from lack of oxygen before the plane crashed and that the plane was in fact flying on auto-pilot.
The Australian Safety Board has concluded: ““Given these observations, the final stages of the unresponsive crew/hypoxia event type appeared to best fit the available evidence for the final period of MH370’s flight when it was heading in a generally southerly direction.”
Having not read the report, I am left wondering how they explain, both humanly and technically, the extraordinary flight path directionally and altitudinally, from the time it disappeared from Malaysia’s ATC radar. This could only be done by disconnecting the auto-pilot to complete the complicated, unscheduled manoeuvre, so if they are right, auto pilot would have had to have been re-engaged, presumably before everyone fell asleep!
Does not the auto-pilot have to be programmed? Would this be possible on a totally suicidal, unapproved route? And if the intention of the pilot was to crash the plane into the sea, why go to the trouble of setting a ridiculous course, and relying on hypoxia instead?
Clearly the Australian Safety Board is wholly convinced by the voracity of the information provided by the British Inmarsat satellite, however tentative its findings, and predicates its conclusions on it. If the report considered and excluded the other well known sightings and possibilities is not clear. If they have, they appear not to have been referred to by Mr Truss in his press conference. This immediately reduces the credibility of Mr Truss and his story.
Not only is a new explanation launched to the world (how this reminds me of Chevaline) but for some unexplained reason a new much further south location has been floated. The obvious question that must be asked, is why if Inmarsat’s given parameters of speed and distance were so reliable, should the crash site be so widely and inaccurately estimated, and now thousands of miles further south, compounded by a complete lack physical evidence, not to mention the abortive “pings”. Some might think this is a tad convenient.
It is a statement of the obvious that this was a very peculiar event, technically and politically. The reaction of both the United States AND China is strange to say the least. In the former, relative silence, distance and un-involvement, despite its nationals on the plane. We know how it loves to “big-up” any suggestion of Muslim related terrorism and use it for statements and a military response. This time virtually nothing.
In the case of China, actually ordering the bereaved to stop their demonstrations and demands and just accept that their loved ones had died! Could there be a more callous and surprising response to a a major tragedy involving its own?
We need constantly to be reminded, in spite of the intrigue and speculation surrounding the event, this was still a devastating human tragedy that has not been explained. Any unexplained air accident raises much wider safety issues and implications, yet apparent complacency on the part of airlines and their countries around the world not to mention the deafening silence coming from the manufacturers of the aircraft and engines!
At another level, does anyone trust the official government interpretations? I doubt it. For once it would seem the famous “Five Eyes” were all blind and Mr Truss’ explanations cannot be trusted.