A 777 Pilot Weighs In On GreenDot & MenTour Pilot's MH370 Theories (Episode 30)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- In Episode 30, Jeff and Andy go deeper than they've ever gone before on a question that's the crux of the whole MH370 mystery. It's a topic which is newly important because a bunch of viral MH370 videos have come out that spend a lot of time discussing it and, they'll argue, are getting it wrong.
To help with this important task, the podcast invited a very special guest, Juan Browne, an experienced airline pilot and the host of the popular aviation channel Blancolirio on UA-cam.
More information at the Deep Dive show page:
www.deepdivemh...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @deepdivepodcastnetwork
Many thanks to Juan Browne:
/ @blancolirio
Mentour Pilot also clearly states, that no one really knows 100% what happened. He only believes that there is enough reason to look in the newly calculated location.
Seriously, he never said it was definitive. To spend this amount of time attacking the theory without any alternative isn't helpful.
They said their not attacking bec they they don't like it they're just asking bec if you get answers you can then be more certain that's how analyzing works .. l bet if mentour pilot saw this he'd appreciate it
The title is a misleading clickbait. Juan doesn't "weigh in on the theories of Mentour and Greendot", he just says you normally do not touch the electric panel.
Yes more bullshit by these two snake charmers. In all their episodes they haven't proven jack shit. Two total losers. If you want to know what happened by the plane watch the presentation at the aeronautical society. There's nothing to find here.
Alright, this is probably gonna be a little long, so if you're the TLDR type person, I wish I could help you. But here's the deal. While I don't have instructor experience on a triple seven directly I do have instructor experience on other Boeing aircraft as well as smaller regional aircraft throughout the last ten years that I've been flying in the part 121 airline world and I can say this that one of the things that you get to learn whenever you become an international airline instructor, especially for a wide body aircraft, is the depth of knowledge that resides in manuals in other countries other than the US. I understand that you asked certain airline pilots what AC system or DC system powers the SDU and they looked at you like a deer in the headlights and that's expected because in America and even Europe, we have the expectation to only know what we can change and to utilize a QRH to try and fix and if not, "secure" the rest. But, that's not culturally how it works in most other countries especially out in Asia. For example, I have a friend of mine who went through the nearly forty six week process to upgrade at Singapore Airlines on the 747 and his sim partner failed because he didn't visually scan enough in RVSM. Which is ridiculous but is the standards in certain training regiments. Ask any Cathay pilot how upgrade training went for them on the triple seven and the seven forty-seven and the day-long oral that they had and some of the most insane multi-failure sims that they had to go through just to get their checkride done. You compare that to an average AQP/LOE profile in America, It doesn't even remotely stack up. I'm not saying that America's training system is weaker, but rather it prioritizes a different subset of knowledge, which means the training documentation doesn't give the pilot the knowledge that otherwise you needed many years ago when you had to "build the airplane" like most senior pilots will tell how training was 20, 30 years ago in the airlines. For example, this friend needed to know the voltage of the bulbs underneath the glare shield as part of his Captain Upgrade oral. This was only 6 years ago. That manual absolutely has each and every light, the current draw that runs through it, the temperature that it gets to, and it has a full and complete list of every single affected system in every AC and subsequent DC bus on the entire aircraft in this manual. I've seen it myself and I've used it to reference certain things whenever I wanted to get deep into systems with certain students who were ever curious.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is you all are making an assumption as well, and it's an incorrect one about the level of robust reading material as well as knowledge required for pilots across the world being somewhat linear, when it's not. In America, it is a completely different standard than in a place like Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Japan.
We know that he utilized his simulator, and although it might not have been exactly study level, you also inadvertently underplay the quality of level of immersion and study level capability of some of these simulators that existed even 15 to 20 years ago on things like X-plane and PMDG aircraft in 2004. For example, I have the PMDG 747 for Microsoft FS2004 and have tested almost every large failure that I can muster from AC to DC failures to hydraulic failures (using it as a pretraining aid before going to class). Most if not all the EICAS messages are correct and all of the buses that remain powered are also correct. And again, this was made nearly 20 years ago.
So I guess to low down this rant lol, what I'm trying to say is although Juan Brown is very good at his position and I'm never going to question that. He's good at the position dependent on the standards that American AQP and FAA guidance requires him to be at. He physically does not have the manuals that would give the detail that a lot of other countries assumed some pilots need to know. And in that, at least on the 747 manual that I'm referencing directly, absolutely has the SDU, the fans 1A, all of the material that's needed to communicate via ADSC, ADSB, SATCOM, and anything within RCP 240 to RSP 180 compliance in the NATHLA and in the Pacific. You could easily at least try to simulate those failures at a home simulator if you had those materials.
One last thing. You all make the assumption that because you lose AC power that to the pilot they have no idea the implications. That is ALSO not true. At least in initial qual for type ratings you have to do an all-engine failure DC power battery powered descent so that you see what's left to control the aircraft and the cability to be able to land it. I just did that in training on my new type 2 weeks ago. I know what is left. We have to know. We're supposed to see every scenario they can throw at us and they definitely consider a full AC power failure or dual engine flameout with a failed rat deployment something they'd want to generate.
I really appreciate what you guys are doing, and as a pilot for now over 15 years, and an individual who's been fascinated by the MH370 disappearance, I don't 100% agree with the French pilots and the British pilots who came to the theory that is being presented by Green Dot or by Mentor Pilot, however, the rebuttal that you're utilizing can be dismissed if you spend time talking to airline pilots from places like the aforementioned locations and see the manuals they possess. My purpose was not to write this by calling you wrong, but rather assisting in the realities from other perspectives to get to the truth.
Also one very last thing! Haha, when he did all of that the airplane would have been in trim and if he had a secondary flight plan saved (which is available on the FMS in a DC power emergency) he could have pre loaded the fixes, activated the FMS from the RTE COPY/RTE 2 page, and flown an overlayed path on the magenta line.
Okay I'm done I promise lol. Good luck with this, it isn't an easy task by any stretch 🤞👍
I love the way you describe an alternate way of ‘thinking.’ While not trying to declare a causation, you simply imply a different direction in which to explore a possible path to the eventual outcome. Sometimes we overlook many thought processes by our mainstream ideologies in a two dimensional way which can be limiting.
I’m sure those that study languages and religions on this planet have a greater understanding how different minds from different cultures manifest human behaviour almost paradoxically from our own logical reasoning.
Reminds me of a famous Sherlock Holmes quote, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable, must be the truth."
@@adamb1671Thr improbable that we don't understand is in our way to solve this riddle. Everything that has happened strikes me as too eleborate und complocated for both suicide, attempted Terror attack or skyjack and the outcome is very anticlimactic, I mean sneakimg around the skies for hours only to dip into the drink?
Is that training regime still accurate for Asia Airlines? Seems like it would cost the airlines tons of $$$$$$$$$$
@nadineblachetta3202 I described it all in detail and I have thousands of hours of flight time in these type aircraft. Just because it's too complex for YOU to believe doesn't mean it is for people in a field of study we work hard to be acumens within.
@byronjaffe518 how so? And yes, it is actively happening specifically at Cathay, Asiana, Nippon, and Singapore. Having a manual with complex information only needs to be made once and then put into a PDF. That doesn't cost tons of $$$$$$. If you're talking about the sims? Upgrade sims is a 2 year process but at the aforementioned locations, you come back for sim once a month and run scenarios. Versus in the US, Twice, the rest of AQP is done with DBL or distance based learning aka PowerPoint and quizzes
Petter on Mentor Pilot evens says he does not like to speculate, and that’s why he hadn’t done an MH370 video. However, he thought enough time passed and his number one reason for doing this video is to get a new search started.
Juan Browne’s “testimony” doesn’t add anything to this discussion, through no fault of his….he only answered the questions he was asked. Essentially, all he said was “no sane pilot would under normal circumstances start pushing buttons on the 777 electrical panel without direction from a checklist”. True, but again that doesn’t help solve the mystery.
Agree re Juan. They make a lot of assumptions here about the about the implausibility of the pilot doing stuff and wanting to have a perfect crime, which may not be true. And they admit they don't know about the quality of the sims or research materials available. So we're still left with forming an opinion about various explanations that could be true.
It takes a lot of research and thought to come up with a plausible theory, such as those shared by Green Dot and Mentour Pilot.
It takes no research at all to say "well no one knows for sure" without actually challenging those theories
I love Mentour pilot and Greendot's channels. They are brilliantly informative, engaging and professionally presented. I think I've watched them all and continue to watch them over and over again. Such exceptional quality from people effectively creating content in their spare time. 👍👍👍
Pretty sure Mentour pilot has seven staff to create those. Excellent channel.
sorry guys, this is not convincing, so you are saying he wasn't suicidal? if not then I struggle to undertsnad what you are arguing against, the certainty?, but the plane didnt turn itself, you cant say those turns from commercial route were on autopilot, he overflew Malaysia to boot, he was conscious enough to do all that but never called for help or attempted to land, accident scenario is even wilder than suicide. The holes you point out rely on normal pilot procedure which I find quite puzzling. He does those extreme actions because he has extreme goals, you yourself said the actions were not impoosible. Also about pilot knowledge, a determined person can learn a lot, I understand that that level of knowledge is not something a regular pilot would seek but he wasn't a regulr pilot was he, he needed specific information for specific tasks and i believe in the 21st century you can find information if you look hard enough and look in the right places.
You guys seem to be simply willful conspiracy theorists.
"don't know what would happen if you cut AC bus" --well, you could determine what might happen with experience and curiosity.
"path looks like autopilot" --what path?! There's only the arcs. There's absolutely no way to determine what the flight path truly looked like and it's totally plausible to fly an airliner without autopilot (which...hasn't always existed...fucking obviously)
"pilot suicide doesn't make sense/no motive" -- that's true. It's incredibly bizarre and seems totally confusing. Why might Captain Zaharie kill his passengers and copilot? It's very tough to say, pure speculation, and largely unconvincing.
All that said, the Greendot thesis (which is explicitly explained to be heavy in conjecture for narrative, to be clear. Low conspiritard blow tbh) is the most compelling and best supported by existing evidence. It really is not nearly as unbelievable or implausible to pull off if so desirable.
I find it quite telling how you asked the 777 pilot about the electronics but never interrogated whether he would have been able to pull off something like the generally accepted narrative if he was inclined to do so. My prediction is that he'd say that, in Zaharie Ahmed Shah's position, it would absolutely be plausible to do.
Just like Killdozer, 9/11, or the moon landing. It's absolutely wild, but it's just not supernatural nor a conspiracy, and people with a high degree of skill and no inhibitions can achieve wild ends with pretty extreme reliable success.
If you don't like the accepted narrative, it's just a complaint, not science. You don't have a counternarrative to explain the evidence, just nitpicks and whines about minute details of what is best known and understood.
It sure is weird how Building 7 collapsed...but fire is still the best explanation and controlled demolition conspiracy is retarded and flawed by an order of magnitude of orders of magnitude than the official story.
Greendot and Mentour Pilot told a story that is probably just largely true.
The more interesting part of the whole affair ist the evasion of all ATC. Such an undertaking had to be initiated by someone with the specific knowledge when to turn and when to alter speed and height.
No AP can do such flight profile on its own, except "Infinite Apes, infinite Typewriters".
Exactly. Well said!
Was with you all the way until you mentioned building 7 .
Ask yourself this . Trained pilots with thousands of hours struggle everyday to carry out their missions . Can anyone really fly 50 hours of a Cessna and jump into Boeing 767 cockpit and have any idea what they are doing .
I’m an airline pilot of 12 years . I did 250 hours in Florida . Did 2 full type ratings on Sim in Europe and still was completely lost the first time I sat in the real seat .
And I had an examiner with me .
Not everything is a conspiracy but not everything is as plain as it looks either .
@@zaildarbains Well, as long as just want to fly visual and crash in some buildings that is quite possible with some basic training and a flight simulator on a home PC..
@@EK-gr9gd ha ha . ud be surpirised to know how many pilots cant fly visual even after a thousand hours on the real thing . let alone a few hours on microsoft flight sim. its like saying if i had rocket simulator at home i could be the next man in space. or if played NBA on playstation i could beat the college team. or if i played need for speed i would know how to drive fast cars. I'm sorry to say it just doesnt work that way . if it were so all of us would be pilots just by playing microsoft flight sim.
It's like listening to Beavis and Butthead commmenting in aviation videos instead of MTV. From 44 mins, the only worth listening to is Juans comments
Beavis and Butthead. 😂
True somehow..
😂😂😂😂😂
i was expecting one to screaming tp for bunghole! 44 minutes wasted
Saying that one would not shut down the electrical system in normal circumstances is obvious. One doesn’t need to be a B777 pilot to realise that. The point that Pitre was making on MentourNow was that it was DELIBERATELY turned off. It was not someone bumping the switch or thinking they were doing something normal. The suggestion was made in the video that someone took deliberate action to do this. That was the point of the MentourNow episode.
"I have never had to mess with the electrical systems" That warms my heart.
Whoever kept flying that 777, he/she/they was/were trying to make sure, for whatever reason, the plane will never be found. That's the reason why the plane took the path it took and ended up wherever it is.
I was baited in with the promise of Juan Browne input 😂
I never even realised Blancolirio was an airline pilot until recent. He’s such a decent and knowledgeable guy.
I also have a lot of respect for Mentour Pilot.
They're definitely smart and accomplished guys who are excellent in two very different domains: podcasting and flying. /JW
Mentour is very handsome
@@DeepDivePodcastNetworkYou do realise both are highly experienced commercial airline pilots, Petter is an instructor and lead Captain - so it is safe to say he knows more than two people who do not fly.
The only people who had the technical knowledge to disable the comms on the aircraft, according to deep dives into the backgrounds of passengers and crew - was the flight crew. The APU would not be running under normal conditions - it must be turned on by the flight crew.
Mentour Pilot basically was saying he personally thought it was active pilot with criminal intent to the end, hiding aircraft in the SIO someplace. That is obviously *probably* what happened, but many aviation groups (especially ATSB and others who are leading search strategy decisions) are opposed to considering pilot intent unless it can be pre-proven to the 100% level. The current consensus is pilot intent is only proven to the 100% level until about Arc2. Green Dot basically supported the ghost flight from Arc2 narrative. Credit to Blelly/Marchand/Mentour for bravery (going against aviation community group-think) to consider pilot intent to end of fight, but I suspect they have not yet grasped the nature of an active pilot plight path. They are basically suggesting near equivalence to ghost flight after Arc2, with glide at end. I do not think that is how it went down.
Jeff- saying a nefarious pilot would be adverse to unorthodox cockpit settings is denial, and basically you are exploiting public/aviation community reluctance to admit and fully explore the politically-incorrect reality of probable criminal intent to end of flight. How can an aircraft vanish? Because the pilot is allowed to turn everything off, instantly and secretly and protected by Fort Knox doors (in a 2014 vintage B777 anyways).
It's interesting that you think that Blelly/Marchand are brave for going against aviation community groupthink; from my perspective the pilot murder/suicide scenario has long been the default narrative. True, the ATSB did not say as much in their final report, and I think you're right in assuming that they didn't want to accuse him of such a heinous crime given their lack of absolute certainty, but behind the scenes I think Australian officials, was well as influenial independent commentators like the Independent Group, quite strongly believe that Zaharie did it.
As for the second part of your comment, I don't see why you need to stoop to making an ad-hominem attack. If you think that shutting off a 777's entire electrical bus is no big deal, then I think you should make a case for that position, rather than attacking me for even raising the issue. How is that Blelly/Marchand are courageous for challenging assumptions, but I am a villain for doing the same? /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork Many in the aviation industry have a huge issue with public being told what likely happened. The fear is that the public would ask "why do we let nefarious pilots turn off Xponder/etc. and fly off to Never-Never Land." Hence we have industry denial of varying degrees, varying degrees of ghost flights, even though behind closed doors the industry knows what apparently happened: which is the pilot flew off and hid the plane. Not everyone has this denial, but the loud voices taking control are those who have a conviction that the public needs to cool their heels for several decades before we can tell the public what happened. This head-in-sand approach allows further pijackings to happen, which they have.
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork I didn't read an attack. Simply the obvious deduction that any number of pilots have repeated. All the controls are accessible and if you know what you are doing then you can do what you like. No conclusive history can be written because not all the evidence has been retrieved but the evidence which does exist all points to one set of circumstances which is almost universally accepted. There will still be someone claiming it was abducted by Martians though.
I do not quite understand the reasoning of the two podcasters here. If the Captain wanted to show the world how genius he was and how much he knew about planes, then it is totally rational to shut down the power. Hopefully every experienced Captain knows what the APU and rat thingy do. Also you say, it is very unlikely that the Captain knew all this technical stuff and then argue that he need not have switched off all of the power... well... maybe he did not know exactly which AC bus he had to turn off and therefore played it "safe" and turned everything off. Also, he did not fly completely straight.
May have been better to talk with one or both of those whose opinion you disagree with rather than a nothing interview with Juan.
Weak, dumb questions for Juan. We are not discussing a normal pilot who wants to land at Heathrow.
I think you are lucky to have Juan Brown on your podcast - his Blancolirio channel is exceptional and mainly deals in facts and evidence with clear logical explanations of cause and outcome and what may have prevented this. Completely different from this case where it’s mostly conjecture and speculation - really not his area to get involved in.
I’m surprised you didn’t even ask Juan about turning on and off the SDU! Or if he knew how to do it. I thought that would be the first question.
You mean, if he would know how to do it? You're right, I should have. I asked this question of 777s pilots back in 2014 and they all said "The what??" Juan does kind of make this point when he says that for someone to do something like this they would have had to do research beforehand into the system because 777 pilots wouldn't off the top of their heads which equipment is on which bus. /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetworkI am curious why the conversation around this is always that a single pilot done everything or a single hijacker done everything? Why couldn’t the pilot have been working together with other people, or the hijacker’s in a brigade of people?
@@queendomofethelpodcast4662 It just takes more than one hijacker and everything which can be puzzling about mh370 instantly becomes trouble-free. This is what I conclude happened.
Your idea that there were hijackers AND that Zaharie was willingly helping them, was a part of them, is a bit bizarre though.
@@lecochonbleu it’s just a possibility I am suggesting is worth checking. I agree that it is most likely a hacker, however I personally believe this was more likely a group who had a specific plan, and with the times of radio calls and some other interesting background aspects that is what leads me to say it’s worth checking if the pilot was part of that, however that said I do not believe he was ever planning to kill people or himself and believe they landed the plane somewhere and changed the flight path and that’s how he was still very calm when going to work
@@queendomofethelpodcast4662
I agree with you about that there was a number of hijackers. They could well have used the captain, forcing him to do things for them. You're free of course to theorise what you want but I can't work out how it could be that he was actually involved with hijackers.
He was a top-class pilot for decades, one of the most respected senior pilots of the airline, flying people every week, a number of times per week, always taking the safety of hundreds of people in his hands and always making sure to transport them safely and get them back to terra firma to get on with their lives. All of this is done only with the great sense of responsibility for his passengers which a pilot had.
Suddenly, then, to be a part of some hijackers, going against everything he's done day after day for most of his life, doesn't add up to me.
In the case of a suicidal pilot, would many of his actions be chosen so to avoid evidence of suicide, either for his own honor or to make sure his family got a life-insurance payout?
I am convinced it was pilot suicide, committed by the Captain.
You guys are actually speaking against yourselves assuming that shat the pilot did was supposed to be reasonable? Exactly as unreasonable as you assume the theories to the assumption that the pilot controlling the flight till the end would actually doing anything reasonable or would not be able to get the information on the systems of the aircraft to do exactly what is suggested. Why the resistance to explore the theory in search?
Well, the idea I was trying to get across is that even if someone's goals seem irrational to you (e.g. like killing yourself) there are things that they can do to further those goals that make sense, or not. And nothing about rebooting the SDU would seem to further that goal. For what it's worth, I'm not resistant to exploring the pilot-suicide theory; on the contrary, I think I've studied it quite hard, because I want to know its strengths and weaknesses. /JW
There's one thing Mentour Pilot said that I found instructive, I think he makes a good case that Zahari sounded distracted on the last recorded comms. Realistically, time wise whatever was done to take control of the plane must surely have been underway at that point anyway.
Then you have the French documentary (complete with bad AI translated English commentary) that revealed the Co-Pilot's documented history of inviting random passengers into the cockpit and his general laxness about security procedures... (go to 23:45 here) ua-cam.com/video/IZ4gHPwdkyI/v-deo.html
These points are both true; I question how probative they are, though. There are a lot of things that can cause a mild amount of stress, and the fact that the copilot once let some pretty girls into the cockpit does not mean that he did so on that particular night. /JW
Actually if you listen to the last two calls you can hear significant STATIC increases and that is an indication of the wiring being tampered with so could definitely have been from someone in the electronics bay and that distraction could be that the pilot was noticing these odd interferences and calling in the same level twice is commonly to test audio so that’s what that seems to be. I do not believe anyone would’ve been in the cockpit yet, however once the last call was made it’s highly possible the Captain handed it over to Copilot to fly with autopilot to step out and get coffee and food as that’s the most common time a pilot would leave to get food
There’s nothing abnormal about the last 3 radio calls. The reduction in quality and slight change to Zaharie’s voice is easily explained by him using the hand held mic(many do once in cruise).
Repeating FL350 calls are typically used as a hint to ATC for a level change or frequency change or something else quite mundane.
Speaking quicker in a transmission could also be for some other normal mundane reason..perhaps he needed to go to the loo, perhaps the cabin had buzzed him at the same time, perhaps radio congestion required him to squeeze a call in between other transmissions.
"Zaharie sounded distracted on the last recorded comms".
Well, something happened to the plane and 239 living people.
The official Safety Investigation concluded that, whilst nothing could be known and confirmed, there was a lot about the mh370 evidence which suggested anecdotally more that the plane was intelligently controlled than that it was flying itself.
So what might be a distracted voice in a radio message (which I didn't hear myself, though I do note some people believe it and I won't argue against that) is to be expected whatever really did happen to mh370.
If indeed the last communication showed a distracted voice, is it more likely this would be because a pilot was quite calmly putting into place his suicide plan, or because someone was holding a gun to the back of his neck and someone else was holding a gun to the head of his co-pilot beside him?
If the last message did come from a slightly distracted voice, that can't really in itself tell us anything about what really happened.
Some people hypothesise a remote takeover or hacked flight of the fly-by-wire plane which, if you really do a bit of research, all experts say is not only possible but ah increasingly worrying situation for the world of flying. Within that theory, it would be possible the last message didn't even come from Zaharie but a computer generated message deep fake voice.
@@TimHickmott I appreciate that feedback. Can you explain to me how a hand held mic works and if that means he could technically have left the cockpit with that mic, or is it connected to the cockpit?
So Mentour got everything else right except Zahari only turning off the left bus. Zahari had 18635 hours. He was certainly capable of finding out how to best do this. So saying Mentour got it wrong is splitting hairs. Zahari was probably capable of pulling off the total shut down as well so Mentours theory is the best one out there. Mentour said we will not be certain until Ithe boxes are found. Mentour produced the best theory. The Netflix documentary was way far fetched and sensational sounded like hogwash to me.
Well, no, I wouldn't say that Mentour got everything else right; there are other major aspects of his theory that I think also look quite different on closer examination. As far as the total shut down, the two things to understand is that a) it is absolutely anathema to 777 pilots b) it serves no useful function. But more importantly, I think what you're missing is that my goal is not to have a showdown between different theories, to find the one that is most convincing to people with a surface-level analysis. My goal is to provide a deep level understanding of the mystery, and only then try to sort out what kind of scenario makes sense. /JW
I don’t think it is too hard to understand what is powered by the left bus. You could probably find that manual online. Hand flying at cruise altitude is the real problem. The flight envelope is very narrow at cruise altitude and would require very focused attention.
Not that hard in a 777. I have done it several times but not for an extended period of time.
Tom from Germany writing. Sorry to say, it started out as a neutral podcast that I really enjoyed, but ever since focusing almost entirely on the barnacles you guys have completely LOST it.
OMG, where do I even start:
1. It seems you invite people on the podcast until someone finally confirms what you want to hear. Example: Ken, the british IT expert, after him you mentioned talking to another guy who basically confirmed Ken's opinion. But that's not enough which is why you eventually find a guy that goes along with your theory. Yes Jeff and Andy, so much for blaming the Aussies and other experts for only accepting what they want to hear - you guys are not an inch better. Or why did you Jeff need that third IT opinion if not for confirmation, please explain to us all?
2. Comparing barnacle growth to tree rings. How ridiculous is that please. Like Jeff I am a scuba diver nearing 1000 dives. I have seen one and the same turtle eating barnacles from a wooden log in the Andaman Sea for dive after dive on the same day. It seemed not to leave that log until it finished its meal. But I am not even claiming a turtle or any animal might have eaten the flaperon's barnacles. What I want to say is: it's a wild stormy Ocean, not a peaceful forest. The "growth reliability" of barnacles and trees is nowhere comparable, that is downright stupid. Anything could have happen to barnacles on a long journey like that and yet, that is what mostly you are basing you theory on?
3. If the 777 cannot be flown/steered from the electronic bay, as I understood it, what do you assume happened? Guess at some point someone must have gotten access to the cockpit then. But then why no Mayday or distress message to air control? Oh, you think one Russian guy was down in the bay to first turn off communications while another guy then somehow opened the cockpit to point the gun and force the captain to do that manual maneuver at IGARI that indeed only he could have done? Come on, you are now in a deep rabbit hole yourselves guys.
But most important and obvious of all:
You just cannot on one side lift the Russian governent upon the throne of human super intelligence to gather all insider knowledge, go through all the extremely meticulous preparation and carrying out of mid-air hacking including even anticipating a later never-done-before BFO search to start thinking "hmm, we better spoof that"...
While on the other side declare them (Russians) absolute idiots, because idiotic, dangerous and completely senseless is what hijacking MH370 would be for Russia. The Russians would NEVER NEVER intentionally steal or shoot down a plane with mostly chinese people on it. Or how many Chinese people again did the shot down MH17 include? Oops none, now why do you think that is?
They are smart and their launching unit waited all day for a flight with a fitting passenger list - that easy.
If we can agree to the fact that they are smart enough to have known the MH370 passenger list beforehand, guys, you can simply put your theory to waste, it's that simple.
Just forget it. Cause if you don't I must suspect that you're in this just for other reasons like selling books and gaining sponsors.
Deeply disappointed where this series has gone,
Tom from Germany
I'm a journalist and author. There's no way anybody could expect to get rich (or even survive) off doing this. They do it because they care.
@adscooter
It's quite funny reading your comment because you're claiming Deep Dive Mh370 is guilty of being stuck in confirmation bias - yet your own criticism of their theories itself appears to be unable to go anywhere meaningful because it's too fixated in trying to confirm its own original biases.
I can confirm that we’re not doing it to get rich or to quit our full-time jobs. -Andy
Most pilots think the captain took dole control of the aircraft and followed a plan to took his own life along with those of the passengers. Why go out if his way to prevent the investigation from finding the wreck and securing evidence of his actions? I can only speculate he wanted to protect his own reputation or his family or perhaps insurance had something to do with it. In Asia, there was the precedent of the Silk air crash where the captain pulled the CVR's cb prior to crashing the aircraft and the local authorities always denied the destruction of the aircraft was intentional - against the NTSB 's conclusions.
If the equipment cooling fan shuts off, there’s an alternate mode which uses the aircraft’s differential pressure to provide ventilation to the E/E compartment. True he would’ve been extremely busy but selection of that mode is unnecessary as it is activated automatically. Assuming above average system knowledge on the Captain’s part, he would’ve known that. Actually average system knowledge would include this information. Just my two bits as a 12 year 777 pilot. His instruments overheating would’ve been the least of his worries. Great discussion. Always enjoy Blancolirio and Mentour Pilot’s videos👍
Great to hear your perspective. I always enjoy hearing what 777 pilots have to say. What do you think about the idea of shutting down the left AC bus (at least) for no apparent benefit? Do you agree that that's something that most 777 pilots wouldn't even think about, let alone carry out? /JW
They are the best on aviation..mentor and blanc!
Those innocent passengers .
One more thing from the GD vid - at 13:24 he says that the final signal of the transponder proves that it it was turned off manually (ie that this wasn't an electrical fire or other accident). Would you guys agree with this? Would one go even slightly further and say.... does this prove that the transponder was switched off from the cockpit? It seems hard to come up with scenarios where one or other pilot wasn't at least an accomplice if this is true.
There’s NO evidence that the transponder was turned off manually. GD was just quoting what other independent, self appointed experts have claimed. There have been no trials as to what happens to the ADS-B signals when the transponder is turned off in flight. If anything, the last two ADS-B zero altitude values show a failing system- but I would only be guessing, much like the self appointed experts!
Great point. Maybe we should do an episode about this... /JW
I think the SDU tells us that _someone_ had extensive knowledge of the plane to do something drastic. It’s hard for me to interpret the evidence from the SDU and the ADS-B data blip indicating the switch being shut off manually shows anything other than that. The theory that the pilot did it would explicitly require that the pilot researched it extensively; the theory that a passenger did it would require the same.
If someone had pulled the circuit breakers in the equipment bay, why would anyone have pushed the breakers back in later on after the ACARS mode was deselected in the cockpit such that no data were transmitted? In my opinion, the fact that the power was restored indicates it was done via the AC bus and there existed some reason that the power down state couldn’t be maintained indefinitely. I think it’s worth considering that there might be non-SDU reasons to power down the bus.
To me, the green dot theory makes the most sense since the assertion (which I can’t confirm) that the result of isolating the AC bus led to insufficient cooling and would have led to overheating had the operating mode continued in that fashion. It may have also been an autopilot concern. We might also consider that there might have been other motivations, ie did the IFE which was also disabled have any external communications? Did the crew phones allow external communication and were they also disabled?
In my opinion I think that the pilot would have been more comfortable with the behavior of his native airspace and how to evade issues there than international. The evidence would bear out that he did succeed in not being noticed at the time by following the route he did.
I understand that this theory seems very specific but I think we have the capacity to follow the engineering clues here to differentiate, because I think there has to be a reason for the SDU to be powered down and back up. It may have been incidental.
Jeff, I love when you said "I'm trying to basically pry people's fingers off a sense of certainty surrounding this scenario". This is spot on! It seems like people are almost emotionally attached to the theory that Zaharie is responsible, to the extent that they won't entertain any other theories. In my opinion, the idea that Zaharie carried this out is just as insane as any other theory.
Thanks for another great episode! Glad I became a member! I really enjoy both of your dedication to this mystery.
Thank you so much. Couldn't agree more about Zaharie. /JW
Indeed..I agree with you. A lot of people are so hooked on The Zaharie Theory that it will be so difficult for them to look at other theories objectively.
It's completely normal to have a nearly identical self-ending flight scenario on a home computer, correct?
In addition to being a 777 pilot, Juan is also a former US Air Force pilot. Mentour has done many accident reviews of crashes I'd researched and had so much new information it's incredible.
Really enjoying the podcast. I respect the reasoned and rational discussion and scientific approach to this incredible mystery. Great work. Keep it up
Thank you, so glad you're enjoying it.
*I was expecting you guys to ask this Blancolirio guy to answer the questions raised by greendot and mentour pilots about someone turning these Electrical buses from the cockpit, he said that you should not do it but what will happen if its actually turned off by someone?*
I'm sorry, could you explain? /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork The Blancolirio guy said in general terms that one should not mess with the Electrical system but I was expecting you would ask him okay, that is fine, but what if someone actually does this during the flight, what happens then? Would we see a scenario that was mentioned by greendot and Mentour Pilot or the outcome would be different? You also mentioned that you could see one flaw in the reasoning from greendot in the Electronic compartment things were getting hot, where in reality very few electronic systems were running. I want to know if you could ask blancolirio to actually answer this scenario in practical terms rather than simply saying that one should not mess with electric systmes.
@@RustamShahI think the main point was that virtually nobody knows what would happen when you turn off the electric circuit, including pilots, because it's considered far too dangerous to do so. That is, except in an absolute emergency when you're trying to save the plane anyway, when you don't have a choice and there isn't exactly a worse situation than the situation already facing the plane at that time. You can't just try it out in flight and consumer grade flight simulators also don't include this option to try in a safe space.
The guest pilot stressed the very real fears of not knowing actually what kind of things can go wrong and might not be able to be put right in time if you do experiment with the electrical circuits.
Jeff made the point that disabling the electric circuits to turn off the communications was nothing required by Zaharie if he had wanted to crash the plane and kill himself and everyone else. Moreover, disabling electrics complicates all practicalities in any such intended suicide situation and along with other moves which mh370 made such as flying over Butterworth combined Air Forces base, could well end such an attempt. Therefore it doesn't even make sense that Zaharie would do that within this suicide theory.
In itself this known element of the mh370 mystery is just another argument going for that the murder - suicide hypothesis doesn't make sense in the end.
@@RustamShahRight! Just saying that a pilot *shouldn’t* mess with it seems to kind of miss the point. If Mentour Pilot and Greendot’s theories are right, Zaharie wasn’t exactly following procedures anyway. We aren’t wondering what he should have done, we are wondering what he did.
So, here is what we know and my takeaway from this episode...IMHO...
1. The electrical / power and communication systems were shut down in one short swoop and at the right moment, that happened...
2. The plane continued to fly on whatever other power (RAT, etc, who knows...), that happened...
3. The electrical systems / power were turned back on when the PIC thought he was in the clear, that happened...
4. Were it not for the inmarsat info, we would all have no clue where that plane likely went to this day...that happened...
What this tells us is that the PIC knew something most people and pilots did not about that plane...he clearly knew this plane and its power & electricals more than just the flight simulator he had at home...and it surprises me that the commentators here refuse to give him that credit...he probably had the blue prints of that plane's electricals and studied them to a fault...remember also that he (presuming it was Capt. Zaharie) had a YT channel teaching things akin to fixing electrical systems and devices...
Jeff says it makes no sense what he did and that it was all for nothing...but the point is he did it and did it so well that it still baffles everyone to this day how he could have...duped radar, duped ATCs and most other detection systems in real-time, and only in hindsight can we decipher some of it...and here we are!
Furthermore, the fact that it happened seemingly as planned makes almost all other arguments moot at this point...the fact that it happened as it happened may be what was intended to happen...writing it off as mere coincidence and happenstance takes away from the known "facts" of the matter...
Increasingly, if the PIC was Capt. Zaharie, that guy was a diabolical genius (no offence intended to anyone), more than most people are willing to give him credit for...
And it is now extremely imperative that we find that plane and get some answers...
That’s a very, very good summary of how I feel about it. -Andy
DeeKay-yy7op
You say that Zaharie was most likely behind what happened. It's a guess among other guesses, but I think you missed that this episode had an expert & professional Boeing 777 pilot on (the mh370 plane model) who stressed stressed that 777 pilots do not know these kinds of things about the plane.
Basically pilots are taught kind of flowcharts of what to do at all particular times, and in certain, unusual eventualities and that is all they are told. The thinking is that if they're told any more then that, the great importance of sticking to the flowchart procedures may be lost, particularly in emergencies, and they may become confused. The pilot needs certainty, focus and confidence in himself or herself at all times and extraneous information may easily get in the way of that.
What this actually means is that it's in fact very hard for pilots to learn more about these planes than they're taught - and this usually include instructors, who mostly pass on the same info they once received to new trainees and junior pilots. Maybe instructors get a tiny bit of information more, but not any more.
I'm not a pilot but I once went through learning to fly, or rather trying to learn to fly (because I'm too frightened by a cockpit at the end of the day to fly myself) and my instructor told me this.
You actually have to ask how could Zaharie figure out these things. There are so few people who know such things - airplane systems designers and some airplane construction workers (and not many in construction because it's quite compartmentalised and some workers know some things only while others know other things) and some very senior maintenance workers who know more or less less a total overview of the plane model.
That's in the construction and maintenence industries. In the airlines world, from what I learned, generally a whole large airline may have one or two people who know these things about a plane or, honestly, it may have none. Maintenence and checking is usually outsourced beyond the airline.
It is possible that the pilot of mh370 who took off from Kuala Lumpur could have found out more information, but most pilots don't really even have the ability or the sources themselves.
Apart from construction and maintenance industry people, I know for a solid fact that the other category of people who know everything about how each model of airplane used in each country works is intelligence agency staff of numerous countries. That definitely includes the USA and Russia. The stories of dedicated laptop computer like devices which can be plugged into the Electronics bay and then control the airplane, are all perfectly true. This was indeed true decades ago, very old news, because today's concern is unknown parties doing this to a plane remotely, exploiting a vulnerability, without having to go anywhere near the plane themselves.
However that also means that ex-spies keep in-depth knowledge of how the old planes they learned about work. It is fathomably possible that retired spies from one country or another could sell their information - and indeed hands-on expertise - to some kind of rogue outfit.
But if so, what would be the gain for those spies/rogues??
I don't believe in 'just for fun'. @@lecochonbleu
@@lecochonbleuYou said " but I think you missed that this episode had an expert & professional Boeing 777 pilot on (the mh370 plane model) who stressed stressed that 777 pilots do not know these kinds of things about the plane." That is just a statement of fact - it simply wasn't part of their training curriculum. You go on to say "What this actually means is that it's in fact very hard for pilots to learn more about these planes than they're taught". Again, just because that information wouldn't be part of the normal training program doesn't mean it would be very hard for pilots to learn more.
You continue "There are so few people who know such things - airplane systems designers and some airplane construction workers (and not many in construction because it's quite compartmentalised and some workers know some things only while others know other things) and some very senior maintenance workers who know more or less less a total overview of the plane model." I don't know how you arrived at this conclusion; I think most of this information could be easily obtained by a pilot.
@@Xorg462
To reply to you ("I don't know how you arrived at this conclusion"). I didn't. I didn't arrive at the conclusion, and just like you, to me it would also seem to be impossible to work out such a state of things in your head.
I didn't "arrive at the conclusion". I know it as fact from my own experience. I took training to fly in the past and have known numerous people in the industry, particularly pilots and more importantly than that (because they tend to know so much more), trainers in flight schools including heads of flight schools with a lot of networked industry involvement.
It's a profoundly mysterious thing to have an aircraft fly for 5 or so hours without a transponder! Especially given the track was in close proximity to the air force base, and ATC contact was lost!
That's reason enough to be very concerning to ALL passengers on aircraft!
Then to have a airliner crash location not discovered after 10 years plus is a highly disturbing outcome.
It doesn't inspire confidence in air travel, not at all! 😮😮😮
Juan seems to be able to sum up how you fly the 777 in a concise manner. Juan’s the best. Look at his back ground and he will be the guy you want to fly with every time. His background includes the 707, 727, 757, 767, 777 and other non-Boeing products. Thanks Juan for interesting commentary.
Re the oddity that Zaharie repeated his altitude 6 mins or so after it was already confirmed with ATC, what I've never heard about is whether the he had a habit of repetition when speaking with ATC.
It may be / have been interesting to listen to previous conversations with ATC (if available), and whether previous co-pilots were aware of such a repetition habit.
Not that I suspect Zaharie per se, but would be good to rule out this oddity as having any significance.
I realise that this repeat of altitude would've been mentioned in an early episode, but I just thought about this just now.
You could be right, but I'm just not sure how following this line of inquiry would bring us closer to any answers. For my money, it's pure speculation to read any meaning into the repeated call, so I don't see much value to be derived from ascertaining whether he repeated calls frequently or not. /JW
I flew at an airline that had the RAT (Ram air turbine) deploy on two separate occasions (757). The pilots all said the vibration it produced was terrible.
So why do you guys find the theory that the Captain crashed the plane on purpose so unbelievable? Especially since there are indications he practiced a similar route on his simulator?
This is wrong. Inmarsat cannot determine a power cycle from the ground. An internal sdu event can cause a soft reset to modems which looks the same. Soft resets happen. All Inmarsat see is a modem stops talking…it may or may not come back. A modem soft reset does not log off, it is a hard exit from the network. Depending on sdu the modem may come back, another sdu will register, an internal modem failover may happen etc. the assumption that power was disturbed is bad.
You did not ask the main question e.g. if there is a fire on board, do you turn off the 2 busses? Wasted interview.
We did actually address this. /JW
I get so tired at dolts knocking Boeing these days. I have a very good friend who hit mandatory retirement last year. In his career with Pan Am and Atlas flying 747s, he reached 35,000 hours! In all that time he never had an emergency, not even a flat tire. On a side note, he actually flew the first and the last 747.
Mindless meandering babbling... Very disappointing.
Hey here’s a thought, perhaps someone in conjunction with the pilot stowed away in the electrical bay, just to cycle the SDU?? It’s not uncommon for maintenance people to walk into the plane at any given moment during the preflight checks. Mind you, it would mean they also went missing. This could have been a likely scenario if they flew the plane north instead of south. Stuff of mystery, very interesting and compelling to say the least.
Thank you! The major problem with the pilot being behind a spoof scenario is that it's so sophisticated that it really would require state-level expertise to pull off, I think. /JW
Jeff, On My PMDG 777-200ER simulator, if I isolate the left AC bus (i.e. cut off any electricity from it) I get an ECAM a warning message stating the Satellite Terminal is off line.
So let's go through the options to turn off the satellite.
1) Just de-activate the left AC Bus. Can you please confirm from Juan if he could check in the real simulator that would take offline the satellite terminals? If this is so then this would be the less dangerous way of getting the aircraft satellite terminals off line.
2) Turn off APU and all generators. This will deploy the RAT. The aircraft would be flying with minimal systems. However, this would very likely take all the aircraft satellite terminals off line.
3) Go down to the avionics bay and pull the appropriate circuit breakers. Issues are how would he know which ones to pull. Also not enough time to get down the avionics bay. SO THIS OPTION CAN BE REALISTICALLY ELIMINATED.
Jeff if ok with you can you confirm with Juan that the best options from the pilots point of view to take the Satelllite terminals off line are:
FIRSTLY OPTION 1
SECONDLY OPTION 2
Your analysis of the situation matches the general consensus. (I don't think we need to ask Juan, as I don't think there's anything controversial about your assumptions here.)
I’ve been watching Juan for years. That was an awful interview…of course a pilot who wants to fly the plane is going to follow procedures and not “go freelancing.” But if your goal is to crash the plane and cause a mystery and go down in history that way, then you learn how to do the necessary things. Juan often learns and explains very technical systems that he learned in order to share that to his viewers. It’s not something that he uses in practice. For example, I seriously doubt he understood how a Max door was put together until that incident, which he instantly learned and shared, and he’s done that with many more technical videos. But as an intelligent man, he could certainly learn how to do what he wanted. As Zahari probably did.
Also, I saw a time recreation and it was entirely possible for Zahari to go down to turn off the system in time if he wanted to.
Sorry, this isn’t meant to be mean, but Jeff sounds like a 4th grader to me. He imagines people can’t learn without “god level knowledge?” Dude is lost in the weeds.
Why is he assuming Zahari was an ordinary pilot? He keeps insisting on that, which is not even on topic. A smart human can learn anything. Why can’t Zahari have wanted to commit a crime, a mystery, and commit suicide without knowing the exact outcome? The odds were good by turning off what he did and slipping past radar that he had gotten away with it. He may not have needed certainly. Why are you assuming he wanted it to be easy? His motivation may have been not to be easy but to try to cause a mystery. Of course, he wouldn’t know the outcome but he was capable of trying. Because you can’t imagine it doesn’t mean nobody can. You probably can’t imagine serial killers either.
I had thought it was likely Zahari long before I saw Petter’s and Emmet’s videos, because of Occam’s razor, and the wreckage which has been found which has been proven to come from MH300. Their videos make a lot more sense than that disjointed Netflix doc and bizarre theories about Diego Garcia or whatever.
I don’t know what happened but I think the many videos that point to Zahari are likely on the mark. I hope they continue the search and the plane is found and there is enough evidence left that it clears things up. You guys too have made a lot of assumptions that I’m not convinced you even know you are making, like it’s impossible to learn electronics systems in planes when that is patently untrue.
Hopefully we’ll one day find out.
You wrote, "But if your goal is to crash the plane and cause a mystery and go down in history that way, then you learn how to do the necessary things." What are the necessary things? /JW
Very thought provoking. A skilled pilot willing to take his life as well as passengers and crew might be considered crazy and might therefore take extreme risks like hand flying his aircraft after turning off all electrical power, except the RATT. His extensive sim work during annual refresher training would have taught him that nobody messes with the top left panel, but he did so because he didn’t care about the unknown consequences.
The content could be easily be conveyed in 5 mins …. Bla bla
Really enjoy my weekly mystery demystifying. Thanks guys. Loved the book Jeff and you did great on your solo ep
You're too kind, really appreciate your support. /JW
There are lots of comments on cooling. Reg define that equipment must operate with no cooling. It may reduce performance, reduce features etc but safety is maintained. Loss of cooling for example is not a mayday…
Jeff, let me first say thank you for this podcast. As an avid reader of your blog from 2017-18, I was fascinated by this mystery, and you kept referring to the SDU reboot as the crucial part of getting to the bottom of it. At first I thought this podcast was too long-winded, but it is my kind of content exactly: long-form, meticolous, but not long-winded at all!
In a previous comment I already asked about the particulars of the Green Dot and Mentour Pilot counter-arguments, and you promised that in a later episode, this on point discussion will happen. And now a 777 pilot chimes in - great stuff!
I still have some questions - but that's just the nature of this mystery, ain't it? 😄
So what the 777 pilot kept on saying was "you don't ever mess with those switches, unless you are instructed to do so by an emergency checklist". So far so good and logical. But my next question would have been: "Are there any emergency drills - done in professional aviation-grade flight simulators - that involve responding to an emergency by handling those switches?" So as an absolute layman, my guess is that in flight sims, the airline pilots are simulating various emergencies so they can practice instrument failure, unfavorable weather conditions and other kind of dangerous scenarios which are calling for the use of emergency checklists. How often do pilots practice this? How many of them involve those switches?
The point of this question is: you demonstrated that a regular 777 pilot during normal operation would never ever even touch that panel - but practicing emergency scenarious should happen often, so if those emergencies often involve the power system switches, then even a regular 777 pilot should have some experience in what exactly happens when each of those switches are operated.
So putting on my Devil's Advocate hat, if you allow me 🙂 Right now, as I understand your argument, Jeff, we should not assume that Zaharie ever went deep into how the electrical system of a 777 works, since we have no evidence of him tampering with these switches on previous flights, etc. But maybe by practicing emergency scenarios he could have got some experience with this, and maybe "found" a configuration (with or without intentionally looking for it) that allowed him to shut down the SDU and some more systems that were irrelevant for his goal at hand, and then later he switched the systems back on, thus rebooting the SDU?
And let me tell you: this investigation is not about what is possible or what is not possible (your "walking on my hands" analogy is spot on!), but about creating scenarios that are viable to explain all the facts surrounding this SDU reboot, and then choosing one that best fits the big picture (barnacles and all that!) So it has to bee a deep dive (no pun intended!) into that panel, maybe there should be switch by switch breakdown of what happens if the pilot turns off this one, then that one, etc. We have simulators to be able to test that - although again, a 777 pilot's help might be needed to test how viable is the scenario of Zaharie gaining experience on this during simulated emergency drills, and maybe if that 777 pilot would be so kind and think about if someone's goal is to cut power to the SDU, what would be the simplest way for him to do it from the cockpit, etc.
Many-many more things to explore about this crucial point, and as of now (took me long enough, listening to 30 eps), but now I'm convinced that you guys are really enthusiastic about this mystery to go through these - and many other - aspects in a thorough manner - your track record (including the excellent jeffwise.net blog) proves that so far 😀
So Jeff - would you be able to ask this - or a different - 777 pilot in a later episode about emergency drills? Or any other training material that 777 pilots are regularly subjected to, that would cover the functionality of the switches on that panel? Maybe we can craft a scenario that matches the facts, maybe we can't but it's fascinating to learn more and more about MH370 and aviation in general, that's for sure 😄
Thank your this. I really appreciate your kind words and the time you've taken to listen to all of these episodes (and read my blog!). I'm glad that you think that these questions are worth exploring, because I very much want to continue to explore them and actually already have another 777 pilot lined up, and will include your follow-up questions when I talk to him. /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork Excellent news, thank you Jeff for this, and all of your efforts you are investing into solving MH370!
just out of curiosity has been any research done into A.I.R.C.I.A patient with diagrams on where this system is to be patched into the flight system. As well as the A.T. I automatic tranquil infusion system. Neutralizing the whole plane, passangers, and crew. To far fetched?? Maybe but the fact that its been developed on the grounds of safety as a "anti hijacking" system. L but could also appeal to others with m0re nefarious intentions might have something to do with the name of the patient AIR-C_A
Surely if you’re saying the guy deliberately killed everyone on board, himself included, you can hardly apply the same standard of safety consciousness to him as to other trip-7 pilots? Why wouldn’t he switch the power off? If it went down there and then; job done!
Yeah Vatos, it's very interesting how you vatos are laying it all down. I really enjoy listening to the both of you. Thanks vatos😊
Mate the guy who wrote the book looks and sounds like a paranoid drug addict 🙈😂
My Theory is, Someone is shipping something from KLIA to Beijing, and USA or Isreal does not want that to happen.
The cargo contain 3Ton of "mangosteen". That is suspecious.
You didn’t even ask him the question … Do you know how to disable the ACAMS ?
When you have Juan Browne and even Ron Rogers ( retired UA B777 captain ) on UA-cam, it’s going to be good
Jeff makes a very probable argument against suicide. Kudos. Not often that he makes a good argument, but he did the job here with intrepid common sense.
Amazing that plane flew for so long, flying over enemy territories without being intercepted or checked out
It does sound crazy that someone would play with an electrical bus and willingly shut off all main systems of a 777 but then again the extremely big elephants in the room are the arcs and the simulator flight paths. How can you explain those without considering if in fact turning off the SDU was done willingly.
Also, do not underestimate sea exploration effots. Its incredibly hard to survey the ocean floor
The reboot of the systems may have happened because the APU kicked back in when the engines ran out of fuel. People have suggested that the plane automatically tries to start up the APU when the engines get starved of fuel.
The APU fuel is from a standpipe which causes the APU to run out of fuel before the engines. Also if you lose an engine or engine generator the APU starts automatically. The check list tells you to move the APU switch to run so the switch is in agreement with the actual condition of the APU.
Mentour Pilot is a commercial captain and line check captain for a European airline. Every one is speculating which both they say... We might never get the answer but a lot of people are making money on this tragedy.
Mentour Pilot normally does a fair job, but I have found fault in some of his historical items on aircraft design. The things I have found fault with are because I was actually there and involved.
Upon complete electrical system shut-down - due to malfunction or nefarious actions - the 777 has mechanical backup via cables to 2 of the 14 spoilers for roll control and also to the horizontal stabilizer for pitch control. The aircraft CAN be flown with the entire electrical system turned OFF (above the Captain on the overhead panel) with the auto-deploying RAT (Ram Air Turbine) supplying hydraulic and electrical power until electrical service can be restored.
This means that the aircraft could have easily been flown for several hours in this configuration until the engines flamed out.
Yes, absolutely, it can be flown. I guess my goal with this episode is to try to counter the assumption that the SDU reboot is no big deal because the pilots can just easily switch the entire electrical system on and off with no fear of the consequences. In reality, they would be extremely loathe to do so, so much so that this idea should be considered a major weakness in the pilot-suicide scenario. /JW
MH370 is very much an enigma. Every proposed solution sounds reasonable but then when you think about it critically holes pop up and cause you to think it must be something else. The only thing that makes sense is it that it was intentional act. But then we are still left with move. The why? What was the motive? Was there a larger enterprise providing logistical support or "motivation" to execute the mission or plan? If it was part of an intention then was was there no post event announcement to take credit, to show how powerful our group is? Some of the concern about the practicality about some proposed pilot actions, maybe that to achieve the goal then risky steps must be taken. Maybe that is part of the solution, maybe someone took a chance and that chance did not payoff. It just goes around and around.
I'm so glad to have found this channel since almost no-one out there seems to want to counter the cut-and-dry conspiracies which bend all rational analysis of facts to *try to* make it so Zaharie planned it. I've long argued against this in various forums snce it would have involved incredible risk, skill and genius-level knowledge (of things that investigators and even manufacturers didn't know yet) - all for an incredibly complex plan to line up a sequence of events which had to play out exactly right... yet, as you put it, "all in the service of no apparent benefit". Outside of Marvel super-villians, it makes *no* sense for someone to commit suicicde like this - and even then *no-one* could plan and pull that off deliberately!
Yeah I'm just getting into looking into this. I don't know much about flying but I know a bit about the dark place you have to be to unalive yourself. If he wanted to go out with a splash, why didn't he take it down in a city? If he didn't want his body found, why did he want to make it so high profile?
Those types of plans are usually impulsive too. This was meticulous.
I never bought into the satellite theory that placed it South off of Australia! My theory is the crew allowed unauthorized people in the cockpit which according to reports they had a history of doing in. A struggle ensued to take control of the plane which accounts for the erratic altitude movements on radar before the plane turned West before dropping off of radar. I think it continued West, this explains the reports from multiple sources of a unusually low flying aircraft that morning over the Maldives. which have been totally ignored. I believe its probable intended destination was an island off of Yemen a haven for terrorists, probably Socotra airport which runway is large enough to land a 777. According to its wiki page it only has one commercial flight per week, and is relatively deserted other times. From the reported amount of fuel on board, a 777 flown normally could probably just about make it, but with the extra fuel needed to stay low, it went down somewhere in the Northwestern Indian Ocean This is also supported by the debris found on the islands off of Africa. Of course there is no proof of this, just another theory that matches the timeline of events if the current Satellite theory is wrong!
juan could talk about washing the dishes and i would still find him interesting lol. luv his channel.
In the episode Andy suggested that Zaharie's flight simulator 'probably' wasn't sophisticated enough to simulate what would happen when shutting down the electrics and STU, but surely the answer to that question is absolutely knowable and essential to the whole debate. If it can be simulated then it would have been and suddenly Zaharie's plan seems far more easily achieved. Can you confirm?
Microsoft Flight Simulator X is a pretty crude piece of software, even compared to modern home flight simulators, let alone professional simulators used for airline pilot training. I don't think anyone would expect it to accurately model with wiring of a real 777. /JW
You guys did not talk about the possible use of en external GPS and an Ipad, precise hand flying needed, but doable so with the plane trimmed at cruise, this would be enough (no panel feedback required) for an hour or so. Depressurizing the back of the plane sends people to sleep, oxygen ask up front……has an hours worth of oxygen?
He maybe did get lucky, given that if you intend to be somewhere in a 1000 mile radius over an ocean……and not on a STAR, on a glide slope to a specific airport to land successfully, then much of the point of a checklist is kinda not necessary anymore?
Raising some interesting questions.... would have been better with a little less repetition in your remarks (we got it, we got it, really we got it) and emphasis on others' possibly faulty conclusions... you come off sounding a little envious of Mentour and Green Dot's popularity.
Appreciate the feedback. Trying to get better at podcasting as we go... /JW
I'm sorry but, Juan, was asked a couple of questions, but does he really weigh in? No, sorry he doesn't. For him to weigh in you would need to ask him better questions. This was click bait pure and simple. You got me, shame on me.
This is probably the most relevant and objective episode so far. A sophisticated hi jacking scenario involving the satnav/sdu would necessitate elaborate pre-planning even from a crew very experienced flying the 777. This logically would involve studying all available documentation including the bus distribution list. Did you check with JB whether he was aware of the existence/availabilty of such a document back in 2014?
Great question. I think it's been established that documents which were publicly available at the time included sufficient information for somoene to determine which pieces of equipment were on which bus, so it's not impossible to imagine a determined perp (in this case presumably Zaharie) could figure out how to turn off a piece of equipment in this way -- but the big question remains why they would do so. /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork @JW hmmm- From what I had read (Including one of your detailed blog posts about the SDU), I had been under the impression that there was neither a bus list published for the 777, nor did crews asked know where to find that information. If true that the crew could easily obtain the information that changes my outlook on possible scenarios. Could the reason for the action perhaps be to prevent the one other crew member from having a chance to use the cabin satellite phone?
Interesting but yalll have to condense the information....too much redundancy and fluff...UA-cam nerds want info fast and we also listen on 1.5X
This is a reply on 2 channels(Decoding the Unknown & Mentour), so it looks a bit strange.
The answer to the plane crash is: Captain Chesley Sullenberger
I'm on holiday at the moment and that means I get to watch a lot of UA-cam.
I have also wondered about what has happened with MH-370. Something Mentour mentions at the start is that a plane cannot disappear, plane parts will be found in the sea or on a beach.
Parts have been found and also more than I thought.
I had a conversation with my parents a few years ago about the matter. And my idea was to have spaces in the nose, wingtips and in the tail with balls where the plane's number will be written. It will make it possible to find more parts in the event of a plane crash.
As previously written in Mentour's video, it is said that a plane cannot disappear. Why haven't they investigated how a plane disappears ? There is a natural difference in how an aircraft behaves on land and on water. But what would an impact with a large concentration of debris or missing parts look like?
And then I think of a movie with Tom Hanks where he plays Captain Chesley Sullenberger.
How about comparing the preparations regarding Flight 1549 and MH-370 ?
I guess I’m an expert having 15000 hours on 777s and worked for Asian carriers for more than 20 years.
I’m always frustrated by people’s need for absolute certainty. Aviation accidents are almost always a strange and seemingly unlikely series of events. I don’t know what happened; some sort of human input seems likely but as you say is by no means certain. Someone taking over the plane could have left everything on and flown out to sea unmolested because at 3am doing 500 kts nobody is going to catch up with you in that region.
A few points:
- you don’t need the cooling fans for avionics at altitude, differential pressure will do the job.
- I have no idea how all the stuff on a 777 works, beyond a basic description that detail is not available, you need access to manufacturer documentation and assistance and you’d leave a massive trail.
- depowering and repowering the aircraft is no big deal, but I have no idea how it would affect the Satellite connection. For all I know it could have a backup battery for power transitions. Probably not but who knows?
-based on a piece of interior panel amongst the wreckage found it is likely the aircraft broke up on impact and is scattered on the sea floor. We’ll probably never know what happened.
I'm delighted to have 777 pilots weighing in. This a great point you make here -- that even after doing a lot of research Zaharie wouldn't have been 100% positive what effects turning off the left AC bus would have. Given that it had no apparent benefit for his plan, I think that's a huge red flag. /JW
The Human EGO Has Everyone Thinking They Know What Happened
I wonder if any of the washed up wreckage, like the flapperon, Roy, and no step have been available to see if there is evidence of being disassembled. By possibly examining what is left of the edges, I think if there could be saw marks, places that show to have been pressed by tools, or even if the process of disassembly is done with a plasma cutter or welding torch the metal would also hopefully have signs of being worked. Probably a long shot in making the case for eveidence, given the ocean's own abuse may be too much to distinguish where said markings could have come from.
This is a great question. Something that I've spent a fair bit of time looking at, but haven't yet discussed on the show, is the pattern of mechanical breakage that investigators found in the recovered debris items. It's actually quite interesting... /JW
Very interesting, Gentlemen, thank you. Does anyone know how much time Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah spent on his home simulator? Hours? Days? Weeks? Months? IF he was planning suicide, then he would have taken his time to meticulously plan it. Could the crucial top-secret American military base at Diego Garcia, Indian Ocean (which also has some of the most important C.I.A. floating bases) have anything to do with the disappearance of MH 370? I am sure you know, that B-2 Bombers and B-1B Lancers take off and land there.
Yes, the flight simulator data does show how often he used it, and it seems like he was on it fairly frequently. Although there was one flight to the southern Indian Ocean, it doesn't seem like he planned it meticulously, and nothing like the turnback at IGARI or a steep final plunge. As for Diego Garcia, a connection has been proposed but the plane couldn't have flown anywhere near there, if the Inmarsat data is real (which I assume it is). /JW
@@DeepDivePodcastNetwork Thank you for your reply. Another possibility: Could the two male Iranians on board with stolen passports have hijacked the aircraft? I know they were desperate to get to Europe; it seems bizarre that they would want to go to Beijing! In my opinion, these two were not looked into deeply enough.
@lynnchateau2313
There were hundreds of little flight simulations saved from Zaharie's home machine but not one of them showed any preparation at all for putting an airplane into the sea by any manner at all, whether in a slow, controlled ditch or a fast dive or anything in between.
It never even occurred to me....Why fly over an Airforce base if you are trying to vanish?
What I find interesting is that the co-pilot's phone is apparently the ONLY cell phone that connected to the cell tower in Penang. It stands to reason that a few of the passengers' phones would have connected, whether they were dead or alive. Did Shah instruct the passengers to turn their phones off? Possibly the co-pilot had been locked out of the cockpit, and suspecting that Shah had bad intentions, left his cell phone on hoping to call to the ground, or at least to leave some evidence of the plane's location.
Yes, it is uncanny that of all the 239 people on the plane, it was the co-pilot's phone that connected at Penang. It does make you wonder if he knew something, or was able to do something, that no one else could. /JW
Could be that reception is better in the flight deck? I’ve sometimes left mine on and had a bunch of “welcome to” messages from overflying countries.
I believe that the best way to navigate through life is to cultivate an attitude of not being sure.
Very well put. Couldn't agree more. /JW
Of course the "fire on board" theory holds water!!!!! The Oil Rig worker saw it; the lady on the boat saw it; the procedure for fire on board includes turning off the busses to isolate any electrical fire. Wow - to disregard the fire on board scenario is a big fault in your presentation.
Wouldn't a fire onboard that catastrophic bring down the plane a lot sooner? Past cases of fire (e.g. Swissair 111) have resulted in planes not remaining airborne for long
A plane on fire doesn’t fly for 6 more hours after it started. That doesn’t hold water
Yes it does.
@@tombombadill22 no it does not.
Its interesting that the two chaps here are debunking two experienced pilots with access and understanding of aviation practice, theory and actual manuals.
They also say they are somewhat unsure of these actual pilots as they are 'fixating' on the de-powering of the busses. whereas these guys are simply fixated on the loss of the SDU. in essence everyone is fixated on something. The reality is the SDU is not even considered a secondary system. certainly in my operator I don't know anyone who would know off hand which bus the SDU hangs off and what failure conditions would cause it to depower. The dive into the books, certainly Airbus books, would be long and laborious to find the answers to either question
With ref to their comments about electronics overheating at around the 35 minute mark, certainly on the 737 classic and the 757 if you were in a reduced power scenario you did indeed get overheating due to the loss of cooling. This usually resulted in the removal of colour restoring on the PFD / ND's. I have no experience on 777 as I'm now on the A320/A350 fleets but I would think it would fare better as the screens are LCD units not CRT's that generate more heat.
Episode 30 🎉 sorry to hear about your bicycle misdemeanor @Jeff 😮 But hey! Some people can’t walk up a flight of stairs without falling over multiple times 😂 great episode keep up the good work 😊
Thank you! Your kind words make up for the physical pain :) /JW
I watched Green Dot after I watched this episode the first time (and now I'm back watching it for the second time). One thing GD makes apparent was the long length of time (20 minutes plus?) when at most one person aboard the plane knew what was going on and everyone else must just have been in panic and horror. It's a terrible mental image. The biggest problem with GD is that he just throws out statements that have no proof. So, for example, he talks about Fariq Hamid's movements - he has no evidence for this (right?). So when he then goes on to talk about the simulator history I'm left wondering - does he actually have data for the assertions he makes about the timing of Zaharie's simulation runs?
It's true that Zaharie ran a suspicious-looking simulator run a month before the disappearance, but it's not as cut-and-dried evidence for his guilt as Green Dot suggests. We discuss the topic in Episode 23. /JW
I find the whole sabotage explanation implausible. How would Zahari know how to manipulate the complex electrical systems of a 777? He would need to have knowledge equivalent to that of the
aircraft's designers. Juan Browne is also a certified A & P mechanic, as well as a 777 pilot. If he could not accomplish this series of arcane manipulations, how would Zahari know how to do it? It strains credulity. I think there was a major systems failure on MH370,
which led to a cascade of other failures. Perhaps sudden depressurization, or an electrical
short leading to fire, or a computer malfunction. Hijacking by a passenger or passengers
is also a possibility.
Really? Are you sure, there is no info on the electrical systems on the web? No nerd-forum where this has been discussed before? No one who has wondered and discussed online how to make an airliner disappear? Mh....
Its good you keep asking questions. Keep it up .
I'm wondering, if Zaharie was the reason mh370 went missing, if his internet history has been released, covered and shows anything? Or was he asking any of his friends questions about 777's? Did he have any manuals or notes on 777s? If these dont show anything connected to powering off the various systems, that's a gaping hole in the s'cide/flying to a secret airfield theories.
How did he know and plan this complex chain of events would work (surely there would be evidence somewhere that he planned it?), and seemingly get away with it.
To me, the complexity doesn't support s'cide, the official story really sounds like a cover-up , perhaps of a state sanctioned operation.
You raise an excellent point -- there really isn't anything in Zaharie's background at all, including his known internet use, that suggests either an inclination toward this sort of thing or planning towards it. /JW
He made this exact journey in his home simulator then tried to delete the evidence
Two questions: 1. Doesn't a pilot as they are goung thru the training pipeline, have to learn the systems?...granted, not to the level of a technician, but don't they have to learn the "what" and the "why"? 2. Where is the debris? This is the biggest area of contintion I have...weather crashed, or shot down, why is there not more debris...if you look back at Swiss Air 111, a million pieces. A hollow tube filled with air suddenly being filled with rushing water from the high speed impact of a nose dive, equals tremendous over pressure that lliteraly results like a balloon popping. Damage analysis of flaparon sections suggest controlled ditching.
A
The 777 I flew had 162 computers on board controlling everything and there was a back-up to the back-up. No one at Boeing or any place else can explain the whole electrical system. It is to complicated.
There was a recent crash, I believe, of a small jet flying for a couple hours no response. Military jets did not scramble until heading for Washington, DC
Surely it’s possible to run various theories in an approved and accurate to type sim. Surely this has been done?
I will say, I am not a fan of the pilot suicide theory and never have been. I think that we just don't see the evidence in his personal life - if he was struggling, he was struggling completely alone and never reached out to anyone, which seems extremely unlikely. However, I am very cautious about takeaways from this video. The fact that you guided Jaun into particular answers without the context (at least from what we saw), of what his word was going to be used to support is a bit of a red flag IMHO. And I think the expectations about what someone would or wouldn't do this far outside the normal envelope of operating a plane is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Thanks for another great episode! I have a few questions and comments:
1. On the discussion re: what the pilot would get from disabling the left AC bus - isn’t it possible that he purposely did this so that after the fact (not in real time) it would be harder to tie the crash to him (e.g., to save his family the shame of this)? This seems aligned with the rest of his actions to hide what happened to the plane under the pilot suicide theory.
2. You made the interesting point that if the pilot’s goal was to commit suicide without having the investigation lead to him, it would have been better to go to the Mariana Trench. Can you explore this more and show why that would be better? I’m particularly curious re: how the air traffic control map & air traffic would differ if he did that - I.e. would it be equally possible to get to the Mariana Trench while traveling along the borders of air traffic control regions to avoid detection? Would there be more or less traffic on that alternative path? Are there fewer military bases in that direction? If you could really show that the Mariana Trench path (or some other path) would be easier for someone trying to avoid detection that’d be interesting.
3. Is there any scenario in which he turned the satcom back on because he got tired of manually flying the plane so once he knew he was out of military radar range, turning the electrical systems on allowed him to use the autopilot again?
Thank you! Some responses: 1. A lot of ideas have been floated about Zaharie's motivation -- that he wanted to pull off the perfect crime, save himself and his family from blame, but also to humiliate the Malaysian government, somehow. I don't think that any of these ideas really make sense... 2. .... for example if his goal was to escape suspicion, pulling a U-turn at IGARI and flying over Butterworth Air Force Base definitely undercuts that goal. I like your idea of our discussing the Marianas Trench option in a future episode. 3. One could imagine this, but I think that it presupposes he turned off the electrical system, which as we point out in this episode is pretty far-fetched. /JW
In the first few minutes you've already lost credibility by suggesting the initial search was driven by some sense of certainty. I believe it was driven by a sense of uncertainty and the desire to solve the mystery. There is no bogeyman here, there's only theories that may have a higher confidence than others but no one has ever mentioned certainty. Sheesh.
OMg, just sak a 777 tech, he can probably recite the manual on how to isolate either bus, do really think they have switches that they don't know what they do?
What you guys describe in the end is a huge problem in general. U have half the world thinking climate change is a hoax or that the earth is flat cause of the fact that anyone can just go on youtube and make a convincing video which is presented as "fact". Nice chat guys! I had also see both Greendot and Mentour but this does shed a lot of new doubts in my mind.
Good evening DPN - yt algo took me to your channel for the first time today. Interesting podcast and intellectually stimulating but really no facts.
Just wondering - all this talk about de-energizing electrical bus(es)... and potentially opening a can of worms, makes no good sense as @blancolirio points out every action is standardized to contain those potential worms, 777s are not flown by the seat of your pants...nor "approximately"
How about simply pulling specific circuit breakers for very specific COM/SUR equipment - (might be a little tedious getting into the E&E bay, admittedly) and, after the controlled or uncontrolled "landing" (the airplane had to end up somewhere - unless the aliens took it?) there would be no way of proving c/b manipulation, unless collaring proves true criminal energy?
Just my 2c worth, FAA/EASA Comm/frozen ATPL and FAA/EASA multi-decade Flight Dispatcher, greetings from Connecticut, USA