TexasCHLforum.com

Been thinking...

Considering ALL the countries unable to identify, track, and locate flight 370, including world wide state of the art computer systems, satellite tracking, etc., it is amazing no one has identified or found anything before, during, or after the event.

Allegedly turned off transponders, radio communications, automatic reporting of plane's status to ground based receivers, etc. And, supposedly flight plan was modified to "evade" before take-off.

Given this, I'm thinking it might have been a TEST run to avoid detection by some terrorist group, "flying under the radar" to see if they could pull off a suicide flight without any facility identifying it before it hit an "infidel" target.

Another 9-11 in the planning stages somewhere in the world???

Could be that or maybe something else. Not sure, but probably one or the other.

Idk, seems to me this incident could (or should) result in the industry changing/incorporating some safeguards to better track aircraft. I think a "dry run" like this would only make the real event harder to pull off.

Running Arrow Bill wrote:Been thinking...

Considering ALL the countries unable to identify, track, and locate flight 370, including world wide state of the art computer systems, satellite tracking, etc., it is amazing no one has identified or found anything before, during, or after the event.

Allegedly turned off transponders, radio communications, automatic reporting of plane's status to ground based receivers, etc. And, supposedly flight plan was modified to "evade" before take-off.

Given this, I'm thinking it might have been a TEST run to avoid detection by some terrorist group, "flying under the radar" to see if they could pull off a suicide flight without any facility identifying it before it hit an "infidel" target.

Another 9-11 in the planning stages somewhere in the world???

Very interesting theory. Thanks for the post.

We're talking worldwide... This wasn't a US-based aircraft. Forcing retrofit on all commercial aircraft worldwide will be tough. And you're talking about a system that would be impossible for a pilot or flight engineer to disable.. Meaning a system that can malfunction without impacting the aircraft. Tough one.

This wasn't a test (opinion). If you have that asset for a terroristic purpose, it'd be used. Want to test? Use small aircraft - cheaper and less obvious means to check for weaknesses.

WildBill wrote:

Running Arrow Bill wrote:Been thinking...

Considering ALL the countries unable to identify, track, and locate flight 370, including world wide state of the art computer systems, satellite tracking, etc., it is amazing no one has identified or found anything before, during, or after the event.

Allegedly turned off transponders, radio communications, automatic reporting of plane's status to ground based receivers, etc. And, supposedly flight plan was modified to "evade" before take-off.

Given this, I'm thinking it might have been a TEST run to avoid detection by some terrorist group, "flying under the radar" to see if they could pull off a suicide flight without any facility identifying it before it hit an "infidel" target.

Another 9-11 in the planning stages somewhere in the world???

Very interesting theory. Thanks for the post.

First time I have heard anyone mention this. Excellent point.

My theory is that the pilot hijacked the plane, he and the copilot incapacitated/killed each other trying to regain control (there is at least one fire axe in the cockpit). The two Iranians that got on board with stolen passports were there to assist the pilot in controlling the aircraft once he took care of the copilot. Due to the reenforced doors the passengers/crew were unable to get into the cockpit to regain control and after the pilots took each other out the plane flew on autopilot until it ran out of fuel and crashed.

cb1000rider wrote:We're talking worldwide... This wasn't a US-based aircraft. Forcing retrofit on all commercial aircraft worldwide will be tough. And you're talking about a system that would be impossible for a pilot or flight engineer to disable.. Meaning a system that can malfunction without impacting the aircraft. Tough one.

This wasn't a test (opinion). If you have that asset for a terroristic purpose, it'd be used. Want to test? Use small aircraft - cheaper and less obvious means to check for weaknesses.

A small private aircraft would not cause enough damage to create a major event. That's why the terrorist groups use large commercial aircraft for most impact. E.g., 9-11 Twin Towers...

Running Arrow Bill wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:We're talking worldwide... This wasn't a US-based aircraft. Forcing retrofit on all commercial aircraft worldwide will be tough. And you're talking about a system that would be impossible for a pilot or flight engineer to disable.. Meaning a system that can malfunction without impacting the aircraft. Tough one.

This wasn't a test (opinion). If you have that asset for a terroristic purpose, it'd be used. Want to test? Use small aircraft - cheaper and less obvious means to check for weaknesses.

A small private aircraft would not cause enough damage to create a major event. That's why the terrorist groups use large commercial aircraft for most impact. E.g., 9-11 Twin Towers...

I think cb1000rider is only talking about testing whether they could fly around undetected, not the damage caused by an impact.

Unless they are testing a star trek cloakng device.

I wouldn't be surpised if a fedex or dhl cargo jet is used in an attack. Unless the terrorists moved past airplanes as a payload delivery method.

From what I can determine, this plane was lost/stolen by CNN.

Since day one of this story, it seems to run 24 hours a day on this so-called network, and they are having the only upturn in their viewership in years. I am sure that once this story has run its course, they will be back down to the bottom of the ratings, where they belong.

Dave2 wrote:

Running Arrow Bill wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:We're talking worldwide... This wasn't a US-based aircraft. Forcing retrofit on all commercial aircraft worldwide will be tough. And you're talking about a system that would be impossible for a pilot or flight engineer to disable.. Meaning a system that can malfunction without impacting the aircraft. Tough one.

This wasn't a test (opinion). If you have that asset for a terroristic purpose, it'd be used. Want to test? Use small aircraft - cheaper and less obvious means to check for weaknesses.

A small private aircraft would not cause enough damage to create a major event. That's why the terrorist groups use large commercial aircraft for most impact. E.g., 9-11 Twin Towers...

I think cb1000rider is only talking about testing whether they could fly around undetected, not the damage caused by an impact.

A single or twin engine private aircraft would be a heck of a smaller object to identify than a 737, 747, etc. large aircraft. Even small aircraft are supposed to have a transponder and "sqwak" their code when approaching or entering a Control Zone. Given that, if one could escape surveillance with a large jet, a terrorist would be "home free" to do serious damage, so to speak. And, any aircraft that disabled their transponder code to lose the blip on a controller's screen should be red alert to scramble military jets to investigate. That said, if a large aircraft could do "under the radar" undetected, then...

Running Arrow Bill wrote:A single or twin engine private aircraft would be a heck of a smaller object to identify than a 737, 747, etc. large aircraft. Even small aircraft are supposed to have a transponder and "sqwak" their code when approaching or entering a Control Zone. Given that, if one could escape surveillance with a large jet, a terrorist would be "home free" to do serious damage, so to speak. And, any aircraft that disabled their transponder code to lose the blip on a controller's screen should be red alert to scramble military jets to investigate. That said, if a large aircraft could do "under the radar" undetected, then...

Then so could a Russian or NorK strategic bomber.