Twitter

Saturday 17 October 2015

#MH370 Clive Irving's Deadly Cargo article superb, but changes nothing!


+MH370 News

+clive irving 's Deadly Cargo Article 15 October 2015 is superb, but it changes nothing

In Clive Irving's recently published  Article "The Deadly Cargo Inside MH370: Exploding Batteries Explain the Mystery" he suggests:


"Exclusive insight from inside Boeing and urgent new warnings from the FAA make a compelling case—based on fact, not conspiracy—about what happened.
Why have both the Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing suddenly both gone public in issuing warnings about the “immediate and urgent risk” (quoting the FAA) of allowing consignments of lithium-ion batteries to be shipped in the cargo of passenger-carrying flights?
Last Thursday’s statement by the FAA’s Angela Stubblefield, a hazardous materials expert, that there is now a body of evidence that the batteries can cause explosions and fires capable of destroying an airplane echoes the urgency of a warning sent to all airlines by Boeing in July that the shipment of batteries created “an unacceptable risk” to crew and passengers."


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/15/the-deadly-cargo-inside-mh370-how-exploding-batteries-explain-the-mystery.html

The article is a well-written piece which adds a plausible alternative scenario to the one I favour, which is that the disappearance of #MH370 was caused by an intentional unlawful act by the pilots or by someone else.

The problem I have with the exploding batteries theory is that, when considered against the known facts, it is certainly possible, but not as probable as the theory I favour.

I contend, instead that my theory, which I first tendered on this blog within 36 hours of the aircraft's disappearance, remains the most logical one. I eventually wrote further blogs on the subject expressing the same thing and ultimately the "book" MH370 & AF447 which I published through Smashwords and which is available for free.

In my book, I explain in detail how and why I came to the theory I did, based upon known facts. The logical process involved is also explained.

One or two conspiracy theorists take pleasure in pointing out that I'm a trial lawyer, and a flight sim pilot, and not a real pilot. Anticipating such criticism, the first chapter of my book sets out how often I've been first, or one of the first, to offer theories on various air crashes, only to have my initial theories become the one most aviation experts ultimately favour.

In my book, I not only refer to the views of many other aviation experts who later came to the same conclusion I did, but also to the highly regarded National Geographic programme, "Air Crash Investigation". The experts on the MH370 episode also favour my view.

I invite you to download my free ebook at +Smashwords Inc. or other popular ebook stores such as +iBookstore or +Kobo Inc. and many others.
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/526079

I take you through the known facts and draw a conclusion from those facts which, in my view, is the most probable likely scenario. I don't intend to regurgitate the book here. I do, however, wish to deal with the chief reason why I regard the exploding battery theory, and similar theories involving technical failures, as improbable.

The problem I have with the competing theories, such as the battery theory, is simply this. The possibility / probability of exploding battery theory needs to be weighed, on the known facts, against the greater or lesser possibility/probability of the unlawful act being the correct one.

Consider the flight from Malaysia to Beijing. If we accept, for argument's sake, that the true facts were that the pilot/pilots unlawfully elected to divert the aircraft from its course, or that they were forced to do so, and we accept further that the intention was to cause the aircraft to become untraceable and to "disappear", one has to ask this crucial question. Which precise moment of that flight would the pilot/pilots / cockpit intruder choose to divert the aircraft in such a way as to remain unnoticed (with the transponder off) for the maximum amount of time????

Best Answer: In the few seconds  it usually takes between signing off from Malaysian ATC and the completion of the handover to Hanoi ATC by contacting them by radio. (I call this the window of opportunity) Why?  Because, as in fact occurred, the pilots would have known that Malaysian ATC would have assumed that the handover had occurred, and Hanoi ATC would have assumed that the aircraft was delayed or something similarly mundane, and thus, no alarm was likely to be raised for long enough for the aircraft to disappear without trace.

Question. Did the aircraft complete the handover? No. Did the aircraft instead suddenly divert without any ATC transmission and did the Tranponder and the EICAS stop operating at about the very same time. Answer to all these questions: YES

The window of opportunity or handover to Hanoi which, to be generous ought normally to take under a minute, is a precise moment of the flight which, if expressed in percentage terms of the entire flight, is less than 1% of the 7 and a half hour flight.

We know that the aircraft completed the first part of the handover without any ado. So, what happened had to have occurred within a minute or so thereafter. Why? Well, if not, the handover would have gone ahead.

So here's my problem. What are the odds, that fate would choose the precise thirty second or one minute window of opportunity an errant pilot would choose to unlawfully divert the aircraft and that this would be accompanied by the transponder going dark and the aircraft diverting, all at the same time, to visit a technical disaster such as exploding batteries etc. thus perchance causing the very same events which an errant pilot /pilot under duress would have initiated in that same very same window of opportunity?

Is it possible? Of course it possible. Remotely possible (less than 1% if you use my window of opportunity time span as a guide).

Is it probable on the known facts? Not a chance! It's so mathematically remote as to be safely capable of logical rejection as anything but a remotely possible theory.

There is one additional related problem that really undermines all the technical failure theories. It has to be considered in addition to the probabilities being highly against these theories for the reasons set out above. What are the odds of a technical failure arising during the "window of opportunity" which in addition to being so serious so as to cause the transponder and the EICAS failures, and which explains the failure to make an emergency call and a failed attempt to try to return to Malaysia, but which thereafter seems to have settled down sufficiently  to allow the aircraft to not only make further turns (ignoring that those turns are the same ones an errant pilot trying to avoid discovery by radar would make) AND ALSO permitted the aircraft to keep flying for over five more hours?

One has only to utter that theory to expose its inherent improbabilities, to put it generously.

Now let's take my theory. Consider the mathematics. My theory has to emerge as highly probable. ON THE KNOWN facts FIT the theory I advance almost like a glove whilst the competing "technical fault / catastrophic accident"  theories all fall apart on the same KNOWN FACTS for all the reasons I set above, and in my book.

This is the logic I applied within 36 hours of hearing the facts then known. I did the maths and risked publishing my theory. Thereafter each newly published known fact has operated to confirm my original theory and the competing theories have all emerged as seriously improbable.

Have a look at my book for more. Remember, I'm not alone in my theory. I may have been first. But of late most serious pilots and aviation experts have come to the same conclusion.

It's not rocket science. Logic combined with aviation related knowledge I accumulated during years of studying the subject whenever I had the chance.

I apologise to my detractors for what they clearly assume is the outrageous luck and good fortune which seems to permit me, a mere flight sim pilot,  to accidently stumble upon the correct cause of the airline crashes I have to date seen fit to comment upon while many other airline pilots and other experts were flirting with theories which were not only wrong, but which were absurd in that they flew in the face of common sense and the known facts.



S G WALTHER 17 OCT 2015

Publicity for Terrorists & Mass Killers: A deadly gift that keeps on giving:
http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.co.za/2015/10/mass-shootings-in-us-news-media-are.html


DJ Daddy Cool of Cape Town Top 125 Chart
http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.co.za/2015/11/dj-daddy-cool-of-cape-town-top-125.html

No comments:

Post a Comment