5 ms·
This seems like a hijack and the Malaysian incident seems like a hijack. How are there not satellite photos of the plane changing course and landing on a freigh
by debt 13y ago
This seems like a hijack and the Malaysian incident seems like a hijack. How are there not satellite photos of the plane changing course and landing on a freighter or something? That's got to pop on a satellite image somewhere.
- neurotech1 13y agoOnly the smallest civilian turboprop aircraft would have any hope of landing on a flat-top freighter without arresting gear. Even a BAe-146 would require too much landing distance. A Boeing 777 would be much safer ditching close by a freighter and awaiting rescue of passengers from life rafts. A US Navy Cruiser (Aegis type) has a maximum radar tracking range of about 200-300NM for an airliner. If they were tracking MH370 then they'd have a good idea where it went down. When AF447 disappeared, there was little Naval activity in the region. When TWA800 went down, the US Navy turned over volumes of radar data to investigators that somewhat confirmed how the aircraft broke apart.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> How are there not satellite photos of the plane changing course and landing on a freighter or something? (1) Because a 777 has only a slightly better chance of landing on a freighter as a snowball has of landing -- still frozen -- on the surface of the sun, and (2) Because there isn't satellite video being recorded of every point on the Earth's surface, including the oceans, 24/7, contrary to what one might infer from certain kinds of (deliberately fictional) movies and TV shows.
- debt 13y agoI guess I didn't mean it literally landed on a freighter, but something similar; like a small island or something. But it looks like it would've popped up on somebodies radar at some point before it landed.