Was the disappearance of MH370 a CIA false flag operation?
DISCLAIMER: The following is just a theoretical opinion, a theory, based on my own knowledge of events, news reports, factual evidence, and my own research. I do not expect people to read this as a factual report but simply as my own personal theoretical opinion. Updated Jan 2018
Seychelles Africa, February 2014
Two American ex-Navy Seals, who worked for the maritime security company Trident Group, assigned to guard the ship Maersk Alabama and it's cargo from pirates, Jeffrey Reynolds and Mark Kennedy, were found dead in a cabin on-board the ship on February 18th, 2014. Both men were reported to have died of respiratory failure and possible heart attacks. A local pathologist concluded that Mr. Reynolds’s and Mr. Kennedy’s heart failures “had been as a result of a combination of heroin and alcohol consumption,” the police said in a statement.
|Mark Kennedy Jeffery Reynolds|
The problem with this story is that both men, according to friends and family, were health nuts, and were never known to take hard drugs such as heroin. Friends, neighbors, and family of both men were completely shocked to find out this news about their demise and were in disbelief when the news was announced. Read this report. Also interesting to note is that all employees of this company Trident Group must undergo a drug screening test before they are even hired.
The obvious questions here are; What was the Maersk Alabama doing in the Seychelles and what cargo was on-board this ship? Did someone kill both these men to steal valuable sensitive cargo on board the ship? Was the cargo on-board the Maersk Alabama sensitive military hardware like US drone mobile command and control units destined for drone bases in Africa? Seychelles has become a hub for US drone activity in recent years due to the Obama's administrations drone war on terrorism.
Read this interesting blog entitled the "The Drone Papers" The Drone Papers
Do you know what this map tells me?
It tells me, that there is a whole SHITLOAD of sensitive valuable drone technology in Africa, and probably the Somalia Pirates and the Chinese knew this. This news report, Sun Sentinel Report shows us how much the Chinese are willing to pay to get their hands on US drone technology and how much of significant threat this would be to US national security if they did.
Here is a video of a USAF classified anti-gravity drone. Is this the kind of drone technology the Chinese may have been interested in to gain knowledge of and wanted to steal this technology from the US Government?
The Chinese and Somalia pirates in Africa were well aware of these drone bases in Seychelles. and elsewhere in Africa, and knew about the valuable sensitive mobile drone command and control cargo being shipped to these drone bases on-board the Maersk Alabama thanks to Chinese Intelligence who were eagerly interested in getting their hands on such hardware and purchasing it. What the pirates wanted was money and what the Chinese wanted was the technology. The Somalia pirates knew that the Chinese would pay big bucks for this technology so they launched a plan to get on-board that ship and steal this valuable drone technology.
Chinese hackers managed to hack into US shipping company servers and were able to find out what military cargo was being shipped on which US vessels. I believe this is why and how the Maersk Alabama was targeted. The Chinese hackers were able to find out what drone cargo, in which containers, was on-board the Maersk and they passed this info onto the Somalia pirates. Read this security report.
The pirates devised a plan to use two woman prostitutes to lure Kennedy and Reynolds, who were getting drunk and gambling at a casino that evening, back to the ship for a private party and kill them. Read this article about that fateful night: New York Times Report
The woman went back to the ship with Reynolds and Kennedy, to their private cabin, and waited until the men passed out, from drinking all night, and then injected them both with a lethal dose of heroin leaving the syringes in their hands to make it look like they injected themselves. Once they were both incapacitated the woman let onto the boat other pirates who went onto the ship and searched the containers for the mobile drone command and control cargo using bolt cutters to open up the containers. Most of the other crew members were asleep at this time and only a few were on deck at the front of the boat and did not notice any strange activity. Once they located the drone hardware, that they were after, the pirates then unloaded the crates by ropes off the back of the ship and onto a waiting cargo truck. The pirates then left the ship, along with the two prostitutes, and made off with the cargo.
The stolen drone hardware was then driven to a pirate cargo ship and loaded on-board then transported to Malaysia arriving there at end of February 2014, where Chinese Defense Intelligence officers purchased the hardware and transported it to the Chinese Embassy in Kuala Lumpur. At the Chinese Embassy were a team of 20 scientists and engineers from the company Freescale Technologies, who were working for Chinese Defense Intelligence, waiting for the arrival of the drone cargo to immediately begin downloading the software and back engineering the drone technology. What the Chinese wanted was to be able the hack into America's Global Drone Network and be able to control US drones themselves. The US Government saw this as a major significant threat to their national security.
The Chinese then planned to have the secret cargo transported to Beijing via a commercial carrier. They calculated that this would be least suspicious way to transport the cargo and they figured it was the safest way because the Americans would never harm the passengers. MH370 was the ideal carrier.
The Cover Story
Upon hearing the news of the discovery of the bodies of both Kennedy and Reynolds on-board the Maersk Alabama and the theft of several crates containing a mobile US drone command and control unit the CIA immediately issued a cover story. They needed to keep the fact that US drone technology was stolen a secret so they planted this story in the media to make it look like Kennedy and Reynolds died a tragic death and nothing nefarious happened on the boat. The CIA did not want any publicity about the stolen cargo and instructed the crew not to tell the local authorities about the theft of cargo for it was a classified matter. They immediately started to investigate the incident and would stop at nothing to recapture this cargo.
The cover story: CNN Report
If this hardware ended up in the hands of Chinese they could have easily back engineered it's technology and within a few months they would have been able control and disable US drones using their own technology, no way would the US allow this to happen. The US has invested billions of dollars in their drone programs and having a foreign government being able to hack into their drones and use them as possible weapons against the United States would have been seen as a very serious national security threat to both the CIA and US military.
What the Chinese would have wanted more than the hardware was the software contained in the command unit that would give them the signal protocols, encryption methods, and command codes used to control these pilot-less drones which would give them the ability to hack into other US drone systems as well.
Most US drones are controlled via satellite control from various drone bases located worldwide of which some are located in Nevada and elsewhere in the US and throughout the world including bases in Afghanistan, Seychelles and elsewhere . There are Predator drones that are flown and controlled by US forces from these drone bases using mobile command and control systems that are installed in climate controlled trailers with a satellite up-link, like this one (see photo below). They are used to monitor enemy positions, troop movements, as well as attack enemy targets.
Could one of these units have been the mysterious cargo labelled "radio equipment" on-board MH370?
Why is information pertaining to a commercial airline accident considered classified information within the US Government?
This freedom of information request pertaining to information on MH370, submitted by Dr. Orly Taitz in April 2014, was rejected in this letter citing that it was a "classified matter." The only other commercial airline accidents that were classified by the US government, that I am aware of, were the 9/11 attacks. I find this highly suspicious that US Government would classify this information if MH370 was just a pilot suicide or mechanical issue.
According to this letter the matter (MH370) was classified because it was related to intelligence activities, including covert actions. intelligent sources or methods, or cryptology.
Why was the Diego Garcia US Military Base on a lock-down on March 8th with no scheduled flights in or out of this base for 72 hours? Was some sort of covert mission going on at the base at this time?
The objective of this CIA operation was to make absolutely certain that the stolen US drone command and control system on-board MH370 did not make it to Beijing under no circumstances whatsoever. The CIA basically had three options;
Option 1: Wait for the plane to take off and then blow it out of the sky in which case they would not have been able to recover their stolen system but the cargo would not have made it to Beijing. This would have been very public and messy and would have been a public relations nightmare for the CIA and US Government as well as run the risk of starting a war with China.
Option 2: Do a ground assault on the heavily guarded transport convoy and try intercept the cargo before it was loaded onto the plane. This would have inevitably resulted in a deadly shoot out on the streets of Kuala Lumpur, or at the airport, and it would have also have been very public and messy as well. The CIA did not like this option because it would have been too dangerous for their operatives to overtake this convoy in a foreign land without bringing in Special Forces and it would have run the risk of bringing public exposure to the mission and run the risk of starting a war with China. This was not a good option either.
Option 3: Wait for the cargo to be on-board the plane and then hijack it in flight, fly it out to Thimarafushi Airport, which was in fuel range, by evading radar, recover the cargo, and then ditch the plane somewhere in the Indian Ocean, and make it look like a tragic, mysterious, plane accident and then blame it on the pilot.
Option 3 was their preferred choice and the best option that would ensure recovery of the cargo, hide their involvement in the tragedy, and not cause a war with China. Unfortunately killing all on-board was necessary, in their view, to ensure the secrecy of the mission and eliminate any opposition to it. I also believe the CIA also wanted to make sure the Defense Scientists and Engineers from the company Freescale on-board, who may have already had access to some of the classified proprietary information of this drone system, were also killed in this tragedy.
FIGURE 1: MH370 : Two plane diversion plan.
The plan was to use another aircraft that looked identical to MH370 and it would be used as a decoy in case the Malaysians sent up fighter jets to look for MH370. The decoy airplane would fly back towards the Malaysian peninsula and would be use to divert their attention away from MH370. At 17:07 UTC the AES unit on MH370 was shutdown and the transponder was then disabled at 17:20UTC. Following the transponder being switched off MH370 then did a rapid descent completely falling off both civil and primary radar.
|Figure 2: MH370 2 Plane Radar Map.|
Once MH370 was at low altitude, after way-point IGARI, it would fly on a flight path, staying below radar horizon, over an obscure part of Malaysia which is mostly mountain ranges, not heavily populated, and then flew out towards the Straits of Malacca and then onto the Indian Ocean heading to Male Airport (see Figure 3 below). It's exact flight path cannot be determined but this theoretical flight path can be reconstructed based on eye witness sighting.
|Figure 3: MH370 Flight Path to the Maldives|
|Image of Thimarafushi Airport|
|Article from Florence DeChangy in LeMonde|
Here are some screenshots below of the actual flight records from Male airport on March 8th, 2014 from this report .Maldives Revisited report by Blaine Alan Gibson. The flight records prove that earlier reports in the press of a domestic flight DQA149 from Male to Thimarafushi landing at 6:33 are false. There was no such flight.
|Image courtesy of Blaine Alan Gibson|
|Image courtesy of Blaine Alan Gibson|
I believe the Maldivian National Defense Forces (MNDF) were involved in assisting the CIA and US military in landing MH370 at Thimarafushi airport and covering it up for them by trying to explain away what that plane was that was seen and heard that morning by the villagers. This is why the Maldive's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued this false statement and the MNDF have said they cannot comment on this matter because it is a matter of National Security.
A US Navy elite force were able to gain access to this airport, with the assistance of the MNDF, by boat, under the cover of darkness with all their ground crew gear and a tanker truck full of jet fuel. They setup shop behind the small island, near the runway apron, which blocked the view of their boats from the village. No one from the village could see them. Once they had the plane taxied to the apron behind the Island, I believe they did this operation, unload, refuel, and take-off, in under an hour and by 7:30 AM (2:30 UTC) that plane took-off to the North/East.
MH370 remained at low altitude on the runway during take-off to the North/East, so no one saw it from 1 Km away in village because the palm trees along the village's perimeter which reduces visibility of the airport . People from within the village, at ground level, could not have seen the plane because it remained below the tree line of the trees which are blocking the view. Taking off and landing towards the North/East (runway side furthest away from village) would keep the plane out view from the village. With the help of the MNDF the villagers were kept away from the airport and not allowed access to it during this time. Most people may have been indoors at this time as well in the early morning which may also help explain why NO ONE SAW SOMETHING!
|Thimarafushi Village is heavily surrounded by trees|
The CIA, with the help of US Navy elite force, were able to do this in broad daylight because the CIA can jam all satellite signals to prevent any countries satellite from taken pics during the operation. NO SAT PICS
The CIA chose this airport, Thimarafushi Airport, because of it's secluded locale, easy access by sea, and also because it was within range of MH370 fuel limits flying at low altitudes. It also has a 1200m (3937ft) asphalt runway which would make it possible to land a B777 there. To do a take off they needed to completely unload the airplane to make it as light as possible to make a short runway take off.
Meanwhile the decoy plane would stay flying at a higher altitude on it's flight path out towards the Straits of Malacca then North West towards Banda Aceh and then turning south heading towards the Southern Indian Ocean (see Figure 4 ). It was the decoy plane that was only seen on radar between the way-points IGARI and MEKAR while MH370 was flying at low altitude completely unseen by any radar and undetected by satellite. Once the decoy plane was off radar, near way-point MEKAR, it then switched on it's AES unit at 18:25UTC which had been reprogrammed, prior to flight, to emit the same AES octal address ID as MH370's AES unit. This was done to make us believe MH370 was still in the air flying and would leave a trail of bread crumbs to mislead us. By doing this all the Inmarsat data after 18:25UTC was generated by the decoy aircraft thus creating the perfect deception and making us think MH370 crashed in the Southern Indian Ocean.
Figure 4: Decoy aircraft flight path trajectory
Decoy Impact Zone
Here is where the decoy aircraft crashed where 3 sets of data (Inmarsat, imagery, acoustic) converge and seem to indicate some plane, like a B777-200ER crashed down here and this plane cannot possibly be MH370 because debris from this latitude would drift eastwards towards southern Australia and not Africa. Notice how it's flight path trajectory (green flight path) fits in with the Inmarsat data and imagery data as shown by Dr. Bobby Ulich's in his contrail flight path theory,
The Decoy (The Clone Drone)
In order for this mission to be successful the CIA needed a second identical aircraft to be used as decoy in case the Malaysians sent up fighter jets to search for MH370. Once MH370 descended to lower altitude it would only be this aircraft (the decoy) that would be seen on radar and this would divert their fighter jets to chase this plane instead of MH370. The CIA even staged a makeshift fire on-board this aircraft to make it look more like the commercial airliner was in distress and it would have not been seen as a hostile aircraft and not likely to have been shot down by fighter jets.
|Identical aircraft 9M-MRI of MH370 being stored in hanger in Tel Aviv|
The CIA enlisted the help of Israeli intelligence to obtain this plane N105GT to be used as their decoy plane which was sitting in a hanger in Tel Aviv scheduled to be dismantled. It was the perfect decoy plane because it used to belong to Malaysia airlines and it is a perfect match with MH370. This plane is basically from the same fleet of airplanes (777-200) as MH370 and it's tail number was 9M-MRI before it was sold to GA Telesis. No one seems to know where this plane is and the company that owns it has made no comment on this. Read this blog by Chris Bollyn.
This plane was retrofitted with a Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot (BUAP) and was flown like a drone via satellite control by the CIA. It's airborne earth station (AES) was reprogrammed so it would emit the same AES octal address ID as MH370 this way the satellite company Inmarsat would not be able to tell the difference between the two airplanes satellite signals and all data packets received by Inmarsat's ground earth station (GES) would have MH370's unique identifier code in them. Thus the plane being tracked by satellite after 18:25UTC was the decoy aircraft and not MH370.
How exactly was MH370 hijacked by the CIA is unknown however this maybe one possible scenario.
Before MH370 departed Kuala Lumpur airport I believe a couple of CIA agents (US Navy Seals special ops) got on-board this aircraft, as stowaways, disguised as Malaysian airline maintenance employees via the external door in the Electronic and Equipment (E/E) bay of the aircraft situated underneath the plane. Once inside they plugged a laptop, running LoadStar software on Windows7.0, into the Portable Maintenance Access Terminal (PMAT) USB 2.0 port which allowed them to send data on all the aircraft's Arinc 615 busses giving them the capability to control all flight systems on-board and reprogrammed the Flight Management Computers (FMC) while overriding pilot controls and comms by pulling circuit breakers inside this E/E bay.
At 17:07 UTC they disabled the aircraft's Airborne Earth Station (AES) or Satellite Data Unit (SDU) by pulling circuit breakers within the E/E bay and also disabling , ACARS and ADS-B communications systems , the pilots at this time were completely unaware of this. At 17:20 UTC they disabled the aircraft's transponder and VHF comms making the plane go completely silent just after Captian Zahrie Shaw gave his final sign off at 17:19 UTC as the plane was entering Vietnam airspace. This was the perfect time to hijack the plane and soon after this final sign off the plane's FMC was reprogrammed on a new flight path and did a rapid descent completely disappearing off radar at 17:21 UTC. The hijackers may have depressurized aircraft from E/E Bay at this time , both were equipped with oxygen masks and made the plane fly back towards Maldives at very low altitudes until out of radar range from Indonesia then ascending back up to cruise altitudes until landing at Male.
Click image above to veiw PMAT 2000 datasheet
(17:20-17:30 UTC) . 8 ear witnesses in the district of Merang in Terrenganu heard a loud noise around this time that sounded like an explosion and the sound of the "fan of a jet engine" but they did not see the plane. They heard the noise coming from the north east of their postion.
(17:30 UTC) Here is a report by two fisherman near the Malaysia/Thailand border who saw this low flying plane while out fishing in the South China Sea.
(17:30-17:45 UTC) This low flying plane was also spotted by Mohd Hisham Seman. near Kota Bharu flying over the South China Sea .
( 18:00 UTC) A farmer, Konok Ibrahim in Tumpat, in Malaysia, said he saw a low flying jet on with it's tail fin on fire at around 2:00 am, The farmer stated that he even saw the Malaysian Airlines logo on this plane. Here is an English translation of their eye witness accounts.
Here are some other English reports on these sightings :
(18:30 UTC) A woman in Langkawi, Malaysia saw a low flying plane looking out her window facing Gunung Raya
"It’s the only plane I’ve ever seen flying between Mount Raya and the house."
(19:20 UTC - 19:42 UTC) Eye witness Katherine Tee, on her boat, said she saw a low flying aircraft off the coast of Sumatra, glowing orange with a trail of smoke following it at between 19:20 UTC and 19:42 UTC early that morning. Here are some reports on her sighting
Read this report by Blaine Alan Gibson: http://www.thehuntformh370.info/content/plane-sightings-sightings-kate-tee
(01:15 UTC) Various witnesses in the Kudahudvadhoo, Maldives also said they saw/heard a low flying plane that they believed look liked MH370. I believed by the time this plane flew past the Maldives the fire on-board was extinguished.
Read this report by Blaine Alan Gibson: http://www.thehuntformh370.info/content/blaines-independent-investigation
(Sometime before 02:00 UTC) 4 witnesses on the island of Gaadhiffushi, Maldives see a low flying jet circling near their island which seems to suggests that this airplane was getting ready to land and was probably burning off fuel to reduce weight before attempting a short runway landing. The only place it could have landed at this time would have been Thimarafushi Airport because by this time MH370 would have been nearly out of fuel. I believe the exact timing of their sighting would have been closer to 6:30 AM (01:30 UTC) just before plane landed at Thimarafushi Airport at 6:33AM (01:33 UTC)
Read this report from Sergio Cavaiuolo: http://www.foundmh370.com/MH370-MaldivesObjectLocationVisit.pdf
|Gaadhiffushi is located just to the North East of Thimarafushi airport.|
|FIGURE 5: :Location of Raja's sighting on March 8th, 2014 in the Andaman Sea.|
How can all these witnesses have seen this mysterious plane, on the same day, at different locations, several of which said it seemed to be on fire, and there not be some truth to story they are telling? All the witnesses swore they saw an airplane that day and the witnesses in the Maldives are convinced it looked exactly like MH370. How many times before or after March 8th, 2014 has a low flying jetliner, that looked like a B777, has been seen flying over the Malaysian peninsula or the Maldives? The answer is never, which is why these eye witness reports must be taken seriously . Shouldn't the authorities not be more curious about this and investigate these claims.
The Inmarsat Problem
At 18:25 UTC, just after last radar contact at 18:22 UTC, the airborne earth station (AES) unit on the decoy airplane (N105GT) was switched on emitting handshakes to the 3F1 satellite on an hourly basis this would make it seem that MH370 flew for several more hours and eventually crashed somewhere else at a later time. It would also buy the CIA time while they were off loading the cargo from MH370 at Thimarafushi Airport to then fly the plane back to where they ditched it near the Andaman Islands.
The AES unit on the decoy plane was reprogrammed prior to flight to emit the same unique identifier code as MH370's AES unit and the aircraft was modified not to transmit any ACARS data that would give away it's true position. By doing this it would lead the British company Inmarsat to believe that MH370 was still in the air flying for several more hours but would not be able to tell where it's actual position was.
|Figure 6: Inmarsat BTO data from 18:25:27 UTC - 00:19:37 UTC|
|Figure 7: Inmarsat BFO data from 18:25:27 UTC - 00:19:37 UTC|
The Inmarsat BFO/BTO data shows that there was no user data transmitted after 18:25:27 UTC because I believe that it was being transmitted from another plane, the decoy's Airborne Earth Station (AES), which was modified not to transmit any user data and reprogrammed to transmit the same AES ID as MH370's with each data packet transmitted. The CIA quickly realized this recorded BFO/BTO data could give away the decoy plane's position in SIO.
One thing the CIA could not have for seen in the planning of their operation was that Inmarsat was recording the Burst Timing Offsets (BTO) and Burst Frequency Offsets (BFO) on these satellite pings (handshakes) from the decoy plane's AES unit. This presented them with a very huge problem because if that data became public it would indicate that the decoy plane flew for several more hours and that it could have crashed along an arc indicating it's true position of where the CIA had made the decoy plane (N105GT) crash. The CIA did not want this data to be public because they did not want us to know of the existence of this plane nor did they want us to know where it's crash location was in the SIO. If the search teams ever found the decoy plane (N105GT) they would automatically assume it was MH370 however if they checked the serial numbers of the parts they would eventually find out that this plane was not MH370 and this would blow their cover-up plan so the CIA would do anything possible to keep this secret buried at the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
When the CIA got wind of this information from Inmarsat I believe they went into damage control mode to try to prevent this information from becoming public and decided to kill the satellite controller who was working on the Inmarsat data in hopes this would somehow make this problem go away. Remember the story of the Inmarsat satellite controller, who died a week later after the disappearance of MH370, suddenly from a heart attack? Unfortunately for them this plan did not work and the Inmarsat data was eventually released.
When the search area eventually moved down to the SIO off of Perth, in an area where debris from the decoy plane (N105GT) was spotted by satellite near it's crash site, the CIA devised plans on how to distract the searchers and make them move away from the real crash site. One of their plans that worked was to have someone tell the ship Ocean Shield to go look in a certain area where the CIA had dropped pingers in the water to make us believe that the black boxes and wreckage were in this area much further North away from the debris field. This would give the US military some time to clean up the debris field while everyone else was focused on the other search area. This plan worked brilliantly.
Covering up the evidence
The CIA realized that if the search authorities ever found any pieces of N105GT they would automatically assume it was from MH370, since this was the only plane that had vanished in March 2014. However they also realized that if the authorities were to ever check the maintenance tags on these debris pieces from N105GT with the maintenance records they would eventually discover that these pieces were not from MH370. So in order to maintain the perfect cover-up, and negate this problem, the CIA decided to torch the avionics shop where all Malaysian Airline maintenance records were kept. Perhaps this is why the French authorities are having a difficult time identifying the Flaperon piece (found on Reunion island) with 100% certainty because the maintenance records have been destroyed?
Here's a report on this fire: http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/03/28/Fire-breaks-out-at-MAS-...
During the course of my research into debris images spotted on Tomnod (DigitalGlobe's search campaign for MH370) I concluded that there were two possible locations in the Indian Ocean where a 777 airplane may have crashed. One off the coast of Sumatra and the other one in the Southern Indian Ocean near the 7th arc. Originally I thought that the plane debris off of Sumatra was MH370 but after researching this more and reviewing all the inconclusive data (Inmarsat, radar, acoustic, and imagery) and reading the theories by other experts, such as Dr Bobby Ulich, I then concluded, at that time, that MH370 did indeed crash into the Southern Indian Ocean (SIO) most likely near Dr. Ulich's endpoint along the 7th arc.
|Debris captured by satellite in Southern Indian Ocean (SIO), March 25th and 26th, 2014|
Here is a link to my blog on this debris sighting http://www.thehuntformh370.info/content/possible-mh370-debris-sighting-sio
The question that has been haunting me for several months was " If MH370 did crash in the SIO then why does there appear to be another airplane that has crashed off the coast of Sumatra that looks like a B777?". Why is there also so many eye witness reports of a low flying plane that looked like a B777? Many people have tried to discredit these images and tell me they are not plane parts but the majority of people I have spoken with, along with some satellite imagery experts, who have seen these images believe they possibly could be. I have always stuck to my belief that these were indeed aircraft parts because the mathematical probability that these are just random pieces of junk that look this astonishingly similar to plane parts seemed very improbable to me. I have always believed they were but if they are not pieces of MH370 then from which plane did they come from and what is this plane doing in the Indian Ocean at a time where the entire world is looking for a missing plane that looks like this? Is this plane MH370?
|Debris captured by satellite off the coast of Sumatra, March 16th, 2014|
Here is a link to my blog on this debris sighting http://www.thehuntformh370.info/content/possible-mh370-debris-sightening...
More interesting is if we are to assume that the sighting off of Sumatra is indeed MH370 then drift analysis, done by the company GEOMAR , suggests from this location it is possible for debris to have reached Reunion Island within this time frame. It is possible that the flaperon and other debris may have circulated in gyros for several months before moving into currents that would eventually take them to Reunion Island and perhaps even the Maldives. THE PLACE WHERE IT LANDED!
Here is also a link to a reverse drift study I did which shows that this area near Sumatra is the most probable place where all this debris in Africa is originating from: http://www.thehuntformh370.info/content/location-mh370-reverse-drift-stu...
|Figure 8: Composite reverse drift model for all debris pieces found thus far in Africa|
Now that we have found evidence that two airplanes may have crashed into the Indian Ocean in March of 2014 one off the coast of Sumatra and one in the Southern Indian Ocean then we must completely rethink our theories. This could not have been a simple hijacking, pilot suicide, mechanical problem, or a fire/decompression emergency, but rather this would had to have been a conspiracy, something much more sophisticated and sinister than we have previously imagined.
If we are to believe the eye witnesses who saw this strange low flying airplane flying around on March 8th are telling us the truth and we are also to believe that the Inmarsat data, radar data, and imagery data are also valid then we can only make one logical conclusion here, there must have been two airplanes involved in this tragedy for both to be valid (data and witness reports), no other logical explanation can explain this. If this is the case then who has the ability to do this, fly a second plane without the public's knowledge, without filing a flight plan, and hijack another plane, flying it at low altitudes, at the same time and cover this up? In my opinion there could only be one suspect who could have done this, the CIA.
NOTE 1:"Russia "Puzzled" Over Malaysian Airlines "Capture" By US Navy“
NOTE 2: Mangosteens
Another interesting footnote that should be noted is that mangosteens are harvested in the months of May through July in Malaysia. Why was there so much mangosteens onboard MH370, in the month of March, when the fruit was not in season?
NOTE 3: Mysterious cargo not specified on cargo manifest
According to this article quoting a spokesperson for Malaysia Airlines the mysterious cargo was "radio equipment". I wonder exactly what kind of "radio equipment" this was and why a spokesperson for the Chinese shipper of this cargo said he could not comment on this because of legal reasons. Why would commenting publicly on this "radio equipment" be of legal concern?
NOTE 4: The Drone Wars
Here is a fascinating look into the Obama's administration's drone wars. The Intercept obtained a cache of secret documents detailing the inner workings of the U.S. military’s assassination program in Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia. The documents, provided by a whistleblower, offer an unprecedented glimpse into Obama’s drone wars.
This article, below, explains just how much money the US is investing in their unmanned drone programs, billions of dollars. It's easy to understand why they would want to protect the security and technology of these drones from possible hackers like the Chinese and Russians after investing this much money in their unmanned drone programs which have become a vital and strategic part of the US military and CIA counter-terrorism policy.
Read this article which tells us about how America has buillt a global network of drone bases: "America's Secret Empire of Drone Bases" http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php/features/covert-drone-war/7447-americas-secret-empire-of-drone-bases
The last thing the US would want is to have is hackers from other countries stealing their drone technology to control or disable them, or worst yet, use them against their own military. When you read this information you can see why the CIA would stop at nothing to protect this technology from getting into the hands of foriegn Governments.
NOTE 5: Radar data
This excerpt from Victor Iannello report seems to suggest that the crossing radar tracks maybe from two separate aircraft's.
"The path is assumed to follow a trajectory towards BITOD at the last recorded ground speed of 473 kn until a sharp turn commences at around 17:22:52. The military data show an impossibly steep turn that would indicate that the graphical representation in the figure is not accurate or the radar data has been misrepresented. It is possible that the sharp radar track is actually crossing radar tracks from two separate aircraft. These hypotheses merit further investigation, and will be the subject of future work."
Here is a link to his https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B35tmLZHg1FEMWV6R0M5Z1k3Zm8
Here is another excellent report by Victor Iannello about the radar data seriously questioning the validity of this data and it's interpertation by the Malaysian Government: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B35tmLZHg1FEZXBWZ3BZdVdxcjA
NOTE 6: Where the flaperon debris piece could have come from.
According to Oceanographer Erik van Sebille there is only a 10% chance the flaperon piece may have come from the current search zone.
NOTE 7: MH370 ADS-B radar in Maldives on March 8th,2014 at 1:00UTC (6:00AM Local time)
Here is what the ADS-B radar data looked like on March 8th, 2014 at 1:00 UTC. Notice there were only 3 airplanes appearing on radar in the air at this time over the Maldives. There is also 1 flight, a B767aircraft, flying towards the Maldives, which was flying with no call sign at this time.
The Thimarafushi Airport opened in Sept 2013 but these satellite images is all I can find on this airport which were taken before airport was constructed.
Image courtesy of Google Earth
Image courtesy of Microsoft Corporation
This would be a good entry point (see photo below) for someone by boat to gain access to airport and bring trucks onto the tarmac.
Image courtesy of Microsoft Corporation
Below is a beautiful color image taken Ad Hashim Sept 2st, 2015 of the Thimarafushi Airport, taken from the boat dock facing airport. As you can see the airport, by this time, has a Control Tower and radar coverage by now. you can also see from this image just how convient it is to access this airport by boat.
Here is the first aerial photo that I have seen of this airport taken by Ali Mohamed on May7th,2015. You can see clearly the paved runway at this time. The people in the village only heard the plane but could not see it because of the dense foliage which surrounds the perimeter of the village. The airport for the most part is not visible from within the village.
This photo (below) of Thimarafushi Airport was taken in April 2014, as you can see the airport runway was paved at this time and airport building in background was still under construction.
Image courtesy of Adnan Haleem taken April 2014
Image courtesy of Munah Ahmed taken in April 2014
Here are a couple of imags, courtesy of Amira taken May 2011, looking back at the Thimarafushi village from the outside.. Notice how dense the foliage is which surrounds the perimeter of the village and blocks the view of residents from within the village of seeing the airport from ground level. THIS IS WHY NO ONE SAW SOMETHING!
View from Village, courtesy of M,G,H, Traders, Riyaaz, Oct 2009, shows view from port looking towards airport, YOU SEE NOTHING!!!!
NOTE 8: Is it even possible for someone in an airplane at 35,000 feet to see a B777 airplane in the water down below?
Someone on Twitter told me it was impossible for Raja to have seen an airplane from an altitude of 35,000 feet flying in an airplane. Well I started to do some research on this question and this what I found out.
First off, if you can see an airplane flying in the sky leaving contrails behind it then that airplane is most likely flying above 30,000 feet because that is typically the altitude and higher in which contrails can form. So it stands to reason if you can see an airplane from the ground above 30,000 feet then you can probably see one floating in the water if you are 30,000 feet above it. However it has been pointed out to me that contrails on colder days, or in colder climates, can been created at much lower altitudes.
Further more, someone with "standard vision" (20/20 vision in English measurements) has a resolutiuon limit of 1 arc minute, 1/60 degree =.01666666 degrees. A B777-200 aircraft is approxiamately W 200 feet X L 209 feet and Raja altitude of her flight at this time was about 35,000 feet. To calculate her resolution limit you divide the length of the airplane by the altitude distance and take the arctangent of the result. This will give you the answer in radians and then you multiply by a factor of 57.2957795 to get the answer in degrees.
arctan(209 ÷ 35000) = X radians x 57.2957795 = Y° = 0.342 °
therefore 0.342° ÷ .01666666° = 20.52 arc minutes
This result equals 20.52 arc minutes which is well within the resolution limit of someone with standard vision (20/20).
Another point I would like to make here is that of contrast. A light colored airplane would stand out more on the Ocean surface than in the sky because the Ocean surface is a darker shade of blue than the sky. This is why it might not be possible to see an airplane flying at 35,000 feet from the ground looking up but it could be possible to see an airplane looking down from 35,000 feet against the darker blue Ocean. The retina in our eye's tend to get smaller when looking at bright objects, such as the sky, and allow less photons but looking at darker objects, such as the nighttime sky, our retinas open wider to allow more photons, this is why we can see the distant stars at night. So greater contrast in color against darker backgrounds will make objects stand out at further distances. This why it is possible to see a flickering candle at night from very far distances (upto 30 mi) and stars from distance galaxies because of greater contrast in colors against darker backgrounds.
So the answer is "yes" it is absolutely possible for someone flying in an airplane at 35,000 feet , flying directly over it or close by, with good eye sight, standard vision, to be able to see a 200 foot airplane in the Ocean below. This is of course assuming it was a clear day with good visibilty which it was on March 8th,2014.
NOTE 9: How can an Airborne Earth Station (AES) unit on another airplane be reprogrammed to generate the same octal address (AES ID) as MH370?
Anything that is programmable can be reprogrammable. Most modern digital programmable circuit boards that use flash memory intergrated circuits (IC) or Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA) intergrated circuits to store program source code (firmware) have a connector on them called a JTAG connector. This JTAG connector allows you to connect an in-circuit programmer device ( see photo below) which allows you to debug and reprogram these IC's on the circuit board. You simply connect this device to the JTAG connector on the circuit board and then connect a computer to the unit and you will be able read, edit and reprogram any source code embedded in any IC on the circuit board. To reprogam the AES souce code would be a simple matter of reading the source code from the flash memory IC, locating the octall address (AES ID) code in the source code, and changing it to match the octal address (AES ID) of MH370's unit. Once this is done you simply reprogram this flash memory chip with the new source code and now this AES unit will transmit it's data indentical, with same unique indentifiel code (AES ID), as MH370's unit. With the right know how and information the entire process would take only several minutes to do. If you only operate one of these AES units at a time there would be no network error or conflict and Inmarsat would not be able to tell the difference if this data came from another aircraft or not.
If you look at the Inmarsat data there seems to be a distinct change in the data after 18:25UTC. At the beginning of the flight upto 17:07 UTC when the AES unit on MH370 was believed to have been turned off the data contained user data that was being regularly transmiited. After 18:25 there was only handshakes being transmitted hourly with no user data this could have meant that this data was being transmitted from another aircraft which had it's ACARS switched off or disconnected. There is of course other explanations for why this occurred but this certainly is one plausible explanation that could explain how the Inmarsat data may have been spoofed from another aircraft.
NOTE 10: Does the US military ship military hardware on commercial US flag ships?
The answer is yes, if it is not consider dangerous cargo (i.e. weapons) the US military often ships equipement, such as computer hardware (i.e. drone command and control units) on charted commercial US flag ships like the Maersk Alabama. These ships often will have private security onboard to protect the ship and it's cargo and are used to meet the demands of their shipping needs, and reduce costs. The US is currently expanding their drone operations in Africa by setting up drone bases which would require a significant amount of hardware to be shipped to these bases which is why commercial flag ships, such as the Maersk Alabama would be nescessary to transport all this hardware. It's a simple question of logistics and costs.
Here is a joint publication on the US Defense Transportation System: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp4_01.pdf
NOTE 11 Trident Group Mandatory requirements
NOTE 12: Boeing 777-200 Runway Length specifictions and MH370 weight limits
This chart above shows that it's possible for a 777-200 aircraft, at an airport at sea level, with a maximum operational takeoff weight below 460.000 Lbs, can make a 5000 ft runway take-off. The airport at Thimarafushi has a 1200m (3937ft) asphalt runway but has approx. 5000 ft of real estate (end to end) for a large aircraft to take off from. This certainaly is at the performance limit of this aircraft and is not the ideal conditions for a 777 aircraft, but if you don't mind blowing a tire or two, or scratching the paint job, then I believe this takeoff is doable by an experienced veteren military pilot. Since they were going to ditch the plane anyways they were not concerned about damaging it. .
MH370 Zero Fuel Mass (ZFM) 174,000Kg = 383,604 Lbs
MH370 Fuel Weight = 49,200 Kg =108,467 Lbs
MH370 Operational Takeoff weight = 223,200Kg = 491,631 Lbs
In order to make a 5000' takeoff they needed to keep the weight of the plane below 460,000 Lbs so they simply unloaded the plane completely added less fuel for the takeoff at Thimarafushi, to reduce it's zero fuel mass (ZFM). When they arrived at Thimarafushi airport the plane was almost out of fuel so it had expended all that weight. So long as they stay well below this takeoff weight they were ok to make the shorter 5000' runway takeoff.
Landing weight = ~ zero fuel mass (ZFM) in Kuala Lumpur = 174,000Kg = 383,604 Lbs.
Takeoff weight = (base weight for B777-200ER) ~143,000kg + (fuel weight) 24,600Kg = 167,600Kg = 369,494 Lbs.
Realistically I think they only needed about half the fuel weight as in Kuala Lumpur to ditch the plane off the coast of Sumatra flying at low altitudes, about 1170nm away, so I believe they used about 24,600Kg of fuel weight for the takeoff at Thimarafushi for a total weight of 369,494 Lbs. They wanted to keep the takeoff weight at least 5% lower than the recommended weight limit in order to take into account reduction in B777 performence due to 20% of the runway surface (~1000ft) being compacted aggregate
NOTE 13: Thimarafushi airport specifications of runway, pavement strength, and foundation
Here is a picture of Thimarafushi Airport when it's runway was under construction. The site preparation included that the entire foundation, and length ofthe airstrip 1500m (4921') by width 150m (492') , that the airport is built on, to be compacted with 4 100% compacted layers of aggregate. This means that the run-off surfaces, on either end of runway, are also compacted and can very easily support the weight and take-off of a B777-200 although this surface is not designed for this purpose but they are designed to support an airplane in case it overshoots or undershoots the runway which is why these surfaces must be compacted as well. I believe the aditional real estate at each end of runway, totalling about 1000', plus the runway length 1200m (3937') by width 30m (98.4') was sufficent enough space for a B777-200 to make a ~5000' takeoff there with a much lower takeoff weight (below Max. 437,838 Lbs) and reduced performance because of 20% of the runway surface being unpaved compacted aggregate which is stronger than asphalt. It would not have been good on the tires, nor the paint job, but certainly doable is my belief.
Here is a link to the airport bidding document which shows on page 10 (section 4.4c), that Thimarafushi was one of the sites being considered for this airport plan. The airport specifications are listed on page 63 and require a pavement classificion(PCN) of 15 (high grade strength and high load capacity). I believe this runway surface of compacted aggregate, which is stronger than concrete, would be sufficient enough to support the landing and takeoff of a B777-200ER airplane at least once. The actual PCN for this airport is 15/F/BX/T
The foundation has a load bearing capacity of 300lb/in3 which equals 518,400Lbs / ft3. The weight of the aircraft is distributed on 3 sets of landing gears covering several square feet so this foundation would have no problem supporting the weight of a B777-200ER aircraft at these weights (see NOTE 12).
The ACN of this aircraft would be about ACN 30, at these weights, which exceeds the recommended PCN rating for this runway (15) however this does not mean the pavement of the runway if overloaded will catastrophically fail. It just means that if this overloading is done reguraly on an airports runway it will accelerate the pavement deterioration of the runway. Thimarafushi airport was opened in Septemeber 2013 and it had only had about two flights per week at that time so it's runway was in relatively prestine condition.
NOTE 14: Miscellanous notes
Video of landing at Thimarafushi Airport. This is what the airport looks like on a landing approach.
All airport ICAO specifications recommends an additional (1000ft) runway overshoots. 1000 feet is equivalent to the international ICAO-RESA of 240m plus 60m strip. This Runway End Surface Area (RESA) must be suitably prepared for air crafts, so this real estate can be used for extended take-offs for larger planes.
NOTE 15: Can a B777 land on a short runway? Watch this simulator video.
NOTE16: Can a B777 takeoff from a short runway? This one did.
NOTE 17: PERSON OF INTEREST# 1
Article from Pierre Boisson in Society Magazine: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B35tmLZHg1FESjlQZUdqQWFocVE
English Translation https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B35tmLZHg1FEWVZnSjV1a2x5WEE