Whilst it is inadvisable to speculate about the causes of any air crash prior to the wreckage being recovered and a proper investigation is conducted, certain of the facts which have come to light scream Cockpit Incursion.
Firstly, it immediately struck me as strange that, two hours after take-off, the aircraft apparently disappeared from radar over the sea in the Gulf of Thailand between Malaysia & Vietnam. I would have thought the airliner would be much further away after the elapse of two hours.
To test the length of time it takes from Kuala Lampur to Vietnam mainland along the flight path I flew it in a flight simulator under identical conditions and with enough fuel on board for the airliner to reach Beijing.
I was unsurprised to discover that the aircraft should have crossed the coast of Vietnam mainland after about 1 and a quarter hours.
All time spent after 1 hour 15 minutes in the Gulf of Thailand must be regarded as suspicious or as an emergency. THE AIRCRAFT IS IN THE WRONG PLACE.
The aircraft stayed on radar and in the Gulf for two hours. The last 45 minutes must represent an emergency situation.
We are informed by the Malaysian authorities that the aircraft may, according to Military radar, have turned to return to Kuala Lampur.
If the crew experienced a sudden emergency, their failure to communicate with ATC would not be strange. However, it is difficult to conceive of an emergency which would have prevented one of the crew from using one of the on-board systems to communicate for an entire forty five minutes.
If indeed the pilots felt it necessary to return to Kuala Lampur, communicating their intentions prior to doing so is standard protocol. Perhaps an emergency prevented this from occurring immediately. But failing to communicate the change in intentions for forty-five minutes is almost unprecedented.
I refuse to accept that the pilots were unable to use one of the many means of contacting ATC to advise of the emergency during this period. The aircraft’s transponder code can be changed to indicate cockpit intrusion or some other emergency such as failed radios. We know that the transponder was probably working since this is how the flight was tracked and identified.
Apart from various radios, an on board “texting” system also exists.
I can only conclude that cockpit interference must have prevented the pilots from using any of these methods to communicate during the controversial last forty five minutes of the flight.
The fact that two passengers boarded the aircraft with false passports and that the tickets of both of these passengers were purchased together could be an unrelated coincidence, but if taken together with the odd occurrences above, the conclusion I have drawn only becomes more probable.
If there was a cockpit incursion, it was done by people who are aware of the various methods the crew can use to communicate such an event to ATC without most hijackers being aware of it.
This of course, does not explain what happened next. Did something go wrong? Did a terrorist /hijacker deliberately or accidently trigger a bomb they may have brought on board. Was a member of the crew involved?
I’m still working on that. Only time will tell, however, whether my theory holds any water. In the meantime, my thoughts are with all the unfortunate victims.