Malaysia Airlines loses contact with plane carrying 239 people

http://www.wired.com/2015/05/feds-say-bann...andeered-plane/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm just saying....

 

http://www.lambopower.com/forum/index.php?...t&p=1110889

http://www.businessinsider.com/doubts-grow...d-flight-2015-5

you think they landed the plane somewhere or ditched it at sea?

 

I have my money on "Mariana Trench". Not too far off of the original flight plan... Should have been in their range... And fills the "first place that comes to mind for anybody, anywhere, who has a fifth grade education to answer the question, 'where do you take something if you want to make sure it will never, ever be found'" criteria.

Whilst I have no doubt the vulnerability is a viable threat the question I ask is why? No one has come forward, they have actually taken a plane and lives and that is no small matter so why would there not be a group claiming actual responsibility for the incident.

 

AQ is good at keeping their mouths shut when it serves a bigger purpose.

 

I think the biggest flaw in my theory is actually the "why not?" If this was a test run (which AQ did for the original "Bojinka" plot) Why HAVEN'T they done it again? Why haven't we seen a day where 10 or 15 or 30 planes crash?

 

I don't have the answer for that. Maybe theyre training guys to do it and it takes time?

 

Maybe their was something unique about that plane or airport that they havent been able to duplicate or scale? Maybe an inside man in maintenance or in the ground crew?

 

Maybe the pilots responded in a way they hadnt anticipated and it caused the test to be a failure despite the ultimate crashing of the plane? Maybe whoever was on the plane wasnt able to communicate to their outside C&C what was happening, and they didn't get the data they needed? Maybe just crashing the plane wasnt the objective? Maybe they had hopes of 9/11 style attacks without breaching the hardened cockpit, and that proved impossible?

 

I don't know. But If this theory is right, they do.

Lol jesus

The flight was either hijacked (possible hijack of the flight computers) or one of the pilots decided to commit murder suicide.

There is no way a network architect would design a network where you would be able to communicate between the communication system and the entertainment system. I do not buy that theory at all.

 

It is possible they are on the same switches but on different VLANs with no route between them but even that is highly unlikely.

There is no way a network architect would design a network where you would be able to communicate between the communication system and the entertainment system. I do not buy that theory at all.

 

It is possible they are on the same switches but on different VLANs with no route between them but even that is highly unlikely.

 

Perhaps the systems were designed during a time when a inflight hijacking wasn't something that had to be considered during the planning stage?

 

 

Perhaps the systems were designed during a time when a inflight hijacking wasn't something that had to be considered during the planning stage?

How old are the planes in question?

 

Network security has always been a concern, so I highly doubt it, but you do bring up an interesting point.

How old are the planes in question?

 

Network security has always been a concern, so I highly doubt it, but you do bring up an interesting point.

 

 

Pre 9/11.... Which is the event that changed everything... "Systems Integration" has been the buzzword in network design for twenty years now.... Every system talking to every other system, or at the very least, sharing a central backbone so that a maintenance tech can plug in his laptop to a central port, and DL all of the planes data and fault codes, check individual flight hours for each component and sub-component, and upload fixes/firmware, quickly and easily, and replace the various parts that are due for replacement. The guys designing the system aren't thinking that a bunch of (fairly sophisticated) fucksticks are sitting out there, getting their hands on all the open sourced materials they can find, for the sole purpose of finding and exploiting weaknesses. And will find that if they buy a ticket for seat XXX, wrap themselves in a big fcuking blanket so nobody can see what theyre doing, they can remove a small panel in the bulkhead, and plug into the whole enchilada.

 

Ever been on a long flight and instead of watching CNBC or Gigli on the IFE, you watched the little airplane icon float across a map of the U.S.? Its getting that telemetry data from SOMEPLACE... Where do you think its coming from? (Hint, its from the Plane's GPS, which is tied into the auto-pilot, which is tied into the engines and the flight controls.... Both of which are now connected to the cockpit by software. Software that tells the Ailerons "when the stick in the cockpit gets pulled in Y direction by X% you go in A direction B%." Get into that software and you can reprogram it so up is down, left is right, down is engines off, and right is vent cabin pressure.)

Pre 9/11.... Which is the event that changed everything... "Systems Integration" has been the buzzword in network design for twenty years now.... Every system talking to every other system, or at the very least, sharing a central backbone so that a maintenance tech can plug in his laptop to a central port, and DL all of the planes data and fault codes, check individual flight hours for each component and sub-component, and upload fixes/firmware, quickly and easily, and replace the various parts that are due for replacement. The guys designing the system aren't thinking that a bunch of (fairly sophisticated) fucksticks are sitting out there, getting their hands on all the open sourced materials they can find, for the sole purpose of finding and exploiting weaknesses. And will find that if they buy a ticket for seat XXX, wrap themselves in a big fcuking blanket so nobody can see what theyre doing, they can remove a small panel in the bulkhead, and plug into the whole enchilada.

 

Ever been on a long flight and instead of watching CNBC or Gigli on the IFE, you watched the little airplane icon float across a map of the U.S.? Its getting that telemetry data from SOMEPLACE... Where do you think its coming from? (Hint, its from the Plane's GPS, which is tied into the auto-pilot, which is tied into the engines and the flight controls.... Both of which are now connected to the cockpit by software. Software that tells the Ailerons "when the stick in the cockpit gets pulled in Y direction by X% you go in A direction B%." Get into that software and you can reprogram it so up is down, left is right, down is engines off, and right is vent cabin pressure.)

 

 

 

Boom

Pre 9/11.... Which is the event that changed everything... "Systems Integration" has been the buzzword in network design for twenty years now.... Every system talking to every other system, or at the very least, sharing a central backbone so that a maintenance tech can plug in his laptop to a central port, and DL all of the planes data and fault codes, check individual flight hours for each component and sub-component, and upload fixes/firmware, quickly and easily, and replace the various parts that are due for replacement. The guys designing the system aren't thinking that a bunch of (fairly sophisticated) fucksticks are sitting out there, getting their hands on all the open sourced materials they can find, for the sole purpose of finding and exploiting weaknesses. And will find that if they buy a ticket for seat XXX, wrap themselves in a big fcuking blanket so nobody can see what theyre doing, they can remove a small panel in the bulkhead, and plug into the whole enchilada.

 

Ever been on a long flight and instead of watching CNBC or Gigli on the IFE, you watched the little airplane icon float across a map of the U.S.? Its getting that telemetry data from SOMEPLACE... Where do you think its coming from? (Hint, its from the Plane's GPS, which is tied into the auto-pilot, which is tied into the engines and the flight controls.... Both of which are now connected to the cockpit by software. Software that tells the Ailerons "when the stick in the cockpit gets pulled in Y direction by X% you go in A direction B%." Get into that software and you can reprogram it so up is down, left is right, down is engines off, and right is vent cabin pressure.)

 

While seemingly possible...that doesn't necessarily mean it can happen.

 

But, Airbus would definitely seem to be more susceptible to this kind of issue though. Rumor is that the recent A400 crash is attributed to the computer shutting off fuel to all four engines. Boeing seems to program their airplanes so the pilot can override the computer, which isn't true in the Scarebus.

While seemingly possible...that doesn't necessarily mean it can happen.

 

Absolutely... But, if it CAN happen, there are assholes out there who will figure it out and do it.

 

Again, the biggest weakness in the theory is that its been over a year and its not raining planes.

Again, the biggest weakness in the theory is that its been over a year and its not raining planes.

 

"they" could be waiting for the general public to forget about the whole thing and be lulled into a false sense of security. At which point, suddenly 20-30 planes all drop in one day.

Does anyone remember the 2 passengers with the fake passports ? it was mentioned a couple of times, dismissed and we never heard about it again. Mossad agents tracking the cargo.

Additionally, 3 more CIA agents on board. The cargo was very sensitive US military equipment stolen during the withdrawal from Afghanistan and sold to China. PLane landed in Diego Carcia when the equipment and 5 agents were taken off the plane and was sent back out.

It has been crashed at one the deepest spots in the ocean, around the mariana trench. All this was done remotely by hacking into the plane's computers and taking over all the controls.

We will never see this plane again.

 

Does anyone remember the 2 passengers with the fake passports ? it was mentioned a couple of times, dismissed and we never heard about it again. Mossad agents tracking the cargo.

Additionally, 3 more CIA agents on board. The cargo was very sensitive US military equipment stolen during the withdrawal from Afghanistan and sold to China. PLane landed in Diego Carcia when the equipment and 5 agents were taken off the plane and was sent back out.

It has been crashed at one the deepest spots in the ocean, around the mariana trench. All this was done remotely by hacking into the plane's computers and taking over all the controls.

We will never see this plane again.

 

 

Ok, now I had to go look this shit up.

 

https://intellihub.com/freelance-journalist...e-diego-garcia/

 

 

 

 

 

Read a bit of that before highlighting the finalist for the comment of the year below:

 

 

The Photo is bull.

1. Iphone 5 doesn't take so small pictures

2. Why are the GPS Coordinates that you state not in the EXIF Propeties?

3. Iphone does have a flash

4. Try getting a 6 cm Wide divce up your Ass

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So no one here believes any of the passengers are alive, right? That there isn't the worlds most realistic recreation of Lost going down as we speak?

But, Airbus would definitely seem to be more susceptible to this kind of issue though. Rumor is that the recent A400 crash is attributed to the computer shutting off fuel to all four engines. Boeing seems to program their airplanes so the pilot can override the computer, which isn't true in the Scarebus.

My god you really are biased in a certain way towards Airbus.

Not that I care, but it really seems to be a predominant theme in almost every other post of yours that has anything to do with aviation.

There´s no government agencies on this board(I hope, lol), no one is thinking about buying an Airbus, or rather a Beoing in here that you could persuade.

Does anyone remember the 2 passengers with the fake passports ? it was mentioned a couple of times, dismissed and we never heard about it again. Mossad agents tracking the cargo.

Additionally, 3 more CIA agents on board. The cargo was very sensitive US military equipment stolen during the withdrawal from Afghanistan and sold to China. PLane landed in Diego Carcia when the equipment and 5 agents were taken off the plane and was sent back out.

It has been crashed at one the deepest spots in the ocean, around the mariana trench. All this was done remotely by hacking into the plane's computers and taking over all the controls.

We will never see this plane again.

 

 

I remember the two passports story... But wasnt that waved off with "lots of chinese have fake passports so they can travel" or something like that?

 

I can see crashing a plane from the passenger compartment... But LANDING it, at night, in the middle of the ocean, with no instruments or visual cues? That sounds hard to imagine.

Ok, now I had to go look this shit up.

 

https://intellihub.com/freelance-journalist...e-diego-garcia/

 

 

 

 

 

Read a bit of that before highlighting the finalist for the comment of the year below:

 

 

The Photo is bull.

1. Iphone 5 doesn't take so small pictures

2. Why are the GPS Coordinates that you state not in the EXIF Propeties?

3. Iphone does have a flash

4. Try getting a 6 cm Wide divce up your Ass

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So no one here believes any of the passengers are alive, right? That there isn't the worlds most realistic recreation of Lost going down as we speak?

 

I agree with the comment... Sick joke... And easily done.

 

 

Where ever they are, they're dead.

Pre 9/11.... Which is the event that changed everything... "Systems Integration" has been the buzzword in network design for twenty years now.... Every system talking to every other system, or at the very least, sharing a central backbone so that a maintenance tech can plug in his laptop to a central port, and DL all of the planes data and fault codes, check individual flight hours for each component and sub-component, and upload fixes/firmware, quickly and easily, and replace the various parts that are due for replacement. The guys designing the system aren't thinking that a bunch of (fairly sophisticated) fucksticks are sitting out there, getting their hands on all the open sourced materials they can find, for the sole purpose of finding and exploiting weaknesses. And will find that if they buy a ticket for seat XXX, wrap themselves in a big fcuking blanket so nobody can see what theyre doing, they can remove a small panel in the bulkhead, and plug into the whole enchilada.

 

Ever been on a long flight and instead of watching CNBC or Gigli on the IFE, you watched the little airplane icon float across a map of the U.S.? Its getting that telemetry data from SOMEPLACE... Where do you think its coming from? (Hint, its from the Plane's GPS, which is tied into the auto-pilot, which is tied into the engines and the flight controls.... Both of which are now connected to the cockpit by software. Software that tells the Ailerons "when the stick in the cockpit gets pulled in Y direction by X% you go in A direction B%." Get into that software and you can reprogram it so up is down, left is right, down is engines off, and right is vent cabin pressure.)

No, network security was a huge concern prior to 9/11 and you always have a completely different network for guests and employees; there is no way to cross between the two. DMZs are in place for public (guest network) access and is completely different from the inside (private network).

 

The feed of the GPS has nothing to do with the controls of the plane and there are also firewalls set in place to only allow specific traffic in and or out. Traffic can't be initiated from the outside (guest network) to the inside (private network).

 

It goes a lot deeper than this of course.

No, network security was a huge concern prior to 9/11 and you always have a completely different network for guests and employees; there is no way to cross between the two. DMZs are in place for public (guest network) access and is completely different from the inside (private network).

 

The feed of the GPS has nothing to do with the controls of the plane and there are also firewalls set in place to only allow specific traffic in and or out. Traffic can't be initiated from the outside (guest network) to the inside (private network).

 

It goes a lot deeper than this of course.

 

Ah, dear boy, yes in an ideal world the above would be implemented everywhere. Sadly it's not even implemented properly everywhere in the network vendors' environments. Let alone getting modern enterprise stuff approved for use in aviation. Even the shuttle is (was) running on a ruggedized AGS+. The Airbus' run on last gen, but very good Alcatel kit. IFE kits are provided as a 3rd party solution, depending on the airline's spec. They will have to hook in somewhere as RD says. I doubt there's a firewall in there anywhere...

 

My god you really are biased in a certain way towards Airbus.

Not that I care, but it really seems to be a predominant theme in almost every other post of yours that has anything to do with aviation.

There´s no government agencies on this board(I hope, lol), no one is thinking about buying an Airbus, or rather a Beoing in here that you could persuade.

I'll go with StoleIt's perspective on heavy airplanes. Aviators tend to have strong feelings on this stuff because they put their lives on the line with it. If StoleIt wants to take every opportunity to rail on Airbus, I won't blame him. The competition can only help the two giants get better. But if there's anything Americans are the absolute best in the entire world at, it's building airplanes. The rest of the world seems to think it's all ego, dismissing what it takes to become this good and assuming their own products are just as good, but our track record speaks for itself. In general, the rest of the world's best airplanes are usually only slightly better than our average/worst airplanes. We make mistakes and wrong turns, but Europe and Asia make worse mistakes and "wronger" turns than that, and often follow us mindlessly down the most poorly conceived paths. America also has over a century of experience as the leading innovator and foremost investor in progress where the rest of the world has spent the last century roller coastering inconsistently or simply piggy-backing on American advancements...plain opinion based on factual history, no ego. Granted, we might not be this good forever, but on top of that,

 

- Who does the rest of the world call to investigate their aircraft accidents in the mountains of east Bejesus? The NTSB, which is like calling the FBI to investigate a murder in Prague.

- Who does the world rely upon to deploy air power when and where needed as the majority/primary force? The USAF/USN/USA/USMC.

- Who does the world rely upon to define and develop airspace infrastructure assets and serve as a benchmark for aviation law? The USA.

- What language is the entire world required to speak on the radio in controlled airspace? English.

 

Obviously, majority portions of the development of powered flight, avionics, propulsion, rocketry, navigation, space exploration, combat aviation, general aviation, naval aviation, and civil aviation, all have their roots here. Maybe I got a little too big-picture with that (how does all that relate to Airbus??), but it still points to the immediate issues that we see in the smallest of aircraft systems coming from different cultures where the human beings behind them have very different motivations and different backgrounds that are unconnected to the entrenched and continuously streaming aviation culture made in America. This coming from a guy who doesn't even like Harleys or Dodge Hellcats (or cauliflower) (or poodles) (or mosquitoes).

 

...The feed of the GPS has nothing to do with the controls of the plane and there are also firewalls set in place to only allow specific traffic in and or out...

Maybe not in this instance, but RD's point of integrated systems isn't too far fetched. Aircraft manufacturers are indeed beyond simple independent systems and are rapidly moving toward highly integrated architectures where, for example, a GPS has an input to the flight control computers much the same as the pilot has only a "vote" in a fly-by-wire control system. We're not wholly there yet across all platforms, but we're going in that direction and people will assume more connectivity or integration than what realistically exists presently. Whether or not that is connected to the "infotainment system" is another matter, but the learning point at this juncture is that we definitely need to design airplanes that recognize the importance of the man in the loop and provide redundancies that allow the jet to keep flying. The basic point of a bypass-able oil filter is often hidden or lost on a software engineer who translates ideas from an alternate reality into our own. I agree with StoleIt's implication that Airbus, from a cultural standpoint, is definitely more excited to automate and show off their engineering prowess at the expense of human life. The ambitions of engineers can either be a blessing or a curse, lol.

Does anyone remember the 2 passengers with the fake passports ? it was mentioned a couple of times, dismissed and we never heard about it again. Mossad agents tracking the cargo.

Additionally, 3 more CIA agents on board. The cargo was very sensitive US military equipment stolen during the withdrawal from Afghanistan and sold to China. PLane landed in Diego Carcia when the equipment and 5 agents were taken off the plane and was sent back out.

It has been crashed at one the deepest spots in the ocean, around the mariana trench. All this was done remotely by hacking into the plane's computers and taking over all the controls.

We will never see this plane again.

 

Are you being serious?

 

If it was "really sensitive military equipment" then why wasn't it being moved on a military jet?

 

 

My god you really are biased in a certain way towards Airbus.

Not that I care, but it really seems to be a predominant theme in almost every other post of yours that has anything to do with aviation.

There´s no government agencies on this board(I hope, lol), no one is thinking about buying an Airbus, or rather a Beoing in here that you could persuade.

 

Oh I am definitely biased. I don't like any jet where the pilot isn't the absolute end all be all authority on what the airplane does and doesn't do.

 

Airbus believes the computers will keep the jet safe. Boeing believes the pilots will keep the jet safe. It's just a difference in design/programming philosophy.

Are you being serious?

 

If it was "really sensitive military equipment" then why wasn't it being moved on a military jet?

 

 

 

 

Oh I am definitely biased. I don't like any jet where the pilot isn't the absolute end all be all authority on what the airplane does and doesn't do.

 

Airbus believes the computers will keep the jet safe. Boeing believes the pilots will keep the jet safe. It's just a difference in design/programming philosophy.

 

I think the contention is that it was stolen sensitive military equipment... And we stoleit back... So its your fault.

No, network security was a huge concern prior to 9/11 and you always have a completely different network for guests and employees; there is no way to cross between the two. DMZs are in place for public (guest network) access and is completely different from the inside (private network).

 

The feed of the GPS has nothing to do with the controls of the plane and there are also firewalls set in place to only allow specific traffic in and or out. Traffic can't be initiated from the outside (guest network) to the inside (private network).

 

It goes a lot deeper than this of course.

 

 

This isn't that kind of network... This isn't wifi like in the starbucks... There is no Public and Private side. This is a single (hopefully) CLOSED network in an incredibly confined space, whereby information is travelling between the planes instruments, controls, flight surfaces, engines, A/C etc. Passengers arent SUPPOSED to have ANY access to the planes systems... Other than choosing a particular channel on the in flight tv via the (usually broken) controls on the arm rest. In fact, the the only people who are supposed to have any interaction with it at all is the pilots. Its a plane. You're limited in the amount of space/weight allowance you have for wires. (Which is one of the reasons to integrate all this stuff, especially when you start considering that some of the critical flight computers have 1 or 2 redundant backups taking up space as well... ) The wires run along the cabin, in out of sight but easily accessible runs... Find out where the guy who's job it is to fix stuff when it breaks, gets to those wires, and you can get to them as well if you've got the stones..

 

 

And, the FEED from the gps doesn't control the plane. But the GPS itself is absolutely part of the autopilot, and can fly the plane, on any path programmed into it.