Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet

[YorkVol]

$250+ million for the brand new airframe.

For a used airliner, you are probably looking at high eight figures, low nine depending on conditions.

These guys paid $500K for an old IL-76 for a one way trip into Afghanistan...

Inside the Dirty World of an Outlaw Pilot | Reader's Digest

John is an England-based middleman who matches crews with aid organizations. He recounts one wildcat Il-76 job that left the American military command in Afghanistan breathless with awe. “The U.S. military had this huge generator they needed to get to an airfield site they were planning in the south,” he explains. “This was a remote area, and aside from a few pockets of U.S. troops, it was completely under bandit control. There was no fuel available for miles around, and none of the outfits we approached would touch it. They kept saying, ‘We’ll never get out again; how can we take off from an unprepared airfield with no fuel?’
“The job was priced between $60,000 and $70,000, but one day there’s a phone call from these Russian guys. They said, ‘We’ll do it, but it’ll cost you $2 million, in advance.’ The Americans didn’t have a choice at this stage, so they paid. And sure enough, right on time, this ex-Soviet air force crew flew in, in this battered old Il-76, unloaded the generator, and then sat down for a leisurely smoke.

“Just as the Americans were wondering how they were going to fly out again, up clatters this old minibus driven by some Afghan bloke—and these airmen just get in and drive off.

“The Yanks were going, ‘Hey, how will you get the plane back?’ And the crew said, ‘We won’t. We bought it for this job, and we’re ditching it here.’ Half a million dollars it cost them. They held it together with string, just long enough to land, cleared $1.5 million in profit, and left it to rust. It’s still there.”



Read more: Inside the Dirty World of an Outlaw Pilot | Reader's Digest - Part 2

 

[YorkVol]

You wouldn't need a 777 to transport a nuke. Even a crude model would be able to fit into a much smaller plane.

Point York was trying to make is if you can afford to bankroll making a nuclear device, you can probably afford to buy some type of cargo plane capable of moving it. Plus, it would be a whole lot easier to buy a plane that nobody is looking for compared to stealing one of the size of a 777 that everyone is looking for.

I won't discount there could have been a hijacking for any of these purposes, but that someone on board then caused the plane to crash before it reached its destination. And if there were some sort of WMD on board that would explain the lack of info from the Malays or anyone else as they would want to recover the weapon before releasing any info.

Nevertheless, I don't think that is the most likely scenario.

 

[hog88]

You wouldn't need a 777 to transport a nuke. Even a crude model would be able to fit into a much smaller plane.

Point York was trying to make is if you can afford to bankroll making a nuclear device, you can probably afford to buy some type of cargo plane capable of moving it. Plus, it would be a whole lot easier to buy a plane that nobody is looking for compared to stealing one of the size of a 777 that everyone is looking for.

I don't think they have a nuke or that is the purpose of taking this plane. Hell a 182 could carry a nuke.

The plane itself would be the bomb with probably additional conventional explosives loaded in.

 

[davethevol]

It would be so much easier to just buy a plane to do what you are saying. It is one thing to do an immediate event ala 9/11 to cause terror, but for a prolonged event this isn't the way to go. At this point everyone in the world is looking for this plane, which isn't the best way to run a convert op like you suggest.

A purchased plane would leave a money trail. Let's just say it is state sponsored by Pakistan and they want as few leads back to them as possible, a multi million dollar transaction would raise flags from the outset and make it easier to trace the funding.


All that being said, I hope turns out to be mechanical error and not something crazy.

 

[YorkVol]

A purchased plane would leave a money trail. Let's just say it is state sponsored by Pakistan and they want as few leads back to them as possible, a multi million dollar transaction would raise flags from the outset and make it easier to trace the funding.


All that being said, I hope turns out to be mechanical error and not something crazy.

There are plenty of old military planes out there you could buy for cash.

 

[Grand Vol]

I don't think they have a nuke or that is the purpose of taking this plane. Hell a 182 could carry a nuke.

The plane itself would be the bomb with probably additional conventional explosives loaded in.

But we still come back to the overall point that why steal something that everyone is looking for when you can buy something that nobody is looking for?

 

[Grand Vol]

They didn't locate Air France 447 for two years.

Actually, they found wreckage of the plane after about five days of searching. They didn't locate the flight data recorder for almost two years.

 

[hog88]

But we still come back to the overall point that why steal something that everyone is looking for when you can buy something that nobody is looking for?

It's hard to move 1/2 mil or more in cash around the globe without leaving a trail. If your financed by people who want deniability then stealing is the way to go.

 

[lawgator1]

Because if you are going to use the plane as a guided missile (which seems to be the trending theory) having hostages on board, even a few might give a nation pause for thought at shooting it down. Not saying that makes sense, but perhaps these terrorists have watched too many movies.

The "trending theory"? I think you mean the "current pure speculation."

Bunch of Geraldo's running around these days.

 

[Grand Vol]

It's hard to move 1/2 mil or more in cash around the globe without leaving a trail. If your financed by people who want deniability then stealing is the way to go.

Actually, not that hard as terrorists, drug dealers, businessmen and others do it all the time. Think about it, if you are a terrorist and want/need a large airplane for some form of attack and have the money to spend on it, you think dropping a few Benjamins on a customs agent in some third world country is going to cause concern?

And it's far easier to hide in plain sight rather than trying to hide something the size of an airliner. If I buy a plane, it's now mine. I have a record of sale with rightful ownership. I have committed no crime using that object so I can claim plausible deniability in everything.

But if I steal a plane, I'm automatically on the radar scope (no pun intended) for theft and draw attention to myself. And if I'm planning something big, I don't want attention drawn to myself.

 

[Grand Vol]

The "trending theory"? I think you mean the "current pure speculation."

Bunch of Geraldo's running around these days.

So you still don't believe in the nefarious purposes behind this?

There is a chance this is purely an accident of some sort, but look at the evidence that's gone out so far. Not that I don't trust the Malaysians to pass on all the info, but I just don't trust the Malaysians to pass on all the info. And if our own intelligence and military sources are saying they have potential information to the contrary, I'm more apt to believe them at this point.

No offense to the Malaysians, but they have purely sucked in this matter.

 

[YorkVol]

It's hard to move 1/2 mil or more in cash around the globe without leaving a trail. If your financed by people who want deniability then stealing is the way to go.

Not true. Plenty of people deal in large amounts of cash that isn't tracked. Heck the drug industry in southern Afghanistan brings in an estimated 4Billion/year, all cash.

 

[Velo Vol]

How long was that search considered intensive? It was pretty much an afterthought to most after the first month.

It would drop off the news every night, but people will continue searching for it until it's found.

 

[lawgator1]

So you still don't believe in the nefarious purposes behind this?

There is a chance this is purely an accident of some sort, but look at the evidence that's gone out so far. Not that I don't trust the Malaysians to pass on all the info, but I just don't trust the Malaysians to pass on all the info. And if our own intelligence and military sources are saying they have potential information to the contrary, I'm more apt to believe them at this point.

No offense to the Malaysians, but they have purely sucked in this matter.

I have no freakin' clue.

What I do know is that so far every lead or claim of "radar shows this" or "the transponders did that" or "satellite pings demonstrate this" have turned out to be incorrect.

 

[Gramps]

It's hard to move 1/2 mil or more in cash around the globe without leaving a trail. If your financed by people who want deniability then stealing is the way to go.

It is easy to move cash around without leaving a trial.

 

[Septic]

I have no freakin' clue.

What I do know is that so far every lead or claim of "radar shows this" or "the transponders did that" or "satellite pings demonstrate this" have turned out to be incorrect.

Like I said earlier, the journalistic integrity of the reporting is more focused on being first than right.

 

[Grand Vol]

I have no freakin' clue.

What I do know is that so far every lead or claim of "radar shows this" or "the transponders did that" or "satellite pings demonstrate this" have turned out to be incorrect.

I guess it boils down to who you would believe. The Malaysians that are acting plenty shady over this entire affair or the US Government that really doesn't have a dog in this fight?

Tough choice there, I know. But I'm not being xenophobic when I say I just don't trust the Malaysians at this point. The Chinese...perhaps a little more, but still not entirely trustworthy.

 

[Velo Vol]

I was watching Hannity last night or night before, don't remember which. Anyway, one of the talking heads was discussing all the conspiracy theories popping up about what is going on with MH370. And he said he would like to be able to discount some of the more absurd ones, but can't because of the utter and complete lack of evidence.

Start with the simplest explanations (involving the fewest people) that match the facts, and work your way down the probability totem pole from there.

Mechanical/structural failure, pilot suicide, hijacking, so forth.

 

[Grand Vol]

Like I said earlier, the journalistic integrity of the reporting is more focused on being first than right.

That's about normal in any situation in recent memory though. The Boston Marathon bombings for example.

 

[Grand Vol]

Start with the simplest explanations (involving the fewest people) that match the facts, and work your way down the probability totem pole from there.

Mechanical/structural failure, pilot suicide, hijacking, so forth.

So you're saying the theory that a meteor hitting the plane and it disintegrating probably isn't plausible?

In seriousness, I'd actually put mechanical/structural failure way down the totem pole. The aircraft has an impeccable record.

 

[TheDeeble]

Here's my conspiracy theory for the day: the plane was hijacked and is now in possession of terrorists who also have a nuclear bomb. Since they don't have a missile system to deliver it, they needed a plane. They will be able to fly it close enough to a major city to detonate it before it is shot down. I do not necessarily think it will be used against the US, but I think this is going to be worst case scenario that the world hasn't experienced yet.

If the people behind this are financing a nuke, the money for an airplane is chump change. Just buy one instead of going through this hassle and risk of hijacking.

As far as paper trail, if they used it to deliver a nuke, that plane and everything else in the area in dust. There's nothing to investigate.

 

[Burhead]

Because if you are going to use the plane as a guided missile (which seems to be the trending theory) having hostages on board, even a few might give a nation pause for thought at shooting it down. Not saying that makes sense, but perhaps these terrorists have watched too many movies.



Difference being, I don't think the US would be a target in this scenario. Way out of position in the world to strike at anything within the Continental US. So I'd figure the target is international if there is one.

The other thing that will be a consideration would be the fact that a 777 zipping along towards Tel Aviv or wherever is going to get noticed. And even if it's repainted (we're stretching here) folks are going to connect the dots quickly.

Perhaps targets in China?

 

[Grand Vol]

Perhaps targets in China?

That's the $64,000 question right there isn't it?

 

[Velo Vol]

Like I said earlier, the journalistic integrity of the reporting is more focused on being first than right.

Your point is right as a general proposition.

But what specifically do you object to in this instance?

I watched part of one of the Malaysian press conferences the other day. It resembled a media circus. There were four of five people up front, none of whom seemed to be entirely on the same page. Someone would ask a question, an official would give a strange-sounding answer, and the guy in charge would immediately cut him off and go to the next question. No followups.

If this is representative of the way it's been to cover this story, I'm willing to grant the press more of a pass on this one.

 

[lawgator1]

I guess it boils down to who you would believe. The Malaysians that are acting plenty shady over this entire affair or the US Government that really doesn't have a dog in this fight?

Tough choice there, I know. But I'm not being xenophobic when I say I just don't trust the Malaysians at this point. The Chinese...perhaps a little more, but still not entirely trustworthy.

I agree the Malaysians have looked terrible, though I can't think of something they've asserted that has proven to be wrong. I mean, they have said xyz and it sure looked like xyz. Their problem, it seems to me, is that they've looked like they have no information at all and they are left to respond to statements by others.

That they are responding, instead of in charge is their PR problem. But its not like they have been shown to be misleading people. Not to mention they have lost a plane and 240 people, with the families their main concern.

I want to be careful not to translate weak PR efforts into complete ineptitude in every respect, much less that they are somehow involved in shenanigans, or covering up shenanigans.