My guess is that the US, Russian, and Chinese militaries have the interest, and operational ability, to track every in-flight commercial jet all over the world. The IR signature alone makes a commercial jet obvious at any altitude as long as the engines are running. So MH370 is probably not lost; its final position is just being concealed by military protocol to avoid confirming satellite capabilities that have, in all likelihood, existed since the 1960s.
Would have to be a pretty hardened pilot to take a 777 down to FL 50 and keep her there anywhere except approach.<p>"Experts said flying a Boeing 777 in such a way would be dangerous, stressing the airframe and possibly causing those on board to be air sick and suffer from spatial disorientation."<p>This truly meets the definition of incredible. How could you be that good, but then end up crashing the plane? If you <i>are</i> that good, then you are not going to crash that plane.
Ignoring for the sake of argument the tragedy of hundreds of people getting murdered / kidnapped, this is the most captivating news event we've had in a while.
What a poorly written article. It twice says that the plane "dropped/descended 1500m," when it should be written "dropped TO [an altitude of] 1500m." (assuming I'm understanding the article correctly). A newspaper should at least have sufficient grammar standards to clearly convey the main point of a story.
> Today, Reuters reports that the last words from the cockpit of missing MH370 – "all right, good night" – were uttered after someone on board had already begun disabling one of the plane's automatic tracking systems.
I'd still bet on ocean crash. Flying low or not, heading across the Bay of Bengal towards land, and you're going to get pinged with military radar.
I may be missing something, but this seems like a very misleading headline.<p>The actual article states that the plane "dropped 5,000 feet (1,500m)" and later that the "twinjet descended 1,500m or even lower". This simply means that the plane descended by a relatively small amount compared to 35,000 - 40,000 foot cruising altitudes, not that it was skimming the ground at 5,000 feet.
This article lost me midway second sentence.<p>"to evade commercial (secondary) radar coverage after it turned back from its flight path en route to Beijing."<p>Secondary (used by ATC) radar is based on transponders responding (the very thing that was switched off).<p>Primary radar is usually military and does not need any device being on or off.
Better written version of the story: <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/9836664/Malaysian-jet-avoided-radars-in-three-countries" rel="nofollow">http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/9836664/Malaysian-jet-avoi...</a>