y*****n
发帖数: 145 | 1 Another idea getting traction is this one, from a general aviation pilot
named Chris Goodfellow who explains the flight’s turn off course as a
response to an inflight emergency — a deviation forced by an electrical
fire. While headed for an emergency landing, the crew was overcome by smoke
or fumes. Its autopilot on and course reprogrammed, the plane then continued
on for a time before crashing. The theory is described in the headline as
“startlingly simple,” though in fact there’s nothing startling about it,
and Goodfellow says exactly what I said five days ago. You can read it
further down this page in the March 14th update, and here it is again…
…Or, was the crew diverting to a nearby airport because of a fire or some
other emergency? Did the plane crash shortly thereafter; or were the pilots
overcome by smoke or fumes, at which point plane continued on for a length
of time? It’d be interesting to see what some of their divert options were
at the point when the jet fell out of contact, and if any of those options
are consistent with the path supposedly taken.
And I wasn’t the only one. Other people suggested the same thing, more or
less, once it was revealed that the plane had made that off-course turn.
This remains a perfectly plausible theory — a lot more plausible than many
of the ones we’ve been hearing. |
|
