[sauce: http://82.221.129.208/.ya5.html]
Indonesia Plane crash Part I
CORRECTION TO POST IMMEDIATELY BELOW, it is 3:30 AM and I got the horizontal/vertical stabilizers mixed up. Farther down in the report I say elevator (for horizontal stabilizer) which proves I am not an idiot with this. I am trying to log in and fix the error immediately below. I can't fix this in combat mode unless I successfully log in.
To fully explain the Indonesian air line crash post below, and why it was a probable remote hijack:
If it was a wing flap or horizontal stabilizer failure, the plane would have been turning as it crashed. It flew straight. It was therefore not a wing flap or horizontal stabilizer problem. If it was a vertical stabilizer problem, the plane would have either looped or nose dived to it's death instantly. It did not. it instead gained and lost elevation erratically. Therefore an actual problem with the vertical stabilizer is unlikely.
If the plane stalled it would not have smashed into a million pieces after descending many times free fall speed. It did smash into a million pieces after descending many times free fall speed. ANSWER THEN: FULL THROTTLE DIVE. Gee, how would that happen? Read the reports below!
Indonesian air line crash: HERE IS WHAT THE BLACK BOX IS GOING TO SAY: BET ON IT:
If I am correct about the remote hijacking, Folks, I am not 100 percent sure, only 95 percent sure, but if I am right, here is what the black box will say: Erratic pilot input Pilot will be blamed because the plane really was piloted straight into the ocean after a very erratic flight and the black box probably won't differentiate between remote commands and actual pilot input.
PILOT ERROR.
If that is the answer, I am right about the remote hijacking. It could also go like this, and still be a remote controlled crash: Flap or elevator commanded to (x) position resulting in crash. I am not going to post what the black box should say for a legit crash because I am not going to give the idiots in the media who'd never figure that out any hints to lie with. However, The remote control hijack is strongly supported by the fact that the plane was rapidly gaining and losing alititude while flying straight. If a flap malfunctioned it would have been turning, and if the elevator malfunctioned it would not have been going up and down before finally crashing, it would have simply gone down instantly in one whack. This really looks like the pilot was fighting for control against outside input, which all Boeing jets will allow. Airbus is different, once the fly by wire makes a decision the pilot can't influence it. Boeing allows the pilot to fight the system but it takes a lot of strength. He (probably) fought until he tired out and the remote hijackers won.
The remote hijackers probably tested their hack on Sunday, when an irregularity with the plane was noticed but nothing was found wrong with it (obviously) so it was cleared for flight. The pilot probably noticed an anomaly when the hijackers first got into the system and requested a return, and then, when the plane was where they wanted it they crashed it.
BIG PROBLEM FOR THEM: Somehow, miraculously, a video from inside the plane of the entire event made it to the public within a couple short hours of the crash and it will prevent total bullshit from being told. There will be some explaining needed and that explanation is going to be picked apart totally. I am sure the remote hijackers (if that is what the black box indicates happened) never expected a video of the whole event to make it to the public.