gut;1591845 wrote:It may have been missed or ignored, and obviously countries are reluctant to divulge much about their radar capabilities. I've just not seen anyone that really believes the plane evaded radar. Possible someone is lying, otherwise very unlikely that plane went north.
Again, go back to the hijacking scenario. You have an "invisible" plane and could hit major targets...WHY would you risk landing the plane anywhere or pushing your luck with radar? If you would, you'd make a go for a remote island rather then try to get past India, Pakistan or US radar in Afghanistan.
Then if you believe the plane has crashed, why would nobody take credit for at least hijacking it?
Maybe smells more like pilot suicide with a twist to make it memorable.
I am beginning to believe that the goal was never to strike a major target. It's more likely in my view that the intention of those responsible was to land the plane in a "safe zone" somewhere in the Middle East and then to initiate an old-school hostage negotiation for some type of ransom. It's possible that the two pilots were in on it together, or that there were actual hi-jackers on board in the cabin who commandeered the aircraft.
If the pilot theory is correct, and nobody else was involved, then there obviously was never a hijacking and no one alive to tell about it. If this was the work of actual hijackers from some sort of terror group, then I'm not sure anyone alive would want to come forth and take credit for the plan since the plan did not work. Why divulge any information after a failed attempt, if there are plans for more in the future?
The idea of pilot suicide with a twist -- wanting to go out with a bang, so to speak -- is also interesting to consider.
