NOTE: This text contains sensitive and vivid details that some readers may find disturbing. Furthermore, the text contains theories that have not been confirmed and, as such, enter the realm of speculation. The purpose of the text is to commemorate the presumed deaths of 239 passengers and crew members in the greatest mystery of modern aviation, by bringing together relevant facts and proposed theories from relevant international investigators.

On 8 March 2014, a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER disappeared. Flight MH370 departed that March night from Kuala Lumpur bound for Beijing, carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew members. The evening flight proceeded according to plan until 01:21, when the aircraft disappeared from radar. Two minutes before the disappearance, the captain made the last contact with Kuala Lumpur Area Control, where he incorrectly responded to the air traffic control instruction to switch to Ho Chi Minh Radar with the now well-known words: “Good night, Malaysian three-seven-zero.”

After the aircraft disappeared from radar, military radar established its position, and the military confirmed that the aircraft had deviated from its route and headed back toward the Malaysian peninsula, making a sharp 180-degree turn. As the aircraft continued toward the Indian Ocean, it left the range of military radar and disappeared from all radar screens. After air traffic control and emergency services calculated that the aircraft had run out of fuel, search operations turned into rescue operations. The search for the aircraft and passengers continued intermittently until 2017, when it was officially suspended. It was the most expensive search ever carried out, costing more than USD 160 million by 2017 alone. Nevertheless, Malaysian authorities remain committed to finding the aircraft and have decided to relaunch the search if new “relevant evidence” emerges.

After the search was suspended in 2017, an official report was published, prepared by experts from Malaysia, Australia, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Singapore and France. Although the report could not confirm or state unequivocally what happened to the aircraft, it is notable that it did not exclude “unlawful interference by a third party.” Despite this, investigators agree that the aircraft has not been lost, but that their work remains unfinished.

This text provides a chronological overview of the events, the best-known theories about the disappearance, and answers to the questions investigators were able to address using the minimal aircraft debris found on the African and Australian coasts. The sources used in preparing the text are listed at the end. We ask readers for understanding, as some of the information consists of claims and assumptions that cannot be confirmed.

Timeline of flight MH370

23:15 MYT (15:15 UTC) – Both pilots, Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah and First Officer Fariq Abdul Hamid, reported for duty. Approximately 15 minutes later, the pre-flight briefing of the flight and cabin crew began.

00:00 MYT (16:00 UTC) – The aircraft’s SDU system logged on to Inmarsat’s satellite communications network, indicating that the aircraft’s APU, Auxiliary Power Unit, or GPU, Ground Power Unit, was switched on. Boarding of the 227 passengers began a few minutes later.

00:27 MYT (16:27 UTC) – The aircraft doors were closed and pushback was approved. The aircraft started its engines. During pushback, the passenger safety demonstration video began.

00:40 MYT (16:40 UTC) – The aircraft reached the holding point for entry onto the runway and air traffic control cleared it for takeoff.

00:42 MYT (16:42 UTC) – The Boeing 777-200ER operating flight MH370 took off from runway 32R at Kuala Lumpur Airport.

00:42:53 MYT (16:42:53 UTC) – Air traffic control cleared flight MH370 to climb to FL180 and instructed it to fly directly to waypoint IGARI.

00:46:39 MYT (16:46:39 UTC) – Tower control instructed flight 370 to contact Lumpur Radar.

00:46:58 MYT (16:46:58 UTC) – After initial contact with Lumpur Radar, MH370 was instructed to continue climbing to FL250.

00:50 MYT (16:50 UTC) – Lumpur Radar instructed the aircraft to climb to its planned cruising altitude, FL350.

01:01 MYT (17:01 UTC) – The captain contacted Lumpur Radar and reported that MH370 had reached its cruising altitude, FL350.

01:07 MYT (17:07 UTC) – The last data transmission from the aircraft via the ACARS protocol, the system for transmitting text messages by radio or satellite link.

01:07–02:03 MYT (17:07–18:03 UTC) – The aircraft’s link with satellite communication systems was lost during this period.

01:07:56 MYT (17:07:56 UTC) – In response to a call from air traffic control, the captain confirmed that MH370 was flying at FL350.

01:19:30 MYT (17:19:30 UTC) – Lumpur Radar instructed MH370 to contact Ho Chi Minh Radar. As the aircraft crossed waypoint IGARI, the captain replied, “Good night, Malaysian 370.” This was the last contact between the aircraft and air traffic control.

01:21:13 MYT (17:21:13 UTC) – Flight MH370 disappeared from radar. Since the aircraft’s position was detected by military radar, its disappearance from civilian radar marks the shutdown of the aircraft’s transponder. Immediately after the transponder was turned off, the aircraft deviated from its planned route, made a 180-degree turn and began flying southwest.

01:30 MYT (17:30 UTC) – On the instruction of Ho Chi Minh Radar, another aircraft attempted to establish contact with MH370. In response to the call, the pilots of the other aircraft heard mumbling and interference on the radio. Since MH370 was contacted on the emergency frequency, there is no air traffic control recording of the established contact, and it has not been officially confirmed that the reply actually came from MH370.

01:37 MYT (17:37 UTC) – The expected half-hourly ACARS transmission was not recorded.

01:39 MYT (17:39 UTC) – Ho Chi Minh (HCM) Radar contacted Lumpur Radar. HCM confirmed that no verbal communication had been established with MH370 and that MH370 had disappeared from radar near waypoint BITOD. Lumpur Radar confirmed that MH370 had not attempted to contact their control after passing waypoint IGARI.

01:46 MYT (17:46 UTC) – HCM Radar confirmed that radar contact with MH370 had been established near IGARI but was lost near BITOD.

01:52 MYT (17:52 UTC) – MH370 flew over the far south of Penang Island. A telecommunications tower recorded contact with the mobile device of First Officer Fariq Abdul Hamid. It was confirmed that no other data exchange took place. The aircraft then turned northwest.

01:57 MYT (17:57 UTC) – HCM Radar informed Lumpur Radar that, despite numerous attempts, communication with MH370 had still not been established.

02:03:41 MYT (18:03:41 UTC) – Malaysia Airlines’ dispatch centre sent a text message to the aircraft via ACARS. The message was sent several times between 02:03 and 02:05 MYT, but the aircraft did not receive it.

02:03:48 MYT (18:03:48 UTC) – Lumpur Radar forwarded information from the Malaysia Airlines operations centre to HCM Radar stating that the aircraft was in Cambodian airspace.

02:15 MYT (18:15 UTC) – The Malaysia Airlines operations centre confirmed that it was able to establish “signals” with the aircraft and that MH370 was in Cambodian airspace.

02:18 MYT (18:18 UTC) – Lumpur and HCM Radar determined that MH370’s flight plan did not include flying over Cambodia and contacted Cambodian authorities, who confirmed that neither radio nor radar contact had been established with the aircraft.

02:22 MYT (18:22 UTC) – One hour and one minute after disappearing from civilian radar, the last radar contact with MH370 was recorded by the Malaysian military. The last recorded position was 370 kilometres northwest of Penang Island. After that, the aircraft flew beyond the range of all available radars.

02:25 MYT (18:25 UTC) – An automatic “log-on request” was again sent from the aircraft’s satellite communication system to Inmarsat’s satellite network. The connection was established after a loss lasting between 22 and 68 minutes from the aircraft’s takeoff.

02:34 MYT (18:34 UTC) – Lumpur Radar sent a request to the Malaysia Airlines Operations Centre (OC) for information about MH370. The OC confirmed that a message had been sent, but also reported that there was no confirmation whether it had been received.

02:35 MYT (18:35 UTC) – The Malaysia Airlines OC informed Lumpur Radar that, according to its information, the aircraft was in “normal operating condition,” based on signals exchanged while the aircraft was in the airspace of northern Vietnam.

02:39 MYT (18:39 UTC) – A call made to MH370 via the satellite communications network went unanswered.

03:30 MYT (19:30 UTC) – The Malaysia Airlines OC announced that its tracking of the aircraft was no longer reliable and that it had no further information about the aircraft’s condition or location.

03:41 MYT (19:41 UTC) – Automatic hourly “handshake” exchange of information between the aircraft and the Inmarsat satellite communications network.

04:41 MYT (20:41 UTC) – Automatic hourly “handshake” exchange of information between the aircraft and the Inmarsat satellite communications network.

05:09 MYT (21:09 UTC) – Singapore air traffic control sent an inquiry regarding MH370.

05:41 MYT (21:41 UTC) – Automatic hourly “handshake” exchange of information between the aircraft and the Inmarsat satellite communications network.

06:30 MYT (22:30 UTC) – According to the schedule, MH370 should have landed in Beijing. Families of the passengers at the airport were informed that the aircraft was delayed.

06:32 MYT (22:32 UTC) – The Kuala Lumpur Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre was activated.

06:41 MYT (22:41 UTC) – Automatic hourly “handshake” exchange of information between the aircraft and the Inmarsat satellite communications network.

07:13 MYT (23:13 UTC) – The Malaysia Airlines OC again attempted to establish contact with the aircraft via the satellite communications network. The call went unanswered.

07:24 MYT (23:24 UTC) – Malaysia Airlines issued a press release stating that flight MH370 had been declared missing.

08:11 MYT (00:11 UTC) – The final automatic hourly “handshake” exchange of information between the aircraft and the Inmarsat satellite communications network took place.

08:19:29 MYT (00:19:29 UTC) – The aircraft sent a “log-on request,” or “partial handshake,” to the Inmarsat satellite network. Investigators believe this request indicates the time when the engines shut down, most likely due to fuel exhaustion.

08:19:37 MYT (00:19:37 UTC) – In response to the “log-on request” from the ground station, the aircraft replied with a “log-on acknowledgement” message, which was the last transmission from flight MH370, a total of 7 hours and 37 minutes after takeoff from Kuala Lumpur Airport.

09:15 MYT (01:15 UTC) – The aircraft did not respond to automatic “handshake” attempts.

Flight MH370 was operated by a Boeing 777-200, registration 9M-MRO. The aircraft’s serial number was 28420, and its official type designation was 777-2H6ER. The aircraft was delivered to Malaysia Airlines in 2002, while its first flight took place on 14 May 2002. It had a passenger configuration with 35 business-class seats and 239 economy-class seats, and at the time of its disappearance it was 11.8 years old. Officially, the aircraft is listed as “written off.”

The entire flight MH370 is shrouded in mystery. Official information about the flight is contradictory, and based on it, it is almost impossible to form a single, clear theory about what happened to the aircraft or what happened to the passengers. A detail from the official report states that the number of fatalities was 239, but with the note “presumed,” meaning that it is assumed that, in the accident, whatever its nature, all 239 passengers and crew members “probably” died. It should be noted that the term “presumed” is used in all accidents in which the bodies of passengers have not been found.

The investigation and search for the aircraft were initially conducted in a disorderly manner, since the data from Malaysian and Vietnamese air traffic control first had to be reconciled, while data on satellite communication with the aircraft reached investigators only one week after the disappearance. The continuation of the text provides information and a chronology of the investigation, as well as the course of the search and rescue operation.

8 March 2014

At 05:30 local time, the protocol of the Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre (ARCC) at Kuala Lumpur Area Control was activated. The first searches began in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand, in the areas where MH370 disappeared from radar. This is the first confusing piece of information, since the search was conducted in the area where the aircraft’s transponder had been turned off, even though military radar had tracked it and confirmed that it disappeared from radar because it flew beyond the range of available radars, 370 km northwest of Penang Island.

At 07:24 MYT, Malaysia Airlines stated in a press release that flight MH370 had been declared missing at 02:40 MYT, from the moment when the Malaysia Airlines OC could no longer track the aircraft. That information was later changed, and the aircraft is now listed as missing from 01:30, i.e. nine minutes after the aircraft disappeared from civilian radar. Only around 07:30 MYT, exactly one hour after the aircraft’s expected landing time in Beijing, did Malaysia Airlines change the flight status from delayed to officially missing and inform the passengers’ families. After initial contact with the families, the airline published the manifest, i.e. the list of passengers on the flight in question. Most passengers were from China (153) and Malaysia (50), while the remaining passengers came from another 12 countries.

Below is a translation of the first press release:

“Malaysia Airlines confirms that flight MH370 today (8 March 2014) at 02:40 lost contact with Subang Air Traffic Control. Flight MH370, operated by a B777-200 aircraft, departed Kuala Lumpur on 8 March at 12:41. MH370 was expected to land in Beijing at 06:30 the same morning. There were a total of 227 passengers on board, including two infants, and 12 crew members. Malaysia Airlines is currently working with the authorities, who have activated a search-and-rescue team to locate the aircraft.”

Only after the official announcement of the disappearance did the Malaysian military publicly state that an aircraft had been identified on military radar and that it was later determined to be MH370. Whether the military informed air traffic control of the aircraft’s identification immediately after it disappeared from civilian radar is not known. Search and rescue services accepted the military data as relevant only several days after the announcement. This explains the inconsistency in the initial search: the military did not share the information in time, so the first search was focused on the area where the aircraft disappeared from civilian radar.

Meanwhile, the embassies of countries whose citizens were on the passenger list published information: Austria and Italy confirmed that two of their citizens were on the passenger list, but that they had checked in for the flight using their own passports, which they had reported stolen within the previous two years. This information was later corrected: those passengers were not on the flight; instead, other people had used the stolen passports.

Since the aircraft was manufactured in the United States, the NTSB, the US National Transportation Safety Board, sent a team of investigators to Malaysia.

Inmarsat sent the first satellite tracking data for flight MH370. The data was kept secret for several days, while unofficial information suggests that investigators received it only one week after the aircraft disappeared.

9 March 2014

A total of 40 aircraft and 24 vessels were involved in the search, and at the request of the Malaysian authorities the focus of the investigation shifted to the Andaman Sea. During the day, the Royal Malaysian Air Force announced that, according to military radar recordings, there was a possibility that the aircraft had turned around and flown over the Andaman Sea.

Malaysia Airlines sent 150 senior managers to Beijing to establish an information and reporting centre for the passengers’ families. The same type of centre was opened in Kuala Lumpur. At the same time, the airline announced that it was ready to provide financial assistance to the passengers’ families and, if necessary, transport them from Beijing to Kuala Lumpur.

Authorities examined CCTV footage of passengers before boarding due to a possible connection with terrorism, but it was later announced that no connection between the passengers and terrorist organisations had been found.

9–11 March 2014

Inmarsat announced that, based on the data received, it could make a constructive contribution to the investigation. By the morning of 11 March, it was determined that the aircraft’s last contact had occurred somewhere within a range of “two arcs,” and the Malaysian authorities were informed.

Malaysian police confirmed that two passengers on the flight had used stolen passports. They were Iranian citizens who were probably attempting to emigrate to Germany. INTERPOL stated that “the more information we get, the more we are inclined to conclude that it was not a terrorist incident.” This solved the mystery of the alleged Italian and Austrian passengers using their own passports that had been reported stolen: the two Iranian citizens had checked in for the flight using stolen passports belonging to people who were not on the aircraft.

Only on 11 March did Inmarsat manage to establish contact with Malaysian authorities. After consultations with American investigators, the Malaysian authorities agreed to cooperate and authorised the NTSB to further analyse Inmarsat’s satellite data.

12 March 2014

Only on 12 March, four days after the disappearance, did Malaysian officials announce that the aircraft identified by military radar was “probably MH370,” and that the aircraft had flown beyond the range of all radars, 320 km northwest of Penang Island.

13 March 2014

A White House spokesperson announced that, based on Inmarsat data, the search could be expanded to the Indian Ocean.

14 March 2014

Inmarsat publicly released the collected and processed data. It also announced that it could confirm with “almost 100 percent certainty” that the aircraft had continued flying for several hours after disappearing from all radars.

Malaysia Airlines retired the flight numbers MH370/371 and replaced them with MH318/319.

© Andrew Heneen

As mentioned above, the investigation was conducted actively until 2017. Five countries took part in the active investigation, and members of the public were also able to participate by analysing satellite images of the search area. During the investigation, mostly in March 2014, many possible pieces of evidence were found. Among other things, orange “rectangular objects,” green or grey “circular objects,” oil slicks, scattered debris and similar items were observed. However, none of the evidence was accepted as relevant, and the findings were not linked to MH370.

At the end of summer 2014, authorities abandoned the “surface search” and shifted their focus to an underwater search, mainly by scanning the seabed. Once again, no relevant evidence was found.

On 29 July 2015, parts that could have belonged to the aircraft were found on the coast of the African island of La Réunion, a French territory. Analysis confirmed that it was the flaperon of a Boeing 777-200, and after inspecting the serial numbers, authorities confirmed that it was part of the aircraft from flight MH370. Immediately afterwards, a detailed search of the coast was launched in the hope of finding further evidence. The search was fruitful and a “sufficient” number of aircraft parts were found, including a suitcase, a water bottle, parts of the aircraft interior, parts of the engine cowling and similar items. However, investigators can confirm with certainty only that the flaperon came from flight MH370. For the other parts, the statement was only that they “almost certainly” came from flight MH370, although there is no way to confirm this unequivocally.

It was precisely the flaperon that caused the most debate among investigators. While some claim it would not have remained in one piece if the aircraft had hit the sea at high speed, which would indicate that the aircraft was uncontrolled, or that someone was controlling the aircraft during descent into the sea, others argue that the flaperon shows either that nobody was controlling the aircraft at impact, or that it was being controlled by someone who was not a pilot. As an argument, they cite evidence on the flaperon indicating that the flaps, which are used during landing, were not extended.

On 17 January 2017, all further active search efforts for the aircraft were suspended. After 120,000 km2 of the Indian Ocean seabed had been analysed, authorities decided to suspend the search. The total cost of the search amounted to USD 160 million.

© ATSB

Based on the investigation, the investigation team proposed a total of five “possible in-flight events,” but what is disturbing is that each proposed scenario has a “hole,” or at least one detail that does not fit some of the evidence. This, of course, created fertile ground for numerous conspiracy theories, but those will not be listed in this text. Below are the official five “possible in-flight events.”

Incapacitated crew and hypoxia

Investigators considered what could have incapacitated all passengers and crew on board the aircraft and directed the aircraft into the unknown. The MH370 case was compared with Helios Airways flight 522 from 2005, in which, due to a crew error, the cabin was not pressurised. As a result, passengers and crew were deprived of oxygen and suffered hypoxia, a condition in which the body cannot function because of a lack of oxygen, causing a person to lose consciousness. The crew were not aware of the phenomenon, and although oxygen masks deployed in the cabin, they kept the passengers conscious for only 12 minutes. In the end, none of the crew or passengers remained awake and conscious, apart from one flight attendant, and when the aircraft ran out of fuel, it crashed into hills near Athens.

Investigators attempted to apply the same scenario to MH370. Although hypoxia would explain why the crew stopped communicating with air traffic control, it is difficult to explain how unconscious pilots could have caused the aircraft’s precise turn off route, as well as the shutdown of the transponder. Also, after fuel exhaustion, if nobody was controlling the aircraft, it would have entered a spiral dive into the sea, which is not supported by the discovery of the flaperon on La Réunion Island. Namely, the flaperon was found in one piece, which Australian investigators say would not have been possible if the aircraft had crashed into the sea at high speed, as in a spiral dive. On the other hand, this sequence of events would explain why none of the passengers or cabin crew reacted in any way, i.e. tried to prevent the catastrophe. Could the pilot have flown the aircraft using his own oxygen mask? Yes, but not for long, because pilot oxygen masks are also limited by the amount of oxygen available. Did the passengers wake up after the aircraft descended to altitudes where oxygen is available? No, because after several hours without oxygen, the human body is “brain dead.”

Loss of electrical power

Investigators discovered that for 46 minutes during the flight, before the aircraft disappeared from radar, the aircraft’s SATCOM satellite communications system was not operating, which could indicate a fault in the electrical system. Such a fault could explain the shutdown of the transponder and even the turn, if the fault caused an autopilot malfunction, or if the pilots intended to return. Also, a loss of electrical power or any kind of system fault could cause a fire. The problem with this theory is that the crew would have reacted to an electrical failure or malfunction, in the worst case by landing the aircraft at the nearest possible airport. Even if the aircraft had caught fire, which could have prevented the crew from reacting, it would not have flown on for several more hours in an unknown direction.

“Dangerous cargo”

A total of 221 kg of lithium-ion batteries were loaded in the cargo hold of flight MH370. Although such batteries are flammable if handled improperly, they were packed and loaded in accordance with IATA regulations, in LD containers, which officially made them non-dangerous cargo.

In the past, lithium-ion batteries, or fires caused by them, had caused fires on two aircraft, UPS Airlines flight 6 and Asiana Airlines flight 991, which investigators proposed as a possible cause of the MH370 crash. A fire could explain the loss of communications, the shutdown or failure of the transponder, and even the turn, which could indicate the crew’s intention to return to the Malaysian peninsula for landing. However, MH370 did not land, which in the case of a fire could indicate crew incapacitation, and a burning aircraft with an incapacitated crew would not have continued flying for several hours, thousands of kilometres away from its original route.

Passenger involvement

Since it was discovered early in the investigation that two passengers had used stolen passports, investigators and police suspected possible passenger involvement in the form of a hijacking aimed at carrying out a terrorist act. It was also discovered that the passengers were Iranian citizens and that both had purchased one-way tickets. This possibility was partly refuted when it was found that the passengers were probably migrants, with evidence, not presented to the public, indicating that they were attempting to emigrate to Germany.

However, suspicion of a potential hijacker shifted to a Chinese citizen, an engineer employed by a private charter airline. It was determined that he was the only passenger who could have had the skills to fly the aircraft. Later, this suspect was also assessed as “highly unlikely.”

Suspicions were soon partially dismissed, since a hijacking or terrorist attack would have involved terrorist organisations claiming responsibility for the attack, while hijackings would have involved demands by hijackers and attempts at negotiation, none of which occurred.

Crew involvement

In its report, US authorities expressed the belief that “someone in the cockpit” reprogrammed the flight computer in order to divert the aircraft onto the route it followed. Police searched the homes of all 12 crew members and conducted more than 150 interviews with their family members, friends and other flight personnel at Malaysia Airlines. As a result, Malaysian police announced that in the case of “human intervention that resulted in the disappearance of MH370,” the main suspect was Captain Zaharie.

The FBI examined the history of the flight simulator found at Captain Zaharie’s home, but found “nothing sinister.” Malaysian police also announced that they had examined the financial status of all crew members and found nothing indicating the planning of such an act. In addition, CCTV footage showing the crew boarding the aircraft was analysed, and it was determined that “no suspicious behaviour was observed.”

In 2016, an FBI document was leaked showing that the FBI had found on Captain Zaharie’s simulator a route almost identical to the one flown by MH370. The ATSB, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, later confirmed this information, but stressed that it did not indicate the captain’s involvement in the aircraft’s disappearance. The same claim was confirmed by Malaysian police. In 2018, the document was further explained, stating that six manually programmed waypoints had been found in the captain’s simulator which, when connected, created a route almost identical to the actual route, including the point of disappearance as the final point of the route. It was also confirmed that the points in the simulator had been programmed on 4 February 2014, a little more than a month before the disappearance. Despite all this, forensic investigations state that events “from a video game” cannot be linked to the events of the night MH370 disappeared.

Since the official possibilities proposed by investigators did not satisfy the public, especially the families of the missing passengers, numerous theories began to emerge, many of which can be classified as conspiracy theories. Still, some theories could offer a relevant explanation, which, among others, investigators have also confirmed, but due to a lack of evidence they were not listed as possible. What is certain is that the proposed theories do not offer solid answers, but raise further questions. The continuation of the text presents independent theories that over time have been accepted as relevant, as well as theories that the investigative community has unanimously rejected as unfounded.

Electronic hijacking

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad proposed a theory in which the FMS, Flight Management System, of the Boeing 777-200ER had been hacked and the aircraft remotely taken to the location where it disappeared. Boeing itself refuted this theory, stating and presenting evidence that such a system cannot be hacked in a way that would allow someone at a remote location to control the aircraft.

Misinterpreted satellite data

The fact is that Inmarsat’s satellite did not have the aircraft’s exact location at each “handshake,” or data exchange, but only information on how far the aircraft was from the satellite. Thus, investigators and Inmarsat experts were able to determine, for each “handshake,” a so-called arc, or a circle along whose circumference the aircraft could have been located at that moment. In other words, not the exact location, but a circle along its entire circumference. Of course, taking into account the aircraft’s last known location, the amount of fuel and maximum and minimum flight speeds, an area in which the aircraft could have been located was isolated. The farther the aircraft was from the satellite, the wider the area became. A total of seven “handshakes” were recorded, meaning Inmarsat had information on seven different distances of the aircraft from the satellite. Mathematical methods isolated the area of the seventh arc, as the area of the last partial “handshake,” slightly southwest of the coast of Australia. However, the same seventh arc, or circle, also passes through South Asia, all the way to the area of Kazakhstan. Many considered that the aircraft could have been there, but in that case military radars would have been able to identify it. It is precisely the fact that the aircraft could mathematically have been in South Asia, but would in that case have been identified by other radars, that refutes this theory.

The hydrophone theory

Dr Usama Kadri, a mathematician and expert in fluid dynamics, proposed a theory according to which the crash site is not somewhere along a 2,000-nautical-mile line along the seventh arc, but in an entirely different location: somewhere between the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and Madagascar. Dr Kadri explained that there are underwater stations equipped with underwater microphones, or hydrophones, originally intended to listen for possible clandestine underwater nuclear detonations. The hydrophones are arranged in such a way that they cover and can listen to the entire world’s oceans. Namely, an aircraft crashing into the ocean would create a so-called gravity pressure wave, or a sudden change in pressure at the crash site, which a hydrophone could detect, and based on the recording it would be possible to determine the source of the sound.

Dr Kadri estimated through calculations that the strongest signal could have been detected by the hydrophone station on Diego Garcia. After requesting and obtaining the recordings from the night MH370 disappeared, he realised that 25 minutes of recordings, exactly during the period when MH370 was calculated to have run out of fuel, were missing. As the cause, he found that the recordings were missing because the hydrophones had been deliberately turned off. In other words, someone deliberately turned off the hydrophones for 25 minutes, exactly at the time when the aircraft is presumed to have crashed into the sea. Dr Kadri never received an answer to his questions about why the hydrophones were turned off.

Despite this, Usama Kadri analysed the remaining recordings and found a signal that could indicate the crash of MH370. The problem is that this signal was recorded about 30 minutes before the calculated fuel exhaustion, i.e. about 30 minutes before the “partial handshake” with the Inmarsat satellite. Also, the source of that signal is not near the seventh arc at all, but somewhere between Diego Garcia and Madagascar, exactly where the first aircraft parts were found. Investigators did not consider this evidence relevant enough to redirect the investigation to another area, and treated the detected signal as possible tectonic activity, not the sound of a Boeing 777 crashing into the sea.

Military involvement

Although this theory slightly enters the realm of conspiracy theories, it is worth mentioning because relevant political commentators around the world have also discussed such possibilities. They put forward the idea that MH370 was actually shot down, and that all evidence later staged was intended to divert public attention from the real evidence. A theory was proposed in which MH370 was shot down either accidentally or deliberately after it deviated from its route in order to avoid a worse scenario, such as that of 11 September 2001. They note that this could explain why the military did not scramble fighter jets to intercept the aircraft.

The official response to this theory is that the chances of such a scenario are almost impossible, since the military provided radar recordings that were assessed as credible. As the reason why fighter jets were not called to intercept the aircraft, it was stated that the aircraft was flying along the Malaysian and Vietnamese border, and that air traffic controllers for a long time, as can be seen from the flight timeline, believed the aircraft was in contact with another air traffic control unit. By the time they coordinated their information, the aircraft had already left their airspace.

Suicidal act

Perhaps the first theory to emerge was that a suicidal pilot, crew member or passenger hijacked the aircraft and deliberately committed mass murder. A team of psychologists and psychiatrists analysed the mental states of all crew members and assessed that it was “highly unlikely” that someone from the crew, with the intention of committing suicide, had taken the aircraft to its death. They also noted that it was unlikely that a passenger had done so, because even if he had managed to enter the cockpit, incapacitate the pilots without any resistance or calls for help and take over the controls, he would not have needed to fly thousands of kilometres away for such an act, but could have done it immediately after taking control of the aircraft.

Once again, all the listed theories do not provide answers, but raise new questions. There is one more detail that confused investigators and led them to consider a scenario suggesting that flight MH370 had been carefully planned: the aircraft’s beacons, or rather their batteries, had not been replaced for two years after their expiry date. Every aircraft has a certain number of beacons, devices that send radio signals in the event of an accident to make it easier to find black boxes, the aircraft or life rafts with surviving passengers. All these devices have batteries that must be replaced periodically. On the aircraft that operated flight MH370, 9M-MRO, those batteries had not been replaced for as long as two years after their expiry date. Malaysia Airlines explained that such activities were recorded in the software used to plan aircraft maintenance, and that during the transition to new software this information was omitted, meaning mechanics did not have information that the batteries had expired. The investigation team referred to this detail in one of its reports and unofficially commented that, if someone wanted MH370 to disappear, they had chosen the right aircraft for it.

At the beginning of 2021, one of the ATSB investigators commented to The Guardian that “MH370 will surely be found, wherever it is.” However, time is not on anyone’s side in this case, because if the aircraft is under the sea, seawater and marine microorganisms are destroying part of the evidence every day, and depending on the condition they were in after the crash, the black box recordings may never be successfully analysed, even if the recorders are found.

The greatest motivation for a potential continuation of the investigation is precisely the victims, the passengers who have never been found. Perhaps the saddest statement related to the passengers is the one from the ATSB report:

“We share your profound and prolonged grief and deeply regret that we have not been able to locate the aircraft, nor the 239 souls on board who remain missing.”

Still, the multinational investigation team agreed on one point: in the documentary programme “60 Minutes Australia,” broadcast in 2017, they agreed that it is highly unlikely that the disappearance of MH370 was the result of a technical failure of the aircraft.

Although MH370 is only one of a total of 103 official aircraft disappearance cases since 1940, it is precisely MH370 that remains the greatest mystery. One investigator once commented that it is “almost unbelievable that, with all the technology and all the technological progress, we still cannot find something as large as a Boeing 777.”

Finally, we include a detail that is a tragic coincidence connected with this mysterious disappearance. The Boeing 777-200, registration 9M-MRO, involved in the incident, carried Boeing production line number 404, the same as the well-known internet error: 404 – NOT FOUND.

Sources: ATSB, NTSB, Malaysia Airlines, Discovery Australia, Wikipedia