Malaysia Airliner Hijacked

There is a headline I expect to read any day now that new information may be coming to light that indicates an intentional effort to switch off the various communication devices aboard the Beijing bound 777 aircraft. For the very first time, I have seen the word “Piracy” associated with this particular flight.  As you know, there are some very interesting similarities between this latest air disaster and that which also occurred to the Pan Am Airways Hawaii Clipper. In that still unsolved mystery, the state of the art and Concord of its days flying boat, was also China bound and disappeared with no debris of any kind. Soon, a non-related oil slick appeared in the general vicinity of the Hawaii Clippers last know position (accounting for drift), just like something we all read about last week in the news concerning Malaysia Airlines aircraft. Additionally, sabotage was suggested in Pan Am memos, government documents and many letters from concerned friends and families within days of it disappearing near the Japanese Mandate Islands of the South Pacific.

Meteorologic Tests from RCA Victor
Meteorological Tests from RCA Victor

Pan Am Clipper Pan Am Clipper

On the Hawaii Clipper flight 229, researchers looking into its vanishing have proposed it was hijacked in mid-flight by rogue Japanese nationalists working either independently or with tacit complicity of the Japanese Imperial Navy. The plan may have been to overtake the crew, capture the aircraft and deliver it to a “no fly zone” deep within military controlled territory.  The reasons all vary from a huge some of money aboard (Three million in Gold Bank Notes) that would fall into the hands of the Chiang Kai-shek and aid in the fighting against the invading Japanese Army, a high-tech aircraft with military upgraded engines (were placed on the Hawaii Clipper only two weeks before she was lost) and a theory put forth by Charles Hill that the three million was  actually ransom for Amelia Earhart. At the time in 1938, there were growing swings in military expansion, perhaps something like we are seeing today in Ukraine, as well as espionage and suspicions of espionage. So with these similarities known, I ask about the Malaysian Airlines vanishing a question: IF indeed the Boeing jet was hijacked, what for? Was there some precious cargo inside her fuselage too as in the Hawaii Clipper, a new technology being smuggled or tested, powerful people who needed to “disappear” with the aircraft or some act of revenge? There was even new evidence last week that the Hawaii Clipper’s communications were being actively jammed with radio noise from three Japanese Navy posts and were described as “Rain Static” by the Navigator in her last message before vanishing. All of these theories also apply to the Hawaii Clipper, but I feel however that this modern mystery will be revealed in the coming weeks. Maybe when the Malaysian civil authorities release the complete cargo manifest and maybe in-depth information on all the passengers aboard, perhaps a potential theory as to why the jet was seemingly turned around in mid-flight and flown toward the Indian Ocean with no communications will finally be answered.

What say you?

9 Comments Add yours

  1. Johnny Talpas says:

    Guy, Sir, I hope YOU are having a great day. Could one surmise that at least one person would have used a cell phone or whatever to make contact with the outside world if all were not deceased or incapacitated? There were; after all, 200+ people that could have done something. I have been giving that a lot of thought. Things, however were not the same on the Hawaiian/Hawaii Clipper when it’s people were lost – God Rest their souls. Take good care and be safe. Johnny


    1. Guy says:

      Hello Johnny,

      Thanks for your comment. I will tell you that I am certainly not an expert in modern civil aviation however I have heard it from folks that are that being able to communicate via cell phone (if not directly via an on board WiFi system if still operational) is not possible at most of the cruise levels an airliner would fly. Here is a brief breakdown via “Demand Media””

      The maximum distance between a cellphone and a cell tower depends on many different factors. The connecting technology, landscape features, the power of the transmitter in the tower, the size of the cellphone network cell and the design capacity of the network all play a role. Sometimes the celltower transmitter is set to low power on purpose so that it doesn’t interfere with neighboring cells. Often hills, trees or buildings interfere with transmission. Any of these factors might prevent you from getting a signal, even if a cell tower is quite close.

      Maximum Distance
      A typical cellphone has enough power to reach a cell tower up to 45 miles away. Depending on the technology of the cellphone network, the maximum distance may be as low as 22 miles because the signal otherwise takes too long for the highly accurate timing of the cellphone protocol to work reliably. Usually cellphone signals don’t reach anywhere near these maximum distances. Typical cell size outside of urban areas means cellphone signals may have to travel up to several miles.

      Sources of Interference
      Cellphone signals are in a frequency range that travels in a straight line and has limited penetration capabilities. Interference weakens the signal and means that cellphones may not be able to reach a cell tower that is quite close. Sources of interference are natural obstacles such as hills and trees or man-made structures such as buildings, walls and tunnels. In urban areas, cellphones blocked from one cell tower may connect to another one nearby, but in rural areas, interference with coverage from a single cell tower may make reception unreliable.

      Capacity Planning
      Carriers often reduce the distance between a cellphone and a cell tower due to capacity issues. A cellphone carrier receives a certain number of frequencies to use in his network at a given location. Each cell tower can handle a maximum number of calls determined by the number of separate frequencies. If the carrier expects that his customers may make more calls, he reduces the size of his cell and re-uses the frequencies in a neighboring cell. This means that, especially in urban areas, cell towers may be a fraction of a mile from the cellphone.

      Cell Size
      When cell sizes in a cellphone network shrink, carriers reduce the power of the transmitters on their cell towers to eliminate interference with neighboring cells using the same frequencies. Operating on such low power, a cell tower may have to be within a few hundred yards of a cellphone for the cellphone to pick up its signal. If interference blocks one tower with a weak signal, a cellphone may connect with another nearby tower.

      Hope this helps and thanks for checking in!



  2. Warren Bell says:

    Thank you, Guy. I’m following your work with interest. I hope you’re successful on your next visit to Truk.


  3. Warren Bell says:

    Guy, I too have been fascinated for some time with the disappearance of Hawaii Clipper. I stumbled on the mystery while researching my last novel, HOLD BACK THE SUN. The book opens with a Clipper flight to Manila in 1941. I wrote a blog post yesterday about it in which I mentioned you and gave a link to your site. Here’s a link to my blog post: . Warren Bell, Author


    1. Guy says:

      Thanks Warren, much appreciated and I will certainly reciprocate by pushing along your website to!


  4. James T. Lee, MD says:

    These days I suspect that most “powerful people” would not be flying on commercial airliners; they would be on private jet aircraft moving discretely hither and yon.

    The news flash on CNN just now is reporting HUGE altitude excursions up to as high as FL 450 after the plane had supposedly “disappeared” east of Malaysia.


  5. David Wilma says:

    Guy, have you connected with any of the media outlets? They would love to interview you with regard to the Hawaii Clipper. You might even get a trip out of it. I think your work is instructive.


    1. Guy says:

      Thanks for this and no, not yet. I’m not so sure if that would help or hinder the efforts to find the remains, but you make a great point. Thanks David!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s