Seriously, why? Can anyone think of a single justification?
The plane has a fully functioning communications suite, so if your plan was to commit suicide but then you got cold feet, you could call for help. Otherwise, what you’re looking at a best-case scenario in which you wind up sitting on a slowly-sinking aircraft for a little while until you wind up treading water until you drown or get eaten by sharks.
And you’d have six hours beforehand to do nothing but sit there and think about what lay in store.
Maybe a ship was waiting in the vicinity?
The endpoint of MH370 may have been a location where an ‘exchange’ took place. No detection by radar or satellite and deep waters to dispose of the plane.
Well, why do people commit suicide ? Why is it hard for people to believe that someone with an iron will like that of the captain could wait for 6 hours and then carry out his act?
IMO people are making it way too difficult. All this useless fuel,sat calculations have led us nowhere. It is time to investigate the investigators.
@agreen:
When you have just hardly enough fuel for exchange, the exchange could never happen. As far as I understand, almost all fuel was exhausted
@alex
Not supporting any exchange theory but there is no evidence for fuel exhaustion at 00:19.
The flaperon is not from MH370. That is why we are waiting.
Lots of great feedback on the drift analysis. I think the following simple statement should help clarify my personal position:
I am in no position to arbitrate between what the (inside) signal/fuel data experts say, and what the (outside) drift data experts say. All I’m pointing out is that they are saying mutually incompatible things (SW of Oz v. NW of Oz, respectively).
I’m with agreen. A possibility which supports the hijacking theory. I would suggest most passengers, potentially all and all crew were left behind.
Another idea, since we’ve now learned about hacking into control of vehicles while they are being driven, why not a remote plane hacking? The physical presence of hijackers with piloting skills wouldn’t even be necessary.
After all this time, after all the ink in the papers and in the Internet one single thing is completely clear. Whoever performed this “incident” is a hiperproffesional group of people who obviously do not commit a mistake.
So, in my mind the general though is “mission accomplished!!
Could it be altruistic suicide? For example, if the crew knew the aircraft was carrying biologically/chemically/radiologically hazardous material, after some incident that prevented a safe landing (and communication) they chose a controlled ditching in the SIO.
Answer to the title question: An Islamic fanatic.
http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2015/08/media-ignores-obvious-about-mh370-pilot.html
The reasons I come up with if a pilot or perp was coherent to the end are:
1. A new twist on pilot suicide, the heck with the nose down quick get it over, let’s ride out the fuel and enjoy flying one last time? Lone wolf doesn’t run with the pack or do as the pack?
2. Fixated with water landings, a Sully-wannabe?
3. Lost his mind completely, psychotic?
4. To hide it so no one can find it if making his statement against gov’t. taking all lives including his own?
5. Someone waiting to rescue pilot/perp on water but too James Bondish?
6. Something was terribly wrong, cannot land, Banda Aceh attempt failed, get plane away from land and further loss of life?
7. None of the above, plane went there on it’s own after crew became incapacitated?
Rob Anderson,
Not buying that article. If anything Zaharie Shah was more inclined to atheism. I don’t think this has anything to do with religion. As far as the Anwar situation, a nice man from Malaysia came on here recently and explained to Jeff et al that 50% of Malaysians feel as he did about their government. This was an early story out that he was “in no shape to fly.” The wife, for the 99th time, did not LEAVE him, she as practiced always when he flew, stayed at another home. Whether the Anwar thing made him snap we just don’t know but from all accounts this is a generous, helping man who would save lives not take them in vain. Which was it we just don’t know.
@all
Finally we confront the elephant in the room – motive.
The suicide theory just about has to be the default theory of the IG and ATSB (even though they have steadfastly refused to align their analytics with a theory). Of course, it is not simply suicide, but suicide and mass murder. Does not compute for me at all, but I am not a psychologist.
The mechanical emergency theory needs to connect a number of dots to be workable. I have looked at Bruce Robertson’s lithium ion battery theory, and while no aspect of it can be discounted, there are a lot of steps in the process. I just seems too complicated to be true. Likewise with any other mechanical failure based scenario.
A hijacking to the SIO makes no sense at all. The possibility of ditching the aircraft in that area in a manner consistent with allowing anything to be transferred from it is extremely unlikely. Plus no one has been able to suggest a motive (what would be of sufficient value to warrant such an action) for a hijacking to any region.
…and so it goes. There just is no reason to account for the plane being in the SIO unless it was a spoof designed to make us believe it ended in the SIO.
For the flaperon to arrive on Reunion, it is far more likely to have originated North of Australia as the a’
priori models gathered by Brock indicate. Hendrik’s model needs more data (and time) to be useful at this moment.
The next shoe to drop will be the forensics on the flaperon which may give us strong indications of how it separated and how it was damaged. The clock is ticking.
Pilots found out there was a dirty bomb on board? Doesn’t explain everything that happened, but it was my gut instinct reply to Jeff’s title question — Why Would Anyone Fly a Plane Into the Middle of the Ocean and then Ditch it?
@Barbara, Sure, but why wouldn’t they call someone? We know they had a working satcom. Hard to imagine how they could be in control of the plane but not the comms.
The least unreasonable theory (to me) would be a foiled terrorist hijacking, aiming to do a 9/11 on the Petronas Towers.
Kill all the passengers. Overcome pilots, order to switch off communications. Race to KL Pilot(s) succeed in switching on communications.
Pilot(s) somehow foil hijackers, but fatally injured in process. Z turns plane south to avoid crashing into populated areas.
May not fit all of the facts, but it’s a believable motive.
Yeah, not a very well thought out comment posting — again, it’s my from-the-gut response to your headline. I’m a humanities major, no tech here! I am intrigued by this mystery and try to follow the developments through your commenters but can’t keep all the info/theories straight.
Just saw the “altruistic suicide” comment above. I guess that’s what I was thinking.
This Captain Zahrie Shah, this is a guy we want to feel good about, we want him to be the hero who fought for the lives of his crew and passengers, not a deeply disturbed man who murdered 238 people and killed himself, and yet……my scenario of the day has his motive being emotionally despondent over a possible relationship ending, compiled with severe disdain for a corrupt Prime Minister and Malaysian government. He wanted to draw world attention to them by forcing their military to shoot down a civilian plane never anticipating the loopholes with no attempt to intercept his rogue aircraft. This only became apparent after flying over the ocean for hours running low on fuel. It needs some tweaking of course and I don’t for a minute believe it but the answer is there somewhere and I truly believe we will find it.
Only the crew themselves can refuse to contact HCM atc
@Jeff
“@Barbara, Sure, but why wouldn’t they call someone? We know they had a working satcom. Hard to imagine how they could be in control of the plane but not the comms.”
Jeff, I have two questions for you:
1. What do you mean by ‘satcom’?
2. How do you know that they had a working ‘satcom’?
I will respond sometime tomorrow.
@Barbara
Barbara, you are doing just fine
(see @Barbara Posted August 18, 2015 at 9:35 PM.). In this situation we have a boatload of questions and only a handful of iffy answers.
Susie Crowe,
All well and good but I literally say BULL about being upset over a relationship ending. He can have 4 wives simultaneously if he wants to. I have YET to see any man of that faith upset over any relationship, they go out and get another one readily arranged for them. Women are second class citizens in most of those countries. Upset over a “relationship” not in my book he’s not.
Jeff, I am thinking that ‘satcom’ is the ‘handshake’. Just want you to confirm it.
Thank you.
@Cheryl
Thank you for the clarification, hmmm maybe this isn’t a guy I “want to feel good about”
It’s simple. Zaharie, after his PKK defeat to UMNO in the elections, felt it his duty to commit an atrocity so great and cunning that the entrenched, nepotistic, despised and loathed govt. of 60 years would crumble.
He knew that nothing but the most drastic of measures would have a chance of realizing this goal. All else had failed and there was no end to the one-party hold on power in sight.
Z happened to have a very powerful weapon at his disposal, a 777 owned/leased by MAS and, de facto, the govt.
Z also had a strong sense of duty and self-sacrifice in regard to bringing about the destruction of BN/UMNO and the change he desperately desired to see.
He realized that party politics as usual was a lost cause in the face of the status quo power structure in Malaysia. Oppression was increasing, persecution of those that dared to stand up (Adam Adii for one…who Z called a hero) was rampant, and whatever semblance of democracy had been feigned to exist, was no longer.
It was all unacceptable, and from Z’s perspective, an intractable situation.
So you leave KL on the evening of the Anwar verdict, having had this plan in the works for many months. No better day to say a proper “fuck you”, right?
His only concern is destroying the regime. So how best to achieve this? Well, there are clues in ‘window seal’, obviously left for posterity (though some pretend otherwise).
You go dark at handoff (buying precious minutes), lock the FO out, kill the pax, fly over the country making a mockery out of all in charge and responsible for the flight, and then disappear into the SIO THINKING THE A/C WILL NEVER BE FOUND, NOR TRACKED.
Malaysia, where is the planes? Malaysia, the a/c flew OVER YOUR COUNTRY and you did what?? Malaysia, people have simply vanished?? Malaysia, we would like some answers here? Malaysia, why the cover up?? Malaysia, what the hell is going here??
Then, finally, as we will see shortly…Malaysia, why would this man ever do such a thing? No mental history (stated in the FI), no nothing other than POLITICS.
Was this man being persecuted, punished for his political affiliations? Could his family have been threatened even? Maybe we need to look at the culture and intertwinement of the govt. and MAS? What exactly is going on over there?
And still the a/c is missing. Fucking Malaysia.
All of this is opinion…Jay, no comments please. ):
Joe T.,
Just helping Jeff. If I have any of this wrong Jeff can correct:
The Classic Aero system – Ground Station Perth/to IOR satellite/to AES on plane. The satcom or AES was reconnected on the plane (via left bus we don’t quite know). Therefore the system reboot and resuming of the handshakes. With that are the satphones, a means of communication, which MAS called them on prior to the FMT.
There is no reason. Shah may have “gone” completely psychotic but how likely is it that he turned on a dime? Did he have a history of mental health issues? Do medical records indicate that he suffered from some sort of sudden onset of a brain abnormality?
Obviously we do not have access to this information, but we can probably assign a low probability rating to a scenario of the sudden onset of radical brain damage.
Of course….it could have been HAARP. But in all seriousity, I only say that to poke fun at all of the tin foil hat wearers out there.
I have known people both personally and professionally who have experienced a psychotic break and when they do they are not lucid. They are generally unable to function at a very basic level when they are going through a true psychosis. They have literally “lost their mind” and often do not recognize loved ones, cannot take care of themselves and cannot speak with any clarity about very simple things. This includes psychosis caused by schizophrenia, bipolar mania and depression.
Statistically psychotic breaks rarely lead to suicide. Most psychotic people don’t have their shit together enough to make and carry out a prolonged suicide plan, let alone fly a Boeing 777 and precisely know when and how to turn off ACARS, when to fly high or low to avoid primary radar, etc.
So for the suicide theory to work, Shah would have had to have been in his right mind….just really angry or depressed. But to commit suicide and mass murder on such a long time scale reminds me of the arguments against the right to bear arms.
Hang with me on this for a sec: it takes a great deal more anger and some serious guts to kill someone with your bare hands or a knife instead of a gun. The general consensus is that the longer you have to contemplate, the less likely you are to go through with the actual murder. You have time for reason to kick in as you are strangling the life out of a person than you would if you just pulled a trigger.
And if Shah did this on purpose, he put a LOT of planning into it. Months…perhaps even years. Then he would have had to actually fly for hours and hours thinking about his plan. It seems that reason would “kick in” at some point.
Some may say that the terrorists who committed 911 had years to think about their plan, but they also made a very public statement out of it. It was suicide with a political/religious purpose (or reward), and this was made very well known afterwards or else it would have been in vain. Shah had no such motive, or else it would have been made public, and he would have gladly claimed that it was because he was a Muslim.
All mass murderers commit acts of murder, at least on some level, for the notoriety.
So that leaves me with only 3 other ideas: 1. Somehow he screwed up and killed all the people on the plane pretty early on, felt like he had no other choice except to take his own life, and took some time to think about it. However, this does not explain the expert maneuvering to avoid radar, which he would have had to known before he killed all of the people on board.
2. He had been threatened and was a dead man walking. By whom and for what reason, I cannot say, but again he would have had to have his course changes, altitudes and various other things planned out well in advance.
3. The plane carried something or someone so dangerous to the world that he felt like he had to take it down himself. Again, this does not explain the expert maneuvering at critical points of the flight, including the curious reboot.
The question is, what did Shah have to GAIN from slow, contemplative suicide and mass murder?
Roberta,
Thanks for clarifying psychotic behavior.
I have said many times here if he did plan this out that the human mind would vacillate between right and wrong and he had those 6 hours to do so and change his mindset. The Anwar thing could have put him over the edge politically,and he could have turned on a dime as you say, but this has nothing to do with religion. I have stated he was more of an atheist which is what I have read from what he had been reading.
A tech savvy guy screw up, I doubt it. He was the most tech savvy guy on that flight we know of, a stellar 25+ years career, knew that B777 well and practiced on the simulator as well, which is a way of honing one’s skills. (speaking of the simulator I wonder if Miles has gotten anywhere on that?)
Perhaps they aviated, navigated, and it was time to communicate in the Straits so voila the reboot but somehow they could not? The rule of thumb is aviate/navigate/communicate. Perhaps whatever they were dealing with warranted bypassing communications even with Ho Chi Minh.
What would he have to gain? If he went rogue like this to embarrass and expose the country on a global stage, that would be his gain but then again he would want to stay around to witness the outcome of his efforts.
Roberta, you said “Some may say that the terrorists who committed 911 had years to think about their plan, but they also made a very public statement out of it. It was suicide with a political/religious purpose (or reward), and this was made very well known afterwards or else it would have been in vain. Shah had no such motive, or else it would have been made public, and he would have gladly claimed that it was because he was a Muslim”.
If you don’t believe Shah had a political motive, with an triggering ‘event’ (Anwar verdict) that very morning, I’m afraid your out to lunch (and have not closely studied Shah).
I use ‘triggering’ lightly, as I believe this was planned 2 some years prior. He was just waiting for the right day.
You said “The question is, what did Shah have to GAIN from slow, contemplative suicide and mass murder?
His honor and a fulfillment of what he came to see as his duty (the 2 go hand in hand). It was the only self-respectful act he could undertake given what others had sacrificed. He had implored all to partake in this recalcitrant posture, and made it clear that he was not exempt from this…he just happened to have 777 by his side. And he believed he was doing everything possible to destroy Najib, Hishammuddin and all the other cronies.
As for the notion that ALL mass murderers do it for the notoriety on some level, I don’t disagree. NB “on some level”.
Zaharie, IMO, didn’t for a second believe that no one would know it was him. Surely a select few have figured this out, and sadly very much approve of his great effort. This is the greatest affirmation and validation in some regards. La lucha.
Cheryl,
Any self-respecting person doesn’t stick around after murdering 238 people…mass murderer’s on the whole are probably not a self-respecting lot, but I think we can assume that Z was atypical in this regard…there’s no way he was sticking around, no way. He was ‘a lone soldier’.
All of this is opinion (I must now state this or be banned).
@Cheryl
He needn’t vacillate for the 6 hours if the pax were already deceased. Just saying.
He flew the plane in the deepest part of the ocean and ditched it because he didn’t want the plane to be ever found. That’s because he was :-
a) Very angry/bitter with the world and felt the world had troubled him for some reason. What better way to trouble the world than by taking a place full of 239 passengers and making it disappear? The world would be looking for it forever and his act would be a way of showing a middle finger to the world – “Find the plane if you can”.
b) It’s about a twisted legacy. He wanted to do something no civil aviation pilot has ever done – take the large airliner full of people in the 21st century and make it disappear without a trace. He wanted to leave behind an enduring mystery that would never be solved, or take decades/centuries to fathom. He was an accomplished pilot with a power to do it, so why go out with a wimp when one go out with a bang? So his diabolical mind planned the biggest heist story in civil aviation. I am guessing he had a massive ego.
People have said insurance could be a reason. If insurance was a reason, he could have done it without killing 239 people (puncture the tires of your car, then drive off a cliff at high speed making it look like an accident). Killing 239 people implies an over arching ideology that transcends money but I guess he didn’t mind getting the benefit of insurance money.
Perhaps some new form of terrorist-type attack? If the plane is never found, and no one knows what happened it’s going to be pretty tough to prevent it in the future.
Open ocean means a cell phone won’t work. No satellite means internet won’t work. Then if the wreckage is lost there’s little chance of recovering useful info from the CVR and FDR.
9/11 could never happen again, in large part due to information gathered from phone calls from planes, recovery of wreckage and CVR/FDR, and hijackers accidentally broadcasting to ATC.
I can buy the suicide angle, I can buy the mass murderer angle… but I can’t buy the length of flying time in the wrong direction (or at least not the correct direction) into nowhere, with a copilot and a plane load of passengers. Sure, crash he plane into the ocean or mountain (EgyptAir, SilkAir, GermanWings), but to sit there for hours on end? Can’t buy it.
@Joe T.
“satcom” is simply voicecall over Inmarsat (so satellite phone in fact, usable without HF radio range), which was loged as ringing/flashing in cocpit twice during flight (once near Malaysia and once near the final ping ring), but both calls was unanswered. And this is digital protocol, which simply either just works “two-way”, or doesnt work and logs/reports errors or doesnt work at all. Pilots was able to call this way any phone number on the Earth. Some planes allows such sat-calls also from passengers seats, but this one had not this ability.
The pilots had nothing to do with it.
I take it the OP is asking, GIVEN that one is dead set on committing mass murder/suicide, Why not get it over with quickly with a brief flash of pain, followed by immediate blackness, rather than a lingering death like drowning?
1. The life insurance.
2. Therefore, since the goal is to leave the incident unsolved, it is imperative to minimize debris.
3. Drowning in fact is not the worst way to go; in any case, with all that cold water, you would not last long.
4. Don’t waste your life on mundane lifestyles! It’s mundane to practice unpowered ditchings with simulators. It’s another thing to do it in real life! The chance to do it in real life is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity not to be passed up!
@ Jason: 9-11 could very easily been repeated that morning, as whoever was in control could have easily crashed it into Malaysia’s own Twin Towers. Obviously, the RMAF was caught with its pants down.
That’s what bugs me: while I can understand ditching in SIO, rather than crashing in the South China Sea, but if the goal really is to make a political statement, then why not take down the Petronas Towers if you got a chance?
Spencer,
I don’t think suicide by either pilot can be completely taken off the table.
But as you are probably its strongest proponent on this forum I have to say I find the version of events you set out is very unsatisfying.
A politically motivated and Internet savvy man like Zaharie would surely have laid out his manifesto if his desire was to damage the incumbent regime.
To ‘hope’ that after his actions the aftermath ‘might’ have the desired effect seems very risky for someone as meticulous and controlling as you paint Z to be.
Any astute political observer would surely realise that the cowardly murder of innocent civilians would only damage his cause. Look at the vitriol heaped on Lubitz. There is something special about the pilot – passenger relationship, and its violation causes a strong emotional reaction.
He would have realised that the incumbent government would simply paint him as a demon. It would not damage them at all. The fact that they have not done so, even by subtle means, suggest there may be genuinely little evidence of his involvement available to them.
Very early on, maybe the 2nd or 3rd day of the incident, there were reports that 370 climbed to 45000 ft., after the turn at Agari. This was quickly retracted. I believe it to be true. This is the reason why no calls nor attempts to call along the run down the straights. The cell blips from the FO’s cell were to either confuse or shift the investigation from Z. The final flyby at Panang. It’s blatantly obvious to some that it was a suicide, while others just can’t, or refuse to wrap their minds around it. Why does someone need to have a running history of mental illness to perpetrate such a horrible act for us to believe it.
Andreas Lubitz had his mental issues, but could anyone foresee or BELIEVE he could do such a thing. Look into past pilot suicides. No “Mental Histories” there. In Z’s case, be it political or otherwise….It’s a big “Up Yours..now come find us & prove it”
Whilst I admit to having harbored more ‘exotic’ theories than this, I think an on-board scenario such as the following potentially fits with some of the known facts:
a) Zaharie hijacks from the cockpit after locking Fariq out (both with electronic and physical cockpit door lock)
b) Z commences depressurization of cabin, utilizing flight deck oxygen for himself
c) Pax succumb, Fariq and/or other crew scramble to portable emergency oxygen so have about ~1 hour (?)
d) In desperation (after failed attempts at cockpit door) Fariq and/or crew access EE bay and flick left AC bus breakers in trying to disable electronic lock. This coincides with 18:25 satcom reboot.
e) Physical lock in place, so still no access. Desperation escalates, and not knowing Z’s intention (maybe suspecting suicidal / homicidal attacks), Fariq(?) re-enters EE bay to also disable the flight deck oxygen supply tanks.
f) Z succumbs to no oxygen. Soon after, and with no access to cockpit, Fariq / crew portable bottles run out, and they fall unconscious too.
g) This occurred after Banda Aceh turn but before Z’s intention to subsequently turn back to KL for potentially nefarious reasons
h) Thus, with everyone on board deceased, ghost flight continues on last known leg direction, to SIO, until fuel exhaustion.
Whilst the limited debris remains odd (esp re ditching vs crash), such a scenario does allow for other tidbits that have never quite been confirmed or denied (e.g. Fariq’s phone call would fit, as might failed negotiations with Z to ground, etc)
To clarify the above – that scenario also addresses motive in a more believable way to “suicide mission to SIO” – as others have said, the idea of such an extended suicide plan seems somewhat far-fetched. Indeed in this scenario, Z may not have decided what his intentions were other than attempting to negotiate and/or threatening KL, and in any case he was interrupted half way through, so a cohesive ‘closure’ on his plan is not required in explaining the events.
My vote at this point is with Rakesh!
It’s a statement…..I think from the rhetoric the Malaysian Government knows it and they’re hiding something.
OZ
Funny that nobody questions the mental stability of the FO.
@Gysbreght, Few have taken a serious look at the FO simply because he was a newbie at flying the 777 and whoever took the plane evidently had a sophisticated knowledge of the plane and its systems.
Evidently?
@rakesh
“He flew the plane in the deepest part of the ocean and ditched it because he didn’t want the plane to be ever found. That’s because he was :-
a) Very angry/bitter with the world and felt the world had troubled him for some reason. What better way to trouble the world than by taking a place full of 239 passengers and making it disappear? The world would be looking for it forever and his act would be a way of showing a middle finger to the world – “Find the plane if you can”.
b) It’s about a twisted legacy. He wanted to do something no civil aviation pilot has ever done – take the large airliner full of people in the 21st century and make it disappear without a trace. He wanted to leave behind an enduring mystery that would never be solved, or take decades/centuries to fathom. He was an accomplished pilot with a power to do it, so why go out with a wimp when one go out with a bang? So his diabolical mind planned the biggest heist story in civil aviation. I am guessing he had a massive ego.
People have said insurance could be a reason. If insurance was a reason, he could have done it without killing 239 people (puncture the tires of your car, then drive off a cliff at high speed making it look like an accident). Killing 239 people implies an over arching ideology that transcends money but I guess he didn’t mind getting the benefit of insurance money.”
This explanation given by @rakesh is the most suitable if we forget the first choice, an orchested operación by a highly proffesional group of people (like an evil think-tank).
[abusive comment redacted — Spencer is now banned. JW]
@Gysbreght
Good point as FO has much less of a provenance than Captain Shah
@jeffwise
This doesn’t mean that the pilot’s “sophisticated knowledge” and flying weren’t under duress
“The French-led investigation team examining the wing part or flaperon of the vanished Malaysia Airlines (MAS) flight MH370 aircraft has concluded the first phase of inspection work. Australian Joint Agency Coordination Centre (JACC) said the French authorities would in consultation with Malaysia report on the progress in due course. “The French investigation team is working as quickly as possible to provide complete and reliable information,” the agency said in a statement today.”
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/french-complete-inspection-work-on-mh370-wing-part
@Cheryl, @falken
Thank you for your input on the ‘satcom’ question. I was treating ‘satcom’ like an acronym (and from the get go I knew that ‘satcom’ meant ‘satellite communications’). I was not sure what ‘satcom’ was referring to. There is a boatload of communications on MH370.
If you are a newbie I suggest you watch PBS’ NOVA episode titled ‘Why Planes Vanish’.
Here is the link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/why-planes-vanish.html.
Among other things the episode goes into detail about the communications on the plane. Our very own Jeff Wise is on the episode. He has a number of things to say about what happen to the plane. I do not agree with everything that he has to say about the plane. Mind you I am not saying that he is wrong. I am just saying we have a difference in opinion on why the plane went down.
I do agree with Richard Quest (he does NOT appear on the episode). He says that we do NOT have the evidence to know if was a mechanical problem or a suicide or any other scenario that may have brought the plane.
Enzyme seems to have a good explanation which fits the known facts.