Flight MH370 carrying tonnes of "mangosteens" - and Li-Ion batteries?

So MH370 was carring several tones of "mangosteens" ?
Mmmm yummy. Those look good.
But really - the CEO of the airline says the plane was carrying "tonnes of mangosteens" - ?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
Was there a load-shift in the cargo hold on take-off?
Were there Li-Ion batteries on the plane? Did they self-combust, or were they damaged by a shift of cargo upon take off?
Are there no smoke detectors in the cargo hold?
Surely if there were detectors, they would have alerted the crew to danger (and thus allow the crew to send out radio message) before comms equipment became disabled.
Missing jet WAS carrying highly flammable lithium batteries: CEO of Malaysian Airlines finally admits to dangerous cargo four days after DENYING it
* When asked days ago, he said it was carrying 'tonnes of mangosteens' * Li batteries have caused 140 mid-air incidents in last 20 years * The devices are commonly used in mobile phones and laptops * Classed as dangerous by The International Civil Aviation Organisation * Reignites theory that flight may have crashed after on-board fire * Expert said it re-affirm belief that flames started in cargo hold * One cargo plane crashed in 2010 after attempting an emergency landing * Battery caught fire and filled the flight deck with smoke
A long way south: The southern search zone is one of the most remote places on Earth
Two pieces of wreckage that are possibly from the missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 - one estimated to be 78ft in size - have been found to the west of Australia, it was announced today. Pictured: Satellite pictures released by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority of the object thought to be related to the search for MH370 --------
Malaysian Airlines today confirmed that flight MH370 had been carrying highly flammable lithium-ion batteries in its cargo hold, re-igniting speculation that a fire may have caused its disappearance.
The admission by CEO Ahmad Jauhari comes four days after he denied the aircraft was carrying any dangerous items and nearly two weeks after the plane went missing.
He said the authorities were investigating the cargo, but did not regard the batteries as hazardous - despite the law dictating they are classed as such - because they were packaged according to safety regulations.
The revelation has thrown the spotlight back on the theory that the Boeing 777 may have been overcome by a fire, rendering the crew and passengers unconscious after inhaling toxic fumes.
Lithium-ion batteries - which are used in mobile phones and laptops - have been responsible for a number of fires on planes and have even brought aircraft down in recent years.
According to US-based Federal Aviation Administration, lithium-ion batteries carried in the cargo or baggage have been responsible for more than 140 incidents between March 1991 and February 17 this year, it was reported by Malaysiakini.
In rare cases, aircraft have been destroyed as a result of fires started from the devices, although they have been cargo planes in both incidents.
In one case, UPS Airlines Flight 6 crashed while attempting an emergency landing in September 2010 en route from Dubai to Cologne in Germany.
Flight MH370 disappeared from radar screens two weeks ago on March 8 after taking off from Kuala Lumpur bound for Beijing.
The second day of a new search, concentrating on a desolate area in the southern Indian Ocean, failed to locate two possible pieces of debris from the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777.
Aircraft and ships scoured the seas around 2,500 km off the coast of the Australian city of Perth, for 10 hours before darkness fell. Australian officials have vowed to continue the search tomorrow.
Billie Vincent, the former head of security for the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, said the revelation re-affirmed his belief that flames started in the cargo hold, destroying the aircraft's communication systems then filling the cabin with toxic fumes.
This, he says, would have overwhelmed the passengers but may have given the pilots a chance to divert the aircraft for an emergency landing.
He told Air Traffic Management: 'The data released thus far most likely points to a problem with hazardous materials.
This scenario begins with the eruption of hazardous materials within the cargo hold – either improperly packaged or illegally shipped – or both.'
It is thought the missing plane climbed to 45,000ft - a move Mr Vincent believes may have resulted from the pilots not being able to see the controls properly.
Responding to a question at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur, Mr Jauhari said: 'We carried some lithium-ion small batteries, they are not big batteries and they are basically approved under the ICAO (The International Civil Aviation Organisation) under dangerous goods.
'They (lithium-ion batteries) are not dangerous goods per se, but in terms (of) they are (being) declared as dangerous goods under ICAO.'
He insisted they were checked several times to ensure they complied with the guidelines.
'Airlines do that all the time, it is not just Malaysia Airlines. These goods are being flown by many airlines as cargo anyway, (which) is based on ICAO’s ruling,' he added.
When asked earlier this week if there was hazardous cargo on board, Mr Jauhari said no, adding that it was carrying 'three to four tonnes of mangosteens'.
The United Arab Emirates’ General Civil Aviation Authority blamed the crash, which killed the crew, on the batteries which it believed may have 'auto-ignited' and filled the flight deck with smoke.
The batteries have also caused problems in the cabin including a flight attendant and two passengers who were burned when they handled a mobile phone and spare battery in September 2012.
Six months earlier, a lithium battery caught fire inside one passenger's personal air purifier.
The incident prompted to the ICAO to introduce a new rule last year stating that any cargo with more than two lithium-ion batteries be packaged under hazardous goods regulations.
Malaysia Airlines has not responded to a call from MailOnline.
Today the transcript of the last communication between the flight deck of the missing plane and ground control emerged.
The final 54 minutes of dialogue between Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, co-pilot Fariq Abdul Hamid and air traffic controllers is captured from take off until the moment Hamid uttered the last message: 'Alright, good night.'
Two minutes later the plane's transponder was disabled.
The transcript shows the moment the plane took an unexpected turn west, over north Malaysia coincided with the point at which air traffic controllers in Kuala Lumpur handed over to their Vietnamese colleagues in Ho Chi Minh City.
Former British Airways pilot Stephen Buzdygan told The Telegraph, if he was planning to steal an aeroplane, that would be the moment to choose.
He said: 'There might be a bit of dead space between the air traffic controllers … It was the only time during the flight they would maybe not have been able to be seen from the ground.'
From the first sign-in at 12.36am local time, when the plane was on the ground in Kuala Lumpur, co-pilot Hamid gave regular and routine updates, alerting air traffic controllers to the plane's location, ascent and altitude.
'The communication up until the plane went to the changeover [to Vietnam] sounds totally normal,' Mr Mr Buzdygan said. 'I’ve done it hundreds of times. It is perfectly normal.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2586308/Missing-jet-WAS-carrying-highly-flammable- lithium-batteries-CEO-Malaysian-Airlines-finally-admits-dangerous-cargo.html

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
Add image file
On 03/22/2014 09:12 AM, Dan Rather wrote:

Big fricken deal!
Who cares if a few people die? They were prolly lazy union workers anyway.
The important thing here is that the airline is profitable and execs get nice bonus.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
Add image file

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.