Air Crash Investigation Covers MH370

Filed Under: Malaysia, Videos

I’m a big fan of National Geographic’s “Air Crash Investigation” (okay, perhaps “big fan” isn’t the right term to use to describe how I feel about a show that discusses air disasters, but it usually is fairly well done). There’s no denying that over the years the show has become significantly lower budget, as there seems to be an ever-decreasing amount of customization to each incident in terms of cabin mockups, pilots, etc.

Anyway, Air Crash Investigation just aired their episode about MH370 this past weekend, and it’s a good watch, if you have 45 minutes.

Yes, obviously the cabin mockups/dialogues are total speculation, but there are some interesting experts on the case that chime in. Though the fact that they can’t even get the airline’s name right is sort of concerning (it’s Malaysia 370, not Malaysian 370).

Did I learn anything new? Nope. But I feel like it consolidated everything we reasonably have learned about the case into 45 minutes, and reaches the only plausible conclusion as to what happened.

Here’s the video, if you haven’t yet seen it:

What did you think of ACI’s take on MH370?

  1. interesting episode. i agree 100% with their ultimate theory. it has precedent and it unfortunately is the most logical explanation. shocking to consider but in the context of other human actions, not outside the realm of possibility at all.

  2. Guys, don’t post spoiler alerts :).
    Ben – I am a big fan of it as well….
    Looking forward to watching my Friday night TV!

  3. Correct, the airline’s name is Malaysia Airlines, without the ‘n’, but I believe their callsign is actually ‘Malaysian’ – so I don’t think calling the flight Malaysian 370 is actually a mistake…

  4. Though the fact that you can’t even differentiate between the airline’s name and callsign is sort of concerning (it’s Malaysian 370, not Malaysia 370).


  5. Hmm. As the others said the flight call sign absolutely was Malaysian 370. Never heard anyone say Malaysia 370. So perhaps you did learn something new after all?

  6. Call sign may be Malaysian, but is that meant to be used for non-ATC discussions about an airline? If BA had a crash would we be talking about “Speedbird XXX?”

  7. “Mark” a whinging and a blather? An Aussie of Celtic decent? Isn’t a blog run by a blather wouldn’t it be a whinging and a blathering? Lucky I have been reading since a layover in Kakadu so 5+ year’s and I hate you for your JAL review. There is still a couple left though maybe not as global. Then there are some airlines that only do business but are fun to fly with. For beginners I would recommend a late afternoon arrival early evening on Air Tahiti Nui into PPT. The crew can be very, very entertaining on there arrival home.

  8. I am a Boeing pilot and when we amongst us mention that flight we refer to it as “Malaysian 370”. If we refer to the company, not a particular flight, we’d say “Malaysia…”. If you prefer to call the flight “Malaysia”, you would have to say “Malaysia Airlines flight 370”.

  9. I did not see this particular programme,but I would like to add my thoughts about the loss of this flight, seems to be a very long shot I know,but if the aircraft was put down on the sea without much damage,then sank slowly, my mind,I can not help thinking that it could have “Glided” below the surface for quite a long way,(miles perhaps) before reaching the bottom!!…and there is no way of telling in which direction,
    I don’t know if anyone else has taken this into account!

Leave a Reply

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *