COMMENT I know at the time of writing, there is much speculation about what happened to the MH370 flight to Beijing.

I am deeply saddened by this tragic event. As a frequent traveller, I can only imagine the sadness of the family and friends of all those on this flight.

I am also extremely puzzled over the incident, the wealth of Internet-based intrigues that surround this flight and, to a very large extent, the snail-pace of news from the parties responsible.

So I venture my theory and hope that I'm dead wrong and that MH370 will be found safely, having landed somewhere in China where the radar could not detect.

At the outset, I would like to stress that I do not at all intend to hurt, malign or embarrass any party as I'm writing this essay based on my personal thoughts and experiences as a frequent traveller who considers safety aspects carefully.

If any party feels hurt by what I write, I apologise upfront as no malicious intention nor insensitivity are at all intended but only constructive suggestions to prevent a recurrence in Malaysia. And if I’m adding to the speculations, sorry, sorry.

As Sherlock Holmes once said, once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. First, the process of elimination:

1) This could not have been a simple structural malfunction as this Boeing 777-200 was a well tested plane with a great safety record and Malaysia Airlines itself is well reckoned as a safe carrier with an impeccable maintenance schedule;

2) This could not have been due to pilot error as there was a very senior pilot in command and I believe this plane would not be new to him;

3) There could not have been an engine failure as this Boeing 777 had two engines and for both to fail at the same time would be impossible;

4) There was no "Mayday" call by the pilots and therefore they were either prevented from doing so, or there simply wasn't enough time to do it as the event was very sudden; and

5) It's impossible to even consider that someone would use an Austrian/Italian passport to sneak into Beijing (where they would be standing out clearly) without an overriding motive.

Ergo, there must be a motive, means and opportunity. I am not making these assertions as an aviation/avionics expert or flight engineer but merely on what I see as the logical pieces to a puzzle, based on what I read on the Internet and viewed on TV on Saturday, March 8.

What would the motive be?

I would guess that the main reason for this would be to make a public statement about certain compelling grievances that the perpetrators feel.

Again, just using the world events now, the strife in Uighur, Palestine, southern Thailand and Ukraine come to mind.

Because the two passports were stolen as far back as two years ago, I would eliminate other country as there has been no recent strife.

There was a Ukranian passenger in the flight manifest and a Ukranian could possibly pass off as an Austrian to a Malaysian immigration officer.

Similarly, a Palestinian could pass of as an Italian in our eyes. A Thai or Uighur could pass off as a Chinese if he has Chinese stock in him. This is an important possibility because MH370 had many Chinese passengers.

Any of these identified passenger would have the "requisite" motive. I eliminated the random act of terror or a "ransom" attempt because the planning for this deed must have taken some effort, as you will see.

A "hijacking for ransom" gone awry is a possibility, although given the intricacies of planning and the profit motivation for this possibility, the end results suggest that this is again highly unlikely but we will not discard this angle as the means and opportunity criteria still fit.

Serious planning involved

A plan was hatched to hijack an airplane and possibly crash it to highlight the cause(s) above. Very likely a copy cat act. This could have been hatched as far back as two years.

It's entirely possible that the passports were bought off the streets recently, at random, but I think, the perpetrators did a fair bit of homework (as you will see) and thus, they probably bought/stole it well ahead so that they could have time to carefully plan their heist.

I also think these perpetrators did not intend to crash the plane on land because in their mind, you can say twisted logic, that would have caused more collateral carnage than necessary. So again, there was serious planning involved, meaning lesser possibility of a random act.

Because many countries have implemented bio-metric identification upon entry, including Malaysia, there would be a need to ensure the perpetrators' thumbprints matched those in the passports upon entry via an immigration bio-metric scanner.

This is not that difficult to overcome because either the passports could have been tampered professionally to replace the original prints with the perpetrators' own prints or a "skin" could have been made with the original thumbprint (lifted from the original passport) that can be worn over the perpetrators' own thumbs.

There was no need to make prints for the other digits at all. So, two sets of thumbprints will suffice. Of course an even easier way would be to enter legally using their own passports and then exit using the stolen passports with the "skin" if indeed required, should they be scanned bio-metrically.

Most countries take bio-metric prints upon entry but not upon exit so anybody can exit with a passport as long as his face reasonably resembles the picture in the passport (which again can be fixed professionally) by walking to the immigration counter.

In the KL International Airport (KLIA), there is a special lane for VIP passengers to exit, that is, those travelling first class and business class, or belonging to a few select frequent traveller programmes.

In this lane, the exiting passengers are given special treatment befitting their presumed premier status and I dare venture a guess, the perpetrators must have used this lane. There would have been less scrutiny, for sure.

Less stringent pre-boarding screening

The opportunity availed itself when the perpetrators came across a country where the passenger pre-boarding screening process was less stringent than other airports.

I'd like to propose that KLIA has a higher publicity value than, say Ho Chi Minh City and hence, the selection. For example, in KLIA's main departure screening process, until recently, there was no requirement to remove laptops from the cabin luggage.

I always found it strange that anywhere else in the world, this was mandatory but not in Malaysia. I presume that in Malaysia, the scanners were somehow more investigatively diagnostic.

If you carried some powder (or liquid less than 100mg) based explosives in your laptop, it was almost certain that you would have been able to pass through because there was no chemical swab test either at KLIA.

I had a few times mistakenly failed to remove my coins or pen from my pockets and when the gantry sensor "beeped", all I had to do was to show the pen or coins and I would be waived through.

The security inspectors did not make me go through the gantry again, especially if I wore a suit and dressed like a senior executive. The opportunities were certainly plentiful. The perpetrators may even had done some trial runs ahead in their planning stage.

In the secondary screening stage at the boarding gate, the checks are more stringent but again, because there is no swab test, I could carry through a powder-based explosive in my computer. At this point, the two perpetrators have boarded the plane to Beijing. So, still possible?

So now, the three ingredients for the perpetrators to select MH370 has been established. In the actual the flight path radar tracker , at periods 0.36am and 1.28am, the plane showed a colour change from the normal yellow, to red.

My guess is this was due to extreme heat being emitted and somehow the radar's technical configuration picked it up. The plane disappeared from the radar after period 1.29am, when current Internet literature says that was when the KLIA control tower lost contact with MH370.

Perpetrators sat close to the cockpit?

My theory is that, one of the perpetrators, as a First or Business class traveller (therefore availing the benefits of the VIP immigration exit lane as described earlier), sat in a seat in Row 1, close to the cockpit.

 If a perpetrator was to detonate his "laptop", it would do significant damage and indeed, would probably knock off the cockpit instruments and the pilots, etc.

It would also damage the various telecommunications apparati in MH370 and that would conveniently explain why the pilots were not able to call in "Mayday", even though there was approximately 52 seconds between the first and second "red spot" on the radar screen.

The second perpetrator would have sat further behind, likely closer to the plane's fuselage and detonated the second "laptop" about 50 seconds later, having taken the cue from his accomplice's action earlier, to "finish off" their mission.

At this point, MH370 disappeared from the radar screen as it was not in a radar detecting structural form that was recognised by the control tower's radar's configuration schematics.

For simplicity, the radar would monitor something that resembled a "pen with a cover" but not when the cover and the pen were separated. You get what I mean?

I have deemed an impossibility of pilot error, the plane's unsound structural integrity, a surface to air missile attack ( about 2am?) and other accidental events because none of these would make complete the other parts of the puzzle based on the evidence that I've reviewed, as a layman.

And a Boeing 777 with some eight hours of fuel does not simply plunge into the South China Sea or spontaneously combust and drop off the skies.

With an experienced pilot, there was absolutely no way that he could not have sent Mayday messages or glided the plane to a water landing, or, in fact, back to an airport less than 130 nautical miles away (Kota Bahru), if he was flying at an altitude of 35,000 feet, at the mere hint of the problem.

He was prevented from doing so. Similarly, the passengers were as surprised and prevented from using their mobile phones to call or text. For all I can guess, they would have been asleep until seconds before the event(s). Some may have slept in forever peace.

For me to be totally wrong, this incident has to be one of the following:

a) Random terrorism;

b) Alien abduction;

c) Pilot error, plane's mechanical failure and telecommunication equipment malfunction all happening together; or

d) A bogus Austrian and Italian sneaking into Beijing, but to do what?

The truth is, we can expect some group claiming credit for this despicable act. And the final piece: The stolen passports were actually booked to travel on China Southern Airlines.

So, they wanted to be found out. Now, I'll let you decide which of the identified groups above has an issue with Malaysia or China ?

I pray very hard that later today, MH370 will be located with its passengers all safe. I rather be a fool for my theories and see a happy ending than to be proven right. And God Bless All.

RAMESH RAJARATNAM is a frequent flyer who observes airport and airlines security features in his global travels. He feels there is much to be enhanced in the current market to assure travellers of their safety concerns.