Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Edmund's avatar

Ed Skerritt (author of The Skerritt Model):

Really thoughtful questions throughout this thread—from Trip, Dr. Douglas, and Jeff himself. I wanted to briefly jump in with a third-party perspective that challenges one key assumption echoed here: that MH370’s deviation was the result of deliberate intent.

There’s a lot of effort here trying to reverse-engineer a villain:

• Remote hijackers with scuba tanks

• Unauthorized E/E bay access

• Depression-era suicide theories extended over 6 hours

• Mask cutoffs and staged SDU resets

But what if the mystery isn’t who did it—but rather what was missed?

That’s the premise of the Skerritt Model, which doesn’t begin with a motive. It begins with cockpit dynamics, automation logic, and overlooked procedural breakdowns.

Between 12:42 and 12:52 MYT, evidence shows:

• A First Officer in training entered an incorrect FMS waypoint

• The autopilot was engaged by 12:52

• The turn happened later—but was already committed to automation

The transponder? Likely flipped to standby during a routine radio change.

The SDU reboot? Possibly an automatic recovery, not an intentional reboot.

The overflight of Butterworth? A continuation of a heading, not a signal.

In short: automation followed a bad input, and no one caught it in time.

Jeff mentioned the turn being “too steep” for autopilot. But LNAV logic is designed to handle high-rate turns at cruise altitude. The radar path and BFO data match known autopilot behavior—not a rogue pilot fighting the system.

What’s missing in this entire narrative—across official reports, media, and psychological profiles—is a serious look at human error combined with automation compliance. That’s what the Skerritt Model reconstructs: a minute-by-minute breakdown of how MH370’s flight path can be replicated by procedural slippage, not malice.

No need for scuba tanks or spy-level sabotage.

No need to assign motive when no motive explains the data better than systems following misprogrammed guidance.

Happy to share more, including the FMS path logic and timing correlations with the Rolls-Royce engine data, if there’s interest.

Sometimes the truth isn’t hidden. It’s just been overcomplicated.

—Ed Skerritt

Author of “The 51% You Were Never Told”

Creator of the Skerritt Model | Vanished Skies Podcast

Expand full comment
Tom Brown's avatar

Hi Jeff, I'm glad to see the video has posted on this site, but surprised to see only a response from Prue; I guess all those with something to say got their licks in last weekend. The response from a listener proposing that Zaharie pulled off his mask and just went to sleep was Green Dot's theory of the end, as I recall. But it misses the key point: Why would Zaharie commit mass murder and suicide in the first place? There was slander and hearsay and innuendo that he was not as normal and chill as he seemed, but nothing, true or false, that could explain what most believe about him. The only concrete thing pointing to his guilt is the simulator flight, which he tried to delete. In court, a skilled plaintiff lawyer or a prosecutor would probably win on that alone. As far as I know, no one has suggested that the southern route was created by someone else to frame Zaharie.

Your psychological profile of the perp is sound and consistent, and it doesn't sound like a commercial pilot. Still, there abides the question, "Who flew the plane?" I still can't buy that such exquisite navigation and airmanship could have been accomplished by an unknown hijacker in the avionics bay. Altering the data is wholly believable. I refer to the little rhyme about Benjamin Jowett and the certainty of Mike Exner.

It's far too early for speculation, but the crash of Air India Flight 717, in light of your Vanity Fair piece, is definitely disquieting.

Expand full comment
50 more comments...

No posts