wasn't human intervention it. >> barbara, i want to ask you a question which david gallow put to us a few moments ago and it's an excellent question about it, and we talked to andy pasztor about it. but officials you were talking to believe the plane ended up in the ocean. how can they believe that if we were led to believe this plane went for some five hours, how are they saying it ended up in the water? are they saying that definitively? what leads them to that conclusion? >> let me start with, nothing is definitive in this story over the last week, as we know, other than this plane is missing. they have made some calculations based on this technical data, and what they believe the flight path could have been if they could have calculated it based on the radar returns, the so-called blips or pings, they

believe the airplane was flying for five hours over the indian ocean. it was an airplane that matched the description and the engine type on this malaysian airlines flight. there was no other aircraft in the region at the time that matched that technical description, that matched the data, the blips coming off the plane. so definitive, no. but good reason to believe it was malaysian airlines flying there. so they have the blips out four to five hours over the ocean. they technically analyzed and use computers to figure out the calculation, where was the satellite in relationship to the earth -- >> how did they get it didn't end up on land? >> well, it may well have, anderson. nothing is definitive. what we are reporting is as time has gone on, and they make the calculation, the path takes them in these two ways. there are islands there.

there are some pieces of land out in these flight paths. but i think logic at the moment that they feel on the u.s. side is that this plane, if it landed somewhere, would have been noticed. but definitive, no. our reporting is that there is an increasing likelihood that it went into the water but nothing is definitive. >> i want to bring in john hansman and mary schiavo, she currently represents victims of transportation accidents. professor hansman, given this new information, the altitude, the course headings, satellite pings, is there any chance in your mind that what happened to the plane could still be mechanical? >> i think it's less likely. but there's still a chance that there may have been some sort of progressive failure making it difficult for the airplane to

fly. but the fact that it if it's true that it took both -- i can understand why it would have trouble if the flight control system and pitch, so maybe climbing and descending. but it's hard to see that and also the airplane changing course. so it does sound more like it was being handled by someone not familiar with the airplane. jet airplanes of this type are very sensitive in pitch, so it's not as difficult as you think to climb up and down. >> but not changing course once but more than once according to "the new york times." >> exactly. yeah, the first course change could have made sense, because it was a diversion towards an emergency airport. but the multiple course changes don't make sense from a failure problem. and it's hard to see a problem that we would have in the flight control system that would cause this erratic flying, but that would allow the airplane to keep going for the five hours. >> andy pasztor -- go ahead,

professor. >> i was also going to say that i'm still troubled by the fact that if it was flying for five hours, it should have gone further than the search area they're talking about. so i do think what you would do is look at the directions and go with the flight speed the airplane was flying and propagate that out to a search little further out than they're showing. so i don't know if there's something i'm missing. >> david gallow that gets to the point you raised earlier. andy pasztor, in terms of your reporting that it was a manual change of direction, how can they know that it was manually done? >> because one of the -- the system that sends up data from the aircraft to a satellite was not switched off at that point. it took them maybe between 14 and 20 minutes or something around that time, whoever was doing this, to make the transponder stop working and disconnect the satellite communication system. and in that period of time is when the course change occurred

and the data that was relayed up to the satellite, according to the folks we talked, to indicates this was a manually -- a manual direction to the flight control computer. i want to answer maybe your other question, why are they searching in the indian ocean more than 3,000 square miles. the last signal that was received from the aircraft to the satellite was over the indian ocean. so they're starting their search based on the assumption that something happened from that point of view. we should be very aware that whoever was doing this was a very -- had some sophisticated knowledge of aircraft and aircraft electronics, because to disable these systems in a series of efforts, not at the same time, is not as easy and most pilots would not know precisely to do to disable them. once again, it indicates it's not likely to be some catastrophic event. it's just too suspicious for that. >> let me bring in ron brown,

who is a pilot here with over 30 years experience. how difficult is it to fly a 777 to disable these systems? what level of technical training would one need? >> well, first of all, to fly the 777, the controls in your hands in flying it is like having power steering. it's a very easy, docile airplane to fly. it's basically like power steering. the changing of altitudes and stuff that went on, i don't think that it dropped as fast as it did in reality. but somebody that sat down in the seat and took the controls would change altitude like that, trying to get the handle of it. but the point i want to come back and defend the crew is, if this airplane flew somewhere and landed, they would have needed the captain and the first officer to do that. because the people that took over this airplane didn't have the skills to really fly that

airplane in the proper parameters that it needed to be flown in. now, boeing, when they built this airplane, they said look, if you fly within these parameters, this airplane is safe and you won't have any problem. if you fly outside these parameters, the airplane can come apart. this is true with all airplanes. but to just go out there and fly an airplane, do you need a whole lot of experience? well, to just fly it straight and level and make some turns, no. but to land it and take it off, yes, you need a lot of training, especially on that particular type airplane you're flying. >> you also need a long runway for the 777, if i'm not mistaken, right, ron? >> if they flew this airplane somewhere, they need a bare minimum of 6500 to 7,000 feet, because this airplane has reversers on the engines and so on down the line. once again, that would take somebody that knew the airplane

and was trained on the airplane, and knew what they were doing. now, i think that there was probably more than just one or two people. i think there was three or so, because you had to have one person that had knowledge, that knew how to turn off or make sure that the transponders were turned off, knew how to go down in the compartment and find those circuit breakers and turn that other stuff off. this wasn't just one person hijacking an airplane or two people. i think this was something thought out. now, where was that airplane going to go? i have no idea, but the simpleness of it is, if you can't find wreckage in the water, somehow this airplane made it somewhere. >> and the search area is just enormous. i want to talk about that. we have to take a quick break and continue the discussion. there are a lot of dimensions to this story. we are trying to piece it together as best we can. this information is just coming to us in the last 30, 45 minutes. we'll continue the conversation

next. also later, we'll take you inside a flight simulator, and run you through various scenarios and show you what it's like from the cockpit perspective. we'll be right back. you've tried to forget your hepatitis c. it's slow moving, you tell yourself. i have time. after all there may be no symptoms for years. no wonder you try to push it to the back of your mind and forget it. but here's something you shouldn't forget. hepatitis c is a serious disease. if left untreated, it could lead to liver damage and potentially even liver cancer. if you are one of the millions of people with hepatitis c, you haven't been forgotten. there's never been a better time to rethink your hep c. because people like you may benefit from scientific advances. advances that could help you move on from hep c. now is the time to rethink hep c and talk to your doctor. visit hepchope.com

to find out about treatment options. and register for a personalized guide to help you prepare for a conversation with your doctor.

back with the panel. after a day and night of breaking news, including reporting in "the wall street journal" that investigators are now looking more closely at the possibility of sabotage or some kind of cockpit takeover. mary sciavo is with us. regarding these wild swings in altitude that seem to have taken place, although there is some question about how accurate some of the altitude information is, you say for you that's the most convincing piece of evidence you've heard that points to human involvement, terrorism,

sabotage, whatever it may be. >> well, the wild flying, the erratic flying would point to some sort of human intervention. but the problem with the data that's the most recent data is the plane can't dive that fast. the plane can't even fall out of the sky that fast. we know that data is unreliable. we know the directional data is unreliable, because the plane can't be going north and south at the same time. so i think the problem here is to sort out what data is reliable and what isn't. and factually speaking, it's impossible that they both are, but i know the plane cannot dive that fast. it would come apart. >> andy pasztor, you've just broken this story, how accurate did they feel the data is? because the idea of -- and you -- everybody has been raising suspicions about the plane plugging 40,000 feet. there's other data, as well.

>> of course, we're talking about two different things, anderson. the wild swings in altitude come from radar data that the malaysians have put together, which is i would say significantly suspect, just because of some technical issues and distance from the radar to begin with. but the information that the plane is sending to the satellite, that's much more specific and i think much more accurate. it's rudimentary. it doesn't give you a good sense of exactly where it is and what it's doing, but it does provide some help. the only good news so far in this whole scenario is that that information coming off the plane, there's significantly more information in this accident than there was several years ago in an air france jet liner crashed into the atlantic. so we have made some advances in technology and there have been some decisions to enhance the systems. so at least we have a little bit more information about the -- what this plane was -- where it was and what it was doing than we would have had years ago. >> david gallow, you co-led the

air france flight investigation. "the new york times" reported a short time earlier today about the slow pace of information being shared from malaysian authorities to u.s. officials and to others, a number of officials that "the new york times" talked to in washington were frustrated by the pace of that, that it has gotten better over the last several days but it's been very frustrating. sharing information in something like this is critical, particularly when you have u.s., which has high technology ships in the region searching. they need that information. >> well, also, there's nothing definitive about this except there's a missing plane. if it was just about the missing plane, this would have been one of the most horrific s.a.t. questions ever devised. but there's 239 passengers on that plane, and when you're in that room of the few people that know what's going on, we always

felt in air france 447, it was important to get some information out to the public and the families and the loved ones of the victims, because they needed to know things were moving forward. we were very careful not to let too much filter in and not to put something out there that was speculative. i think a lot of the confusion we see going on right now and the suspicion is self-generated. there's about 50 people that have a good handle on what's really going on, probably, and about 2 billion people that think they're experts, self-proclaimed or otherwise, that think they need to say thing about this. and it's not helpful when you have to sift through the information whether it's real or bogus. so during air france 447, i felt like we -- i didn't totally appreciate the french -- their version of the ntsd was so tight with the information but now i

get it. >> bob, in terms of the investigation into personnel, which has been taking place, which will certainly continue, if not quicken, given the reporting by "the wall street journal" that the idea the investigation is turning on some sort of sabotage. you want to hear more information from malaysian authorities about the crew, about the people on board this plane. >> as well as the chinese. we actually need to see the data. we need to know their cell phone numbers, we need to know their e-mail addresses, we need all of that stuff. that would be run through alga rhythms. it would give us an idea if there's some stray phone call that would explain the political bend of the possible hijackers. and without that, we're not even going to begin to get the motivation and motivation is key in this. we can assume that the hijackers are irrational, but they may

have political connections which we need to get the right away. >> does it make sense from an investigation stand point that they would not have already searched the home of the pilot who had a flight simulator in his house and others? >> i don't believe that. i think they went to his home, they've been there already, they've gone through his stuff. the malaysians don't want to talk about the possibility that one of their own citizens brought this plane down. they're very sensitive about this. remember that 9/11 in a sense started in malaysia with a meeting in kuala lumpur. two of the hijackers left and went to san diego. they're still sensitive about that and they have an islamic fundamentalist problem there, which they don't want to come out and admit to the whole world. >> bob baer, everyone, thank you for being with us. andy pasztor, you've been breaking this story at the top of the hour. it's going to be on "the wall street journal" website right now and will be in the paper

tomorrow. we'll take you inside a 777 flight simulator when we come back, use the information we have so far on the plane to try to show you at least what it's like inside that cockpit and what we know. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ ben! ♪ [ train whistle blows ] oh, that was close. you ain't lying. let quicken loans help you save your money with a mortgage that's engineered to amaze. the recent increase in cafeteria prices is not cool.

when you vote for flo, we'll have discounts. ice-cream discounts. multi-cookie discounts. pizza loyalty discounts! [ kids chanting "flo!" ] i also have some great ideas on car insurance. [ silence ] finding you discounts since back in the day. call or click today. i like her. if yand you're talking toevere rheuyour rheumatologistike me, about a biologic... this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain. this is humira helping me lay the groundwork. this is humira helping to protect my joints from further damage.

doctors have been prescribing humira for ten years. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira is proven to help relieve pain and stop further joint damage in many adults. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal events, such as infections, lymphoma, or other types of cancer, have happened. blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure have occurred. before starting humira, your doctor should test you for tb. ask your doctor if you live in or have been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. tell your doctor if you have had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have symptoms such as fever, fatigue, cough, or sores. you should not start humira if you have any kind of infection. take the next step. talk to your doctor. this is humira at work. so our business can be on at&t's network for $175 a month? yup. all 5 of you for $175.

our clients need a lot of attention. there's unlimited talk and text. we're working deals all day. you get 10 gigabytes of data to share. what about expansion potential? add a line, anytime, for $15 a month. low dues, great terms. let's close! new at&t mobile share value plans our best value plans ever for business.

welcome back. to cover all the angles of the search of the missing flight, we want to take you inside a cockpit simulator with martin savidge. also with me, richard quest, who also even flew with the co-pilot of the missing flight for a story that cnn did several weeks ago. so martin, and richard may jump in here as well, we know now the plane made extreme changes in altitude, climbing to 45,000 feet, then dropping 23,000 feet. is that each possible to re-create on the flight simulator? >> it's almost impossible, and i would have to say, we tried to run this through the simulator a number of times. it's impossible to make this plane do in the simulator what it's reported to have done in the various reports in the paper. right now we're at 45,000 feet, well above what would be the maximum operating level for this particular aircraft, and even

with all the still that richard casano has in operating this plane, we're barely in the air. this is the upper yellow line. that's the line that shows we're about to rise to fast. the bottom line, it says we're about to go too slow we're going to fall to the ground. let me show you what happens if you go over the top and decide to descend at that rate. mitchell, push us over the top. >> let's do it. >> reporter: there's going to be a tremendous g-force that builds up, and the alarms, the sc nrven -- sink rate. this is where stuff is falling off the airplane. the airplane would begin to break apart in the air, pieces

literally coming off, and if you can level off, which mitchell will try to do, you pass such a level of g-force, you can't imagine if it's survivable or whether nibble would be conscious. so when you try to run this through this simulator, it really can't be done. >> the actual numbers of 45,000 and 23,000, martin, may be slightly off. they sort of admit that the range or capability of the malaysians might not have been as strong. but the fundamental point of going up and coming down, going up, coming down, do the two of you believe that that would have been possible in these circumstances albeit not to the extremes? >> mitchell? >> that is definitely in the realm of the extreme. going up and down like that, i mean, flying any airplane is all about very small, smooth corrections. you have passengers in the back.

you want to make it smooth and you eventful. going up and down like a roller coaster -- >> we should point out the information about it going up and down. that information comes from signals sent to satellites as opposed to the drop -- the precipitous drop which comes from radar, which all along authorities have said they are very skeptical about. what about, martin, this new "wall street journal" reporting, that the first turn the plane made after the transponder was turned off, would have had to be manually made, as well the fact there would have to be more than one person involved, one person to fly the plane, one to climb down and disable the other recording equipment. >> reporter: turning the plane manually, that could be done. a lot of the controls mitchell has been doing so far have been the dive and trying to correct us, that's manual.

as far as one person flying the plane and another goes down into a hatch into the electrical bay, we talked about this. some of the electronics it would require that activity. does it need two people? in theory, we could put it on autopilot. >> it happens in operational flying all the time. the captain go to the bathroom and the other pilot is just sitting here monitoring the autopilot. >> reporter: you could at least in this practical nature, put it on autopilot. yes, you're going to leave the plane and go down below. it could be done by one. >> appreciate you being in the cockpit showing us what it's like. richard, again, it bears reiterating, we have to take all this stuff with a grain of salt. >> we've said all week, you keep looking for pieces of the jigsaw to be put on the table. and tonight, we have more pieces of the jigsaw on the table that are starting to form a picture.

and that's the significance of what's happened in the last few hours. >> based on reporting from cnn and "the wall street journal" and "the new york times" today. richard, great to have you. we'll be right back. ection: up so we're up early. up late. thinking up game-changing ideas, like this: dozens of tax free zones across new york state. move here. expand here. or start a new business here... and pay no taxes for 10 years. with new jobs, new opportunities and a new tax free plan. there's only one way for your business to go. up. find out if your business can qualify at start-upny.com

more throughout the night on the missing malaysian airline flight. that does it for us. thank you very much for watching. next, breaking news about missing flight 370. a