try to speculate or until it's verified fact, it really doesn't mean much to you, unless you're looking at expanding that model. >> so, how far can you go based on what we know? >> basically what i would say at this point is if the intent was to mask that aircraft, which it appears to me that there is -- some intent had been made to mask the aircraft, to turn off the transponders. i don't think it's likely there was a failure on board the aircraft that would cause those transponders to go out. >> because mary schiavo thinks it's more likely that it was an event as opposed to intentional thing, a decompression event, because there was a warning maybe about like the stress cracks around the antenna. she doesn't think it's more likely it's intentional, but you could go either way, you're saying. >> yeah, you could, you could. but the reason i go the direction that i do is because if there was something intentful, if there was not something intentful, then a massive failure would have had to take out three redundant systems within that aircraft. you have three different buses,