Gangurru wrote:Reading many of the posts over time, I get the impression many don’t comprehend the size and remoteness of the search area. Given a choice between a conspiratorial cover up or well intentioned search teams missing small pieces of wreckage in a vast ocean, I’d put my money on the later.
If the search vehicle was a plane instead of a boat, the height above surface would be the same as the cruising altitude of a turboporop. From a cabin window, the horizon is about 100km away.
The search area of 217,000 km2 covers the same as the amount of land you would see from the window of a turboprop on a five hour flight.
I have flown on the world’s loneliest air routes over the southern oceans between Australia/New Zealand and Africa/South America. The isolation is of an almost indescribable scale. Prior to MH370, I told my partner that if I was ever on a flight that went down in that part of the world, expect nothing to be found due to the isolation and extremely difficult search logistics.
Can not agree more. A few months ago I flew SCL-AKL. Twelve hours at cruise speed, overflying water and only water. The size of the Indian Ocean is equally overwhelming considering the fact that we are searching for an object that is big for the human scale, but very, very small and insignificant considering the context / size of the possible resting place. I usually explain this with the following analogy : Let´s say your search area is now your desk ( yes the desk you are using now to write with your keyboard ). But the "object" you have to find is a single, specific proton. The proton is there, and if you spend enough time and effort with the sole purpose of find it, well, yes, eventually you CAN find it. But the truth is, it is a really really hard task, and the odds are against us.