Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 98): If the apparent concentration of parts from the 9M-MRO is real, that raises the likelihood that our main theory that the crash location is somewhere near the so-called 7th arc could be radically wrong....

No, just take a look at the arcs next to this area...

The pings are visualized as circles. And they are crossing within that area where all the stuff was found:

http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b/0508&opt=0

[Edited 2016-03-06 10:43:52]

[Edited 2016-03-06 10:44:40]

Quoting mikeromeo5 (Reply 100): Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 98):If the apparent concentration of parts from the 9M-MRO is real, that raises the likelihood that our main theory that the crash location is somewhere near the so-called 7th arc could be radically wrong.... No, just take a look at the arcs next to this area... The pings are visualized as circles. And they are crossing within that area where all the stuff was found:

Um, MH370 had enough fuel to travel maybe 3,000 nautical miles max after it left the Malacca Strait. This could have got it as far as the Seychelles and could explain the concentration of debris and the reported sighting at the Maldives; but in that case the "ping ring" arc lines-of-position are no where near the aircraft (except perhaps for the first one or two). The BTO arcs are difficult to dismiss, however, as controlled flights were later performed on other aircraft and the arcs proved to be accurate measurements of actual, known positions....

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 98): If the apparent concentration of parts from the 9M-MRO is real, that raises the likelihood that our main theory that the crash location is somewhere near the so-called 7th arc could be radically wrong....

A few parts over the still large area the pieces were supposedly found is not a concentration.

Based on Indian Ocean current charts it is very possible that the parts ended up where they were supposedly found if flight MH370 ended in the SIO area that is currently being searched - especially after 2 years of drifting!

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 99): There could also be a population density effect

There could also be widespread unfamiliarity with ocean circulation patterns, leading to a mistaken expectation that debris would wash up in Australia. Just sayin'.

https://youtu.be/PZ7yQ1u2rqw

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 103):

Hello Sir,

In follow up to our discussions in the old MH370 threads, I am wondering what odds you now give to 9M-MRO being found / the cause being determined?

You seemed very optimistic that the plane would be found and we would get answers from the black boxes whilst I had much greater doubts.

FWIW I give the current search less than a 5% chance of locating the plane.

It would not surprise me if the plane is somewhere not too far outside of the current search area boundaries or it was missed because of the sea floor terrain   

Thank you for your time.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 101): Um, MH370 had enough fuel to travel maybe 3,000 nautical miles max after it left the Malacca Strait. This could have got it as far as the Seychelles and could explain the concentration of debris and the reported sighting at the Maldives;

The places where debris is found almost have no relevance any longer. Any debris, which has travelled for instance at an average speed of one knot for a year, can have made 24 x 365 = 8,760 nm.

Imagine two kts and two years, and it may have travelled way further than around the world.

It will be widely spread since it is affected by both currents and wind. Depending on shape and density the various pieces will have been differently affected by wind and currents, spreading it over endless millions of square miles.

A couple of years more, and MH370 debris may in principle show up on any beach in the world.

Any new debris only tells that MH370 crashed in the sea, not on land. We already know that 100% sure after finding the flapperon last year.

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 86): Oh boy....Side panel near a cheat line being composite too???

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 94): In which case that would be consistent with a piece of the vertical stabilizer or the rudder; that in turn would seem to support a high velocity impact?

Well, with the gray paint below the blue, that really wouldn't be the rudder but more like the wing to body fairing.........and those are fragile.....

Boeing should be able to determine if the part came from a 777. If it did, there is only one 777 in the world that is unaccounted for, and that is MH370. As to getting information off the recorders, AF447 was in the ocean for a long time before it was found, and they were able to read them. I would presume that when MH370 is found that the same will be true.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 107): I would presume that when MH370 is found that the same will be true.

I really hope there is a 'when'...

If MH370 is found, and if the black boxes are located, and if the black boxes can be recovered, and if the black boxes aren't too badly damaged, then I would presume that the data could still likely be recovered.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 108): If MH370 is found, and if the black boxes are located, and if the black boxes can be recovered, and if the black boxes aren't too badly damaged, then I would presume that the data could still likely be recovered.

Problem is the CVR only has the last 2 hours, so we actually will never find out what happened in the cockpit during the initial change of flightpath... 

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 106): Well, with the gray paint below the blue, that really wouldn't be the rudder but more like the wing to body fairing.........and those are fragile.....

Gray paint below the blue? It looks more like white paint IMO, and about the only place where that combination is for a flat part would be the vertical stabilizer/rudder. Here are a couple of pictures:

Quoting zeke (Reply 93): Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 84):The question is: Is this more consistent with a low-speed, semi-controlled ditching or with an uncontrolled, high-speed crash? Hitting the water at any speed with a 777 has so much kinetic energy that I do not think it is reasonable to say "low speed" vs "high speed", any speed is going to be very destructive.

A recent article by Byron Bailey. It's behind a paywall, but you may be able to hack into it:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...y/95dacd99e50cf87629040a5c82411568

Quote: Assuming a pilot was hijacking the aircraft, attempts to hide the aircraft in as remote a location as possible would mean calculating the final leg on long-range cruise speed and optimum altitudes. These would be about 40,000 feet before an idle-engine descent with enough fuel to carry out a controlled ditching. A normal descent profile at engine-idle for a Boeing 777 is M.83 (83 per cent of the speed of sound), transitioning to an airspeed of 310 knots, which would cover about 130 nautical miles (240km). A pilot wishing to cover a much farther distance would engine-idle “glide” at about the optimum minimum drag speed of 220 knots and cover much greater distance. Westerly winds generally are on the beam (cross angle) of a southerly heading. Just a difference of five degrees over 5500km in the heading from the turn north of Sumatra would result in a possible longitudinal splay of 450km. This position line based on probable fuel used by a rogue pilot hijack tied in with the seventh arc would give a much more probable location for MH370 of hundreds of kilometres farther south and west of where the search originated. A controlled ditching under power is a Boeing flight manual procedure requiring the flap down and undercarriage up at the lowest possible speed into wind of more than 40 knots and a landing just on top of or just after the primary swell. Even in a perfect ditching, in heavy seas engines may be torn off and other significant damage — especially to protruding airframe parts — may occur, but the aircraft would be substantially intact. The pilot would not be so foolish as to wait for engine flame-out (engine failure because of lack of fuel), which is a serious emergency situation that limits flight control through reduced hydraulic power via the ram air turbine (which generates power from the airstream) and reduced electrical power to standby instruments. The auxiliary power unit may fire up for a limited duration but could repressurise the aircraft only at 22,000 feet on the descent. However, no flap would be available in this one-shot attempt at a ditching in those rough seas south of latitude 40 (the Roaring Forties) and the water contact at about 300km/h is essentially a crash with resultant debris.

If this theory is correct, it would mean the crash site is like two full degrees of latitude south of the final arc, probably somewhere more like in the vicinity of 41S 86E.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 111): Quote: (From TheAustralian article) The pilot would not be so foolish as to wait for engine flame-out (engine failure because of lack of fuel), which is a serious emergency situation that limits flight control through reduced hydraulic power via the ram air turbine (which generates power from the airstream) and reduced electrical power to standby instruments. The auxiliary power unit may fire up for a limited duration but could repressurise the aircraft only at 22,000 feet on the descent.

If the engines flame out due to fuel starvation, you're not going to get much (if any) runtime out of the APU ...

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 111): If this theory is correct, it would mean the crash site is like two full degrees of latitude south of the final arc, probably somewhere more like in the vicinity of 41S 86E.

The ATSB are not in agreement with the theory that there was any pilot intervention in the final stages of flight, nefarious or not. It is not their responsibility to consider the causes of the disappearance, but for the reasons of the search location this issue does of course become important.

Quote from ATSB updates:

Quote: Mr Bailey’s article claims that the ATSB rejects any possibility that MH370’s disappearance was the result of a person taking control of the aircraft. For the purposes of its search, the ATSB has not needed to determine – and has made no claims – about what might have caused the disappearance of the aircraft. For search purposes, the relevant facts and analysis most closely match a scenario in which there was no pilot intervening in the latter stages of the flight.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/correcting-the-record.aspx

R.I.P. MH370...

In just over 1 hour it will be the 2 year anniversary of the end of the flight / the final ping...

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 109): Problem is the CVR only has the last 2 hours, so we actually will never find out what happened in the cockpit during the initial change of flightpath...

Whilst having CVR coverage for that entire flight would be extremely useful, especially at the time near IGARI when something happened, the various parameters recorded on the FDR should be enough to provide answers. The FDR will be able to tell us if somebody was alive and making inputs and until when at least.


Anyway, here is some 'optimistic' news -(The article is quite long so I only quoted selected portions):


'MH370: head of search says 'very likely' plane will be found by July'

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...very-likely-plane-will-be-found-by

""Martin Dolan, head of the Australian authority scouring the Indian ocean, is confident aircraft will be located.

The man in charge of the hunt for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 believes it is “very likely” the plane will be found in the next four months, even as the multimillion dollar search effort enters what is likely to be its final stage.

Since 31 March 2014, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau has led the search effort for the plane, driven by what its investigators have always considered to be the most likely scenario – known as the “ghost flight” theory – that no-one was at the controls when the jet went down.

The ATSB’s modelling shows that, after running out of fuel, the plane would have crashed in the southern Indian ocean, off the coast of Western Australia. As of this month, four ships have searched more than 85,000sq km of a long but narrow “seventh arc”, totalling 120,000sq km of seafloor – without success.

To Dolan, that suggests that the plane is in the 30,000-odd sq km yet to be searched, and will be found when the operation concludes around July, if not before.

“It’s as likely on the last day [of the search] as on the first that the aircraft would be there. We’ve covered nearly three-quarters of the search area, and since we haven’t found the aircraft in those areas, that increases the likelihood that it’s in the areas we haven’t looked at yet.”

At this late stage, Dolan is aware that his assurance could seem like blind optimism, or a bid to save face over a US $133.3m operation – paid for by Australia and Malaysia, plus $14.8m in funding and equipment from China – that has already been said to have failed.

The search zone – twice the size of Tasmania – shows a range of places the plane could be, some higher probability than others. “We now know that there’s a range of those places the aircraft isn’t in, but that hasn’t changed the overall probability that the aircraft is in the total search area,” Dolan said.

“To eliminate that from the search – assuming we don’t find the aircraft – we have the cover the whole area.”

Given those uncertainties, Dolan can’t be specific about when the search will be completed. But he remains optimistic. “We’ve still got some serious area to cover, including some areas in the assessment that are highly prospective for finding the aircraft, and the aircraft’s very likely there.""

"“At some point, whatever the total of the evidence is, is going to have to be assessed and a conclusion reached as to the most likely solution to the mystery,” says Dolan.""



This argument has been used before:

""""“It’s as likely on the last day [of the search] as on the first that the aircraft would be there. We’ve covered nearly three-quarters of the search area, and since we haven’t found the aircraft in those areas, that increases the likelihood that it’s in the areas we haven’t looked at yet.”""""

- The problem I have with this is that they don't know that the plane is actually anywhere in the area they are searching to begin with. If they know it's in that area, then yes, it's just as likely on the last day or the first day of the search that the plane will be found. But it's also likely that the plane is not it the area being searched so it won't be found at all.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 114): It’s as likely on the last day [of the search] as on the first that the aircraft would be there. We’ve covered nearly three-quarters of the search area, and since we haven’t found the aircraft in those areas, that increases the likelihood that it’s in the areas we haven’t looked at yet.

It's always in the last place you look...

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 114): Martin Dolan, head of the Australian authority scouring the Indian ocean, is confident aircraft will be located.

Not unless they start looking somewhere else.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 110): Gray paint below the blue? It looks more like white paint IMO, and about the only place where that combination is for a flat part would be the vertical stabilizer/rudder. Here are a couple of pictures:

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 85): Wow! They found another part on Renuion!

Sure looks gray, not white. And if we are looking at the same part, you are not looking at the entire wing to body fairing where it is flat.

@CALTEC: I see what you mean. When you look at the one picture of Mssr. Begue where he is comparing the part to a photo printed on paper, the paper is quite white compared to the part. Also note that the color of the blue on the part is the same as the color on the printed paper.

Quoating from the Guardian:
"The model may be perfect, but it is only as accurate as its input data." (See URL below)
End of Quote.
If they do find that aircraft by July, based on those models, it would indeed be an incredible feat.
As it says in the definition of that term, it would really be ... a product of skill, endurance and ingenuity.

Whether that other part found is white or grey cannot really be judged from a poor quality photo.
(Where does the colour 'white' end and when can it be called 'grey'?
In German there is a saying:
At night all cats are grey!)

It is important to first determine whether that part originated off 9M-MRO or not.
Once they know that, having the piece in their hands, they'll soon be pretty certain about the colour too.
And if it can be confirmed the part is off the missing aircraft, then, I'm pretty sure they would just as soon know where exactly it was fitted.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...very-likely-plane-will-be-found-by

Are you sure that the skin of the tail is made of honeycomb material? I think it is thin aluminum...

About the only certainty in all of this is that frame and engine companies can say yes or no regarding found parts. Certainty may be less for other parts.

Well, the 2nd Annual Interim Report is out now--all 2.5 pages of large-font, double-spaced fluff...

http://mh370.mot.gov.my/2nd_Interim_Statement_English.pdf

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 105): The places where debris is found almost have no relevance any longer. Any debris, which has travelled for instance at an average speed of one knot for a year, can have made 24 x 365 = 8,760 nm. Imagine two kts and two years, and it may have travelled way further than around the world. It will be widely spread since it is affected by both currents and wind. Depending on shape and density the various pieces will have been differently affected by wind and currents, spreading it over endless millions of square miles. A couple of years more, and MH370 debris may in principle show up on any beach in the world. Any new debris only tells that MH370 crashed in the sea, not on land. We already know that 100% sure after finding the flapperon last year.

I agree. Bits of MH370 washing up on beaches provide nothing, except perhaps evidence for those that need it that the aircraft was not abducted by aliens and it didn't land.

I think the chances of finding a debris field on the ocean floor (and as such the FDR & CVR) are now approaching zero.

Quoting gzm (Reply 120): Are you sure that the skin of the tail is made of honeycomb material? I think it is thin aluminum...

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 121): About the only certainty in all of this is that frame and engine companies can say yes or no regarding found parts. Certainty may be less for other parts.

Here's a structural repair manual for the "HORIZONTAL STABILIZER UPPER FORWARD TORQUE BOX PANEL SKIN". It's pretty detailed down to the types of epoxy used.

https://bigroundthingsblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/panel-copy.pdf

[Edited 2016-03-08 07:38:46]

Quoting gzm (Reply 120): Are you sure that the skin of the tail is made of honeycomb material? I think it is thin aluminum...

It looks to me like Nomex, which is used on the 777, but on the cabin floors. It's also sometimes used in Yacht construction, which is where i'd put my money. You can treat yourself to some here  http://www.fibreglast.com/product/No..._1562/Vacuum_Bagging_Sandwich_Core

Quoting gasman (Reply 123): Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 105):The places where debris is found almost have no relevance any longer. Any debris, which has travelled for instance at an average speed of one knot for a year, can have made 24 x 365 = 8,760 nm. Imagine two kts and two years, and it may have travelled way further than around the world. It will be widely spread since it is affected by both currents and wind. Depending on shape and density the various pieces will have been differently affected by wind and currents, spreading it over endless millions of square miles. A couple of years more, and MH370 debris may in principle show up on any beach in the world. Any new debris only tells that MH370 crashed in the sea, not on land. We already know that 100% sure after finding the flapperon last year. I agree. Bits of MH370 washing up on beaches provide nothing, except perhaps evidence for those that need it that the aircraft was not abducted by aliens and it didn't land.

Not true. Debris finds can shed light on how the final crash occurred. Number one: Was the flaperon extended or not?? That is a most important piece of information with YUGE implications for the search area: namely, the implication being there was a pilot at the controls, and we can expect the main wreckage to be up to 130 nm from the 7th arc. Similarly, if a bunch of small pieces from all over the aircraft fuselage were found, that would indicate a high-speed impact that disintegrated everything, then the main wreckage area should be within 15 nm of the 7th arc.

Quote: I think the chances of finding a debris field on the ocean floor (and as such the FDR & CVR) are now approaching zero.

Given that the ATSB is married to the no-pilot hypothesis, and the current search area is based on that hypothesis, the odds that the main wreckage will be found within the current search area is rapidly diminishing, whereas the Bayesian odds that they're barking up the wrong tree is increasing. The question is money flow.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126): Not true. Debris finds can shed light on how the final crash occurred

Sure they can, but you'd need to get very, very lucky to find that telltale piece of debris even if one exists. At the current rate of - what, 3 pieces of debris in two years?? - we're going to be waiting a rather long time.

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126): Given that the ATSB is married to the no-pilot hypothesis, and the current search area is based on that hypothesis, the odds that the main wreckage will be found within the current search area is rapidly diminishing, whereas the Bayesian odds that they're barking up the wrong tree is increasing.

Assuming of course, there even still is a "main wreckage".

[Edited 2016-03-08 08:08:51]

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 125): It looks to me like Nomex, which is used on the 777, but on the cabin floors. It's also sometimes used in Yacht construction, which is where i'd put my money. You can treat yourself to some here

That manual I linked to above states that the core material for the horizontal stabilizer skin is all aluminum honeycomb. Also, if you'll look chunks exposed on the MH17 wreckage of the vertical stabilizer, the color looks the same as that nomex stuff. Evidently, the aluminum is coated with a similar sort of phenolic coating? Anyway, the "NO STEP" marking on the Mozambique piece is pretty much a dead give-away IMHO. The 2nd Reunion piece is more ambiguous, but it seems like they ought to be able to tell from the paint, etc.

Quoting gasman (Reply 127): Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):Not true. Debris finds can shed light on how the final crash occurred Sure they can, but you'd need to get very, very lucky to find that telltale piece of debris even if one exists.

I think the flaperon is such a telltale piece. I think it was Pihero who said it looked like the flaperon was in an extended position based on the damage to the trailing edge, but there has been zero word from the French authorities that sheds any official light on the question.

Quote: At the current rate of - what, 3 pieces of debris in two years?? - we're going to be waiting a rather long time.

The fact that Mr. Gibson and his friends were able to find that piece within 20 minutes of starting their search tells me there's probably a lot more debris on east African and Madagascar shores that is there for the pickings of a trained beachcomber who knows what to look for.

Quote: Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 126):Given that the ATSB is married to the no-pilot hypothesis, and the current search area is based on that hypothesis, the odds that the main wreckage will be found within the current search area is rapidly diminishing, whereas the Bayesian odds that they're barking up the wrong tree is increasing. Assuming of course, there even still is a "main wreckage".

Well, there should at least be a recognizable debris field!





[Edited 2016-03-08 08:43:18]