ATCGOD
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:44 pm

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 196):
"(CNN)A preliminary assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies, produced in the wake of the MH370 disaster, suggested it was likely someone in the cockpit deliberately caused the aircraft's movements to go off course before the Malaysian airliner disappeared'.

I don't think that was ever really debated. The motive behind the deviation and the question behind the turning off (or malfunction of the transponder) is highly suspect.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3273
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:05 am

Quoting horstroad (Reply 141):
If the S/N does not belong to 9M-MRO (according to documentation), then the search begins. Boeing knows to whom they sold the flaperon, attached to an airframe or not. It shouldn't be too hard to follow the life something like a flaperon.

Yes, in a very expensive Aircraft the parts are traceable.

I guess Mandala 499 is quite busy now... hope he chimes in and let us know more info.

Best Regards

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
PBNZ
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:01 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:07 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 198):
If it's the right flaperon, it follows that the *inboard side* is in the left of the drawing,especially when the *FWD* direction is noted : the inner side should be on the right of the page... So...The drawing is for the left wing... and in this case, the parts numbering should be switched over.

I agree - it looks like the diagram used in the manual is used for the left side, which has then been reused on the page for the right one. Probably saved someone duplicating and mirroring the diagram.
 
RogerMurdock
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:01 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:21 am

Quoting oxymorph (Reply 196):
"(CNN)A preliminary assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies, produced in the wake of the MH370 disaster, suggested it was likely someone in the cockpit deliberately caused the aircraft's movements to go off course before the Malaysian airliner disappeared'.

An "assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies" makes it sound like they have some secret info, but in this case they're probably going off similar information as the public has, and coming to the same likely conclusion as any sane person.
 
karadion
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:06 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:38 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 198):

You're nitpicking over something where someone saved time because they didn't flip the drawing around for the left side. Just take the image in your head and flip it around. Those pages I have comes directly from the MAS Maintenance Manuals for the 777.
 
QF744ER
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:59 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:58 am

Interesting discussion about components on here, typically large airlines take new parts off new deliveries and swap them with older/used components to avoid have vital components 'time out' at the same time and require replacing which becomes much more maintenance intensive.

I've even heard of airlines swapping out engines after new deliveries for similar logical reasons.
 
User avatar
Groover158
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:43 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:00 am

Quoting Txspotter (Reply 121):
95% of the time the airline would take the damaged flaperon and exchange it with a repaired flaperon like the one I posted. They would pay about 1/10th of the price of the repaired one.

Example: A new flaperon costs $500,000
We would give them our new flaperon for $50,000
We would get their damaged flaperon and get it repaired, another $50,000
we would bill the airline for the repair and now have another unit ready to sell.

The airline has payed $100,000 for a new unit instead of $500,000

Airlines save money by only paying 1/5th the price and do not have expensive spare parts sitting around their warehouses that they may never need. Win-win.

Air France will almost NEVER buy anything OUTRIGHT (i.e. pay $500,000), they will exchange their broken for our new.

I believe Air Austral flies their B777's to Reunion as well.
Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 128):
Interesting business model, sounds lucrative. So the "new" flaperon you sell back to the airline is a repaired/refurbished unit which is in as good as new condition, with the paperwork and warranty and everything done?

I figured something like this was happening, but it's interesting to hear it from someone who works in that business.  


This is not something new and novel, all airlines and air forces have been replacing broken bits with refurbished bits for many decades now as replacing broken items with brand new items each time would be very expensive. However, there would be limits to what is repairable and what isn't and all repairs would need to be undertaken by an approved MRO, using qualified technicians who are conducting the repair to approved standards. The part in question should also have a traceable history that would highlight where it has been fitted and how many hours it has flown. There will also be instances when the damaged component may be deemed to be beyond economical repair.

One other issue that has me confused is this bit...

Quoting Txspotter (Reply 121):
Example: A new flaperon costs $500,000
We would give them our new flaperon for $50,000
We would get their damaged flaperon and get it repaired, another $50,000
we would bill the airline for the repair and now have another unit ready to sell.

Perhaps, I'm not interpreting correctly, but this sounds like double dipping unless the repair agency is fully owned by the airline and the billing for the repair cost is an internal accounting requirement. As I see it:

Airline has damaged Flaperon but doesn't want to spend $500,000 for a new one
Your organisation sells them a refurbished replacement item for $50,000
Your organisation then takes their damaged Flaperon and repairs it (do you pay them for the damaged item?)
Your organisation then bills the airline for the repair (I don't know why they would want to pay for the item to be repaired when they have already paid for it to be replaced)
Your organisation then sells it to the next airline and pockets a completely free $50,000.

Why wouldn't the airline buy the $50,000 refurbished item and simply dispose of the damaged item, thus saving $50,000 for a repair they no longer need.
 
alfa164
Posts: 3078
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:18 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 8):
If this disappearance was a nefarious act pretty much anywhere from central Asia to the Indian Ocean, the perpetrators - if it was not the crew - have had ample opportunity to plant what they want where they want.

Can you tell us where they would have bought a spare flaperon to "plant"? "Damaged Flaps R Us"? I

wasn't aware of any 777 flying around with its flaperon missing... going unnoticed by the crew...

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 12):
1) Foul play by the flight crew, or
2) Hijacking to western China by Uighur separatists, followed by bungled rescue mission by ill-equipped locally-based Chinese forces leading to mass deaths and a need to conceal the event.

The Uighurs? And a failed Chinese rescue mission? The conspiracy theories here never cease to amaze me...   

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 12):
Unfortunately, it has been obvious from the start that a number of major powers know precisely what happened but have elected not to reveal that information either not to reveal their own secret capabilities or because they have sought to use the information as leverage in other matters of international politics. That is very prudent politics, but it means that a full picture is impossible to assemble.

I hope you have some facts to back this up.

Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 16):
"Professor Charitha Pattiaratchi, from the University of Western Australia, said the aircraft part “can only have come from” the current search zone."

"Professor Pattiaratchi said modelling showed that wreckage would emerge in the region around Reunion Island within 18 to 24 months but current speeds were not uniform and difficult to predict. The MH370 aircraft went missing almost 17 months ago."

That is a fascinating - and credible - observation.

Quoting 77west (Reply 27):
Well, put rest to any silly theories involving military bases or aliens. (Actually, no, no it won't.....)

Sadly, I am afraid you are right.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 185):

It's disheartening that *every* MH370 thread - even ones related to factual events - has to turn into a conspiracy soapbox. Some people have been watching too many LOST episodes. Charles Widmore is not a real person, guys.

         And thank you for the rest of your post; it was very informative.
I'm going to have a smokin' hot body again!
I have decided to be cremated....
 
TXspotter
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:02 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:30 am

Grover158
Not sure where the confusion is on your first point.

To your second point.
-yes we pay for the repair them bill it back to the airline. If the repair is more than the value of the unit (in this example $500k) we would then bill them for the cost of the new unit ($500k) + ($50k) for the time they've had the new unit.

Why would they pay for the repair? If the repair is $100k then it's cheaper than buying a new one for $500k...maybe I'm missing something.

this is called an exchange purchase.

Your last point "why wouldn't the airline buy the repaired part for $50k..?" Because the part is not for sale for $50k. It's available for exchange for $50k. If you want to buy it outright, that will be $500k.
 
QF744ER
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:59 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:34 am

Quoting groover158 (Reply 206):

Whilst I'm not a fan of the conspiracy theories MH B777's have been broken up before, I recall seeing a photo of one in the USA with its cockpit section 41 area removed.

Think there was one in TLV too.

Just saying....
 
TXspotter
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:02 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:42 am

Quoting QF744ER (Reply 210):


Whilst I'm not a fan of the conspiracy theories MH B777's have been broken up before, I recall seeing a photo of one in the USA with its cockpit section 41 area removed.

Think there was one in TLV too.

Just saying....

GA Telesis scrapped a MH B777 in Tel Aviv, 9M-MRI.

GA Telesis scrapped 9M-MRK at Orlando Sanford

Most airplanes have their cockpits removed before scrapping. There's a market for them.

In all, 4 MH B777s do not exist anymore.
 
edmountain
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:00 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:53 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 185):

It's disheartening that *every* MH370 thread - even ones related to factual events - has to turn into a conspiracy soapbox. Some people have been watching too many LOST episodes. Charles Widmore is not a real person, guys.

Occam's razor applies here as anywhere else. The conclusion that requires the fewest jumps in logic tends to be the right one.

A voice of reason rises among the clamor!

At the very least this find has already increased the probability of an Indian Ocean landing far above that of any other scenario. If confirmed to be from MH370 then the Indian Ocean landing will be the only valid scenario.

Despite this though--as has been the pattern throughout this story--every new piece of data simply serves as fuel for a whole new host of conspiracy theories. The fly-to-the-moon or land-in-Dushanbe hypotheses have been replaced with grey-market flaperons being ditched overboard by second-rate mercenaries.
 
QF744ER
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:59 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:58 am

Quoting Txspotter (Reply 211):

Interesting is that why you see then basking in desert minus the whole cockpit section...am I correct in assuming the cockpit off whole and then salvage companies dismantle them for all the avionics etc?
 
747megatop
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:09 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 195):
Quoting 747megatop (Reply 186):
Now..now. Aren't we treading on uncharted territory here? Isn't this best left to the Barnacologists?

Actually, people that study barnacles would be "cirripediologists", of whom Charles Darwin himself was a noted exemplar.

I understand that many of of you all are mainly concerned with exactly what happened on the inside of that plane. However, we will never be able to conclusively answer that question until we find out WHERE the crash happened.

The Inmarsat data proved crucial, as it was about the ONLY evidence that MH370 was diverted to SIO. Still, the resultant search area is HUGE. Therefore, any clue at all, including biological evidence, that can further constrain the search area would be extremely helpful. IMHO. YMMV.

While I am no cirripediologist, I do happen to have an MS in fishery biology (in addition to my geology degree), and I've studied phylogenetic and biogeographic theory quite a bit. So I'm probably one of the few people on this forum who can quickly dig into the cirripediology literature, understand the jargon, and hopefully scoop up some useful information.

That said, barnacles are problematic because they have such wide geographic distributions. Still, there is some biogeographic diversity among Lepas sp.

Now, it turns out that Lepas anatifera is sometimes also known as the "long-necked barnacle" because individuals are typically supported by an unusually long (for barnacle species) stalk or peduncle, which can be quite striking as a quick google image search for "Lepas anatifera" will show.

In addition, Lepas anatifer is characterized by scarlet to orange edges of its plates.

But the picture of the flaperon shows drab colored goose barnacles lacking long necks.

IOW, they look to me more like Lepas australis goose barnacles. These are a cold water species that make the Antarctic circumpolar current their main breeding grounds. This current extends north up to perhaps 40*S, so if the flaperon were colonized by L. australis barnacles, that would indicate that the crash site is most likely in the extreme southern area of the search area, as in about 39*S 87*N. Just sayin'.

Alternatively, they could perhaps be true Lepas anatifera that haven't had time to develop long necks yet, possibly indicating a colonization event that happened quite a while after the known crash time, which would also indicate a southern crash site. Or they could be Lepas anatifera that are fully 17 months old, and that would indicate a northern crash site.

Of course, I'm no expert in cirripediology, that's why it's absolutely mandatory that bona fide cirripediologists be granted access to the actual specimens attached to the flapiron. Because, as my initial foray shows, the species and age of the barnacles can say quite a bit about at least the water temperature, and hence the latitude of the initial colonization event. As it stands now, there is only speculation about such things as the speed and course of the aircraft, whether their was a pilot, and other esoterica that can constrain the latitude of the search area band--and these are anybody's guess, I'm the first to admit. Any other clues that could further constrain the search area would seem to be a good thing IMO.

Blistering barnacles (like how Tintin's Capt Haddock would say). I was just kidding when i meant Barnacologists. I still feel though that we are in uncharted territory regarding the barnacles and leave it to the scientists to figure that out!  We have enough theories going on in these 2 threads + the other 80 MH 370 related threads to keep our hands full.
 
TXspotter
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:02 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:27 am

Quoting QF744ER (Reply 213):
Interesting is that why you see then basking in desert minus the whole cockpit section...am I correct in assuming the cockpit off whole and then salvage companies dismantle them for all the avionics etc?


Yes. However the avionics are pulled long before they start cutting. The cockpits will have some the frames of the consoles and electrical harnesses. No avionics are left.

Many cockpits end up as flight simulators.

[Edited 2015-07-30 19:29:29]
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:31 am

Quoting Luv2cattlecall (Reply 146):
Quoting edmountain (Reply 212):
Despite this though--as has been the pattern throughout this story--every new piece of data simply serves as fuel for a whole new host of conspiracy theories. The fly-to-the-moon or land-in-Dushanbe hypotheses have been replaced with grey-market flaperons being ditched overboard by second-rate mercenaries.

If the Flaperon has signs of a high velocity impact (which should be decernable), I think those other, non-crash source scenarios, improbable to start, become more unlikely. It would require a highly sophisticated deception with a part impacted to simulated a crash, then placed months at sea to eventually turn up in a place modeled where it should be.

I guess it's possible, but really getting to be a stretch.
 
my787
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:14 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:42 am

Quoting WarrenPlatts (Reply 183):

Actually, I understand that the serial number on the 777 flaperon is also embossed into the material on the inside of the part.

my787
717 727 737 757 767 772 773 788 DC10-30 MD80/83/88/90 E175 E190 Q400 A319 A320 A321 A330-300 A380 CRJ700 CRJ900
 
B777fan
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:44 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:48 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 198):
For crying out loud !
See the page linked to by Karadion # 177 . : 57 - 05 - 03

For crying out loud yourself. You ask for perfection and gave no reference to the page you saw.

My answer was correct but general as I had no idea what you were looking at. See post 44 upthread where the manual lists 657BB as a flaperon leading edge. No drawing of the flaperon is on this page. Also see post 52 where 657 is called out as the right wing flaperon.

The two pages shown in post 44 also note 500 numbers are for the left wing and 600 numbers are for the right wing. Correct facts as I stated them.

The drawing I have been using is from post 132 in the first thread. It shows a left flaperon in a view identical to the one you are referring too but with 500 series numbers. This view appears to have been lifted and used on the page you refer to with the numbers replaced with 600 series numbers. While the view is clearly of a left flaperon as you point out, the 657 number is pointing to the mirror image of the correct panel. In other words the bottom inboard leading edge skin.

The drawing is further confused by the two details below which appear to show a right flaperon outboard actuator labeled as the inboard actuator.

[Edited 2015-07-30 21:02:29]
 
tcyvr
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:20 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:50 am

According to CNN (http://www.cnn.com/) the plane might have broken off in the air based on the part that they found. Now based on that does not sound like pilot suicide. Because for suicide one has to take the jet down for the impact. Also why would the pilot fly the jet that far if he had to commit suicide? What are your thoughts people?
 
B777fan
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:44 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:08 am

Quoting tcyvr (Reply 219):
What are your thoughts people?

My thought are, why are you paying any attention to what CNN is saying.

I see no basis to state that the plane broke up in the air because of the condition of this part. The rear of the found flaperon is broken off aft of the rear spar and the actuators are missing. What does that tell us? Nobody on CNN knows, that's for sure. They're filling time.
 
karadion
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:06 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:13 am

Quoting B777fan (Reply 218):

He's free to get a copy of the maintenance manual which is D633W101 if he has a source. The maintenance manual on this particular chapter is Chapter 57 Wings, section 57-05, subject 57-05-03 - Wings Structural Inspections. Left Wing Flaperon is on page 241 while Right Wing Flaperon is on page 297.

Now Boeing has a lot of these duplicate maintenance manuals which their hosting will vary. One manual showed both L/R in the same orientation while another manual showed exactly the opposite sharing the same orientation. So it's pretty clear that whoever designed the manuals didn't bother or cared to have the correct orientation. I'm guessing that someone expected the MX guys to have some common sense and understand to flip it around in their head mentally. Since Pihero is not going to do that, he's just going to nitpick.
 
edmountain
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:00 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:17 am

Quoting B777fan (Reply 220):

My thought are, why are you paying any attention to what CNN is saying.

I see no basis to state that the plane broke up in the air because of the condition of this part. The rear of the found flaperon is broken off aft of the rear spar and the actuators are missing. What does that tell us? Nobody on CNN knows, that's for sure. They're filling time.

I don't understand why everyone is so concerned about the manner of entry into the ocean. To my mind any manner of entry (attempted ditching all the way to nose-down plunge) is potentially consistent with any initial scenario.
 
tcyvr
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:20 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:25 am

Quoting edmountain (Reply 222):
I don't understand why everyone is so concerned about the manner of entry into the ocean. To my mind any manner of entry (attempted ditching all the way to nose-down plunge) is potentially consistent with any initial scenario.

The manner of entry in the ocean will make a difference. If the plane was in one piece or broke in the mid air before falling into the water. One might be intentional and the other an accident.
 
edmountain
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:00 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:33 am

Quoting tcyvr (Reply 223):
The manner of entry in the ocean will make a difference. If the plane was in one piece or broke in the mid air before falling into the water. One might be intentional and the other an accident.

One might be intentional and the other an accident but it's all non-deterministic.

For example, if the plane broke in midair how do you tell if it's nefarious or benign? You still need more information.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3273
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:51 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 198):
... as the discussions as to conspiracies and crime + suicide, they shouldn't be on this thread. 80 + haven't brought anything anywhere.

  

I really hope they can link this part to the missing aircraft, if it turns out to be something else, the CT theorists will have a fiel day!

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:56 am

Quoting B777fan (Reply 220):


I see no basis to state that the plane broke up in the air because of the condition of this part. The rear of the found flaperon is broken off aft of the rear spar and the actuators are missing. What does that tell us? Nobody on CNN knows, that's for sure. They're filling time.

Not being an expert, I'm just speculating...but even the experts are speculating, so I feel in good company.

To me, it just doesn't look like an inflight breakup to me. It seems like it was forcibly ripped free of the hinges, by something more solid than even supersonic air.

My guess is if the flaps were down, we'd see more of a bend in the flaperon, and it seems to me there's a very good chance it would have shattered...if it landed relatively flat...which I doubt.

Again, I go to Ethiopian 961, which came apart even though it was pretty much under control until just before hitting the water, shattering into a bunch of pieces.

There just doesn't seem to be that much holding the flaperon to the wing. It could have been torn off in any number of ways; landing flat would have quite likely caused enough drag by the water to tear it off straight back, whether or not flaps were extended. The wings may have disintegrated and , among other things, tearing off the flaperon. That might hold true for a failed attempt at a proper ditching, as a vertical plunge.

There are lots and lots of potential ways that a flaperon could detach from a wing. To me, in air breakup seems the least likely...though I am perfectly fine with being proven wrong. I am much more interested in the truth than the glory achieved by guessing correctly.
What the...?
 
matthewkellyva
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:22 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:57 am

Quoting edmountain (Reply 224):
One might be intentional and the other an accident but it's all non-deterministic.

For example, if the plane broke in midair how do you tell if it's nefarious or benign? You still need more information.

Yeah we need more information, but this is one step to get more information. Before we found the flaperon we knew nothing. With this new information we might be able to determine the structural integrity of the aircraft on impact with the water, which is a stepping stone. It will not give us a final conclusion but will lead us to the next clue and the next clue until we find out what happened. We are not going to write a final report based on this one find.
To aviators, the sky is not the limit, it is home.
 
Halophila
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:44 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:14 am

I'm a marine biologist. Just wanted to add that we could probably get clues as to where this has been by looking at the types of viruses that are in those barnacles. The barnacles themselves recruit from larvae which are very wide ranging in ocean plankton, but their viruses can be pretty region specific. Just an offer to whomever may be reading this thread! Contact me via this site.
Flown on A36 310 319 320 321 332 333 343 388 350 707 717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 743 744 74SP 757 753 762 763 772 773 77W 787 D10 DC9 M11 M80 M87 CRJ CR7 CR9 CR1000 120 135 145 175 190 146 F28 F50 F70 F100 Tristar
 
tcyvr
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:20 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:34 am

US intel says that the jet was deliberately crashed after changing the route.
 
jcxroberts
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:41 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:35 am

People don't want to hear this, but it's very likely they've been looking in the wrong place. The problem is the currents aren't strong enough in that area to take it this far in 17 months.

"According to a model of ocean currents developed by Erik van Sebille, an oceanographer at the Imperial College in London, there is a less than 10 per cent chance that the plane crashed in the area off the western coast of Australia where the search was focused. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...72187/MH370-debris-found-live.html
 
flyDTW1992
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:04 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:53 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 94):
The flaperon was found in French territory, hence the BEA takes responsibility for the investigation just like the FAA would do when an Airbus jet crashes in the United States.

NTSB, but yes.

Quoting jcxroberts (Reply 230):

People don't want to hear this, but it's very likely they've been looking in the wrong place. The problem is the currents aren't strong enough in that area to take it this far in 17 months.

"According to a model of ocean currents developed by Erik van Sebille, an oceanographer at the Imperial College in London, there is a less than 10 per cent chance that the plane crashed in the area off the western coast of Australia where the search was focused. "

Have we not had numerous posts within this thread and the previous one saying exactly the opposite? I've seen at least a few sources saying it is very possible the debris drifted that far in as much time.
Now you're flying smart
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Posts: 11183
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:53 am

This thread is getting long and will be continued here: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 3 (by KaiGywer Jul 30 2015 in Civil Aviation)
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Aircraft Flap Found In La Réunion (RUN) Part 2

Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:28 pm

I got tired of reading all of the conspiracy theories very soon, and have not followed much beyond the first couple of weeks, when it became evident that nobody knew much of anything (and I reject the theory that some of the governments involved know exactly what happened. I did believe that it most likely was deliberate pilot action, though, and then yesterday I encountered this article for the first time, and it makes more sense than anything else I have read. After all, if it was deliberate pilot action, what was his intent? If it was suicide/mass murder why divert and not just crash right there? What threw me off was the transponders being switched off, but this article (by an experienced international airline pilot) has a logical explanation. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/.../malaysia_370_tragic_accident.html
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos