Back to Squawk list
  • -7

Authorities Call Off Aerial Search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 - Hunt for Missing Plane to Continue Underwater

Officials announced a major change in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Monday that will include a halt in the aerial searches that has gone on since early March. Australian Prime Minister announced the plans in a news conference. “"I regret to say that thus far none of our efforts in the air, on the surface or under sea, have found any wreckage,” he said. The next phase of the search will be a more intensive underwater search and will involve the use of private contractors, he… ( Plus d'info...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

matt jensen 11
Still looking in the wrong place.
arlys 1
I agree.
Marcos TABOADA 1
Where is the right place?
Marcos TABOADA 1
Which is the right place?
Graham Manley 5
The time has come to revisit the underlying assumption that MH370 took the southern track into the southern Indian Ocean despite the fact that the last radar sightings had it travelling north towards the Indian / Bangladesh coast.

The northern tracks were eliminated as all the countries in that direction said that it had not shown on their radar defences. The possibility that one or more of them may not have told the truth (or had missed detecting the flight ) should be considered. If a country had detected it as an intruder and shot it down, maybe they would want to keep that quiet once they realised it was a commercial airliner, not a military aircraft.

There are number of hypothetical scenarios that could be considered, but in the absence of any physical evidence that the flight went south, no alternative possibilities should be discarded. For the sake of the relatives, and all passengers and crews flying 777s, the search must continue, but look north as well as well as south.
matt jensen 2
2M sq miles of that ocean have been searched. Time to look elsewhere. This report was given to the Malay officials 15 Apr - it got buried.
Ron Nash 1
So - you claim a total "absence of physical evidence" - then how do you explain away the ULB pings picked up over several passes over several days by the Bluefin 21?
An escaped US Navy dolphin who just happened to be carrying a 37KHz pinger? Nothing of marine life origin in the ocean makes a 37KHz ping with a repetition rate of one ping per second.
The B777 is built like a tank, it flew into the water at just above stall speed, with empty fuel tanks, so no JetA1 slick. It likely stayed 99% intact except for the engines and some panels tearing off, all of which promptly sank. The conditions were warm Summer temperatures, low wave levels, and low wind levels at the surface at 8:00AM. No B777 has ever gone into the ocean, so we have nothing to work from as to this particular model of aircrafts behaviour when it ditches.
An impact into terra firma over the Northern route would result in an earth tremor recorded by seismic equipment, which is sensitive enough to record 250 tonne aircraft crash impacts. Nothing that might represent an aircraft impact has been picked up on the morning of the 8th March by the seismic recording equipment.
There have been serious numbers of aircraft that have disappeared without a trace into the open ocean, from the 1920's onwards. The numbers that went missing like this during WW2, would astound you.
Paul Kronfield 1
With so many vessels in the search these "pings" could have been calibration pings from one of the searching vessels. I used to operate pinger locaters, and mind had a calibration pinger to fine tune the receiver. I am inclined to believe the aircraft went north. Another scenario is the aircraft landed intact, filled with water slowly and sunk. But at a certain depth the aircraft would have stopped singing and is suspended in the water column and moving with currents. It should be far away from where satellite data indicated it ended its journey.
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Isn't it comparable to 'looking for a black cat in a dark room' where the size of the room is unknown and even the presence of the 'black cat' within "that room" is uncertain ?
About 'pings' science fiction is full of stories !
And remember, if fiction is strange, but then then remember

" 'Tis strange - but true; for truth is always strange;
Stranger than fiction " - Lord Byron, in Don Juan (1819-24)

So let's wait and watch about the analysis of the 'pings'.
And just a polite reminder, doesn't it take some time to analyse the data of the two black boxes, after opening them ? Why aren't the details readable straight away ? Like you tell time from your watch ?
We all know why !
Same for the pings , my friend Ron Nash.
Roland Dent -2
Ron....have you the audacity to suggest that this machine was "taken" by technology superior to life on this planet?
Ron Nash 2
Roland, I'm not suggesting anything of the kind. I'll leave that to the tinfoil hat and "woo-woo" brigade. The simple fact remains, we have some very expert people on the MH370 job - a fact which seems to escape a lot of observers.
There are literally hundreds of electronic scientists, marine scientists, and aviation experts; and the searchers also have access to some classified military information.
These people have all calculated with a reasonable degree of accuracy where the aircraft ended up; from the satellite pings, from radar traces, from calculated aircraft headings and altitudes, and from ocean current drift knowledge, .
Pings were heard, several times, over many minutes, over several days, and they weren't "calibration" pings, as someone has suggested.
Does this commentator think all these highly qualified SAR people all work independently, like a bunch of half-cocked amateurs? There's a chain of command in place, and it's not one run by Nigerians.
The movement of sound from the sea bed through water is determined by many factors - the sea bed shape, the varying strata of the different temperatures of the seawater - and the SOFAR channel, which can send weak sound signals a long way.
Thus the JACC has to have more information on the shape of the seabed where MH370 lies, because this area is largely unmapped, as far as the sea bed is concerned.
In addition, it is understood, from the only sea bed core sampling that was done in the 1960's in this area, that the seabed comprises many metres of very soft clayey silt which would assist in muffling the pings and hiding the wreckage.
In summation, Woods Hole Institute is likely to be called in to survey the seabed, with ROV's, the same as they did for AF447. They are the only people with the ability to handle the great depths that exist where MH370 lies.
The searchers have to extend the search area and possibly go over some areas already covered, if there is any doubt in the sonar interpretations that have been done. It's going to be a long, slow, hard grind, as with all difficult jobs.
Roland Dent 1
Ron..thank you for that detailed answer which is very much appreciated. As it happenes I have witnessed two "woo-woo" phenomena. One in 1967 and one is 2011. Now I am not suggesting that this flight was deviated by "woo-woo" phenomena. Yes I think only a Wood's Hole team could do this job. As for your comment about missing assets in WW2 as a friend, now long departed who was personally involved back then, told me.."more were lost fooling around than in direct combat"
glang3 2
Some of the passengers worked for a specific company...what was the name again?
Graham Manley 2
Freescale Semiconductor from Austin Tx had about 20 employees on board.
...Somebody out there knows...they know!!....sooooo SAD!!!!
Nick Hesler 1
I think this needs to be done. Get 5-7 aircraft with a long range and have them fly along that line the satelight showed would the the location of where the plane would be. And not just fly over the water, over the land part too. That i think would bring up something.
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I wish the searchers (researchers in the process) all the best and wish to remind every one about the following -

'Prosperity doth discover vice, but adversity doth best discover virtues' - Francis Bacon, 1625, 'Of Adversity'

'Sweet are the uses of adversity,
...... ' - William Shakespeare, 1599 ' As you like it '

And that is how science and technology develops. Check out the following -

A new and highly developed tool in ocean research
'British government okays £200 million Antarctic science ship'

Another one with multifarious functions and unlimited applications,
' AW609 tiltRotor aircraft completes autorotation trials'

and with specs as follows

All these and many more to come are the results of challenges that are thrown every now and then by circumstances/adversity before some dedicated people working with singular mind, usually considered 'mad' by ordinary mortals !
PaulN2719 1
If this plane were on land somewhere, even in remotest Tibet, someone would have seen it from a satellite by now. I cannot take seriously anyone who still believes this plane didn't crash into the ocean.
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I fully ditto your views. I am from India where astrologers still claim a lot of following. They follow the same path, of speculating, generally the kind the client wants to hear, to let the hope survive, how so ever false it may be ! And in the process these astro guys earn a sizable booty !
David Stark 0
A large aircraft could easily be hidden in a jungle area, especially if those who took it knew they would have several hours before anyone would even know it was missing. Statements made by the airline and the Malaysian government are totally suspect. It would take a conspiracy with very well-placed members to pull a caper like this one off.

SE Asian jungles are also very good places to dump large numbers of bodies. I no longer think the passengers were preserved as hostages because it has been too long. Keeping that many people alive in the jungle for this long would be too much of a logistical challenge.
matt jensen 1
Martin Haisman 2
Multiple internet sites jumping on the bandwagon. Hard to believe there is the ability to identify elements in the deep water of the Bay of Bengal. Surely if this technology is available they would have discounted Bluefin, saved a heap of money and started with the Adelaide company. Something not right here.
Martin Haisman 1
More than 90 ships have sunk in the Bay of Bengal - quite a load of scrap metal there.
matt jensen 1
And a 777 too!
Graham Manley 0
The Bay of Bengal theory does not tie in with the known flight duration unless it circled for a long time - I think they still need to look further north.
Martin Haisman 1
Finally someone makes sense.
David Stark 1
We don't know what that aircraft was doing after it went off radar. We are told that the satellite telemetry from the engines continued for several hours. That proves nothing, especially about duration, direction or distance of flight.
David Stark 0
I have been saying from the beginning that they should be looking for the (stolen) aircraft on land, starting in southeast Asia. I still stand by that.
Martin Haisman 0
I would have thought the aerial search for wreckage would have to have been called off some time ago as any light wreckage would have submerged by now.

As for the underwater search I think they should stop and re-examine all the data before continuing. I am sure its in the Indian Ocean but the tracking/blips/handshakes still leave a huge area of ocean to cover.

Where it initially went after the transponder stopped broadcasting followed by other tracking systems seem fairly accurate. As for the military radar it will always be unconfirmed no matter what the outcome so just a maybe and nothing else.

Many aircraft accidents are full of surprises so in a couple of years or so the final report will tell as much as possible what is found (Or not found?)
arlys 0
Someone knows where it is, and why. This whole thing is on the bugle. Why would MAS wait four hours when one of their aircraft went missing? Any other country would be doing a backflip, if it was one of theirs.
Jere Brinkley -1
I have to wonder if those Emergency boxes weren't dumped in the ocean to give the appearance of a crash site, and 3 mile deep water should have crushed a airplane hull so debris should be visible at the crash site, along with fluids inside engines etc. Nothing, tells me that airplane is probably somewhere else and a 777 on a ramp are not uncommon or in hangers at airports like Tehran or Mashhad or any number of airports in the ME. Only an aircrew would recognize a specific airplane even setting in the open. The next question is who has the resources to pull something like this off.
Ron Nash 2
You seem to forget that Air France flight 447 went to the seabed at 13000' and the pressure did not crush the hull. Openings in the hull provide the means for water to enter and thus equalize the pressure. SAR teams recovered bodies from the hull of AF447 that were identifiable.
You're living in la-la land if you think you can just fly into any airport out of the blue, un-announced, with a 250 tonne aircraft - and no-one asks any questions.
We're talking about the most highly regulated industry in the world, with the most intensely-watched equipment. Millions of spotters are always watching, let alone the people working in the industry, controlling all the aircraft.
Even the size of runway required for a B777 puts a very large number of airstrips out of the picture.
The only way you can completely lose a big aircraft is in the vastness of the ocean.
People talk of crashes in the Himalayas and other remote places. It's incredible how many people are spread around the Earth, and even in remote places, there are still tribespeople people who see things happen.
Graham Manley 1
The only thing detected was a signal apparently from a beacon just a few inches in size of the type that is attached to a flight data recorder. The signal (if it was from such a beacon, other possibilities have been suggested) does not mean that a data recorder was attached to it, or that it was attached to an aircraft.
arlys 0

Se connecter

Vous n'avez pas de compte? Inscrivez-vous maintenant (gratuitement) pour des fonctionnalités personnalisées, des alertes de vols, et plus encore!
Ce site web utilise des cookies. En utilisant et en naviguant davantage sur ce site, vous acceptez cela.
Saviez-vous que le suivi des vols FlightAware est soutenu par la publicité ?
Vous pouvez nous aider à garder FlightAware gratuit en autorisant les annonces de Nous travaillons dur pour que notre publicité reste pertinente et discrète afin de créer une expérience formidable. Il est facile et rapide de mettre les annonces en liste blanche sur FlightAware ou d’examiner nos comptes premium.