The only problem with the nice explanation by the ex-NATO bloke is that the Iranians claimed they launched the missiles because they thought it was a missile attack.

(Written on 01/16/2020)(Permalink)

Mr Wiley, thank you. Although an Australian, I lived in Italy 1990-2001. In that time I organised a local bushfire brigade for our village, based on the practices of the New South Wales Volunteer Bushfire Brigade. I bought and took to Italy a dozen McLeod tools, which were put to good use when a fire in the pine forest above the village went up. That day we were saved by the Canadairs. I recounted the incident in my book Villa Foruna, which you may find, although now out of print.

(Written on 12/02/2016)(Permalink)

Wilbur: I should have explained that I am writing from Australia and the McLeod tool is a tool for rural (bush) fire fighters, not city units called out to fight what you Americans call wildfires. We refer to them as "bushfires" irrespective of their size and devastation. Nevertheless I was under the impression that the McLeod tool originated in America. The tool is mainly of use before a fire, to clear combustible matter and form a fire break, or after the fire has passed to deal with burning logs, embers, etc. It's obviously not the right thing to use against a wall of flames!

(Written on 12/01/2016)(Permalink)

McLeod refers to the McLeod Tool, commonly known as a rake-hoe. It's a simple implement of hardened steel fastened at right angles to a long handle. On one side there are several rough teeth for raking burning embers or forest litter to clear a path; on the other side of the steel plate there is a razor sharp edge for cutting and slashing undergrowth. They are standard tools for firefighters on the ground.

(Written on 12/01/2016)(Permalink)

Please punctuate and spell correctly. It's difficult to know what you're saying.

(Written on 08/11/2016)(Permalink)

Roy, it's difficult to understand your comments, except that writing from residency in the U.S. you may not be familiar with what's happening in Australia. Politically there has been a determination to try to find what happened to MH370 - in part because 6 Australians were lost, but more importantly because the search area is in Australia's area of maritime responsibility. However there is mounting concern in Australia at the cost, especially as the Chinese are not contributing. The fact that they have indicated they will manage the recovery effort if the plane is found is not reassuring, as many believe an investigation and enquiry should be conducted by an independent body, or representative of a group of involved nations. There is a lot of politics in this behind the scenes, with China very critical and suspicious of Malaysia's suppression of data and important statements early in the affair. The excitement about the discovery of the flaperon is simply because it proves the aircra

(Written on 08/01/2015)(Permalink)

There is no meed for BEA or ATSB to say anything:: Malaysia Airlines told the Malaysian government on Friday the wreckage is definitely from a Boeing 777, citing an identification number. "This could be the convincing evidence that MH370 went down in the Indian Ocean," said Malaysia's deputy transport minister Abdul Aziz Kaprawi.

(Written on 08/01/2015)(Permalink)

I am surprised you are still peddling the idea that the flaperon could be from the Ethiopian plane. The first entry on this thread identified the part as from the starboard wing of a 777. Since then the Malaysian authorities have confirmed it's a 777 part and as far as they're concerned it's from their aircraft. I see you are also an expert on ocean currents. The UK Hydrographic Office is right now undertaking a study you say is impossible - retro calculating drift in the Indian Ocean. Personally, I don't see where it will help. The 20% chance comes from the fact that $78 million has been spent and found nothing. The budget runs out at $90 million. I'm com pletely au fait with the Inmarsat theory and calculations. They have their sceptics. The real scancal is that China, which had more nationals on the plane than any other country (Australia had 6) has contributed nothing to the search cost, leaving Malaysia and Australia to pay for it.

(Written on 08/01/2015)(Permalink)

Martin, I'm sorry to say that none of those things warrants the ridiculously expensive search which has only a 20% chance of success and cannot answer the main questions even if it does. Maintenance and aircraft defects do not come into this. The aircraft was taken off course and its communications disabled by human intervention. Personally I have no time for the sentimentality of this "saying goodbye" business, but in this case do you seriously suggest families going to an unmarked patch of desolate ocean many thousands of miles from land, on the basis that their loved ones ended up on the seabed 7000 metres down?

(Written on 07/31/2015)(Permalink)

Discovery of this flaperon establishes only one thing - that MH370 finished in the Indian Ocean. It tells us nothing about where or why. Washing up on Reunion covered in barnacles is consistent with the anti-clockwise movement of the South Equatorial Current and 16 months is about the right time for it to have drifted. The big question is: Is the underwater search over a vast area a waste of money? Even if the fuselage is found, even if the FDR and CVR are found, what will they tell us? Even if they confirm the plane was deliberately flown on that course until it ran out of fuel, what will it tell us about why? Many of us in Australia believes that the $60 million spent so far is a waste of money, and now the search area is to be extended. This is nothing more than aviation tragics using taxpayers money to play with underwater toys for no good purpose.

(Written on 07/30/2015)(Permalink)