[Peetwo]

MH370 & truth prevailing - maybe??

Malaysia has finally answered a request to release the unredacted satellite logs for #MH370. Details here.
http://mh370.radiantphysics.com/ 

I imagine that time and some pretty thorough analysis will determine whether the INMARSAT data forwarded to Victor Ianello and the IG crew is genuine and/or helpful or not?

Via Victor's blog:

The Unredacted Inmarsat Satellite Data for MH370
by Victor Iannello
POSTED: MONDAY, 6/12/2017

Inmarsat’s Mark Dickinson holding the satellite data in an interview with CNN

Since we first learned of its existence, we’ve been asking for the complete record of the communications data between MH370 and Inmarsat’s satellite network. In May 2014, Malaysia released satellite data logs, but they were incomplete: fields of data were missing, and only a small number of data records from before the flight was made available. When pressed for the complete logs, Inmarsat and Malaysia both claimed the data had to be released by the other.

We now have what we believe is the complete record of communications between airframe 9M-MRO and the Inmarsat satellite network, from March 7, 2014, at 00:51 UTC, until March 8, 2014, at 01:16 UTC. This time period includes the previous flight from Beijing to Kuala Lumpur.

The satellite data was shared with me by a relative of a Chinese passenger on MH370. The data was given to him by Malaysia Airlines with the following email text:

Please find attached the Inmarsat data, for your info. Please note that these are raw data as you have requested. The authorities agree to release the data, on condition that:

1. We will not translate the data into any meaningful information as the data is proprietary to Inmarsat. The Malaysian Investigation team does not have any experts to translate these data into any meaningful information.
   
2. We will not translate the data into any other language, including Mandarin.
   
3. These data are complete and obtained from Inmarsat. Please do not manipulate the data.
   

[size=undefined]
I know, by having these data, you will have more questions, but I have to say that we are providing these data to satisfy your request, but we cannot answer any questions on the data because we too, cannot understand it. Only the experts from Inmarsat can.
 Hope you understand.
 Thank you

I suspect the data will confirm some assumptions, and will raise even more questions. I hope the data can help us learn more about the disappearance.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 12th, 2017 at 10:59 am and is filed under Aviation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.[/size]

  
And Mike Exner wasted no time in getting down to business   :

First look at the complete Inmarsat Logs

Michael Exner

June 12, 2017

I have been looking at the new (complete) Inmarsat Log File. So far, I have not discovered anything to suggest that the May 2014 redacted log file had any material errors or changes. As VI noted, the new data covers the previous flight, and it includes all the columns. Having the receive power and C/N0 data for both flights is especially helpful.

I note the following:

1. All MH370 transmissions were via the IOR s/c (as previously reported).

2. All MH370 transmissions were via the High Gain Antenna (as previously reported).

3. There were no CRC errors on any transmission (thus, 0 or low BER).

4. The value of C/N0 at 18:25:27 was 15 dB lower than nominal. All the other MH370 C/N0 values were nominal or close to nominal, including the one 7 seconds later.

5. A 15 dB low C/N0 anomaly occurred 3 times during the previous flight.

6. The C/N0 value at 00:19:29 was 6 dB lower than nominal, but so were 3 other transmissions between 16:00 and 16:07 while MH370 was on the ground.

7. Of the 4 low C/N0 anomalous values, 3 happened on the previous flight and 1 happened during MH370. They occurred on both R600 and R1200 channels, and via both the IOR and POR s/c.

8. In all cases of low C/N0, the receive power (70 MHz IF power in FDMA channel) was nominal. That means the demods detected higher than normal noise, not low signal strength. This could be due to real "noise" (like, adjacent channel interference, adjacent satellite co-channel interference, etc.). However, it could also be due to CU demod measurement error. Such estimate errors should be expected to occur rarely, as observed here.

Thus, there is nothing to suggest these low C/N0 transmissions were caused by aircraft maneuvering or unusual attitudes. In all four cases of a 15 dB low C/N0 between March 7 at 01:00 and March 8 at 02:00, the values of C/N0 were nominal a few seconds before and after, so it does not appear to be due to anything unusual happening at 18:25:27 or 00:19:29.

One can only hope that the worm has finally turned and the disinfo crew has lost interest and knocked off...


MTF...P2

Ps Also for those interested PT's take on this latest development:

Missing MH370 satellite data released, doesn't contain surprises

Shared by
Ben Sandilands
[/url]

• Buffer
  
• Google+
  
• LinkedIn
  
• Email
  

A key element in some conspiracy theories about the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 can be dismissed following the release of all of the data generated between the Boeing 777 and an...

[url=https://twitter.com/PlaneTalking]

[Gobbledock]

Excuse my ignorance but why would the Malaysians now decide to play ball?
Is there something bigger taking place behind the scenes? It would have to be something big enough to concern them.

Maybe it's my suspicious nature, but is it possible that the INMARSAT data they have released is a load of hogwash? Manipulated information carefully hacked and molested?
If you can hack a computer and leave a trail behind that makes it look like the Russians did it then are we absolutely certain the Malaysian data release is real data and not pony pooh? Again, I'm just asking the question as it seems real odd that a country known for its shonkiness and for not cooperating during the investigation would now just release the data!

Perhaps we should ask Julie 'stick insect' Bishop? She seems pretty chummy with the Malaysians.

Just sayin......

[ventus45]

Well Gobbles old mate, you are not alone.

Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?

It is interesting, very interesting, that VictorI, was at first excited about the "metta data" in the Excel file, seeming to indicate that it was made by Inmarsat only a few hours after the news of MH370's demise hit London. BrockM questioned his confidence, and VictorI demoured a little. Not long after, MikeE stated that he had it from an "official channel" that it was the same file that the Malysians had given the ATSB in late March 2014 (and that raises it's own set of questions for Dolan, Foley, Hood, and a heap of others !).

But now, an air of caution ?

VictorI has "redacted" his earlier "confidence" in that metta data, and is conducting "further enquiries".

Leave those thoughts "hanging" for a moment.

Moving on to the covering "Release Note", ie, the e-mail that provided the file:-

"The authorities (begs the question, WHICH so called "authorities", within DAS, within MAS, within the JIT ?) agree to release the data (WHY, why now ? On the run up to, the near "eve" of the "promised" FINAL Report (the Malaysians did affirm that it WAS being "worked on" and would be published in the second half of this year)), on condition (who are "THEY" trying to kid ?)that:

  1. We will not translate the data into any meaningful information as:
     (a) the data is "proprietary" (bollocks) to Inmarsat.
     (b) The Malaysian Investigation team does not have any experts (If "THEY" had any "genuine" intention to understsnd the data, "THEY have had "more than enough time", three and a half years, to either learn (you can get a Satelite Enginnering degree in that time, easy, shorter if you are a real smart k...) or "hire in" suitable people) to translate these data into any meaningful information. (Which amounts to a blatant "we don't want to either.)
  2. We "will not" translate the data into any other language, including Mandarin. (Hardly surprising, "THEY" haven't been seriously, let alone genuinely interested from "day one" !)
  3. (a) These data are complete and obtained from Inmarsat.
     (b) Please do not manipulate the data.

Gobbles mate, you really have to laugh at point 3. Beaker must have taught them well.

It is worth remembering, that INMARSAT, Mark Dickinson in particular, was quite specific early on, that the data belonged to SITA, and NOT MAS. He also said that the data had "initially" only been given by Inmarsat to the AAIB and SITA, and another "industry player" to check and verify their analysis. He never said who that was, but it is not hard to figure that out.  See below.

He also said that the AAIB had quickly passed it on to the Malaysians, with an explanation of it's meaning and the implications for the search.

Later, when Malaysia rejected the data, and persisted in fumbling around in the South China Sea, and then the Straits of Malacca, and beyond north west, and then, with the Farcical Lido "event", by day 9, and with the Chinese at that stage ready to "spit the dummy", the "yanks" entered the frey, with White House Press Secretary Jay Carny's now imfamous anouncement "a new search area might be opening up in the SIO", complete with the NYT suddenly publishing the - now long forgotten by most - two tracks - into the SIO.

Why did he, and why did he then, specifically, on day 9 ?

No matter. All of a sudden it was "scramble" for RAAF Pearce, and the show switched hemispheres.

Now a suspicious mind, might just wonder a little, about the yanks and their motives.  Bear in mind that if you delve into the history of the design of 3F-1, by whom, when, where and (initially) why, it is clear that it was a "follow on" part of the "initial system" (MARISAT) which was sold off (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inmarsat) to Inmarsat prior to 3F-1 (which was commisioned by Inmarsat).

The hardware specs for the 3F-1 satellite are:
Satellite Name: Inmarsat-3F1 (Inmarsat 3 F1, I3F1, IOR)
Status: active
Position: 64° E (64.5° E)
NORAD: 23839
Cospar number: 1996-020A
Operator: Inmarsat plc
Launch date: 2-Apr-1996
Launch site: Cape Canaveral
Launch vehicle: Atlas 2A (Atlas IIA)
Launch mass (kg): 2068
Dry mass (kg): 827
Manufacturer: Lockheed Martin
Model (bus): AS-4000

It doesn't take a genious to figure out who knows all about the hardware, and the firmware, and software, that runs it, now does it.

It also doesn't take a genious to figure out who (besides the operator - Inmarsat) would have the knowledge to decode the data, and that was not the NTSB. The NTSB needed "expert help" to produce their "two tracks", and it took some doing, it took some time, probably too much time. Finally, after an agonising 9 days, "Jay" finally gets the nod that "the data is good",and he hops up on the podium, and gleefully "drives" the search into the SIO.

At the same time approximately, Inmarsat’s Mark Dickinson went to Malaysia to brief the Annex 13 "team".

So, did he brief them on the basis of the "initial raw day one data", or was he briefing them on a possibly "processed", (supposedly by the NTSB), data set ?

It is also interesting that Jay did not last too long in the job.  Publickly farwelled by Obama himself - for "personal reasons", or so we are told. Obama went to see Najib too, not a long time after.  First time a President had ever been to Malaysia.  Just thinking aloud.

Gobbles old fella, it comes back to provenance.

Provenance M'lud, provenance, where for-art thie provenance, M'lud ?

It will be interesting to see what VictorI says tomorrow.

It IS tomorrow - 5:45am - bugger - time for bed !!

Edited to add this - 7 1/2 hours later - after a good sleep.

"During the Night" ..... Mike Exner (Ne ALSM on VictotI's blog), posted the following:



(REF:=  Victor's Blog:  http://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2017/06/...mment-4300 )

Micke Exner posted this BFO comparison on twitter a couple of hours ago.



And now, from Dr. Bobby Ulich‏ @DrBobbyUlich on Twitter



Red  circles are 12:50 POR Log-on  which occurred about 30 seconds later in thermal transient than 18:25 log-on. Warmer at 12:50 than 18:25.

MikeE - ALSM.GIF Size: 34.52 KB  Downloads: 153

New BFOs.jpg Size: 155.71 KB  Downloads: 151

DCQKcXsWAAMSWbT.png Size: 324.25 KB  Downloads: 149

[Pixie P]

Excellent summary of all the twists & turns in the hours, days, weeks & months following the loss of MH370.
My head is still spinning as I attempt to digest it all.. wading through the murkiness that seems to be a constant companion of almost every aspect of this case.
The 'experts' succeeded in orchestrating both a confused and futile search, based on some mysteriously produced tracks into the SIO.
Just who was responsible and WHAT exactly are they responsible for??
As my head continues to spin wildly, I take comfort in this thought:
You can fool almost everybody for a short time, but you can't fool anybody for ever.
Well.. unless you use a powerful sedative with hypnotic side-effects.☺

[Peetwo]

'That Man' on MH370 O&O'd Final Report -

Via the Oz:

Victim families angered at further delay to MH370 search report

A modified Boeing 777 flaperon tested in waters near Hobart to help determine the final resting place of MH370.

Ean Higgins
The Australian
12:00AM June 30, 2017

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has conceded it could be another three months before it releases its report on its failed search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, further angering families of the 239 victims.

The ATSB had indicated to family members that the report on the $200 million underwater hunt would be finished and published about now.

But ATSB spokesman Daniel O’Malley has now told The Australian, “we anticipate that the report will be released in the third quarter of this year”, meaning it could be published as late as the end of September.

The two-year search of 120,000sq km of ocean, funded by Australia, China and Malaysia but directed by the ATSB, ended in January without finding a trace of the aircraft.
The ATSB came under considerable scrutiny from scientists who had suggested relatively early on that drift modelling of debris from the aircraft found on the other side of the Indian Ocean indicated it came down further north than the area searched.

Some senior airline pilots and air crash investigators claim the ATSB’s strategy was flawed from the start because it assumed the Boeing 777 had crashed in a pilotless “death dive” rather than being flown to the end and outside the search area by a rogue pilot.

MH370 disappeared on March 8, 2014 on a scheduled flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Primary radar and automatic satellite tracking data indicate it doubled back over Malaysia 40 minutes in, before turning south on a long track to the southern Indian Ocean.

There is an expectation that the report on the search could be used by the ATSB to advance its tacit campaign to have the three governments relaunch the survey in a new 25,000sq km area north of the old one.

Queensland’s Danica Weeks, who lost her husband Paul on MH370, said the continuing delay in the ATSB’s formulation of its report was increasing the angst of the families.

“This is our lives they are playing with. We think of loved ones 24/7 and how this could happen; we hang on any, every information that surrounds MH370 and always will until the answers are forthcoming,” Ms Weeks told The Australian.

“If the ATSB had crossed their ‘t’s’ and dotted their ‘i’s’ on the search, why would it take nine months to produce a report? It’s inconceivable.”

Despite the plea from Ms Weeks, Mr O’Malley would not provide a clearer timeline for the release of the report, or explain why it had been delayed.

The delay comes amid continuing outrage among victims’ families at the refusal of the bureau’s chief commissioner, Greg Hood, to grant a Freedom of Information request from The Australian to release assessments of its “death dive” theory by a panel of international experts looking at the satellite data.

The lack of resolution on MH370 also sparked debate about the need for recorders that could be more readily found after crashes. Airbus has said it will equip its aircraft with new cockpit voice recorders and flight data recorders able to record up to 25 hours of information. One will “be deployed automatically in case of significant structural deformation or ... submersion”.

Why are people surprised that the Malaysians, with the assistance of top-cover Muppet Hoody, O&O-ing the MH370 ICAO Annex 13 Final Report (Refer PelAir MKII here: PelAir re-re update ) -


MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

The Aussie that might actually find MH370 -

By Marnie O'Neill , via News.com.au:

Shipwreck hunter David Mearns leads push for new MH370 search
July 28, 20174:46pm

• Video
  
  

A new MH370 search is being led by the man who found the HMAS Sydney, Shipwreck hunter David Mearns. Courtesy: Studio 10

• July 28th 2017
  
• 7 hours ago
  

[img=0x0]https://i1.wp.com/pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/news/content/v2/7d663854d75c841f0313c5697cfafc1c?t_product=newscomau&t_template=../video/player[/img]

Marine scientist, oceanographer and shipwreck hunter David Mearns was awarded an honorary Order of Australia after finding WWII ship HMAS Sydney off the coast of Western Australia.


Marnie O’Neill[img=0x0]https://i1.wp.com/pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/86e4cdf929f450a650d886f1315cb16f?t_product=tcog&t_template=s3/ncatemp/desktop/includes/content-2/authorBlockSingle[/img]

HE found the wreckage of the HMAS Sydney in the Indian Ocean in 2008 — almost 70 years after it sunk in a clash with the German cruiser Kormoran, killing all 645 on board.

Now marine scientist and oceanographer hunter David Mearns is turning his attention to an even more ambitious project — solving what is arguably the world’s greatest aviation mystery.

Mearns revealed he’s in talks with relatives of those on board missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 about a new, privately funded search for the plane, which vanished in 2014 with 239 people on board, including six Australians.

The famed shipwreck hunter said it was “inexcusable for the authorities not to do be able to continue to do something” to find the plane given that it was still not known how and why it crashed.

“I wasn’t involved (in the search for MH370) unfortunately when that happened and the government called for my assistance as I was on another project and I couldn’t respond,” Mearns said in an interview with Studio 10 this morning.

“But since the search has been suspended — which I think is basically an unacceptable thing to have happened — I’ve been working with the families and some experts to see if we could actually mount a privately funded search for the plane.

“It’s inexcusable that the plane isn’t located because it can be found — they just have to look in the right place. It can be found. The technology is there to find it, we just need to be able to look in the right place and they’re narrowing down the areas.

“The next search area would be smaller than what’s been done. Everybody should be concerned about this because until that plane is found and we recover the blackboxes, we don’t know what happened.


Lost for 66 years, WWII light cruiser HMAS Sydney was found in 67 hours by marine scientist and oceanographer David Mearns in 2008. Picture: The Finding Sydney Foundation


David Mearns at the memorial to HMAS Sydney at Mount Scott in Geraldton, Western Australia.

“We all rely on the safe operation of global airlines global airlines and this is vitally important.”

A multi-million dollar hunt for the Boeing 777 was called off in January after crews painstakingly combed a 120,000 square km search area in the southern Indian Ocean off Western Australia for three frustrating years and found nothing.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), which led the operation, said it would not resume the search unless it received credible evidence about its location.

As the man who found “the unfindable shipwreck”, HMAS Sydney, as well as the lost German raider that sunk it in 1941, Mearns believes he’s the right person to lead a fresh search for MH370.

He said it was clear authorities had been searching the wrong area “because they haven’t found it”.

“When they look in the right place they will find it, but it can be done. I’m here to tell people it can be done,” he said.

“(It was) the same way with (HMAS) Sydney. People said it was ‘the unfindable shipwreck’. It wasn’t a needle in a haystack because they didn’t even know where the haystack was but in the end I found the Kormoran in 64 hours and the Sydney in 67 hours.

“We basically found both shipwrecks in one weekend by looking in the right place with the right technology. And that’s the other key thing, technology has moved on and so now we can search much faster than before.”

“There’s an area that can be searched in an efficient way and I believe that we don’t just owe it to the families but, internationally, it’s an important thing to do.

“This is the first time a major aircraft like this has been lost without any resolution or any lessons learned about why it crashed and that is not only unacceptable, it’s inexcusable for the authorities not to do be able to continue to do something.”


Mearns said Australian authorities have been targeting the wrong search area in the hunt for MH370


The barnacle-encrusted laperon from MH370 that washed up on La Reunion.

MH370 disappeared en route from Beijing to Kuala Lumpur on March 8, 2014 with 239 crew and passengers on board.

It is believed to have deviated sharply from its course for unknown reasons and then flown south for several hours before ultimately crashing in the southern Indian Ocean off the coast of Western Australian.

As authorities conducted a futile three-year search of the seabed, dozens of pieces of wreckage, including a barnacle encrusted flaperon and cabin fragments, washed up on beaches throughout the Indian Ocean, from Reunion to Madagascar and even South Africa.

However, the fuselage and black boxes have never been found.

Malaysia Airlines CEO Peter Bellow has also expression optimism in finding the plane.

“(Given) the advances in scientific research around the location where the aircraft may have gone down ... I personally would be very surprised if in the next three or four years, we don’t get a breakthrough. I think that’s the timescale we’re looking at,” he told CNBC on Wednesday.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Will Mearns & OI get the KL nod?

Could be just another spin'n'bulldust story but this AM the following MH370 scuttlebutt was doing the MSM rounds...

From the AAP, via the Oz:

MH370 search to ‘resume’

6:38am

Malaysia to announce that US company Ocean Infinity will resume the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight 370.

The West Australian reports an offer by US company Ocean Infinity is believed to be favoured by the Malaysian government after a two-year search failed to find any wreckage.

The plane disappeared on March 8, 2014, on the way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, with 239 people on board, and the Australian-led search for the aircraft was suspended in January.

Ocean Infinity’s HUGIN autonomous underwater vehicles are capable of operating at depths of 6000m.

Last month, the company offered to take the financial risk of a renewed search for MH370.

“The terms of the offer are confidential, but I can ... confirm that Ocean Infinity have offered to take on the economic risk of a renewed search,” company spokesman Mark Antelme said.

“We’re in a constructive ­dialogue with the relevant authorities and are hopeful that the offer will be accepted.’’

Voice370, a support group for families of the 239 people on board, said under the terms of the offer made in April, Ocean Infinity “would like to be paid a reward if and only if it finds the main debris field”.

AAP

& via news.com.au this afternoon:

Malaysia is set to resume the search for missing aircraft MH370
MALAYSIA says it is in no rush to kickstart the abandoned search for MH370 despite three companies offering to continue to look for the missing plane.

Staff writers, AAP, Reuters
News Corp Australia NetworkOctober 17, 2017 3:49pm


Authorities say they now have a better understanding of where the plane of missing flight MH370 may be.
[img=0x0]https://i1.wp.com/pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/news/content/v2/2f4a1ac9afbee545dfd72870657970e5?t_product=newscomau&t_template=../video/player[/img]

Malaysia is set to resume the search for MH370. Picture: AFPSource:AFP

THREE companies have offered to continue the abandoned search for MH370, but Malaysia says no decision has been made on whether they will be given the go ahead.

The West Australian reports an offer by US company Ocean Infinity is believed to be favoured by the Malaysian government after a two-year search failed to find any wreckage.

The plane disappeared on March 8, 2014, on the way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, with 239 people on board, and the Australian-led search for the aircraft was suspended in January.

Last month the company offered to take up the search.


HMAS searches for MH370 in the Indian Ocean in 2014. Picture: AFPSource:AFP

“The terms of the offer are confidential, but I can ... confirm that Ocean Infinity have offered to take on the economic risk of a renewed search,” company spokesman Mark Antelme said.

“We’re in a constructive ­dialogue with the relevant authorities and are hopeful that the offer will be accepted.’’

Voice370, a support group for families of the 239 people on board, said under the terms of the offer made in April, Ocean Infinity “would like to be paid a reward if and only if it finds the main debris field”.

Malaysian Transport Minister Liow Tiong Lai said proposals were received from U.S.-based seabed exploration firm Ocean Infinity, Dutch firm Fugro and an unidentified Malaysian company.

“We won’t be deciding anything now on whether we are embarking on a new search or not,” Liow told reporters on the sidelines of an event in Kuala Lumpur.

“We have to discuss with the companies. It will take some time as it’s some detailed discussions,” he said.

Earlier this month the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) published its final 440-page report into the search, which spanned 1046 days from the time the Malaysia Airlines plane disappeared on March 8, 2014, until it was suspended in January.

“We ... deeply regret that we have not been able to locate the aircraft, nor those 239 souls on board that remain missing,” the report said.

The search for MH370 was the largest of its type in aviation history, covering several million square kilometres of the ocean’s surface and below.

It came at a cost of $200 million, and involved Australian, Chinese and Malaysian authorities.

“Despite the extraordinary efforts of hundreds of people involved in the search from around the world, the aircraft has not been located,” the report said.

ATSB chief commissioner Greg Hood described the search as “an unprecedented endeavour” but said the situation remained “a great tragedy”.


The most likely resting place of MH370. Picture: GoogleSource:Supplied

“We wish that we could have brought complete closure to the bereaved,” he said.

“I hope, however, that they can take some solace in the fact that we did all we could do to find answers. Governments from around the world contributed to the search, with extraordinary expertise committed to the task.”

The ATSB acknowledged that it was “almost inconceivable and certainly societally unacceptable”, in an era where 10 million passengers fly daily, for a large commercial aircraft to still be missing.

“And for the world to know with certainty what became of the aircraft and those on board,” the report read.

At least 20 reported remnants of the plane, including a flaperon, have washed up on the shores of Madagascar and Reunion Island off the African coast since it disappeared.

MORE: How MH370 crash unfolded


Visiting aviation and air safety experts examine the right outboard main wing flap from MH370 at the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) in Canberra last year.Source:News Corp Australia

MH370 VIRTUALLY PINPOINTED

In August it was claimed new evidence had virtually pinpointed the location of MH370 — 1258 days since it disappeared.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau released an explosive report that effectively narrowed the search zone for the missing plane down to an area half the size of Melbourne.

The report placed the most likely location of the aircraft “with unprecedented precision and certainty” at 35.6°S, 92.8°E — in between Western Australia and Madagascar.

ATSB chief Greg Hood said he would have liked to see the search continue but admitted it would require more conclusive evidence to convince the government.

“Clearly we must be cautious. These objects have not been definitely identified as MH370 debris,” Mr Hood said.

Malaysian transport minister Dato Sri Liow Tiong said the newly defined area was not enough to go on and it was hoped debris drift modelling would help narrow the location further.

GeoScience Australia has been examining four satellite images of objects floating on the southern Indian Ocean taken two weeks after the plane went missing in the area identified late last year as MH370’s likely resting spot.

They found 12 objects in those images that they deemed man-made and 28 that they regard as possibly man-made.

The images were taken by a French Military satellite in late March 2014 but were discarded by authorities. The ATSB was not involved in the search at that time.

The drift modelling initially released late last year identified an area of 25,000sq km just outside the original search area.

The report combined a refinement of that drift modelling as well as the discarded satellite images to narrow the likely search zone down to an area of just 5000sq km.

As part of the latest report, all satellite imagery of the relevant new area came up for review.

Their location near the “7th arc” of the search zone makes them impossible to ignore, the report states.

The new plot is based on comprehensive drift modelling and testing — including the release of a real Boeing 777 flaperon to test the floating characteristics of the one belonging to MH370 recovered off the coast of Africa.

“We measured its drift characteristics after modifying it to match the damaged one retrieved from Ile de la Reunion,” the report said.

“This work did not change our estimate of the most likely location of the impact — it just increased confidence in the modelling by explaining more easily the 29 July 2015 Ile de la Reunion flaperon discovery.”

The researchers combined ocean current modelling with the satellite images, assessing the motion of wind and water in the Indian Ocean between March 8 and 24.

They came up with a ‘bracket’ of locations based on these tested drift patterns, naming them West 1, West 2, East 1 and East 2. These locations straddle the arc from which MH370’s transmitters were last detected.

Researchers “consider the location in East1 to be the more likely” because it is the only one indicated by both drift models, the report reads.

It goes on to add that it cannot rule out all possible man-made debris came from the same impact location on March 8.


MH370 victim Paul Weeks with his wife Danica.Source:News Corp Australia

MH370 SEARCH SUSPENDED

After nearly three years, the hunt for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 ended in futility and frustration, as crews completed their deep-sea search of a desolate stretch of the Indian Ocean without finding a trace of the plane.

The Joint Agency Coordination Center in Australia, which helped lead the hunt for the Boeing 777 in remote waters west of Australia, said the search had officially been suspended after crews finished their fruitless sweep of the 120,000-square kilometre search zone.


A relative of missing Chinese passengers aboard MH370 before a meeting in Beijing in January, a day after authorities announced the end of search operations for the aircraft. Picture: AFPSource:AFP


Amanda Lawton and Jeanette Maguire at the Memorial service for families of MH370 victims at St John's Cathedral in March. Picture: Jamie HansonSource:News Corp Australia

“Despite every effort using the best science available, cutting-edge technology, as well as modelling and advice from highly skilled professionals who are the best in their field, unfortunately, the search has not been able to locate the aircraft,” the agency said in a statement, which was a joint communique between the transport ministers of Malaysia, Australia and China.

“Accordingly, the underwater search for MH370 has been suspended. The decision to suspend the underwater search has not been taken lightly nor without sadness.”

Officials investigating the plane’s disappearance have recommended search crews head north to a new area identified in a recent analysis as a possible crash site.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Update: Apparently the answer is yes -


Via the ABC news:

MH370: Malaysia decides on US company Ocean Infinity to resume search for missing aircraft
By South-East Asia correspondent Adam Harvey
Updated about an hour ago
[b]PHOTO:[/b] The initial search of the ocean floor was suspended in January. (Reuters: Andrew Winning, file)
[b]RELATED STORY:[/b] Malaysia considers authorising new search for MH370
[b]RELATED STORY:[/b] MH370 search narrows further to area along 'the seventh arc'
[b]MAP: [/b]Malaysia

The Malaysian Government has confirmed it has chosen a company to begin a new search for MH370 and is now negotiating the terms of the deal.

It has notified the families of the 239 people lost aboard MH370 that it is negotiating the terms and conditions of the search with US company Ocean Infinity.

The seabed exploration company had offered to look for the missing Boeing 777 aircraft on a no-find, no-fee basis.

What we know about MH370

Mystery still surrounds the case of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 with investigators still to determine how the plane ended up in the Indian Ocean.

MH370 disappeared over the southern Indian Ocean in March 2014 while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

The initial search of the ocean floor was suspended in January after no trace of the plane was found on the ocean floor.

Advice sent today to MH370 families states that the MH370 Response team, "received several proposals from interested parties to search for MH370. This include an offer by a company known as Ocean Infinity on a No Cure No Fee basis".

"These offers have been thoroughly assessed by the team and the Governments of Australia and China have been informed of this in line with the spirit of tripartite cooperation.

"In this regard, the Government of Malaysia has given the permission for the response team to proceed negotiating the terms and conditions with Ocean Infinity."

MTF...P2

[P7_TOM]

Bloody amazing-

“Not everyone shared his optimism. That Australia helped coordinate the surface search was one thing. But that it should be in charge of the underwater phase puzzled many, including American aviation journalist and author of The Crash Detectives, Christine Negroni.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) was still tainted by its shoddy investigation into another aviation disaster in which a Pel-Air WestWind air ambulance was forced to ditch near Norfolk Island in 2009, having found itself unable to land in bad weather and with insufficient fuel to divert. The two and a half year investigation by the ATSB prompted a national scandal when a television documentary aired allegations of misconduct by the ATSB. A subsequent Senate inquiry found the ATSB’s accident report was deeply flawed and had unfairly blamed the pilot.

“It seemed to me that the Australians including the [head of the ATSB] Martin Dolan were eager to become the heroes in solving the world’s most riveting air mystery. In an interview in June 2014, Dolan told me enthusiastically that coordinating the search was ‘the challenge of a career’,” recalled Negroni.

Beset by public humiliation, did the ATSB see the MH370 mission as an opportunity for redemption? To cleanse its name and bury past shame? Possibly.

Whether it was up to the task is another matter. The man appointed to head the initial search effort was the much decorated Angus Houston, former Chief of the Australian Defence Force, who had a great reputation in the military but no previous experience of civil aviation accidents nor of underwater searches”. Florence de Changy.

Our very own, highly professional AMSA was ‘bundled’, without a beg your pardon, out of the search, to allow the ATSB (not seriously expert in maritime searches) to rule the roost. Now we see the company AMSA would, possibly, have contracted, tearing their hair out in sheer frustration; offering essentially a Lloyds open – no cure, no pay – just to get the blasted job done; and, get it done right!

No matter which way you cut it; the Australian government have (IMO) many, very many, serious questions to answer; the cost to the Australian tax payer being just one, those of the Chinese nation others. WTD were they thinking; and, why ain’t Martin Dolan pilloried?

[Peetwo]

MH370 and the Human Factor -

Finally some rational expert opinion/ thoughts amongst the plethora of dodgy MH370 hypotheticals...

Via the Borneo Post... :

Expert speaks of ‘human factor’ involved in MH370 disappearance
November 17, 2017, Friday




A man walks past a mural of missing Malaysia Airlines MH370 plane in a back-alley in Shah Alam, Malaysia (AFP file photo/MANAN VATSYAYANA)
 
NEW YORK: A top US security expert and a former FBI agent believes that the “human factor” may have been behind the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 aircraft in March 2014; the aircraft’s disappearance remains a mystery to this date despite a vigorous hunt for substantive plane’s wreckage pieces and the bodies of the passengers on board that fateful flight.

While speaking on “Cybersecurity trends and the current cyber threat landscape” on Tuesday at the New York Foreign Press Centre, Edward Stroz, the co-president of Stroz Friedberg, a management firm that specialises in security matters, including cybersecurity, highlighted the plethora of security risks in today’s rapidly-changing technology-driven environment.

Stroz, who formerly worked as an FBI agent and supervised a computer-crime fighting squad at the FBI in New York before co-founding Stroz Friedberg, said that although people enjoy the benefits of technology, risks are also replete in the realm of technology.
Citing the problem of driverless cars, he said that hackers can access the computer system of a car remotely and take control of it.  “So they could cause the car to brake, they could cause the car to steer to the right or steer to the left, and that scares a lot of people,” he said.

Though there were “very smart engineers” making such cars, that did not necessarily mean they know everything about how an adversary would compromise it, and “so our firm is often turned to, for example, by other companies when they roll out applications for your phone; they ask us to test it.  And I think we have to decide how much risk do we want to take in this area”.

Stroz recalled that in the case of jet airliners and planes, pilots used to fly by much more pneumatic and sort of mechanical connections, and then decades ago they went to “what we call fly by wire which the pilots did not like, but ultimately, with the testing and the rigour, nobody’s even talking about this anymore”.

Asked if he had a theory to explain the disappearance of the MH 370 flight aircraft, Stroz told Bernama that his example about the jetliner was not about manipulation but that there was a time when people were concerned about manipulation.

“If they did not have a mechanical connection between the control surface and the control.  If it was not just a wire sending an electronic impulse, some pilots were a little concerned about, hey, is this going to work the way it’s supposed to? So my point was about vulnerability,” he said.

The missing aircraft, which was carrying 239 passengers and crew, vanished on March 8, 2014.

Despite experts never having found the body of any of its passengers, the hunt for the MH370 was officially suspended on January 17, 2017 by officials in Australia.

Only 33 pieces of wreckage were found during the hunt, with investigators searching the deep sea areas near the suspected crash site in the Indian Ocean. The plane’s disappearance fuelled a number of conspiracy theories.

“I only know what I read in the newspaper about the example (MH370 flight aircraft) that you gave, so I don’t have a theory associated with that.  I would put one point in here:  Whether we’re talking about driverless cars or airliners – it’s not just the risk from the technology; it’s the risk from the way the technology is being used.

“So the human factor, what we call the insider risk, the person who is authorised to fly the plane – and I’m not making any particular point about the Malaysian episode, but we – since we don’t know, we just don’t know.  And there have been other episodes where we know that the human factor was the one that caused things to go wrong, that we have to be not just so focused on technology, but the human beings who are running the technology,” he explained.

Stroz said that it was also a question of checks and balances, reminding that this was a reason why there are two seats in the cockpit of an airplane.

“And if one is unoccupied, there are certain protocols to follow to get away from a single point of dependency, not just because there could be somebody doing something intentionally, but what if one person is at the controls and they suffer a heart attack or something were to occur?  – and this is how we practice security.

“If there is a single point of dependency, is there something we can do about that? Sometimes there is; but it’s too expensive; and sometimes you just can’t get away from it.  But that type of critical analysis is really what has to occur,” he contended. – Bernama

 
&.. via News Corp:

The lawyers of MH370 victims fear documents critical to the investigation will be destroyed

Paul Toohey, News Corp Australia Network
November 18, 2017 10:00pm


LAWYERS acting for families of passengers on Malaysia Airlines MH370 are still fighting for critical documents, including any psychiatric records of the pilots, but fear Malaysian agencies could conceal or destroy them as time drags on.

Malaysian lawyers say some documents were provided following an earlier court order but are pressing for more, including raw flight data, the cargo manifest and internal reports.

“We’re at the point where discovery of documents, which is of fundamental importance, hasn’t been completed,” said Ganesan Nethi of the Malaysian law firm Tommy Thomas, which will soon launch a new action.

A distraught relative of missing passengers aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 that disappeared on March 8, 2014. Lawyers are concerned critical documents may be destroyed. Picture: AFP/Fred Dufour

“We have a couple of documents’ worth of boxes, but we think there are more, for about 25 specific categories — everything from pilot psychiatric records to aircraft maintenance records, which we think we should have. So, we are waiting.”

The firm was instructed to commence proceedings in Kuala Lumpur by Miami-based firm Podhurst Orseck, representing 76 relatives of 27 of the 239 people who disappeared on the March 8, 2014 flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Most families of the six Australians who went missing have settled with Malaysia Airlines but Danica Weeks, whose husband Paul was on the flight as he headed to a new job in Mongolia, is continuing with her own actions against Boeing and Malaysia Airlines.

Danica Weeks with her two children Jack and Lincoln. Danica's husband Paul Weeks disappeared on MH370 nearly three years ago. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen/The Australian

“I’ve always believed it was a technical fault,” Ms Weeks said on Friday, which would have been the 10th anniversary of her marriage to Paul, father to her two sons. “They flew supposedly into the Southern Ocean — and I say ‘supposedly’ because they haven’t found it.

“The documents should just be made available. We shouldn’t be jumping through hoops. Hand them over. What have they got to hide?
“I’m bemused why these simple documents aren’t already available. They’ve got to be pushed to show us everything.”

The Malaysian suit names five entities: Malaysia Airlines; Malaysia Airlines Berhad (the corporately identical successor to Malaysia Airlines); the Department of Civil Aviation; the Royal Malaysian air force and the Malaysian government.

This map shows the indicative priority search area for MH370 in purple. Picture: Supplied

A document being prepared for the new discovery case states: “The Plaintiffs have reason to believe that MAS, DCA, RMAF and GoM may dispose of, conceal or destroy documents which relate to the subject matter of this suit.”

Mr Nethi said documents received from the previous court order had revealed little.

“At this point in time I have not seen any smoking gun,” he said. “But I will caveat that by saying some of these are highly technical. As soon as we get them all, we will hand them over to experts and get them to tell us what they think.”

The Malaysian suit accuses Malaysian air-traffic control of negligence for failing to follow progress of the plane or immediately issue search protocols; the air force for failing under the Chicago Convention to notify civilian authorities of the plane’s unusual tracking; and the Malaysian government as the parent of both entities.

A shot taken from vision provided by 60 Minutes during their interview with Danica Weeks, whose husband Paul was on-board MH370. Picture: 60 Minutes

It further names Malaysia Airlines and its successor.

“It’s quite simple, it’s their airplane,” said Mr Nethi. “The Montreal Convention imposes a duty on Malaysia Airlines to take care of the airline, to operate it properly, and if anything goes wrong, the burden of proof falls on Malaysia Airlines to explain or show that the plane was lost due to the fault of someone else, a third party.

“If they cannot discharge that burden of proof in court, they are liable for all damages suffered.”

The related American action further targets Boeing, the insurer Allianz and Malaysia Airlines. It argues that there is no evidence of terrorism and says the captain, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, had a faultless disciplinary record.
High Court of Malaya document with statement from families fearing the destruction of documents of MH370 evidence. Picture: Supplied

The action is in part for damages against Boeing “based on the malfunction of a defective product, namely a Boeing 777-2H6ER airplane”.


Lawyers acting for Boeing, Allianz and Malaysia Airlines argue that the US proceedings should cease and the case be shifted to Malaysia. The US court is yet to rule on that application.

Texas-based seabed explorer Ocean Infinity is expected to sign a “no win, no fee” contract with the Malaysian government before year’s end, which would allow it to fine-comb areas of interest identified since the original search.
Originally published as The cover-up MH370 families fear

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Possible MH370 debris pics overlooked -

Courtesy the Times:

‘Missing flight’s debris spotted by The Times’
Bernard Lagan, Sydney
December 4 2017, 12:01am, The Times


A New Zealand air force patrol aircraft took the picture of what could be wreckage from the plane - TONY CHENG

Experts monitoring the search for the Malaysia Airlines jet that went missing in the Indian Ocean nearly four years ago have suggested that pictures first published in The Times three weeks after it disappeared showed wreckage from the lost plane.

The significance of the images may have been missed by Australian search organisers who failed to find any surface debris from Flight MH370, which disappeared in March 2014 with 239 people on board.

A group of independent scientists, engineers and aviation experts has published a paper which suggests that the debris photographed was ignored or wrongly identified by search controllers.

The Australian government has long rejected accusations that it missed or ignored potential debris in pictures taken by the 22 aircraft that searched millions of square miles of the Indian Ocean in the six weeks after the jet vanished. An international £113 million search has proved unsuccessful but the government has insisted that none of the photographed objects was “assessed” as being connected to it.



The pictures were taken over the Indian Ocean from a New Zealand air force Orion maritime patrol aircraft on March 28 and published the next day in The Times, which had a reporter on the search plane. The leader of the surveillance crew on the Orion, which included airmen seconded from the RAF, told his men he believed that they had found a debris field while searching for MH370, which had gone missing 20 days earlier on March 8, 2014. The plane was on an overnight flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing when it mysteriously turned around and headed into one of the world’s remotest areas.

Australia’s Maritime Safety Authority, which co-ordinated what became the world’s biggest aerial search, issued a press release saying that the New Zealand search aircraft and four other planes had sighted many objects on the same day. It said: “The objects cannot be verified or discounted as being from MH370 until they are relocated and recovered by ships.” Few if any of the objects floating about 1,200 miles west of Australia, were retrieved but the authorities later said they were confident that none was from the missing jet.

The claim has long puzzled members of the MH370 Independent Group, a collection of scientists who are investigating the mystery and monitoring the search. The paper’s author, Victor Iannello, an American engineer who has published several articles on the disappearance, has suggested that a large, rectangular panel photographed from the Orion and published in The Times could have come from the missing aircraft. He said that other military search plane photographs, some taken in the same place the next day, and obtained by his group’s members, included objects that resembled a suitcase, a panel with wires and a cargo package.

It was 500 days before the first confirmed piece of wreckage from the jet washed up on the island of Reunion. Several other items have washed up on islands in the eastern Indian Ocean and on the coast of Africa.
A new underwater search is likely to start in January. The Malaysian government is expected to sign a contract before Christmas with an American company that will be paid a multimillion-dollar success fee if the missing plane is found. It will search a newly identified 10,000 square mile section of the Indian Ocean floor believed by Australian government and other international experts to be MH370’s most probable crash zone.

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Update via the Oz:

Photographs of debris a possible link to MH370

A Royal New Zealand Air Force image of debris taken during the search for MH370.

• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM December 5, 2017
  
• [size=undefined]RHIAN DEUTROM
  Reporter
  Sydney
  @Rhi_lani
  Aviation experts have called on authorities involved in the ­search for the missing MH370 plane to re-examine ­photo­graphs captured by the Royal New Zealand Air Force during the initial surface search in March 2014.
  Authorities are plotting locations for the next subsea search, to be conducted by private company Ocean Infinity next year, in a bid to locate the remains of the plane, which was carrying 239 passengers and crew when it disappeared over the Indian Ocean.
  
  US-based engineer Victor Iannello, who heads a group of scientists and aviation experts known as the MH370 Independent Group, said photographs of debris in the Indian Ocean were disregarded by original search teams and “demand a new level of attention in light of the prospect for restarting the search”.
  
  Dr Iannello said proposed plans to search a 25,000sq km area of ocean were misguided, pointing instead to an area just north of the site, where items were spotted by aerial cameras in the first 21 days after impact.
  
  “Many believe that ... it is possible that debris was missed during the surface search,” Dr Iannello said.
  
  The photographed items include two debris fields containing small fragments, an object resembling a suitcase, a large metal panel, an item containing wires and a cargo package.
  
  “As far as we know, none of the objects identified in the surface search on March 29, 2014, were recovered by ship, so the relationship to MH370 remains unknown,” Dr Iannello said. “As only 21 days elapsed between the impact of MH370 and the discovery of the debris, it should be possible to backtrack the objects to March 8 to determine a potential point of impact.”
  
  A spokesman for the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, which assisted in the initial surface search for survivors, said any photographs taken from the air were referred to the expert working group for investigation.
  
  “During the search for MH370, many objects were ­observed by aircraft in the search areas,’’ the spokesman said.
  
  None of the objects recovered “were confirmed to be related to MH370”, he said.
  [/size]
  

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

MH370 final report to be released July 30th - 

Via Reuters, courtesy the ABC...  

MH370: Malaysia to hand down report on missing plane on July 30
Updated yesterday at 7:25pm


PHOTO: Mr Loke said the investigation team would brief families of those aboard on the report, before releasing it to the public. (Reuters: Edgar Su)
RELATED STORY: MH370 families win bid to have Perth memorial plans shelved
RELATED STORY: Unofficial search for MH370 continues as vessel scans a whole new area
RELATED STORY: 'We don't get to walk away': Families of missing demand answers as MH370 search ends

Malaysia will release on July 30 a long-awaited report into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, according to the Minister of Transport.

In May, Malaysia called off a privately-funded underwater search for the aircraft, which became one of the world's greatest aviation mysteries when it vanished with 239 aboard en route to Beijing from Kuala Lumpur on March 8, 2014.

The investigation team would brief families of those aboard on the report at the transport ministry on July 30, said the minister, Anthony Loke.

"Every word recorded by the investigation team will be tabled in this report," he told reporters, adding that a news conference would follow the closed-door briefing.

"We are committed to the transparency of this report," Mr Loke added.

"It will be tabled fully, without any editing, additions, or redactions."

PlayGIF2.3 MB

Settings

[size=undefined]
GIF: MH370's known flight path, the search area, and where debris has washed up[/size]

The report will be put online, with hard copies distributed to families and accredited media, among others, Mr Loke said.

"The whole international community will have access to the report."

[/url]
The data behind the MH370 search

[url=https://geoscience-au.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=038a72439bfa4d28b3dde81cc6ff3214]
The data gathered during the Australian Government-led search for flight MH370 in the southern Indian Ocean.

Voice 370, a group representing the relatives, has previously urged the Malaysian government for a review of the flight, including "any possible falsification or elimination of records related to MH370 and its maintenance".

The only confirmed traces of the Boeing 777 aircraft have been three wing fragments washed up on Indian Ocean coasts.

The search Malaysia called off on May 29, by US-based firm Ocean Infinity, covered 112,000 square kilometres in the southern Indian Ocean within three months, ending with no significant new findings.

It was the second major search after Australia, China and Malaysia ended a fruitless $200 million search across an area of 120,000 square kilometres last year.

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has said Malaysia would consider resuming the search if new clues came to light.
Reuters

 
Hmm...interesting perhaps P7 could work out the odds on whether the FR will be a work of little known facts or a complete fairytale - just saying??   
  
Also of interest on the MH370 front..   
 

NEW MH370 STUDY SUGGESTS IT’S FURTHER NORTH
By
 Geoffrey Thomas
July 21, 2018

MH370 -could it be further north?

A new study by MH370 Independent Group (IG) member Richard Godfrey has completed a new drift analysis that asks could have MH370 crashed further north than was previously searched.
The location would be off Exmouth, Western Australia and the drift analysis supports the article in Airlineratings.com on June 10.

On the website, Radiant Physics IG lead Victor Iannello says that Mr. Godfey has concluded: “that the recovered aircraft debris from the beaches of East Africa could have originated from potential impact sites as far north as 20.5°S latitude.”

“He is recommending that a new subsea search cover the part of the 7th arc between 25°S and 20°S latitudes based on his new drift analysis,” says Mr. Iannello.

“As further justification for a new search to the north, he also cites the reconstructed flight path over Cocos Island ending at 22°S that we [IG] discussed in the previous post.”

Mr. Iannello says “the new drift analysis highlights the timing and location of the discovery of four parts that were found with barnacles still attached.”

Drift analysis was done by Mr Godfrey

[size=undefined]
“These pieces are particularly important because the presence of marine life on a part suggests that the timing of the discovery was close in time to the arrival of the part.  Any marine life that is attached to a beached part either falls off or is picked off due to decomposition and scavenging, so the presence of barnacles is a good indicator that the part was recently beached.”
Mr. Iannello says that the four parts found with barnacles that were considered in the drift analysis were:

[/size]

1. The flaperon found on Reunion Island after drifting about 508 days
   
2. The fragment of the engine cowling (“Roy”) found in Mossel Bay, South Africa, after drifting about 655 days
   
3. The fragment of the cabin divider found on Rodrigues after drifting about 753 days
   
4. The outboard flap found in Pemba, Tanzania, after drifting about 835 days
   

[size=undefined]
The drift analysis put together by Mr. Godfrey uses the database of buoy positions that are tracked as part of the Global Drift Program (GDP).

“The data sets from 96 buoys were used to build a model of the Indian Ocean with a spatial resolution of 1° of latitude and longitude, and 1 day of temporal resolution. Both drogued and undrogued buoys were considered,“ says Mr Iannello.
[/size]

I gather this AM's extraordinary revelations (above) from the self-appointed Wannabe aviation expert GT (vomit -   ), nearly caused Chillit to choke on his Nutri-Grain : 

Mike Chillit‏@MikeChillit


#MH370 Amused by the GROUNDBREAKING analysis out of #IG two YEARS after the crash area was published by Daniel, Durgadoo, Trinanes. Just wait until someone tells them the plane’s location can be triangulated. Wow!! If they start working on #ARASanJuan now, results by 2030?

  


MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Latest MH370 goss - 

From the AAP, via the SBS:

US judge dismisses flight MH370 lawsuit

A relative of a victim of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 holds a candle for a silent prayer in Kuala Lumpur on 3 March 2018. Source: EPA
Australians were among the families of MH370 victims who initiated legal proceedings.
Updated 2 days ago

A US judge has dismissed nationwide litigation over the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 in which victims' families sought to hold the carrier, its insurer Allianz and Boeing liable for the still-unexplained disaster.

US District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in Washington ruled on Wednesday night that the wrongful death and product liability litigation, encompassing 40 lawsuits, did not belong in the United States.


Relative of passengers on board the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 3 March 2018.
AAP

She said the case belonged in Malaysia, which has an "overwhelming interest" in and "substantial nexus" to the March 8, 2014 disappearance of MH370, a Boeing 777 heading to Beijing from Kuala Lumpur with 239 people on board, including six Australians and a resident.

"At its core, this case is about the unexplained disappearance of a passenger plane operated by Malaysia Airlines as part of its national air carrier fleet following its departure from a Malaysian airport," Jackson wrote.

"Litigation in the United States related to the Flight MH370 disaster is inconvenient," she added.

A Royal New Zealand Air Force P3 Orion is seen through low level cloud during the search for MH370 in the southern Indian Ocean.

The 61-page decision is a setback for plaintiffs from the US, Australia, China, India and Malaysia who represented more than 100 Flight MH370 passengers, including from Japan.

The plane is believed to have crashed in the south Indian Ocean after veering far off course, but no remains or large pieces of wreckage have been found.
MH370's disappearance remains one of the world's greatest aviation mysteries.

A 495-page report from Malaysian investigators in July offered no clear answers about what happened.

The plaintiffs sued under the Montreal Convention, an international treaty governing air transportation incidents, and various US state laws.

Mary Schiavo, a lawyer for some of the plaintiffs, said in an email on Friday her clients were preparing for a June 2019 trial in Kuala Lumpur over the plane.

Malaysia Airlines, Boeing, their respective lawyers, and lawyers for other plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Source AAP - SBS

From twitter Annette Garland copied and pasted KS Narendran's response to that decision:

@NarendranKs, whose wife was on board missing #Malaysia Airlines flight #MH370, gives his reaction to the decision by a US judge to dismiss lawsuits brought by plaintiffs from the US, Australia, China, India, and Malaysia. The judge said the case should be heard in Malaysia.

 
And this was Annette Garland's excellent review article on the US Judge's decision: https://changingtimes.media/2018/11/25/j...-malaysia/

 Judge in the US says MH370 lawsuits should be dealt with in Malaysia
BY ANNETTE GARTLAND ON NOVEMBER 25, 2018

A judge in the United States has dismissed lawsuits brought by relatives of passengers on board missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, saying that the cases should be heard in Malaysia.

The multi-district litigation (MDL), which encompasses forty lawsuits, involves plaintiffs from the US, Australia, China, India, and Malaysia.

District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled in favour of the defendants, who had called for the case to be dismissed on the grounds that the US court was a forum non conveniens (an inconvenient forum) for the lawsuits.

“This court has concluded that litigation in the United States related to the flight MH370 disaster is inconvenient, and that dismissal of the MDL cases in favour of Malaysia is warranted,” the judge stated in her ruling, issued in Washington last Wednesday (November 21).

The judge said Malaysia had an “overwhelming interest” in the resolution of any Montreal Convention claims that had been asserted against its own national carrier.

MH370 disappeared on March 8, 2014. The Boeing 777 was en route from from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board.

While some of the MDL lawsuits were brought under the Montreal Convention, an international treaty that governs air transportation incidents, others are common law claims.

The cases that assert claims under the Montreal Convention have been brought against Malaysia Airlines System Berhad (MAS) and Malaysia Airlines Berhad (MAB), and/or the insurers Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty SE (AGCS SE), and Henning Haagen, an officer at AGCS SE. (MAS was placed under administration in 2015 and MAB was incorporated to operate as Malaysia’s new national airline.¹)

There are also cases that assert common law wrongful death and products liability claims against the airplane manufacturer Boeing.

One case that has been brought under the Montreal Convention also makes wrongful death and personal injury claims, and names MAS, MAB, AGCS SE, Haagen, and Boeing as defendants.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in her ruling: “At its core, this case is about the unexplained disappearance of a passenger plane operated by Malaysia Airlines as part of its national air carrier fleet following its departure from a Malaysian airport.”

She added: “The disappearance of Flight MH370 was the subject of a years-long investigation by Malaysian authorities, and while a host of other countries undeniably participated and undoubtedly have some interest in the legal claims that have been made in the wake of this tragedy – including China, Australia, India, and the United State – these other points of connection do not alter the fundamental and substantial nexus between this tragic incident and the country of Malaysia.”

The judge said that the “substantial and overriding nexus to Malaysia” outweighed the “less substantial connection to the United States”.

She points out in her ruling that legal actions about the disappearance of MH370 have been brought in both Malaysia and in the United States and many plaintiffs have filed suit in both jurisdictions.

In the US, complaints have been filed in California, the District of Columbia, Illinois, New York, South Carolina, and Washington state, and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation subsequently centralised the pretrial proceedings with respect to all of these cases in the District of Columbia.

In her ruling, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said that there could be no dispute that Malaysia had the “primary public interest” in litigating the products liability claims.

She said that much relevant evidence was located outside the US, and the prospect of impleading raised “complex immunity considerations” that weighed in favour of dismissal.

“Whether or not Boeing can implead MAS or MAB as third party defendants raises questions of sovereign immunity, given that both MAS and MAB appear to be agencies or instrumentalities of the Malaysian government for purposes of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, “ the judge wrote.

She also said there appeared to be other potentially sovereign defendants. The plaintiffs in cases pending in Malaysia had named several Malaysian government entities as defendants, including the Department of Civil Aviation, the Royal Malaysian Air Force, the Immigration Department of Malaysia, and the Malaysian government, as well as certain individual Malaysian officials.

“Any effort to implead such defendants would substantially complicate any litigation involving the wrongful death and products liability claims that are pending against Boeing in the United States,” she stated.

The judge added, however, that plaintiffs were asserting manufacturing and design products liability claims directly against Boeing – a United States party – and it was undeniable that most of the evidence pertaining to these claims was inside the US.

“This would suggest,” she said, “that the private interest factor concerning the location of the evidence points squarely in the direction of litigating the claims in the United States; however, notably, Boeing has agreed to make all such evidence available in Malaysia, and has also agreed to pay any judgement that the Malaysian courts hand down.”

Even if the plaintiffs intended to base their case on the negligence of defendants in the planning, design, manufacture, assembly, testing, service, and inspection of the aircraft and its engines, the evidence regarding the crash itself and the actions of the airline were central to the tragedy, the judge added.

“Given that no one specific cause of the disappearance of Flight MH370 has been claimed affirmatively, much less that a certain known design or manufacturing defect precipitated this accident, this court is hard pressed to find that the interests of the United States in resolving the instant product-defect claims against Boeing outweigh what is, at its core, a Malaysian tragedy,” she said.

Australian Danica Weeks, whose husband Paul was on board MH370, said Wednesday’s judgement was “disgusting and disturbing”.

She added: “We have reached a very sad state in the world when a big corporation like Boeing is not answerable in a case like this when so many lives have been lost.”

Danica Weeks at the MH370 remembrance event in KL in 2017.

American amateur investigator Blaine Alan Gibson, who has found numerous pieces of plane debris, said: “The plane was designed and made in America. The company that made it is American. Three American citizens were on board. That should be enough to establish the court’s jurisdiction.”

K.S. Narendran, whose wife Chandrika was on board MH370, and who has written a book entitled Life After MH370, said: “How a product liability case against Boeing is best litigated in Malaysia is beyond my comprehension.” 

Narendran, who is from India, published a piece on Facebook in which he said he was shocked, perplexed, and disappointed by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s ruling.

Narendran at this year’s MH370 remembrance day event in KL.

‘The logical thing to do is to wait for the lawyers to take stock, strategise, and let us know the way forward. Is there an appeal process? We don’t know. Should we take our plaints to Malaysia and let it run its course?” Narendran wrote.

“After being accustomed to a state of ‘not knowing’ regarding MH370 during the past four years and more, dealing with uncertainty should come easy. But it doesn’t.”

The plaintiffs allege that there were design flaws in Boeing’s tracking and communications systems that endangered lives.

“There were superior technologies available that should have been part of the product in the interests of passenger safety,” Narendran wrote.

Boeing’s research, design, development, manufacturing, and sales are all primarily located in and directed from the US, and Boeing’s headquarters is in the US, Narendran notes.

“In light of this, it seems contrary to common sense to hold that ‘litigation in the United States related to the flight MH370 disaster is inconvenient.”

While the context that gave rise to the plaints is the same, the parties to the litigation, the arguments, and the pleas are varied, Narendran adds.

“Hearing all cases together perhaps creates a fiction that the case is one,” he wrote on Facebook.
The next of kin have waited more than two and a half years for Wednesday’s ruling. “How long this case might take in the Malaysian courts is anybody’s guess,” Narendran wrote.

“Meanwhile, we watch Boeing deftly manoeuvre its way out of the Boeing 737 Max 8 safety issues that caused the Indonesian airline Lion Air’s JT610 to fall from the sky at high speed last month killing more than 180 people on board.

“Huge orders are at stake. Large corporations like Boeing and Allianz can be expected to unleash the full force of their corporate communications and legal teams to manage fallout, and the lobbyists to contain any demands for change.”

The search for MH370

Not a trace of MH370 was found during lengthy searches in the southern Indian Ocean – initially by an Australian-led team.

The Australia-led search went on for 1,046 days and was suspended on January 17 last year. An area spanning more than 120,000 square kilometres was scoured.

The American seabed exploration company Ocean Infinity then searched, and collected data from, an area spanning about 120,000 square kilometres, which was far in excess of the initial 25,000-square-kilometre target.

The only debris that is said to be from MH370 has been retrieved on the African mainland and on islands off the African coast.

The full report released on July 30 this year by the Malaysian International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Annex 13 Safety Investigation Team for MH370 says that items of debris possibly from MH370 have been found as far north as the eastern coast of Tanzania and as far south as the eastern coast of South Africa.

It says that this is “in addition to several islands and island nations off the east coast of the African continent”.

Of these items of debris, the flaperon, a part of the right outboard flap, and a section of the left outboard flap were confirmed to be from MH370, the report states.

The report states that 27 significant pieces of debris have been recovered and examined.  In addition to the three pieces confirmed to be from MH370, seven pieces, including some cabin interior items, have been determined to be “almost certainly” from the plane. The report says eight pieces of debris are “highly likely” to be from MH370 and one piece is “likely” to be from the plane. Eight pieces of debris were not identifiable.

Twenty-six pieces of debris are with the Malaysian authorities, but the flaperon found on Reunion island is still with the French judicial authority.

Blaine Alan Gibson with debris found on an island in eastern Madagascar.

Lead investigator Kok Soo Chon said when releasing the report that the safety investigation team was “unable to determine the real cause for the disappearance of MH370”.
 

1. After the disappearance of MH370, the Malaysian government’s sovereign wealth fund Khazanah Nasional Berhad purchased the remaining ownership shares of MAS from minority shareholders and MAS was delisted from the Malaysian stock exchange. The government then enacted the 2015 Malaysian Airline System Berhad (Administration) Act, pursuant to which MAS was placed under administration and a new, separate entity – MAB – was incorporated to operate as the national airline. 
   

Next Mike Chillit finally reveals his calculated best guess (x marks the spot) for the final resting place of MH370 - 

Via the UK's Daily Star: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-n...sin-latest

..The amazing new calculations, obtained exclusively by Daily Star Online, effectively narrow the search zone for the missing plane MH370 down to a simple Google Maps coordinate.

Maths expert Mike Chillit completed drift analysis that questions whether the Malaysia Airlines aircraft crashed further north than was previously searched.

The location, he believes, would be in a place called the Perth Basin, which rests in the Indian Ocean.

The Boeing 777 – carrying 239 people – vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8, 2014, above the Indian Ocean.

All efforts to track down the jet have failed and the missing plane’s whereabouts have remained a mystery ever since.

Experts previously calculated the most likely crash site around 1,000 miles West of Perth, Australia.

But Mr Chillit believes the plane is in the Perth Basin based on where missing parts of the plane have washed up.

So far, five pieces of debris have been confirmed as being definitely or probably from flight MH370.

Parts of the jet have turned up on the shorelines of Africa, Reunion Island, Mozambique and Mauritius.

Mr Chillit, who detailed his findings in a series of diagrams, told Daily Star Online: “We know it is there.

"We've known that now for more than two years.

“I've suspected it was in Perth Basin for a long time, partly because one large piece of debris ended up on Pemba Island, which is Zanzibar, Tanzania.

"All the rest of it ended up south of Madagascar.

“No searches have been conducted at that location yet, when they do they will find it.”









Mr Chillit told us the Australian search amazingly missed the wreckage by just 109km.

And the Ocean Infinity search, which ended this year, missed it by 350km.

The new revelation comes after Malaysia concluded it couldn’t rule out “third party interference” in their final report in July...

 MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

MH370 update - 7/12/18.

From Ironsider, via the Oz:

MH370 debris find ‘not enough’

ROBYN IRONSIDE

Five new pieces of debris almost certainly from missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are unlikely to be enough to reopen the investigation.

Handed to Malaysia’s Transport Minister in Kuala Lumpur last week, the fragments collected in Madagascar in the southwest Indian Ocean include a piece of flooring from a Boeing 777. Certainty on the piece’s origin stems from a serial number matching a Boeing Material Specification.

Despite representing an important part of the puzzle, Uni­versity of Western Australia oceanographer Charitha Pattiaratchi said the debris did not shed further light on the final resting place of the Boeing 777, which went missing in March 2014.

“They were found in areas where our models predicted they would end up,” Professor Pattiaratchi told The Australian, after inspecting the debris at the request of American adventurer Blaine Gibson.

“But along with the other items found, (the debris) represents something like 0.01 per cent of the whole plane. If you tried to put the 32 pieces we’ve found into a plane, they would cover only a very small area.”

Even Mr Gibson acknowledged the bittersweet reality of the latest discoveries.

“They are small pieces of a very large puzzle,” he said. “It’s useful information but it’s not enough. It tells us something about the where, it tells us something about the what. It doesn’t tell us the who, it doesn’t tell us the why.”

As a tireless supporter of MH370 families who have mounted their own campaign to solve the near five-year mystery, Mr Gibson desperately wants Malaysia’s government to reopen the investigation, which was put on ice in the absence of “new credible evidence”.

Transport Minister Loke Siew Fook repeated that condition of resuming a search last week after taking delivery of the debris.

Hopes that private companies might step in came to fruition earlier this year when Ocean Infinity undertook a 90-day search on a “no find, no fee” basis. But at this stage it would appear the company has no intention of another search despite its recent success in locating the missing Argentine submarine ARA San Juan.

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute also ruled out launching its own search, after showing interest in the first year after MH370 vanished. Director of special projects David Gallo said he was not convinced about the seventh arc hypothesis but his approaches to Malaysia and Boeing were ignored. “No emails or phone calls were returned,” he told The Australian.

And while the latest pieces may not pinpoint the plane’s whereabouts, Mr Gibson said they strongly suggested a violent end for the 777-200ER.

“The piece of flooring is just one more piece of evidence added to the others, that proves that the main cabin tragically shattered on impact,” he said.

MTF...P2 

[Brock McEwen]

Hi all: I am trying to crowdsource the first official confirmation of MH370’s scheduled route (routes & waypoints). Can anyone help me?

Even if it isn’t “the first”, “official”, or even “confirmation”, I’d keenly appreciate hearing what all readers have to say on the subject. This is surely something we can sort out if we compare notes. Huge thanks in advance for any contribution you can make.

[Peetwo]

C/O KS Narendran. 

Via: https://www.facebook.com/notes/narendran...407932786/
 

If wishes were horses...

NARENDRAN KS·SUNDAY, MARCH 17, 2019



The Transport Minister agreed to meet me in his office last week for an interview.  It was his most recent interaction with someone from the Press one-on-one. an exclusive of sorts. It was also more than 6 months after he assumed office and close to the 5-year anniversary of the disappearance of MH370, and he was candid about his early mistakes, most notably on handling of the MH370 matter. He was accustomed to speaking his mind during his interactions. There weren’t the stock replies and standard handouts of the past.

Here is a transcript of the interview:

Q: Take us back to the time when you took office. What was uppermost on your mind?

A: Well, obviously MH370 was a big priority. The previous Government in its wisdom approached it in ways that some of our leaders had concerns about. The search by Ocean Infinity was unsuccessful and we were apparently at a dead end. The families of passengers were pressing for a continuation of search. We couldn’t search indefinitely. So, some decisions had to be made. An Investigation report was due anytime. I was eager for its release. I thought that it may put the entire matter to rest.

Q: There were great expectations from your Government, from you as the Minister of Transport. The MH families for instance were very hopeful. After all. Dr. Mahathir Mohamed had even alleged that the CIA was involved or knew about the plane’s fate, at one stage. Mr. Anwar Ibrahim had been scathing in his criticism of the previous Government’s handling, or bungling as some would say, of the MH370 matter…

A: When I came in, I thought it was a matter of months before we will be able to put MH370 behind us. I saw my role more in forward looking terms, in terms of adding to and strengthening our transportation infrastructure, the road and rail network, the regulatory and safety framework for various modes of transport and supporting our airlines as they fought to regain reputation. There were investment proposals from Singapore, China, and other major countries. MH370 was a national embarrassment. Its shadow loomed large on the consciousness. It had become a festering wound. It had exposed us in an unflattering way. I was all for a swift and decisive end to all this. It may be unpopular. But at least we could look ahead rather than be tied to a painful past.

Q: But Dr. Mahathir and Mr. Ibrahim….

A: They are senior leaders with great responsibility at this critical juncture. Our alliance of parties has its task cut out. The country’s finances we discovered were fragile after being subject to the scandalous greed, loot and accumulation of public wealth by the previous government’s leading lights. So, it was a question of priorities in a context of near crisis. I am sure MH370 and the status of the search, and other related issues of significance are not lost on them. But as I said, it seemed that we were going through a serious situation, and we had many promises to keep.

Q: One gets the impression that where MH370 was concerned, you were even more in a hurry to bury it than…

A: Maybe I gave that impression early on. I was also led by briefings and advice from officials who were steeped in the MH370 issues. Not only was I dealing with more information than I could handle and form an independent opinion, I was also dealing with a team that had internalized a set of stances and behaviors at the instance of the previous Government that made it difficult to explore alternative responses. There were many entities at play – domestic and international - Everyone wanted to come out unscathed if not smelling like a rose and it seemed convenient to let the prevailing trajectory of events to take its natural course.

Q: So, you were prepared to betray the trust of the MH370 families and of millions of others who believed your leaders’ expressions of solidarity with the MH families, and desire to pursue the truth?

A: I believed I was acting in the interests of all Malaysians on the promise of good governance and a new resurgent and proud Malaysia. ‘Betrayal’ is a harsh word that I reject.

I admit that I made mistakes. In the initial months. I was following advice. But I believe I made amends.

Q: You say you made amends. Could you elaborate?

A: I under-estimated the groundswell of sentiments in favor of the families of passengers who had kept MH370 in the public eye. I assumed that after all these years, the search tragedy fatigue would have turned into public disengagement and apathy. Also, after all the millions spent on the unsuccessful search, the public’s commitment to spend still more millions will lack public backing, or so I assumed. How wrong I was! People let it be known that they had been let down. It began to be said that my Ministry and by extension our new Government had the same stale odor of the previous government. This was a big surprise. Though when I think back now, it shouldn't have come as a surprise.

Q: So, what DID you do?

A: I am getting to it…

I did not meet the MH families who had come together for the Investigation team’s (Annex 13)  briefing in July last year. That was a big mistake. I was squarely criticized for it. After all what could be more important for a Transport Minister than meeting the families of passenger victims of an incident involving my country’s premier airline?

I sent word that I would like to meet with the families. No agenda from my side. I had in the meanwhile read the entire set of statements and correspondence from Voice 370 and the China Families. I came away believing that a callous administration had heaped insult to injury on shocked and grief - stricken families over the past 4 years and more. I was no longer willing to give too much credence to advice that engaging the families was dangerous. I felt the fear was unfounded, the stance unkind and unimaginative.

Q: You met the families? How did that go?

A: It was a very emotional meeting. The families were initially suspicious but as the meeting progressed, they were willing to give me a chance. I apologized at the outset for not meeting them earlier. I also apologized for any statements from me that may have been construed as insensitive. I let them know that I had personally read all the Statements released by Voice370 till date, that I only had deep admiration for the steadfast pursuit and the fortitude with which they had proceeded. I told them that while I could not bring back to life their loved ones, I would strive to do my utmost to gain their trust.

What was intended as a brief introductory meeting turned into a full-scale meeting that ran over an hour. It would have been cruelty to cut short their recounting of long-accumulated grievances – of hurt, neglect and marginalization. I thanked them for not giving up. I promised to look into their issues, expectations and suggestions.

I told myself that If there was a new beginning to be made this is a good place to start.

Q: You acknowledged their existence in a real, human way just by listening?

A: Well, there seems to have been an unstated adversarial stance vis-à-vis the families. While decisions were being taken in their name and supposedly in their interests, they were never consulted. Most of the time they were the last to know. I told myself, email and messaging will be to complete the formality associated with messaging, not as the sole or principal mode of communication. There had to be more person-to-person contact. So I did two things: First, I made time to meet the families first Saturday of every month. Besides, any family member from anywhere in the world could ask to speak to me and I (or in the exceptional circumstance, a senior official in the MOT) would make time within 48 hours. Second, I made it a point to elicit the views of families on any steps my Ministry mooted regarding MH370.

Q: How was this received? Am curious.

A: in a nutshell, dread and disbelief. My team received this shift in approach with dread. It was as if some bastion had been breached and they had to crawl out of the trenches to meet and greet the ‘enemy’. There was resistance, even some silent sabotage. I was accused of yielding too much ground. I had to remind them that we assume office to serve. The people’s mandate given was an act of faith. We needed to act so that we deserve. My own Ministerial colleagues were skeptical. They would tell me that the task of government can’t be conducted on the basis of the whims and wishes of people. I left it to them to reflect on their words.

The families were disbelieving. To them after years of bitterness and neglect, a friendly hand extended was a gesture in disguise, a cynic’s move. When I followed up our first meeting with invitations for subsequent monthly interactions, the dynamic changed.

Q: This may be interpreted by some as managing the optics, appeasement, or a softer approach to co-opt the families into the choices that your Ministry has already made…

A: I sometimes feel that if something shifts within, the world looks and feels different. A suggestion that instantly raised hackles or appeared threatening at one time seems suddenly reasonable. I agree I took some time to get to grips with the nitty-gritty. But this is what I have attempted (Many have been reported by the Press, but when I share this together, you will see that they have all been sensible).

I asked my team why the search has been given up and what are their recommendations for a resumption of search. They were quick to remind me of the earliest tripartite (China-Australia-Malaysia) formulation on the need for ‘new credible evidence that could help pinpoint the location of the plane as a per-condition’. Excellent, I said, and asked who was on the job of hunting for such evidence. There was total silence. I asked the Chief of the Civil Aviation Authority. He drew a blank. I asked the Annex 13 team’s Chief. He said search was not his remit and he could not comment. I wondered if we took responsibility only to the extend of funding the search while outsourcing the search task to Australia. It was easy to say: the Australia’ search efforts were unsuccessful. We staved off accountability. So, I said, this won’t do. I asked for clear steps, a detailed action plan to find that ‘credible new evidence’. While the world’s renown Safety and accident investigations Boards signed on the Annex 13 report, the report raised many questions about the lack of incisive analysis and investigation. For good measure, knowing that our technical capabilities may be limited, I suggested that we engage with a range of experts from within and outside the global bureaucratic system.

We soon called for a Consultation meeting and brought in many of the key members of the Independent Group and some of their critics. This was a crucial step. We agreed that we would share all raw data and analysis covering any and every angle that the group found worthwhile to explore. Some have called it a public audit. Others have called it crowdsourcing of expertise. Some have argued that we were exposing ourselves to criticism, ridicule, accusations, threats of additional litigation, … But I would point to the fact that the past approaches shrouded in secrecy or couched in legalese hadn’t yielded much. We were being roundly criticized no matter what we did!

I think this new approach promises much. Already the learning and insights from these ongoing consultation processes have been invaluable. We have clear lessons that easily translate into design, process, and procedural re-imagination of various aspects of civil aviation. Public confidence in our efforts has grown. We could indeed see a resumption of search.

Q: Is this a scoop you just dropped on my lap? Breaking news?

A: Disappointment alert! What I am saying is that with greater exchange of information, newer analysis, fine modeling, and sharper but professional critique, the search zone recommendations are likely to be well received overall. Given all that we know, I am not optimistic about a precise location. I don't think that is even a realistic expectation to set.

Q: Are families allowed to sit in during these consultation meetings?

A: I am glad you brought that up. Yes, indeed they are welcome. They have been told so. Their presence serves as an important reminder that at the end of the day, their emotional settlement and well-being remains a key consideration. It keeps egos in check, and everyone focused.

Q: What about military raw radar data? Has that been shared too? If not, isn’t the team denied crucial data based on which many of the movements of the aircraft has been deduced? It has been alleged that even the Annex 13 team never got access to raw data and had to work off whatever the military fed them.

A: I will not criticize or defend the Annex 13 team’s work. The Government of the day and the military took certain decisions in the national interest. World over, matters of the military and national security are inseparable and dealt with on a different footing. So, one could argue that there was no cause to adopt a line very different from what most Governments would take.

Which is, that the data is classified and cannot be shared in a manner as to pose a security threat or disclose military capability or readiness.

However, I am hopeful of some positive developments on this front. My discussions with the Defence Ministry and the Prime Minister suggest that we might find a way. I impressed upon them that after more than 4 years since the plane was last seen, our defence capabilities are likely superior to what they used to be. We might at worst risk being mocked at and told that someone slept on the job instead of keeping watch. This is a criticism that has been doing the rounds anyway. I impressed on them there is much to be gained from sharing the data. I have also asked the PM’s intervention to seek Thai and Singapore data as well for the night of 7-8 March 2014. Our commitments on mutual cooperation extends to mutual security assistance and this is a fit case. An unsolved MH370 could well be a safety and security threat to more countries in the region. And, if I may add to the world.

Q: On a different note, has all debris been collected from Madagascar? Has that region received the attention it deserves? It may be worth recalling that all confirmed MH370 debris came from the coastlines of East Africa or islands off that coast.

A: Our lack of effort on this front was shocking. We could commit a couple of hundred million dollars for the underwater search in the southern Indian ocean (SIO) but not a cent in areas where debris landings were predicted near Africa. The Reunion find in 2016 should have triggered intensive inter-governmental efforts to put a search plan in place. Maybe we were committed to the SIO and everything else was a distraction. We wanted dearly to find the black box for instance. No other debris could give us answers we were seeking. So, we perhaps believed.

We are in advance stages of a plan for debris look-out on the coastlines of Somalia, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa and the islands of Reunion, Madagascar, Mauritius, and the Maldives. It relies on the ocean drift models of Dr. Patiaratchi, Dr. Griffin and some others. It will involve coastal communities, tourists, fishers, etc. A well laid out communication plan that includes signages, pamphlets, radio and TV, print media, etc. is envisaged. Incentives for reporting and turning over potential debris will be in place. It seems like better late then never. We should not be found wanting in effort or backing up intentions with attention and funds.

Q: It sounds like replicating what the MH families attempted late 2016!

Indeed, they had the right idea. They had Alan Blaine Gibson too there if I remember. He had established some connects with locals in Madagascar and they kept a lookout for debris in his absence. It was a desperate effort under the prevailing circumstances. And a brave one! What the families did and show the way was really what the Government ought to have done. I told the families during one of meetings that I would like my Ministry to reimburse the expenses of the families who undertook the trip to Madagascar and Mauritius and asked for a statement of expenses, bills and receipts. The families would have none of it. They wore the hardships of that journey like a badge. The offer remains on the table.

Q: Will the search company, Ocean Infinity, be back?

A: We remain in touch with the company’s Management. We keenly follow the search successes related to the Argentinian submarine and the S Korean ferry. They have tasted success and only seem to be getting better. Ocean Infinity have expressed a desire to get back to the search for MH370. We welcome that. We are currently working on a less restrictive set of terms that are attractive, and not something that is valid for just one search season. We want to explore if it is feasible for the representatives of the MH families to be on board if they are medically cleared. We remain open to other search companies too who can convince us that their capabilities match Ocean Infinity’s or is superior.

Q: What about money? All what you have talked about will require commitment of funds.

A: Of course. There will be bills to be paid! Within the Government, there is a broad consensus that the plane must be found and no effort must be spared. I have a free hand and also the readiness of my senior colleagues in Government to join me in any mobilization of funds. We have reached out to a dozen friendly countries for a contribution. The response is favorable. China has come forward this time round with a more generous contribution befitting its size, financial muscle and number of lost souls even though as partners our two countries went through a tense initial phase soon after our government assumed office involving cancellation of some deals. Boeing is coming around too to contribute financially. They are a large company with a lot at stake actually. For our growing aviation market, even as we are looking to shore up Malaysian Airlines, we are also looking at our long-range forecasts, strategies and fleet composition options. Airbus set an example in the case of AF447 not too long ago and part funded the search and recovery. We are also finalizing a one-dollar contribution per passenger ticket to a search fund for all journeys originating out of Malaysia for an initial period of 6 months. Funds will be available if the will is there.

Q: What about conspiracy claims, competing theories, pilot suicide and other such chatter in the media?

What do you say to those who believe there are those who are actively working to make sure MH370 is never found?

A: I say they may have less to do with the truth and more to do with competing with Tom Clancy. All I can say is we will follow the data we have, the leads we get. We don't favor one set of leads over another based on the source. If they pass scrutiny, and in the collective wisdom of experts we consult, it merits further action, then we will act. There are vested interests everywhere. Most benefit from getting the facts, knowing the truth, making lives safer and better. There are the few who profit from fear and obscuring the truth for as long as they can. I have made my choice.

Q: Before we close, what would like to say to the MH370 families? The 5-year Remembrance event is around the corner…

A: As you see from this conversation, a lot of our work on MH370 after I took charge has been in line with the families’ stated expectations. I believe they had actionable demands, genuine concerns about airline safety, and justified grievances. I deem it an honor to be invited to the Remembrance event. Besides the personal they have served a precious public purpose. We owe a debt of gratitude to them for not letting MH370 be forgotten. In reminding us of the unfinished search task, they have shone the light on a critical safety gap. We cannot rest easy till we know how we might prevent a recurrence.
01 March 2019

I have often wondered how things might be if all things that seemed the right thing to do as regards MH370 search and investigation (from our perspective) were indeed done by those in charge: people who make decisions, spend millions, ignore or bow to public opinion. I had time to write up this fictitious interview with Malaysia’s Transport Minister while on a train from Salem to Chennai last evening. Felt good. Have shared here.

MTF...P2 

[ventus45]

Pity it is only a fictitious interview.
If the MSM had done their so called job properly in the beginning ......................
It would be interesting to get the Malaysian Minister's replys now .......................

[Peetwo]

#MH370: By Bill's sister and 'that man' 2 days ago...  

Via the Oz:

MH370’s co-pilot ‘tried to use mobile in mid-flight’

EXCLUSIVE
By KRISTIN SHORTEN and EAN HIGGINS
12:00AM MARCH 23, 2019
110 COMMENTS


MH370 co-pilot Fariq Hamid going through security before the flight left Kuala Lumpur. Picture: YouTube

An expert review of evidence from a secret MH370 report suggests the flight’s first officer may have tried to use his mobile phone mid-flight, reinforcing the theory the captain hijacked his own aircraft after locking the co-pilot out of the cockpit.

Minutes before the Boeing 777 was lost from radar on March 8, 2014, a mobile telephone registered to the aircraft’s co-pilot, Fariq Abdul Hamid, was detected by a telecommunications tower at Bandar Baru Farlim Penang.

And the co-pilot’s family was never told.

Speaking for the first time, Fariq’s father, Ab Hamid Bin Md Daud, told The Weekend Aus­tralian that Malaysian authorities had not informed him of his son’s mobile phone detection.

“No. I don’t know about that,” he said from his Selangor home. “That’s beyond my information.”

A Malaysia police investi­gation report into the disappearance of Flight MH370 — completed in May 2014 but kept secret — revealed that Telco Celcom had detected a mobile phone number, registered to Fariq on March 8, 2014, at 1.52:27am, Malaysian time.

“MH370 co-pilot’s mobile phone was reported as detected in Celcom’s mobile network in Penang by Sector 2 of BBFARLIM2 Base Station,” the secret report said. “Based on the recorded flight path of MH370 obtained from PDRM, it is noted that MH370 was flying in the coverage area of Sector 2 BBFARLIM2 Base Station at 1.52:59am ... which is close to the time it was detected by the BBFARLIM2 Base Station.”

Mike Keane, the former chief pilot of Britain’s largest airline, EasyJet; said the mobile phone ­either remained on from takeoff or was switched back on midflight to make an emergency call.

Like most professionals in the aviation business, he believes Captain Zaharie Shah hijacked his own aircraft in a complex act of mass murder-suicide.

Mr Keane reckons Zaharie would have asked his “compliant” first officer to go to the cabin — for a concocted reason — before locking the cockpit door, isolating himself with an oxygen supply and depressurising the aircraft.

“The first officer would have been skilled in responding to depressurisation due to regular training,” he said. “If Fariq had his mobile phone with him, he would have grabbed an oxygen bottle before taking his phone off flight mode or switching it on.

“If someone was going to make a transmission with the phone, it’s likely to be the crew because they are trained to get oxygen on as quickly as ­possible.”

After failing to establish communication, the phone would have remained on.

Matthew Sorell, senior lecturer in telecommunications at the University of Adelaide and adjunct professor of digital forensics at the Tallinn University of Technology, confirmed the mobile phone appeared to have already been switched on before the plane approached Penang.

Dr Sorell, who has extensive operational experience in forensic analysis of mobile phone network records, said the mobile phone connection happened at the edge of the coverage cell, indicating the handset was performing a “new location area update”.

“This means the phone was on, and responded automatically when it detected the cell signal over Penang,” he said. “That ping occurs about 28 seconds after entering new coverage space, which is what would be expected in the case of a location based update.”

The elevated, high-powered base station that detected Fariq’s phone is built to provide wide-area rural coverage stretching 32km over mountainous terrain.

When a local newspaper first reported details of the phone detection in April 2014, Malaysian authorities called for the publication to be “severely punished” for printing a “bare-faced lie” and engaging in “gutter journalism”.

The confidential police report from May 2014, later leaked online, confirmed Malaysian authorities knew about Fariq’s phone detection by April 24 of that year.

Despite this, Malaysia made no mention of it in its Factual Information Safety Investigation report released in March 2015.

Hmm...a 110 comments so far? - WOW! 
Mick, the former RAAF baggage chucker, cuts to the chase on the obvious overlooked bollocks with this article:

Mick

2 DAYS AGO
 (Edited)

An expert review of evidence from a secret MH370 report ... 

'Secret'?!   Yes, this report was so 'secret' that it has been circulating in the public domain for years.

The very simple fact of the matter is that the First Officer's mobile phone connection have been known about for nearly five years now, since 12 April 2014.  The connection is detailed in the official Malaysian Safety Investigating Report (it is covered in Section 1.1.5 Detection of Hand Phone Signal, p.20).   That report was released all of nine months ago! 

   
However Botsy nails it for mine - 

andrew

2 DAYS AGO



They can be flown remotely by outside sources and there were Chines military engineers on board that owned the latest patent on missile semiconductors so the truth may never be known and their demise was of great advantage to the west.
Easy to find on Google.

Botswana O'Hooligan

2 DAYS AGO



Excessive consumption of cheap cooking sherry can do that too, make one believe in all sorts of things that are just not possible. 

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

And so, ever so slowly:-

Questions.