AuntyPru Forum

(05-19-2016, 06:51 AM)MikeChillit Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:

Quote:Tom Lindsay
Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:59 AM
Hi All
 Have checked out this pic (RR) with some very good software, which I use on a daily basis. Not one sign of any Exif/meta data to be seen. NOT one. Clean as a whistle. My opinion – looks staged.

Personally I hope the photo is ridgy, didge and did turn up 3 months before to simply be washed out to sea again...
MTF...P2

Just a caution from Chillit. Far as I know, Twitter scrubs all Exif data off of each and every image posted to a Timeline. In any event, the absence of Exif data may not mean much, and this can almost certainly be traced back through the guy who reported it and is on record as having found it: Neels Kruger. Don't have his address, but Jeff may.

The only part that got my attention the first time I saw it was the striated sand on the lower part of the picture. Looks like it was recently raked. Why? Just presentation, or is there more to it. Personally not concerned about impropriety, but would like to know more. Is it in a quiet bay? How much wave action is there? Was it found between tides, or was it far enough up the beach to be out of the tide zone? What were weather conditions around that time if anyone knows. Just contextual things for me.

Quote:P2 Edit 

JW Update - UPDATE 5/18/16: Today an Afrikaans-language website published an article entitled “MH370 piece all photographed in December” by Eugene Gunning explaining how the photograph at top came to be taken. Below is the translation courtesy of Google Translate with a bit of cleanup on my part. Obviously parts are still pretty baffling, if anyone cares to help to polish up them up in the comments section that would be most welcome. Thanks to readers @SA Reader and @Afrikaans for alerting me to this story.

The debris of the missing flight MH370 Malaysia Airlines which was conducted in December on the beach of Little Brak River by a resident of Knysna.

Dr. Schalk Lückhoff, a retired physician from Knysna, may help to solve the mysterious disappearance of the missing flight MH370 Malaysia Airlines.

In December last year Lückhoff came accross a piece of debris on the beach of Klien-Brakrivier, which is presumaby from the missing aircraft. He didn’t realise at the time that it is from the missing aircraft.

This is the same debris that more than two months later by Neels Kruger, an archaeologist from Pretoria, seen on the beach and picked up.

The debris has been sent to the Malaysian government.

The plane went missing on March 8, 2014, shortly after it Kuala Lumpur took off en route to Beijing. There were 239 passengers and crew on board.

The Australia Transport Safety Board announced Thursday that the debris probably came from the plane.

Lückhoff said he walked at Klein Brak River on the beach on 23 December. It was about 07:22 when he saw an object on the beach. It lay on the riverbank. He took a picture of it.

“I was really busy,” he told to take pictures of fast-flowing water for a photography project. “The piece caught my attention because it was the only thing on the bare expanse of sand. Because it stank because of the decaying barnacles, I have not dealt with and took a casual photo.

“I did not recognize what it was and thought it might be part of an old notice board. It was full of sand and mussels and just a small part of the letters put out.

“After the next high tide I haven’t seen it again and supposed that it washed back into the sea.”

When he saw the story about Kruger in the Cape, and he knew it.

Kruger said on inquiry that he is very excited about it. “It can make a contribution to the investigation.”

MTF...P2  

So, we are expected to swallow the idea, that the Rolls Royce "Roy" debris was washed ashore, onto the beach at Klein Brak South Africa (34.092 South 22.148 East) on 23rd December 2015 heavily barnacle encrusted, and 3 months later, on the 21st March 2016, it is found again, only 8 kilometres south, at Mossel Bay (34.179 South 22.140 East) almost as clean as a new part ?

Call me a skeptic, but I don't buy it.

Let's look at the facts, as we best know them at present.

FIRST FINDING
Dr Schalk Lückhoof, a retired physician from Knysna, said that:
(1) He was walking on the beach at Klein-Brak River on 23 December 2015.
(2) It was approximately 07:22 when he saw an object on the beach.

NB: (Low tide was 07:54 - see tide charts in post # 344 below)

(3) It was lying against the river bank.
(4) “I was actually busy taking photos of the fast flowing water for a photography project,” he said.
(5) “The piece attracted my attention because it was the only object on the bare/naked piece of sand.
(6) Due to the rotted/ rotten (eendmossels*), it stank, (and) I did not handle it and (by the way**) took a photo of it.
(7) “I did not recognize it for what it was and thought that it was part of an old notice/sign board.
(8) It was full of / covered with sand and mussels and just a small part of the letters was showing.
(9) “After the following high tide, I didn’t see it again and supposed that it was again washed into the sea.”

SECOND FINDING
Neels Kruger, an archeologist from Pretoria.
(1) The same item of debris IS found again on the 21st March 2016 by Neels Kruger near Mossel Bay.

Quite amazing.

So, it was first found, alone, by itself, on, or very near, a sand spit, in a fast flowing tidal estuary / river mouth, at Klein-Brak, which is itself, intermittently opened or closed to the sea.

Further question for Dr Schalk Lückhoof

Where was it - exactly ?
Was it:
(1) In the "fast flowing" river channel ? or
(2) On the sand spit ? or
(3) On the ocean beach ?

If it was in the channel or on the sand spit, was the "fast flowing water" going into the river mouth (rising tide) or flowing "out" to the sea (falling tide) ?
If it was on the ocean beach, was it north or south of the river channel ?

Since the water was flowing, how fast do you think it was,in metres per second ?
Was the channel deep ?  
Did you walk across it - either through the flowing water - or when it was still - at "the turn of the tide" ?
Since you were "on a photographic assignment", presumably you took many photos, some of which should show "precisely" where you found it.  
Where are those photos Doctor ?
Where was it - exactly - precisely ?
Have you been back since, or can you go back, and photograph precisely where you found it ?
Can you show us on Google Earth ?








Further question for Neels Kruger.

Where "exactly" at Mossel Bay did you find it ?
Did you take any "location" photos at the time ?
Have you been back since, or can you go back, and photograph precisely where you found it ?
Can you show us on Google Earth ?





There are many reasons to be sceptical.

Notice the bathy contours above.

(see next post - sice maximum number of images per post is 5 - bugga Aunty !!)

Now, let's look at the location - big picture.

Let's "zoom out".











This area of the South African coast is subject to a very strong current flowing from east to west.

(see next post).

This area of the South African coast is subject to a very strong current flowing from east to west.



Notice the two areas of "recirculation".

Is it possible, is it credible, that items swept down the east coast, to the south coast of Africa, could be caught in this "recirculation region" off the continental shelf to the south, and "deposited", then swept out to sea, and then "redeposited", in the same bay, 3 months later ?



Look at the breakwater at Mossel Bay, and the wave action.



And here are the Tide Tables for Mossel Bay for December 2015 and March 2016.






Anyone want to form a lotto syndicate ?

www.news.com.au pulls it's own story -



Here is the initial link.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innova...public_rss

Pulled within hours, in the middle of an election campaign, suspicious.

It appears that the original news.com.au article has been republished here:

Quote:Mystery team in hunt for MH370

• Video
  

[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/news/content/v1/origin:video_integrator.V5ZmdnMzE6KI_cF25marIoPU_0sA4HoY?t_product=video&t_template=../video/player[/img]

The newly-constructed Nan Hai Jui 102 pictured in November last year, will be the primary vessel used in the new, China-led search for MH370 due to start next month

[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/86e4cdf929f450a650d886f1315cb16f?t_product=tcog&t_template=s3/ncatemp/desktop/includes/content-2/authorBlockSingle[/img]
A FOREIGN government agency is about to take over the search for MH370 after a fruitless two years scouring the southern Indian Ocean under the direction of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB)

The country that has stepped up to the plate is China and the agency is the China Rescue and Salvage Bureau of the Ministry of Communications. The vessel taking on the daunting task is called the Nan Hai Jiu 102.

According to the Singapore-based MacArtney Underwater Technology, which has been contracted to install the vessel with a winch for the deep tow sonar system, the search will be “reinitiated in June 2016 by an Australian-based search team”.

In April, the Chinese sent a search vessel, the Dong Hai Jiu 101, to join the Fugro Equator and the Fugro Discovery in the hunt for the missing Boeing 777 and it’s likely to continue working alongside the Nan Hai Jiu 102.

News.com.au sought comment on the development from Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester but he declined to address the question, issuing instead a statement about next month’s “tripartite meeting” on MH370 involving Chinese, Malaysian and Australian officials.


The new Chinese vessel set to take over the Australian search, the Nan Hai Jiu 102, is currently being fitted with this winch (pictured) supplied by MacArtney Underwater Technology.Source:Supplied

A notice in this month’s edition of Oceanlogy International stated that Nanhai Rescue (a division of the China Rescue and Salvage Bureau) had ordered “two Teledyne Benthos deep-tow systems with QINSy software from QPS through reseller Geo-Marine Technology”.

“The deep-tow systems will be used in the search for MH370,” the notice said.

“QPS will add extra functionality for this project, such as obstacle avoidance for the tow fish. Sensors on the tow fish include multibeam and dual-frequency sidesman sonar.”

The tow fish has been lost on two occasions in the current search — once coming loose after colliding with an underwater volcano.

MacArtney has created a page on its website which provides more detail about the capabilities of the Nan Hai Jiu 103.

“MacArtney has won the tender to supply a MERMAC R40 winch for a Benthos deep tow sonar system,” the website says.

“The winch is to be installed on board the search and rescue vessel Nan Hai Jiu 102 and the search for flight MH370 is going to be reinitiated in June 2016 by an Australian-based search team.

“The MacArtney MERMAC R electrically driven winch in question is a robust and advanced vehicle handling system which safely controls the launch, operation and recovery of ROVs and towed vehicle systems.”


The depressor weight being brought aboard the vessel supplied by China in April, the Dong Hai Jiu 101. Source: ATSB, photo by Mel ProudlockSource:Supplied

EIGHT VITAL MH370 QUESTIONS THAT NEED ANSWERS
ARE YOU INADVERTENTLY HOARDING A PIECE OF MH370 WRECKAGE?

Managing Director of MacArtney’s Asia Pacific Operations, Steen Frejo, told News.com.au that the Nanhai Rescue would start work “as soon as the vessel and all the equipment is ready”.

The ATSB has repeatedly said it will end its search by July at the latest, with no plans to extend the current search area — a 120 sq km zone off the west coast of Australia known as the “7th arc”. However, recent comments by ATSB chief Martin Dolan suggested the deadline may be extended to make up for bad weather stalling operations.

“We have some way to go and our best bet is that we will complete that search late July, early August, depending on unforeseen circumstances,” he told The Australian newspaper on Friday.

“The technical capability is there to continue the search but the resources to do it is a matter for government.”

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board on March 8, 2014.

With less than 15,000 sq km left to be searched, Mr Dolan admitted hopes of recovering the plane are fading.

“At this point there is a diminishing level of confidence that we will find the aircraft,” he told the Australian.

“There will be a lot of disappointment if we don’t find it. At worst we will know at the end of this process that the area we have searched does not contain the aircraft. At best we will find it.”


There are less than 15 sq km of the search zone known as the 7th arc (above) left to be searched and so far no sign of the plane.Source:Supplied

Five pieces of wreckage believed to have come from the missing plane have so far been recovered — none were found in the search zone — but there has been no sign of the fuselage or the black box.

News that the search will be continued by China will be welcomed by the grieving families of those on board MH370, who have been left in limbo since the plane vanished. Authorities still don’t know why or how it happened but it is hoped that with fresh eyes, answers will come.

News.com.au approached Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester for more details on the Chinese search and the identity of “Australian-based search team” but no answers were forthcoming.

Instead, Mr Chester issued a statement saying: “A tripartite meeting of senior officials is scheduled to be held in June, which will pave the way for a ministerial level meeting planned for mid-July.

“These meetings are expected to take place prior to the completion of the 120,000 square kilometre search area in the southern Indian Ocean to discuss the search.”

Mr Chester added: “Without any credible evidence that leads to the identification of a specific location of the aircraft, there will be no further expansion of the search area.

I wonder what the true intentions of the Chinese really are.

It is worth pondering the possibilities.

As I pointed out long ago, if the Chinese have been unhappy with the Malaysian "directed - controlled - demanded - commanded" search, and intend to conduct their own search, for legal reasons, they do have to wait for the official ICAO - Annex 13 search to officially end.

After that happens (now apparently "slipped to the right" - again - to the end of August 2016) - they are "legally" free to do whatever they like.

If so, it is unlikely that they would give the "Beaker Bugle Boys" the time of day.

I hope that they have their own theory, which leads them to a specific area, and which subsequently proves to be correct when they find the plane.

It will be interesting too see exactly "where" they search.

Then the rest of us can burn many more brain cells, trying to work out "why" they search "there".

Hopefully, they will search in my area, "inside the 6th arc".

Time will tell.

All the "ship tracker guys" - Mike Chillit - Richard Cole - and others, had better be ready to burn many more hours monitoring.

It will be interesting !

(05-24-2016, 04:29 AM)ventus45 Wrote: [ -> ]www.news.com.au pulls it's own story -



Here is the initial link.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innova...public_rss

Pulled within hours, in the middle of an election campaign, suspicious.

It appears that the original news.com.au article has been republished here:

Quote:Mystery team in hunt for MH370

• Video
  

[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/news/content/v1/origin:video_integrator.V5ZmdnMzE6KI_cF25marIoPU_0sA4HoY?t_product=video&t_template=../video/player[/img]

The newly-constructed Nan Hai Jui 102 pictured in November last year, will be the primary vessel used in the new, China-led search for MH370 due to start next month

[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/86e4cdf929f450a650d886f1315cb16f?t_product=tcog&t_template=s3/ncatemp/desktop/includes/content-2/authorBlockSingle[/img]
A FOREIGN government agency is about to take over the search for MH370 after a fruitless two years scouring the southern Indian Ocean under the direction of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB)

The country that has stepped up to the plate is China and the agency is the China Rescue and Salvage Bureau of the Ministry of Communications. The vessel taking on the daunting task is called the Nan Hai Jiu 102.

According to the Singapore-based MacArtney Underwater Technology, which has been contracted to install the vessel with a winch for the deep tow sonar system, the search will be “reinitiated in June 2016 by an Australian-based search team”.

In April, the Chinese sent a search vessel, the Dong Hai Jiu 101, to join the Fugro Equator and the Fugro Discovery in the hunt for the missing Boeing 777 and it’s likely to continue working alongside the Nan Hai Jiu 102.

News.com.au sought comment on the development from Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester but he declined to address the question, issuing instead a statement about next month’s “tripartite meeting” on MH370 involving Chinese, Malaysian and Australian officials.


The new Chinese vessel set to take over the Australian search, the Nan Hai Jiu 102, is currently being fitted with this winch (pictured) supplied by MacArtney Underwater Technology.Source:Supplied

A notice in this month’s edition of Oceanlogy International stated that Nanhai Rescue (a division of the China Rescue and Salvage Bureau) had ordered “two Teledyne Benthos deep-tow systems with QINSy software from QPS through reseller Geo-Marine Technology”.

“The deep-tow systems will be used in the search for MH370,” the notice said.

“QPS will add extra functionality for this project, such as obstacle avoidance for the tow fish. Sensors on the tow fish include multibeam and dual-frequency sidesman sonar.”

The tow fish has been lost on two occasions in the current search — once coming loose after colliding with an underwater volcano.

MacArtney has created a page on its website which provides more detail about the capabilities of the Nan Hai Jiu 103.

“MacArtney has won the tender to supply a MERMAC R40 winch for a Benthos deep tow sonar system,” the website says.

“The winch is to be installed on board the search and rescue vessel Nan Hai Jiu 102 and the search for flight MH370 is going to be reinitiated in June 2016 by an Australian-based search team.

“The MacArtney MERMAC R electrically driven winch in question is a robust and advanced vehicle handling system which safely controls the launch, operation and recovery of ROVs and towed vehicle systems.”


The depressor weight being brought aboard the vessel supplied by China in April, the Dong Hai Jiu 101. Source: ATSB, photo by Mel ProudlockSource:Supplied

EIGHT VITAL MH370 QUESTIONS THAT NEED ANSWERS
ARE YOU INADVERTENTLY HOARDING A PIECE OF MH370 WRECKAGE?

Managing Director of MacArtney’s Asia Pacific Operations, Steen Frejo, told News.com.au that the Nanhai Rescue would start work “as soon as the vessel and all the equipment is ready”.

The ATSB has repeatedly said it will end its search by July at the latest, with no plans to extend the current search area — a 120 sq km zone off the west coast of Australia known as the “7th arc”. However, recent comments by ATSB chief Martin Dolan suggested the deadline may be extended to make up for bad weather stalling operations.

“We have some way to go and our best bet is that we will complete that search late July, early August, depending on unforeseen circumstances,” he told The Australian newspaper on Friday.

“The technical capability is there to continue the search but the resources to do it is a matter for government.”

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board on March 8, 2014.

With less than 15,000 sq km left to be searched, Mr Dolan admitted hopes of recovering the plane are fading.

“At this point there is a diminishing level of confidence that we will find the aircraft,” he told the Australian.

“There will be a lot of disappointment if we don’t find it. At worst we will know at the end of this process that the area we have searched does not contain the aircraft. At best we will find it.”


There are less than 15 sq km of the search zone known as the 7th arc (above) left to be searched and so far no sign of the plane.Source:Supplied

Five pieces of wreckage believed to have come from the missing plane have so far been recovered — none were found in the search zone — but there has been no sign of the fuselage or the black box.

News that the search will be continued by China will be welcomed by the grieving families of those on board MH370, who have been left in limbo since the plane vanished. Authorities still don’t know why or how it happened but it is hoped that with fresh eyes, answers will come.

News.com.au approached Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester for more details on the Chinese search and the identity of “Australian-based search team” but no answers were forthcoming.

Instead, Mr Chester issued a statement saying: “A tripartite meeting of senior officials is scheduled to be held in June, which will pave the way for a ministerial level meeting planned for mid-July.

“These meetings are expected to take place prior to the completion of the 120,000 square kilometre search area in the southern Indian Ocean to discuss the search.”

Mr Chester added: “Without any credible evidence that leads to the identification of a specific location of the aircraft, there will be no further expansion of the search area.

(05-24-2016, 09:22 AM)ventus45 Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder what the true intentions of the Chinese really are.

It is worth pondering the possibilities.

As I pointed out long ago, if the Chinese have been unhappy with the Malaysian "directed - controlled - demanded - commanded" search, and intend to conduct their own search, for legal reasons, they do have to wait for the official ICAO - Annex 13 search to officially end.

After that happens (now apparently "slipped to the right" - again - to the end of August 2016) - they are "legally" free to do whatever they like.

If so, it is unlikely that they would give the "Beaker Bugle Boys" the time of day.

I hope that they have their own theory, which leads them to a specific area, and which subsequently proves to be correct when they find the plane.

It will be interesting too see exactly "where" they search.

Then the rest of us can burn many more brain cells, trying to work out "why" they search "there".

Hopefully, they will search in my area, "inside the 6th arc".

Time will tell.

All the "ship tracker guys" - Mike Chillit - Richard Cole - and others, had better be ready to burn many more hours monitoring.

It will be interesting !

Yes a fascinating development indeed...   Hopefully the Chinese will screen all calls coming from ATSBeaker & that silly 'photogenic filter' & self-flagellating miniscule, Dazzling Dazza the Jestering Chester -

Quote:For having traffic with thyself alone, Thou of thyself thy sweet self dost deceive. (Shakespeare)

[/url]

Photo of Australia’s deputy prime minister after a hostile meeting with an aviation industry group. Courtesy of Minister for Transport, via the twitter ‘Selfie’ king.  Sign photo-shopped by an anonymous industry commentator.  The national image eh? Stellar.

#DontVote4Chester.
[url=http://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Screen-Shot-2016-05-12-at-1.21.57-PM.png]
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave…when first we practice to deceive. (W Scott). {Marmion}.
 
- See more at: http://auntypru.com/#sthash.P02gzSB4.dpuf

Quote:

Marnie has now confirmed on twitter that the takedown of her original online article was due to publishing issues and can again be viewed at this link: Mysterious Australian team to work with China in new search for MH370  

Also of passing interest is the Senate Estimates AQON - after several false starts - are finally available for public access, here is the link for the ATSB AQON.

Relevant to MH370 is the answer to Senator Sterle's written QON #194:

Quote:Question no.: 194
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Australian Transport Safety Bureau
Topic: Search for Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370
Proof Hansard Page: Written


Senator Sterle, Glenn asked:

1. How much has the Australian Government spent so far in the search from MH370?
a. In 2014-5?
b. In 2015-6 so far?
2. What is the Commonwealth’s overall budgeted amount available for the search?
3. What have other nations contributed to the search?
4. What is the outlook for the search process?

Answer:
A comprehensive briefing on the search for Malaysia Airlines MH370 was provided to the Committee on 22 February 2016 by the Joint Agency Coordination Centre (JACC), which was established to coordinate whole of Australian Government activities in regard to the search, and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), which is responsible for underwater search operations. This response has been provided by the JACC.

1. In the 2014-15 Federal Budget, the Government committed up to $89.9 million over two years from 2013-14 as part of Australia’s contribution to the search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. This provided:

• $2 million for the Joint Agency Coordination Centre;
• $27.9 million to Department of Defence for costs in search for MH370; and
• $60 million to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau to undertake the underwater search.
a. In 2013-14 and 2014-15:
• Department of Defence expended $27.9 million;
• Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development expended $1.6 million to support the JACC; and
• ATSB expended $41.8 million of Australian Government funding on underwater search activities.

Other agencies absorbed their own costs.

b. As at 29 February 2016, an additional $18.2 million has been expended of Australian Government funding by the ATSB.

2. $89.9 million.

3. Twenty-five other countries have been involved in the search for MH370, generously contributing resources and expertise: Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Myanmar, Malaysia, New Zealand, the People’s Republic of China, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. During 2014-15, Malaysia directly funded the provision of a vessel and search system as part of the search.

The contract for the provision of these services was directly with Malaysia and the value of this contribution is not available. In addition, Malaysia has committed a cash contribution of $100 million, of which $80 million has been paid as at 29 February 2016. During the early part of the search, China provided a vessel to undertake underwater mapping services. The value of this contribution is not available. In addition, China has committed to supply a search vessel and funding to cover search costs, to a total value of $20 million

4. It is anticipated that searching the 120,000 square kilometre search area will take until the middle of 2016 to complete. Upon completion of the entire area, it is expected all high probability search areas will have been covered. In the absence of credible new information that leads to the identification of a specific location of the aircraft, the Governments of Australia, Malaysia and China have agreed that there will be no further expansion of the search area.

Nothing outstandingly new in any of that I guess but the statement..

"...In the absence of credible new information that leads to the identification of a specific location of the aircraft, the Governments of Australia, Malaysia and China have agreed that there will be no further expansion of the search area..."
 

...in light of Marnie's article, with follow up pending, would appear to indicate that China may have other ideas, contrary to the party line -


MTF...P2

How about - credible OLD information - source not public - obviously

UDB! - Bring on June 30 - please someone..anyone??
 
Reflecting on the SMH thread quoted post below:

(06-01-2016, 04:20 PM)Peetwo Wrote: [ -> ]Beaker clearing the decks for Hoody??

Moving on but still on the soon to be departing SMH Beaker? Some poor bastard is trying to make some sense of the Albo/McComic/Beaker years and asked if I could run a bio search on Beaker.

Still going with this project but some of the goss I have discovered on Beaker so far is simply staggering and begs more questions than answers...

Examples - Did you know that Beaker..

..at one stage was on the CASA Audit & Risk committee?

Quote:Here is part of his bio from the CASA 2004-2005 Annual Report:

Martin Dolan Member, Audit and Risk Committee – April 2004 to present

Martin Dolan is the interim Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Energy
Markets Commission and was previously the Executive Director, Aviation and
Airports, Department of Transport and Regional Services...

...In 2001, Mr Dolan transferred to the Department of Transport and Regional
Services. After completing a review of the department’s road programs, he took
over management of the Airports Division. He was then responsible for the
Department’s role in selling Sydney Airport, the enhancement of aviation security,
post-Ansett aviation policy and aviation safety reform. 

Did you know that Beaker..

Quote:..was also on the Airservices Australia Directors Board: 

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/Airservices_Annual_Report_2004-2005.pdf

During the year, Chief Executive Officer Bernie Smith retired after four years in the position, and Board members Ronald Entsch and Kevin Gale completed their terms. Belinda Gibson and Martin Dolan resigned mid year.

Not sure how long he was on the CASA committee or ASA Board but apparently he suddenly and unexpectedly resigned from both positions around about the same time??

Before those positions Dolan of course was a First Assistant Secretary of DOTARS (see page 14 https://infrastructure.gov.au/department/annual_report/2002_2003/pdf/part_2.pdf ) in the Aviation & Airports Policy/Regulation division and was apparently the primary tweaker of the Airports Act & attributed for drawing up and sealing the deal on the Sydney Airport sale.

While at DOTARS Beaker also had a brief stint as Deputy dog to the then Secretary Ken Mathews (see page 16 above link).

However with Beaker what really piqued my interest was his involvement with the implementation of the NAS (2B), remembering that he was the muppet that commissioned Jeff Griffith to review the possible ramifications of modifying (to Australian unique conditions) Class E over D in the NAS(2B) program:  https://infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/publications/pdf/aviation_griffith_report.pdf

The following is a link to Hansard from 26 May 2004 Senate Estimates: http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=COMMITTEES;id=committees%2Festimate%2F7632%2F0007;query=Id%3Acommittees%2Festimate%2F7632%2F0002

P2 intrigue?? - The outstanding questions that remain are; is there any truth to the rumour that Beaker disgraced himself in 2004-5 to the point of being as closely sacked as a senior public servant can get and if so; how was it possible for Beaker to worm his way back into the aviation safety bureaucracy in the plum job as the first Chief Commissioner of the ATSB only 3 short years later??

I guess what all the scuttlebutt highlights (so far) to me, is if there was one person ideally suited to the role of providing top cover (PelAir, MH370 & Airservices Australia) for any of the aviation safety agencies, or the department, that position would be perfectly suited to that man (muppet) Beaker...    

Still trying to track down what was so bad that Beaker was cast off (public servant equivalent of being sacked) into the backwaters of Victoria's bureaucracy for 3 years??

However the far bigger questions are; Q1/ who the hell let him back in again; and Q2/ why is such a maligned, Pecksniffian, sanctimonious individual seemingly impervious to similar sanction from now five different government ministries, ever since his original appointment as the first Chief Commissioner to the ATSB??

Truss had the perfect opportunity to cut him loose after Beaker's contract was due to expire, but bizarrely after all the evidence from the PelAir debacle that the Muppet was a liability, dopey Truss renewed Beaker's contract for a further two years -   

Well fortunately the countdown is now on with 24 days to go till the Muppet exits stage right...

However from the other Aunty today it would appear that this public servant enigma is determined that he won't be easily forgotten before he slithers off the MH370 stage with his gold-plated parachute - FDS! {Warning: Bucket will be required }

Quote:MH370: Search chief echoes relatives' calls to continue hunt for plane
Indonesia bureau chief Samantha Hawley
Updated 56 minutes agoSun 5 Jun 2016, 7:39am

Photo: Sakinab Shah, the sister of the MH370 captain, says Malaysia should continue the search. (ABC TV)

As the mission to find missing Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 draws to a close, the head of the international search is pushing for the hunt to continue until the aircraft has been found.

Key points:

• Australian transport safety chief says team still "deeply passionate" about the search
  
• Family of MH370 pilot begs for Malaysia to continue looking for plane after Australian-led search ends in July
  
• No evidence of plane found at pinpointed location
  
  

The Australian-led search of 120,000 square kilometres of the South Indian ocean seafloor will end in the weeks ahead when the final 15,000 square kilometres has been covered.

But Australian Transport Safety Bureau chief commissioner Martin Dolan said the team of 200 was still deeply committed and passionate about the search.

His sentiments were echoed by the extended family of the captain of flight MH370, who have pleaded for the search to continue.

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 lost contact with air traffic controllers during a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 passengers and crew, including six Australians, on board.

The plane's disappearance on March 8, 2014 sparked one of the greatest mysteries in aviation history.

The flight was piloted by Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, 53, who had flown with Malaysia Airlines since 1981. He had a total of 18,365 flying hours.

The first officer was 27-year-old Fariq Ab Hamid, who joined the airline in 2007 and had flown a total of 2,763 hours.

In the aftermath of the disappearance, there were multiple theories including that Captain Shah may have been to blame, although a report released a year after the aircraft was lost found no suspicious behaviour by the pilot, co-pilot or crew.


Photo: MH370 captain Zaharie Shah had more than 30,000 hours flying experience before the plane went missing. (ABC TV)

The sister of Captain Shah, Sakinab Shah, told the ABC it was up to Malaysia to continue the search for answers.

"From my personal opinion Australia is within its rights to call off the search," she said.
"It is Malaysia's responsibility, this is Malaysian MH370, our national carrier, once our pride and joy."

Ms Shah said her bother was deeply missed.

"There is nobody in this world that can replace him," she said

"He was a very kind fellow, very caring, he made time for everybody. He was generous-hearted."

No answers despite $180m search effort

Over the past two years, mass efforts have been thrown at the search in an area of the plane's most likely resting place, which was determined according to satellite imaging from British company Inmarsat.

But as the massive $180 million search draws to a close, no evidence of the plane has been found at that location.

Mr Dolan said once the mission in the designated area was complete, it was his preference the search continued.


Photo: Samantha Hawley speaks with the sister of MH370 Captain Zaharie Shah, Sakinab Shah. (ABC TV)

"Obviously if you ask me, from the point of view of Australian Transport Safety Bureau, working with the Malaysian authorities, our preference very strongly would be to continue the operations until we find the aircraft," he told the ABC.

"But we're realistic that there comes a point when governments have to decide that they've spent enough resources on the task.

"From the professional investigation point of view, we'd be saying we should continue until we find the aircraft."

Mr Dolan said the search area covered the vast majority of the possible flight paths of the aircraft.

He defended the search areas, saying it was calculated from satellite data.

"If we don't find it in that area then it's in an adjacent area that we will find the aircraft, it's just that the adjacent area is large," Mr Dolan said.

Self-funded searcher calls for refined area

American man Blaine Gibson has undertaken a self-funded search for the missing plane.
He found one of the pieces of likely plane debris off the coast of Mozambique in March this year.

How the disaster unfolded



Look back over how events unfolded following the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

"If they do not find it [MH370] there I hope that they refine the search area and look at other evidence in the hope that more debris is found that can give an idea where it is," he told the ABC from the Kuala Lumpur International Airport.

"Maybe it is somewhere north-west of there."

Mr Gibson said authorities had not adequately investigated a sighting of an aircraft near the Maldives on the evening the plane went missing.

"We need to look at the eyewitness sightings in the Maldives and other eyewitness sightings in Malaysia," he said.

"Most importantly the debris evidence, the current and drifts of the five pieces of debris that have been identified and the marine biology on them."

He hoped an international consortium would resume the search once the Australian-led mission was complete.

So far five pieces of debris likely to be from MH370 have been found, while three more pieces that have washed up on Indian Ocean beaches in Mauritius and Mozambique are being examined by Australian investigators.

Photo: Debris was found off Mosambique in March this year. (Supplied: Aircrash Support Group Australia)

The Malaysian Transport Minister refused the ABCs request to be interviewed.

The Malaysian Government has consistently rejected criticism its initial response in the vital early hours and days of the search lacked rigour and transparency.

It took four days for Malaysia to reveal the international search in waters in the South China Sea to its north was pointless and that the plane had taken a sharp turn left towards the strait of Malacca.

"We didn't start looking for surface wreckage in the southern Indian Ocean until day 10 or day 11 after the disappearance of the aircraft, which meant that things could have drifted a long way," Commissioner Dolan said.

Photo: Map from AMSA showing the planned search areas and Sonobuoy search areas for flight MH370 on April 12, 2014. (AMSA)

'We need to know where our family is'
Queenslanders Cathy and Bob Lawton were on the flight, and left behind a loving extended family, three daughters and grandchildren.

They were travelling with friends Mary and Rodney Borrows on a so-called trip of a lifetime.

Cathy's sister Jennifer McQuire said the family wanted the search to continue, but understood it could not be funded forever.


Photo: Queenslanders Catherine and Robert Lawton pictured on holidays. Both were on board Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. (Facebook)

"It is always an emotional rollercoaster — at one point you are quite good and then the next part you're just torn apart with everything inside yourself," Ms McQuire said.


"You don't want it to stop, we need to have closure, we need to know where our family is."

University of Western Australia oceanographer Charitha Pattiaratchi compared the search to looking for something with your eyes closed.

"It it took 100 years for them to go and find the exact location of the Titanic," he said.
"Same for HMAS Sydney, maybe some time in the future when we have better techniques, there might be another expedition which may be able to find the plane."

Is there no limit to the low depths that this Muppet will go??- UDB!

Trying to describe with one word or one line the Beaker enigma and his puerile impact on aviation safety administration is a challenge. Is he the Moriarty; or the spook; or the Uriah Heap of aviation safety?? Would appreciate others insight, however for me the best line description for the Muppet is...




MTF...P2

Well well well !
It seems a few of my questions from post 342 (http://auntypru.com/forum/-Australia-ATS...22#pid4322) have been answered.
See Jeff Wise - 7th June 2016 - http://jeffwise.net/2016/06/07/more-abou...70-debris/

A short time ago from Reuters via the SMH: 

Quote:'Plane debris' found on South Australia's Kangaroo Island examined for MH370 link
Date June 9, 2016 - 9:31PM

Georgina Mitchell

Australian Transport Safety Bureau will investigate if a piece of debris found washed up on the South Australian coast on Thursday afternoon has links to the missing Malaysian aircraft MH370.

A man who was searching the beach for driftwood discovered the debris, which appears to be from a plane, on the coast of Kangaroo Island at around 2.40pm ACST.
South Australian police collected the shoebox-sized piece of wreckage for safekeeping until the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) picks it up to be examined.

A photo of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, missing since 2014. Photo: AP
A spokeswoman for the ATSB said the agency is waiting for further information.


"We'll examine each component as it comes in. At this stage, there is nothing definitive and we'll follow our normal procedure," the spokeswoman told Reuters.

"All we know is that there is wreckage."

It is understood the Civil Aviation Safety Authority has seen a photograph of the piece of debris and believes it could be from a plane, but referred it on to investigators at the ATSB.

Footage broadcast by Seven News on Thursday night showed a fragment of white wreckage with a honeycomb symbol and printed words saying, "Caution no step".

Flight MH370 disappeared in March 2014 with 239 passengers and crew on board shortly after taking off from Kuala Lumpur bound for Beijing, in what has become one of the world's greatest aviation mysteries.

A first piece of the Boeing 777, a wing part known as a flaperon, washed up on the French Indian Ocean island of Reunion in July 2015. Malaysia and French authorities confirmed it was from the aircraft.

Two pieces of debris discovered later in South Africa and the Mauritian island of Rodrigues were almost certainly from the jetliner, Malaysia's transport ministry said last month.

Investigators believe someone may have deliberately switched off the plane's transponder before diverting it thousands of miles off course over the Indian Ocean.
with Reuters


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/plane-debris-found-on-south-australias-kangaroo-island-examined-for-mh370-link-20160609-gpftdf.html#ixzz4B5Emfe8v

MTF...P2

Remember this ?

We should send out the beach search parties in SA, Vic & Tas now !

But that said, I don't think this Kangaroo Island item is from MH-370.

The markings are too small (compared to his hand) for a "big aircraft".



And the fonts are totally different to the other "no step" part.



Thus, I think it is more likely from a smaller aircraft, a drone perhaps, i.e. a UAV, that may have  crashed in the SIO.

Just obtained two more photographs of the Kangaroo Island piece found by Samuel Armstrong.







NOTE:

MANGOSTEEN !!

(06-05-2016, 09:51 AM)Peetwo Wrote: [ -> ]  UDB! - Bring on June 30 - please someone..anyone??    
 
Reflecting on the SMH thread quoted post below:

(06-01-2016, 04:20 PM)Peetwo Wrote: [ -> ]Beaker clearing the decks for Hoody??

However the far bigger questions are; Q1/ who the hell let him back in again; and Q2/ why is such a maligned, Pecksniffian, sanctimonious individual seemingly impervious to similar sanction from now five different government ministries, ever since his original appointment as the first Chief Commissioner to the ATSB??

Truss had the perfect opportunity to cut him loose after Beaker's contract was due to expire, but bizarrely after all the evidence from the PelAir debacle that the Muppet was a liability, dopey Truss renewed Beaker's contract for a further two years -   

Well fortunately the countdown is now on with 24 days to go till the Muppet exits stage right...

However from the other Aunty today it would appear that this public servant enigma is determined that he won't be easily forgotten before he slithers off the MH370 stage with his gold-plated parachute - FDS! {Warning: Bucket will be required }

Quote:MH370: Search chief echoes relatives' calls to continue hunt for plane
Indonesia bureau chief Samantha Hawley
Updated 56 minutes agoSun 5 Jun 2016, 7:39am

Photo: Sakinab Shah, the sister of the MH370 captain, says Malaysia should continue the search. (ABC TV)

Is there no limit to the low depths that this Muppet will go??- UDB!

Trying to describe with one word or one line the Beaker enigma and his puerile impact on aviation safety administration is a challenge. Is he the Moriarty; or the spook; or the Uriah Heap of aviation safety?? Would appreciate others insight, however for me the best line description for the Muppet is...

It would appear that not a weekend goes by now that our MH370 super sleuth Muppet pops up somewhere in the World MSM, this time on NYT:

Quote:Australia Reconsiders How Far Flight 370 May Have Flown
By KEITH BRADSHERJUNE 11, 2016


Photo

 
Technicians worked aboard the Fugro Equator, a ship searching for the remains of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, as it docked in Fremantle, Australia, in May. Credit David Dare Parker for The New York Times

PERTH, Australia — The search for Malaysia Airlines’ missing Flight 370 on the floor of the southern Indian Ocean is nearing an end with no sign of the plane in the area that investigators had concluded it most likely went down, prompting a last-ditch reassessment of assumptions used to calculate its final descent and draw the search zone.

At issue are estimates of how far the plane may have traveled after it ran out of fuel, notably whether it followed a tight or broad spiral down as it fell or glided toward the ocean, officials said.

“We’re really doing further work to test our assumption about the end of flight, which defines our search area,” said Martin Dolan, the chief commissioner of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. “It’s really testing to make sure we haven’t missed anything, and that our assumptions remain valid.”

The failure to find any wreckage in the area also raises the possibility that the plane began descending earlier, or perhaps changed course in an attempt at an emergency landing at sea, though investigators have discounted these outcomes as inconsistent with other evidence.

There is still hope that the plane will be found in the search zone, an expanse of 46,000 square miles, about the size of England. But ocean survey vessels have scoured about 90 percent of the area and are expected to finish the rest in August. Unless new information emerges, that is when the governments of Australia, Malaysia and China plan to abandon the search, leaving one of the greatest mysteries in the history of modern aviation unsolved.

Flight 370 disappeared on March 8, 2014, while flying to Beijing from Kuala Lumpur, the Malaysian capital, carrying 239 passengers and crew members from 15 nations. An analysis of radar and satellite communications data determined that the Boeing 777-200 made several turns and then flew south for five hours with little deviation. But investigators never pinpointed where the plane ran out of fuel.

“There is no reason
we should give up the
search — at least they
have to give us an answer.”

Steve Wang, whose 57-year-old mother was on Flight 370

Instead, they identified a 400-mile arc from which the plane most likely sent its last satellite signal. Survey vessels have been going back and forth at walking speed across that swath of the southern Indian Ocean for two years, using sonar devices towed over the seafloor to scan the Stygian depths more than two miles below the waves.

How Missing Jet’s Debris Could Have Floated to Réunion MARCH 17, 2014 

Investigators are now asking whether they have been looking in the right place. They are reconsidering an assumption that when the plane’s engines ran dry, the aircraft spiraled into the sea without traveling a horizontal distance of more than 10 nautical miles — a relatively tight spiral.

Analysts at Boeing and elsewhere have been re-examining their models of how the aircraft operating under autopilot might have responded to an initial loss of power on one side of the aircraft, and, up to 15 minutes later, on both sides. The simulations assume the right engine ran out of fuel first, because over its years of service that engine on the aircraft had tended to burn slightly more fuel than the left engine, according to records from Rolls-Royce, the engines’ manufacturer.

The three countries bankrolling the search for the missing Boeing 777-200 agreed in April last year not to expand the search area unless new information provided clear clues that the plane was somewhere else.

So far, no evidence has emerged that would justify an expanded search, Mr. Dolan said.
While the search for Flight 370 is already the largest and most costly in aviation history, relatives of passengers on the plane have called for it to be extended, as have many scientists, pilots, hobbyists and others mesmerized by the mystery of its disappearance.

“There is no reason we should give up the search — at least they have to give us an answer,” said Steve Wang, a technology company salesman in Beijing who has served as an unofficial spokesman for the families and whose 57-year-old mother was on the plane.

“Everything about MH370 remains a mystery — what happened, and how?”

Photo

 
Messages of hope in Kuala Lumpur at a March remembrance of the Malaysia Airlines flight that disappeared in 2014. Credit Joshua Paul/Associated Press

The search zone was calculated using the last automatic signal sent by the aircraft’s engines to a satellite right before it disappeared. The signal indicated that the satellite system had been reset, suggesting a power failure, possibly caused by the engine’s running out of fuel.

Though the signal did not include location data, analysis of the time it took the transmission to travel to and from the satellite led investigators to focus on the 400-mile arc.

But Duncan Steel, a scientist on a panel of experts that has advised the Australian government, said the arc might have been drawn too far south. Investigators have assumed the plane was at cruising altitude when it sent its last signal, he said, but if the plane had started descending earlier as it ran low on fuel, it would have covered less distance before it hit the ocean.

Investigators said on May 12 that two pieces of debris recovered in March from South Africa and from Rodrigues Island, part of Mauritius, were “almost certainly” from the missing plane. But neither part — a piece of the interior panel in the main cabin and a piece of engine covering — provided significant information about the aircraft’s final location.

Australia’s minister of infrastructure and transport, Darren Chester, announced on May 26 that two more pieces of debris had been found in Mauritius and another in Mozambique that would also be examined for possible links to the missing aircraft.

The Australian government said on Friday that four more pieces of debris, three found on Madagascar and one on a southern Australian island, would be checked to determine whether they came from the missing plane.

Three other pieces linked to the plane were discovered on African beaches last year and early this year. One was identified as clearly belonging to the right wing, while another was identified as “almost certainly” coming from the right wing and a third as “almost certainly” coming from the right side of the tail.

The accumulation of parts from the aircraft’s right side has led some to suggest that the plane may have changed course before it crashed, possibly under the control of a conscious pilot.

In theory, a pilot could have attempted an emergency landing by turning the plane and trying to land it just behind an ocean swell, before the next swell arrived.

One of the many risks of such a maneuver would be a wave’s snagging and tearing off a wing, leaving wing debris that might end up floating far away while the rest of the aircraft landed more softly and sank.

Peter Marosszeky, a longtime aircraft engineer who advised Boeing on the development of the 777 aircraft and is now the managing director of Aerospace Developments, a Sydney consulting firm, said some wing parts were made from lightweight composite materials that would float easily.

If a conscious pilot were still at the controls, it also would have been possible in theory for the plane to glide and travel much farther after it ran out of fuel.

But Mr. Dolan said considerable data from the rest of the flight, including signs that the plane maintained its speed, altitude and heading hour after hour as it traveled south across the Indian Ocean, made it very unlikely that a conscious pilot was at the controls.

Huh! Where is this so called considerable data?
 
"..maintained its speed, altitude..." Obviously not otherwise it would have been found by now. 

"...and heading.."  I don't believe it has been discounted in anyway that MH370 could have been flying a great circle track??

Oh well 16 more days till Beaker finally leaves the building -


MTF...P2

A ramble - Not really for pilots:-

Now I don’t want to get into the deep technical here; but I do want to raise some questions related to ‘how’ the search area was actually defined – from the navigation data provided and the apparent assumptions drawn from assumed data.  Basic. potted stuff follows,  I know; but, I keep reading articles where ‘confusing’ terminology is worked into a theory or notion and presented as ‘hard’ fact.  Without accurate flight planning data and the actual weather data for any of the assumed direction of travel; from an accurate start point, tackling the end of journey point, as purely a navigational and operational exercise, becomes the stuff of nightmare.  When pure ‘guess-work’ is melded with inaccurate terminology; well, you can see where I’m heading. For instance:-

Heading – much is made of the aircraft’s ‘heading’.  It wearies me to keep reading about this item.  A ‘heading’ is, simply put, what the compass reads.  Lets say you want to head North; but which North, there are basically two reference choices – Magnetic or True – and corrections must be made, if you wish to arrive in Albuquerque not Mecca.  But the ‘heading’ is the basis on which navigational outcomes are based.

Track – simply put; the ‘track’ defines the actual path the aircraft travels.  Say you still want to go North but the air through which you are travelling is moving from West to East.  If you simply make your heading ‘N’ (360˚) then you will be carried East of your desired ‘track’ at a rate commensurate with the speed of the wind,.  So; if Albuquerque is 200 miles North of your starting point, you will, 200 miles later be a considerable distance to the East of there, if you don't adjust the heading .

Wind Correction Angle – to avoid this embarrassment, a prudent pilot has a look at the ‘winds aloft’ prediction for the desired track and then, by a ridiculously simple method adjusts the basic heading to allow for ‘drift’. This is, surprisingly, known as the wind correction angle.  The vagaries of the actual wind against those forecast become a simple matter of weighing the ‘track-made-good’ against where the aircraft actually is and a further simple correction is made to regain the desired track.

Speed – is a truly moveable feast of potential confusion.  Almost every element of flight affects it, from power to weight, from temperature to altitude, from turbulence to aircraft trim.  One of the basic ‘must’ have navigational speeds is the rate at which the aircraft travels over the earths surface, to wit; the ground speed.   Another essential is the ‘True Airspeed’ (TAS).

TAS is, stand alone, a strange beast.  A simple method of coming to terms with it is the ‘ICE-T’ formula.  I= Indicated (IAS is what’s on the dial) – C =Calibrated (IAS corrected for position installation error)– E= Equivalent (EAS is CAS corrected for compressibility); from which TAS which defined, i.e.  the EAS corrected for temperature and pressure altitude.

Why is the fool rabbiting on about this? Well, it is important if theory is to meet reality; for example; once you have defined the true speed of your aircraft and corrected the speed over the ground for wind; once you venture up into the higher atmosphere it really, really matters that these assumptions are correct.  Above 25, 000 feet (ish) things change, the rate at which the temperature changes for example; but one of the real changes is the wind speed range and the ‘jet stream’.  Anywhere between 60 to 120 knots (nautical miles per hour) is almost routine.  These may be thought of as ribbons or ‘corridors’ of very fast moving air.  


Just pretend you are still heading North at lets say 480 knots TAS (48 every six minutes) and the Jetstream is heading East at 100 knots.  If you do not change you heading to accommodate this, for every 48 you progress North, the wind will carry you, off track to the  East 10.  Rather than be 10 miles off track every six minutes; you correct for the drift i.e. alter heading to the West.  With high wind speeds and high wind correction angles comes a penalty.  The angle of correction required reduces the value of the True Airspeed.  Your 480 TAS ‘effectively’ becomes 470, due to the vectors involved.

So what cries the mob – well when you are looking for a needle in a haystack a small differential of 5 to 10 knots every 6 minutes over lets say 5 hours, becomes a huge area.  Work with 5 knots x 10 = 50 miles (92.6 Kms) x 5 hours = 250 miles (463 Kms).  So even an analysis of the effective TAS reduction due to wind aloft demands detailed, accurate knowledge of several factors.  This element, if not acknowledged, alone casts doubt over the area of intended search.

Whether the aircraft was ‘Navigating’ to a predetermined way point or not becomes another important element. If, as many would have it the aircraft was flying a ‘Heading’ then wind and temperature data becomes essential if the search area is to be accurately defined.  If the aircraft was ‘tracking’ then the effective speed become important.

When you start to operationally define this flight the odds against any sensible conclusion being drawn, without full knowledge, are slightly more than throwing a dart at a map and betting $100,000,000 that you are right.

My sincere apologies to pilots and navigators everywhere; this ramble was not intended to do any more than outline why many, taking well intended liberties in trying to define the most probable search area should not.  I know none of us can define it; not accurately.  We simply do not have the required information to even begin to make an educated guess.  Starting with the very basics, through to the sophisticated satellite data, there has not been enough information made publicly available for constructive, nice analysis.  We must rely on the integrity of the powers that be to provide those answers; but I’m ducked if I can find any that make good, sound operational sense.

Here endeth the ramble; if you managed to plough your way this far – have a CF

Toot toot.

(06-19-2016, 08:35 AM)kharon Wrote: [ -> ]............... there has not been enough information made publicly available for constructive, nice analysis.

True.

(06-19-2016, 08:35 AM)kharon Wrote: [ -> ] We must rely on the integrity of the powers that be ......

Why ?

Let's look back to day one.

Real, verifiable, "Information" or "data", has been next to zero.
"Misinformation", for the world's media, has been plentiful.
"Disinformation", has been overwhelming.

A year on (minus 2 days) revisit post #86

And a new "special" tripartite meeting of "only the highest officials" will be held in KL next week ?
Q: For what purpose ?
A: To "wrap it up".

The existing farce of the 120,000 square kilometre search will end in a few weeks, (weather permitting).

Then the "tripartites" can "with deep sorrow" officially end the search.

Then, this thread can be closed with it, and archived, which is precisely what "the powers that be" want.

Alas, 'tis sad but Oh so true.

Quote:“V” - Then, this thread can be closed with it, and archived, which is precisely what "the powers that be" want.

Alas, ‘tis true.  Like all of the great air disasters, it will wind up the subject of some highly dramatized, advert ridden, repetitive sales platform for ‘entertainment’ purposes only.  Once every few years it will surface as does the Erebus accident and the other ‘famous’ crashes.  The difference being that in many of the ‘famous’ accidents there are facts for the docomentaly challenged to work with and nearly always a properly executed investigation.  Not so with the MH 370 event

From soup to nuts, there has been a feeling of ‘wrongness’ (for wont of better) about the whole thing.  You know the feeling, plodding along in cruise, all is well but there’s something just not right.  Of course once AMSA were stood aside and Beaker stuck his oar in, it was game over for me; interest switch –identified – Off.  But I have watched with some interest the efforts made by the honest folk to undo the Gordian knot and those who have dedicated time, effort, good will and brain power to the cause, most admirable.  I have also learned to avoid the ravings of fools and halfwits who can’t resist pounding everyone to tears with half baked, uneducated personal views and then attack anyone who dares challenge the lunacy.  Then we have those who cynically, for their own benefit provide ‘plausible’ analysis, get it wrong, then have the Gaul to come back with an equally preposterous ‘alternative’.  

But what of those still waiting for news?  It must have been a roller coaster ride to Hell, hope alongside uncertainty. The frustration levels must be sky high and these are not ‘silly’ folk, they may not know too much about aircraft or deep sea search; but they know when they are being fed a line of the purest pony-pooh or sold a rotten fish.  

No, the whole thing has been either brilliantly handled or grossly mismanaged; depending on your point of view.  But time passes and as the money runs out and the press have hurried off in pursuit of the next story and the politicians become busy with serious matters; this story will fade away, the insurers will sort out the pittances to paid and the world will go on it’s merry way, as it always has.

For my two bob; this was a criminal act.  Find out who and why and the airframe will be found; anything else is window dressing.

Toot toot.

ATSB CC Dolan spotted in KL = Tripartite meeting is a farce -  

Dolan accompanied by Peter Foley (and some other dude?) was caught leaving the first day of the MH370 Tripartite meeting in KL:





Also if you go to this tweet link (courtesy of Melissa Goh) you will see some video footage: https://twitter.com/MelGohCNA/status/744739181599985665

According to Ms Goh the ATSB crew were in somewhat of a hurry...

MG tweet 1: "..Australian officials left in a hurry after making presentation at MOT , declined to speak to the media.." 

 ...and when asked for a comment..

"...Australian officials decline to comment on #MH370 tripartite meeting " any queries please direct to the #JACC .."

{Note: The fact that Beaker is in KL and sporting a beard, are IMO both ominous signs that the Tripartite meeting is a total sham and the MH370 SIO search 'end game' is nigh... } 


MTF...P2

Ps TY Oceankoto for the links...

Who is "the woman" in that photo ?

Both Dolan and Foley are (by body language) obvious "subordinate" to her.

Is she Murky's shadow ?

(06-21-2016, 11:03 AM)ventus45 Wrote: [ -> ]Who is "the woman" in that photo ?

Both Dolan and Foley are (by body language) obvious "subordinate" to her.

Is she Murky's shadow ?

Judith Zielke from JACC & Murky's deputy I think??