Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Printable Version

+- AuntyPru Forum (https://auntypru.com/forum)
+-- Forum: MH 370 -Media unscrambled. (https://auntypru.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=53)
+--- Forum: P2 - Wheat from Chaff. (https://auntypru.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=54)
+--- Thread: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 (/showthread.php?tid=24)

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 09-12-2015

The following is extracted from CSIRO David Griffin's latest 'MH370 - Drift Analysis' 

Quote:Summary



Analysis of the trajectories of satellite-tracked drifting buoys deployed in the Indian Ocean over the last 30 years confirms our earlier conclusion based on computer modelling that the MH370 flaperon found on La Reunion in July 2015 is consistent with MH370 having crashed near the 39°S-32°S segment of the 7th arc on 8 March 2014. With just one piece of MH370 found, however, the buoy data, like the computer modelling, can not significantly refine the ATSB's sea-floor search area - it just increases our confidence that the flight path analysis underpinning the choice of sea-floor search area is not wrong.

Introduction
Our 5 August news item described how the 29 July 2015 discovery of a flaperon (now confirmed as being from MH370) on La Reunion island did not cast doubt on the MH370 sea-floor search area chosen by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau based on analysis of the satellite ping data (see the ATSB Fact Sheet). This conclusion was based on ocean modelling. Here, we discuss additional information that lends further support to our 5 August conclusion.

The Global Drifter Program is a highly-valued legacy of the World Ocean Circulation Experiment. The satellite-tracked drifting buoys ('drifters') measure ocean surface temperature for calibration of satellites, and atmospheric pressure for improving the accuracy of weather forecasts. The trajectories of the drifters tells us about ocean surface currents.

The term 'surface current' however, needs discussion before we connect it with the drift of the flaperon.

The flaperon is buoyant, flat, and only a few meters long. Depending on exactly how it floated, it would have drifted at the velocity of the water averaged over the top 0.5-2m.

This is certainly close enough to the ocean surface for the effect of waves to be important, so the Stokes Drift would have contributed to its drift. If the flaperon had any non-negligible freeboard (projection into the air) then it would also catch the wind and 'sail' slowly through the water at some small fraction of the wind speed. This down-wind velocity is often referred to as 'leeway' and expressed as a percentage of the wind speed. We do not have an estimate of the leeway factor of the flaperon, so our modelling work was done for a range of plausible leeway factors. As an aside, we note that winds and waves are usually strongly correlated so empirical leeway factors will include the Stokes Drift if the influence of waves is not deliberately isolated.

Global Drifter Program drifters are fitted with 10m-long sea-anchors (or 'drogues') centred at about 15m depth so that, by design, they do not drift downwind like buoyant items such as the flaperon. There are several good reasons for this design, both scientific and practical. Fortunately for our present purpose, however, the drifters lose their sea-anchors after some time (Lumpkin et al. 2013), making them much more relevant to the question we now face with the flaperon than they were designed to be. Their leeway is possibly slightly higher than the flaperon's, but we think that the error associated with this is smaller than the errors of any other source of information available. We refer below to these as undrogued drifters. Trajectories of the drogued drifters are also shown to highlight the importance of the difference, and for comparison with models that have not included the effects of winds and waves, such as the recent GEOMAR study.

Results
We have extracted from the 1985-2015 database the trajectories of all undrogued drifters relevant to MH370, i.e. drifters that were near the present MH370 sea floor search area (the high-probability segment of the Inmarsat 7th arc between 39°S and 32°S) in February-April, or near La Reunion in April-July, in any of the last 30 years.


Forward drift from 39°S-32°S near 7th arc
Seventy four undrogued drifters (right, click to expand) passed through an area surrounding the present sea-floor search area for MH370 and reported data for at least 200 days after that. A substantial fraction of them went near La Reunion within 500 days. These are drifters that transited the blue rectangle within 6 weeks of 8 March. Relaxing that criterion, we see that trajectories at other times of the year were not very different. One drifter actually beached on La Reunion.

Water temperature and barnacles
The drifting buoys record the surface temperate of the ocean. These data, along with the general northward then westward drift post-crash, show that the flaperon probably entered water warmer than 18°C within a month or two of the crash, so barnacle nauplii may have started settling and growing on the flaperon for most of the voyage.

Forward drift from other segments of the 7th arc
We have also looked at the trajectories of drifters passing though segments of the 7th arc either south of 39°S or north of 32°S. Drifters passing through the southern region have an increased tendency to go east and a lower chance of going to La Reunion. Conversely, drifters passing through the northern region mostly went west across the Indian Ocean but passed north of La Reunion, several beaching on Madagascar or Africa in less than 300d. The flaperon finding is therefore too late as well as too far south to be consistent with a crash site north of the present sea-floor search region.

Comparison with model results
The undrogued drifter trajectories differ from our model trajectories in that the real drifters passed by La Reunion principally north of La Reunion, while our model drifters were principally south of La Reunion. This is precisely the sort of model error we had in mind when we said taking model errors into account in our 5 August news item.

Trajectories leading to La Reunion
Turning the question around, the origins of drifters that passed close to La Reunion any time in 1985-2015 were principally in the southern Indian Ocean, including regions near the supposed MH370 crash site, as shown at right. Selecting only those that arrived near La Reunion in April-July does not greatly alter the picture. What does change the picture, as mentioned above, is selecting for tracks of drogued drifters that (ultimately, possibly with the drogue off, like this one) go near La Reunion. These drifters are more likely to have originated in the tropical Indian Ocean. As discussed above, however, the flaperon floated close to the ocean surface, so the tracks of drogued drifters are much less directly relevant than those of the undrogued drifters.

Conclusion
Taking the modelling and drifter observations together, we stand by our earlier conclusions: the finding of the flaperon is not a reason to doubt the present choice of sea-floor search area. And with only one piece of MH370 found, the presence of ocean eddies makes it essentially impossible to refine the sea-floor search area with any confidence. The flaperon finding does, however, support the flight-path analysis conclusion that the 39°S-32°S segment of the 7th arc is indeed the highest-priority search region for MH370.

I am just a mere knuckledragger but this bit really makes one think that old mate Griffo has been tasked by the 'powers to be' to make the prognosis fit the synopsis...
 "...What does change the picture, as mentioned above, is selecting for tracks of drogued drifters that (ultimately, possibly with the drogue off, like this one) go near La Reunion. These drifters are more likely to have originated in the tropical Indian Ocean. As discussed above, however, the flaperon floated close to the ocean surface, so the tracks of drogued drifters are much less directly relevant than those of the undrogued drifters..."

If that is not the biggest load of presumptive codswallop, I don't know what is. If that is what they're basing their drift model on why then did they not bombard the 7th arc with SLDMBs that can simulate both floating & drogued drifters??- FCOBL...

MTF..P2

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 09-12-2015

Aussie;

"Bringing the reporting times down to 14 minutes will make no difference if it takes the people on the land hours to do anything about a missing plane load of people".

Couldn't agree more. And a reduced timeline also doesn't prevent orchestrated coverups and/or acts of malfeasance or criminality. It does SFA!

From P7 quoting Ben Sandilands;

"China’s concerns about MH370 are very real. The intensity of those concerns is confirmed by its apparent reluctance to turn up in Canberra. If only we knew what Beijing knows"

Yep, China's bizarre actions, and at times inaction, is not logical or commensurate with the depth of this situation. I have even tried to reason that perhaps it is a cultural type of thing, and somebody out there with a better understanding or appreciation of Chinese culture could explain it to a layman like myself? Otherwise to me in regards to their behaviour 2 + 2 does not equal 4.

And one final thought for consideration. As I've said all along I do not believe that neither the Yanks nor China with all of their hardware, subs, satellites and god knows what else they have, do not know anything? Bollocks! But in the meantime the search certainly provides a great unforeseen opportunity for the Anglo American world power to concentrate a lot of time and energy both under the sea, upon the sea, and up in the sky in that particular region of the world don't you think?

MTF? Most certainly.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 09-23-2015

"She sells seashells on the sea floor??"   

A bit of a development from today's JACC Ops Search Update:

Quote:Sonar contacts

During this swing Fugro Discovery will resurvey several Classification 2 contacts identified previously during the underwater search. More than thirty Classification 2 contacts have been identified to date.

The resurvey of Classification 2 contacts will be conducted using the deep-tow at lower altitude and using higher frequency sonar. The higher resolution data from this method will enable the search team to identify the relevance of such contacts without the need to await the arrival of the autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) which cannot be deployed until the weather improves in the summer months.

The search for MH370 is being conducted thoroughly and to a very high standard and it is important that contacts are comprehensively investigated and considered.

By way of background, there are three classifications for sonar contacts identified during the course of the underwater search:

• Classification 3 is assigned to sonar contacts that are of some interest as they stand out from their surroundings but have low probability of being significant to the search;
  

• Classification 2 sonar contacts are of comparatively more interest but are still unlikely to be significant to the search; and
  

• Classification 1 sonar contacts are of high interest and warrant immediate further investigation.
  
  

A fact sheet containing further information about sonar contacts as well as image examples of each of the classifications is available on the website of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau via: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2015/mh370-sonar-contacts.aspx.

As you can expect this created some MSM interest, e.g. courtesy news.com.au:

Quote:MH370 search to revisit more than 30 sites previously ruled out
September 23, 2015 5:34pm

THE search for MH370 will return to more than 30 sites in coming weeks to ensure nothing has been missed.
The latest update on the underwater search reveals the decision to revisit “Classification 2” sites where search vessels have previously made “sonar contacts of interest”.

Despite being rated as “unlikely to be significant to the search” the Australian Transport Safety Bureau now believes they warrant a second look.


Tough work ... Waves crash over the back deck of Fugro Discovery during search for MH370 in the southern Indian Ocean. Pic: Supplied.Source:Supplied

“The resurvey of Classification 2 contacts will be conducted using the deep-tow at lower altitude and using higher frequency sonar,” said the ATSB update.

“The higher resolution data from this method will enable the search team to identify the relevance of such contacts without the need to await the arrival of the autonomous underwater vehicle which cannot be deployed until the weather improves in the summer months.

“The search for MH370 is being conducted thoroughly and to a very high standard and it is important that contacts are comprehensively investigated and considered.”


Found ... objects thought to be shipping containers on the floor of the southern Indian Ocean.Source:Supplied

The decision follows criticism from various experts worldwide about the methods being used to search for the Malaysia Airlines’ Boeing 777 that vanished over 18-months ago.
Former French naval officer Paul-Henry Nargeolet who coordinated the search and recovery of Air France Flight 447, spoke out in May about the “inappropriate equipment” being used, and the inexperience of contractor Fugro to perform the work.

Mr Nargeolet questioned the withdrawal of GO Phoenix, which he said was best equipped for a deep sea search.

Australian and Malaysian authorities have indicated more vessels may join the search when the weather improves.


Searching ... Fugro Discovery heading out to the search zone in the southern Indian Ocean yet again. Pic: Supplied.Source:Supplied

Currently only two, Fugro Discovery and Fugro Equator, are involved in the massive operation over 120,000 square kilometres in the southern Indian Ocean.

A little over half the area has now been scoured, and Australia, Malaysia and China have decreed the search will not be extended beyond that zone unless new evidence comes to light.

The discovery of a flaperon from MH370 on Reunion Island in July failed to provide any new leads for search co-ordinators.

Australia has funded the lion’s share of the search, contributing $90 million compared with $40 million from Malaysia and nothing from China.

Of the 239 people on board MH370, six were from Australia and 152 from China.

• • Latest comments:
    
  • Bill Posted at 6:20 PM Today
    
    The French are welcome to volunteer their services for free but I'm sure they wont. It will never be found in this way. Its just another waste of taxpayers money
    

 
Of course for a more informative & balanced take, there is this from PlaneTalking:

Quote:MH370 search to revisit 30 objects of interest on sea floor

Ben Sandilands | Sep 23, 2015 6:51PM |

The special AUV requires stable surface conditions for deployment and recovery

At least 30 places or objects of potential interest in the search for MH370 that have already been detected on the floor of the south Indian Ocean are about to be resurveyed by deeper, sharper sonar scans.

In its weekly search update the JACC says checking the objects more closely now will speed up the overall search by eliminating (or confirming) objects that would otherwise remain unchecked until winter sea conditions abate sufficiently to deploy the highly capable Norwegian AUV or autonomous underwater vehicle which has been in storage for five months.

Quote:Sonar contacts
During this swing Fugro Discovery will resurvey several Classification 2 contacts identified previously during the underwater search.  More than thirty Classification 2 contacts have been identified to date. 
The resurvey of Classification 2 contacts will be conducted using the deep-tow at lower altitude and using higher frequency sonar.  The higher resolution data from this method will enable the search team to identify the relevance of such contacts without the need to await the arrival of the autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) which cannot be deployed until the weather improves in the summer months.
The search for MH370 is being conducted thoroughly and to a very high standard and it is important that contacts are comprehensively investigated and considered.
By way of background, there are three classifications for sonar contacts identified during the course of the underwater search:

• Classification 3 is assigned to sonar contacts that are of some interest as they stand out from their surroundings but have low probability of being significant to the search;
  

• Classification 2 sonar contacts are of comparatively more interest but are still unlikely to be significant to the search; and
  

• Classification 1 sonar contacts are of high interest and warrant immediate further investigation.
  

A fact sheet containing further information about sonar contacts as well as image examples of each of the classifications is available on the website of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau.

The Hugin 4500 AUV was chartered early this year to look into particularly deep, complex or challenging locations where sections of the original priority search zone may not have been fully checked for debris from the missing Malaysia Airlines 777-200ER which disappeared on 8 March 2014 en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board.

The jet was over the Gulf of Thailand and had signed off from Malaysia’s air traffic control zone prior to an intended sign on for its entry into Vietnam controlled air space. However its identifying transponder went dead and an object believed to be MH370 was then seen by military radar to divert across the Malaysia Peninsula and ultimately vanished on a general heading toward the Andaman islands.

Analysis of ‘pings’ from an engine status reporting computer on board the jet send to the Rolls-Royce service centre in Derby via an Inmarsat communications satellite and a ground station in Australia indicate the jet flew southwards into the vastness of the Indian Ocean, but, to glide over a fierce technical controversy, to exactly what part of it remains unknown.

The only piece of wreckage so far  identified as coming from MH370 is a section of the trailing edge of the wing which was recovered from the shores of La Réunion island in the western Indian Ocean in July.

The Australian managed search for MH370 is directed by Malaysia.  When tripartite talks between Malaysia, China and Australia on the progress of the search were held in Canberra earlier this month China was a no show.

Good point Ben - Why does China remain strangely silent & disengaged from all this?
MTF..P2

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 09-23-2015

Out of genuine curiosity, was it ever determined whether lithium batteries were manifested as cargo on the flight?
I know that Fedex and UPS have done a lot of work on their onboard fire suppression systems. Naturally commercial operations differ to an all freight operation, but I was just curious.

Fedex;

http://venturaaerospace.com/fire-suppression-systems/

Lithium batteries still can't be ruled out, then again neither do a number of other possibilities. Anyway, I'm sure Beaker will work it out.....

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - ventus45 - 09-26-2015

(09-23-2015, 10:16 PM)Gobbledock Wrote:  I'm sure Beaker will work it out.....

That woke me up !

I realise the sarcasm of course, but whilst still in the realm of the fuzzy land of the first 30 minutes of "awakeness" after a heavy night on the turps, that cost me half a cup of coffee, and possibly a mouse (missed keyboard thankfully) !

Re the Li-O's, my recolection is no, but there was a hell of a lot more "mangosteens" than normal.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 09-26-2015

(09-26-2015, 10:05 AM)ventus45 Wrote:  

(09-23-2015, 10:16 PM)Gobbledock Wrote:  I'm sure Beaker will work it out.....

That woke me up !

I realise the sarcasm of course, but whilst still in the realm of the fuzzy land of the first 30 minutes of "awakeness" after a heavy night on the turps, that cost me half a cup of coffee, and possibly a mouse (missed keyboard thankfully) !

Re the Li-O's, my recolection is no, but there was a hell of a lot more "mangosteens" than normal.

Choc frog Ventus...   Well for the other half a cup, have you noticed how quiet our resident MH 370 super sleuth Muppet has been of late? - Well maybe (from off the Safeskies thread) this is why...

Quote:Paparazzi Rumour Mill... 


Thought it was passing strange that the doyen of Australian Aviation Safety & AAI, our MH370 super sleuth Muppet, a legend in his own OHS approved breakfast bowl, was apparently not present at "Safeskies are decidedly Empty Skies" gobfest.

Well a little piggy told me that someone with very large sunnies and an obvious dyed beard, was spotted walking the beach on Reunion Island?? Then I saw this on the internet celebrity gossip/rumour pages - Beaker on hols?- Sighted in Reunion Island, enroute to Maldives for a secret rendezvous with Miss Piggy.

Well if true it is good to know that even Beaker doesn't believe Safeskies worthy of an appearance, just for appearance purposes, & to pump felt with (so called) fellow self-flagellating, aviation safety gurus...  

Maybe in a sign that there could be an inkling of truth to the rumour, I intercepted the following tweet:

 
Really scrapping the bottom of the bucket now..   Guess Manners or even Sanga, are also out combing the beaches in RI &/or the Maldives..    

 
But seriously did anyone else see this?

Quote:..Mr. Truss said that the French forensic investigation will reveal when and how the flaperon separated from the wing, but the French have not yet finalized or shared their determination because it is a criminal investigation. He says it will determine if it detached before the crash (since a plane can fly without a flaperon) or in an explosion in the air, or upon impacting the water, or afterwards after floating or sinking while attached..

..If it detached upon impacting the water they can determine whether it was a high speed or low speed impact. Peter Foley added that they believe it detached at the time of a high speed impact with the water, but await the results of the French investigation to confirm..

..Peter said they are convinced the plane continued to fly until fuel exhaustion, one engine at a time, resulting in a spiral downward from cruising altitude and a high speed impact with the water. He said this scenario tracks perfectly with the final two handshakes...

MTF...P2

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 09-26-2015

BUCKET PLEASE!!!

P2 you are a real bastard. You mentioned Beaker, Foley and Truss in the one post. There goes my strong black and bacon sandwich!
Warning next time please? Cheers mate

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 09-27-2015

Mi mi mi mi FrankenBeaker.....it's alive

It would seem the French holidaying Super sleuth, beard entrepreneur and all round stammerer Beaker has returned from France and the Hajj??

http://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?news_id=2018655

"MH370 search teams re-examine previous sites
 Search teams still hunting for MH370's final resting place will go back and examine 30 sites which were previously ruled out. 
 The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said investigators will use 'higher frequency sonar' at the sites.
 "The search for MH370 is being conducted thoroughly and to a very high standard and it is important that contacts are comprehensively investigated and considered," the ATSB told the Daily Mail.
 The Southern Indian Ocean has been scoured by search teams for clues but the only physical proof so far has come from the discovery of a 'flaperon' wing piece which washed ashore in Reunion Island.
 In the two months since then, no other debris linked to MH370 has been found.
 ATSB chief Martin Dolan still remains confident they are searching in the right area and the jet will be found.
 "There's still a lot of territory to cover and still a very high prospect that we will find the aircraft there," he recently said.
Friday, September 25, 2015

Beaker ol mate, you couldn't find the left tit from the right tit.

Bucket please. NOW

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 10-10-2015

Is Beaker bad for business? Apparently so

Quote;
"Mr Mueller said the MH370 tragedy continued to hurt the airline’s popularity in Australia where authorities insisted on “reporting weekly what they had not found”.

Article link;

http://mobile.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/malaysia-airlines-boss-says-quick-fix-to-mh370-style-disasters-are-available-now/story-e6frfq80-1227552894532

It is somewhat ironic. The bearded one does tend to report on MH370 weekly, in which he never has anything new to add, yet any other investigations that involve a QF or VA aircraft it's like getting a diamond out of a turd! Nothing, nada, not a thing said for at least 2 years!!!

Wankers 

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - aussie500 - 10-13-2015

Well if they failed to give an update on the search for MH370, people would rightly complain. A lot of people are interested in what happened to MH370. We would also forget a search was even ongoing with out the regular reminder of those out in the middle of nowhere, diligently working away. I did read that bit about "reporting weekly what they had not found" a while ago and had a laugh though. A real gem that.

They are not reporting on the investigation, they are reporting on the search.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 10-20-2015

Senators on the prowl - The Heff, Senators Johnson, Gallacher etc have suddenly caught a sniff of the stench emanating from the ATSB 'blank check' MH370 SIO search and they're 'not happy Jan'...

(10-20-2015, 05:45 PM)kharon Wrote:  The Nitty Gritty.

Quote:Which only leaves ATSB and a hapless, re bearded Beaker – one texted comment cracked me up – it suggested the beard is used as cover for telling the really big Porkies.  Foley did well on MH 370 – he seems to be across the brief and manages to give an impression of honesty.  The session is worth reviewing – Norfolk and Pel-Air were mentioned and the bearded one looked distinctly uncomfortable during that interlude.  MTF.

The inestimable Fawcett.  Watch as he demonstrates, emphatically, why the Committee needs him on the paddock – every game.  Nice to see him out for a run.  

Part III @ 0230 Beaker babbles trying to dodge the question, eventually DF lets him slither away; only to lead him straight to the Pel-Air aftermath.  Off the hook? No way NX; picks up the ball at 06.00 and drives the nail home, with Bullock running interference.  Back to DF playing at 5/8 (old money) for the coup de grace, a dire warning delivered clear as crystal.  As the clock ticks down to the final moments – watch the Beaker expressions from 10.40 and the speed it moves at when Heff blows the whistle and team Beaker limp off.  Except for Beaker who is out of the chair like his nuts was a’fire. Bravo committee.  

It’s good to see all that ‘on the record’ and the record being used as a lethal weapon.  The Chambers Report still features, it is a two edged sword and with any luck the malign intent of that document will become apparent – once the Committee decide to stop using it as a handy club and start using it as a rapier.  That’s is for the CASA thread.  

Parts I & II – the MH 370 stuff up; I wonder does the world realise that the chair of our esteemed, aviation savvy Senate Committee regards it as a “stuff up”, which is Ozspeak for a right royal duck up – or, a load of Bollocks.  The most telling statements, the full stop deadline on the search, has been decided.

Then we get to Norfolk – "initial assessment of conditions" – Beaker really does believe he can get away with curling his toes up, so they can’t put his socks on – purblind folly.   The gig is up and the clock is ticking – as the chair remarked; do not ask a question if you don’t know the answer. Bye bye Beaker – watch Merde’k, the master of the game.

Hansard is brilliant; but, the video – is bloody marvellous, thank tech crew as always a great job.

MTF – fair bet.

Toot toot.

Hansard 19/10/15:

Quote:CHAIR: I think generally you may face some questions about the MH370 stuff-up.


Senator JOHNSTON: Mr Dolan, could you very briefly tell us what we are doing as of right now?

Mr Dolan : At the moment we have two vessels with deep tow equipment in the Indian Ocean or en route to continue the search of the surface in the defined area for this event.

Senator JOHNSTON: That is pursuant to a contract which is worth how much?

Mr Foley : The contract value varies depending on a sliding scale in the contract. We initially started with a contract for 30,000 square kilometres and in three successive moves we have upped the number of square kilometres that we have been asked to search.

Senator JOHNSTON: To 90?

Mr Foley : We are currently at 80,000 square kilometres.

Senator JOHNSTON: You have 10,000 square kilometres to go?

Mr Foley : We have done 70,000 at this point. So, what we have got on AusTender, where we report periodically when we change the value of the contract, is $90 million.

Senator JOHNSTON: So, what is the value of the contract all up with what we have spent so far on the search?

Mr Foley : It is $97 million as of end of September.

Senator JOHNSTON: What is the term of the contract and how is it terminated?

Mr Foley : The term of the contract is two years from the date at which it started and it is terminated at our request, effectively, which is obviously triggered when we find the aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: So, two years or anytime thereafter on reasonable notice, I take it, is roughly right?

Mr Foley : No. Two years is the fixed term of the contract. We extend the contract in terms of square kilometres periodically to, if you like, pre-empt what we think we are going to need to search in the coming months.

Senator JOHNSTON: But after two years we finish?

Mr Foley : After two years we finish.

Senator JOHNSTON: And you estimate the total value of that contract after two years will be?

Mr Foley : It depends on how much we search.

Senator JOHNSTON: A rough estimate?

Mr Foley : That is a hard one. We do not know what our bottom line is in terms of funding as yet because it is reliant not just on the Australian government but the Malaysian government as well. So, in essence, the value of the contract varies depending on how much funding is provided by—

CHAIR: Do you have an open chequebook?

Mr Foley : Not at all. We have been given $60 million.

CHAIR: It sounds like you have.

Mr Foley : We were given $60 million by the Australian government at the start of the search. We have not spent that money yet. Other moneys which have been contributed by Malaysia we are using in tandem with the Australian government money.

Senator JOHNSTON: What is the percentage breakup between Australia and Malaysia?
Mr Foley : At this point it is around about fifty-fifty and it increases proportionately in terms of Malaysia's funding as time goes on.

Senator JOHNSTON: The aileron or whatever it was that was found on Reunion Island—I have been reading that it is from MH370, a Boeing 777.

Mr Foley : Correct.

Senator JOHNSTON: Are we certain that the serial numbers on the component parts of that piece of equipment indisputably match that of the aircraft?

Mr Foley : The French judicial authorities are actually doing the investigation. They are certain that there are unique identifying numbers within the flaperon which related to 9M-MRO, which is the accident aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: And Boeing have confirmed that?

Mr Foley : As far as we know, yes, but the French—

Senator JOHNSTON: Do we have anything in writing?

Mr Foley : The French have announced publicly that it is definitely from the accident aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: Thank you.

Senator GALLACHER: You have contracted a vessel. I presume it is a vessel to tow this equipment.

Mr Dolan : Two vessels.

Mr Foley : The contract currently allows that.

Senator GALLACHER: Are they the best suited vessels for this work? We have received representations that you have picked the wrong vessels, or at least the wrong equipment.

Mr Dolan : We went to the international market with a very clearly specified tender for the services for the search for the missing aircraft. We did a very serious technical assessment of bids that came forward from that. There were three bids that technically complied with our required specified tender conditions and we selected the one that was the best value for money. The vessels that we had available to us are fit for purpose, as is the equipment and the crews that they are using.

Senator GALLACHER: So, whilst it might have been the best value for money was it the one with the best proven success record of finding and utilising this equipment?

Mr Dolan : There has not been any exercise on this scale of this capability so we have no benchmark for it. The closest we have—

Senator GALLACHER: What about the Air France aircraft?

Mr Dolan : The Air France aircraft was talking about a much more constrained area with a much more specified last location of the aircraft. We are talking about a somewhat different ocean bottom as well. There is a whole range of different circumstances. There was nothing that we could directly compare our current exercise to and we are confident that we have the best value for money for the Commonwealth for the exercise.

Senator GALLACHER: The best value for money but we do not know how much we are going to spend or how long we are going to be active for, so is it the best piece of equipment to be doing the job?

Mr Dolan : The equipment is doing the job that we require of it.

CHAIR: That was not the question.

Senator GALLACHER: Is there a piece of equipment that will give you a wider span either side?

CHAIR: There is. You do not ask the question unless you know the answer and I am sure you know the answer.

Mr Foley : Yes, of course. We considered a number of options when we put together the statement of requirements for the tender. We got the best technical advice that we could, which is expertise that exists within the United States, and we specified, very carefully, the technical requirements for the systems that we would use in the search.

Senator XENOPHON: May we get a copy of that technical advice and all the other material that you relied on before you made your decision as to which search company that you went to and the equipment used?

Mr Foley : We can certainly provide that documentation. We have it in existence, of course. It is part of the tender assessment process. The normal, if you like, commercial-in-confidence rules apply, which do not apply here.

Senator XENOPHON: I am not interested so much as to what each of them were going to charge for it. I am interested in the technical assessment of those.

Mr Foley : In assessing the tender we firstly did not consider price at all. The panel was blind to the price of the bids until such time as we had actually assessed their technical merit. Once we had assessed their technical merit, taken advice on the technical merit of the various bids from an expert, we then—

Senator XENOPHON: Who was that expert?

Mr Foley : He is currently contracted to us as our sonar expert. His name is Andrew Sherrell who worked, amongst other things, on finding Air France 447...

...Senator GALLACHER: Just on MH370, could you supply on notice what you can about the tender process, the technical advice and the cost, because you may or may not be aware that there are people giving a lot of different senators—coalition, opposition and cross-bench senators—a very different view of what you are actually doing there. It is not a complimentary view, and it does not appear to be sour grapes. It appears to be a very different technical assessment, so you are going to need to justify your contract, your decisions, or at least publicly make them available to us, because we are getting an information source which is contrary to what you are saying. Are you aware of that?


Mr Dolan : We are aware that there is some fairly public commentary about an alternative approach to this. We have paid attention to that. Every time the question that has been asked of us as to whether our techniques are up to the necessary standards, we have provided the information. I am very happy to provide that information to the committee. I am very happy to provide a separate briefing to committee members if they wish it.

Senator GALLACHER: Thank you....

MTF...P2

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 10-21-2015

(10-20-2015, 06:41 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  Senators on the prowl - The Heff, Senators Johnson, Gallacher etc have suddenly caught a sniff of the stench emanating from the ATSB 'blank check' MH370 SIO search and they're 'not happy Jan'...

(10-20-2015, 05:45 PM)kharon Wrote:  Parts I & II – the MH 370 stuff up; I wonder does the world realise that the chair of our esteemed, aviation savvy Senate Committee regards it as a “stuff up”, which is Ozspeak for a right royal duck up – or, a load of Bollocks.  The most telling statements, the full stop deadline on the search, has been decided.

Hansard 19/10/15:

Quote:CHAIR: I think generally you may face some questions about the MH370 stuff-up.

Senator JOHNSTON: Mr Dolan, could you very briefly tell us what we are doing as of right now?

Mr Dolan : At the moment we have two vessels with deep tow equipment in the Indian Ocean or en route to continue the search of the surface in the defined area for this event.

Senator JOHNSTON: That is pursuant to a contract which is worth how much?

Mr Foley : The contract value varies depending on a sliding scale in the contract. We initially started with a contract for 30,000 square kilometres and in three successive moves we have upped the number of square kilometres that we have been asked to search.

Senator JOHNSTON: To 90?

Mr Foley : We are currently at 80,000 square kilometres.

Senator JOHNSTON: You have 10,000 square kilometres to go?

Mr Foley : We have done 70,000 at this point. So, what we have got on AusTender, where we report periodically when we change the value of the contract, is $90 million.

Senator JOHNSTON: So, what is the value of the contract all up with what we have spent so far on the search?

Mr Foley : It is $97 million as of end of September.

Senator JOHNSTON: What is the term of the contract and how is it terminated?

Mr Foley : The term of the contract is two years from the date at which it started and it is terminated at our request, effectively, which is obviously triggered when we find the aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: So, two years or anytime thereafter on reasonable notice, I take it, is roughly right?

Mr Foley : No. Two years is the fixed term of the contract. We extend the contract in terms of square kilometres periodically to, if you like, pre-empt what we think we are going to need to search in the coming months.

Senator JOHNSTON: But after two years we finish?

Mr Foley : After two years we finish.

Senator JOHNSTON: And you estimate the total value of that contract after two years will be?

Mr Foley : It depends on how much we search.

Senator JOHNSTON: A rough estimate?

Mr Foley : That is a hard one. We do not know what our bottom line is in terms of funding as yet because it is reliant not just on the Australian government but the Malaysian government as well. So, in essence, the value of the contract varies depending on how much funding is provided by—

CHAIR: Do you have an open chequebook?

Mr Foley : Not at all. We have been given $60 million.

CHAIR: It sounds like you have.

Mr Foley : We were given $60 million by the Australian government at the start of the search. We have not spent that money yet. Other moneys which have been contributed by Malaysia we are using in tandem with the Australian government money.

Senator JOHNSTON: What is the percentage breakup between Australia and Malaysia?
Mr Foley : At this point it is around about fifty-fifty and it increases proportionately in terms of Malaysia's funding as time goes on.

Senator JOHNSTON: The aileron or whatever it was that was found on Reunion Island—I have been reading that it is from MH370, a Boeing 777.

Mr Foley : Correct.

Senator JOHNSTON: Are we certain that the serial numbers on the component parts of that piece of equipment indisputably match that of the aircraft?

Mr Foley : The French judicial authorities are actually doing the investigation. They are certain that there are unique identifying numbers within the flaperon which related to 9M-MRO, which is the accident aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: And Boeing have confirmed that?

Mr Foley : As far as we know, yes, but the French—

Senator JOHNSTON: Do we have anything in writing?

Mr Foley : The French have announced publicly that it is definitely from the accident aircraft.

Senator JOHNSTON: Thank you.

Senator GALLACHER: You have contracted a vessel. I presume it is a vessel to tow this equipment.

Mr Dolan : Two vessels.

Mr Foley : The contract currently allows that.

Senator GALLACHER: Are they the best suited vessels for this work? We have received representations that you have picked the wrong vessels, or at least the wrong equipment.

Mr Dolan : We went to the international market with a very clearly specified tender for the services for the search for the missing aircraft. We did a very serious technical assessment of bids that came forward from that. There were three bids that technically complied with our required specified tender conditions and we selected the one that was the best value for money. The vessels that we had available to us are fit for purpose, as is the equipment and the crews that they are using.

Senator GALLACHER: So, whilst it might have been the best value for money was it the one with the best proven success record of finding and utilising this equipment?

Mr Dolan : There has not been any exercise on this scale of this capability so we have no benchmark for it. The closest we have—

Senator GALLACHER: What about the Air France aircraft?

Mr Dolan : The Air France aircraft was talking about a much more constrained area with a much more specified last location of the aircraft. We are talking about a somewhat different ocean bottom as well. There is a whole range of different circumstances. There was nothing that we could directly compare our current exercise to and we are confident that we have the best value for money for the Commonwealth for the exercise.

Senator GALLACHER: The best value for money but we do not know how much we are going to spend or how long we are going to be active for, so is it the best piece of equipment to be doing the job?

Mr Dolan : The equipment is doing the job that we require of it.

CHAIR: That was not the question.

Senator GALLACHER: Is there a piece of equipment that will give you a wider span either side?

CHAIR: There is. You do not ask the question unless you know the answer and I am sure you know the answer.

Mr Foley : Yes, of course. We considered a number of options when we put together the statement of requirements for the tender. We got the best technical advice that we could, which is expertise that exists within the United States, and we specified, very carefully, the technical requirements for the systems that we would use in the search.

Senator XENOPHON: May we get a copy of that technical advice and all the other material that you relied on before you made your decision as to which search company that you went to and the equipment used?

Mr Foley : We can certainly provide that documentation. We have it in existence, of course. It is part of the tender assessment process. The normal, if you like, commercial-in-confidence rules apply, which do not apply here.

Senator XENOPHON: I am not interested so much as to what each of them were going to charge for it. I am interested in the technical assessment of those.

Mr Foley : In assessing the tender we firstly did not consider price at all. The panel was blind to the price of the bids until such time as we had actually assessed their technical merit. Once we had assessed their technical merit, taken advice on the technical merit of the various bids from an expert, we then—

Senator XENOPHON: Who was that expert?

Mr Foley : He is currently contracted to us as our sonar expert. His name is Andrew Sherrell who worked, amongst other things, on finding Air France 447...

...Senator GALLACHER: Just on MH370, could you supply on notice what you can about the tender process, the technical advice and the cost, because you may or may not be aware that there are people giving a lot of different senators—coalition, opposition and cross-bench senators—a very different view of what you are actually doing there. It is not a complimentary view, and it does not appear to be sour grapes. It appears to be a very different technical assessment, so you are going to need to justify your contract, your decisions, or at least publicly make them available to us, because we are getting an information source which is contrary to what you are saying. Are you aware of that?

Mr Dolan : We are aware that there is some fairly public commentary about an alternative approach to this. We have paid attention to that. Every time the question that has been asked of us as to whether our techniques are up to the necessary standards, we have provided the information. I am very happy to provide that information to the committee. I am very happy to provide a separate briefing to committee members if they wish it.

Senator GALLACHER: Thank you....

ATSBeaker under siege on MH370? 

Breaking story today from the MSM, which IMO is very much related to the Senate Committee line of questioning, 1st from the Oz:

Quote:Seabed images could show MH370, says US firm  

• by: BRENDAN NICHOLSON
  
• From: The Australian
  
• October 21, 2015 12:00AM
  

Defence Editor
Canberra



Sonar images of the Air France crash. Source: Supplied




Sonar images of debris that could indicate the site of the missing Flight MH370. Source: Supplied
American deep water search specialists say the team hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 in the ocean off Western Australia may have missed its wreckage 4km below on the sea floor.  

Williamson and Associates has examined images collected by scanning equipment aboard the search ship Fugro Discovery in September and believes items spotted and dismissed as rocks are likely to be man-made metal parts with circular surfaces.

It also noted strong similarities, albeit at a great distance, between what it believes is a ­“debris field” off Western Australia and the wreckage of Air France Flight 447 that crashed in the South Atlantic.

Specialists on the search vessel and others engaged by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau concluded that the objects were part of a geological formation and said they confirmed that in a further sweep over the site. Last night the bureau said it remained satisfied the objects were not man-made.

So far $90 million has been ­allocated for the search for the airliner that vanished with 239 passengers and crew aboard in March last year.

Williamson is a respected company and played a big role in the successful search for the cruiser HMAS Sydney, which was lost off Western Australia in a battle with a German raider in World War II.

The company made a bid to search for MH370 but missed out when the multi-million-dollar contract was awarded a year ago.

Williamson based its conclusions on images released by the ATSB on October 1.

Staff told The Australian the objects resembled a debris trail similar to other wrecks they had found. They said it was a “probable aircraft debris field” and should be investigated closely with a remote-controlled unmanned search vehicle.

The debris field was 700m by 250m, similar to the 600m by 250m debris field left by the Air France crash in the South Atlantic in June 2009.

“These targets have the characteristics of man-made metal parts with circular surfaces and with greater hardness than scattered rocks,” they said, saying there was cause for further investigation.

An ATSB spokesman said the images on the bureau’s website were a very small sample of extensive data collected on several passes at lower altitude, varying range scales and sonar frequencies with Fugro Discovery’s deep tow system. The data was assessed by Fugro’s expert geophysicists and sonar specialists and independently by the ATSB’s sonar data quality assurance team, and took account of the characteristics of comparable aircraft debris fields.

“All of the experts are satisfied that the structures in the sonar records are consistent with the surrounding geological formations and with the geology found in the search area. Based on analysis of all of the data, there are no indications that there is anything possessing the characteristics of an aircraft debris field,” he said.

Next from Ben..

Quote:Does this image show the MH370 debris trail on the sea floor?

Ben Sandilands | Oct 21, 2015 8:43AM |

Surely there is a need to see this possible debris field in sharper detail than shown in this ATSB image?

The Australian managed search for the wreckage of missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has no option but to take a very close third look at part of the floor of the southern Indian Ocean where previous sonar scanning detected objects it later dismissed as natural features.

This follows the overnight Reuters report drawing renewed attention to an image which bears an at least superficial resemblance to an aircraft debris field at a depth of 4000 metres.

That image, and other reasonable doubts about the effectiveness of the ATSB search, have been the subject of repeated posts on Plane Talking.

Resolving the doubts as to what two previous sonar scans picked up will require the reactivation of an advanced Norwegian automated underwater vehicle resembling a large fat torpedo that the ATSB hired earlier this year but had to store in Fremantle during the winter sea states that could have prevented its safe deployment and retrieval from its support ship.

Those wild conditions have only gradually started to subside.

The ATSB’s own doubts as to the effectiveness of its side sonar scanning towfish used in the sea floor search led to its hiring of the Hugin 4500 AUV to look into particularly deep, complex or challenging locations where sections of the original priority search zone may not have been fully checked for debris from the missing Malaysia Airlines 777-200ER which disappeared on 8 March 2014 en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board.

However when the ATSB began a second look at 30 objects of possible further interest that had been previously logged in the priority search area last month it did so with more cable towed sonar scanners that lacked the definition to pick up objects the size of window frames, or the 777′s two ‘black box’ data recorders.

Whether the ATSB and the claimed unanimous panel of experts were right or wrong in dismissing the synthetic image as showing natural features which do indeed bear a resemblance to an aircraft debris field they are now under pressure to check them out close up.

The inability of the ATSB to investigate the ditching of the Pel-Air medical charter near Norfolk Island in 2009 with integrity and competency, even  in shallow waters in a known location, has severely damaged its reputation.  A stuff up involving the MH370 search would be an intolerable embarrassment.

 
And finally from this evening's ABC radio PM program:

Quote:MH370 search descends into experts rowing over possible discovery site

Peter Lloyd reported this story on Wednesday, October 21, 2015 18:20:00
About JW Player 6.11.4923 (Ads edition) 

TIM PALMER: Is it the wreckage of missing Malaysia Airlines flight 370 or merely the rocks and natural contours of the Indian Ocean sea floor?


An international dispute has broken out between a respected American deep water search company and the official Australian-led search team over a series of recently released sonar images of the sea floor off Western Australia.

The US firm believes they show what could be the debris field of an aircraft. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau says that's wrong and the Turnbull Government says the American firm can't be taken seriously because it lost the bid for the search contract.

Peter Lloyd reports.

PETER LLOYD: In the complex business of searching and finding objects in deep water, Williamson and Associates have had some impressive finds. From rockets engines off Apollo 11 to the discovery of the wreck of the Australian Hospital ship Centaur off Brisbane and more famously, discovering the wreckage of HMAS Sydney.

The Sydney's whereabouts had been Australia's most enduring maritime mystery.

Williamson and Associates didn't get the contract to search for MH370 and they've been highly critical of the skills of the company that did, but when the firm sea search experts cast their eye over images uploaded on the Transport Safety Board Website on the first of October, they were in stunned.

To them, objects scattered on the floor weren't natural. Art Wright from Williamson and Associates explains how he came to that conclusion.

ART WRIGHT: The way they're situated does not match the debris in the area there. Number two, they haven't been there very long because they're sitting on semi soft mud, soft sand, muddy sand.

PETER LLOYD: Art Wright is fairly certain what the two images show: a debris field of plane wreckage.

ART WRIGHT: I would guess it's about 700 metres by 300.

PETER LLOYD: And how does that compare to aircraft crashes in the ocean?

ART WRIGHT: Air France was about 650 by 250.

PETER LLOYD: So almost the same?

ART WRIGHT: Yes. We'd call it a category one target according to the ATSB system, so it should be looked at immediately.

PETER LLOYD: The ATSB won't say if it will take another pass over that location. Last weekend Williamson and Associates sent an email to the agency outlining their suspicions. The company claims they didn't get a courtesy reply.

Instead the agency released a media statement that left no doubt that it doesn't share their view.

ATSB STATEMENT: The data was assessed by expert geophysicists and sonar data specialists and indecently by the ATSB sonar data quality assurance team. All of the experts are satisfied, there are no indications that there is anything possessing the characteristics of an aircraft debris field.

PETER LLOYD: The Deputy Prime Minister's spokesman had a simpler response: "you may recall Williamson and Associates were unsuccessful tenders". The company expected to cop flack like that, says one of its bosses, Rob McCallum.

ROB MCCALLUM: So there's nothing in this for us at all other than we understand the value of the closure that has bought to families of whoever is left behind, and so you have to ask the question the other way, why wouldn't you go and investigate this target?

PETER LLOYD: I put that to both the Deputy Prime Minister's office and that of ATSB chief Martin Dolan. Neither responded. Nor has there a reply to this question: if the Australian side is so certain of its analysis, why not release all the data?

By its own admission, the ATSB has, quote "extensive data" on several passes in the area. Rob McCallum, from Williamson and Associates, can hardly be called objective, but his company argues the families of MH370 passengers, and Australian taxpayers footing the search bill, are not getting the services of the world's best at finding objects in deep water.

The company that has the contract is Fugro - a Dutch multinational. Even it has admitted that the sea bed was more complex and irregular than anticipated.

ROB MCCALLUM: At the time that the contract was issued, the comment was made that the only company that did not have a deep water search record, had not done a lot of deep water operations and did not actually own a sonar was the one that got the job.

We think if you're going to be a professional member of this very small industry, you have to do your job thoroughly and when you see a target of that clarity left un-investigated, that's a poor job and it needs to be investigated.

PETER LLOYD: It's a conviction, claims McCallum, that's widely held in the sea search industry. Now it's come to the surface.

TIM PALMER: Peter Lloyd reporting. 

Hmm..the bit in bold?? Troubling very troubling - but unfortunately not surprising...  
MTF..P2

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 10-21-2015

Yep. A twist in the MH370 search and the potential to perhaps solve the mystery has been left in the hands of a Bearded Muppet and a crusty headed farmer! What more can I say.......

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Kharon - 10-23-2015

For those who can find the time - 28 pages - lots of pictures: the report - HERE - is worth reading.  It's technical but sane without any wild eyed speculation.  

Ignore the drop box 'thing' - click it off.

Toot toot.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 11-22-2015

The Chinese have just offered Australia $20 million to continue the Mh370 search;

http://www.news.com.au/world/china-pledges-20m-to-help-australia-continue-mh370-search/news-story/4c0cc0bc09236fe6cc4e998f7df13494

Interesting. But wouldn't it be easier for the Chinese to just offer up the coordinates of where it actually crashed, the data downloaded from one of their satellites or Subs? I'm sure they have that squirrelled away somewhere.

Beaker will think a lifetime of Christmas's have come at once, having such a huge injection into his bucket of money! Stand back and watch as the bearded bumbling banker gets his abacus fired up and starts massaging numbers! Personally if I was the Chinese president I would be offering an extra $1 million for Beaker to be removed from the search altogether. That is a better investment don't you think?

"Safe trough top-ups for all"

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 11-22-2015

(11-22-2015, 09:12 AM)Gobbledock Wrote:  The Chinese have just offered Australia $20 million to continue the Mh370 search;

Quote:China pledges $20m to help Australia continue MH370 search

November 21, 2015 9:22pm
Network Writers, agencies News Corp Australia Network
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Premier Li Keqiang at the ASEAN meeting today. Screen capture: Xinhau


CHINA has offered Australia $20 million to maintain its search for missing airliner MH370, and the many Chinese nationals it had on board.

Chinese news agency Xinhau News reported Premier Li Keqiang today held a meeting with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at the 10-nation ASEAN meeting in Kuala Lumpur.

The Boeing 777-200ER with 239 people on board vanished from radar shortly after taking off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport early in the morning of March 8 last year.

An extensive search of the Indian Ocean has so far proved fruitless.

The $20 million is intended to encourage Australia to continue the search, the Chinese news agency reports

Mr Turnbull arrived in Kuala Lumpur for a program of bilateral talks on Saturday, meeting leaders from China and Cambodia, and was expected to meet representatives from South Korea and Vietnam.

Meeting China’s Premier Li Keqiang, Mr Turnbull remarked on the free trade agreement, a deal already seeing great benefits, he said, the visit last year of President Xi Jinping and co-operation between naval forces.


“There is intense co-operation and growing understanding between Australia and China,” Mr Turnbull said.

Longstanding disputes over South China Sea territorial claims also loom over the Kuala Lumpur talks.

Tomorrow, Mr Turnbull is due to meet Mr Najib and join the expanded 18-country East Asia Summit with US President Barack Obama and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi among others.
  
The East Asia Summit: — comprises the 10 ASEAN countries: Brunei, Myanmar, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam — plus Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Russia and the US.
Originally published as China pledges $20m for MH370 search

http://www.news.com.au/world/china-pledges-20m-to-help-australia-continue-mh370-search/news-story/4c0cc0bc09236fe6cc4e998f7df13494

Interesting. But wouldn't it be easier for the Chinese to just offer up the coordinates of where it actually crashed, the data downloaded from one of their satellites or Subs? I'm sure they have that squirrelled away somewhere.

Beaker will think a lifetime of Christmas's have come at once, having such a huge injection into his bucket of money! Stand back and watch as the bearded bumbling banker gets his abacus fired up and starts massaging numbers! Personally if I was the Chinese president I would be offering an extra $1 million for Beaker to be removed from the search altogether. That is a better investment don't you think?

"Safe trough top-ups for all"

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 11-23-2015

MH370 & the D-Day - Desperate, disparate, diverging times indeed?? 

Don't believe in coincidences Left field - one day we get the Chinese pitching in with a $20 million dollar shout - Li announces funds for MH370 search, urges implementation of China-Australia FTA.


The next day we get Malcolm in the middle talking up MH370 search with Najib..

Quote: MITM/NAJIB JS "..We discussed in the course of our meeting the tragic loss of MH370 and of course followed by the shocking shooting down of MH17. And we are working together to find out, find the location of MH370. Both Malaysia and Australia are cooperating in that endeavour. It’s a very large ocean of course and the search is taking time and we were both very pleased to see a contribution of a ship plus $20 million from the Chinese government yesterday – Premier Li Keqiang made that commitment. That was very helpful.."

And now today from (err... ) 'that man again'?? - courtesy the Oz:

Quote:Pilot says new tack in search will find MH370 ‘within weeks’  

• by: EAN HIGGINS, JAMES GILLESPIE
  
• From: The Australian
  
• November 23, 2015 12:00AM
  

New suspected location. Source: TheAustralian

After 20 months of fruitless search, the hunt for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has switched to an area identified by a British pilot who developed a different theory about what happened to the doomed passenger jet.  

Simon Hardy, who has made the prediction based on the ­assumption that the Malaysian jet’s captain made a controlled ditch into the sea, said he ­expected MH370 would be found within the several weeks allocated for the search of the area.

The revelation came as Chin­ese media reports said that, at a meeting in Kuala Lumpur with Malcolm Turnbull at the weekend, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang had offered to commit $20 million to continue the search for the Boeing 777 that vanished in March last year with 239 passengers and crew.

However, a spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss, whose portfolio covers the search effort for MH370, said “details of the funding contrib­ution have yet to be settled”.

When Captain Hardy, a senior Boeing 777 captain with a commercial airline, revealed his analysis in The Sunday Times in March, the Australian search operat­ion was more than 100 nautical miles from the crash point he identified.

Since producing that analysis, based on his knowledge of the aircraft and a mathematical technique to calculate the plane’s route, Captain Hardy has recreated the final moments of the flight on a simulator.

“I am fairly confident that wreckage will be found within the next four to eight weeks,” he said.

A spokeswoman for the Joint Agency Co-ordination Centre, Annette Clark, confirmed that two vessels — Discovery and Equator — had arrived in the area of Captain Hardy’s proposed ­location last week.

“The vessels will be searching in the area of Captain Hardy’s prediction during the November-December period,” Ms Clark said.

The new location was within the overall greater search area, which “takes into account all the credible theories and analyses, ­including the work of Captain Hardy. He has talked with the team … we are now reaching the area he has nominated”, Ms Clark told The Australian yesterday.

The Boeing 777 left Kuala Lumpur for Beijing in the early hours of March 8 last year. The last voice heard from the plane was that of the captain, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, not long into the flight, although earlier commun­i­c­ations had been handled by the first officer, Fariq Abdul Hamid.

The transponder was turned off and the aircraft turned and flew back along the border between Malaysia and Thailand before ­executing a fly-past of Penang ­Island, the pilot’s home town.

Captain Hardy believes the plane came down in a controlled landing on water, which means the fuselage remained intact and could have drifted some way from the ditching point.

“But there will be some wreckage at that point,” said Captain Hardy.

“There are many movable aerodynamic surfaces on the Boeing 777, some of which will be torn from the aircraft during ditching, in a similar fashion to the flaperon, a wing control surface found at Reunion Island (in the Indian Ocean).”

Additional reporting: The Sunday Times

'Passing strange'??- Not a Muppet, a Mandarin, a Miniscule, nor a Hedley in sight


MTF...P2
 

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - P7_TOM - 11-23-2015

Oh Ho, this has real legs.  Now a cynic would say that it took those who knew where to look a while to find the right way to get the information ‘out there’ – to a credible source.  Face saved, secrets safe and a little egg on face for ‘other’ contenders – just needed an acceptable, credible journalist; ‘Iggins will do very nicely, we’ll have him.  OK; “X” marks the spot, here’s your press release, here’s your hero and here’s some pocket money – off you go Tiger – go get it.

But not me though– Oh no, I’ll just swallow it whole and say thank you.  All the ‘bit players’ ushered off stage pleases.

Well done China, well done Turnbull and well done that man – “Iggins.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Gobbledock - 11-23-2015

'Passing strange'??- Not a Muppet, a Mandarin, a Miniscule, nor a Hedley in sight"

Not really. Politicians and bureaucrats only like to take glory when the object is a 'sure thing'. They don't like chances. The change in the search location is still not a 'guaranteed win', so the bottom dwelling parasites in power won't be too quick to attach their names to the latest information. They will crawl out from under their Can'tberra rocks when the wreckage is found. There will be big press coverage, Farmer Truss will be lisping in front of the TV screen with Beaker and his resplendent beard glowing beneath the television lights. There will be hi-5's, backslapping and leg humping, with all kudos going to themselves. That's how the political vermin in society operate.

So don't worry, the Miniscule and his minions will make a carefully scripted appearance......just not yet.

---

RE: Australia, ATSB and MH 370 - Peetwo - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 08:15 PM)Gobbledock Wrote:  'Passing strange'??- Not a Muppet, a Mandarin, a Miniscule, nor a Hedley in sight"

Not really. Politicians and bureaucrats only like to take glory when the object is a 'sure thing'. They don't like chances. The change in the search location is still not a 'guaranteed win', so the bottom dwelling parasites in power won't be too quick to attach their names to the latest information. They will crawl out from under their Can'tberra rocks when the wreckage is found. There will be big press coverage, Farmer Truss will be lisping in front of the TV screen with Beaker and his resplendent beard glowing beneath the television lights. There will be hi-5's, backslapping and leg humping, with all kudos going to themselves. That's how the political vermin in society operate.

So don't worry, the Miniscule and his minions will make a carefully scripted appearance......just not yet.

You could well be right Gobbles... However the latest MH370 search shenanigans has a different feel about it, especially with the somewhat unexpected announcement of the Chinese contribution to the search i.e. a search ship & $20 million...

Also P7's observation is IMO quite significant:

Quote:...just needed an acceptable, credible journalist; ‘Iggins will do very nicely, we’ll have him.  OK; “X” marks the spot, here’s your press release, here’s your hero and here’s some pocket money – off you go Tiger – go get it.


But not me though– Oh no, I’ll just swallow it whole and say thank you.  All the ‘bit players’ ushered off stage pleases...

 I can kind of understand sidelining - the not so deadly - Hedley after the MH370 Maldives stuff up, but the aviation senior journo Creepy normally always gets the gig, especially when the Miniscule's department and/or CAsA want to obfuscate & shutdown a story.. 

Can't keep a good Muppet down..

Gobbles it should also be noted that later in the day our resident MH370 Super Sleuth Muppet did make an appearance to again set the record straight..

As hunt moves, pilot "fairly confident" MH370 will be found

Quote:
French gendarmes and police stand on the beach where a large piece of debris from missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was found in Saint-Andre, on the French Indian Ocean island of La Reunion, July 29, 2015.

Quote:...But Australian authorities are not being guided by the experienced Boeing 777 pilot's analysis. Martin Dolan, the bureau's chief commissioner, said the search was moving farther south within a 46,000-square-mile priority area because the southern hemisphere spring had made the extreme conditions in the southern ocean calmer.


"We're aware that we're in the area that Capt. Hardy specifies, but we're in that area because it was next in our search sequence, and we've been moving progressively south because the weather is improving," Dolan said...

..Dolan said authorities still believe that the final satellite transmission from one of the jet's engines indicated that it was out of fuel, meaning the plane would have plummeted into the ocean out of control and disintegrated...

 
Anyway enough BB (Beaker Bollocks) for one day - the following was also on News Corp -  MH370 search looking in the ‘right place at last’ say Boeing 777 pilots

And from Ben Sandilands (Planetalking), with a far more pragmatic report on the latest MH370 SIO events :

Quote:Two, maybe three things may now help MH370 search


Ben Sandilands | Nov 23, 2015 7:20AM


The typical sea state of the South Indian Ocean in the search area

There are a number of reasons to think the search for missing Malaysia Airlines jet MH370 may be taking a turn for the better.

The JACC or Joint Agency Coordination Centre has confirmation that the sea bed search is now in the area predicted for the point of impact, if not controlled ditching, by a British pilot Captain Simon Hardy almost a year ago.

China has also agreed, at last, to put a reported $20 million and an extra ship into the search, after it seems watching askance at the Malaysia directed Australia performed effort, which until now has been jointly funded by Kuala Lumpur and Canberra.

And it seems highly likely, but not yet confirmed, that better sonar scanning equipment will soon be deployed to look more closely at suspicious objects seen but not resolved in close detail by current equipment on the ocean floor.

The report of China agreeing to become materially involved came out of the East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur. More detail, and perhaps a degree of urgency, would be welcome.

If Captain Hardy is correct, and he has certainly been methodical, logical and persuasive except when it came to getting through to the searchers, then the heavy sunk wreckage of the missing Boeing 777-200ER and the flight recorders and the remains and telephone and tablet chips belong to the 239 people on board flight MH370 should be located before Christmas.

MH370 was operating the Kuala Lumpur-Beijing route on 8 March 2014 when it vanished as a transponder identified flight on air traffic control screen while over the Gulf of Thailand.

Success isn’t a certainty. The wreckage may have come to rest just outside the area calculated by Captain Hardy, or the assumptions he has made might in one or more critical elements, be wrong.

There could be a big ‘gotcha’ factor in this perplexing disappearance, something not known to the searchers, that might change the big picture. However nothing seems likely to change the broad satellite signal analysis that says MH370 flew for seven hours 39 minutes (or so) after takeoff, and was only heard by a communications satellite parked over the west Indian Ocean which at the time of the flight’s impact, had to be around 44 degrees elevation above its horizon.

 MTF..P2

---