[Peetwo]

Popinjay's ATSB & Geoscience Oz #MH370 review cont/-

Via the Oz:

ATSB did not miss MH370 debris in search zone, review finds



A review of data from the original search for the missing Malaysia Airlines flight 370 has concluded that it’s highly unlikely that aircraft debris was missed by the massive operation.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has released the results of a data review by Geoscience Australia following new analysis by British aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey.

Mr Godfrey claimed he knew the precise location of the missing Boeing 777 after analysing hundreds of radio signals with the aid of technology known as weak signal propagation reporter (WSPR).

His proposed crash location was within an area of the southern Indian Ocean that formed part of the zone scoured in the original search for MH370 undertaken between October 2014 and January 2017.



Despite some scepticism about the accuracy of Mr Godfrey’s theory, the ATSB requested Geoscience Australia re-examine high resolution sonar imagery collected during that search.

Over the past two months, imagery from an area spanning 4900 square kilometres was reviewed, and 11 objects were identified that had not been previously analysed.

Eight of those were assessed as most likely geological features, and while three were identified as not naturally occurring, none were considered to be from an aircraft.

ATSB chief commissioner Angus Mitchell said the report therefore concluded it was “highly unlikely there was an aircraft debris field within the area reviewed”.

“The ATSB concluded its formal involvement the search for MH370 in 2017, but we acknowledge the importance of locating the aircraft to provide answers and closure to the families of those who lost loved ones and in the interests of aviation safety,” said Mr Mitchell.

“Can I thank Geoscience Australia for their work in applying their expertise and knowledge in reviewing the original search data.”

Geoscience Australia CEO Dr James Johnson said the imagery reviewed was of a very high resolution.

“This data allowed us to detect objects as small as 30cm by 30cm. If the aircraft was within the area we have reviewed, the sonar data would have shown a scatter field of highly reflective debris,” Dr Johnson said.

“I want to thank my team for the skill and heart they brought to this work and the ATSB for their leadership and partnership throughout this process.”

The Malaysia Airlines flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing disappeared on March 8, 2014 with 239 people on board, including six Australians.

A long investigation led by the Malaysian Government failed to offer any explanation for the airliner’s disappearance which confounded experts worldwide.

Working with a range of organisations throughout the world, the ATSB established a proposed path for the Boeing 777 based on satellite “handshakes” with the plane.

That data was then used to determine a possible crash site for the aircraft in the southern Indian Ocean.

Around 120,000 square kilometres of seabed was searched by vessels towing sonar vehicles to capture every inch of the sea floor.

Another search has been proposed by US technology company Ocean Infinity next year, on a no find, no fee basis but the Malaysian Government is yet to respond to the offer.

Ocean Infinity is developing a fleet of robotic ships considered ideal for the search, because they will not have to return to land every month of so to be resupplied.

Plus via Airlineratings.com : 

INCOMPLETE ATSB MH370 REVIEW CREATES DISBELIEF

By Geoffrey Thomas
April 22, 2022



The ATSB review of its historic underwater search data for the new location of MH370 identified by British aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey has been met in many industry circles with disbelief.

On Friday, April 22, 2022, the Australia Transport Safety Bureau issued the report on the review of its search data by Geoscience Australia and stated that; “The Geoscience Australia report notes that it is highly unlikely that there is an aircraft debris field within the area reviewed.”

However, the report states that only 29 per cent of the requested area was reviewed.

Also, the report states multiple times that “further data acquisition” and “additional data acquisition” are required.

It is perfectly clear from the report that there are multiple gaps in the search and it is important to note that even Ocean Infinity, with far better search equipment, had to make two sweeps to find the ARA San Juan, while AF447 was only found in Phase 4 of the underwater search.

According to Mr Godfrey, it is clear that “the previous search has in principle skipped a significant portion of the search area with the “holidays” and the use of equipment with insufficient performance (resolution) to find the target.

“MH370 could easily have ended up in one of these insufficiently searched areas.”

The Geoscience Australia report also notes that “there are significant regions, mainly beyond the 10 nautical mile radius from the proposed crash location, that have either no data, data collected by Ocean Infinity that is not part of this review, or data collected using shipborne multi-beam sonar, which has insufficient resolution to identify an aircraft debris field.”

Data collected by Ocean Infinity during a Malaysian Government-contracted survey in January 2018 were not reviewed as part of this process, as Geoscience Australia did not have access to this data.

The data reviewed included high-resolution sonar datasets acquired during Phase 2 of the original search for flight MH370.

These covered an area of about 4,900 km2, or 29 per cent of the area requested of 17,000 km2.

Geoscience Australia concludes that “however, there remains a significant area of 12,100 km2 within the 40 NM radius from the proposed crash location as well as 72.79 km2 area of gaps and holidays” [that has not been reviewed]

The “gaps” and “holidays” (72.79km2) as they are called are the following:

1. Missing data – 1.57km2
   
2. Equipment failure – 5.37km2
   
3. Lower probability of detection – 48.91km2
   
4. Off-tracks – 0.17km2
   
5. Terrain Avoidance 8.44km2
   
6. Shadow Zones 8.33km2
   

The report also revealed that the “review led to the identification of eleven additional contacts by GA. However, an independent external review of these contacts by an expert in deep water search and salvage operations determined that none of the contacts were likely from an aircraft debris field. As each of the anthropogenic contacts was identified as a single feature in physical isolation of other contacts, they were not categorised as being associated with an aircraft debris field. Verification of any features would require further data acquisition.”

Hmm...here we go again??? - 


MTF...P2