[P7_TOM]

Firstly, welcome to AP Brock.  We have all read and followed your discussions in the social media re MH 370.  We do appreciate logic, facts and non combative discussion; even idle speculation.  The only ‘local’ custom that does apply is we always play the ball – never the man, or do anything else which may startle the horses.  So welcome.

We do have Maldives experience to call on, however, let’s make some base line ‘operational’ assumptions, from what we have.

40 miles off course – in a cruise situation is ‘big’, but not unusual with storms around, 20 to 25 miles (nautical) is routine to ‘step’ around on track weather, 30 is relatively common, 40 not unheard of.  It depends very much on where the ‘diversion’ is started, fuel available and engine running time is always a factor.  Now then, for a Dash-8-400 with a load on board at low level a 40 mile ‘step’ at low level is an expensive business.  Draw a dot anywhere on track between the departure and destination and do the math – dot is a storm, no matter where you place the ‘storm’, which is the only reason for a 40 mile step, the aircraft must run at least an additional 80 miles (::15 minutes).  If the storm was near the destination, then 40 miles ‘running around behind’ is feasible.  Once, I racked up about 60 miles, skipping behind a storm at an island destination and following it through – so again – feasible.  Were there any storms around which would require such aerial gymnastics?

Paperwork – aviation is drowning in it.  50 seat aircraft operating scheduled, passenger services to ‘remote’ destinations require miles of it.  There must be tangible evidence from fuel dockets (time, date, place, amount loaded, by whom, which aircraft, the delivers signature and the aircrew acceptance signature).  That fuel load would be recorded, firstly on the fuel company records – as a sale - and on the aircraft ‘tech-log’ as the fuel on board (FOB) calculation made (endurance [time in air] officially recorded).  Flight deck log is an ‘official’  record with a statutory, minimum retain time.  With respect to weight, here again a mandatory calculation for take off performance and obstacle clearance, with a minimum ‘keep’ time.  But wait, there’s more.  Passenger manifests, border control, ATC records and, importantly – airport and air services charges records, all minimum specified time life which can supply a wealth of factual information.  The CAA claims of ‘time expired’ and discarded does not withstand scrutiny.  Anyway – payment for service records are kept many years – the money is always a solid trail to follow. Clever folk is they.

In short, if the movements of ‘that’ aircraft cannot be tracked down to the last gallon of fuel, the last sandwich ordered, the flight plan, the manifest, the local passenger lists and take off and landing charges; then something is terribly wrong.  If all else fails, passport and local government agencies records go back centuries.  A clear, unequivocal record could have and should have been made available to ‘eliminate’ the aircraft from our inquiry – as they say.

Operationally speaking, it is almost impossible – IMO – for there not to be a ‘paper trail’ which either positively rules out; or, confirms that the aircraft seen was a local service or, something else.

So the question stands – was it or was it not, positively, beyond a reasonable doubt DQA149?