[Peetwo]

The ATSB Bearded Popinjay promises due diligence on MH370?? -

On the 16th of February 2022 the ATSB released the following Media Statement: 

Statement on Mr Richard Godfrey’s analysis of the location for missing aircraft MH370

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has not had a formal involvement in any search for the missing aircraft MH370 since the conclusion of the first underwater search in 2017, has not recommenced a search for the aircraft, and notes that any decision to conduct further searches would be a matter for the Government of Malaysia.  

“The ATSB is aware of the work of Mr Richard Godfrey and acknowledges that he is a credible expert on the subject of MH370, but the ATSB does not have the technical expertise to, and has not been requested to, review his ‘MH370 Flight Path’ paper and workings. As such the ATSB cannot offer an assessment of the validity of Mr Godfrey’s work using WSPR data,” said ATSB Chief Commissioner Angus Mitchell.

“The ATSB does acknowledge that Mr Godfrey’s work recommends a search zone for MH370, a significant portion of which covers an area searched during the ATSB-led underwater search,” Mr Mitchell continued.

“When the ATSB was made aware that Mr Godfrey’s zone incorporates an area of ocean surveyed during the ATSB-led search, out of due diligence the ATSB requested Geoscience Australia review the data it held from the search to re-validate that no items of interest were detected in that area.”

The ATSB expects that review to be finalised in coming weeks, the results from which will be made public on the ATSB’s website.

“The ATSB acknowledges the importance of locating the aircraft to provide answers and closure to the families of those who lost loved ones,” Mr Mitchell said. “The ATSB remains an interested observer in all efforts to find the missing aircraft."

Mr Mitchell reiterated that any decision to conduct further searches for MH370 would be a matter for the Government of Malaysia, and that the ATSB was not aware of any requests to the Australian Government from Malaysia to support a new search for the missing aircraft.

 
Next via the UWA and Twiggy Forrest's philanthropy organisation:

Launch of Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre reveals the world in deep east Indian Ocean

01/02/2022 | 5 MINS (INCLUDING 3 MIN VIDEO) (P2 - Go to link above to view videos.. )

A world-leading research centre pushing the boundaries of frontier exploration and science in the deep sea has been officially launched in Perth by Minderoo Foundation Chairman, Dr Andrew Forrest AO, and The University of Western Australia Vice-Chancellor, Professor Amit Chakma.

The Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre has been established through a major five-year grant from Minderoo Foundation’s Flourishing Oceans initiative. Its mission is to explore the submerged earth fractures of the east Indian Ocean, six kilometres below the surface, known as the hadal zone.

Never-before-seen footage released from the first expedition to the Wallaby-Zenith Fracture Zone off the midwest coast of WA in the eastern Indian Ocean, outside Australian waters, reveals some big surprises according to the Centre’s Founding Director – world renowned biologist, engineer, adventurer, explorer and author, Professor Alan Jamieson.

“It is fascinating, it’s like another world,” Professor Jamieson said.

“On the very bottom it is soft white sand but there were a lot of animals, it is very diverse and then along the escarpment, which is a 600-mile-long wall, about 2000 metres high, there were things there I still don’t understand. It’s going to take a long time to unpack it in terms of what’s going on geologically.”

The centre is the vision of Dr Forrest, whose own PhD research focused heavily on the biodiversity of the Indian Ocean’s Perth Canyon and its ecological importance. Dr Forrest said the deep sea held the key to unlocking many of the questions about life on earth in terms of biodiversity, ocean processes such as currents and circulation, and human impacts, including climate change.

“We need to consider the ocean as one big body of water,” Dr Forrest said. “We know a lot about the top 2000 metres and then as you get deeper, our understanding becomes less and less. It’s Minderoo Foundation’s aim to fill in the gaps for that deepest 50 per cent of the ocean so we can better understand how to treat the ocean as a whole and understand what it is telling us about the pressure we are putting on it.”

The Indian Ocean is the world’s third-largest ocean spanning 70,560,000 km² and accounting for 19.5 per cent of the world’s ocean area. With an average depth of almost 4000m, it is the least understood of the world’s five named oceans and very little is known about marine fauna and species at its depths.

UWA Vice-Chancellor Professor Amit Chakma welcomed the investment in deep-sea research.

“UWA is proud to support this important collaboration contributing to much-needed research in one of the most unexplored parts of the world,” Professor Chakma said.

“It aims to comprehensively explore the deepest areas of the Indian Ocean – mapping the ocean floor, and characterising and discovering new fauna and marine species.”

Expeditions

The Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre has already completed a major expedition to the east Indian Ocean. It led the DSSV Pressure Drop on a one-month long campaign to the Wallaby-Zenith Fracture Zone, Wallaby-Cuvier Escarpment, Perth Canyon and the North Australian Basin in April-May 2021. There, researchers mapped these extraordinarily deep features, participated in 14 dives in the full ocean depth submersible DSV Limiting Factor, and completed 25 deployments of baited camera lander vehicles. Alan Jamieson led six of those dives to waters as deep at 6591m.

The results of that expedition include mapping the deep-sea biodiversity inhabiting both deep undersea volcanoes, the deepest parts of the fracture zone and the near-vertical walls of the abyssal escarpment and surveying what turned out to be a significant manganese nodule field at 4000-6000m depth.

In 2022, the centre is planning an expedition to the Diamantina Fracture Zone and Perth Canyon (March) as well as re-joining the DSSV Pressure Drop to dive in the deepest trenches around Japan in the North Pacific (June-July).

Science

In the first six months the centre has published various findings from a recent expedition including a global census of all fishes deeper than 5000m, plus the deepest-ever recorded squid, and a description of the fauna and habitats of the deepest places in Antarctica. It also has studies documenting large-scale seafloor disturbance at the deepest shipwreck ever found (The USS Johnston, a WWII destroyer sunk by the Japanese in the Battle off Samar) and its implications for deep-sea mining, deep ocean microbial studies on plastic contamination, and several studies relating to global genetic connectivity of some of the deepest animals in the world.

Technology

The centre is in the final stages of completing the construction of three new full ocean depth lander vehicles. These landers are equipped with baited imaging systems, collection devices and environmental monitoring sensors. The lander can operate to depths of 11,000m.

There are also plans to design and construct long-term sustainable observatories to be deployed at the base of the Perth canyon and another marine park off the WA coast. These observatories will operate for 6 to 12 months to monitor various ecological processes over long periods of time in some of the deepest areas off WA.

Ok now consider the following mapped tracking details of the UWA/Minderoo expedition and it's proximity to the original MH370 7th arc:



Then keep in mind this quote from Mike Chillit:

"..Keep in mind that the original 7th ping was calculated when everyone believed in “Zombie Pilot”, autopilot-to-the-end, etc. so the final ping has always been off by the distance the plane would fly during the final 9 minutes: 70 to 100 km.."

In the interest of 'due diligence' and considering the majority consensus (including former ATSB MH370 search director Peter Foley) is now firmly in the 'Pilot did it' camp, why wouldn't the Minderoo-UWA Deep-Sea Research Centre not allow Geoscience Australia/ATSB/AMSA/NTSB (former MH370 SSWG and/or some other totally independent body of experts) access to the scanning footage/data etc. obtained during their expedition to the Wallaby-Zenith Fracture Zone...

Especially when you consider the following image (and summary explanation of how it was derived) from the area scanned during the Minderoo-UWA expedition - courtesy of Mike Chillit: 

Germany’s Geomar, an oceanographic organization like Woods Hole or Scripps, unofficially searched for the plane the same time the rest of us did. They used a doctoral student named Jonathan Durgadoo who used a drift model known as particle drift to simulate the flaperon’ s origin in 2015-16. Durgadoo found that it probably started between Batavia Seamount and Zenith. There was plenty of reason to believe Durgadoo was close to the right place, not the least of which was the US satellite image of debris at Zenith. Before we knew it Geomar sponsored a scientific cruise to Zenith; but they called it a geologic/biologic cruise. But, miracle of miracles, they also used multibeam to scan the abyss, and that’s when they caught “the object”. Not yet clear if they knew they filmed it or were lucky. They initially removed it from public access, but they were required to send complete copies to Scripps and GEBCO. Scripps turned around and published the whole thing and I caught it.

Of course the image could be an unusually (B777) shaped rocky outcrop but surely in the interest of Popinjay's promise of 'due diligence' it is worth checking out?  - 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

OI promises an AI MH370 search in 2023?? -   

Via the Oz:

Robotic ships to embark on search for MH370 in 2023



On the eve of the eighth anniversary of flight MH370’s disappearance, marine search specialist Ocean Infinity has offered to mount a new hunt for the missing aircraft on a “no find, no fee” basis.

The US company announced its commitment to a further search of the southern Indian Ocean using a fleet of new robotic ships to scour more of the vast seabed, thought to be the Boeing 777’s final resting place.

Addressing friends and families of the 238 people on board the Malaysia Airlines’ flight, Ocean Infinity chief executive Oliver Plunkett said he hoped to go back in early 2023.

“There’s a lot of work for us to do to get the ships ready, to talk to the Malaysian government, to get ourselves organised,” Mr Plunkett said.

“Hopefully we’ll enjoy the same support from the Australian authorities as we did last time. The regulatory framework for a ship that can be driven without a person on board doesn’t exist so we’d need the support of the Australian government to operate those too.”

Ocean Infinity last searched for MH370 in 2018, after the suspension of the official Australian Transport Safety Bureau search on January 17, 2017, more than two-years after it began.

Altogether a total of 230,000 square kilometres of seabed was scoured, and former ATSB program director Peter Foley said less than 100,000 sqkm was left to be examined “where MH370 could possibly be”.

The now retired marine engineer told MH370 next of kin it could take as little as 100 days to cover that area with Ocean Infinity’s technology.

“I’ve said for quite some time that I believed the official search ended prematurely,” Mr Foley said.

“We were still very eager to continue. We knew there were some highly prospective areas that needed to be searched and there was some crucial analysis that was still being undertaken at the time the search was wound up.”

Mr Foley said until the aircraft was found, no-one could be certain of what happened on the flight that left Kuala Lumpur on March 8, 2014 and vanished from radar screens shortly afterwards.

“Everyone who boards an aircraft has an interest in this and everyone in commercial aviation has followed MH370 and the loss of the aircraft and the subsequent search very closely. It’s something that impinges on the conscience of everyone who boards an aircraft today and this is why we can’t leave the mystery unexplained,” he said.

“The only evidence we have of what occurred on that aircraft is somewhere in the southern Indian Ocean.”

The ATSB under new chief commissioner Angus Mitchell, recently embarked on a review of data collected in the sea search in partnership with Geoscience Australia. A report is expected to be finalised this week.

Mr Mitchell also welcomed Ocean Infinity’s commitment to renew its search next year.

“If there is movement from an external party that is very encouraging,” he said.

“We haven’t been asked to do more than what we’re doing at this stage.”

The Malaysian Government reiterated its position that it would not renew a search for MH370 unless there was specific evidence pinpointing the aircraft’s location.

Offering his condolences to next of kin, Minister for Transport Wee Ka Siong said his government’s “aspiration to locate MH370 had not been abandoned”.

“We just need credible and actionable new evidence to act on before we can mount an expedition which we are certain could yield results,” said Dr Wee.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Popinjay's ATSB & Geoscience Oz #MH370 review completed - 

Via the ATSB:

MH370 data review joint statement from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau & Geoscience Australia

A review of search data from the original Australian Transport Safety Bureau-led search for the missing MH370 aircraft has concluded that it is highly unlikely there is an aircraft debris field within the reviewed search area.

In late January 2022, the ATSB asked Geoscience Australia to undertake a review of some of the sonar imagery collected during the original search for MH370, conducted between October 2014 and January 2017. 
   
The ATSB made the request after British aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey proposed an impact location for MH370 within an area surveyed during the original ATSB-led search, after his analysis of Weak Signal Propagation Reporter (WSPR) data.  
  
“The Geoscience Australia report notes that it is highly unlikely that there is an aircraft debris field within the area reviewed,” said ATSB Chief Commissioner Angus Mitchell. 

The review identified 11 objects not analysed during the original search. However, none were assessed to be from an aircraft wreckage debris field. 
   
Eight of the objects were assessed as most likely geological features, and while three were identified as anthropogenic (ie not naturally occurring), none were determined to be associated with an aircraft. 

Geoscience Australia Chief Executive Officer Dr James Johnson said over a two-month period, a team of experts had reviewed a band of high-resolution sonar imagery spanning 4,900 square kilometres.   
 
“This data allowed us to detect objects as small as 30 centimetres by 30 centimetres. 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 Australian Transport Safety Bureau for their leadership and partnership throughout this process.” 
  
Said Mr Mitchell: “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. 

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

Stated Dr Johnson, “We all understand the emotion that will come with this news, and those at the centre of this tragedy remain in our thoughts.”  
 
The data review report is available for download here.

MTF...P2 

[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 

[Peetwo]

Courtesy of Mike Chillit, via the Last Ping :

“Photoshopped” Images 1


May 7, 2022 by Mike Chillit

In 2014 I was one of several individuals who spent time and personal resources on the effort to locate MH370’s crash site. Having spent many years as a statistical analyst, I thought perhaps I could help. Volunteers like me chose to use a variety of tools. The most common was something developed by Inmarsat known as Burst Frequency Offset (BFO). I tried several different approaches, but by mid 2017 I concluded that the US government had been correct in placing the crash site at or near Zenith Plateau, 91 degrees and 1,227 kilometers due west of Exmouth, Australia. The US government came to that conclusion with the help of classified satellite images of surface debris near Zenith. Those images were not made available to volunteers.

So, the rest of us were on our own. The method I finally settled on is known as trilateration, a close relative of the more familiar triangulation. The main difference between them is that trilateration uses the ratios between each of three sides of a triangle to obtain an unknown side or angle; triangulation uses the ratios between each of three angles of a triangle to obtain an unknown side or angle. In practice, there isn’t much difference between the two approaches, and most geometric solutions incorporate both angles and sides metrics. As a rule, solving for the lengths of triangular sides or angles between triangular sides requires three sides, or three angles, or a combination of three sides and angles. The Pythagorean Theorem sometimes makes it possible to solve with just two sides or angles if one of the angles is 90 degrees. That often comes in handy, but there was more than enough information from the satellite to locate the endpoint without Pythagoras.

With a geometric solution I was quite sure was correct, I spent some time testing and Tweeting it to friends and followers on Twitter. By late 2020 I believed I had located the plane’s endpoint using only the geometry of the plane-to-satellite final ping, plus the GPS locations for the satellite and the Kuala Lumpur airport. I routinely shared my findings with others on Twitter. By chance in late 2020 I discovered a Google Earth plugin developed by Scripps Oceanographic in California that included a bright shiny object in the deepest part of the Indian Ocean that needed clarification. The only reason I noticed it is that it was precisely where my math put the plane’s terminal “ping”: the so-called Seventh Ping.

No one at Scripps seemed able to explain what it was, but we all agreed that it was “unusual”. Scripps suggested I contact the Principal Investigator for a 2017 Oceanographic survey, which was their source for the data. I did that, and was told it was probably just “noise”, which can do odd things with sonar data. But I could not help but wonder how the object could be precisely where MH370’s debris field should have been, if my calculations were correct.

Then, December 12, 2021 I received five JPEG images from Victor Vescovo purporting to show a pristine seafloor at Zenith Abyss. They were sent to me by Mr. Vescovo in five separate Twitter DMs (each of which is limited to one attachment.). Mr. Vescovo indicated that the images were actually from marine biologist Alan Jamieson, and that he, Vescovo, was passing them along to me as Jamieson requested. Only four of the images were unique.

Since it had taken Mr. Jamieson seven months to agree to share the images, I took the precaution of conducting a series of forensic checks on them to determine their value in the search for MH370. All were found to have been altered (“photoshopped”). Each of the images is displayed below, followed by the finding that all pixels in each image were from “software editors”. Hence my conclusion: all four had been altered beyond recognition before Messrs. Vescovo and Jamieson sent them to me. To date, neither individual has disputed that.

When I questioned the absence of aircraft debris, Mr. Vescovo stated that he had personally interviewed each member of the crew to confirm that they had not seen aircraft debris at Zenith. (The seabed at Zenith is seven kilometers below the surface and cannot be viewed from a surface vessel.)

The conclusion I reached long ago is that Alan Jamieson or someone acting on his behalf photoshopped those images to deceive me, the flying public, grieving families, and those who have shared that grief for years. He covered up a seafloor strewn with debris from MH370 in an effort to convince viewers that MH370 did not crash 2,000+ kilometers north of the original search area. But make no mistake, that abyss became a cemetery on March 8, 2014, and Mr. Jamieson did as Geomar had done four years earlier without acknowledging why he was there or what he found.  The object may include geologic material such as rocks. But rocks do not shine like aluminum. More importantly, AIS ship tracking data confirms that DSSV Pressure Drop made repeated passes across the area for 35 continuous hours at only one or two knots, beginning at the object and scanning in the direction the plane had been moving: to the southwest. That is a debris search pattern, recognizable worldwide.

Knowing all of this solves two mysteries. I can confirm MH370’s crash site, and I’ve explained why ATSB’s Greg Hood threatened his staff with criminal prosecution if they talked about any of it. Fortunately, they were not all intimidated.













The website titled "Image Edited?" finds that this and each of the other three images shared with the author are basically forgeries. They were all edited extensively, presumably to hide MH370 debris strewn across the Zenith Abyssal seabed.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

HVH, MH370, Mangalore midair and the 4C's?? -   
(4C's = Conflict of interest/Conspiracy/Cover-up/Cock-up)

To begin I refer to the following historical MH370 AP and media  references:

Captain's Log 17.04.17: Hoody plays the TSI card on MH370 

...Mr Hood, in an internal ­review of Mr McNamara’s decision, also refused to release the documents. “The activities of the ATSB with respect to assisting the Malaysian investigation are covered by the TSI Act,” Mr Hood wrote in his decision.

He advised that the act holds that if a serving or former ATSB staffer or consultant “discloses ­information to any person or to a court; and the information is ­restricted” they have breached the act, which stipulates a penalty of two years in prison.

In response to an earlier ­inquiry, Mr Hood would not say whether he would allow any ATSB staff who no longer agree with the “ghost flight” and “death dive” theory to publicly express their views...

Australia’s chief science agency CSIRO says it knows where MH370 can be found

AUSTRALIA’S chief science agency says it is more confident than ever that it knows the area in which missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 can be found.

The CSIRO said its new report, released on Friday, that the most likely location of MH370 was a new 25,000 sq km area, north of the original 120,000 sq km search area.

The Boeing 777 disappeared en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8, 2014 with 239 people on board and is one of the greatest aviation mysteries.

The new area was revealed in December, and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau chief commissioner Greg Hood has described it as “highly likely” that the area identified by experts contains the aircraft.

Given the above it was therefore of much interest to me the latest additions to HVH's (semi-retired) CV:

Deputy Chair
Airservices Australia · Contract
Sep 2021 - Present 11 mos
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

Member
CSIRO Marine National Facility Steering Committee (MNFSC) CSIRO Marine National Facility Steering Committee (MNFSC) · Part-time
Jun 2021 - Present · 1 yr 2 mos
Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

A quick Google search of the CSIRO MNFSC brings you to this link: https://mnf.csiro.au/en/About/Governance...-committee

Mr Greg Hood, Member (Government Representative)
Deputy Chair - Airservices Australia

Govt Rep?? - 

Got to ask what the hell experience, other than his previous association (see above) with the failed ATSB MH370 search, does HVH have in the area marine/ocean scientic research??

Couple that with the timing of his appointment to the ASA Board in the middle of the ATSB investigation into the Mangalore Mid Air crash, where back in 2020 IMO "Advance" on the UP succinctly summed up in his post the real and affordable solutions to mitigating the safety risks highlighted by the Mangalore crash: Hooded Canary releases Mangalore mid-air prelim report 

US vs Australian airspace

In the USA ALL IFR aircraft are separated by ATC.

Dick Smith has been trying to bring Australian safety standards up for at least 30 years by insisting on the same ATC separation here.

The ATSB report confirms what this forum has known for some time => both aircraft were visible to ATC via ADS-B tracking.

Airservices have a flow chart that demonstrates the workload of providing separation is LESS than the workload of only providing traffic.

WHY?

Each task requires ATC considering the trajectory of every aircraft in the sector.

To separate aircraft, the ATC makes a decision and issues an instruction.

If the ATC passes traffic then the pilot may respond with his decision to change altitude or track or otherwise avoid the conflict

BUT then the ATC has to assess this change to determine if a different conflict will occur and perhaps pass further traffic.

So let us stop accepting the nonsense argument that it costs more to provide separation compared to traffic information - it does not.

What is the total cost of this accident going to be?

Almost two decades ago Dick organised a trip by both Airservices and CASA staff to the United States with flights arranged to demonstrate the ease of use and safety of Class E airspace.

A very experienced US ATC from the Southern California Terminal Radar Control Unit addressed the team and pointed out how easy it was to provide separation and how safe the result.

John and Martha King of King schools tried very hard to educate the team on why US airspace is as safe as Australian airspace in terms of collisions per flight hour but has so much greater traffic density and thus greater actual safety.

A lot of very experienced pilots and controllers in this country know Dick was right back then and he is proven right again by this accident.

CAN WE LEARN FROM IT THIS TIME???

   
Which brings me to yet another coincidental Can'tberra bubble bureaucratic appointment - remember this? 

MH370 Search Likely to Last Another Year Despite Debris Clue

&..this photo:



...with this post: https://auntypru.com/forum/-Australia-AT...28#pid4528

And these FOI disclosure log entries: https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/...dacted.pdf & https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/...dacted.pdf

Not long after heading up the JACC Zielke was appointed COO of the CSIRO and was recently appointed the new CEO of the Australian Research Council.

Interesting to note that over a similar timeframe that both HVH and Zielke have been in perfect positions to help diffuse, obfuscate any potentially embarrassing media and public attention given to several international and domestic aviation safety issues (MH370/Mangalore Midair/Essendon DFO crash/Pelair ditching/FAA & ICAO audits) - Just saying...

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

The question “where is 'Iggins” has been asked many, many times: Silence, the stern reply... From Sky News – tonight:-


"The NSW State Coroner's Court will review the disappearance of veteran Australian journalist and author Ean Higgins to decide whether the matter should progress to a formal coronial inquest."



"The review will be conducted by NSW Deputy State Coroner Elizabeth Ryan and is due to start later this month."

[ventus45]

It should also include the six Australians and one resident that were on MH370, so eight in total.

[P7_TOM]

V45 - “It should also include the six Australians and one resident that were on MH370, so eight in total.”

Exactly. But, can a humble NSW Coroner break through the veil? Despite the many 'theories', notions, investigations and continued 'external' research, the big questions have never been answered satisfactorily. For many of us, the moment AMSA was unceremoniously dumped from the search and Beaker (he of the Simply Marvellous Horse pooh) took over, the little red flags were raised. This was compounded by the Minsky 'briefing, pre departure and when Canary Hood threatened his crew with gaol, for talking out of school concerns amplified; that alone rang all the bells. If only Foley could be 'un-muzzled' - there is a man we could all trust.



Something was, and IMO still is very, very wrong with the MH370 saga. No idea why, nor can I present a sensible argument as to what that 'wrong' is; but too many things just do not pass the pub test. The what and the why of Ean's 'disappearance' from the radar may help explain – who knows....But, it is a puzzle right enough.

[Peetwo]

#MH370: Where is 'Iggins? - Part II 


Via the Twitterverse: https://twitter.com/nihonmama/status/157...0350704640

- Higgins "disappeared".

- Disappearance *not suspicious* WHY?

- "post mortem report" (HOW, unless there's a dead body?)

He was a veteran journo, but neither
@australian nor others report his disappearance?

But it's revealed in a doc?

AYFKM? #MH370

Plus via https://mikechillit.net/ :

MH370: Upcoming Coroner’s Review of Ean Higgins’ 2020 Disappearance

October 7, 2022 by Mike Chillit

It is premature to suggest that Greg Hood, former Chief Commissioner of the Australian Transport Safety Board (ATSB), may eventually be charged in connection with the disappearance of veteran journalist Ean Higgins. But, that there was an atmosphere of animosity between the two individuals is undeniable. It would nevertheless be an unacceptable flight of fancy to speculate beyond what little is currently known: namely that Mr. Higgins vanished without a trace, much like the Boeing 777-200 he had covered for The Australian newspaper for six years. No physical evidence is known to have been found, apparently; no letter or note of despair; no corpse; no nothing.

Figure 1: Ean Higgins was an accomplished journalist who worked for “The Australian” newspaper when he vanished in early 2020. A Coroner’s Review is now scheduled to examine that disappearance, two and a half years after it was first characterized as “suspicious”. Why did it take so long? Not known at this point. But there is a disturbing possibility: Mr. Higgins’ had a consuming interest in the disappearance of MH370. He also ardently believed his own Canberra government repeatedly lied about its efforts to locate the plane. Higgins was so certain of Canberra’s culpability for a search that seemed to languish endlessly that he published “The Hunt for MH370” shortly before he disappeared. The paperback version sold out quickly. Sadly, Mr. Higgins’ disappearance is not the first collateral calamity to befall those who have challenged Canberra’s integrity with regard to MH370. (Click to enlarge)

Jimmy Hoffa, déjà vu; Australian style.

---

Image 1: Ean Higgins, Journalist for The Australian and vanished “under mysterious circumstances” in early 2020. A coroner’s review is underway in New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. While Mr. Higgins’ age and other personal details have not been published at this point, it may be safe to assume he was not “shot in the back by a jealous husband”. There has certainly not been a “rush to judgment” in Australia given that Mr. Higgins disappeared more than two years ago. Mr. Higgins’ professional interests included the fate and terminal location of MH370. He published The world was just waking up to the fact that the plane had been confirmed at Zenith Abyss in 2017, but not published until late 2019. Higgins published a book on the plane’s disappearance in 2016.

---

Image 2: Greg Hood, Australian Transport Safety Bureau Chief Commissioner between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2021. MH370’s debris field was located by Germany’s Geomar in June 2017, one year after Mr. Hood took the helm at ATSB. After Germany confirmed that MH370 crashed at Zenith Abyss, Hood promptly warned all ATSB employees that they would be criminally prosecuted if they revealed anything pertaining to the discovery. No announcement was made to the public or families of victims. Australia, of course, had spent millions of dollars searching a strip of seafloor 2,000 kilometers southwest of Zenith; a location simple mathematics confirms the plane could not possibly have been. Mr. Higgins ardently believed Hood was engaged in a coverup related to MH370. Hood retaliated with a strongly worded condemnation of Higgins, even after Hood had gone on record as intent on pressing criminal charges against any employee who shared information with the media, and after Germany’s Geomar is known to have scanned the plane’s debris field in 2017. Australia has still not acknowledged the location of the debris field, but Scripps of California and others have confirmed it.

Justice, like trying to get an official acknowledgment that MH370 was physically located, scanned, and filmed by Germany in 2017, appears to be a slow-motion proposition Down Under. It is well known, for example, that Canberra funneled money through a private foundation to put a private search vessel above Zenith Abyss in May 2021 to fully document the MH370 crash site. Yet, none of the still images or video footage has been released nearly two years later. Thanks to a German Multibeam scan in 2017, an unmistakable specular reflection from the depths of Zenith Abyss perfectly matches the shape and dimensions of a Boeing 777-200. In addition, telemetry places the plane within meters of that large shiny object at the exact same abyssal location. Only the right wing and engine appear to be missing. The possibility that the right wing had been sheared on impact was predicted in 2018 by Canadian investigator Larry Vance. If correct, it may explain why so little loose debris was ever found. The most common compounds in the depths of Zenith Abyss are well documented: lava, pelagic sediment (pelagite), and manganese nodules. None of it reflects sonar or light. Reflections from the depths of the abyss are from aircraft surfaces and have been mapped to a Boeing 777-200.

One of Ean Higgin’s collegues had this to say:

Ean Higgins was active until at least mid-2020. Since then (from what I can discover) he has disappeared off the face of the earth. I’ve still got his mobile number on my phone and until recently regularly would still send him SMS messages relevant to both the GA industry and MH370. So do I find it suspicious and a huge coincidence – you bet??

Greg Hood’s 2017 poison-pen condemnation of Ean Higgins.

Correcting the Record
MH370 reporting by The Australian

28 April 2017

Letter to the Editor of The Australian

I am writing to express my concern regarding the manner in which The Australian journalist Ean Higgins continues to inaccurately report on the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 – in particular I am concerned at the negative impact this inaccurate reporting is having on the knowledge of the search by the families of those on board the aircraft.

To reiterate, under the International Civil Aviation (ICAO) Annex 13 provisions, the government of Malaysia is responsible for investigating, determining and reporting the causal factors behind the loss of MH370. It is my understanding that their investigation team is well progressed in the development of a draft report. The role of the ATSB, at the request of the government of Malaysia, is to coordinate the conduct of the underwater search.

Many of Mr Higgins’ recent articles have been centred on the ATSB’s decision not to provide him with a series of emails between members of the group of experts advising the ATSB on the search strategy in 2016. The emails pertain to an analysis of the final series of satellite communications between the aircraft and the ground earth station which indicate that the aircraft was, at that time, in a high and increasing rate of decent. The analysis was performed by one of Australia’s leading scientists in the field, is based on solid evidence and it has been extensively peer reviewed and published in a scientific journal.

The implication of this analysis for the search is that the aircraft probably impacted the surface of the ocean reasonably close to where the transmissions were made (what is known as the 7th arc). This is contrary to the views expressed by Mr Higgins and Mr Byron Bailey from The Australian, who have been vocal critics of the search and have long contended that the aircraft was being actively controlled at the end of flight and was glided to a location well away from the area which has been searched. The analysis of the transmission data, when complemented by the recently published CSIRO drift-modelling analysis, provides the best possible definition of an area in which the aircraft is likely to be located.

Mr Higgins’ articles have also consistently attempted to create the appearance of contention between the search strategy experts and members of the ATSB’s search team where none exists. He has suggested in his articles that some ATSB officers have had second thoughts about the ATSB’s position in relation to the end of flight scenario and further;

“(the) Australian Transport Safety Bureau has invoked draconian legislation in refusing to release material about its search for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, warning that any bureau employee who provides such information to the public or a court could face two years in jail.”

I find the use of this journalistic tactic particularly objectionable. No such warning has ever been issued, every member of the search strategy group and the ATSB’s search team understands, and is in agreement with, the science associated with the search and the implications on the search area of the analysis of the satellite communication data. Members of the ATSB’s search team are operating under the standard legislation that ATSB employees normally operate under, governing the disclosure and use of information.

Similarly Mr Higgins suggests in his most recent article that the work currently being performed by the ATSB was prompted by negative public opinion about the search. To quote;

“But he (Mr Hood) and his ATSB colleagues are no doubt thinking the best way out of this continuing world of pain is to find MH370, and behind the scenes that’s exactly what they are trying to help make happen.”

This is also incorrect – the CSIRO drift study work we have recently published was commenced in April 2016. It is the most comprehensive and accurate study of the point of origin of MH370 debris performed to date. It forms a part of the ATSB’s ongoing work to bring the best possible science to bear to find the aircraft.

It is particularly regrettable that Mr Higgin’s articles have now led to some of the MH370 next of kin expressing doubts about the ATSB’s conduct of the search, and by implication, our commitment to finding the aircraft. The ATSB’s search team, and the experts from many organisations both in Australia and overseas supporting the search, have worked with absolute commitment, dedication and a single minded focus on finding the aircraft to provide the answers for the families of those on board and to improve transport safety. It is extraordinarily difficult and challenging work.

Leaving aside his harassing and intimidating approach in dealing with my staff when requesting information, you can perhaps now understand why I find Mr Higgins’ approach to attacking the credibility of the search unwarranted. The ATSB reserves its rights not to interact with Mr Higgins.

Greg Hood
Chief Commissioner and Chief Executive Officer
Australian Transport Safety Bureau

MTF...P2

ps Another passing strange coincidence? Via the Twitterverse: https://twitter.com/nihonmama/status/157...1087721473

..FOUND IT. Note the title.

"highlighted a peculiar reluctance by the Australian government to endorse CSIRO and ATSB research that suggests success is close at hand."

https://web.archive.org/web/201710200139...used-look/



Which brings us back to "disappeared" Ean Higgins. #MH370

[Peetwo]

#MH370: Where is 'Iggins? - Part III

Courtesy Mike Chillit:

MH370: Next Steps

October 19, 2022 by Mike Chillit

I have decided to migrate most of my coverage of MH370 to other websites and shift the focus of upcoming posts away from personal efforts, and toward specific areas of analysis. Examples will include:

1. The obliteration of MH370 was premeditated mass murder, not suicide;
   
2. The crash location was confirmed with sonar in 2017 by Germany acting as a surrogate for Australia;
   
3. Collateral damage, including Journalist Ean Higgins’ disappearance in 2020; almost certainly related to his coverage of MH370; almost certainly related to his criticism of ATSB, Greg Hood, and official Canberra; New South Wales is now investigating Higgins’ death, but his body vanished like the plane he was covering for The Australian;
   
4. Telemetry developed and shared openly online was used to locate the plane in June 2017; three nations collaborated in trying to keep it “secret”, perhaps believing the fellow who developed it wouldn’t notice; and,
   
5. Malaysia and Australia intentionally misled Ocean Infinity in 2018 when the latter offered to continue the search on a “no find no fee” basis. (There are indications Ocean Infinity has now been “paid off” or “hush moneyed”, but details are sketchy. It is abundantly clear that Malaysia and Australia lied to Ocean Infinity’s CEO, Oliver Plunkett, to avoid disclosing that the plane had already been found six months earlier.)
   

There appear to be criminal elements to some of the above, but that is generally a non-starter when sovereign states are involved. There is certainly evidence that at least three nations collaborated on confirming the plane’s location while also fully intending to keep that location unconfirmed, unpublished, and unreported for eternity. That in turn prompted the following comment from an individual who had worked with Ean Higgins:

What expertise has Greg Hood got in the field of ocean/marine research other than previously being the Chief Commissioner of the ATSB in a time when the ATSB was the overseeing govt agency (bizarrely over the expertise and experience of AMSA) of the MH370 search?

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Foley calls for Australia to back new search for MH370?? - 

From a (somewhat surprising) source on Linkedin, the following was brought to my attention:

Graham Drummond

Manager Transport Safety at ATSB
1d •  1 day ago

“There are a lot of people who contributed to the original search and everyone who’s been involved in the search is really keen to get answers for the families.”

...

A spokesperson for Bridget McKenzie, the Coalition’s shadow transport minister, emphasised that the search had only been suspended, not closed.

“The families of those who were tragically lost with the disappearance of flight MH370 will not have closure until solid answers are obtained as to what happened,” the spokesperson said.

“If credible new evidence becomes available as to the location of the missing plane, this should be fully considered – noting the government of Malaysia is responsible for making any decision to resume the search for the missing plane.”

Australia should back new search for MH370, top official who led first effort says

Interesting that the Guardian got a informed comment, on behalf of the Shadow Minister Senator Bridgett McKenzie, however no comment from the actual Minister herself...err WTD??   

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Courtesy of Mike Chillit:  

The Hoax Known As MH370 (reprint)

February 11, 2023 by Michael Chillit

Introduction

In late 2016 MH370‘s final resting place was calculated by the author to be at or near what is now colloquially known as the “Zenith Abyss” in the South Indian Ocean 1,200 kilometers west of the small town of Exmouth, Western Australia. The author used publicly available telemetry acquired by Inmarsat’s 3-F1 satellite on March 8, 2014, to calculate the plane’s endpoint.

The analysis initially endeavored to identify the relatively small portion of the plane’s final ping – with a circumference of 30,254 kilometers – that could actually have been flown the day the plane was lost. Specifically, where was the plane when the satellite recorded its final ping at 8:19 AM local? The only thing certain was that the answer — if one could be found — would be unlike anything else in use at the time because it would have nothing whatever to do with fuel reserves, ground speed, or compass heading. Those traditional metrics had become unknowable after the plane’s communication systems were disabled forty minutes after takeoff.

The solution turned out to be surprisingly straightforward. The plane’s location on the circumference of the final ping required nothing more than an accurate measure of the radius of the final ping, which was known to have been 4,815 kilometers. At the moment MH370 entered the South Indian Ocean at Zenith, the illustration below shows the departure airport at Kuala Lumpur, Inmarsat’s 3-F1 satellite, and provides a partial overview of the area spanned by the circumference of the final ping. The latter extended from the Democratic Republic of the Congo in west central Africa to the Malay Archipelago.


Image 1: Above, a Google Earth overview of the South Indian Ocean and parts of Oceania when MH370 collided with the ocean surface seven kilometers above the seafloor of Zenith Abyss, 2,760 kilometers south of Kuala Lumpur Airport.

Based entirely on the radius of the final ping, two “geometric reflections” were added to the Indian Ocean tableau: a mirror image of the 3-F1 satellite and a mirror image of the final ping. Mathematical formulas can be easily used in lieu of illustrations, but illustrations alone are used here. Neither of the two additional geometric reflections is real if defined as space junk. Yet both are geometrically and mathematically valid constructions. This technique is ancient and is used in the building trades, engineering, optics, and many other pursuits. It is also taught in primary and secondary schools worldwide.


Image 2: Above, a Google Earth overview of the East Indian Ocean and the Malay Archipelago showing the two geometric reflections used to aid identification of MH370’s location as it crashed into the surface of the South Indian Ocean above Zenith Abyss.

The geometric reflections that pinpointed MH370 created two equally likely crash location possibilities at either end of the green vertical line, sometimes known as a common chord or radical axis. As a rule, additional information is needed to determine which of the two endpoints is the correct endpoint. With MH370, that task was greatly simplified by China when it announced that the plane did not enter its airspace. That left only the southern endpoint at Zenith Abyss, which would be confirmed by Germany three years later.

The following chapters take the reader through each step needed to confirm MH370‘s final flight path from takeoff at Kuala Lumpur Airport on March 8, 2014, to its crash site at Zenith Abyss eight hours later.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Mike Exner voices his disgust in Netflix MH370 conspiracy doco?? - 

Via the Oz:

Netflix MH370 doco ‘a horrible piece of conspiracy nonsense’



An aviation expert who appears in a Netflix documentary about the disappearance of MH370 has criticised the “shameful” series and said he regrets participating in it.

Engineer Michael Exner says he feels betrayed by production company RAW, which produced the three-part series, MH370: The Plane That Disappeared, which he has labelled a “a horrible piece of conspiracy nonsense”.

“Before agreeing to be interviewed for the series, I asked for and received assurances from RAW producers that this was going to be a ‘first-class documentary’,” he said. “They said it would be focused primarily on the Next of Kin stories. In reality, the series is not about the NoK at all.

Instead, it exploits the NoK stories to help set up and push baseless conspiracy stories, ignoring most of the factual evidence and analysis they were provided by me and several other experts.”

Mr Exner – a member of the Independent Group of experts investigating the world’s greatest aviation mystery – said producers had promised to stick to the verified evidence.

“They assured me that they would stick to the facts and the science, and not dwell on the debunked conspiracies promoted by people like (journalists) Jeff Wise and Florence de Changy,” he said in a tweeted three-page documentary review. “They used the NoK stories to get the viewers sucked in emotionally, then turned Jeff and Florence loose with their conspiracy book promotions. It is shameful beyond belief.”

MH370 vanished during a red-eye flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8, 2014. The airliner disappeared from air traffic control screens about 40 minutes into the flight when its secondary radar transponder was turned off.

Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah issued the last radio transmission, saying “Good night, Malaysian Three-Seven-Zero”.

Military radar and satellite “handshakes” later showed MH370 flew back over Malaysia, then up the Straits of Malacca, ­before turning south to the Indian Ocean, where it remains lost ­despite multiple searches.

The series, released this month to coincide with the nine-year anniversary of the disappearance, ­focuses on three theories about what might have happened, including an act of mass-murder-suicide, a Russian hijacking, or that US Airforce jets shot down MH370 in the South China Sea.

Mr Exner, a pilot, said the Russian hijack theory was “complete garbage” and that the “wacky” American military intercept theory was “100% BS”.

He said documentary producers omitted critical information.

“They had all this information, and understood the implications, but deliberately left it out to push the conspiracy episodes,” he said.

British aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey – who declined to participate in the documentary due to concerns about the story treatment – has also claimed the series is “full of misinformation and disinformation”.

“Netflix has relied entirely on speculation and fantasy from questionable sources, but they provide no definitive answers to the what, where and why of MH370,” he said. RAW did not respond to questions by deadline.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Chillit dissects GT's reincarnation of Godfrey's #MH370 #WSPR!! -   

MH370 news yesterday with FIGJAM GT publishing Richard Godfrey's latest #WSPR theory on the location of MH370 - see here: MH370: GROUND-BREAKING REPORT REVEALS LOCATION (Godfrey's report HERE)

And courtesy 9 NEWS Oz, via Youtube:

96,608 views  Sep 1, 2023  #9News #BreakingNews #NineNewsAustralia

Subscribe and ?: http://9Soci.al/KM6e50GjSK9 | A report has been presented to the Malaysian Government that could finally lead to closure for the families of victims of the MH370 disaster.

The document suggests the final resting place of the doomed Malaysian Airlines flight could be northwest of Perth, ending a nearly decade-long search.

Despite years of conspiracy theories and ongoing speculation, aviation expert Geoff Thomas told Today the report is an accumulation of four years of research and it's findings will hopefully finally bring peace to the loved ones of those on board.

This was Mike Chillit's Tweep reply to these new revelations...

Mike Chillit
@MikeChillit

#MH370 Just to briefly revisit Mr. Godfrey's reincarnation yesterday. I've overlaid his latest track on Google Earth's “Geographic Coordinate System; GCS”, which is a modification of the WGS84 datum, as it is known.

I'm now inclined to believe Mr. Godfrey's latest effort is probably intended to be farcical. To quote Rex Stout and his Nero Wolfe, "the man is not an idiot".

With that thought, his correction appears to me to be precisely correct and ends at Zenith Abyss. First image below. What took so long?

If you enjoy Mr. Godfrey's antics, by all means hang on his every #WSPR. But please don't forward any of it to me. Better things to do.

Ref: https://twitter.com/MikeChillit/status/1...7085606117

MTF...P2 

[ventus45]

https://www.raes.org.au/eventdetails/226...7404fc86ac

[Peetwo]

Sky News MH370 ten years on (20 Feb '24): Popinjay to the rescue...

Courtesy Sky News Oz, via YouTube:

Sky News Australia will premiere ‘MH370: Ten Years On’, the third instalment in its compelling documentary series examining the unsolved disappearance of flight MH370, on Tuesday 20 February at 7.30pm.

As the 10th anniversary of the greatest mystery in aviation history approaches, Sky News anchor and investigative journalist Peter Stefanovic continues the search for answers.

The documentary sheds light on the diplomatic difficulties with the Malaysian Government, the actions of Australian search authorities, and hears campaigners ask the question: was there a cover-up?

‘MH370: Ten Years On’ is the third instalment in the Sky News Australia series of documentaries that includes ‘MH370: The Final Search’ and ‘MH370: The Untold Story’ which remains the highest rated Sky News Australia documentary of all time.

Subscribers to SkyNews.com.au will be able to watch ‘MH370: Ten Years On’ from Tuesday February 20 at 7:30pm. The documentary is also live at that time on Foxtel, Flash and Sky News Regional.
Transcript

"Can we say that MH370 will be the last plane to disappear?"

Popinjay: "Umm..!!??"

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Asking the 'right' questions.

The 'Sky News' latest production, looking into the MH 370 mystery - HERE - will not, in all probability, become be a 'useful' tool for changing official attitudes toward finding the aircraft. It should be. - However, it does serve quite well to touch on several essential questions which demand answers. Not questions about the 'how' or the 'why' of the aircraft's disappearance; that will only be answered when the wreckage is found. The 'real' questions, related to why the aircraft has not been located reside within the attitude of the respective governments. IMO, that is a deeper mystery than the actual event itself; many intriguing, disturbing questions in this area remain unanswered, almost lost in time and silence now. For example:-

Sky News - "Mr Waring also questioned why the Australian Transport Safety Bureau had been chosen to spearhead the operation."

That one item of interest has puzzled 'professional' interest since the appointment of 'Hood' to the ATSB and the inept Dolan to the mix. Wrong choices for 'investigation' yet the right choices for 'cooperation' with the status quo. To say there were better qualified folk available to conduct the orchestra would be no exaggeration.

"But the question really needs to be asked why the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, which is an aircraft investigation authority, not a search and rescue authority, not an organisation that has any experience of conducting a search, why they were put in charge of one of the largest and most expensive searches in human history," he said. - (Waring)..

P7 - "Exactly. But, can a humble NSW Coroner break through the veil? Despite the many 'theories', notions, investigations and continued 'external' research, the big questions have never been answered satisfactorily. For many of us, the moment AMSA was unceremoniously dumped from the search and Beaker (he of the Simply Marvellous Horse pooh) took over, the little red flags were raised. This was compounded by the Minsky 'briefing, pre departure and when Canary Hood threatened his crew with goal, for talking out of school concerns amplified; that alone rang all the bells. If only Foley could be 'un-muzzled' - there is a man we could all trust".

Aye well; no doubt the silence will continue; but it is 'passing strange' that we can throw the odd 20 and 30 millions at a project without a second though; but cannot release a few pennies to support a search or even allow Twiggy and his crew to take a look. I wonder why not?

Toot - toot.

[ventus45]

https://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2024/03...ment-36091

https://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2024/03...ment-36093

https://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2024/03...ment-36095
https://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2024/03...ment-36096

[Peetwo]

https://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2024/03...ment-36091

ventus45 says:

March 5, 2024 at 11:47 pm

@Peter Norton, @Barry Carlson

I basically agree with your sentiment’s gentlemen.

It was clear to many after only a few weeks that Malaysia did not want it found. I think it is clear that Malaysia still does not want it found, recent chest beating notwithstanding.

The early dumping of AMSA for Dolan’s ATSB, the ‘driving of the search north’, and the subsequent creation of the JACC (with Houston for PR ‘street cred’ cover), all had a faintly unpleasant odor about it, (to some of us local natives at the time) which seemed to be driven, more by the perceived need not to contradict, annoy or (God forbid) embarrass Malaysia, diplomatically, than with actually getting on with the job of finding the plane. It became a political / media circus.

The Chinese weren’t impressed either, especially when their IL-76’s were prevented from searching where their own satellites showed target of interest (deep south west end of the search area, plus a bit further). They packed up and went home pretty smartly after that little episode, and their official attitude has been one of ‘studied indifference’ ever since.

If you go back through contemporary ‘Senate Estimates’ hearings, (some of which are still available on YouTube) you will find that most of the time the dear Senators were asking more about ‘how much is this costing’ than anything else. In fact, they even questioned the ATSB’s choice of Fugro, (since they had ‘representations’ from some ‘aggrieved parties’ who strongly suggested that the ATSB had not selected the best offer that was tendered for the search contract), either on technical grounds, or on financial (best value for money for the Commonwealth) grounds.

It was in this political climate, that the phrase ‘credible new evidence’ came into being.

In all probability, it was undoubtedly created by a sly Australian public servant within the Australian Treasury, as a barrier, an impossible hurdle to hurdle, that would give the Government an excuse to stop spending any further money on any further searches.

The Malaysian Government loved it, and adopted it, as their ‘get out of (further searching) jail card’.

Money is still the public Malaysian issue.

In the multiple press conferences and short interviews the other day, the Malaysian Transport Minister kept repeating that any contract proposal had to ‘go to Cabinet’ because of the financial implications.

Most people mistakenly interpret that to mean the cost of the new search (if it occurs). Such costs would be a mere drop in the bucket, a few tens of millions, nothing more than loose change to a nation.

But that is only a ruse for the media and the NoK, it is not the real issue at all.

The real issue is that if the aircraft were to be found, and if the investigation proved that either the Airline or the Captain was culpable, the financial implications would be huge, and the political and diplomatic damage would be substantial.

I think it is clear that Malaysia never wanted 9M-MRO found, still don’t, and never will, for those reasons.

Now, that leads into their current problem, how to handle the building calls for ‘another search’.

At this point, I have to declare my hand clearly, (for those who may not be aware).

I am embedded in the deliberately piloted flight to the ‘deep south’ camp, specifically, into the GFZ.
I have never accepted that drift studies of the Flaperon confirm 35 South (give or take two or three).
I do not have a gut acceptance of WSPR technology either.

Now, since the Malaysia Government can not afford for MH370 to be found, (for the reasons above), handling calls or a new search becomes an exercise in political damage control for Malaysia, pure and simple, nothing else matters to them.

In my opinion, the Malaysian Government will only ever ‘reluctantly’ agree to a new search, (for PR brownie points only) in an area that their own information tells them it can’t possibly be, because they must be absolutely certain, in their own minds, that the search will certainly fail, and that OI will end up with egg on their face, yet again, before they sign any new contract.

They will ‘reluctantly’ sign contracts in the north, but only if they have to, for PR reasons alone.

Now, hypothetically, consider what would happen if the IG suddenly came out with some miracle reinterpretation of the ISAT data, that re-confirmed the absolute certainty of the initial positions near 38/39/40 South !!

Would all ‘the pilots’ suddenly get a fair hearing ? All of them are down there, Hardy, Keane, Bailey, and others.

MTF...P2