MH370: Malaysian Airlines Flight to Beijing carrying 239 people is lost over sea.

  • Thread starter Furinkazen
  • 1,507 comments
  • 80,567 views
prisonermonkeys
I'm pretty sure that we are. It was put out to competitive tender months ago. It's also being justified as an opportunity to survey a part of the ocean floor that we know next to nothing about.
Click to expand...

And it pays off, it seems.
 
That could narrow the search quite a bit once they figure out the currents in that part of the Indian Ocean.
 
There's a suggestion in the comments on that blog that the part number matches a Beech 200, not a 777.

Does anyone have a link to the photo of the parts sticker? It doesn't seem to be evident in that blog or any other source that I could find.

EDIT: The part number is, apparently, BB670. 9 News.
 
TenEightyOne
There's a suggestion in the comments on that blog that the part number matches a Beech 200, not a 777.

Does anyone have a link to the photo of the parts sticker? It doesn't seem to be evident in that blog or any other source that I could find.

EDIT: The part number is, apparently, BB670. 9 News.
Click to expand...
That's quite a stretch for someone to call that a part from a King Air after personally flying one with a friend.

I'd have to agree it's most likely an aileron or the outer flaperon from the right wing, as the profile slims from left to right.
 
Swagger897
That's quite a stretch for someone to call that a part from a King Air after personally flying one with a friend.

I'd have to agree it's most likely an aileron or the outer flaperon from the right wing, as the profile slims from left to right.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. There's some suggestion in various places that this might be "legacy" wreckage from SA295... I'd disagree with that theory as the wreckage doesn't look that old and 747s don't employ flaperons. And that's definitely what this piece looks like.
 
Mike Rotch
Tantalizing. If this is part of it, then the account of the plane being sighted from the Maldives might all of a sudden not be so outlandish....
Click to expand...
Which begs the question of how we ended up looking for it thousands of kilometres off-course, and why Inmarsat picked up data placing it on a steady course south-west of Perth.
 
It is strange that a relatively large piece of an aircraft is what has been found. I would have expected any number of other things to wash ashore first - mainly the seat cushions, which are designed to float, as well as random personal effects.
Will be interesting to see what comes of it over the next few days. I am seeing conflicting reports
"It is the wrong type of aircraft"
"If it was an MH777, that bit wouldn't be painted that colour"
and my favourite "We are only missing one plane, that has to be it"
and the most sensible, despite being the least sensationalist "It could be, but experts need to have a reeeaaallly good look at the part"
 
prisonermonkeys
Which begs the question of how we ended up looking for it thousands of kilometres off-course, and why Inmarsat picked up data placing it on a steady course south-west of Perth.
Click to expand...

But did they? While I'm sure that none of the Inmarsat findings put the plane anywhere near (or on a course for) La Reunion I thought they'd decided from the traces that it was going north or south, nothing more accurate?

ExigeEvan
I think you're underestimating the power of ocean currents. It's been over a year so I don't think it's impossible that debris has travelled significant distances.
Click to expand...

This is an aerodynamic (and therefore hydrodynamic) part. It does seem rather odd that there's no other debris. That is, of course, unless the plane attempted to land and lost the trailing edges on the water, then sank intact.

Barra333
the most sensible, despite being the least sensationalist "It could be, but experts need to have a reeeaaallly good look at the part"
Click to expand...

This, really. The air-sickness expert is now a full-on "aircraft expert" in a lot of papers this morning, somebody more qualified than him needs to go. The part looks very like the 777 part on the photographs, but I guess that's a given or we wouldn't be here now :)
 
I find it odd that a large piece that would be a few kilos in weight would come up from the ocean floor and end up being washed ashore, rather than smaller plastic pieces like interior.

Seeing as you need 5 to 6 people to carry it.
 
Grayfox
I find it odd that a large piece that would be a few kilos in weight would come up from the ocean floor and end up being washed ashore, rather than smaller plastic pieces like interior.
Click to expand...

See my previous comment, what if the plane didn't disintegrate but it did lose the trailing edges during a forced water landing?

I was thinking about the part while I made my coffee, I also pointed out in my previous post that it's aerodynamic. It's possible that this piece actually gained hydrodynamic lift from a current.

All pretty "out there" and convoluted guesswork to fit the known facts... but then the known facts are so thin on the ground (or seabed) that, y'know :)
 
TenEightyOne
I was thinking about the part while I made my coffee, I also pointed out in my previous post that it's aerodynamic. It's possible that this piece actually gained hydrodynamic lift from a current.
Click to expand...
Once a piece like that hits the sea floor, it is not coming back. There are some strong currents going around (3-4kts), but not in the open Indian Ocean, and certainly not within a metre of the floor.
I know you said it is an out there guess, but I think it is beyond the realms of possibility.
 
TenEightyOne
I was thinking about the part while I made my coffee, I also pointed out in my previous post that it's aerodynamic. It's possible that this piece actually gained hydrodynamic lift from a current.
Click to expand...

Being a heavy piece it would have sunk to the bottom quite quickly and once on the bottom of the ocean I cant see how any kind of current will create lift since all the water will be flowing over the top and not the bottom.

IIRC when the titanic sunk the bow of the ship hit the ocean floor at about 50km/h due to the hydro dynamic design.

Cant help but think the same thing would have happened whether the plane went in nose first or it was glided on the surface.
From what history tells us, any time you do a ditching style landing on the surface of ocean, lake, river, ect the engines act as scoops which cause a braking effect which will cause the plane to flip, just as ethiopian airlines 961
 
Grayfox
From what history tells us, any time you do a ditching style landing on the surface of ocean, lake, river, ect the engines act as scoops which cause a braking effect which will cause the plane to flip, just as ethiopian airlines 961
Click to expand...

I don't think history tells us that at all? Certainly not in the cases of Lion Air 904 (737), Trans Arabian 310 (707), China Air 605 (747, overrun), the Tarom Tupolev, Japan Airlines Flight 2 (DC8) or, most famously, US1549 that landed in the Hudson.

The Ethiopian flight that you reference was undergoing a fight for control, it was no textbook landing by any means.

EDIT: An interesting overview of ditchings. We're presuming in this thread that the occupants of MH370 didn't, sadly, survive... but this link does go to the associated likelihood of an airframe remaining intact and above water after ditching/EROPS.
 
TenEightyOne
But did they? While I'm sure that none of the Inmarsat findings put the plane anywhere near (or on a course for) La Reunion I thought they'd decided from the traces that it was going north or south, nothing more accurate?
Click to expand...
I suppose it could have gone down, broken up, and its debris carried around the world in the time since it went missing.
 
prisonermonkeys
Well, there's only three planes that it could be from: Malaysian Airlines flight 370, Ethiopian Airlines flight 961, South African Airways flight 295.
Click to expand...

Can't be from SA295 if, as it appears, the piece is a flaperon - 747s don't have them. 777s definitely do and, as far as I know, so do 767s. Then again, so do many other aircraft and even on a light aircraft they're not always dissimilar from those on larger jets in proportion or size.

Grayfox
Wouldnt it be quite rusty if it were EA961
Click to expand...

That depends on the base material. Aluminium doesn't rust, nor do composites (a la 777).
 
prisonermonkeys
Well, there's only three planes that it could be from: Malaysian Airlines flight 370, Ethiopian Airlines flight 961, South African Airways flight 295.
Click to expand...
From here:

Another possibility is that the flaperon is from a retired 777 that has been broken up and had its parts sold.

A third possibility being flagged is this: Flaperon components like the one found on La Reunion are manufactured in a factory run by Hindustan Aeronauticals in Bangalore, southern India. Could the wreckage be a factory reject sent for recycling that found its way into the ocean from India’s coast?
 
Sitting in the waiting room while my Dad has an MRI and NBC is saying a damaged suitcase was found nearby.
 
If this piece turns out to be of MH370, a lot of family members of the victims will have closure or at least some piece of mind.
 
Grayfox
Ninemsn article about a suitcase find.
Didnt post as I assumed it was done so already.
http://www.9news.com.au/world/2015/07/30/13/18/what-flight-did-this-aircraft-piece-belong-to
Click to expand...

Interesting. Again though... I'm cautious. Two swallows don't make a summer and to date we don't know if either is actually a swallow. Stuff does wash up on beaches all the time, a case could be from anywhere. If it wasn't for the "flaperon" then that bag would just be an unremarkable one of hundreds.

EDIT: Is it just me or is there something very odd about the white line across the stone/boot? Just a coincidence I'm sure... but very weird :)

CLJhS1hWoAALPOs.jpg
 

Latest Posts

Back