Malaysia Airlines Plane "Loses Contact"
Discussion
So The French investigators and the authorities that be have had the so called confirmed flapperon for almost a week now.
Now I am no tin foil hatter, but something is definitely not right here again.
Once again we are not being told the full truth, and I a confident there is a lot of political conversations going on between the authorities that we are not going to be told about.
I just hope that we get some truth for the sake of the families very soon, this can't be dragged out much longer,, surely?.
Now I am no tin foil hatter, but something is definitely not right here again.
Once again we are not being told the full truth, and I a confident there is a lot of political conversations going on between the authorities that we are not going to be told about.
I just hope that we get some truth for the sake of the families very soon, this can't be dragged out much longer,, surely?.
Edited by nigelpugh7 on Saturday 8th August 21:41
nigelpugh7 said:
So Airbus and the authorities that be have had the so called confirmed flapperon for almost a week now.
Now I am no tin foil hatter, but something is definitely not right here again.
Once again we are not being told the full truth, and I a confident there is a lot of political conversations going on between the authorities that we are not going to be told about.
I just hope that we get some truth for the sake of the families very soon, this can't be dragged out much longer,, surely?.
Airbus?Now I am no tin foil hatter, but something is definitely not right here again.
Once again we are not being told the full truth, and I a confident there is a lot of political conversations going on between the authorities that we are not going to be told about.
I just hope that we get some truth for the sake of the families very soon, this can't be dragged out much longer,, surely?.
I think you're the one having a 'flapperon'.
eharding said:
French Investigatiors!
I think you're the one having a 'flapperon'.
Sorry Freudian slip,,was having another discussion about Airbus airframes! On another thread.I think you're the one having a 'flapperon'.
Still the point I made about the authorities not revealing all is valid!
Edited by nigelpugh7 on Saturday 8th August 21:42
Mr_B said:
lets just hope after all the searching when they finally find the CVR and FDR only to find that the crew turned them off like in the SilkAir flight !or maybe that's not possible on a 777
Martin4x4 said:
KTF said:
CAPP0 said:
(Semi)-serious question - do flaperons fall off 777s sufficiently frequently, without them crashing, that this could possibly have come from another plane? In other words, are they bolting new flaperons on with such boring regularity that they can't decide whether it might have come from any one of 500 planes currently on the ground with a flaperon missing?
I believe I know the answer to this somewhat-rhetorical question already; however....
From what they have said on pprune, none have fallen off in flight and if the did then it would be reported and logged.I believe I know the answer to this somewhat-rhetorical question already; however....
MH370 Surface Debris – Comparative Analysis of Drift Models
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
AreOut said:
MH370 Surface Debris – Comparative Analysis of Drift Models
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
Thanks for that. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
AreOut said:
MH370 Surface Debris – Comparative Analysis of Drift Models
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
An unpublished, non peer-reviewed paper, completely devoid of objectivity.https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
I enjoyed it, thanks
Good luck getting it published.......
Quote used from the article, homebrew article links to, by Areout.
'Our chief oceanographer working on the search, Dr David Griffin, concluded that if the flaperon drifted...then its arrival at Le Reunion could mean it originated from the present MH370 search area...'
'However, David Also concluded that because of the turbulent nature of the ocean, and the uncertainties of the modelling, it is impossible to use La Reunion n finding to refine or shift the search area.'
This is the guy leading the search.
'Our chief oceanographer working on the search, Dr David Griffin, concluded that if the flaperon drifted...then its arrival at Le Reunion could mean it originated from the present MH370 search area...'
'However, David Also concluded that because of the turbulent nature of the ocean, and the uncertainties of the modelling, it is impossible to use La Reunion n finding to refine or shift the search area.'
This is the guy leading the search.
AreOut said:
MH370 Surface Debris – Comparative Analysis of Drift Models
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
I wonder if you can explain something to me?https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
Only one piece of confirmed wreckage has been recovered. The location is therefore the equivalent of a single data point on a graph.
The location is within the projected range suggested by the various models, assuming a crash site as previously modelled.
The author of this unpublished, non peer-reviewed paper, however seems rather confused, claiming that other destinations for drift of wreckage are ''more probable''
If, however, the location is within the hypothesized zone then the model is valid. Any re-evaluation would only be possible with the recovery of numerous pieces of wreckage. It would be a different matter if it had washed up in Norfolk, or anywhere else highly unlikely given the drift projections and calculated crash site.
I think what I am trying to get at is that it's a heap of crap, but I'm trying to go about it nicely.
Edited by TheSnitch on Saturday 15th August 10:02
TheSnitch said:
AreOut said:
MH370 Surface Debris – Comparative Analysis of Drift Models
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
I wonder if you can explain something to me?https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-r3yuaF2p72dk9ua...
Only one piece of confirmed wreckage has been recovered. The location is therefore the equivalent of a single data point on a graph.
The location is within the projected range suggested by the various models, assuming a crash site as previously modelled.
The author of this unpublished, non per-reviewed paper, however seems rather confused, claiming that other destinations for drift of wreckage are ''more probable''
If, however, the location is within the hypothesized zone then the model is valid. Any re-evaluation would only be possible with the recovery of numerous pieces of wreckage. It would be a different matter if it had washed up in Norfolk, or anywhere else highly unlikely given the drift projections and calculated crash site.
I think what I am trying to get at is that it's a heap of crap, but I'm trying to go about it nicely.
AreOut said:
TheSnitch said:
An unpublished, non peer-reviewed paper, completely devoid of objectivity.
I enjoyed it, thanks
Good luck getting it published.......
the article is not mine nor I know the guy, couldn't care less if it will get published or not I enjoyed it, thanks
Good luck getting it published.......
Jimboka said:
AreOut said:
TheSnitch said:
An unpublished, non peer-reviewed paper, completely devoid of objectivity.
I enjoyed it, thanks
Good luck getting it published.......
the article is not mine nor I know the guy, couldn't care less if it will get published or not I enjoyed it, thanks
Good luck getting it published.......
The more I see of this sad affair the more I despair that the whole truth will ever come out. Other aviation tragedies remain less than competely explained and regrettably I do wonder if this maybe one of those. Sad business, tragedy for the travellers and the bereaved families. Not good publicity for the air travel businesses. No winners.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff