A few things have happened recently in MH370 world that are worth taking note of.
No FMT. The seabed search in the southern Indian Ocean is all over but the shouting, and as a result I see that a consensus is forming that there could have been no “final major turn” into the southern Indian Ocean. Rather, if the plane went south, it must have loitered somewhere beyond the Malacca Strait until after 18.40 before finally flying a straight southerly path from 19:40 onward. This loiter, following a high-speed dash across the Malay Peninsula and up the strait, is quite bizarre, given that no attempt was made by anyone on board the plane to contact the ground, either to ask for help or to negotiate a hostage situation. So the presumption of a loiter doesn’t really shed light on motivation, it does effectively put yet another nail in the coffin of accident/malfunction scenarios.
More of the secret Royal Malaysian Police report released. Mick Rooney, aka @airinvestigate, has released a portion labelled “Folder 6: Audio and Other Records.” The new section contains an expert report analyzing the cockpit/ATC audio up to 17:21, which concludes (with less than 100% confidence) that it was probably Zaharie who uttered the final words “Good night, Malaysia 370.” It also includes ACARS data and the Inmarsat logs which had already been released back in 2014. In perusing the document I was not able to identify anything that would alter our collective understanding of the case, but I hope that others will offer their own assessments. And I applaud Mick for being the only one with the moral backbone to release this information. I am sure that more will follow. UPDATE: The next batch is here: “Folder 5: Aircraft Record and DCA Radar Data.”
Debris trail goes cold. I’ve plotted, above, the number of pieces of debris that have been found each month since MH370 disappeared. After the first piece of debris was found in July, 2015, a smattering of further pieces was found until April, May, and June of this year, when the number spiked and then dropped off again before ceasing altogether. This is a puzzling distribution, since drift models show that the gyres of the southern Indian Ocean act as a great randomizer, taking things around and around and spitting them out after widely varying periods of time. Would expect, therefore, to see the number of pieces found to gradually swell and then fall off again.
There is a complicating factor to this assumption, of course. Even if the pieces do arrive in a certain pattern, overlaid on top of this is the effect of an independent variable: the degree to which people are actively searching for them. It must be noted that a considerable amount of the June spike is attributable to Blaine Alan Gibson’s astonishing haul on the beaches of Madagascar that month. Indeed, Gibson by himself remains responsible for more than half of the 22 pieces of debris found thus far.
Earlier this week, several frustrated family members announced that they would be organizing their own beachcombing expedition, to take place next month. If their efforts prove less fruitful than Blaine Alan Gibson’s, it may raise questions as to what exactly was the secret to Gibson’s success.
@Jeff
Someone could do both. The question is why? Both are so elaborate it requires a very significant reason.
OK, since it seems that a truce (of sorts) has been called, and the concept of a spoof (of some sort) is back on the table, (for “brainstorming” ?), then I have a spoof scenario that treads some new ground.
Consider these three posts “as a set” of ideas, behind a “taking” of the aircraft (by state actors on-board), with the intention of spoofing Inmarsat to hide the fact, and in fact they DID DO SO, but the plan came unstuck, when another state’s actors (also on-board) realised they had been outsmarted, and conducted a “counter hijack”, that resulted in a battle on-board, which led to disaster.
What actually happened, and the crash zone itself, is known to both involved states, and debris was cleaned up, and “selected” bits have been “planted” in the western IO, specifically to reinforce the ISAT spoof, and the “story” that the plane went down in the SIO, when in fact it went down as charted in the link below.
The value of Mike Chillit’s work, is that he, (quite unintentionally, and probably totally unknowingly), is slowly proving that the debris must have been planted, simply because it is actually proving that the SIO is an impossible debris source, ie, crash site.
I commend the following reads, over a good bottle of red.
(A)http://auntypru.com/forum/-Australia-ATSB-and-MH-370?pid=4991#pid4991
(B)http://auntypru.com/forum/-MH370-time-to-think-of-it-as-a-criminal-act?pid=4768#pid4768
(C)http://auntypru.com/forum/-Australia-ATSB-and-MH-370?pid=4783#pid4783
PS: Make that two bottles.
@Jeff, You are amazing and do an amazing job on your blog! And true, your spoof theory has gotten a few punches over time, but FYI, I have not discounted this theory at all. There is much about the debris we do not yet know other than random pieces popping up. We will keep at it! @Johan, Simply loved the song you linked, now THAT was music! Better than the stuff these days that just gives me instant migraines 🙂
@DennisW – if state actors did it – we have seen many times no clear motive stated.
Looks like early DS comments are gone. I was looking for the @DennisW spoofing ideas. Are they archived elsewhere?
@All
Besides the beyond outlandish ‘debris planting’ (a LOT of debris, mind you) that is required for Jeff’s spoof, here is why it is all the more ridiculous and downright fraudulent.
Here is a quote from Gerry Soaetjman: The date: March, 1 2015
“I told Jeff that I got these information back in 2011 and had absolutely forgotten about them until I read his article about spoofing”.
Here is a link to his blog and the respective article:
http://www.gerryairways.com/index.php/en/mh370-i-hate-conspiracy-theories-but-what-can-we-learn-from-them/
Gerry Soaetjman discussed MH370 daily for almost a year and ridiculed, mocked and laughed at BFO spoofing. I can’t emphasize enough how ridiculous he felt the notion was.
Quite a stunning reversal. He FORGOT??? LMAO. What a joke.
As for walls and ‘open minds’…makes for great strawmen. And disingenuousness.
@keffertje:
Let’s make it our anthem. Our video can still be ready for Christmas.
The thing is, JeffW is brave enough to have this open site which gets many “constructive” comments on any theory, including Jeff’s own. Many other other authors essentially do not allow an open comment policy. That’s part of the reason why this website works.
@Ventus45
Pls clarify how Mike Chillits could suggest debris not from SIO? It seems his drift analyses shows debris is probably from 20-30S and maybe inside the 7th arc. He likes the 6th arc better.
@Tbill
The thing is, Gerry was full of___. And Jeff took his cue from Gerry. It’s all complete bs. Absolute fiction and make believe. Period.
But I appreciate the spirit of your comment, and do applaud Jeff for allowing us this forum.
I worded it badly. I meant mike is north of 30s so his source definetly not in SIO ie south of 35s.
On the spoof and debris-planting theory:
IMO it’s about impossible all the debris was planted individualy. This would require a massive logistic, secret, unnoticed and very complicated operation involving quite some people, ships and movements.
If the debris was planted I can see one option though which is less complicated and probably easier to execute with a smaller amount of people and only one ship and one secret trip.
Assuming BFO was spoofed, 9M-MRO crashed somewhere else and the wreckage was recovered soon after.
All an organisation had to do was selecting an amount of debris which would fit a certain scenario and an area not conflicting the Inmarsat data.
Load ~200 pieces of selected debris onto one ship and dump/plant those in a selected area that fits the Inmarsat data.
Then just let nature do her work over time.
The results would look quite ‘natural’.
Spoofing:
Excuse me but couldn’t spoofing mean only to put the crash off target enough to make the plane in effect impossible to find? The debris would be the real thing. “Anywhere else” doesn’t have to be the Centro-Caspian Dictatorship.
I hope btw MAS wasn’t behind with paying for the planes to Boeing. That would explain a lot.
@Johan, Keffertje
If you make an album, I would like you to put the following comment from me on the cover, “read my lips, the debris was not planted”. 🙂
@DennisW
Good to have you back! ☺ ☼
The technically-minded people like Dennis who produce and critique one mathematical study after another are the important one here. Anyone can pen a theory on a whim (like I do hahaha!) but the scientific minds are the ones that make this place really tick.
@Ge Rijn, You wrote, “IMO it’s about impossible all the debris was planted individualy.” Recall that more than half of the debris was recovered by a single person, who located his first piece five minutes after arriving on the Mozambique coast. We’ll watching to see if the NOK’s upcoming expedition enjoys the same rate of success.
@TBill, @Keffertje, Thanks.
@DennisW, @MH, As I’ve said before, the answer to the motive question is, to me, “we don’t know what the motive is, but they must have a motive because they did it again.” Four and a half months after MH370, one of its 14 sister ships was shot down by a Buk anti-aircraft missile system belonging to the Russian Army’s 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade. Immediately after the shootdown, Russian military intelligence began an aggressive and very successful disinformation campaign to shroud the nature of the shoot-down. No one knows why they did this, and indeed the lack of apparent motive was one of the reasons that Russia was so successful in convincing Western analysts that the attack had been carried out by rogue militants and therefore should be considered an unfortunate accident rather than a war crime.
@all, I think one of the reasons I’ve always been skeptical of the provenance of the BFO data is that I moved to New York from Boston at a time when the city was overrun with scammers and hustlers, and out-of-towners were their favorite marks. One game they’d run would be to go up to a mark, tell them they’d been working delivering boxes of VCRs and there’d been this “extra” one on the back of the truck, they could let you have it for five bucks–stroke of luck, right? Then the mark gets it home and it turns out that it’s just a VCR box with a brick in it. In those days one often found oneself face-palming at the stories from newly-arrived friends who’d fallen for some gambit or another. Life lesson: disregard friendly strangers bearing news of your incredible good luck. How does this relate to MH370? A plane that goes dark six seconds after the last waypoint in Malaysia, pulls a 180, and flies away at top speed is clearly intent on evasion and escape. Suspicious behavior, to say the least. It busts through primary radar coverage zone and gets out the other side, free and clear. It’s done it, it’s escaped. But then, two minutes later — hey, pal it’s your lucky day! What a stroke of luck. A set of Inmarsat signals that you can run past your boffins in order to find out exactly where the plane went.
@ROB: @Keffertje:
We’ll vote for the flip-side track in a minute. Stay tuned.
@Jeff:
There is definitely something to that feeling, and it is, to me, in unison with many of the other weird events and tidings that accompanied the search from the first minutes. There were certainly other traits factoring in there which were new to me but probably much less so to the experienced, or perhaps new to many more because of the extraordinary circumstances surrounding this flight in this age in that area. I think perhaps the existence of satellites may contribute to the confusion on the trivial, public, chain-of-events level — and the channels for confusement are of course multiplying too. The distortion at the outset is, potentially at least, greater than ever.
And when you look at it, how can chance come into play in such a way without there being a connection? To me the Shah — Anwar & Court of Appeals is the bigger coincidence, but the “Crimean connection” is by no means far behind. And the relative of Najib/Hishamuddin. In Sweden up to the middle of the last century “coincidences” like these could happen because royalties and their representatives were really the only ones travelling about with any frequency. And the only ones whose accidents one reported of. And who were quite prone to accident due to choice of lifestyle. My comment in the face of this is that in the Malaysian case a factor is probably that the actors involved (who are capable of a certain view of or outlook on their place in history and society) are so very few that coincidence is to some extent put out of play. It is like being surprised that the majority of broken legs in football (soccer) happens on the pitch and not in the stands, despite the overwhelming majority at the latter.
But the big trouble with spoofing for me is that it is disproportionate to anything we can imagine. Except for Boeing wanting to introduce new pilot-free airliners or a certain airliner tracking system that will have as one of its effect that it will be difficult for countries without satellite time to spy on their neighbo/urs. And a few things more of which not many would involve Mother Russia as far as I can see.
@Jeff Wise
This would imply Blaine Gibson (just to name the person) is somekind of secret agent who moved around genuine 9M-MRO debris around the world unnoticed by anyone, planted it and then ‘found’ it.
Or secret agents knew where he was going to look and planted the debris for him to be found, also moving it around the world unnoticed by anyone. Think of it twice..
And what about the flaperon and outboard-flap section. Pieces too big to move around and clearly spent a long time in the ocean (like other pieces).
It just makes no sence IMO.
Blaine Gibson dedicated himself to find debris ~2 years ago. He specialized in it. Learned where to look. Then with some (indeed extraordinary) luck he was the one more prone to find debris. He was actualy the only one looking with an educated view.
This is a far more logical explanation IMO.
If the NoK-team is going to take a random approach their succes can be expected to be low.
IMO if the debris was planted the only option is an amount of specific debris was planted in the SIO according to the Inmarsat-data not very long after the crash.
Very unlikely too IMO but regarding a spoof-and-planted scenario involving the two Oekranians and the Russian guy (and Russian Government?) which you suggested, following outlandish scenario could be a story:
The two Oekranians and the Russian worked as a team to hijack the plane. The Russian in front of the plane had the task of taking control of the cockpit which he did.
One of the two Oekranians (the one sitting left near the SDU-unit) had the task to spoof the SDU. The other one had the task to control the passengers and cabin-crew.
They were both divers who would have known how to handle oxigen bottles.
They had one hour to spoof the SDU and were the only ones able to stay alive in the depressurized cabin during that time with oxigen bottles.
When the spoof was done they powered the SDU again showing the plane flying into the SIO but they flew actualy to the West, to the Maldives. Then turning South towards Diego Garcia their final goal to attack.
The plane was shot by Amarican military from Diego Garcia before reaching it and crashed within their military zone.
The wreckage and casualties where quicly secretly recovered and the American cover-up begon to take shape with the release of the Inmarsat data.
They selected a few hundred pieces of specific debris that fitted a scenario and area that did not conflict the Inmarsat data.
Shipped it to the location secretly and dumped/planted it in the chosen area.
Let nature do her work over time and leave the rest of the world guessing and searching.
@all
Jeff said: ” Four and a half months after MH370, one of its 14 sister ships was shot down by a Buk anti-aircraft missile…
Exactly! Anyone who disregards this without a second thought isn’t thinking hard enough!
“A plane that goes dark six seconds after the last waypoint in Malaysia, pulls a 180, and flies away at top speed is clearly intent on evasion and escape. Suspicious behavior, to say the least. It busts through primary radar coverage zone and gets out the other side, free and clear. It’s done it, it’s escaped. But then, two minutes later — hey, pal it’s your lucky day! What a stroke of luck. A set of Inmarsat signals that you can run past your boffins in order to find out exactly where the plane went…”
Sorry to repeat the whole chunk, but this is absolutely spot on!
@Ge Rijn
Stop it Ge Rijn, stick to script! And for the hundredth time, the Maldives are a figment of your imagination! ☺☺
Well@Ge Rijn, sometimes one has to do whatever to survive.
@JeffW
” But then, two minutes later — hey, pal it’s your lucky day! What a stroke of luck. A set of Inmarsat signals…”
Yes I know the last radar contact was 18:22 and 18:25 INMARSAT picks up the satellite ping signal and tells us where the plane went (sort of). This is amazing and thank you to INMARSAT. It is seems to violate basic aircraft design philosophy whereas pilots are allowed to turn everything off and go silent. Who new Boeing forgot to give pilots an off button something?
@Johan, LF to our album, though I have a voice that could cut glass 🙂 But in the shower it sounds great and keeps the tiles clean! @Jeff, MH17 is close to my heart and has left a wound deep inside me. There is much I do not know, but 2 aircraft within 4 months of the same airline is crazy and IMO more than just coincidence. What is the probability of MAS being a victim twice? So many aircraft were still in Ukrainian airspace, but MH17 was the one shot down. There is more to this and it isn’t coincidence, IMO.
@Rob, Your comment made me smile. But be careful, you may end up eating your words one day…..ZS may seem like the obvious culprit BUT things are never what they seem. Even VIhas said on reddit that he does not exclude that ZS was framed. Always best to keep an open mind 🙂
@Sajid
“but the scientific minds are the ones that make this place really tick.”
Thank you, but the science guys are taking a beating so far. I have long expressed the opinion that all the science can do is qualify a terminus – it can tell us where the plane did not go. Of course, if the data are not valid or spoofed we are back to just about anywhere the fuel range would allow.
@Keffertje
I’m glad it made you smile. My work is not entirely wasted. Thank you for the friendly advice, but I think I’m on safe ground.
I’m not sure who Vlhas is. Sounds like a football club.
Regards
Rob
@Sajid UK
Exactly; the Maldives are only a figment of my imagination. Nothing more.
I don’t believe in it myself.
Just an alternative imaginary spoof-and-planted scenario to think about, set besides Jeff’s suggestions about a even more unlikely scenario with Blain Gibson or other ‘planters’ involved.
@ROB
Victor Iannello (VIhas was VI has) unless the jokes on me. Both Victor and MattM have stated the Z sim runs are probably real and fairly convincing, but outside possibility they say it was a frame and the sim runs I guess could have been not been by Z, I guess they are saying.
@Jeff
Many thanks from me too for providing his forum.
“A plane that goes dark six seconds after the last waypoint in Malaysia, pulls a 180, and flies away at top speed is clearly intent on evasion and escape….” is spot on (agreed, Sajid). However, I wouldn’t exclude that BTO data are incorrect too and could have been hacked in situ after the event. Over the 2+ years many aspects of this investigation have apparently been delivered to placate various protesters (us included), such as “where is the debris?”. Now, it is in the winding-down phase and all that could reasonably be done is being finished off. Either the whole thing is being very cleverly staged by state actors, including the latest, gradually leaked, offering of not quite incriminating Sim evidence; if so, its too dangerous/nigh impossible for us to get any further. Or, the investigators truly don’t know where that plane is and how and why it got there and despite tremendous analytical effort from so many, we can’t move forward without further evidence coming to light. [Or, it is in the search are but has been missed.]
@Freddie – while I find your scenario quite unlikely, can you please provide more information? So far it has just been vague hearsay…
TBill and Keffertje
TBill, thank you for pointing out who Vlhas actually is. My fault probably for taking it literally as written. A failing of mine, I fear.
But I cannot buy into the possible frame-up scenario, in any way. I haven’t followed the saga of the SIMS but have been happy to leave it to others better equipped to assess the significance of it.
Victor is a smart guy. If he concludes that the SIM runs are probably real, I am no going to argue. But that they could have been set up by someone intending to frame Z? No, sorry I’m not swallowing that one.
@TBill
I won’t speak for Victor (other than to note he has publicly said he thinks framing is possible) but what you said accurately characterizes my opinion. The evidence clearly implicates Z.
Only the validity of that evidence can be called into question, IMO. If it was deemed questionable, then the spoof theory could indeed be a hybrid theory – where someone hijacked MH370 and then went to great pains to implicate Z.
When I saw your FLT, the fact that everything prior to the final screen setting was missing – from EVERY recovered FLT in exactly the same way – makes me question the recovered data in a way I never had before. This begs the question:
How likely is it that every recovered FLT file is missing the same critical data in exactly the same way?
But apart from that, again, the evidence clearly implicates Z. That’s why 7 of nine pilots in the AU article feel the way they do.
@DrBobbyUllich
Yes, after poking around I’m comfortable with the 3% figure. But the actual reduction in RANGE from temp is quite small because of the free bump in TAS.
FL350 ISA M0.84=484.32 KTAS
FL350 ISA+10 M0.84=495.26 KTAS
So, for example, in a plane carrying 50,000lbs fuel at M0.84 at FL350:
10,000lb/hr in ISA = 2,421.6nm RANGE
10,300lb/hr in ISA+10 = 2,404.2nm RANGE
That’s a 0.724% RANGE reduction.
I can’t seem to find your original comment. Was that the range reduction you chalked up to temp? Because in your comment in this thread, giving up 110-120nm to temp alone seems quite wrong.
The moral of the story being, we’re all looking forward to seeing PDA numbers in the final report, aren’t we?
@Matt Moriarty
Matt, it is now “crystal clear” that we will never get anything more of “substance”, from any official source, and there will never be any “final report”.
Those are the issues that must be redressed.
@ventus45
I think there will be a final report when the Aussies call it quits. It’s an international requirement. But, yeah, it’s gonna suck as bad as everything else we’ve been handed.
@Matt Moriarty
I am an Aussie (Sydney NSW)
You said.
“I think there will be a final report when the Aussies call it quits.”
I say – you are dreaming.
(A) The ATSB is incapable of producing a final report 7 years after the Norfolk Island Westwind Ditching. I could list many others.
(B) The ATSB is only “assisting” Malaysia, etc.
(C) There are no “international “REQUIREMENTS”” – only “conventions” – that are easily circumvented, and or otherwise ignored.
And then we have this lot, hanging out in Poltava of all places, but perhaps not up to the task in our case:
http://www.unian.info/economics/1656232-avalanche-network-dismantled-in-international-cyber-operation.html
…more here. This is unfolding:
http://www.newsfactor.com/mobile/?sid=00100018PQHI&do=story
@Matt Moriarty
OK thanks, that answers my other question. I guess we do not have the complete FLT files from the sim work.
… or here:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/12/legal-raids-in-five-countries-seize-botnet-servers-sinkhole-800000-domains/
@Jeff It seems part of this forum may swing back to the ‘BFO spoof’ and ‘northern route’ scenarios.
I am a frequent and interested reader and just to help me understand this perhaps you can help with these questions:
1. I believe that I read somewhere that Inmarsat began recording the BFO data only months before the March 8 MH370 flight.
Do you know when this data was initially recorded?
If it was that close to March 8, then it seems odd that someone (the ‘spoofer’) would have anticipated that investigators would use that data to resolve the north/south ambiguity in the BTO data. Would that not point to someone with connections to some aspect of recording, storing, processing …. this data?? An ‘insider’ or someone with connections to an ‘insider’.
2. You seem to believe that if this data were altered, it was done in real time on board the aircraft. That seems a very difficult method compared to hacking into Inmarsat files some time shortly after the flight. It does not alter the basic scenario but I wonder why you seem to favor such a complex method.
BWT, I really appreciate this forum and the work you and others do to keep it alive. Also, I am glad Dennis W continues to participate.
@DrBobbyUllich
Re: your spreadsheet.
All the atmospheric calculations are spot on and I see now how you’re applying temp correction.
I guess my one remaining question is why you ascribe a fuel penalty for temp but an apparent credit for PDA?
@Tbill
Not all complete! Compare the text of your .flt to the ones in this pdf: http://031c074.netsolhost.com/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Sim-Data.pdf
Prior to [Panel.13] in the recovered data, there should be everything your files have from [MAIN] all the way to [Panel.12].
Including every single waypoint you plugged into the FMC prior to hitting “save.”
Crazy, huh?
@Matt Moriarty
> If it was deemed questionable, then the spoof theory could indeed be a hybrid theory – where someone hijacked MH370 and then went to great pains to implicate Z.
You appear to be a very intelligent person, so I should not have to point out how preposterous this is.
A ‘spoof’ or anything of the like fails so pathetically on so many levels…I really hope you are joking in even assigning this the slightest probability.
The kicker being that they’ve done everything possible to KEEP from blaming Z.
@matt. The name of the game is to keep the mystery unsolved. If they blame Z it’s all over for the cousins as well.
@matt (not Moriarty), This forum is not about expressing strongly held opinions without evidence. Or about being insulting. Consider this your final warning.
@Shadynuk,
Thanks for your kind words. Regarding your questions:
1. You’re almost correct: it was the BTO values that only started being recorded in the months before MH370 disappeared. BFO values had always been recorded–no insider knowledge required. That, and the fact that BFO values are much easier to spoof than BTO values, is why I think that only BFO values were spoofed. The fact that BTO values were probably correct allows us to derive a flight path to the north. Intriguingly, it skirts areas of India and China that are subject to intensive primary radar surveillance.
2. Victor Iannello has done analysis suggesting that you would only need to change one parameter in the SDU system table to make the BFO values look like the plane was going south instead of north. This to me seems simpler than having to penetrate the Inmarsat’s cyber defences. But who knows.
@Matt Moriarty. “But apart from that, again, the evidence clearly implicates Z. That’s why 7 of nine pilots in the AU article feel the way they do.”
There does seem to be a higher percentage decided like this amongst professional pilots. Of interest are both the size of the majority of this opinion in this sample and the apparent conviction with which collectively it is held.
So far as I know pilots can advance no more evidence than others, either for or against. Both the opinion and the certainty seem more to stem from their intuition, flowing from their experience, their knowledge of themselves and of their fellows; and of the system.
The system includes selection, training and monitoring, together with crew preventions and inhibitions included in aircraft design and flight management. As I understand it Malaysian as an airline is seen as professional.
With this in mind, the opinion of these 7 of 9 is disquieting in suggesting that their first reaction is not intuitively to doubt suicide but indeed to lead the broader community, including specialists in various fields, in supposing this to be likely.
Already we have had GermanWings, EgyptAir, Silk Air and others.
What steps have pilots taken to turn around their own perceptions of continuing risks I wonder? Going back, I think CRM was given reluctant support by some as was voice recording.
Suppose for now that the cause of this crash will not be found yet the majority of pilots continue to see suicide as likely, I am looking at safety gains to be had from that attitude.
Do you think there is scope and need for action to inhibit this possibility in future, based on the above sample?
@DennisW
You’re welcome! ☺
@Ge Rijn
The Kudahuvadoo folk could’ve made it easier for us but they can’t tell the difference between their own airliner and a Malaysian one!
@TBill, Thank you for clearing that up :), VIhas. I blame Ventus45 for suggesting 2 bottles of red. @Ventus45, If we ever get a report of sorts, I am sure we will collectively puke all over it. My gut is telling me the ATSB will not want to let this one go, but they may not have a choice in the matter. It would be devastating if other independent parties are succesful there where the ATSB failed misserably. This will not reflect well on their already sad report card. I sense they are stretching the search whilst trying to figure out what to do. Other parties will emerge, through whatever funding means. People are not going to let this one go.
@ matt
Take a deep breath and repeat after me: “Matt Moriarty cannot change what actually happened, no matter what he writes at JeffWise.net.”
I didn’t say I subscribe to the spoof. I said that it would logically go hand-in-hand with framing Z. And if there’s such a thing as “bona fides” in the “Z-did-it” camp, mine are gold-plated. So it’s super easy for big Matt to ask little matt…what are you afraid of?
As new details have emerged over the course of 2-1/2 years, I tested my theory against them and my theory keeps surviving, as it has for the overwhelming majority of pilots and other aviation-types who follow MH370. The sim data, for example, looks really bad for Z.
However, when I test my theory and something strikes me as odd, I’m not afraid to say it. The manner in which the .flt files are fragmented is disturbing to me. It makes me wonder if Z is being framed. You have a drive that was erased – maybe even degaussed – and yet you have total uniformity in the way the files were fragmented, and within that uniformity you just so happen to NOT ever get what would have been the case-closed, holy-grail detail. And that happens precisely 8 out of 8 times in exactly the same way.
There’s something really greasy and oily and gross about that little detail. And I have no trouble saying it.
If that makes you insecure, it ain’t my problem.