This article originally appeared in New York magazine on December 3, 2025.
The on-again, off-again search for the wreckage of the Malaysian airliner that went missing 11 years ago is back on. On Wednesday, the country’s transportation ministry announced that marine-survey company Ocean Infinity would begin scanning the Indian Ocean seabed on December 30, with the project set to take 55 days, conducted “intermittently.”
MH370, which took off from Kuala Lumpur on March 8, 2014, was scheduled as a red-eye flight to Beijing and carried 239 passengers and crew members. But the Boeing 777 went electronically dark 40 minutes into the flight, and mysterious satellite communications signals later indicated that it had flown to a remote area of the southern Indian Ocean before evidently crashing. Only a few dozen pieces of debris have ever been found.
The new search appears to be a continuation of an effort Malaysia first announced last November, when it said Ocean Infinity would be searching about 6,000 square miles under the terms of a “no find, no fee” deal that would see Malaysia pay the company $70 million only if it found the plane’s wreckage.
Ocean Infinity, which operates a fleet of more than a dozen marine-survey vessels all around the world, had previously scanned a much larger area of 43,000 square miles in just three months, so the new mission is relatively modest in scope. In March, the company dispatched a 256-foot vessel called Armada 78 06 approximately 1,000 miles west of Perth, Australia. There, the vessel scanned an area that had already been searched, but thanks to gaps in the data, it was possible the wreckage was missed. The vessel then searched a new area nearby that a pair of independent French investigators had identified as a likely end point.
All in all, Armada 78 06 covered about 2,000 square miles, or roughly a third of the previously announced area. Having found nothing, Ocean Infinity paused the search on April 3. “I think right now it’s not the season,” Malaysia’s transport minister said, referring to the onset of winter in the Southern Hemisphere. “I think they … will resume the search at the end of this year.”
Now summer is about to return, and conditions are favorable to tackle the remaining two-thirds of the project. The vessel most likely to carry out the work is the state-of-the-art Armada 86 05, which was launched early this year. Though the ship is capable of operating autonomously, in this case, it will likely carry a human crew. The vessel is currently engaged in a project to scan for historical shipwrecks in the San Bernardino Strait, between the Philippine islands of Samar and Luzon. After that work is completed, Armada 86 05 will likely steam 1,500 miles west to Singapore, where it will refuel and take on fresh supplies and crew before sailing 2,700 miles southwest to the search area, an abyssal plain approximately three miles deep.
Once on station, the ship will deploy three Hugin AUVs, or autonomous underwater vehicles. These robot subs, which resemble bright-orange torpedoes, are capable of operating at depths of nearly four miles for up to three days before they need to be retrieved and recharged. Each AUV can cover about 42 square miles per day with its side-scan sonar, which produces photograph-like images. Given that rate of coverage, the three AUVs could, in theory, cover the remaining 4,000 square miles in about a month. But Ocean Infinity is busy with many marine-survey projects around the world, so the ship might be needed elsewhere before it can finish in one go.
One of the great puzzles of the MH370 disappearance is why the plane’s wreckage hasn’t already been located on the seabed. After the plane disappeared from Malaysian radar, a piece of communications equipment that had been turned off was mysteriously turned back on again. The equipment then began transmitting signals that, because of a malfunction in the system, turned out to include hints as to where the plane had gone. Australian government scientists used that data to create a map showing the plane’s most likely location. They calculated that an area of 46,000 square miles had a 97 percent chance of containing the wreckage. But the wreckage wasn’t found there, nor in the additional 43,000 square miles Ocean Infinity subsequently searched.
That absence suggests something really unusual happened. Signals sent to Inmarsat soon after the plane ran out of fuel indicates that the plane was in a near-vertical dive. The fact that the plane’s wreckage hasn’t been found in the vicinity implies that someone in the cockpit — presumably the captain, Zaharie Ahmad Shah — manually pulled the plane out of the dive and into a glide that took it beyond the search area. But then, instead of easing the plane into the water Sully-style, that person seemingly crashed it violently into the ocean, based on the small size of interior cabin debris that later washed ashore in the western Indian Ocean.
It’s hard to imagine why Shah, or anyone else, would have wanted to behave in such a way. But if the search is unsuccessful, even stranger possibilities will have to be considered.
Jeff, I just watched a recent video of you discussing the MH370 search (S2Ep49). Very interesting. Thank you, George
P.S. – I like your style of reporting.
The failure to find anything in the defined area certainly identifies 2 things; below is from the conclusion of the DTSG into their findings.
“The search zone is dependent on the surface area covered by expected descent scenarios from the time of the final satellite log-on attempt at 00:19. This has been defined by expert accident investigators at the ATSB. If the actual descent scenario was inconsistent with the distribution of possibilities considered then the search zone may need to increase in area.”
1/ The ATSB had a particular bias in the end of flight scenario; and
2/ The ATSB were out of their depth.
Well, I don’t know if I’d use the word “bias”; their descent scenario was informed by the BFO data, which suggested a steep an accelerating dive. They assumed that that dive continued until impact, which is not unreasonable. We now know that the plane was not in the area implied by their scenario.
Thank you very much, George! I appreciate your taking the time to let me know.
Good evening, I was wondering why, in the case of the Malaysian flight, given that the passengers’ phones were always active and on because they were ringing, it wasn’t possible to try to track the phones using the Google or Apple tracking system. If someone had a tracking system, it could be checked even now, after all this time, and it would be immediately clear where they are and what happened.
Hey, thanks for the question. There was a lot of initial reporting about supposed cell phone connections to/from passengers, but these turned out not to be true. The only connection between a phone aboard the plane and a cell tower occurred around 1800 Universal Time, when the first officer’s phone pinged a cell tower on the island of Penang.
Good morning Jeff,
Hope this message finds you well. First time posting a comment here, but long-time follower of your work on MH370 which I have truly appreciated! I wanted to inquire if there are any past comments / discussions brought to your attention regarding the YouTube presentation from Captain Turner. Were you able to review his hypothesis for why the plane went dark? If so, what are your comments / thoughts regarding this presentation? Thank you.
Hi Gary,
Thanks for writing. Am I correct in understanding that Captain Turner is proposing a ghost flight scenario, in which the pilots became unconscious and the plane flew south on its own? If that were the case, the plane would have been found very quickly. Also, it’s hard to explain the speed and course changes that the plane took before the presumed “final flight south.” There are other problems as well. I don’t know of anyone who has studied the case carefully who thinks that any kind of accident scenario fits the evidence well enough to merit consideration.
Hello Jeff! I’ve been reading up on your articles for the past couple of months ever since I had to write an essay about a conspiracy theory of my choice. I obviously chose MH370 due to the fact that I had already watched the documentary (seemed like an easy A). I came to find your articles of MH370 very interesting. Particularly the one about the Russian Hijack Theory. Do you have any more evidence supporting that theory? My essay is long over since I wrote it in September, but I can’t stop thinking about MH370. There are just so so many differing opinions and pieces of evidence to consider when making a claim of what really occured that night. The sad part is, we might not ever really know what happened. So Jeff, do you have a theory that you believe in stronger than others? Or do you have any that you doubt are true? Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Thanks for writing, Lauren. Honestly I feel like your note answers its own question?
Hi Jeff, thank you for your quick response! Yes, Captain Turner is proposing a ghost flight scenario, in which the pilot’s oxygen tank (s) in the electronics bay exploded due to inadequate maintenance, thus causing major damage to the computer systems which resulted in the turn-back. There seems to be a lot of technical information regarding the systems, what was working and not working (left SAT antenna, radio, transponder, etc.), that does appear to fit the scenario overall. The captain goes on to suggest that while the plane was heading up the Malacca Strait, the pilots became unconscious, and that flight crew would have sacrificed themselves to try and revive the pilots with a portable air tank. However, the plane still ends its flight within the proposed search area… My takeaway, which is in line with the position that you have maintained all along of keeping an open mind, is that this plane was advanced enough that, when programed properly (by whomever), it makes sense that it could fly itself until fuel exhaustion. And it may just be dumb luck that the system came back online, or someone did turn it back on, or its just engineering at its best since the triple 7 has redundancies within its systems to keep it flying; which also makes sense that it is a possible theory that the plane may not have been able to receive / communicate while heading West until the turn at Nilam, and then when the right-side SAT antenna of the plane faced the satellite, the Pings / handshakes were received as the plane headed South. I’m not gonna lie, it was difficult to watch Captain Turner get choked up by the end of his presentation, and it lends to the hope that we all still carry for MH370 to bring closure to the families… and to all of us. Thank you for your time Jeff!
Yes, Captain Turner is proposing a ghost flight scenario, in which the pilot’s oxygen tank (s) in the electronics bay exploded due to inadequate maintenance, thus causing major damage to the computer systems which resulted in the turn-back. There seems to be a lot of technical information that he covers regarding the systems, what was working and not working (left SAT antenna, radio, transponder, etc.), that does appear to fit the scenario overall.
Yes, Turner is proposing the scenario of a ghost flight, in which the pilot’s oxygen tank (s) in the electronics bay exploded due to inadequate maintenance, thus causing major damage to the computer systems which resulted in the turn-back. There seems to be a lot of technical information that he covers regarding the systems, what was working and not working (left SAT antenna, radio, transponder, etc.), that does appear to fit the scenario overall.
Oops, technical error on my end. Sorry about the extra comments, please disregard that last two.
Thanks for filling me in! What I’ve seen again and again in this case is that pilots are very knowledgeable about how to fly the aircraft, but they tend not to have a great deal of training as scientific investigators and are prone to fall into pitfalls that they’d otherwise know how to avoid. Turner, in this case, has succumbed to the trap of gathering enough information to produce a theory, and then spent the rest of his energy defending that theory rather than delving deeper into the evidence to find out whether it needs to be modified or abandoned. There unfortunately too many people like Turner who are more interested in advocating for a particular theory than inf fully educating themselves about the evidence in hand.
I understand and that makes sense.
Hi Jeff,
I just watched the Remote Takeover scenario, and I’m wondering what the route may have looked like for the Northern trek for the plane. You mentioned that the plane is believed to had made some extra turns within the Southern Indian Ocean route to help explain BFO data… So, playing devil’s advocate, that could mean that with respect to the mirror route to the north, since the computer systems were turned back on, perhaps the plane was making some specific turns in order to land at a runway, and / or to return the identification of the plane as a commercial airliner back on due to flying in an area with Secondary Radar in the Kazakhstan area so that the plane was not shot down?
Hi Gary, That’s an interesting idea, but no, there’s no evidence from the BTO data that the plane made extra turns within the southern Indian Ocean. Perhaps you’re referring to the fact that, in order for the plane to have wound up somewhere in the southern ocean but outside the seabed search area, it would have had to engage in some complicted, and hence statistically unlikely behavior. But that constraint doesn’t apply if you hypothesize a flight to the north.
Thanks for the article. I watched all the podcasts twice, read a dozen books and still have no idea what happened. The thing that always strikes me though is that the ocean is huge! Duh. The thinking that “oh it’s probably here” to me is pretty ridiculous. Finding AF 447 was an insane accomplishment. I don’t think it will be duplicated.
Thanks for all the great content.
Hey Rick! If you’re read a dozen books you’ve probably ingested a fair bit of information, unfortunately. Yes, the ocean is huge, but we have a pretty good set of technical data that severely constrains the possibilities. Until we’ve taken a rigorous and comprehensive look at that data — with the help of subject-matter experts who can help us understand even the most arcane details — it will be impossible to say that we can’t solve this mystery. In fact, based on what I’ve seen, I think we’re close.
BTW I didn’t think your hijack theory in the Netflix doc was that crazy. I directed a podcast a few weeks ago with the author who wrote an article about the software developer that accidentally accessed 7,000 dji smart vacuums with his ps controller.Technology is crazy stuff.
Thanks
Aren’t you a bit harsh on captain turner with your remark: “There unfortunately too many people like Turner who are more interested in advocating for a particular theory than in fully educating themselves about the evidence in hand.”
You yourselves are and have been pretty strong in advocating your theories to the point you were evicted from the investigation committee. You later came up with the idea of an escape of the plane to Russia. I think there were even satellite pictures presented before and after the burial of the plane.
But since the plane has not been found, not theory is crazy or unrealistic until it is proven wrong. And often you exclude theories as they don’t fit your thinking.
Isn’t that exactly what you accuse captain Turner from?
Apart from this remark I do appreciate all the time you have put in this case. I have followed you since day 1 and may not always agree, hence my comments above, but here you are ten years on and still posting and answering people’s questions.
Chapeau Jeff, outstanding investigative journalism this is and has become.
One question: Why do “we”(you) not believe and have never further investigated the story of Florence de Changy?
How is it possible that during a major combined US military exercise in the South China sea, with AWOC’s in the air and satellites monitoring we do not know where the plane went? It was flying right in the middle of the exercise.
She is convinced it is a US cover-up of an accidental downing of MH370. Since you are an US journalist does it mean you are not allowed to follow up? She accuses the AU govt of assisting in the coverup by funding the search operations. If so, that has worked pretty well sofar.
Thank you
I wouldn’t say that I’ve been strongly advocating for a theory so much as advocating for a method: to amass and analyze the entirety of the evidence available, with the help of subject-matter experts, in order to solve the mystery of the missing plane. There are two possible scenarios that are consistent with the evidence we have on hand. I used to be part of a group of researchers who came together on the internet and called themselves the Independent Group. A number of them decided that they only considered one of these theories tenable and kicked me out for suggesting that the other might be valid as well. At the time, they were extremely confident that a seabed search would quickly locate the wreckage of MH370, and their lobbying was influential on the decision-making of the ATSB. Of course, they turned out to be wrong. The plane was not where they said it would be. The group has essentially splintered, with deep rifts between core members, and they haven’t issued any white papers as a group in a long time.
I won’t address all of your points in detail, but let me tackle this one: you wrote, “How is it possible that during a major combined US military exercise in the South China sea, with AWOC’s in the air and satellites monitoring we do not know where the plane went?” There was no such exercise. Anyone with reporting chops who earnestly wanted to understand this case, and believed that such an exercise existed, would immediately have ascertained its name, its duration, the military units involved, and the assets deployed. The fact that she made no such effort puts her in the well-populated category of people who has spent very little time studying the facts and a lot of time promoting their theories. What is the use in trying to engage with people who aren’t legitimately interested in solving the case in the first place?
Thanks, Rick! Hopefully after my next episode you’ll find it sounds even less crazy. Check out FindingMH370.com.
Hi Jeff,
Yes, I also thought that the AWOC theory was a loose end but heard nothing else about it. Thank you for clarifying this. I am wondering if it could be possible to mimic MH370s transponder from another plane?
Well, remember that the transponder was turned off at IGARI and never turned back on again; the metadata signals collected by Inmarsat were generated by the Satellite Data Unit, part of the satcom system. For various technical reasons, it’s very unlikely that they were generated by another aircraft.
Ahh.. Thank you Jeff. I only mentioned that because in Captain Turner’s theory, he noted that the transponder was turned back on, but there was no identification as MH370, only for a general Boeing 777 ident.. But I do recall now that only the pings were generated moving forward for the rest of the flight. Thank you
Correction- that the satellite data unit was turned back on..
I was just watching the MH370 doco on Netflix and I had this image flash in my mind of a broken plane (I only saw the nose part) inside a dark, some-type of ‘shed’. It was put there intentionally. The sentence in my mind was ‘they are never going to find the plane’. I had the impression the bodies were put all together in an unmarked grave. I just see a big hole with multiple bodies I don’t know the location. I also had the impression that there was no consideration for the humanity of those people. I just needed to get that out there. Thank you. Blessings and my love to everyone involved ✨
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
I stumbled on this video and was very interested because it supported thoughts I had at the time of the disappearance of MH370. There was a lot of speculation and were some claims that an aircraft had been seen flying at a low altitude. Another thought was that it intersected another flights path and had hidden in the transponder return from that plane to enable it to disappear. Several of these indicated a northern route and so I started investigating and given the two arcs that could be derived from the transmissions the satellite received I followed the northern one for the distance I estimated the fuel would enable and did some searching of satellite imagery. Within what I recall was about 50 miles of estimated range, I found what I thought to be an abandoned WWII airfield where there were no buildings and appeared that sand had drifted over most of the facilities. If I could get the information that was available then, I would love to look at current satellite photos. Below is part of an email conversation I had with a coworker at that time.
On 3/26/14 3:56 PM I wrote,
“You know math better than I do, but I don’t understand how (in the below NBC article) the use of the doppler effect eliminates a mirror image path to the north (mirror on a line from satellite to aircraft last position) since to me it seems the plane would be crossing the
concentric circles at similar times, and moving away from the satellite at a similar rate. Guess I need to find a basketball and hoop like the author uses to explain it. Don’t I understand great circles? They also assume constant speed and direction which given the maneuvering prior to turning off the transponder is questionable.
…
Anyway, if you can explain to me how the great circle analysis prevents a jet from crossing the concentric circles on a northward path, I’ll accept that the plane is conveniently lost in a place so far away and so deep that we’ll never find it.”
From NBCNews.com…
How Math Solved the Mystery of the Missing Malaysian Jet’s Path
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/missing-jet/how-math-solved-mystery-missing-malaysian-jets-path-n62026
Also Zweck website:
https://www.utdallas.edu/~jwz120030/
http://keithledgerwood.tumblr.com/post/79838944823/did-malaysian-airlines-370-disappear-using-sia68-sq68
Math PhD friend’s reply,
“Beats me. The ‘angular distance of the jet when each ping was sent’ tells you which concentric circle it was on at the time, and the sequence of concentric circles it crossed tells you if it was getting closer or farther from the satellite, so the Doppler information just gives you instantaneous speed at each ping relative to the satellite and doesn’t seem to add any useful information to distinguish a northerly from southerly route.
>From the perspective of the satellite, there are two paths that would give the same data IMO that would be mirrored in a great circle arc between the starting point and the point on the surface of the earth directly under the satellite. I think they need one more observation perspective to resolve the choice between the two routes.”
Jeff:
Re OI’s press release 8 March 2026
“Conclusion of the search for Malaysian Airlines flight MH370”
(https://oceaninfinity.com/news/conclusion-of-the-search-for-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370/)
Last sentence:
“We’re continuing to work with the Malaysian Government in the hope of being able to return when circumstances allow.”
What do you think the hidden meaning is ?
Hi Douglas, Thanks for writing. The mathematics underlying the conclusion that the plane went into the Southern Indian Ocean is a little complicated, but I explain it in some detail in the first season of the podcast. Suffice to say that the Inmarsat data contains two components, one of which allowed investigators to determine more or less which flight path the plane took, but which also generated a mirror-image route on the other side of the equator; the second metadata component told them which path was real and which was the mirror image.
That’s a really good question. I went back and re-read Plunkett’s statement, and what really stood out for me is that he gave no explanation for why they had decided to abandon the search. Has their analysis changed, such that they no longer think there’s a reasonable chance that they’ll find it within the remainder of the 15,000 sq km that they’d demarcated? Were they feeling flummoxed by the slow progress of their latest effort, and decide that benefits no longer outweighed the costs? He doesn’t offer any hints, so it’s not at all clear what he means when he says that they want to return “when circumstances allow.” I suspect it might be a bit like when two people who haven’t seen each other in a long time run into one another and say “We’ll have to get together soon.” A polite fiction.