Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

What's this has to do with anything I don't know.

True.

The JACC is using AF447 as an example of how difficult this search is. They are also deploying the same equipment and technology that helped find AF447 after 2 years of searching.

There are rumours within the industry that the IIT will use another incident in 2005 where another aircraft had disappeared from radar due to a ADIRU failure. The only problem is this aircraft stayed on course and landed at its destination.

I already explained what AF447 has to do with MH370. The experts in the JACC are not wrong and they are experts whereas you are an IDIOT!

So let's get this straight. We can either listen to Angus Houston who was a RAAF pilot for 40 years and Chief of Defence or Australia's top military leader, or a lemon cake baker who reads Woman's Weekly like you!

I'm sorry, but you or anyone else cannot use AF447 as an example in trying to explain the difficulties faced with investigators searching for MH370, because they need to FIRST find the wreckage of MH370 BEFORE they can set a forecast how long it might take them to find the Black Boxes of MH370, as in the case of AF447. By trying to use AF447 as an example prematurely, would lead someone with some common sense to suspect that the investigators of the MH370 are trying to buy more time to find the wreckage of flight MH370, let alone the Black Boxes of the MH370, by 2 years to be exact. They are shamelessly using one tragedy to cover up their screw-up in another. It's quite disgusting in fact.

[Paphitis]

What's this has to do with anything I don't know.

True.

The JACC is using AF447 as an example of how difficult this search is. They are also deploying the same equipment and technology that helped find AF447 after 2 years of searching.

There are rumours within the industry that the IIT will use another incident in 2005 where another aircraft had disappeared from radar due to a ADIRU failure. The only problem is this aircraft stayed on course and landed at its destination.

I already explained what AF447 has to do with MH370. The experts in the JACC are not wrong and they are experts whereas you are an IDIOT!

So let's get this straight. We can either listen to Angus Houston who was a RAAF pilot for 40 years and Chief of Defence or Australia's top military leader, or a lemon cake baker who reads Woman's Weekly like you!

I'm sorry, but you or anyone else cannot use AF447 as an example in trying to explain the difficulties faced with investigators searching for MH370, because they need to FIRST find the wreckage of MH370 BEFORE they can set a forecast how long it might take them to find the Black Boxes of MH370, as in the case of AF447. By trying to use AF447 as an example prematurely, would lead someone with some common sense to suspect that the investigators of the MH370 are trying to buy more time to find the wreckage of flight MH370, let alone the Black Boxes of the MH370, by 2 years to be exact. They are shamelessly using one tragedy to cover up their screw-up in another. It's quite disgusting in fact.

Well I am and not only this, but the IIT is actually using AF447 and citing this as another example to justify one of the confirmed impending findings.

They also had difficulty finding AF447. The search took 2 years and as a result, the IIT are calling on regulators to review aircraft tracking systems such as Underwater Locator beacons and Electronic Locator Beacons.

There are parallels you are just too stubborn to see past your nose.

Furthermore, they are not using AF447 to forecast how long it will take them to find MH370. They are aware that it could take a lot longer but then again, it could be found within a month because the search still continues in the vicinity of the 4 detections and they. If anything, they are saying that the search is a lot more difficult for MH370, and that is the truth. To begin with they never even hard a start point and the aircraft was flown thousands of kms away from its planned track and if you can't understand the difficulties that this poses, then I really can't help you.

Also, even if they do find wreckage, then it is not going to be much hope nearly 2 months after the event. it is likely, that any wreckage will be thousands of kms away from the crash site and that is not going to help the IIT much. They are better off guesstimating using proper scientific Aircraft Performance Analysis and continue with the hard task of surveying the ocean floor.

Ane even if they do find debris, you are going to accuse them of planting the evidence!

[Paphitis]

Documented evidence that indicates that MH370 ditched along the Southern Corridor.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technolog ... liner.html

[Paphitis]

Search continues for Malaysian flight MH370

Media Release
26 April 2014—am

Up to 8 military aircraft and 11 ships are planned to assist in today's search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

Today the Australian Maritime Safety Authority has planned a visual search area totaling approximately 57,311 square kilometres. The centre of the search area lies approximately 1584 kilometres north west of Perth.

The weather forecast for today is for isolated showers, with south easterly winds up to 20 knots, sea swells of two to 2.5 metres and visibility of one kilometre in thunderstorms and three kilometres in rain.

Early into mission 13 yesterday Bluefin-21 was recovered due to a software issue that required resetting. The AUV has technically sophisticated equipment and a reset is not uncommon. Overnight Phoenix technicians resolved the issue and mission 14 is now underway.

Bluefin-21 has completed approximately 95 per cent of the focused underwater search area. No contacts of interest have been found to date.

The focused underwater search area is defined as a circle of 10km radius around the second Towed Pinger Locator detection which occurred on 8 April. If no contacts of interest are made, Bluefin-21 will continue to examine the areas adjacent to the 10km radius.

Any further information will be made public if, and when, it becomes available.

http://www.jacc.gov.au/media/releases/2 ... mr038.aspx

[Paphitis]

Some earlier posters have implied that if MH370 ditched under control then it would have broken up on contact. This is not true. FAA certification requires that an aircraft can survive a ditching. This is the regulation that Boeing would have to comply with in order to have their aircraft certified by the FAA (Regulator).

http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/new ... wsId=10600

Regulation 25.801(b) states "Each practical design measure must be taken to minimise the probability that in an emergency landing on water the behaviour of the airplane would cause immediate injury to the occupants or would make it impossible to escape".

25.801(c) states that the ditching behaviour must be investigated by model tests.

I remember that over the years we had to watch videos of simulated ditchings in various sea states.

There have been several survivable airliner ditchings in the past. If MH370 was ditched then it will be intact on the seabed.

Here is the video:



And here you can see all the criteria in the Certification Process:

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c= ... ain_02.tpl

there is also a requirement that the engine pylons are attached to the wing with shear bolts which are designed to break away, in the event of a water ditching.

Here is the Criteria for Water Loads:

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SI ... 8&rgn=div7

Some of this will be over the top for some of you, but others may find it interesting.

[Paphitis]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have some information that it is in fact 2 separate devices that were detected by ADV Ocean Shield and that there are no plans to abandon the current search site in the near future. The search so far centers around just 1 of the 4 pings and whilst the JACC has searched 95% of this search area, there are plans to do it again after they search around the other 3 pings.

They still firmly believe that they are over the top of the MH370 wreckage. They do plan to utilize other AUV and RAUV technologies.

Despite the media coverage which they are responsible for, they are a long way off from abandoning or reassessing the situation aside from what are normal protocols.

[Oceanside50]

why would he do that?...if he wanted to commit suicide why not just nose dive and get it over and done with instead of ditching it?...this doesn't make sense

[GreekIslandGirl]

Tun Hussein announces: Nature of the search has changed!

- They are now also searching large tracks of land, crossing eleven countries, as well as more ocean(s).

Police chief Abu Bakar now cites first two areas of concern as 1. Hijacking and 2. Sabotage.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/ ... nged-video

[Pyrpolizer]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have some information that it is in fact 2 separate devices that were detected by ADV Ocean Shield and that there are no plans to abandon the current search site in the near future. The search so far centers around just 1 of the 4 pings and whilst the JACC has searched 95% of this search area, there are plans to do it again after they search around the other 3 pings.

They still firmly believe that they are over the top of the MH370 wreckage. They do plan to utilize other AUV and RAUV technologies.

Despite the media coverage which they are responsible for, they are a long way off from abandoning or reassessing the situation aside from what are normal protocols.

Slowly slowly they will tell you it was 4 separate devices!! This is the ONLY way to explain their own fallacious findings.
You have chosen to be taken for a ride, enjoy it.

Each and everyone of those pings is MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE to ALL OTHERS.
That the only way possible for that happening could be if the the beacon emitting the signals WAS MOVING.
If ping No 1 is correct then all others are wrong. If more than 1 pings is correct, then the "man made device" was moving.

Their own new admission: Hey it was not one device,it was 2

What puzzles me is how on earth all those super experts dealing with the matter have not realized this very simple fact, that even a high school student could of have realized from the very first glance at those positions.

[Paphitis]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have some information that it is in fact 2 separate devices that were detected by ADV Ocean Shield and that there are no plans to abandon the current search site in the near future. The search so far centers around just 1 of the 4 pings and whilst the JACC has searched 95% of this search area, there are plans to do it again after they search around the other 3 pings.

They still firmly believe that they are over the top of the MH370 wreckage. They do plan to utilize other AUV and RAUV technologies.

Despite the media coverage which they are responsible for, they are a long way off from abandoning or reassessing the situation aside from what are normal protocols.

Slowly slowly they will tell you it was 4 separate devices!! This is the ONLY way to explain their own fallacious findings.
You have chosen to be taken for a ride, enjoy it.

Each and everyone of those pings is MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE to ALL OTHERS.
That the only way possible for that happening could be if the the beacon emitting the signals WAS MOVING.
If ping No 1 is correct then all others are wrong. If more than 1 pings is correct, then the "man made device" was moving.

What puzzles me is how on earth all those super experts dealing with the matter have not realized this very simple fact, that even a high school student could of have realized from the very first glance at those positions.

Actually, that is one piece of information they have not officially released or stated anywhere.

But I have my sources, and it may already be in the preliminary report of known facts.

Furthermore, I can tell you that they are going to be in the current search area for a long time. They do not consider the area already covered as complete. They are going to do it again.