Todos
← Back to Squawk list
The Search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370: How Long is Too Long?
Preparations for the flight, boarding, and take-off, and the first hour of the flight itself, were largely unremarkable, in dramatic contrast to the very remarkable over two- week-long search for the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 that departed Kuala Lumpur on March 8 and never reached its destination in Beijing. While some searches do sporadically go on forever (the case of Amelia Earhart comes to mind), it is worth noting that the original search for Earhart and her Lockheed Electra aircraft… (www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
They must search until it is absolutely positively shown to have crashed into the ocean. Only then can some governments rest assured that it is not somewhere to be used later as a weapon. If wreckage from the aircraft's interior is recovered it may also forensically reveal what happened leaving only the Why to be answered. The CVR and FDR would be nice to find only if the wreckage does not tell the story.
But if it crashed in the ocean and everything sank during the course of the past several weeks... You're saying we just look forever?
This whole weaponized stolen plane theory is preposterous, by the way. There is no evidence whatsoever to support such an idea, and the logistics involved would render such a plan impractical. You can't just land a 777 on some jungle runway, with no maintenance support, and expect to fly the thing to the United States and blow something up with nobody noticing.
This whole weaponized stolen plane theory is preposterous, by the way. There is no evidence whatsoever to support such an idea, and the logistics involved would render such a plan impractical. You can't just land a 777 on some jungle runway, with no maintenance support, and expect to fly the thing to the United States and blow something up with nobody noticing.
...I just got a mail about this due to the fact that I had a picture of the plane posted on flickr (but I don't think, here on FlightAware) and the person was asking me to write about background etc of that picture...but there's not much to write...
...my "feelings" are still that plane may not be "lost"...it could have reached a number of locations in the Indian Ocean and the initial reports (I read) were "confusing"...
...I have very little faith in the reporting about this, so far....if someone really wanted to "steal" the plane, it could have been done, I believe...it all happened in the darkness of night...but plane was still "alive" after dawn....?
...I need to see some evidence that something was found still floating in the ocean...or I'll keep thinking plane may be intact....somewhere....south of the Maldives....(on the Maldives I found several large planes casually stored away and apparently abandoned...you can find them too...)
...my "feelings" are still that plane may not be "lost"...it could have reached a number of locations in the Indian Ocean and the initial reports (I read) were "confusing"...
...I have very little faith in the reporting about this, so far....if someone really wanted to "steal" the plane, it could have been done, I believe...it all happened in the darkness of night...but plane was still "alive" after dawn....?
...I need to see some evidence that something was found still floating in the ocean...or I'll keep thinking plane may be intact....somewhere....south of the Maldives....(on the Maldives I found several large planes casually stored away and apparently abandoned...you can find them too...)
Well written article.
I have to agree, or at least at some point ask the question, when is enough, enough?
At the end of the day, it seems Australia gets lumped with the cost of most of the search and recuse effort for the mere fact that the suspected crash zone is off its west coast.
Not only that, I cannot understand in this day and age, as pointed out in the article, that we are looking at grainy satellite images. To add further, information on those images take up to 3 days to reach anyone of significance and then a further 2 days for search teams to reach the location. Seems preposterous that with all this debris spotted, not one iota has been pulled from the ocean......nada, not a thing.
At some stage you have to just say, RIP to all those on board and hope that in the future it can be solved when technology improves AKA finding the Titanic. In a world so advanced, this currently seems beyond us, sadly.
I have to agree, or at least at some point ask the question, when is enough, enough?
At the end of the day, it seems Australia gets lumped with the cost of most of the search and recuse effort for the mere fact that the suspected crash zone is off its west coast.
Not only that, I cannot understand in this day and age, as pointed out in the article, that we are looking at grainy satellite images. To add further, information on those images take up to 3 days to reach anyone of significance and then a further 2 days for search teams to reach the location. Seems preposterous that with all this debris spotted, not one iota has been pulled from the ocean......nada, not a thing.
At some stage you have to just say, RIP to all those on board and hope that in the future it can be solved when technology improves AKA finding the Titanic. In a world so advanced, this currently seems beyond us, sadly.
Many good points there. It seems no country wants to divulge their satellite's capabilities, good or bad, in this search. In their bravado they say that they can read serial numbers on parts from space, but when it comes down to demonstrating something, they really can't do sh!t. The one thing they have done is show that something is there. I can't believe that a ship has not recovered something yet. The seas must be awful.
This attitude is absurd. Anyone who has worked with a zoom lens knows that you get detail at the cost of coverage, or vice versa. In the case of MH370, what's needed is both. Until we have both, though, it's likely the wide angle, large coverage area that gets the most use. Once something is found and positively located, the high detail narrow field view can be used. If Ella's point about the delay is true, that very delay precludes the ability to do this.
What's needed is for there to be a coordinated effort, not unlike a jumping spider spotting prey. Jumping spiders have two forward facing eyes with a very narrow field of view that can see high detail. Those are they eyes they use for final targeting. However, they use their other, low resolution, wide angle eyes to locate the prey in the first place. Once the prey is located, they must rotate their bodies so the two high resolution eyes can pinpoint the subject.
Same with the satellite views. The high resolution narrow view satellites can be used only if they have a good location to look. As far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.
Put another way, you can sight a needle in a haystack with a long enough lens, but you have to know where to point that lens. If you don't, you might be looking at the wrong haystack or even the wrong field.
What's needed is for there to be a coordinated effort, not unlike a jumping spider spotting prey. Jumping spiders have two forward facing eyes with a very narrow field of view that can see high detail. Those are they eyes they use for final targeting. However, they use their other, low resolution, wide angle eyes to locate the prey in the first place. Once the prey is located, they must rotate their bodies so the two high resolution eyes can pinpoint the subject.
Same with the satellite views. The high resolution narrow view satellites can be used only if they have a good location to look. As far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.
Put another way, you can sight a needle in a haystack with a long enough lens, but you have to know where to point that lens. If you don't, you might be looking at the wrong haystack or even the wrong field.
I understand there are limitations, but of the debris located, and they have had serval sightings now, none of it has been pulled from the ocean for identification purposes. Some images were taken on a Sunday for example and search teams were not at the location until the following Friday. By then it's probably sunk or washed 100's of km away from its last know location. Surly we can do better than this?
They have found plenty to turn their spider eyes towards. The problem is they can't or won't use their capability.
I think this is IT in a nutshell. Nobody anywhere wants to show their hand at exactly how much detail they are capable of seeing from space. Really? It's like everybody knows everybody can see everything, it's time for someone to just drop the ball and release the high detail photography already!
Note that the search area has now shifted by over 100 km. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/28/flight-mh370-search-zone-moved-based-on-planes-fuel-consumption
How much detail do you think can be imaged while covering an area of millions of square kilometers?
How much detail do you think can be imaged while covering an area of millions of square kilometers?
They have found plenty with wide angle view in a timeline that didn't permit a view with high resolution because of location uncertainty.