Slashdot Mirror


Australia Elaborates On a New Drift Model To Find MH370

hcs_$reboot writes Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 disappeared on Saturday, 8 March 2014, while flying from Malaysia to Beijing with 239 people on board. And 8 months later, after millions of dollars invested in a gigantic search operation, there is still no sign of the aircraft. Now, Australia is developing a new model to predict where the debris of the missing MH370 could wash up. Authorities had initially predicted that the plane's wreckage could drift and come ashore on Indonesia's West Sumatra island after about 4 months of Flight MH370's disappearance. "We are currently working... to see if we can get an updated drift model for a much wider area where there might be possibilities of debris washing ashore," search co-ordinator Peter Foley told reporters in Perth.

154 comments

  1. Weaksauce by korbulon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A story about a model under development which may or may not lead ... to something? You call this news?

    Here's an idea: next time something this "newsworthy" comes up, don't post it!

    1. Re: Weaksauce by sir_eccles · · Score: 2

      Given huge numbers of mothballed aircraft sitting in the desert in AZ why do you need a grand conspiracy to use a commercial airliner full of people?

    2. Re: Weaksauce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Via the infinite monkey theorem, a infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters for an infinite amount of time will type out the complete works of say Shakespeare. You are like an infinite monkey. Just in this case you typed out the complete works of stupid.

    3. Re:Weaksauce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet every misshapen blob from a 3D printer apparently leads to the great Transhuman Migration to the Stars??

    4. Re: Weaksauce by koan · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'll let you think that through, I think you can come up with a better answer than "use mothballed aircraft" that are no longer flying.

      The "official" story they have passed out is just as high bullshit as the official story of 9/11, it troubles me anyone would believe anything our (or any) government tells them.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    5. Re:Weaksauce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the conspiracy story was that MH370 drifted into Ukraine a few weeks later with an only slightly different transponder code and flight number (MH17) but not even a new paint job.

    6. Re:Weaksauce by MouseR · · Score: 1

      Ferguson.

    7. Re: Weaksauce by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Who needs a conspiracy. Just see how close you can fly to Diego Garcia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... in what the US government now considers a flying bomb, it's not like they don't have a history of shooting down passenger jets, sometimes admitting it, sometimes denying it and sometimes pretending it never happened if they can clean it up fast enough whilst people are conveniently looking elsewhere. It's not like that particular pilot had an anti-US history and had been practising landing at Diego Garcia on a flight simulator.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Obsession by MrL0G1C · · Score: 0, Redundant

    MH370 again, this isn't just obsession, it's extreme obsession, this level of obsession is bizarre, why are officials feeding it? The plane is gone, it's past time to get over it - I don't mean the relatives, I mean the officials and media who are feeding this thing.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:Obsession by Prokur · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Australian government trying to earn more credits in APAC region by taking extra care of Malaysian planes, including MH370 and MH17

    2. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      One crashed within our search and rescue zone, the other had 27 of our citizens on board. But hey, believe what you want, shame its clearly wrong.

    3. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow. Just wow.

      How dare the Australian government search for a plane thought to have crashed in our territorial waters.

      How dare the Australian government take "extra care" when a plane carrying 25 of our citizens gets shot out of the sky with a missile.

      Whatever balance it is you think you're aiming for, go fuck yourself with it.

    4. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They want closure. They're not likely to get it soon though.

      They may not even be looking for floating debris. If the pilot was still in control, he may have made a controlled landing. Like the landing on the Hudson. So it may be a intact aircraft at the bottom of the ocean.

      It's doubtful that they'd make a landing like that in open seas, but it's (remotely) possible.

      But they are really looking for a really small needle in a fucking huge wet moving haystack.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    5. Re: Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasnt shot down. Putin jumped into the sky and karate chopped it down with his bare hands.

    6. Re:Obsession by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We want to know what happened so that we can prevent it happening again.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Obsession by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The plane is gone, it's past time to get over it - I don't mean the relatives, I mean the officials and media who are feeding this thing.

      Gone? You mean it was... *fluffs up hair, sticks out hands* ALIENS?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why am I reminded of Bloom County?

    9. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      They want closure.

      And I want a pony.

      But I think the pony would be much cheaper. People disappear. But we're spending a hugely disproportionate amount of money in the interest of figuring out what happened to 239 people. On average around 400 people die in Australia every day. Why are those 239 people worth so much more?

    10. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a retard.

    11. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Where did you hear that Australia were paying $50M/day looking for MH370? More like 1% of that, and Malaysia is paying 50% of the bill.

      But you wouldn't know anything about numbers, because you're a fucking bogan moron. You are too stupid to be here, fuck off.

    12. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that Australia is trying to show that it is a major country, a genuine player in the international community.

      Unfortunately, drunk sheep shaggers like you ruin their efforts.

    13. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      > The plane is gone

      And since we don't know why its gone, the event could repeat. If there was an evil genius behind the disappearance of MH370 and is not dead (the mastermind person was not onboard or it was a work of a whole shadowy organization) then the culprit is free to repeat the coup, as soon as the world looks the other way. And you can't be sure if the next plane going off the radar will be an anglo-saxon plane or a russian one or a japanese trans-oceanic flight. Sure, Malaysians are 3rd world people, let's forget about them, but the plane was a B777, America's finest produce and next time the same fate could befell your waifu and kids. (Malaysia does have her long sortiment of enemies and haters, but still much less than "world police" USA...)

      Anyhow, the lack of any confirmed floating debris in MH370 case is highly incredulous and there is a non-zero chance the plane landed intact somewhere and the pax got portioned into organs for transplant, Kosovo alban mafia yellow house style (with Diego Garcia military base being the main suspicion in such landing strip theories or maybe the plane continued from then on to Antartica, to land at a US research base ice strip or even a or "Reich-Reptoid" base in the wildest claims.)

      The factuality of the sat-pings is questioned by many, some say those never happened as sparks of electromagnetic transmissions in space, but some INMARSAT engineer created them out of thin air on his PC workstation, because some great power that be ordered him to come up with a fascinating cover story to woo the public's mind.

    14. Re:Obsession by QuasiSteve · · Score: 2

      I understand you're not the same person who complained about a story no longer being in the news, but I guess that just goes to show that for some people there can never be enough coverage, and for others there can never be too little.

      If you want to talk media obsession, though... at least MH370 was still this year and was a whole plane lost under weird circumstances - and not a child abducted while her well-off parents were out partying 7 years ago that still has stories running every other week, or a president that was shot 51 years ago that has complete TV specials made practically every year.

    15. Re:Obsession by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      You can take a purely backward view, sure.
      However, this is an opportunity to do some basic research that will pay dividends the next time there is a need to find a winged needle in a soupy haystack.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    16. Re:Obsession by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      So only investigate someone's death/disappearance if it doesn't take away any funds that could instead go to your favorite social program.

      Is that your stance?

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    17. Re:Obsession by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      Oh no. He shags the sober sheep too.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    18. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

      Don't misunderstand me, I agree. There should be continued search efforts, funded by the airline that lost it. No government is responsible for the loss of those lives. They aren't responsible for notifying the families of the passengers. It is totally up to Malaysia airlines to fund the continued search. Some financial backing can come from governments that represent the passengers, but it shouldn't be a continuing national effort.

      As someone else mentioned, Australia is looking for 239 people, while more than that die domestically every day. Even his perception is wrong. There were 6 citizens of Australia on that flight. By passenger count, China should have the largest interest, with 152 citizens lost. As the airline is based in Malaysia, they could be financially responsible for the continuing search.

      I believe it's to the point where it's "lost", and until further evidence shows up (washes ashore), it can safely be left marked as in the "lost at sea". That does happen sometimes. Searching could continue when there is new reliable evidence. Otherwise at this time it is a waste of manpower and resources.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    19. Re:Obsession by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      What makes these two planes so special that they get money while the government cuts funding to our health system?

      Total cost of the MH370 crash, including compensation and the loss of the aircraft, is likely to hit a billion dollars. Finding out what happened is well worth a few hundred million, if it could prevent the same thing happening again.

      Locating it will take a certain amount of luck, as the wreckage could be in a spot that's hard to see on sonar, but it's almost certainly somewhere in the current search area.

    20. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Australia WANT to fund the search. They are a "Western" nation who, due to geographical distance, have had a limited historical influence on world affairs. They are funding 50% of the search; Malaysia is funding the other 50%.

      Malaysian national prestige has, from their perspective, been dented by the two recent air disasters. Malaysia Airlines is already in financial difficulties due to the two crashes. The Malaysian government has deep pockets - there is a 0% chance that they will let their flag carrier go bankrupt, and they will understandably continue to fund all search efforts themselves.

      What you think "should" happen is irrelevant. So long as Australia and Malaysia have their national prestige to consider, the search will go on. The current search costs (I believe) are only about $500K per day, which is pocket change for two major countries.

    21. Re:Obsession by quenda · · Score: 1

      But you wouldn't know anything about numbers, because you're a fucking bogan moron. You are too stupid to be here, fuck off.

      Nice argument. Never has the schoolyard retort "takes one to know one" been more apt :)

    22. Re:Obsession by quenda · · Score: 1

      Finding out what happened is well worth a few hundred million,

      How do you expect that to happen?
      Even if they managed to find the wreckage and black boxes, they will yield little or no data. The is very different from the Air France crash.

    23. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are you being inconsistent and making an exception because this plane has disappeared or do you seriously advocate that whenever a crash happens, the airline should fund the investigation? That would be fucking terrifying to let airlines decide how much to spend on a crash investigation - or should I say "investigation". It is already the case that because both the airline and the manufacturer always want the problem to be "just one bad pilot" there's a huge bias in all their involvement in the investigation. And if the airline goes bankrupt, who should fund it then?

      In this particular case, well, at least I want to know if there was a fire on board (a common theory on pilot forums) or if the security problem unique to the 777 was exploited (also a common theory among pilots)? Flight crews have tried to highlight that it's trivial to access the electronics bay from a hatch without a fucking lock in a couldn't-be-better-for-nefarious-plans location next to the toilet. Someone went as far as really risking his career by when flying as a passenger visiting the electronics bay and filming the whole thing. Nobody on board noticed.

    24. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the police in Australia doesn't investigate murders? don't coroners do autopsies? ...surely any death happening outside whatever boundary of "natural causes" you trace, gets even a little bit of cash thrown its way.

      Individually they may not get as much cash put into them, or even in most groupings of 200+ deaths, but they ought to be getting some expenses related to them. right?

    25. Re:Obsession by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      No government is responsible for the loss of those lives.

      And you know that no government incompetence, overreach, underreach, or malfeasance led to those deaths because you've recovered the wreckage and studied the cause?

      I don't have a dog in this fight, mostly because I don't have a dog. But let's not make assumptions in any direction without evidence of some kind.

      Australia is looking for 239 people, while more than that die domestically every day.

      There are reasons to find that airliner that have nothing to do with those particular human lives. As time passes, of course, the apparent likelihood of reward does decrease.

      I believe it's to the point where it's "lost", and until further evidence shows up (washes ashore), it can safely be left marked as in the "lost at sea".

      Mmmmm, safely.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:Obsession by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if they managed to find the wreckage and black boxes, they will yield little or no data. The is very different from the Air France crash.

      We don't know that.

      Even if there's nothing in the black boxes, the positions of circuit breakers may tell us how the electronics was turned off and then turned back on. A big hole in the fuselage near the cockpit would tell us that there was a fire on board, similar to the previous 777 fire. The positions of passengers and crew would tell us whether someone hijacked the plane, and whether anyone knew about it. Personal phones and tablets may contain messages from people on board.

      If we can find it from a few satellite pings, we can probably figure out what happened from whatever we recover.

    27. Re:Obsession by war4peace · · Score: 1

      How much is a disappeared citizen worth, exactly? I'm bad at math so please humor me.
      More money is spent each DAY on beauty products worldwide than on the entire cost of looking for '370 up to date. Wasted food in the USA costs 40B a year for households alone (Jones, Timothy. Corner on Food Loss. Biocycle, July 2005. p25). Compared to those numbers, looking for 239 missing people is pocket change.

      From a different perspective (that is, excluding money from the equation), I agree with you, and that perspective is temporal. Too much time has passed since the plane's disappearance. The chances of finding it are below what I'd consider a threshold for continuing to search for it. And again, I must emphasize on this: it is not about the money to me, and it never was.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    28. Re:Obsession by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's put it this way--a full-size jet airliner carrying passengers has *never* been lost without a trace. Not ever. Every one that went down was eventually found.

    29. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I may be drunk, and lacking social graces, but that doesn't make me wrong.

    30. Re:Obsession by camperdave · · Score: 1

      If the pilot soft-landed the plane, then what did he do next? Obviously it wasn't deploying the emergency rafts, because there was no signal from the emergency beacons on the life rafts.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    31. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

      No, I was just trying to say that they've been searching for months. The chances of finding it are growing slimmer constantly. They should stop now, until further tangible evidence shows up. Like part of the plane washes up on a beach.

      Airlines have insurance, which should be enough to carry out reasonable search and rescue (well, recovery at this point) efforts. The reasonable period has long since passed.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    32. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      I presented it as a not-so-plausible scenario. It could be possible to have landed in one piece, so no debris was found. Consider this aircraft which landed itself after the pilot ejected. It's a very doubtful scenario, but not totally impossible.

      As others have said, there was likely an electrical fire. It's possible everyone onboard were incapacitated or dead when it hit the water. So they'd be looking for a crash with no loose debris, so nothing to float ashore.

      Still, the ocean is a really big place, so they may not ever find anything, even if it did break up when it hit. If debris did wash ashore in Australia, that's still a *huge* area to find relatively little wreckage.

      At some point they have to give up search, rescue, and recovery operations.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    33. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      So 264 days later, and still no answer. If your cost estimate is right, that's $132 million to find nothing. It is ok to just say "we couldn't find it". They did their due diligence and then some.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    34. Re:Obsession by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      the other had 27 of our citizens on board.

      Which one? Surely not the MH17 which merely had one US expat with dual American-Dutch citizenship on board. Is Ukraine in your search-and-rescue zone?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    35. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .....what do US expats have to do with the Australian government?

    36. Re: Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoop. Whoop. 'Murican alert.

    37. Re:Obsession by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Territorial waters? Just how many miles out is Australia claiming?

      Your bases are the closest.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    38. Re:Obsession by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      No, I was just trying to say that they've been searching for months. The chances of finding it are growing slimmer constantly.

      No, the chances are improving, as they search more of the seabed. If it's in the search area, with some luck, they'll find it. Even if something does turn up on a beach, they'll still have to conduct a similar search, though possibly of a smaller area.

      Airlines have insurance, which should be enough to carry out reasonable search and rescue (well, recovery at this point) efforts. The reasonable period has long since passed.

      The insurer is probably on the hook for the best part of a billion dollars of compensation payouts if this turns out to be the airline's fault. If it was a hijacking, they're probably not. I would imagine they have a very strong incentive to keep the search going until the real cause is determined.

    39. Re: Obsession by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      Which part do you disagree with?

    40. Re:Obsession by _merlin · · Score: 2

      It's also a useful training exercise for the navy. It lets them practice a near-impossible salvage operation that isn't contrived.

    41. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No. Don't sign blank checks is my stance.

      Spending an disproportionate amount on the investigation of a single accident that claimed a few hundred lives, when that money could better be invested in saving countless more is asinine. If we find out what happened to MH370 and implement a fix then airtravel will go from the safest form of transportation to ... the safest form of transportation. In the mean time people die every day on other preventable accidents.

    42. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I have a far more important question. What do you propose we will find in the wreckage of MH370 that will be worth the $100million we have spent looking for it?

      Is it worth spending $100m to make the safest form of transportation even safer? While we're at it why not dedicate another $1trillion to anti-terrorism, ... you know just in case. We can find that money by de-funding health and transportation.

      I see this as no different to the above example. It is a colossally stupid waste of money finding out what happened to MH370 and to the 8.5x10^-8 proportion of passengers who travelled by air last year. That is the actual figure by the way. $100m invested to find out what happened in an accident that claimed the lives of 0.000085% of air travellers this year.

    43. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a sad day when conspiracy theories get modded insightful and the people calling them out get modded troll.

      Exactly what proof does the GP have for the plane being shot down by a missile? A badly faked photograph? I google for sources and the first thing that comes up are NWO blogs. Credible indeed...

      MH17 being shot out of the sky with a missile is a conspiracy theory?

      What brought it down, a fart?

    44. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      How much is a disappeared citizen worth, exactly? I'm bad at math so please humor me.

      Less than the cost of saving another citizen from a preventable fatality. Even less when you consider the disappearance happened while using the statistically safest form of transportation.

      More money is spent each DAY on beauty products worldwide than on the entire cost of looking for '370 up to date. Wasted food in the USA costs 40B a year for households alone (Jones, Timothy. Corner on Food Loss. Biocycle, July 2005. p25). Compared to those numbers, looking for 239 missing people is pocket change.

      From a different perspective

      You're right, there is something different, and it's not just the perspective. The government doesn't spend tax payers money on investigating an accident caused by a private entity. If Malaysia airlines wants to spend $100m then more power to them. If the Miss World contests want to dedicate their money then go for it. It is their money. The government on the other hand doesn't have money. It uses the money of the people to benefit the people. In this case there is no benefit to the people at all making your comparison to waste in the private sector chalk and cheese.

      Don't get me wrong there's plenty of other waste in the government too, but using the argument that we already have waste so we shouldn't put effort into preventing more waste is exactly the kind of argument politicians to defend their pet spend project. You have to start somewhere, and I propose start at the point of least return.

      Now if my government funds beauty contests that provide no economic benefit then I stand corrected and will modify my protest signs accordingly. But they don't, so I won't.

      I must emphasize on this: it is not about the money to me, and it never was.

      That's kind of the problem. You're speaking from the heart, not from the head. The world is in the economic shitter. The very government that is currently spending $100m on looking for this plane is also introducing a GP co-payment increasing the cost of every medical service by $7 because they claim there's a budget emergency. Either there's a budget emergency, OR we go on an expensive wild goose chase. You can't have it both ways. (The medical thing is only example. I have no pet projects from the government. They are cutting across the board like you would not believe).

    45. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Sorry who has incentive to keep searching?

      The one private enterprise, or the other private enterprise you mentioned?

      Funny how neither of those enterprises are currently footing the bill for the search.

    46. Re:Obsession by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Scratch that, I can't read. :/ I need some sleep, apparently.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    47. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you getting your planes confused?
      I'm not aware of anyone disputing the MH17 was shot down. The only question is "by whom?"

      No one is (seriously) claiming MH370 was shot down....

    48. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No you idiot, they are trying to bring closure to a lot of people. No-one knows why or where the aircraft ended up. This is one way to try and find out. Bringing your ridiculous anti-government bias to the argument shows your contempt of people. Go away

    49. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you thought about this you would see the answer. The 400 people who died yesterday will probably have autopsies done as a matter of course, to discover why they died. That is the law, and its provided as part of the health system. Stop being a lefty for a minute and think about whats going on. If your parents were lost at sea, you are saying that no-one should go and search for them? Thats says more about you than anything else.

    50. Re:Obsession by camperdave · · Score: 1

      I was thinking an electrical fire in the avionics bay at first; a power surge or cross-circuit that knocked out the communications but didn't trigger the O2 systems. It accounts for the sudden turn (diverting to the nearest airport), but it doesn't explain the apparent circumnavigation of Indonesia.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    51. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who owns Malaysia Airlines?

      Oh yes, the Malaysian government, who are funding 50% of the search efforts. You haven't contributed a single fact to this discussion.

    52. Re:Obsession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, I don't know, I'm an Australian taxpayer and when an aircraft of a type I'm quite likely to fly in disappears off the face of the earth with hundreds of people on board I'm quite OK that the Australian government keeps trying to find out what happened. That's the point; they're not just trying to find the aircraft, they're trying to find out what happened.

    53. Re:Obsession by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      There's nothing that they can find that will tell what happened. If the aircraft flew 7 hours after it lost contact with ground than the cockpit voice recorders are useless as they would only have the last two hours of the flight. The flight data recorders would only show the plane going down where it was found. We all abhor a mystery but finding the plane will not remedy the situation.

    54. Re:Obsession by Marquis231 · · Score: 1

      Personally I believe the government funded search efforts are less than altruistic. This first occurred to me as I was standing in a park in Perth one night high on LSD when a massive Lockheed AP-3C Orion flew overhead at low altitude. I recognized the craft immediately though I'd never seen one in person, a truly massive american behemoth.

      That experience, compounded by news in the local papers that a Chinese destroyer had joined our own Australian naval vessels off shore to assist in the search cemented in my mind that the search for MH370 was really just pretence; an excuse for regional governments in the southern hemisphere to conduct wargames. The amount of fuel alone consumed in the search thus far is astronomically uneconomical, it makes no sense to me otherwise.

    55. Re:Obsession by war4peace · · Score: 1

      "In this case there is no benefit to the people at all making your comparison to waste in the private sector chalk and cheese"

      Tell that to the grieving families looking for closure.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    56. Re:Obsession by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      You may well want to know but it is not feasible, the plane is lost and these articles do not tell you what happened to the plane anyway.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    57. Re:Obsession by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I have a far more important question. What do you propose we will find in the wreckage of MH370 that will be worth the $100million we have spent looking for it?

      The reason it disappeared.

      Is it worth spending $100m to make the safest form of transportation even safer?

      Again, this crash will probably end up costing around a billion dollars once all the compensation is paid out. Spending $100m to avoid something that would cost a billion is definitely worthwhile, if there's a significant chance of it happening again.

      Let's say the Malaysian and Australian governments said 'sorry, we're stopping now', and another airliner vanished next year. What do you think they'd be saying then?

    58. Re:Obsession by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      When would it be ok for them to stop looking? A year and $182.5M later? 10 years and $1,825M later? An infinitely ongoing mission, searching every square foot of the bottom of the Indian Ocean, Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea, and Pacific Ocean? MH370's maximum range covers an awful lot of area, including a lot of land.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    59. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The reason it disappeared.

      That is no more a reason for a blank check than the reason a person disappeared. When an industry has cemented itself as the safest in the world then spending an extortionate amount of money investigating a single incident is way beyond the point of diminishing returns.

      Again, this crash will probably end up costing around a billion dollars once all the compensation is paid out. Spending $100m to avoid something that would cost a billion is definitely worthwhile, if there's a significant chance of it happening again.

      Let's say the Malaysian and Australian governments said 'sorry, we're stopping now', and another airliner vanished next year. What do you think they'd be saying then?

      Well saying it again doesn't change my previous reply. Is the Australian Government on the hook for $1bn? No? Then why are they spending $100m on the investigation? You're talking about payouts and contracts that exist between private enterprises. If Malaysian Airlines feels the need to spend $100m searching for a plane then good for them. If they are a government owned company, good for them. My issue is that a country which had nothing to do with the plane other than the fact it may have crashed some 3000km away from it's shore is footing the bill for investigating the incident of a private enterprise when they have no skin in the game. Unless the plane was carrying some highly toxic chemical the Australian Government has neither anything to gain, nor anything to loose from finding the wreckage.

      As for next year... there were 20,046 fatalities last year due to heart disease. The government just cut between $1bn+ from medical research. I would love my government to justify that they didn't investigate a one off freak incident which claimed the lives of 250 people because they were too busy investing in research that kills 75 times more people than that every year.

      Let me make my point perfectly clear. Nothing ever deserves a blank check written for it for emotional reasons, and that point doesn't include the fact that every time the PM has been interviewed about anything the word "budget crisis" has been mentioned at least once.

    60. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the grieving families looking for closure.

      I'm going to call that one "Think of the Children MkII"

      Ok I would be more than happy to do it. Please bring me the grieving families looking for closure. Oh you can't? Well let me write an open letter:

      Dear Grieving families of the flight MH370 disaster,

      I am dreadfully sorry for your loss. Your family members died in unfortunate circumstances beyond their control. It is unfortunate that the circumstances of their disappearance will likely mean we never find out what truly happened. We have made every effort to find out initial causes and search likely crash sites, however the nature of the crash makes it prohibitively expensive to continue the search.

      We are truly sorry
      Sincerely
      Garbz.

      Bam. I should be a speech writer. Now please tell me who else I can tell that their "closure" isn't worth $100m of taxpayer funds while things like medical research get a $1bn budget cut. Common, line them up. I will happily tell it to them all.

    61. Re:Obsession by RockDoctor · · Score: 2
      Fixing problems generally entails finding out what the fuck the original problem was in the first place. That is still a complete unknown in this case, and that is (rightly) very worrying to the entire aviation industry.

      I don't know about you, but whenever one of the types of aircraft in which I fly regularly goes down, I make efforts to keep track of the investigation of root causes as well as airworthiness directives etc that come out because of it. Then again, I get thrown in to a sinking mockup of an aircraft every few years to remind me that I'm liable to die in the process of getting to work, so I might pay a slightly higher attention to keeping my arse alive than you do.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    62. Re:Obsession by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Yup, easy to write such a letter when you have a dry soul. I guess banks and the IRS would have an open position for your kind.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    63. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A dry soul? Let's test that then. I wrote my letter, now it's your turn to tell the grieving families of the 20000 people who died of heart disease last year that the budget for medical research was cut while the government blew $100m on looking for a plane.

      See the problem with your "dry soul" theory is that it's easy to accuse someone of something when you have absolutely no skin in the game. I don't have a dry soul at all. My letter was extremely sincere, and finding the plane is not going to bring people back to life. $100m on medical research however may lead to a new breakthrough that can save lives in the future.

      I wonder what your life is like putting the grief and closure of few above the lives and welfare of the many. I'm sure some tyrant would have an open position for your kind too.

    64. Re:Obsession by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      1 plane is not "regularly goes down"

      "so I might pay a slightly higher attention to keeping my arse alive than you do."

      How in hells name does obsessing about a lost plane equate to this?

      Nothing you said negates what I said or relates to the fact that people are obsessing about a lost plane that is extremely unlikely to be found and the only part of the plane likely to be of use is the flight-recorder and not random bits of flotsam.

      Do you really think they can find the black box?

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    65. Re:Obsession by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Your comparison is retarded for many reasons I can't even start to explain because I'm sure you won't get it.
      So I'll just say: 'tis okay, you win.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    66. Re:Obsession by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Do you really think they can find the black box?

      In the last year I've seen 15 passive acoustic transponders dropped onto the seabed in kilometer+ water depths, and all recovered. OK ; that's in better conditions than this, but IF they can find the strewn field of debris (a definite IF, but that's the object of the exercise) then the location and retrieval of the FDR and CVR is a better than evens chance.

      Putting a flotilla of sonar search boats and a relevant ROV support vessel out is going to run at around 3-4 million AU$ per day, so it pays to do what you can to reduce the search area beforehand.

      What are the possible outcomes? The least important would be "pilot goes mad and does something to kill everyone else on board, then crashes the plane when it runs out of fuel" ; we already know that people go mad or commit suicide in political ways. But there's no evidence of madness, and committing suicide without publicising the political element is just pointless, so I think that's a low-likelihood outcome.

      Which leaves a range of technical errors. And they are important questions to try to answer. Probably billion-dollar value questions. Which is what seems to be gearing up.

      And no, I don't think it is "obsessing", nor pointless. For what it's worth, one of my classmates from uni lost three colleagues on that flight, and there were a number of other oilfield people on board, so there's a fair chance that acquaintances were on board.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    67. Re:Obsession by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Good comeback by the way, I have no idea what to say to your wonderfully logical and thoroughly prepared prose.

  3. Amelia still lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And she's got to be in her late 90s by now.

    1. Re:Amelia still lost by Buchenskjoll · · Score: 1

      She would be 117 - those are the very, very late 90's...

      --
      -- Make America hate again!
    2. Re:Amelia still lost by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It's pretty clear now that she died stranded on Nikumaroro island after her plane crashed in the area...that's about as found as you can get at this late stage of the game.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  4. Looking for Answers in the Debris by Bob_Who · · Score: 0

    Maybe they shouldn't assume that it is debris. Its in one piece perhaps.

    Also its a government gig.

    This means they can spend forever using resources and personnel on this task without having to be accountable for the worthless results. In fact, their incentive is not to find it, else they'll have to go back to work doing the really important stuff: floating around in circles, looking at nothing, and taking orders all day. Furthermore, If they really wanted to find it they'd be looking near Bermuda, not Australia. How can we take them seriously if they're ignoring the Indian and the Atlantic Oceans, and the Bermuda Triangle.

    1. Re:Looking for Answers in the Debris by dbIII · · Score: 2

      Not as such. The main contractors are a private company that can make more money looking for oil, however they are stuck with this gig for a while.

  5. You idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The flight was kidnapped by extraterrestrials via a small black hole. CNN even said so!

    1. Re:You idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, I joined a sect and we're all booking the same MH flight chosen by our guru hoping to meet E.T. My luggage is almost ready. I still need to find sunglasses certified against Hawking radiation.

  6. Not going to find it in Southern Hemisphere. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try Eastern Europe.

    1. Re: Not going to find it in Southern Hemisphere. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or North Korea. Ask Dennis Rodman to search for it on his next adventure

  7. beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me that the notion of a passenger jet "disappearing" in this age of "total information awareness" is absolutely ridiculous and far beyond the realm of plausibility. The only logical explanation I can think of is that the powers that be are testing the general gullibility of the global population, and the effectiveness of the mainstream news media in convincing the public to accept - and BELIEVE - a story that is utterly unbelievable, simply by repeating it over and over again.

    At the very least, the US Military (and CIA/NSA) all know exactly where the plane is, and what happened to it. I would expect that Malaysia, India, and China know as well. Search co-ordinator Peter Foley and his Australian team might save themselves a great deal of time and money by searching any large structures adjacent to the runway on Diego Garcia for starters.

    1. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not hard to disappear if you turn off your transponder and then fly out of primary radar range.

    2. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody spotted several passenger jets veering off course and crashing / smashing into towers until it was too late. And they weren't even trying to hide. And that was over heavily-monitored US airspace.

      The world is bigger than you think and the kind of idiots that go into the Australian outback with no water, or onto the high seas because they've cruised around the Med on a jetksi are exactly the kind of people that don't realise the scale of the problem.

      You're looking for a needle that had zero communication and was over international waters for hours before anyone noticed, that moves at several hundred miles per hour, through international airspace where it's not tracked until it comes in range of a nation state, in a haystack that's basically bottomless without the latest technology, which is still mostly unexplored, which moves and shifts and covering areas more vast than some entire continents. It's quite possible we've actually scanned right over the top of the crash site and not even known.

      Conspiracy theories are fun, but sadly usually destroyed by reality. The "every nation is watching everything everywhere" mantra is precisely what you're led to believe so you feel "safe" - strangely conspiracy theorists are the first ones to jump on and believe such things (along with the "acres of datacentres listening to every call" junk) and then want to claim the government is incompetent and left gaping holes in their plans in the next breath.

      Fact is, once a plane leaves airspace and the immediate neighbourhood, nobody cares. Military systems are looking for entirely different things to air traffic control. And planes crash and change course all the time. We lose ships all the time too - especially if they've been hijacked by pirates.

      The only thing mysterious is the exact details of why it went, not why it veered off course or can't be found now.

    3. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, when they openly admit they are tracking every call - and not just some, and every man and woman in the US now is pretty much considered a possible terrorist, it's hard not to see this. Besides, we've spy satellites reading reg plates from space. So think for a moment...
      there's plenty to read about the "facts" of air travel and transponders which makes it all ludicrous at best to believe the official story.
      I'm much more on the lines of believing the conspiracies, simply because there's a plausible explanation. Not a pilot having a bad day, and deciding to take the passengers with him.

      when islanders see a passenger jet flying extremely low, and fast, that's pretty unusual. So surely, that, and the Malaysian's own evidence points to a rather different picture than the official story, which we'll never hear the end of.

      http://beforeitsnews.com/international/2014/04/officials-mh370-military-expertise-hijacking-diego-garcia-2480712.html

    4. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 4, Funny

      strangely conspiracy theorists are the first ones to jump on and believe such things (along with the "acres of datacentres listening to every call" junk)

      Hey, welcome back to civilization, how did your 2 years without the internet go? While you were away, you missed some news (it was everywhere): turns out the US government was actually recording every voice call in a datacenter somewhere, and a lot more too! I know; crazy, huh? The truth was actually more extreme than the conspiracy theorists feared.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      no, dumbledork. There's not that much tape production. They're recording the metadata from every call. That's very different, both in plausibility (phone companies did this for billing) and is what they said they did.

    6. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Funny

      It also turns out that Joseph McCarthy was right - there really were Communists in the State Department. And they really were using their influential position to attempt to overthrow the US government. The More You Know! (shooting star)

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's not hard to disappear if you turn off your transponder and then fly out of primary radar range.

      That's dumb. What year is it? I realize it's not a non-trivial problem to track bits of metal from space or wherever you've got to be in order to have a good view of airliners, but seriously. What year is it? If we can't have flying cars, we should at least know where our jets are.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      no, dumbledork. There's not that much tape production. They're recording the metadata from every call. That's very different, both in plausibility (phone companies did this for billing) and is what they said they did.

      It's reputed by the usual conspiracy theorists that every call goes to one of those shiny new government data centers they built not so very long ago, and gets analyzed for contents. Then the transcripts are stored, and the contents of any interesting calls as well. This would consume substantially less data.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      We do know where our jets are. So long as they tell us.

      In this case, it wasn't telling us. You can't ensure it tells us unless you build in hardware that can't be turned off, and then you find the next airliner loss is caused by an electrical fire in the thing you just added that can't be turned off.

      MH370 had numerous ways to tell us where it went. But none of them were working, either because someone turned them off, or some electrical failure shut them down.

    10. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      We do know where our jets are. So long as they tell us.

      We had a program which located jets via afterburner IR signatures in the 1970s, I realize commercial jets aren't using afterburners but you'd think we'd have this problem licked by now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      We had a program which located jets via afterburner IR signatures in the 1970s, I realize commercial jets aren't using afterburners but you'd think we'd have this problem licked by now.

      So you're going to launch satellites which can find every airliner in the sky with IR over the entire world? Just in case one disappears again?

      And note that underwing engines are probably going to make IR detection particularly hard as it will block a direct view of the exhaust.

    12. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The story is that the plane flew for hours and hours without being seen or tracked, or leaving any data trail. In this post-9/11 world, I find that to be FAR beyond the realm of plausibility. "Fact is, once a plane leaves airspace and the immediate neighbourhood, nobody cares. Military systems are looking for entirely different things to air traffic control." REALLY? I would think that military systems are watching EVERYTHING, and that the moment the transponder was turned off, every radar would be looking for it as a possible hijack threat. I also do not believe the pilot was suicidal, or that he took the plane for a joy ride to the middle of nowhere and ran out of gas. There is no credible motive and no evidence of a crash at all. The plane flew somewhere, and until they find some wreckage, Diego Garcia is by far the most plausible location.

    13. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      no, dumbledork. There's not that much tape production.

      Citation fucking provided

      "This is voice, not metadata." "In the initial deployment, collection systems are recording "every single" conversation nationwide."

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So you're going to launch satellites which can find every airliner in the sky with IR over the entire world? Just in case one disappears again?

      Since we started launching satellites whose intent was to find military jets in the sky with IR over the entire world in the 1970s, I should think that it is not too much to ask that by 2014 we should have advanced the technology and built out the hardware to the point where we could in fact do that.

      And note that underwing engines are probably going to make IR detection particularly hard as it will block a direct view of the exhaust.

      No doubt. Perhaps there is a superior means which could be used today, although IR is still pretty good for this sort of job and the planes are still big IR sources. Our sensing and data processing technology have both advanced dramatically since then.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 1

      Turns out the conspiracy theorists underestimated the NSA. Check the links in my reply to AC. Storing all US phone calls for a month is just a handful of PB, assuming reasonable compression.

      Seriously, just scroll through this list of programs detailed on Bruce's page. Just the scope of programs is astonishing.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    16. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      You keep thinking that justifies McCarthy's witch hunt. I wonder how you'd feel if you were a victim of it.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    17. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by ledow · · Score: 1

      "I would think that military systems are watching EVERYTHING".

      No. They are not. Your average commuter airport needs dozens of people just to understands the situation for day to day stuff, let alone secretly watching from afar and trying to get a grasp on why one plane moved. There's a reason that air traffic control also control military aircraft manoeuvres to some extent too.

      This is the point - if there were so many people watching, from so many countries, so perfectly, with equipment that performs your impossible miracles, then there are dozens of countries who would happily stand up and say "We saw something suspicious" because they could accuse their enemies. Fact is, nobody has.

      So it's either a global conspiracy with perfect equipment, totalitarian surveillance, absolute collusion and everyone knows this. Or we just don't do that kind of stuff. And we don't.

      One country's military doesn't care about anything except something which isn't on its registered flightpath within their airspace (which they are normally notified OF, not notice themselves), or something that doesn't appear with a registered flightpath at all.

      Flying out into international waters is of no concern to the military of a particular country whatsoever. They have control only up to a limit from the boundary and no more and although they can survey outside that and often do (which is how the UK often spots Russian aircraft approaching its airspace, they are constantly testing but nowhere near stupid enough to actually violate it) they cannot do anything until it's in their territory - and then they have 100 miles in which to see it and get it. Some plane detouring could be anything from a drunk on board to airline recalling an empty aircraft to help with a schedule change.

      And outside of that national boundary, literally nobody cares. There are no laws out there, there is no ownership out there, and thousands of planes (and ships!) come and go and change flight plans every day and do not notify every damn country in the world of themselves doing so. It only matters when you enter an airspace without a flightplan or deviate from one inside it.

      If what you said was true, the Bermuda Triangle would not have the reputation it does, you wouldn't get helicopters being landed on top of protected-sites like wildlife reserves, the military would be first on the scene in a crash, etc.

      Occam's razor. Either everything is absolutely perfect except for the something extraordinary that happened in front of the world's press involving convoluted conspiracy theories, or things just don't operate like you imagine they do.

    18. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > (along with the "acres of datacentres listening to every call" junk)

      Brewster Kale (a current employee of and one of the founders of archive.org) worked out generous estimates for a year's worth of American phone call storage:

      http://blog.archive.org/2013/06/15/cost-to-store-all-us-phonecalls-made-in-a-year-in-cloud-storage-so-it-could-be-datamined/

      Summary: if you're not doing *any* data compression, you could easily store a year's worth of calls in ~4,300 ft^2 of floor space.

    19. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's entirely possible he has the same mindset as this guy I know.

      According to this guy, it's not the US that are eavesdropping on everyone: it's the ebil commies who are behind the scenes, working to overthrow all the hardwon freedoms of the west.

      In the 80s, he was all for the fall of the ebil commies and allowing the populations of their regimes to be free but now that they are free he keeps blaming everyone on them because "Once a commie, always a commie."

      Oh, also, modern commies are neosocialists. Or is it modern socialists are neocommies?

      Doesn't matter. Anything that uses taxes for social purposes is evil communism and stealing from hard workers while the poor are just lazy because if they weren't their bosses would pay them bazillions of dollars because there's no such thing as a boss who would underpay his staff.

    20. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 1

      So you're say that methods matter and the ends don't automatically justify the means? What's your opinion on Obama's amnesty declaration vs the Constitution?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    21. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by neilo_1701D · · Score: 1

      Have a look at this visualization of 24 hours of flights over Europe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

      Now, as you watch that, think about what would happen if just one of those dots went dark.

      It's a very, very hard problem if the planes stop telling us where they are.

    22. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      So you're going to launch satellites which can find every airliner in the sky with IR over the entire world?

      I would think a few countries must be monitoring for heat signatures all over the world, just to detect ICBM launches. Couldn't those satellites be used to figure out where MH370 went? I think it's just USA playing dumb, and not being helpful just because they just can't be bothered over the lives of other countries' people. They could have tracked the fucking jet in realtime if they wanted to. Or maybe the US government was somehow involved in the disappearance. But that does not make much sense, from the perspective of a motive.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    23. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It's legally highly questionable at best, but nobody's lives will be spontaneously ruined by it. A few people's lives will get a lot better and competition will be stiffer for the crappiest legal jobs. There will be less competition for bottom-of-the-barrel jobs that are not exactly legal, involving child labor, sub-minimum-wage pay, hazardous and unhealthy work conditions and all that good stuff. Maybe they'll have to improve job conditions to fill those vacancies.

      Just a disaster, huh?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    24. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I would think a few countries must be monitoring for heat signatures all over the world, just to detect ICBM launches. Couldn't those satellites be used to figure out where MH370 went?

      ICBMs produce a heck of a lot more IR than airliners. I would presume they also use software on the satellite to look for launches, rather than downlinking all the data to the ground, so there'd be no way to go back and look at the old data to try to spot MH370.

    25. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 1

      You immediately dismissed the Constitution-defying means and talked about the ends. Without a government that respects the Constitution, America is nothing.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    26. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Well bad news, respect for the Constitution barely lasted a century, so that ship has sailed. And more bad news, being as legally unfounded as McCarthyism will never make Obama's amnesty declaration anywhere near as bad.

      The fact that McCarthyism was unconstitutional is a tiny footnote of a problem compared to the fact that it was just a victim-drowning short of a modern-day witch hunt, and the fact that there were a couple of real witches in the town this time doesn't excuse it in any way

      If Obama were to unconstitutionally found a kitten-cuddling facility tomorrow, it would not be comparable to McCarthyism either.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    27. Re:beyond the realm of plausibility by lgw · · Score: 1

      McCarthyism came and went with no long-term effect on the nation. Eroding the Constitution is permanent - or at least I assume it will be as the GOP inevitably surrenders, rather than the House amending every bill the pass for the next 2 years with the sentence "Not withstanding any other provisions of law, no money shall be appropriated or otherwise spent on ...". That's not a government shutdown, just an insistence on proper separation of powers.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Down the rabbit hole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is more to this than meets the eye. This is not just about a missing plane. There are occult reasons as to why this is a big deal and why they are hyping it like this. But that is another big story.

  9. Ditched not crashedÃ"no debris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If, as seems likely, MH370 was hijacked rather that suffering mechanical trouble, then it is also likely that it didn't crash. The hijacked ditched it, relatively intact. For a parallel, think of the plane that ditched in the Hudson.

    And ditched means little or no debris to float away. That's why none was found by air searchers. It's why none is likely to drift onto beaches. It's also probably why the emergency beacons on the plane weren't triggered.

  10. B-b-b-but MH370!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is CNN

  11. diego garcia air base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you tube videos already explain the conspiracy perfectly

  12. The plane is sitting in a hangar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is nothing ordinary about any of this, and there are no traces of the plane anywhere. Passenger jets don't vanish into thin air without leaving any traces. It is obviously sitting in a hangar somewhere waiting to be repurposed for something else, which we can only speculate about. You won't find it by looking at the sea.

  13. beyond the realm of plausibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fact is, once a plane leaves airspace and the immediate neighbourhood, nobody cares. Military systems are looking for entirely different things to air traffic control. And planes crash and change course all the time. We lose ships all the time too - especially if they've been hijacked by pirates.
    happy new year

  14. Spratly Islands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never find it near Australia, just a diversion.
    Flight path took it near highly contested area, the Spratly Islands, where it went to
    zero elevation. Likely shot down by China.
    Interestingly the last communication was hand off to Vietnamese Airspace in proximity to islands.
    Another shoot down with similar characteristics but this time with Russia not too long there after.
    Makes you wonder if there are dirty tricks with some tie in to the Malaysian military junta and some secret services.
    Interesting as well is that Australia has a strong strategic security tie in with the NSA.
    It's the beginning moves between the US and an emerging Eurasian economic zone based on Russian and Iranian natural gas petrodollars.

    1. Re: Spratly Islands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice application for "moron of the year". We'll let you know if you won shortly.

    2. Re:Spratly Islands by PPH · · Score: 1

      the Spratly Islands, where it went to zero elevation. Likely shot down by China.

      Unlikely. Too many people with territorial claims on this area are watching it intently. And most of them would be motivated to point the public finger of blame at an adversary should a shootdown be detected.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Spratly Islands by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      Sorry, the limit is 1 conspiracy theory per post.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re: Spratly Islands by stridebird · · Score: 1

      at the end of the year, surely? More morons may come.

  15. Search expanding oceanographic knowledge by wired_parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While they may never find what happened to MH370, the search for it is leading to detailed mapping of an area of the ocean floor that was little explored. And now we're getting better mathematical models of the ocean currents. So while I know there's been a lot of criticism of continuing what seems like a fruitless search, the money isn't being wasted.

    We may never find what happened to that aircraft, but we will have expanded our oceanographic knowledge of that area immensely.

    1. Re:Search expanding oceanographic knowledge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly in Australian government hands, the knowledge will be lost or forgotten about with no serious traceability within 3-4 years.

      (someone who's worked at GA, CSIRO, and BOM)

  16. Hmm by koan · · Score: 1

    Still looking in the wrong area.

    Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad.[18] He said: "Clearly Boeing and certain agencies have the capacity to take over uninterruptible control of commercial airliners of which MH370 B777 is one". In this statement he was referring to off-board hijackers with access to MH370's Flight Management System via the 2003 patented Uninterruptible Autopilot.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Hmm by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      Autopilot can always be over-ridden by the humans on-board. Otherwise what's the point of having a pilot?

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
  17. Whereabouts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can you hope to write a drift model that with any accuracy when you have no clue where the plane crashed? ..just wondering..

    I'm assuming this model will be able to find every lost object ever and end world hunger.

    1. Re:Whereabouts? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      How can you hope to write a drift model that with any accuracy when you have no clue where the plane crashed?

      We do have 'clues where the plane crashed': that's why they're now searching a relatively small area of ocean, which is the most likely place for it to have crashed.

      Doesn't mean that is where it crashed, but if they follow the currents from that area and find debris on a beach, it would certainly help to confirm they're looking in the right place.

    2. Re:Whereabouts? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Why wait until debris hits the beach? Some aerial reconnaissance would provide positive proof of the assumed impact site by spotting stuff floating.

      Its also possible that the plane 'crashed' in a manner so as to produce a very small amount of debris. Pretty much the same way Flight 1549 went down on the Hudson River.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Whereabouts? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Asking people to keep an eye on the beach is cheaper than flying planes around the ocean for days.

      Also, I have a hard time believing there was a controlled ditching. The southern Indian Ocean has some of the worst weather in the world, and you're comparing a river to an area that may have had thirty foot waves at the time (I'm not sure what the weather actually was, but I very much doubt it was flat and calm). Besides which, it seems likely that the aircraft was out of fuel when it crashed, and why would you wait until the fuel was gone before making a controlled ditching? You'd have a much greater chance of success if the engines were still running.

  18. Satellite images by Rashdot · · Score: 1

    In the weeks after the plane went missing I've spent hours looking at satellite images at tomnod.com, but later found out they were supplying images of the wrong areas. They were based on unreliable eye witness accounts of people who had claimed to have seen the plane.

    I was annoyed that they kept wasting my time, even after it became clear that those witnesses couldn't have seen MH370 at all. But I would still invest time if they would supply significant images, of the area and during the time where it's most likely been. It's still possible that MH370 was photographed while it was still in the air.

    --
    This is not the sig you're looking for.
  19. Model/Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should have the AGW folks help out with their model; those folks are dead on everytime.......

  20. Plane was stolen not crashed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    seriously everyone was like "well if they didnt crash it into something what could they possibly hvae wanted with a commercial air liner"

    i suspect the answer is the $50 million or so the plane is worth could be a motivating factor. the plane was obviously stolen by people with advanced knowledge aviation

    1. Re:Plane was stolen not crashed by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      We should check ebay, and see if any used 777s show up cheap.

    2. Re:Plane was stolen not crashed by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That would be pretty hard to hide from an accounting perspective, and the fact that nearly every part on an aircraft has a well-documented serial number can't help.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:Plane was stolen not crashed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because shaving off old, re-plating (in-place) lost surface area w/ portable DMLS, and re-stamping serial numbers is hard... for someone who can afford to buy Boeing 777 parts.

    4. Re:Plane was stolen not crashed by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      However, I believe the airlines currently operating 777s are mostly in countries which frown upon them using spare parts from ebay with dodgy serial numbers.

  21. nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MH370 crashed in Ukraine.

  22. Part it out... safer that way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boeing 777 landing gear assembly. Excellent used condition.
    Wifey says it has to go... my loss is your gain
    be sure to check out my other auctions...

    1. Re:Part it out... safer that way by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Looking for an APU. For a hybrid car project, so no FAA#s needed.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Part it out... safer that way by toddestan · · Score: 1

      The problem is that parts all have serial numbers, no first world airline is going to touch parts of questionable origin, and third world airlines generally don't have 777's yet, so you'd be better off stealing something like a 727.

  23. Cost to expected benefit ratio too low. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are other avenues for spending all this money with higher expected impact on safety.

  24. Basic Science: Look at the most obvious locations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of the supposed (and failed) predictions are for somewhere southwest of perth, australia and Ass-Sume intetional behavior.
    Look at the more obvious places: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gunung+Leuser+National+Park/@3.788892,97.8723907,9z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0000000000000000:0xea09d4f1e6abb67b

    East faces of mountains.

    Everyone has been enamored with the diatribe of an intentional (and silly) - "lets hijack to antartica" bit of BS, instead of acknowledging the more probable (and equally unfortunate) probability of a problem leading to a crash into mountainous jungles following mechanical issues.

    Wait: OMG, Im posting something counter to LOGIC! It must be wrong

  25. It is in one piece at the bottom of the Ob' trench by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.geographic.org/geographic_names/name.php?uni=-240559&fid=6435&c=undersea_features

    And if I am wrong I am no more wrong than all the "experts" in the previous months who caused millions of dollars to be wasted by looking in the wrong place.

    It was landed on the sea surface over the deepest part of the ocean as far south as possible, because that is the only point that makes sense, they would get the biggest impact from it vanishing, or staying lost for as long as possible, because after all it was a form of terrorism (politically motivated violence).