Malaysia airlines 370 with 239 people on board, 8 March 2014 #25

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,141
Something odd is going on here....
First, they said it WAS from MH370, since it was indeed from a 777 and only one 777 is missing.
Now, they are saying it's not from the plane, because maintenance records say so.

I recall that the maintenance records were a little shoddy....so can we really believe what the records say? Maybe the part was put on the plane, and nothing was put on the plane's maintenance records.

So is this flaperon from a 777 or not?
If it is a 777 part, then where's THAT plane?

If by They you mean, Malaysia...
Yes, Malaysia PM stated it came from MH370
BUT
France, who is conducting the investigation, has not been able to conclusively link the flaperon to MH370

Based on some articles I have read there seems to be an issue with this flaperon, the maintenance records, parts and replacement parts and that only Boieng can confirm if that part is from MH370 specifically because each part has a unique number...

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/m...f-flaperon-is-from-mh370-aviation-experts-say

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/08/strange-saga-of-the-mh370-plane-part.html
 
  • #1,142
If by They you mean, Malaysia...
Yes, Malaysia PM stated it came from MH370
BUT
France, who is conducting the investigation, has not been able to conclusively link the flaperon to MH370

Based on some articles I have read there seems to be an issue with this flaperon, the maintenance records, parts and replacement parts and that only Boieng can confirm if that part is from MH370 specifically because each part has a unique number...

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/m...f-flaperon-is-from-mh370-aviation-experts-say

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/08/strange-saga-of-the-mh370-plane-part.html

Yes, by "they" I meant Malaysia.
:sigh: this is getting frustrating...
I just want to see some resolution!

So Boeing hasn't confirmed this is from MH370 yet, either?
Are they investigating this too?
 
  • #1,143
Yes, by "they" I meant Malaysia.
:sigh: this is getting frustrating...
I just want to see some resolution!

So Boeing hasn't confirmed this is from MH370 yet, either?
Are they investigating this too?

Boeing hasn't said this flaperon definitely belongs to MH370

I am not sure, but I would assume Boeing engineers would have been contacted by investigators to be able to give a confirmation, once the serial number was found and read, of which aircraft it belonged to..

Boeing has only said that the flaperon is from the wing of Boeing 777 series of aircrafts and that only the serial number on the inside edge of the flaperon would be able to positively ID which aircraft it belonged to....but as of today that has not happened and so the mystery continues...
 
  • #1,144
  • #1,145
  • #1,146
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...del-places-flaperon-in-east-indian-oc-416263/ SEPT 1,2015

MH370: Drift model places flaperon in east Indian Ocean

From your link -
German oceanographic analysis indicates that the aircraft component washed up on Reunion in July probably originated from the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean.

Very interesting article.
I found this map on Google images that divides the Indian Ocean into sections and shows where the Eastern Equatorial Indian Ocean(EIO) is located.
climate-03-00365-g002-1024.png

https://www.google.com/search?q=eas...iw=1422&bih=994&dpr=0.9#imgrc=xvf-fbXVB32LIM:
 
  • #1,147
TELE ‏@itele 7 min


#MH370 > Le débris d'avion retrouvé à La Réunion fin juillet appartient "avec certitude" au Boeing de la Malaysia Airlines (parquet)



#MH370 > The aircraft debris recovered on Reunion in late July belongs "with certainty" to the Malaysia Airlines Boeing (prosecutor's office)


BBM
 
  • #1,148
[video]http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/03/europe/mh370-investigation/index.html[/video]

Following the analysis of the debris, it is "possible to say with certainty that the flaperon discovered on the Reunion Island on July 29 2015 corresponds to the one on MH370," the prosecutor's office said in a statement.
 
  • #1,149
  • #1,150
  • #1,151
At last!

So does the drift map suggest they should be looking further north than they have been?
 
  • #1,152
French prosecutors today finally confirmed 'with certainty' that the wing part found on a remote Indian Ocean island was from missing flight MH370.

YES!! Finally the confirmation I've been waiting for...
Hopefully there's no more flip flopping back and forth-yes it is...no it's not...
 
  • #1,153
Now that they have settled the origin of the flaperon, I guess the next debate will be the drift current. Did it come from where they are now searching in the IO or did it come from the EIO which would put the wreckage further north?

I am leaning more to the north because of the sightings of the low flying plane. If it had been flying lower, it would have burned up the fuel faster and the travel distance would have been shorter.
 
  • #1,154
Now that they have settled the origin of the flaperon, I guess the next debate will be the drift current. Did it come from where they are now searching in the IO or did it come from the EIO which would put the wreckage further north?

I am leaning more to the north because of the sightings of the low flying plane. If it had been flying lower, it would have burned up the fuel faster and the travel distance would have been shorter.

I believe the islanders that saw a low flying plane with MAS colors.
 
  • #1,155
I've noticed NTSB reports are rarely definitive, and rightly so. They come across as jarring because they are so precise and objective. That is how it should be in an investigation. There can be overwhelming evidence that leads you to a highly likely conclusion, but no confirmation. That doesn't mean the investigators think there are other possibilities - they just will keep working to confirm or admit they could not and indicate that the evidence strongly suggests they are right. They must have found some sort of identification mark or number that allowed them to confirm.

NTSB will only make definitive statements when they have the black box and can physically look at whatever broke or determine the error from the pilot conversations. If they can't pinpoint it, they just say so, and indicate what is most likely or multiple likely options. These investigators wanted to go beyond logical deduction when asked for confirmation, and identify something specific. It doesn't seem like flip-flopping to me. They are just super particular, which keeps the facts separate from the theories, even well-founded ones.
 
  • #1,156
  • #1,157
  • #1,158
  • #1,159
  • #1,160
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
2,777
Total visitors
2,936

Forum statistics

Threads
632,115
Messages
18,622,292
Members
243,025
Latest member
GCobb
Back
Top