General > General Technical Chat
Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
TerraHertz:
--- Quote from: pickle9000 on August 13, 2015, 03:08:28 am ---Here is one image. I'd like to see the group. I wonder if the shadow indicates a curved surface?
--- End quote ---
OK, so it's a computer generated image from sonar echo data, thus not safe to interpret as if it was a light-illuminated scene. But that sure looks like a small cliff with some big rectangular blocks of stone fallen off and sitting near the cliff base. Anyone else see it differently?
Can anyone explain how those blocks could possibly be man-made? But then maybe the apparent level of detail is an artifact, and they could be any shape of around that size. And how come there seem to be 'shadows' to the right of each? From a towed sonar imager, surely there wouldn't be any such effect? Or is it a computer-generated effect to convey height information, which the sonar data would include?
--- Quote from: Psi on August 10, 2015, 07:31:51 am ---Parts have washing up at the Maldives apparently.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3191134/Has-MH370-debris-washed-Maldives-Investigators-examine-items-isles-locals-saw-low-flying-jet-day-plane-vanished.html
--- End quote ---
Very interesting, thanks for the link. That'd be *more* aircraft parts washed ashore in the Maldives in March 2014 soon after MH370 went missing, since there was also the halon fire extinguisher sphere.
See http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54178 and pics below.
Then there's the many eyewitness accounts of a large white plane with red stripe flying low and slow over the Maldives to the southwest early the morning after MH370 went missing. Within the possible flight time. Also I take their description "white plane with red stripe" as a reinforcement of veracity, since that's what one would notice from a brief surprised glimpse. While someone making shit up for publicity attention, would have said "white with red and blue stripes", having looked at photos and seeing both color stripes. I've listened to phone interviews with some of those witnesses, and they sound genuine.
Or the Maldives fisherman who was way out to sea to the south that morning, and reported seeing smoke and flames on the ocean far to his south. Too far for him to go investigate, but he reported it.
None of this ever got into the MSM at the time. Fascinating to see some mention now.
Anyway, good luck trying to discuss such details here. Contradicts the official narrative, and so must be crazy conspiracy stuff, disrespectful to the relatives, and will get deleted and you threatened with banning. Never mind the relatives are the loudest voices insisting there's some kind of coverup.
There's a lot of other 'doesn't fit the narrative' solid details I could mention. Stuff about the passenger list, the cargo manifest, a particular item of cargo on the manifest and what it probably was, the semi-technical data Inmarsat _finally_ released (which cries out for a solid technical analysis), and so on. But in a truth-chilled forum it isn't worth the effort (and getting banned.) Even though the Inmarsat data and evaluation of what the stated Doppler shifts really mean, could hardly be more on-topic here.
TerraHertz:
Update on that wing part:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/08/strange-saga-of-the-mh370-plane-part.html
--- Quote ---About That Airplane Part That Was Supposed to Solve the MH370 Mystery ...
By Jeff Wise August 28, 2015 9:13 a.m.
--- End quote ---
Summary: It isn't from MH370. Serial # plate is removed, but crucially modifications don't exactly match those made by Malaysian Airlines. (An interesting thing in itself.)
Also:
--- Quote ---According to a Toulouse aeronautics expert who requested anonymity,” the article stated, “the element of the wing would not have floated for several months at the water’s surface but would have drifted underwater a few meters deep.”
It’s not yet known why investigators reached this conclusion, but one clue might be that the flaperon found on La Réunion was encrusted on every edge with goose barnacles. These animals are a type of crustacean that attaches while young to a floating object and spends its entire adult life affixed to the same spot. Since they obviously can only survive underwater, their distribution around the object suggests that the entirety of it must have spent at least several months submerged.
http://jeffwise.net/2015/08/26/how-did-the-reunion-flaperon-float/
--- End quote ---
And goes on to say it could not have 'floated underwater a few meters deep' for any length of time by itself:
--- Quote ---So, how could a six-foot-long chunk of airplane remain suspended beneath the ocean surface for a long period of time? At this point, there aren’t any simple, common-sense answers; the range of possible explanations at this point runs from as-yet-unidentified natural processes to purposeful intervention by conspirators. The implausibility of it all is quite maddening — but, then again, when it comes to MH370, maddening and implausible are par for the course.
--- End quote ---
People paying attention and with inquiring minds capable of inference were wondering from soon after seeing the pics how the part managed to have barnacles on every surface, but no algae at all. Since barnacles only grow underwater, and anything in the ocean near the surface for months definitely will get covered in algae. Also how it managed to 'wash ashore' (on a pebbly beach) without getting the barnacles all or mostly ground off. Not to mention staying afloat for so long despite all compartments in such aircraft metal structures having drain holes for pressure equalization during ascent/descent, and to ensure condensation drains out rather than building up and causing corrosion. All these points were raised in forums where free debate of important issues is allowed.
Anyway, now at least some of those questions are in the mainstream media. The part is apparently not from MH370, and that's quite curious. Thought you should know.
Incidentally, it also returns the status of washed-up parts to 'only known candidates were in the Maldives, shortly after the plane was lost.' Except those parts seem to have been vanished, so far as official investigation goes.
NiHaoMike:
If it's not from MH370, where could it have come from?
TerraHertz:
--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on August 30, 2015, 05:42:17 am ---If it's not from MH370, where could it have come from?
--- End quote ---
That's the key question, isn't it?
I'm eagerly awaiting some more formal announcement about this, and seeing how it's spun.
Maybe there'll be some explanation for how it remained deep enough for barnacles to grow on all surfaces, but somehow too deep (or in shade) for algae to colonize the surfaces too. Algae needs light. And I doubt airplane paint includes marine algae inhibitors like TBT.
Or how such a part got in the ocean at all, if it's officially confirmed it doesn't match the Malaysian Airlines maintenance records. Yet no other airframe of that type has ever crashed in any ocean.
Would be nice to get a photo of where the identification plate was supposed to be. I suppose it's possible the rivets just electrolyzed away in seawater, and it fell off.
SeanB:
They rarely rivet those plates on, to save mass on the thousands of parts they generally use a laser etched self adhesive label, which has a 3M adhesive that bonds very well and which is almost totally chemical and solvent proof once cured. your car also has a few of these now, as it is both faster in assembly, the sheet of labels is made in a single process and follows the body shell through the assembly line where they peel off as needed) and you save time in not drilling 4 holes, placing 4 rivets and sealing the assembly to prevent corrosion. They place one on each body panel after the paint shop ( or before with a peel off cover strip on some interior panels for hidden identifying marks) so there is no issue with having a different spec version down the line.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version