MH 777 missing - MH370 media statement

[DrA]

@flyingwithfish OK, so DHS told me DoD said #MH370 was in Pakistan the other day, now Lt. Gen. McInerney says he has a source confirming it is in Pakistan.

Not sure how credible this guy is, but I've been watching his Twitter feed for a while and he seems to have a contact within Homeland Security...

That being said, I have to question this "confirmation". Pakistan would have to have one of the most heavily watched airspaces in the world...I really can't comprehend how MH370 could have passed into Pakistani airspace without the Pakistanis, Indians and Americans being fully aware of it. And if the DHS is "confirming" that it's in Pakistan, then why are the US wasting resources searching in the Southern Indian Ocean?

Does not compute.

 

[legroom]

Not sure how credible this guy is, but I've been watching his Twitter feed for a while and he seems to have a contact within Homeland Security...

That being said, I have to question this "confirmation". Pakistan would have to have one of the most heavily watched airspaces in the world...I really can't comprehend how MH370 could have passed into Pakistani airspace without the Pakistanis, Indians and Americans being fully aware of it. And if the DHS is "confirming" that it's in Pakistan, then why are the US wasting resources searching in the Southern Indian Ocean?

Does not compute.

Bin Laden op went into Pakistan undetected - with stealth heli, spec op aviators and midnight timing

So, that was possible.

But one would expect them to be on guard since.

And MH370 was a large plane as well.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

How long were those containers in the water? And how does that fit with eventually settling at a depth. A photo taken shortly after the containers went into the drink does not support your post.

My post was that it would depend on what the cargo/contents were and how packed (ie how much air is inside)...if full of metal machine parts for example, if the container leaks, then down she goes as the metal is heavier than water. But if say filled with say timber...may float at water level or just above...and if say chock full of polystrene foam it may be well above. If the containers remain watertight. Then they would float well above.. Either way it is a matter of simple physics. Volume (which is different if not water-tight) and average mass compared to water (which varies by depth/pressure and other factors).

Anyway all of that is irrelevant and a side-issue as images to date would such objects that are either mainly submerged, or are floating just below the water.

The key point of my posts just before that is that there are a number of possible large floating objects besides aircraft parts...such as boat hulls, container clusters, seaweed islands (these have been spotted by at least on Australian flight in the search area) and even dead bloated marine life such as whales.


When I have been sailing offshore I have come across objects like groups of logs matted together, and tangles of fishing nets clumped together.

In addition while containers are a very common way to freight, there remains bulk cargo of objects larger than can fit into containers ....some of which gets lost at sea still.

 

[Major]

An extract from Ocean Navigator about containers in the water

A 40-foot container tends to lose structural integrity with 30 tons of cargo rolling around inside, but just how quickly it sinks depends on the cargo itself. A container filled with electronic components wrapped in Styrofoam floats longer than cargo that is easily waterlogged. And refrigerated boxes called reefers are inherently buoyant as are tank containers. They tend not to sink for a long, long time.

Floating for weeks?
According to Vero Marine, a 20-foot container can float for up to 57 days while a 40-foot container will float more than three times as long. That’s plenty enough time to collide with something, especially since a fully-loaded container will generally float only 18 inches above water. Additionally, they don’t always show up on radar and can be especially hard to spot at night

 

[Melburnian1]

While many of us may be very cautious about such pronouncements, our diligent and naturally conservative (and hence not often given to wild, exaggerated statements) PM Mr Abbott seems to be a bit more optimistic about a find:

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370: Abbott flags breakthrough hopes

although the Fairfax stablemate earlier wrote up things in a more melancholy way:

Search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370: objects seen with naked eye

What a difference a headline makes.

 

[JohnK]

Well spotted.

I know you are joking but this search could use someone with my eyesight and processing power.

Not many people I know can track a golf ball at 300+ metres and see it land and know exactly where it stops.

 

[drron]

Fortunately I don't have to spot mine at 300+ metres away.

 

[JohnK]

Fortunately I don't have to spot mine at 300+ metres away.

Me neither.

I did sell myself short though. I can see the ball on the 10th green from the club house which is 400+ metres away.

 

[Boris spatsky]

Not sure how credible this guy is, but I've been watching his Twitter feed for a while and he seems to have a contact within Homeland Security...

That being said, I have to question this "confirmation". Pakistan would have to have one of the most heavily watched airspaces in the world...I really can't comprehend how MH370 could have passed into Pakistani airspace without the Pakistanis, Indians and Americans being fully aware of it. And if the DHS is "confirming" that it's in Pakistan, then why are the US wasting resources searching in the Southern Indian Ocean?

Does not compute.

I have followed him fir 2 weeks - i think he has no idea and is just making stuff up to get more twitter followers. He stated he had disproved one theory, but he had not posted any evidence. When i questioned this, he told me he had a private discussion off twitter with someone 'important' who had disproved it. Load of bollocks.

His DHS contact is made up too methinks. Just far too general etc and all so he can big note himself.

Needless to say i unfollowed him.

 

[FlyboyAl]

Coming home from Auckland this morning, I looked out and saw this.
Made me think of the MH aircraft as it was flying ghostly beside us.

 

[fjc]

OT but relevant: Australia apparently can only release one naval vessel to search in the area. Just shows how depleted our Navy is. I can only hope that we never need them to defend us.

BTW, that's not a jibe at them, who do a superlative job, but rather at our politicians.

 

[DC3]

OT but relevant: Australia apparently can only release one naval vessel to search in the area. Just shows how depleted our Navy is. I can only hope that we never need them to defend us.

BTW, that's not a jibe at them, who do a superlative job, but rather at our politicians.

OT, but yes, we're lucky that we only need to be protected from the boat people at the moment, and not armed aggressors.

Only one ship available. Sad if that's correct.

 

[kpc]

OT but relevant: Australia apparently can only release one naval vessel to search in the area. Just shows how depleted our Navy is. I can only hope that we never need them to defend us.

BTW, that's not a jibe at them, who do a superlative job, but rather at our politicians.

OT, but yes, we're lucky that we only need to be protected from the boat people at the moment, and not armed aggressors.

Only one ship available. Sad if that's correct.

But won't our greatest ally, US of A, send their fleet to help us?

 

[Sprucegoose]

Coming home from Auckland this morning, I looked out and saw this.
Made me think of the MH aircraft as it was flying ghostly beside us.
View attachment 26508

yes spooky indeed....

 

[Boris spatsky]

OT, but yes, we're lucky that we only need to be protected from the boat people at the moment, and not armed aggressors.

Only one ship available. Sad if that's correct.

I doubt it. There is one ship 'releasable'. Surely any ships that are 1) over 1 weeks travel time away or 2) engaged on other duties like border protection or 3) engaged on other global commitments would not be considered.

There are other things still going on in the world besides MH370.

 

[SeatBackForward]

I have followed him fir 2 weeks - i think he has no idea and is just making stuff up to get more twitter followers. He stated he had disproved one theory, but he had not posted any evidence. When i questioned this, he told me he had a private discussion off twitter with someone 'important' who had disproved it. Load of bollocks.

His DHS contact is made up too methinks. Just far too general etc and all so he can big note himself.

Needless to say i unfollowed him.

I agree he seems to be big noting himself more than anything. That he claims to be an aviation security analyst from a few days after sept 11 2001 says a lot IMO.

 

[Buzzard]

yes spooky indeed....

.... Spooky

 

[amaroo]

OT but relevant: Australia apparently can only release one naval vessel to search in the area. Just shows how depleted our Navy is. I can only hope that we never need them to defend us.

BTW, that's not a jibe at them, who do a superlative job, but rather at our politicians.

Defence Force procurement has a horrendous track record! Can't blame it all on the "pigs feeding from the public tit"

 

[DC3]

... There are other things still going on in the world besides MH370.

No, nothing else is going on in the world at the moment, according to the media, from what I can see.

 

[fjc]

I was thinking more of our politicians, who said (to quote a submariner friend of mine): "You have to do more with less". He and his boss resigned the next day. They had no more to give. I know it's OT, but it would appear that our naval fleet is in disarray. And no, I'm not in the Navy, and never have been, nor in the ADF. I think that it will take the Chinese Navy 3 days to reach our shores - thank goodness they're not coming with guns firing.

On topic: I do feel for all the families - and for the people searching for the plane.