'Morning BOAC,
Quote:
"It would appear to me to be completely fruitless to attempt ANY 'analysis' of heading at impact from the lie of any wreckage."
I'm not sure you or I know enough to make that assumption. Let's keep on interrogating the experts, just in case. As auraflyer (while admitting to be a layperson) says: "The pieces which are both densest and offer least resistance, descend fastest and move least with current. Pieces that are lightest and with the most resistance take the longest to fall and are pushed furthest by the current. Other things fall in between."
Comparing the pattern of returns in the east and west, I have a hunch that swordfish41 and others may resolve the 250/070 dilemma at a glance. However, as I asked earlier, is the orientation of this debris field necessarily indicative of the heading ar sea-level impact?
Quote:
"The remains of the aircraft will 'fly' just as well in water as in air, and since most seem to be postulating some sort of rotating motion at impact there is no reason why this should not continue during the 4000m drop resulting in ANY sort of orientation."
Cannot agree with any of that.
Quote:
"...all the wreckage tells us at the moment is roughly where it hit the surface."
It depends what you mean by roughly. For a start, the engines - presumably both detached at sea-level - would have gone pretty-much straight to the bottom. As mm43 commented some time ago, their position relative to this debris field is of the essence.
Maybe the BEA will divulge the Lat/Long of this debris field eventually. But I, for one, am not holding my breath. Pity: I can't see any third party being able and inclined to interfere.
Last edited by Jetdriver; 15th Apr 2011 at 23:15.