Originally Posted by
jcjeant
Hi,
I still feel very frustrated when I look at this map ...
It shows the very first search (aerial) and then those incurred by the BEA
The abyssal plain where you found the wreck was known (from a hydrographic point of view)
I always wondered why the BEA has not started his research in this area .. that was easy enough to explore .. compared with the rugged surroundings.
Over the means used during the aerial search (detection signal pingers) was not very efficient.
Pretty sure the BEA are frustrated too, however there were good reasons for what they did. The area around LKP, including the actual crash site,
was searched in previous phases both aerial search for wreckage
and undersea search for pingers (not aerial search for pingers - if that is what you meant). The third phase, which that map shows most clearly, was setup based on drift analysis of the wreckage - turned out to be wrong. Frustrating, yes, but understandable given the number of variables and the long delay in finding the floating wreckage.
As to why not look in the easy-to-search areas, the answer is that they had already been searched and no pingers detected. The assumption was that (at least one of) the pingers worked, so if sat on the abyssal plain, they would have been heard. In rugged terrain, pinger signal would be more likely to be blocked, so what do you do if you have not heard the pingers and the drift analysis points to a rugged area - search a different flat area because it's easier ?
The big questions (I think) are:
1 - did two independent pingers both fail (and if so why) or was the pinger search not done right
2 - how did the initial air & sea searches miss the floating wreckage despite apparently searching the right area