There is no evidence to suggest that MH370's track on its final leg south into the Southern Indian Ocean had to have been a straight line. In fact, Dr Bobby Ulich recently published a paper Interpretation of MH370 18:25–18:41 Satellite Data that demonstrates that the curving path generated by having the final leg flown on a constant heading of 180T from near waypoint ANOKO at Best Holding speed produces an excellent fit to the BTO and BFO data. The flight path produced initially curves to the west and then to the east under the influence of the prevailing winds.

A 25Cent levy should be paid on every airline ticket and funds kept in trust for this type of SAR op. To say there is no money is like saying we dont care

Go and find the commentary from the CNN panel that happened after the event. The facts described are hardly 'alternative'. They were presented immediately after the event. Only when they didn't fit into the story that wanted to be presented that they became 'alternative'.

Ask your mate about the descent profile flown and tracking after it turned around.

You're relying on MEDIA as your source of the facts? As opposed to the raw data being analysed and presented by the ATSB investigators? Says it all.

I have. And at the end of the day nothing is absolutely clear-cut and nothing is conclusive. Problem is, media will turn that grey information into "facts" and they become self-perpetuating.

This is a reasonable example of the over-reliance on the media and the under-reliance on proper factual information and research that has plagued the discussions on MH370 pretty much since the get go.

The transponder stopped transmitting at 1720:36 UTC; the reason for that is unknown, it may have been a failure or it may have been turned off. It is worth noting that the right and left transponder circuit breakers are rated at only 5 amps, making them amongst the less heavily rated circuit breakers in the P11 Overhead Panel.

As for "the descent profile flown"; there wasn't one. Of the various primary radar traces for the airplane as it tracked back over the Malaysian peninsular, only three contain altitude data:

1. 17:30:35 - 17:35 UTC (01:30:35 - 01:35 MYT), the radar return was at a registered height of 35,700 ft.

2. 17:36 - 17:36:40 UTC (01:36 - 01:36:40), the radar return was at a registered height of between 31,100 and 33,000 ft.

3. 17:39:59 UTC (01:39:59 MYT) , the radar return was at a registered height of 32,800 ft.

Allowing for the vagaries of primary radar with regards to determining altitude over short traces, that data suggests an altitude, or band of altitudes in a tight range, just below the previously established cruise of 35,000 feet, possibly consistent with a decent to FL340 as appropriate for the new westerly heading. Contrary to some early media reports, there was no radar-evading, low level run across the Malaysian Peninsula. Subsequent to the loss of transponder signal the airplane executed a fairly standard diversion manoeuvre, initially towards the nearest airport, Kota Bharu (which was closed), and then towards the nearest suitable airport, Penang.

There isn't the money available to search every 'possible' crash site. We could search this 'new' 25,000 km3 area and still come up with nothing. Then the boffins would come up with another new area,and so on. The cost/benefit equation is not very promising.

If a wealthy person wanted to donate money to fund more searches,that would be good but I think it's time to let it go,accept that we'll never know what happened and move on.

Except that the information presented by CNN at the time is very similar to what the ATSB has.

Other than the guessimates made on the Satellite links there hasn't been much more 'new' information.

What has changed is the rhetoric, and anyone who suggests hijack or military op is quickly shot down as being 'conspiracy' nut. Like it or not every option is still on the table until more evidence is found.

I suspect the reason China is not throwing big money into any future search is because they must already know something.

If we don't spend a single cent from this point on then a version of the truth will eventually wash up on a shore, guaranteed.

Nonsense. I'm not dismissing nefarious conduct or outside interference either. They are certainly possibilities.

You are exactly correct. But that is precisely NOT some people assert. Read post #15, for instance. And red herrings, outright disinformation about "descent profiles" for example, are outright mischievious.

Absolutely spot on, MickG0105. Your entire post, in fact, is spot on.

I'm with Pinky on this one.

I strongly presume that 97% level of confidence comes from assumption that MH370 flew at cruise altitude, also I guess there is kind of confidential notice :O 97% we didn't see it, hence it was not there period! Better never find it instead admitting that we didn't see it right under our nose"

"transponder was turned off. That is not an aircraft fault"
Prove it! The transponder stopped transmitting, nobody knows why, therefore it COULD be an aircraft fault.

"I have this from a friend close to the action, there was no fault with the aircraft."
Your friend could only KNOW this if he/she was on board the aircraft, therefore speculation.

This is simply untrue, you need to think a little more laterally.

Non so blind as those who will not see.

Icarus, the only lateral thinking I can come up with is if someone knows for certain it wasn't a problem with the aircraft why hasn't this been made public and why have they allowed the search charade to continue?

There's not much point in such an extensive search if there incontrovertible evidence the aircraft wasn't at fault.

How much has Boeing contributed?

Your second line is true.
The rest of your story is speculation, you call "facts".

It is a fact it crashed, there are alternative speculations as to why, and even where. ;)

Probably nothing?
They would not want it found if there is a chance it is their fault. ;)
Better to whisper "murder/suicide, nothing wrong with our aircraft" ;)

Yeh right... Boeing was not at fault and you can guarantee they have been heavily consulted, behind closed doors (without Perth's flogga G.T.!) right from the very moment it "went off the screen" and a number of Gulstreams darted out of Diego Garcia & Guam into KL!
Let's keep to the know facts - the aircraft was deftly manoeuvred along the borders of Malay; Thai and Indo airspace right to a point above Bandah Aceh, both in altitude and headings. There were over a dozen "suitable" and capable airfields he flew past, he could have used, if they wanted to.
I personally thought he took the northern arc of "engine pings" to sneak up into the back of China with his "Cargo" but who knows?
What was on the Cargo manifest needs to be examined. Lips have been sealed over this part haven't they!
Herein lies the motivation for such a stunt, I contend.

Is it? Do we know that with certainty? :E

Well let's start by replacing that media hype you're spruiking with the real known facts. The airplane most assuredly did not manoeuvre, deftly or otherwise, along the Malaysian-Thai FIR boundary. After turning back off its planned flight path near IGARI MH370 flew on a track that took it over, not along, a stretch of about 120 kilometers of the Bangkok (Thailand)‐ Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) airspace boundary that traces the Golok River. Subsequently, MH370 remained firmly in the Kuala Lumpur FIR (Malaysian airspace) at all times until it was lost from radar.

The turnback from near IGARI is pretty much what would be expected in the case of an evolving inflight emergency with the flight crew commanding an initial diversion to Kota Bharu (WMKC) by selecting it off the FMC Alternate Page (WMKC would have been the No 1 “default” option) and commanding Divert Now, Execute followed a few minutes later by the choice of destination being amended to Penang (WMKP).

There is not a scintilla of evidence to support the notion that MH370 flew to a point above (over?) Banda Aceh; it disappeared off radar heading west-north-west about 80 nautical miles north-north-east of Banda Aceh and its final turn south would have brought it no closer than about 50 nautical miles to the west of Banda Aceh.