Aircraft parts found Reunion,Mosambique, and SA

[CONSO]

Or, are these honeycomb composite pieces all that survive a two year journey in the currents without decomposing or sinking?

and NO barnacles or algae or ???

[onetrack]

The ATSB has stated that the latest piece of MH370 wreckage found confirms high-speed impact with the ocean, thereby eliminating any conjecture about a controlled or low-speed water landing on the part of the pilot of MH370.

[_Phoenix]

Care to elaborate (link) these ATSB statements, please.

[Airbubba]

The ATSB has stated that the latest piece of MH370 wreckage found confirms high-speed impact with the ocean, thereby eliminating any conjecture about a controlled or low-speed water landing on the part of the pilot of MH370.

If so, must be late breaking news. Here's the update on the debris finds from three days ago, looks like the ATSB hadn't seen the objects at the time:

Joint Agency Coordination Centre MH370 Operational Search Update

9 March 2016

This operational report has been developed to provide regular updates on the progress of the search effort for MH370. Our work will continue to be thorough and methodical, so sometimes weekly progress may seem slow. Please be assured that work is continuing and is aimed at finding MH370 as quickly as possible.

Key developments this week

•Debris, suspected to be from an aircraft, was found in Mozambique. The Governments of Australia, Malaysia, and Mozambique are making arrangements for the debris to be transported to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau laboratories in Canberra. The debris will be examined by investigators from Australia and Malaysia, as well as specialists from Boeing, to confirm if it comes from an aircraft and if so, attempt to establish its origin.

•In addition, suspected aircraft debris was found on La Réunion. Negotiations are occurring with relevant authorities to arrange for examination of the debris.

Operational Update

[Passenger 389]

Aren't the three pieces found (if officially confirmed as being from the plane) all from the starboard side?

Seem to recall a working theory that if MH 370 ran out of fuel, the right engine would lose power first, which in turn would affect the manner and angle at which the plane impacted the ocean.

[testpanel]

Aren't the three pieces found (if officially confirmed as being from the plane) all from the starboard side?

Was thinking exactly the same the last few days.......

[Chronus]

The curious thing about this find is that apparently the South African teenager, Liam Lotter who fished it out of the water when he was on his hols, packed it up in his suitcase and took it home. That was back in December. Now why would anyone do that.

[Passenger 389]

The explanation given (per an Associated Press article - don't have the URL handy, so here's an excerpt):

It had rivet holes along the edge and the number 676EB stamped on it, convincing him he had found a piece of an aircraft. So he dragged the piece back to his family's vacation home.

* * * *

His parents dismissed it as a "piece of rubbish" that was probably debris from a boat, with his uncle making fun of him for dragging it around, but the 18-year-old insisted on bringing it back to South Africa to research the fragment.

"He was adamant he wanted to bring it home because it had a number on it," said Casper Lotter, adding that his son is not an aviation enthusiast but was simply drawn to the piece of debris.

"It just grabbed him for some weird reason," the father said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

Back home in Wartburg in KwaZulu-Natal province, the piece was stored with the family's angling gear and almost forgotten as Lotter focused on his final year in high school. His mother even tried to throw it out, he said.

It was only when Lotter read about another piece of possible debris from the missing airliner also found in Mozambique, about 186 miles (300 kilometers) from where he had made his discovery, that he resumed his probe.

"I was very shocked - Mozambique, similar color, similar area," the teen said of the piece discovered by an American man. "He described it similarly to what I'm looking at right now."

Last week, Lotter's mother Candace contacted Australian aviation authorities and they said the number on the part indicates it may belong to a Boeing 777, according to Casper Lotter.

[Abelard]

The teenaged finder reminds me of a story in Aspen, Colorado 20 or so years ago. A family were skiing there, and their teenage son claimed to have seen an airplane crash behind a ridgeline. They ignored him until they got back home and heard a news story of a missing airplane believed to be in the area. The boy was flown back to Colorado and led searchers straight to the wreckage.

[RatherBeFlying]

Teen age boys are often excellent witnesses for aviation investigators.

[Benjane]

A careful look at the flaperon shows that barnacle do not care for flat even surfaces, vertical or horizontal. They seem to prefer nooks and angles. Plus the spiky edge of composite airplane skin is not quite suitable for soft skin cyprid (barnacle larva)... So this debate is not really one.

[Benjane]

Not a single source uses these exact terms nor ATSB report after an extensive search. Do confirm source please.

[AerocatS2A]

Originally Posted by Chronus

The curious thing about this find is that apparently the South African teenager, Liam Lotter who fished it out of the water when he was on his hols, packed it up in his suitcase and took it home. That was back in December. Now why would anyone do that.

If you were to take any particular item at random and then trace it's path back to manufacturer you would likely find a thousand unlikely coincidences that resulted in that particular item ending up where it is right now. It would seem almost preposterous that that particular item has ended up in your hands. If you go the other way though, trace from manufacturer to you, you would see that for that one item that made it to you there were millions that didn't.

The boy taking an interest in the part and taking it home with him only seems strange when viewed from the present and looking backward. If you consider that for the part to have made it to the news it must necessarily have traced a remarkable path it doesn't seem so strange. There are a million other aeroplane parts out in the ocean that have not been picked up and there may have been many that have been picked up by wandering teenagers and discarded as junk.

[MrSnuggles]

I have no knowledge at all about barnacles. Could someone please inform me if they are easy to remove? This boy stored the part outside of water for some time - could this make barnacles fall off?

[AtomKraft]

If I had to ditch a twin jet like this 777, or the similar type that I fly for a living, I'd take the advice in the QRH and do it with gear up and full flap.

I guess that if I made a decent job, the damage would be limited to the flaps and the rest of the aircraft would be left floating intact.

Then, the crew and I could evacuate the aircraft and hope for the best.

But if pax already asleep, then crack the doors open and wait for it to sink.....no more debris would be released.

[b1lanc]

MrSnuggles - Barnacles are incredibly difficult to remove - some harder than others. Having worked in a marina and lived on a boat in my early years, it was not uncommon to scrape the bottom of fiberglass boats and have part of the gelcoat come off with a barnacle directly exposing the glass fiber. They would attach to rudders (painted or not), props, prop shafts, and of course the hull. A long weekend in the water was sufficient to start barnacle growth, and they never fall off. Our typical procedure was scrape and then sand the residual portion of the barnacles off of the hull - often multiple times each boating season. That's why the anti-fouling paint (about 40% copper as I recall) was so important - at least you sand the paint off and not the gelcoat. Here's a decent link which gives you and idea of just how potent the 'glue' is.

Scientists finally unravel the mysteries of barnacle glue | Science! | Geek.com

Given their propensity to attach to smooth surfaces in our area (that may be dependent on the barnacle species and I'd defer to a marine biologist on that), it very much surprises me that there is no barnacle growth on the 'flat' surfaces on any of the pieces. Then again, we tend to get what's loosely called 'acorn' barnacles here and it seems the flaperon had 'goose' type growth. Attachment points look to be significantly different.

[SLFguy]

shows that barnacle do not care for flat even surfaces, vertical or horizontal

Just about as wrong as you could be. Ask a boat owner.

[Benjane]

Just look at the flaperon largest picture! I've experienced first hand barnacles on boat hulls too and they can grow everywhere indeed. But first, this is no standard boat hull materiel and certainly not at anchor. Plus the citation is a little out of context: not saying that they can't do it, but the number of barnacles on the Reunion flaperon's flat surfaces are quite limited with regards to angular sections and corners. Large flat patches are almost free of them and there are very few attached to the shattered ragged edge. All the newly parts found feature flat surfaces and ragged edges... And that may simply explain this.

[Chronus]

Thanks for the full speel on the whys and fors Passenger 389

Pops might as well have said, Jnr likes collecting shells.

[jolihokistix]

Idea. There seems to be quite a lot of confusion as to who found what and where. To be sure we are singing off the same song sheet, could we not number the objects in order of their discovery?
E.G.
1. Flaperon.
2. Triangular wing section.
3. Square wing section.
4. Liam's rectangular wing section... etc. Or should he be number 2?


With dates, places and a little more detail for each. Just for my own sanity.