GEOMAR in Germany have been readying their Abyss AUV which is good for 6000m, but I haven't heard any report yet about them being requested...

Data from first foray of Bluefin analysed but no objects of interest found.

Search for MH370: first Bluefin-21 underwater search finds nothing

I am surprised the Australians are deploying only a single Bluefin21 submarine for the first part of the underwater search. Is it really too expensive or logistically difficult to have two running simultaneously for double the coverage?

Australia doesn't own the Bluefin. Neither it seems does the US Navy. They lease it from these guys according to this document. Info from the Bluefin website here.

Interesting how they do the navigation. GPS until they go under the water then an inertial navigation system. I was wondering how they would cope with no GPS underwater.

The Oil Slick
 

I assume the sample has to be taken ashore to be analysed?

How will this be achieved? I don't think any vessel other than Exho has been close to OS, unless any other of the ships close enough has a helo aboard.

>I assume the sample has to be taken ashore to be analysed?

How will this be achieved<

HMAS Toowoomba has been close to the search area and is now making 23 knots towards Perth. I imagine its change of course and hanging about the area was to await transfer of the oil sample by a tender from HMS Echo.

>23 knots towards Perth.<

Exmouth now, it seems. Has slowed down now. Is the weather cutting up rough?

What is the goal here?
 

Is it to find the wreck? No. It is to show the families of the victims, and the rest of the world, that they are trying. This will go on until the money runs out, or time fades the will. There's no real proof yet that the thing is even there. And walking speed is unlikely to complete the desired course.

@ Tfor2 : Certainly the SAR is partly for the sake of the relatives, but the real importance of finding the wreck and/or bodies is to do a thorough investigation of anything and everything recovered and try to decide the most likely causes of this awful incident. If they do ever learn what happened and how they will be better able to prevent it from happening again, and that benefits everyone.

7th arc
 

From Houston Press Conf with Chinese medias ( Transcript of Press Conference with Chinese Media, 14 April 2014 ):
Would it imply that the last (partial) handshake with Inmarsat is now considered as the "in water" point? Has something been published about that?

Did they establish just 'what' the partial ping consisted of ? I was under the impression that the 'normal' scheduled pings were the satellite sending out a query to the plane and measuring the time it took to get the response; that time corresponds to a distance (the circles). If the partial ping was initiated by the plane, did the satellite respond and get a further response from the plane? If it did that would seem to be MORE than a 'normal' ping (3 transmissions instead of 2); certainly not a 'partial' ping. What gives ?

This is an interesting viewpoint from David Mearns, Bluewater Recoveries, finder of the the HMAS Sydney and adviser on recovery of Air France 447. Yes, it's an opinion but a lot of experience there, and reasonably upbeat.


Malaysia Airlines MH370: Wreck hunter confident plane will be found - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

From what has been said the last transmission from the aircraft SATCOM was not a standard hourly 'Are You Still Here' transmission but the initiation of a logon sequence. The 'partial' presumably means the full logon transaction was not completed - there may be more transmissions involved than just 3 and presumably this would need to include the hardware ID of the aircraft.

Just to emphasise a matter of physics with the flying fraternity, the restriction on the sub is one of pressure and not depth.

It would involve forensic psychology, the art of getting into people's minds, because no mechanical failures could produce such a bizarre flight profile.

No, we don't know 100% but for now it is considered a "fact", other agencies (NTSB, AAIB, etc) do not question this yet, Malaysian seem sure they got it right. So if you want to come up with a theory better use what today is considered a "fact" and do not bend facts to your theory... Malaysians did contradict themselves but in rather minor details.

it would rather be impossible for those other govt to confirm what Malaysian radar saw, not to mention their radars were probably much farther from the target. And who knows if Thai radar capabilities are even half as good as Malaysian radars.

No one has any answers, at this point there are only questions, it seems to me your are supplying your own answers conveniently skipping all the hard questions.

Role of ACARS
 

Would it be an accurate statement to say that the forthcoming investigation will be the first in which ACARS datalink transmissions to and from satellites are used to determine (or, to provide major inputs for determining) an airliner's flight path and location? My understanding is that the BEA looked at ACARS indications of inconsistencies in airspeed in AF447 but not with respect to flight path or ultimate location.

one atmosphere per 10 metres depth..

ACARS Datalink Sub-function
 

There has been a lot of discussion around ACARS and SATCOM. Some info below on the Data Communications Module function.

"The DCMF supplies the airplane part of ACARS. The ACARS sub-function controls air/ground file transfers and onboard message routing. The message routing process supplies uplink message routing to onboard systems. It downlinks message routing to the ACARS ground service providers (GSP) through a VHF transceiver (Post SB) or through VHF or SATCOM (Pre SB). The ACARS datalink sub-function uses information within each uplink to send the message to the applicable system. The ACARS datalink sub-function also routes downlinks to the path set by the flight deck crew and airplane systems.
The flight crew sets the datalink path through the MANAGER menu of the AIMS flight deck communications function (FDCF). The path preferences are:
VHF
SATCOM (Pre SB)
Auto."

As you may not be aware a lot of operators do not have ACARS through SATCOM and have modified it out of this vintage of B777's; I believe MAS is one of them.

The satellite handshakes were produced through Classic Aero connections for voice communication and satellite telephone.

My guess is that every time there was a major course correction the beam steering unit in the SATCOM was trying to retune the RF signal to keep track with the satellite. This would explain all the pings under 1 hour; = change in course.

The task will go on for ages. Wiser heads will want to give up, but they need to show that they are continuing, despite the futility. But we have learned lessons. This will never happen again. There will be new rules and regulations. That's the plus side to come out of it.