"Star Dust was found over 60 years after vanishing."

Quite. Emerging from a glacier...

I suspect that the decision to call the search off was likely influenced by a common understanding of the parties to investigation that the loss of the aircraft was due to "willful human inputs" as already indicated in the preliminary report. Accepting this scenario, it is highly unlikely that the FDR/CVR would reveal anything that is not already known, both can easily be stopped by pulling a CB, and likely were just like the transponder. I would assume that were there any scenarios that would indicate any technical malfunction (like AF447) , there would be a much greater incentive to find the wreck whatever it takes.

I think andrasz has hit the nail on the head. And whether or not Boeing also believes the loss was due to willful human action (as oppposed to any technical malfunction or pilot error, or combination of those) they are unlikely to spend large amounts of their own money to continue searching.

Another view

Similar to the China Air B747 freighter whose search for the critical pieces in the ocean dragged on and off. Some of us felt not enough effort was being expended by governments . In the end we were damn unhappy when the El Al freighter crashed before the China Air one got sorted out. We vowed never again !!!

Now I'm not being critical of the MH370 search to date but there is this knawing feeling that mysteries are not good for the industry and if we have another it will have much larger repercussions.

I wasn't suggesting any specific mechanism for the plane flying other than straight and level. Only that the straight and level theory for those hours over the Indian Ocean has taken a hit.
From what I've read, they are quite certain that at the end of the flight, there was a high-speed impact with the ocean.

Is the S&L theory incompatible with a high-speed impact?

Note that we can't be certain that the aeroplane *insn't* in the area predicted by the S&L theory, because large parts of that area have a sea bed comprised of a layer of ooze that is up to tens of metres thick. Wreckacge setting on that would disappear below the surface and become hidden from view within a few days.

PDR

The all too important question is what have we learned from this costly disaster. I would suggest, the salutary lesson in this instance is the need for an expedient means of at least finding it`s wreckage, even if we cannot find why it crashed. Has anything been done about that.

That doesn't seem consistent with the wrecks and other debris found on the seabed during the search. As far as I remember, they used an AUV to check the areas the ship's sonar couldn't see into, and the shipwreck debris is still out in the open after sitting on the seabed for centuries.

Edit: of course, I guess there could be other shipwrecks in that are that we didn't see because they did sink.

1. As I understand it, there was no 'straight and level theory', except in the very early days. Later, they modelled a wide variety of routes at different speeds and altitudes and variations of speed and altitude to find the ones that best matched the satellite data.

2. The big question all along has not really been at what latitude it made the final transmission, but how close to that position it hit the sea. the assumption has been that it spiralled in close to the arc of the final transmission, but it could have travelled tens of miles from there before finally crashing. It may be sitting on the seabed half a mile outside the area that's been searched, and it seems likely based on the debris analysis that it's within a few miles of the area already searched at the north of the search area.

My personal guess is that someone on board set it to fly to the south pole or a convenient waypoint nearby, and we could probably find it by searching a relatively small area around the final arc that coincides with those course settings. I remember someone pointing out early on that a setting of 180 degrees at constant speed closely matched all the ping arcs.

If this is the end, hopefully we'll be able to crowdsource a drone search in a decade or two.

Catalog of Found Debris
 

One of the items is an interior cabin panel from the R1 door area - indicative of fuselage breakup. One would think that there would have been a debris field similar to AF447, but the searches may not have covered that area before the debris dispersed.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng...s-found-so-far

Actually, one of the arguments for the aircraft being at the north end of the current search area is that no debris from that area was likely to have drifted into any of the areas searched for debris after the crash.

The cost of installing all ETOPS aircraft with a detachable, solar-powered transmitter on a floating balloon which could be barostatically released at below say 20 metres, would surely be less than the incredible cost of the search for MH370 which still has produced nil result.

Thanks for the link, RBF.

The detached cabin interior trim-panel from Door 1R, which is presumably the forward (service) door on the R/H side, and apparently confirmed as from MH370, suggests that the fuselage did not remain intact with all doors closed. Either the fuselage broke up, or the door opened as a random result of the impact of an unpressurised cabin, or a door-assist (opening) system was triggered, or someone opened the door after a relatively successful ditching. The latter seems unlikely.

Regarding fuselage breakup, this would have exposed most or all of the cabin trim panels to the elements. In that event I suggest that the finding of a door trim-panel would be less likely than panels from the rest of the cabin. It seems likely, therefore that Door 1R opened.

From what I remember, other pieces of what could be cabin debris have been found (e.g. what appears to be part of a seat back), but they're not conclusively linked to MH370. But that's an interesting theory about the door.

Edit: the possible seat back panel is shown here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37820122

Mustafagander

I assume there were no relatives of yours or close family members on this aircraft. In my opinon, you made a rather silly remark without giving it much thought first. Yes, the search did cost a great deal & unfortunately it did have to stop sometime I suppose. However what would you have done, had you been in charge? Have you no thought for the families of all those who so sadly perished.

Personally, I wonder if the scenario of some kind of aircraft damage (say, caused by an O2 bottle fire) that affected the flying characteristics of the aircraft, without it a being a major impediment, was considered in the flight path projections?

This would have the effect of shortening the calculated total flight distance - and this figure appears to me to be the singular major "rubbery" factor that has impacted on the success of the search.

If the total flight distance was say, 10% less than the "best projection", this obviously puts the aircraft well North of the designated search area - and the MH370 debris finds around Mauritius most certainly point to a more Northerly crash location.

But he's got a point, why must Australia pay at all? It was a Malaysian aircraft and passengers were mostly Chinese, frankly it is China which is now such a large economy that should pick up the tab or even carry on the search at their own expense.

kaikohe76,
Correct, there were no relatives of mine on board MH370. I respect your opinion that I "made a rather silly remark without giving it much thought first" but you are entirely wrong. I thought about it quite a bit and concluded that it is unreasonable for the Oz taxpayer to spend these vast amounts of money on something which really is irrelevant to 99% or more of them.
Were I in charge I would have sent the hat around to the major beneficiaries, the families of the victims, to fund the search. I'm certain that it would come back almost empty because most people these days expect somebody else to pay for things and avoid personal responsibility for these sorts of costs.
Personally I'd dearly love to know what happened but my more than 40 years in longhaul aviation has taught me much, including how to determine cost/benefit ratios, and this one does not stack up.

You seriously want to make the relatives pay??????

MH370: "explosive" report
 

May have legs...
MH370: New report virtually pinpoints location of missing flight