Further MH370 Drift Analysis Casts Added Doubt on Current Search Area

Brock McEwen has released a new reverse-drift analysis of the MH370 debris that has been found in the western Indian Ocean. The executive summary is below.

Broadly speaking, Brock’s new paper supports the conclusion of his earlier work on the subject, and also parallels the findings of GEOMAR and Météo France, as I’ve written about earlier–namely, that reverse drift analysis suggests that the debris did not originate within the current search zone.

In conducting his analysis, Brock has erroneously included objects found in the Maldives which did not come from MH370, but my understanding is that the inclusion of this bad data did not materially change his results.

The Australian is reporting that “Despite finishing his term as the head of the ATSB without finding MH370, [Martin] Dolan said he remained hopeful the aircraft would be found” and believes the search should continue. The full story is behind a paywall but Amanda Rose has provided a screenshot here. Also of interest in the article is the assertion that, due to bad weather, the search might stretch on through October.

Meanwhile the New Straits Times says that “The ministerial tripartite meeting on the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 will be held on July 19, Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai said Friday… Liow reportedly said that the meeting would deliberate on the next course of action regarding the search for the aircraft, which went off radar on March 8, 2014, with 239 people on board while on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.” China, Malaysia and Australia have long said that the search will end after the current 120,000 sq km search area has been scanned, but some observers hold out hope that the rash of recent debris finds will encourage officials to press on.

Screen Shot 2016-07-01 at 7.16.39 AM

210 thoughts on “Further MH370 Drift Analysis Casts Added Doubt on Current Search Area”

  1. @Ventus45

    I see it like this:
    The flaperon was the first piece found with a lot of barnacles and the Mosselbay piece was the second piece found in order (the first time) also with a lot of barnacles.
    All the other pieces were found months after the Mosselbay piece and they had no barnacles or a very few small once.
    I suggest then those other pieces landed between july 2015 and december 2015 and got stripped of their barnacles after that and got found like that months later.

    So I suggest a rough timeframe could be between july 2015 and december 2015 for all the found debris till now.

  2. @ventus:45: good question. I did indeed think long and hard about back-dating the “clean” items, for the reason you state. It’s a good idea for a sensitivity test. However, the “Roy” piece – even if both of its two finds were authentic – tells us very little, I think, about the minimum, maximum, or even average time between beaching and discovery for any of the other items.

  3. IF the Kangaroo Island piece drifted from MH370, THEN would that favor more southerly locations, e.g. 33-34S ?

  4. If you follow the general route of the currents from somewhere near the 7th arc from east to the west than the line of order from closest to furthest debris landing points in time and distance would be:
    Rodrigues, Mauritius, Reunion, Madagascar, Mozambique/Tanzania (about the same distance) and furthest Mosselbay/South Africa.

    If you simply assume the Rodrigues piece was the first to land around max. 2 months before the Reunion flaperon and the flaperon arrived mid july 2015 (because of its barnacles) and the Mossebay piece arrived shortly before 23 december 2015 (because of its barnacles) it might be possible to assume a minimum/maximum and avarage timescale for all the debris IMO.

    If you take the Rodrigues piece at landing max. 2 months before the flaperon in may 2015 and you calculate the avarage time needed for a piece to reach Mosselbay in mid december 2015 you have a average timeframe of ~7 months in which all the pieces landed.

    If you take the flaperon as a starting point the average timeframe would be ~5 months for all the pieces excluding the Rodrigues and Mauritius pieces.
    If both timeframes aline with the avarage current/drift speeds on the route to Mosselbay it could give an indication IMO.

  5. @Erik Nelson,

    The Kangaroo Island piece was, according to ATSB, determined by Boeing, not to be from a B777.

  6. [deleted by JW. Falken, please don’t put up off-topic links, espeically without explaining what they are. It wastes people’s time.]

  7. @jeffwise – my LAST post here, be SURE; it wasted my time for 30 months;
    you know, people are by design stupid as hell if something like humanity wastes their time
    [deleted by JW. Falken, please don’t put up off-topic links, espeically without explaining what they are. It wastes people’s time.]

Comments are closed.