On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 13:49:05 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"trader_4" wrote in message news:e4aa3ac2-

stuff snipped

I think there is still a reasonable probability that they will
find debris doing the search. But I agree it's also possible that
someone will just come across something floating or washed up on
a beach somewhere. Even that, if it happend months from now, would
be a major step. We'd at least know for sure which general area
it went down in and that it's not being outfitted with bombs in
Pakistan.

There was a news item in the NY Times today that had some interesting things
to say, some of which both of us had already noted (fair use excerpt below):

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/24...arch-plan-for-
malaysia-airlines-flight-370-is-based-on-farther-controlled-flying.html

Investigators have concluded that Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which
veered off course and disappeared on March 8, was probably not seriously
damaged in the air and remained in controlled flight for hours after contact
with it was lost, until it ran out of fuel over the southern Indian Ocean .
. . The altitude readings from the radar now appear to have been inaccurate,
officials said . . . Initial reports about the radar readings suggested that
along the way, the plane soared as high as 45,000 feet . . . But a
comprehensive international review has found that the Malaysian radar
equipment had not been calibrated with enough precision to draw any
conclusions about the aircraft's true altitude. "The primary radar data
pertaining to altitude is regarded as unreliable," said Angus Houston, the
retired head of the Australian military who is now coordinating the search .
. . he said he doubted whether anyone could prove that the plane had soared
and swooped the way the initial reports suggested . . . Martin Dolan, the
chief commissioner of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, agreed with
Mr. Houston. "There's nothing reliable about height," . . .
Other officials involved in the crash investigation have suggested that
either of the plane's pilots might have commandeered the aircraft in order
to commit suicide, or that smoke from a fire in the fuselage might have
overcome the pilots and passengers but left the engines and autopilot
working normally . . . Some investigators are convinced that one of the
pilots was involved . . . But others say that the evidence suggesting pilot
involvement is inconclusive and contradictory . . . the dismissal of the
radar altitude data prompted a change in the focus of the search . . .The
specifics are still being finalized, but the new search zone is likely to be
a band roughly 400 miles long and about 60 miles wide, straddling the arc .
. . The width of the band is based on a crucial assumption: that when it ran
out of fuel, the plane was being flown by its autopilot.
The width of the band is based on a crucial assumption: that when it
ran out of fuel, the plane was being flown by its autopilot, which was
unable to control the plane when the engines stopped. In that case,
the plane would have stalled and fallen quickly into the ocean. If a
skilled pilot was conscious and still at the controls, however, the
plane could have glided more than 100 miles before it hit the water.



Another article I read dismissed "pilot suicide" as being seriously out of
character with suicidal behavior (as in taking 5 hours to commit it) and
with previous incidents of pilot suicide. Meanwhile, "soft" forensic
evidence is probably being nibbled away by crabs and other undersea
scavengers. If they find the craft, there's still no guarantee the wreck
will tell us much more than we already know. At least it will settle our
disagreement about a fire in the cabin, but the remaining evidence may never
tell us, if there was no fire, precisely what *did* happen.