Ocean Infinity presented a new MH370 underwater search proposal to Anthony Loke, the Malaysian Minister of Transport in Kuala Lumpur on 2nd May 2024. Anthony Loke said that based on discussions held on Thursday, the company had submitted a proposal paper along with evidence and information for examination by the relevant parties under his ministry.
Josh Broussard, the Chief Technology Officer, of Ocean Infinity led the team making the presentation, together with their Commercial Manager.
Pete Foley, the former ATSB search director, also attended the meeting in Malaysia. Pete has been campaigning for a new search for several years and is advising Ocean Infinity on the new search.
Prof. Simon Maskell, from Liverpool University, is a scientific advisor to Ocean Infinity and was also in attendance at the meeting. Simon leads a team investigating the possibility of using WSPR to detect and track aircraft. Simon plans to add the WSPR data to the particle filter developed by the Australian Defence Science and Technology Group (DSTG) described in their book titled “Bayesian Methods in the Search for MH370” in order to refine the new MH370 search area.
The new search for MH370 is expected to start in November 2024. Anthony Loke said the whole process of examining the new proposal, including cabinet approval would take about three months. Two representatives of the Association for Families of the Passengers and Crew on board MH370 also attended the meeting. The Association welcomed the new proposal and thanked everyone involved.
I think it would have been quite another matter if the Malaysian Government (Govt) was sincere, had done its best, and come forward to convince the world that it has done all that was possible and expressed its regrets for the lack of answers. It assumed leadership but was unwilling to be accountable and do whatever was necessary. It has over the years not been proactive, and has mostly acted only when media/public/NOK attention and clamor to keep the search alive was intense. It has appeared for many years now that MH370 is a closed chapter for the M Government but it has been reluctant to say so for fear of adverse reaction.
A solemn duty to sponsor and search for ‘credible new evidence’ was never owned up by the Govt. Further, the responsibility to lead and conduct search has been treated as an optional choice to be exercised if and when some search party came up with an offer that appealed to it.
To assuage NOK and keep them at bay, authorities periodically issue statements of concern for closure. When the government does not conclude a search agreement within a reasonable time frame after announcing its intent to resume the search, and remains silent, it just feels like bad faith/deceit and abuse of trust. This is unacceptable. NOKs are rebuilding their lives while learning to live with ‘not knowing’. The struggle to keep the focus on the search for the plane and answers takes its toll,
I believe it is the unrelenting pressure from scientists, academics and public spirited individuals, (such as people in this group and other similar ones), who put forward their expertise, perspectives and safety concerns that will make the difference. It would have been great if the global civil aviation ecosystem were more vocal in pushing for answers but that is perhaps asking for too much. For much of the world it is ‘business as usual’.
Thank you, Richard Godfrey for your persistence, for anchoring this space, and in not giving up dealing with critics. I am no scientist or technologist and can’t possibly make a substantive contribution here. I feel encouraged visiting here once in a while, reading posts and seeing how immersed people are.
@KSNareneran,
Welcome to the blog and many thanks for your kind words!
I am honoured that you, as someone who has suffered personal loss because of the disappearance of MH370. would so eloquently express your grief.
@All,
Here is the official answer from the Malaysian authorities, courtesy Daniel Schurter of watson.ch:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/uf6vekvzqh4awby26z7wz/Malaysia-s-Response-13FEB2025.pdf?rlkey=9ghqrrhwpqqp7ourod9ohdko5&dl=0
Daniel’s article is posted above:
https://www.mh370search.com/2024/05/05/new-search/comment-page-4/#comment-3406
@Richard
Thank you for that official response. One should translate that in terms of what they are actually meaning.. I think the search season is now over. If the schedule was mid-February initially then it will be like mid-March when we could expect something from them. By then there’s no time left to search I’m afraid.
@Mikko,
I agree with you, this is a bad case of lost in translation.
As you say, “mid February” was never communicated and if it was “scheduled”, then it is too late.
On top of that late date for Malaysian approval, we are now informed that the process has now been “temporarily postponed”.
The conclusion is: “the agreement is still undergoing final review by the Attorney General’s Office.”
The agreement has been sitting in the Attorney General’s Office for 8 weeks.
“All pertinent issues” were thoroughly addressed before Anthony Loke made his announcement on 20th December 2024 according to our sources close to the negotiations.
@Richard,
That reply from Lt Kolonel Muhammad Amir Bin Abdullah TUDM is far more “telling” than it at first appears.
Look at who was “Cc’d”.
1. aduan@mot.gov.my = “aduan” translates from Malay to English as “complaint”.
2. azuwan_abubakar@mot.gov.my = Azuwan Bin Abu Bakar who is a “Customer Service Officer” with the “Corporate Communications Unit” of the “Public Relations and Customer Service Section” of the Malaysian Ministry of Transport, as per https://www.mot.gov.my/my/directory/staff?bahagian=Unit+Komunikasi+Korporat&pagetitle=Unit+Komunikasi+Korporat.
The MILITARY of all nations are well known for their perfunctory attitudes towards the media, but in this instance, it appears that the Malaysian MILITARY AAIB (NB: NOT Civilian AAIB) is effectively “fobbing Daniel Schurter off” to the Civilian Ministry of Transport “Complaints Department” for any further action.
That in itself – is telling.
Richard, if you check on VesselFinder, armada 78 06 is departing the Mauritius area and heading southeast with its Destination set to OFFSHORE AUSTRALIA!
@ventus45,
Many thanks for pointing out the fine detail in the email from Lt. Kolonel Muhammad Amir Bin Abdullah TUDM.
Has MH370 been relegated to customer service and the complaints department ?
@Giuseppe,
Welcome to the blog!
Offshore Australia means the MH370 search area. I believe Ocean Infinity are going to search again, with or without an agreement with Malaysia.
@Richard
Thanks for posting this very interesting email. My first impressions are:
(1) So Daniel Schurter emails the Ministry of Transport, but gets a reply from the Air Force!
(2) The author is obviously stonewalling, but he has at least replied in a reasonably timely fashion to an email he could easily have ignored.
(3) Given that the Air Force was believed to be opposed to a new search, the contents are moderately encouraging insofar as they continue the narrative that a search will be happening.
(4) It’s your call of course, but I think you should redact the email addresses – at least while negotiations are still ongoing. If this guy gets bombarded with abusive emails he might use it as an excuse to recommend that Malaysia pulls out.
@Duncan,
The response is from the Air Accidents Investigation Bureau (AAIB) which is part of the Ministry of Transport. Almost all the members of the AAIB are military personnel from the Royal Malaysian Air Force.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/dw2uqw9hlyh39lngnuxvd/Ministry-of-Transport-Malaysia-AAIB-Organisation-Chart.png?rlkey=6lgy2ko25tk58qmurq8fg14kf&dl=0
https://www.mot.gov.my/my/directory/staff?search=Azuwan+Bin+Abu+Bakar
Not sure how relevant this is, but Armada 7806 is in the vicinity of the crash site of South African Airways Flight 295. This could be used for AUV testing for a potential search.
The FDR was not found, it is still there, somewhere, and NEEDS to be recovered. Armada 7806 could do that. The CVR was recovered, but it stopped recording about 80 seconds after the smoke alarm sounded, and was of little value.
Looking at the vessel tracker, it lists Armada 7806’s listed destination as “OFFSHORE AUSTRALIA” with an ETA of 23rd of February 2025.
I am cautiously optimistic that Ocean Infinity has been given the green light by the Malaysian government. Using my previous logic that Ocean Infinity would not waste resources, I assume they are headed for the search area.
I’m not aware of any other projects Ocean Infinity would be involved in, ie. sunken WW2 wrecks in the Indian Ocean.
@Muhamad S.,
I am also cautiously optimistic that Armada 7806 is heading for the MH370 search area. I am much less optimistic that Malaysia has “given the green light”.
I also share your concerns about the “green light” given or not given Malaysian govt.
But assuming that Ocean Infinity doesn’t send its expensive ships to the extremes of the earth willy nilly without a reason, it gives me hope that the MH 370 search is underway.
We shall wait and see around late Feb/early March if the search is successful. I have high hopes that Ocean Infinity will be able to find the wreck given their track record with the Endurance and ARA San Juan.
Looked at where Armada 7806 is currently doing ROV tests. It is within the vicinity of the crash site of South African airways flight 295. Coincidence?
@Jesse Tulloch,
SAA flight 295 crashed at 19.75°S 59.63°E, which is 140 nmi (260 km) East of where Armada 7806 was testing AUVs for the last 5 days.
@All,
Armada 7806 is underway to a destination offshore Australia where it will arrive in 9 days time.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0j3f0jmbnrl2sr339asw9/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-14FEB2025-0540-UTC.png?rlkey=wziq5jvg5xbd1hnfu6x5zrs38&dl=0
The weather in the Indian Ocean is slowly improving but tropical storm Taliah is still producing winds of 95 km/h (59 mph or 51 knots), which is a storm force 10 with very high waves.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/k7zi7lf9hl53c6uzz7irp/MH370-Search-Area-Weather-14FEB2025-0645-UTC.png?rlkey=s5nq5fcw7rtkwsvllpr4s2411&dl=0
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas has commented on the email from the Malaysian authorities on his You Tube channel Airline Daily News:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rovZBz2xveo
MH370: Malaysian Government Accused Of Deceit
0:00 – Understanding MH370’s Investigation
0:18 – Update on Ocean Infinity’s Search Agreement
1:01 – Delays in the Search Process
1:31 – Financial Factors in the Search
2:07 – Concerns Over Information Control
2:36 – Accusations Against the Malaysian Government
3:02 – Impact on Next of Kin
3:18 – Malaysia’s Leadership and Accountability
3:53 – Government’s Responsibility in Search Efforts
4:13 – Statements from Authorities to Next of Kin
4:49 – International Bodies and the Search for MH370
5:05 – Community Engagement in the Search
5:27 – Closing Remarks and Call to Action
@All,
Ocean Infinity took delivery of Armada 8601 on 18th December 2024 following sea trials off the coast of Vietnam in November 2024. The ship was fully certified on 6th January 2025.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5clmu9g1m26ukrkago2qb/Armada-8601-Vessel-Finder-13FEB2025-0917-UTC.png?rlkey=aowecklgif1zku11jyx5pu60o&dl=0
Since 3rd February 2025, Armada 8601’s AIS tracking has not been updated and although this could be due to a maintenance issue with the brand new equipment, it is also possible that the ship is underway.
As of 14th February 2025, it is possible that Armada 8601 is already in the MH370 search area.
When Armada 7806 arrives in the MH370 search area in 9 days time (weather permitting), then it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Ocean Infinity will search with both ships.
@All,
Geoffrey Thomas has published an interview discussing the news of another search for MH370:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvaJ_KsG6Zk
MH370 Update: Armada 7806 Headed For Off-Shore Australia.
So Ocean Infinity have set sail for the search area before a contract is signed. There’s something rather familiar about this situation, but I can’t think what it is…
Regarding Armada 86 01 going dark eleven days ago, I suspect this is just an equipment issue. I don’t see how it could have crossed the South China Sea and passed through the Sunda Strait without being noticed.
@Duncan,
Ocean Infinity’s ship Seabed Constructor left Durban, South Africa for the MH370 search area on 2nd January 2018. The ship made two stops mid ocean to conduct AUV testing off the coast of South Africa.
The Malaysian government signed the 2018 contract on 10th January 2018, when Seabed Constructor was already over 1,000 km (550 nmi) from Durban doing AUV testing at a depth of over 5,330 m.
Seabed Constructor then left the test area on 13th January 2018 at 07:25 UTC to head for the MH370 search area, where it arrived on 21st January 2018 at 11:52 UTC.
The big difference in 2025 is, that Ocean Infinity’s Armada 7806 has completed its AUV testing at Offshore Mauritius and is heading to the MH370 search area at Offshore Australia, without a contract being signed.
I am sure Armada 8601 has been noticed, but it has not been reported by any ship spotters. I hope you are wrong, when you suspect that the brand new ship has an equipment issue. We will see when the AIS tracking starts again.
Dear Richard,
Do you have any knowledge of media presence onboard Armada 7806? If so, I hope it is a credible organisation and not Netflix, whose butchery of the facts, or complete ignorance of them in their “documentary”, have lead to a frustrating amount of misinformation and ridiculous conspiracy theories among the general public as I know you are aware. I cannot count the number of times MH370 has come up in causal conversation amongst people I know, who have absolutely no idea of the facts or circumstances other than what Netflix has put out there for click bait. What a shame.
I have referred many of those people to this blog, which thanks to you has dispelled their misguided opinions. I hope if there is a media presence on board it is a more credible one.
As a member of the flying public, thank you for all you have done, and continue to do, to help give the next of kin the answers they deserve.
@Laura,
Welcome to the blog!
I doubt that there are any media on board Armada 7806. The ship only has a small crew and Ocean Infinity are very media shy.
When I said “equipment issue” I wasn’t suggesting a malfunction. It may have just been turned off to allow the installation of other electrical equipment, or for another reason.
Does anyone reading this know anyone in Vietnam, who may in turn know someone in Vũng Tàu who could just go and see if Armada 86 01 is still there?
Alternatively, Marinetraffic.com is showing a vessel called Monsoon Enabler currently on the adjacent berth. Someone could just ask them.
@Duncan,
That is why I stated that the reason for switching off the AIS system on Armada 8601: “could be due to a maintenance issue” in my comment yesterday above.
As you say, the easy way to find out is to go look at Vung Tau port and ask someone on the Monsoon Enabler, which has been sitting in the port next to Armada 8601’s last known AIS position for the last 90 days.
Armada 86 01 is broadcasting again, and is in the South China Sea just off the coast of Vietnam conducting “sea trials”.
@All,
Sky News Australia with a report: “Former airline pilot criticises delay to new MH370 search.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ON6hI_VXk
Richard,
The mainstream local Malaysia media have not pick up on the latest development – OI is moving ahead to the MH370 crash site..
The delaying tactics is over.
So I wonder what the Malaysian government actions will be now once global news media is focus on the 7th arc in the Indian Ocean..
I think OI at this point does not care at all about contracts with the Malaysian government.
@All,
An update on the MH370 search on Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsTyz7Uw9ak
@All,
Armada 7806 is now 500 nmi from Mauritius, with just under 1,800 nmi to go to the MH370 search area, which will be reached in 7 days time on 23rd February 2025. The ship has slowed a little to 8.6 knots in heavy seas, where the wave height is 2.3 m (7.5 feet) and has currently taken a more southerly course of 137.8° to avoid tropical storm Taliah.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y8979me76duzjcykrj7mm/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-16FEB2025-0818-UTC.png?rlkey=kn2mvyt5ttq3p5lkvozexdks3&dl=0
The search area comprises 3 hots spots, which are shown on the map linked here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7ef0wbnls26rvnlcr6ovi/MH370-Search-Hot-Spots.png?rlkey=0llt1w4tphalnidwcrcxpng2p&dl=0
Ocean Infinity have received input from a number of experts listed here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4688b5gnwhgee698bl1r9/Research-Summary.png?rlkey=pyhdzm6ktp8i34id7melhxhtd&dl=0
Ocean Infinity presented their proposal to the Malaysian Minister of Transport Anthony Loke in May 2024. The meeting was attended by Josh Broussard (Ocean Infinity Chief Technology Officer), Maxime Even (former Ocean infinity Commercial Director), Pete Foley (former ATSB MH370 Project Director), Prof. Simon Maskell (Liverpool University) and representatives of the MH370 next-of-kin. Here is link to the group photo:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w9o8wdgrk6d36hmelq13i/Group-Photo-with-Anthony-Loke-3rd-May-2024.png?rlkey=6j2wrwz4kzi94wn25k9tc90q1&dl=0
@Richard
Does your Vesselfinder.com subscription enable you to see exactly when Armada 78 06 stopped zig-zagging and started heading for the search area? As far as I can tell from what is available for free on Vesselfinder.com and Marinetraffic.com it was between 21:00 UTC and 23:00 UTC on 13 February.
The reason I ask is that you posted the email from the air force colonel at 20:01 UTC on 13 February, just 1-3 hours earlier. It occurs to me that sight of this email might have been the final straw that caused Ocean Infinity to lose patience with the Malaysians and proceed to the search area without a contract.
Two and a half days on, I see the mainstream media still haven’t picked up on this. Time for a follow-up press release?
@Duncan,
You are correct, that Armada 7806 left for the search area on 13th February 2025 at 23:00 UTC.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/f3urtw0tp6v12zncf0qjo/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-13FEB2025-2300-UTC.png?rlkey=h8piz2icf069r78tkcywtw2m2&dl=0
You are also correct, that I published the response from the AAIB on 13th February 2025 at 20:01 UTC (21:01 CET).
Ocean Infinity were already losing patience with Malaysia on the 8th February 2025.
The main stream media are all preparing their stories and checking their sources (BBC, The Times, Le Monde, 60 Minutes Australia, …).
The only main stream media, that has already broadcast this news is Sky News Australia.
I wonder which hotspot OI will search first..
@Jafni,
I expect that Ocean Infinity will start with Captain Blelly and Jean-Luc Marchand’s area at 35.75°S 93.0°E, whilst the weather is still good in the more southern areas.
I assume they will then work their way slowly northwards, where the weather will hopefully remain good for a few weeks longer.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search on Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PTfAlvtYOg
We show the latest track of Armada 7806 to the search area and list the experts who are advising Ocean Infinity and the experts who supported their presentation to the Malaysian authorities.
The 3 hots spots that are the current search focus are shown and other hot spots are discussed.
Good morning Richard,
Like most people who visit your website, I am regularly checking back for updates and watching the videos that are being produced by Geoffrey Thomas, keep up the good work with keeping us informed.
If the aircraft is found, how much information will Ocean Infinity release to the general public in your opinion? For example, the location, photograph’s, video’s, details of the wreckage and so on.
We are aware that the wreckage can’t be disturbed, but without a search agreement being signed with the Malaysians, I’m interested to know just how much information Ocean Infinity would be willing to share with the general public, with lots of us looking on intensely.
@Gary Moore,
In a statement dated 20th December 2024, Ocean Infinity CEO Oliver Plunkett said the Malaysian government’s decision was “great news”, adding: “We look forward to sharing further updates in the new year once we’ve finalised the details and the team gets ready to go.”
If the aircraft is found, how much information Ocean Infinity will release to the general public, is dependent on whether an agreement has been signed with the Malaysian authorities by then and the terms and conditions agreed for public release of information.
Personally I expect that no agreement with restrictive clauses is signed and Ocean Infinity are free to share “further updates” as they choose.
@ Gary Moore,
I was also asking the same thing to myself.
The local mainstream media in Malaysia have not reported on OI’s current journey to MH370 search area..
Without any sign agreements, I do wonder how the Malaysian government would react once MH370 is found..
It could be an embarrassment to the Malaysian government because the contract signing has been delayed the past few months..
@All,
An excellent article by Jay Gates dated 31st January 2025 titled “Wharf Talk: multi-role offshore support vessel – ARMADA 78 08”. Pictures courtesy of ‘Dockrat’, a ship spotter from South Africa and frequent contributor to Africa Ports & Ships maritime news.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tmmiraumjxmpgpp3vw03n/Wharf-Talk-by-Dockrat-and-Jay-Gates-31JAN2025.pdf?rlkey=hilmj5mlmg26eehpf1k4ieoov&dl=0
The article describes the link between Armada 7808 and Armada 7806 and the search for MH370.
@All,
Armada 7806 has reached S26’32” and appears to have changed course from a south east track to a more easterly track. The path of the tropical storm,’Taliah’ is to the south west and the change in course should take Armada 7806 north of the worst of the weather.
@Godfrey Jack,
Many thanks for the update on Armada 7806:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0lojsh6rauettyplyurp8/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-16FEB2025-1929-UTC.png?rlkey=tx4724dkmdwy6wv7urqeoen5k&dl=0
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search on Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26B7Jo-RYVc
0:00 – Update on Search Progress for MH370
0:52 – Weather Updates Impacting Search Route
2:07 – Confirming Accuracy of Search Information
4:54 – Understanding Legal Responsibilities for Wreckage
5:53 – Equipment and Technology for Finding MH370
7:04 – Legal Permissions Needed for Recovery
7:48 – What Will Be Found at the Crash Site
8:47 – Comparing Findings with Air France 447
10:56 – Conclusion and Call to Action
How likely is it that the FDR and CVR will be recovarable and readable, and what agency would be taking on decoding the FDR Data. Would it be the Malaysian investigative authorities, or the aircrafts manufacturuer Boeing, or the maker of the black box Honeywell?
@Jesse Tulloch,
The FDR and CVR will be recoverable and readable. These recorders are designed to withstand a crash and the memory is non-volatile and is still readable after 10 years.
Recovering the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) will reveal the actual flight path of MH370 and might possibly show that the radar trace presented to the families at the Hotel Lido in Beijing was faked.
Officers from the Malaysian Air Force wanted to board the Ocean Infinity vessel Seabed Constructor on 8th February 2018, when it docked in Fremantle, Australia, in an attempted coup to take over the investigation of the disappearance of MH370.
The Malaysian military want to get their people on board, control the search, take custody of the FDR, CVR and other evidence, as well as control what information is made public.
Many believe that Malaysia does not have a similar capability as the NTSB (US), AAIB (UK) or BEA (France) to perform a thorough analysis of the FDR, CVR and items recovered from the main MH370 wreckage site. Ocean Infinity has the capability of salvaging such items and the previous 2018 contract contained an agreed list of items the Malaysians wanted recovered.
In order for the MH370 investigation to be completed in a credible manner, it is crucial that the ICAO Annex 13 Accredited Partners remain fully involved and under the direction of the ICAO:
Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) United Kingdom
Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) Australia
Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité d l’aviation civile (BEA) France
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) USA
@Jesse
The case of MH370, is, by the overwhelming preponderance of circumstantial evidence, clearly a criminal event, and as such, the wreck site is not an accident site, but a crime scene.
Therefore, the CVR and FDR (when recovered) MUST be passed to the French Judicial Authorities, because:
(a) France is the only legal jurisdiction with both an open and active valid criminal investigation (from very early on),
(b) France already holds the most important item of physical evidence so far secured as physical evidence (the flaperon),
(c) France is the only unbiased and uncompromised legal jurisdiction involved in the case, since all other parties involved may have many reasons to ensure that the recorders are found (by them) to contain nothing of evidential value.
Therefore, the FDR and CVR must never, not under any circumstances, fall into the hands of any authority other than the French Judicial Authorities.
Therefore, immediately they are located, the French Judicial Authorities MUST be notified of that fact, and the finder must do nothing further, unless or until so directed by the French Judicial Authorities, who will no doubt travel to the scene as quickly as possible, to recover and secure the items, to ensure the preservation of the chain of custody of the evidence.
@ventus45,
I agree that BEA would be the best candidate to analyse the FDR and CVR.
Personally, I would like the ICAO to take over the investigation into the cause of the disappearance of MH370. The ICAO could arrange for the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité d l’aviation civile (BEA) in France to do the analysis.
BEA did a thorough job of investigating AF447 and pointing out the cause of that accident and taking steps to remedy the failings.
The French authorities opened two investigations. A criminal investigation for manslaughter against Air France and Airbus, as well as a technical investigation aimed at safety improvements.
The criminal cases against Air France and Airbus were dropped in 2019 and 2011 respectively.
In accordance with the provisions of ICAO Annex 13, the BEA participated in the investigation as representative for the state (country) of manufacture of the Airbus. The Brazilian Air Force’s Aeronautical Accidents Investigation and Prevention Center (CENIPA), the German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU), the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) also became involved.
On 5th July 2012, BEA released its final report on the accident, blaming a temporary inconsistency between the measured speeds, likely as a result of the obstruction of the pitot tubes by ice crystals, which caused an autopilot disconnection. The crew failed to respond to the situation and were taken by surprise to the sudden events and stall warning.
The pitot tube problems primarily occurred in 2007 on the A320, but awaiting a recommendation from Airbus, Air France delayed installing new pitot tubes on A330/A340 and increasing the pitot tube inspection frequencies on these aircraft. Pitot tubes now include heaters to prevent obstruction by ice crystals and a warning system for the crew, if the heaters fail.
@All,
Armada 7806 is making good progress despite heavy seas and having to avoid tropical storm Taliah.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/lmdcenrc50wol2swqhl99/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-18FEB2025-0645-UTC.png?rlkey=07ehthpz6xtzuiwe9v6xs7dgx&dl=0
Fortunately the storm is predicted to die out in the next couple of days, but the sea swell will take some time to settle back down.
The wave height is currently 3.5 m (11.5 feet) with a moderate breeze of 15 knots. The swell forced Armada 7806 to slow down to 4 knots and change course earlier this morning at 06:00 UTC for around 40 minutes, but the ship is now back to its Easterly course at a full speed of around 10 knots.
@Duncan,
Many thanks for the update on Armada 8601.
Armada 8601 left Vung Tau port last night for sea trials in the South China Sea. It is showing restricted movement at the moment in an area where the water depth is only 20 m. I suspect they are testing the ship’s positioning system, which is designed to hold the position very accurately over a defined location.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mmd5ijyts4awjtb9iw1g0/Armada-8601-Vessel-Finder-18FEB2025-0731-UTC.png?rlkey=weyhui32ad5pkxgtpmz7bmzs5&dl=0
@All,
An article titled “MH370 Search – Is the New Ocean Infinity Search About to Begin?” by Len Varley in Aviation Source news:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gjxpw8k1pc3flutbs2x3j/MH370-Search-Is-the-New-Ocean-Infinity-Search-About-to-Begin.pdf?rlkey=7okj4db6rl1mdszyz0vzt67wn&dl=0
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZfy8um3Oeo
The 15 Ocean Infinity ships currently in operation globally are listed here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/96xxr1wijxkxpypu2x71f/Ocean-Infinity-Ships.png?rlkey=gljut6inhkxb5iuoriye6n1ew&dl=0
The 21 AUVs and 26 ROVs Ocean Infinity currently have in operation globally are listed here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ggpntekvtlsqonh5rejvn/Ocean-Infinity-Equipment.png?rlkey=el4ep0n5le13576ka3ner99in&dl=0
The recent operations conducted by Ocean Infinity are listed here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5q8cbq05x1mql5q9k2x7x/Ocean-Infinity-Current-Ships-and-Equipment.png?rlkey=ibb3uz8znglhxnoqwy1g4i8uh&dl=0
Ocean Infinity are well equipped to search for MH370 and I believe they will be successful in the upcoming search.
Please note that the deployment of equipment between the ships changes regularly, depending on the requirements for each project.
When debris field of AF447 was finally located with an AUV operated by M/V Alucia, The A330 wreckage was found at a location of just 5NM from its’ last known position. Also, wreckage had ended up on a patch of more or less featureless seafloor, surrounded nearby by very challenging underwater topography, practically underwater mountains.
Also, aircraft had hit the ocean with practically zero forward velocity, pancaking all the way down. Nevertheless, airframe of Airbus was seriously fragmented and disintegrated at ocean bottom along some 400 meter long trail. Of both engines, practically all that remained, was the engine core and fan structure. Best preserved, not surprisingly, were the landing gear.
Now, it is known, that this Malaysian B777 has at present knowledge come down at a zone in Southern Indian Ocean, where underwater topography is equally challenging in places, if not even more so. Also, at least some pieces of wreckage, that have been found on East African shores, have originated from very innards of the aircraft (passenger compartment panels etc.).
All this may mean, that capability of search assets to be deployed by OI, to resolve seriously fragmented debris field of a B777 from among very difficult ocean floor topography, may well turn out to be the defining factor, whether the mystery of MH370 will finally come to end.
Even factor of pure luck cannot be totally disregarded. But as the old saying goes, “only the skilful tend to be blessed with good luck”. Anticipating the caliber of Ocean Infinity’s resources to be used, let it be that way also now.
@Richard,
Long time follower of this website. Thank you so much for all of the time and work you have put in to pushing for the search and discovery of MH370.
Do you know how much more capable the current fleet of AUVs and ROVs that Ocean Infinity is using during this search are compared to the previous search? Are these vehicles a significant improvement in capability, resolution, etc.? Or is it basically the same technology as last time but just searching new areas?
Thank you for all of your time and work on WSPR, can’t wait to see how that data compares to the final resting spot of MH370!
@All,
9 News Australia on the new search for MH370 by Ocean Infinity, with or without Malaysia’s agreement:
https://www.9news.com.au/national/mh370-search-ocean-infinity-mission-about-to-kick-off-in-indian-ocean/5f63c5ea-3291-448a-a48c-47ba71aa2888
MH370 next-of-kin Danica Weeks and Geoffrey Thomas or Airline News are interviewed.
That’s the first report in what I would describe as the mainstream media to state that a ship is en route to the search area, but without a contract.
Hopefully the story will get some traction now, and the Malaysians will have to either sign up, or explain why they are unwilling to do so.
“Still reviewing the contract” just won’t cut it any more.
@Richard Godfrey
“This new search was brought about by work done by UK aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey, who has developed a new revolutionary tracking system using amateur radio waves,” Thomas said.
There’s no indication that WSPR analysis is the “new credible evidence”. Given your past comments about the Malaysians (which I mostly agree with), you and Thomas if anyone should understand that the fact that they may have agreed to a new search is not based on any good faith re-assessment of new “evidence”. So I don’t understand what is the point of overselling your position/influence in the media like this.
@Puuhöylä,
What do you think is the “new credible evidence” that Anthony Loke referenced in his recent press conference?
Why do you think Prof. Simon Maskell was at the meeting with Anthony Loke in May 2024, where Ocean Infinity first presented their proposal for a new MH370 search?
Why do you think my name is listed by Ocean Infinity on their Research Summary presented to the next of kin at their last MH370 remembrance event?
Why do you think Liverpool University is listed by Ocean Infinity on their Research Summary presented to the next of kin at their last MH370 remembrance event?
Why do you think Ocean Infinity joined a 2 hour video conference call with Prof. Simon Maskell and myself, where we presented our WSPR findings?
Why do you think Prof. Simon Maskell and his team at Liverpool University joined a 2 hour presentation I gave on my WSPR Software Walk Through?
Why do you think Prof. Simon Maskell, Dr. Hannes Coetzee and I have published several papers together explaining the WSPR technology and how it can be used to help find MH370?
I am not trying to sell or oversell anything.
My research into MH370 and WSPR technology is entirely self funded.
@Richard Godfrey
“Why do you think Prof. Simon Maskell was at the meeting with Anthony Loke in May 2024, where Ocean Infinity first presented their proposal for a new MH370 search?”
Was he invited by OI or the Malaysians? Wasn’t he there as an advisor to OI? All your other points also relate to decisions made by OI, not the Malaysians. And despite this, the WSPR spot was not included in the last public proposal by OI (March 2024).
Why do you think it makes sense for the Malaysians to demand “new credible evidence” for a no-find-no-fee search? And if it makes no sense, why do you think that when this ridiculous demand is dropped (as may be the case now), it’s done in good faith based on actual new evidence? Why do you think that your WSPR analysis has been around since 2021 (about as long as they’ve used the “new credible evidence” excuse) and it was only assessed as “new credible evidence” in 2024-25? Why have the Malaysians never stated that WSPR is the “new credible evidence”?
@Puuhöylä,
So you freely admit that you do not know what Anthony Loke meant by “Credible New Evidence”.
It is rather obvious that Ocean Infinity invited Prof. Simon Maskell to the meeting with Anthony Loke as their scientific advisor on MH370.
It is rather obvious that the Malaysians are playing games.
Simon tells me that WSPR was discussed at length in the meeting.
Ocean Infinity have not made the details of their proposal in May 2024 public and Simon is limited in what he can say publicly by a confidentiality agreement.
@Richard Godfrey
“So you freely admit that you do not know what Anthony Loke meant by “Credible New Evidence”.”
Yes, because I don’t think he’s referring to any actual “new evidence” when he says that, because I don’t think that the demand for “new credible evidence” was ever made in good faith in the first place (it was only an excuse to delay a search contract). You disagree?
You basically want to have it both ways: that the Malaysians are “playing games” (meaning that the “new credible evidence” demand was an excuse to delay a search all along?). But also that now in 2024-25 they have assessed that your WSPR analysis is the “new credible evidence” they were sincerely waiting for?
@Puuhöylä,
Ocean Infinity, as it appears to most observers, made their proposal in good faith.
Ocean Infinity, like most observers, took the statement by Anthony Loke on 20th December 2024 in good faith, that the Malaysian government had agreed “in principle” to their proposal.
In a statement on 20th December 2024, Ocean Infinity CEO Oliver Plunkett said the Malaysian government’s decision was “great news”, adding: “We look forward to sharing further updates in the new year once we’ve finalised the details and the team gets ready to go.”
It has since become apparent to Ocean Infinity and most observers, that the Malaysians are playing games.
Every one, except you, appears to recognise that change and the new situation.
@Richard Godfrey
I’m sorry but once again you’re not addressing the points I made.
“Every one, except you, appears to recognize that change and the new situation.”
The “change” between December 20 and now?
You list ways in which you think OI has acted in good faith. Where have I questioned this? I was talking about the Malaysians.
It’s like that time last May when I questioned whether your results were statistically significant in the individual WSPR studies. You gaslighted in the replies until you eventually blocked my last reply. Even your co-author stated in the following email exchange that the point I raised was valid, while you never made any further comment in public or in private.
https://www.mh370search.com/2022/10/28/oe-fgr-case-study/comment-page-1/#comment-2738
@All,
Armada 7806 appears to have altered course again this afternoon, back onto a south easterly track. This route should allow it to pass behind the tropical storm, ‘Taliah’.
There can be little doubt that the vessel is headed for the MH370 search area.
@Godfrey Jack,
Armada 7806 has indeed altered course after passing storm Taliah.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xivjxo3iir0mm9rctrfzg/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-18FEB2025-1915-UTC.png?rlkey=g0gptdh91sdc6cfxjbh39emhz&dl=0
The ship is now on a course of 111.7°T towards the search area defined by the UWA drift analysis at 32.5°S 96.5°E.
Have you noticed the new tropical storm brewing that the models have passing near the search area early next week
Those of us tracking Armada 7806 should not be surprised if the AIS data is suddenly turned off and it could remain that way for several hours or days.
@Godfrey Jack
I would go further than that. Until such time as Ocean Infinity have a contract, it would make sense for Armada 78 06 to be permanently dark so as not to provide competitors with any information about where they have searched and where they have not.
@Duncan
That is idiotic.
It’s not a “competition”.
There are substantial humanitarian issues at the core of this, let alone the technical.
The search is an international collegiate effort from just about everyone (officialdom excluded) from oceanographers to beach searchers to engineers to pilots to researchers to sailors, and many others.
This is NOT about money.
OI isn’t in it for the money.
As a business plan, it is an accountant’s no-go nightmare, huge expense, high risk, low expected Sterling return (if any).
@ventus45
Perhaps you missed the news that Ocean Infinity want $70m if they’re successful? So, like most things in life, it’s very much about money.
And for what it’s worth, I think your inability to debate without an opening insult says more about you than it does about me.
@Duncan,
You are the one missing the point, entirely.
The $70m is neither here nor there in the overall scheme of things.
OI knew that there was a low probability of success way back in 2018, and they know there is a somewhat better, but still (realistically) low probability of success now.
OI aren’t after the money, as in a profit making sense.
That $70m is probably not even up to what they have already spent, and will spend, by the time the search is finished, one way or the other.
That $70m would be a nice little recompense for their outlays to date, and foreseen, but OI have already written off the “sunk costs” (no pun intended) to get this far, as an investment.
They aren’t expecting “a return on investment” in dollars.
@ventus45, @Duncan,
OI have always stated up until recently, that they will not search for MH370 without an agreement with Malaysia.
That position has now changed and they are once again enroute to the MH370 search area without an agreement with Malaysia as of 19th February 2025.
Of course, Malaysia may sign in the next 4 days, but I do not believe that is realistic.
From an accountants point of view, if OI finds MH370, the marketing value will make them a household name.
The searches for MH370 are very expensive for Ocean Infinity and way beyond the usual marketing budget.
Without the prospect of recovering $70M, this is philanthropy with a marketing value, but not business.
@All,
Armada 7806 has increased speed to over 11 knots and having avoided storm Taliah is now on a more South Easterly course to the MH370 search area.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/rrvnhy5532y8yvoxrcgfm/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-19FEB2025-0711-UTC.png?rlkey=zv70ut785ypvpdarn6dc33w2n&dl=0
Some observers have questioned whether Armada 7806 will go directly to Fremantle, Australia.
I do not believe this to be the case:
1. Offshore Australia is still the official destination.
2. A direct route to Fremantle at the current speed would mean arriving on 27th February. The port of Fremantle does not have Armada 7806 on its list of expected arrivals in February.
3. Armada 7806 has an operational endurance of between 21 and 35 days depending on payload and type of operation. As the ship left Mauritius on 8th February 2025, it can stay at sea up until 15th March.
This still leaves up to 15 days in the MH370 search area before a port call for supplies, refuelling and possibly crew change is required.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/jvucbec6zgjv3ukdnvrze/Fremantle-Expected-Arrivals-February-2025.png?rlkey=1hwo5tgv4qlglsp1dpqjpc7gm&dl=0
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBZvUN2gBCc
@All,
Armada 7806 is around 750 nmi from the MH370 search area and will arrive on Sunday 23rd February 2025 as planned:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/90ny36qgfk7341zpyubrt/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-20FEB2025-0732-UTC.png?rlkey=0lz8mru11e09wv7lmwwdm561a&dl=0
The current course of 119° in the direction South East will take Armada 7806 to the hot spot proposed by Captain Patrick Blelly and Jean-Luc Marchand. Their proposed search area is around 35.7°S 93.0°E, where the water depth is 4,200 m.
Armada 7806 is making 11.2 knots, which is slightly over its maximum economic speed of 10 knots, so it will use a little more fuel. The ship’s draught has reduced from 5.0 m to 4.8 m, as fuel is used, the ship’s weight reduces and it sits slightly higher in the water.
The weather in the search area is dominated by a high pressure zone 1024 hPa (mb), surface temperature is 16°C (61° F), a gentle breeze at 10 knots from the South and high humidity at 75%. The wave height is still 2.4 m (7.9 feet), but is forecast to reduce in the coming days.
@All,
Malaysian TV news has reported the Transport Minister Anthony Loke as saying: “”We have yet to sign the contract. The contract is still with the attorney-general and the terms should be finalised in the next few days”:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/52cdp2zeft5ozygbbhzie/Malaysia-Kini-News-19FEB2025.png?rlkey=2iagvvssvraiwcj5vbj4vwkc9&dl=0
The report has not yet been confirmed by other media channels, either in Malaysia or internationally.
We have asked Ocean Infinity if there is any substance to the report and if so, what terms and conditions have been agreed.
The political landscape in Malaysia is constantly changing. The former PM Najib Razak has been released from prison and is now under house arrest. The three-member bench ruled 2-1 to grant Najib Razak’s appeal to use the former King’s decree to argue his case before the High Court. Malaysia’s pardons board, at the time chaired by then-King Al-Sultan Abdullah Ahmad Shah, agreed in February last year to halve Najib’s jail sentence to six years from 12 and reduce fines imposed on him, prompting public uproar. The 71-year-old Najib, who was jailed over the multibillion-dollar 1MDB scandal, had appealed a lower court decision last July that dismissed his bid to confirm the existence of and execute a royal order that he said entitled him to house arrest.
The Attorney General’s office on behalf of the current government is seeking to challenge an Appeal Court decision that ruled in favour of imprisoned former leader Najib Razak last month.
The agreement between Malaysia and Ocean Infinity is still sitting in the same Attorney General’s office.
Today, thanks to Mr. Trise, we have designed a dedicated webpage to follow OI Armada 78-06 ship’s progress.
It is available here: https://www.mh370-caption.net/index.php/armada-tracking/
The ship’s progress is updated at 30 minutes past every hour with a time difference of 1h30. The search and searched zones are also illustrated.
This will work as long as the AIS is available !
Thankyou Mr. Trise (and no doubt many others behind the scenes).
That is a stunningly good resource which I am sure will be very much appreciated (and heavily used) by many people who want MH370 found.
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZOji8ofv8o
The focus today is on the Malaysian breaking news and the equipment that Ocean Infinity have on board Armada 7806 and plan to deploy in the search for MH370.
@All,
Another great website to recommend is the Ocean Infinity News and Update FB page:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063595806055
This is not an official Ocean Infinity FB page, but closely follows their work, the MH370 search and other oceanic research.
I particularly like this BBC News report they posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiX7Q3TfSlU
The BBC reports from on board an Armada ship out at sea.
The report was filmed both on board and live via satellite link in the Remote Control Centre in Southampton, UK.
@All,
Armada 7806 is around 500 nmi from the MH370 search area and will arrive on Sunday 23rd February 2025 as planned:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zmzspoc3ui3p0ecljwk5u/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-21FEB2025-0532-UTC.png?rlkey=5b4309znnmp293dxvtz3o8bci&dl=0
Armada 7806 is heading for the Captain Patrick Blelly and Jean-Luc Marchand hot spot first:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7ssfiu39r2g02kegypdmc/Hot-Spots-Progress-21FEB2025.png?rlkey=8yllcmxsdn6kkx9s5f3o6mc72&dl=0
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8kjdeayAt4
In today’s update we discuss the MH370 search history and the science and technology behind defining the current search area.
@Puuhöylä,
As was the case last May, I do not follow your logic.
My co-author Simon wrote an email explaining what we failed to understand on 29th May 2024.
“I am conscious that I am coming to this conversation late and I sense we come from different backgrounds such that we are using language in ways that the other is not used to but I also hope I can us all understand what is going on. Unfortunately, I can only make a start on helping us reach such a common understanding by asking you some questions. I hope that’s ok.
Indeed, there are a couple of things in your email that I’m struggling to get my head around. First off, I don’t understand why you are considering a (folded) normal as a baseline. While such a distribution would match the moments of the distribution of interest, my conclusion from looking at the SNR values is that they are certainly not normally distributed. I’m therefore unclear as to what you are hoping to infer from analysing the data relative to data simulated to be normally distributed (rather than just focus on the data that we actually have). Can you clarify what insights you hope to derive from considering the normally distributed simulated data?
I wonder if this is a related query, but I sense I don’t really understand what you mean when you refer to one distribution being weaker than another and/or what a weak control group and fairly average test group means. Again, can you explain what you mean?”
You replied in a private email:
“Note the difference between ”SNR value” and ”SNR anomaly value”. I agree that the former is not normally distributed, and I’m not making that assumption in this analysis. I use the folded normal as a baseline of comparison for the anomaly values, because the way it is formed is similar (distance in SDs from the mean).
So the question to me then becomes: can the true distribution be significantly weaker than the normal. By ”weaker” I mean that the values are closer to zero and the resulting AUC therefore below 0.5 when the true distribution is compared against the normal.
I’m open to the possibility that this can be the case. I’m only saying that my (limited) attempts to experimentally create such a distribution have failed, so I wonder if there’s a mathematical reason I’m unaware of that makes it impossible.
I can write a more detailed explanation of this in the evening, but I hope this short reply helps clarifying my argument.”
Simon responded:
“If the true distribution were heavy tailed, then relative to a normal that matched the first two moments, you’d end up with more values that were closer (relative to the standard deviation) to the mean and a small number of values that were many standard deviations away from the mean. Empirically, I recall the distribution being relatively heavy tailed. Theoretically, I don’t have a strong view as to why this comes about, but I’d guess it was because there are some physical effects that have a big influence on SNR and that they don’t average out in the way that would result in normally distributed data.”
You replied:
“Thank you for the suggestion, I tried it and it actually works.”
Please stop your false accusations that we are “gaslighting” or “blocking” you.
I have even posted your false accusations, so I would hardly call that blocking.
It was the same last May, we did not understand the point you are trying to make.
We engaged in a discussion offline, which was resolved to your satisfaction.
Now you are complaining about us entering an offline dialogue to clarify the matter.
Let us also please take the present discussion offline.
@Richard
A couple of questions for either here and/or your next chat with Geoffrey Thomas:
(1) Do you think the Attorney General’s Office’s preoccupation with the political events you describe in your 20 February 2025 at 11:08 post above could be a genuine reason for their failure to complete the contract review in a timely fashion?
Given that the wreckage isn’t going anywhere and the Malaysians are at best divided and lukewarm about searching for it, they probably regarded the review as low priority – at least until Armada 78 06 set sail for the search area.
(2) Regarding OI’s 2018 search, when that ended was any official reason given as to why it wasn’t left open for either OI or someone else to resume it the following season?
@Duncan,
I do not believe that the Attorney General’s Office’s preoccupation with the political events is a genuine reason for the Malaysian’s not having signed an agreement with Ocean Infinity as of the time of writing this comment on 22nd February 2025.
Ocean Infinity presented their proposal in May 2024, both from a technical standpoint by Josh Broussard (CTO) and from a commercial standpoint by Maxime Even (former Commercial Director).
Malaysia has had 9 months to review the proposal so far.
I am reliably informed from sources close to the negotiations, that the terms and conditions were agreed prior to Anthony Loke’s announcement on 20th December 2024, where he stated that the Malaysian government had “agreed in principle” to sign the agreement, but just needed to “finalise the terms and conditions”.
The fact is that the Attorney General’s Office has not finalised their review of the contract in the 64 days since 20th December 2024.
The previous Ocean Infinity search in 2018 was approved by Malaysia for 90 days.
Ocean Infinity started in the search area on 21st January 2018 and finished on 7th June, an elapsed time of 137 days.
There were 3 transits to Fremantle for crew change, provisions and refuelling totalling 29 days.
There was time lost recovering an ROV, which was “wet stored”.
Ocean Infinity left the search area in 2018, simply because the agreed time of 90 days had expired and without any official comment from the Malaysian authorities as to future plans.
@Richard
Thanks for your reply. I have to say how much I admire the way you diligently reply to almost everyone. I wouldn’t have the stamina.
The delay is actually two delays. In my opinion the more egregious is the seven and a half months it took from OI’s presentation in May until Loke’s announcement in December that the cabinet had agreed in principle. As I recall, this was supposed to take three months.
The less serious delay is the two months it’s taken for the AG’s Office to review the contract. I think one month should have been more than sufficient, but two months isn’t completely unreasonable if they had just been tasked with other political cases that they regarded as more pressing. It was this second delay that was the subject of my earlier question.
I’ve just watched today’s video and was especially interested in the rectangular white flotsam shown from 8:02. Where exactly was this, and do the dimensions (especially the length/width ratio) match anything that was subsequently found, or any whole part that may have come from a 777?
@Duncan,
Many thanks for your kind words.
Both the delays you mention are unacceptable in my experience of international negotiations.
The white flotsam was spotted by the RNZAF Orion on 28th March 2014 at 04:48:07 UTC. The co-ordinates are given on the attached screen shot as 32° 31.22’ S 097° 44.54’ E. I analysed the picture and the dimensions fit a flaperon. At the time I concluded it could be a flaperon from MH370.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4bgfxfeknhbxyirejzwps/RNZAF-Target-Screen-Shot-28MAR2014-044807-UTC.png?rlkey=ac9gssmulmhzxoh4hoe489g45&dl=0
Duncan Bosworth from the ATSB provided AMSA search data from 2014 under a confidentiality agreement.
I have received the detailed onboard computer data for the RNZAF MH370 SAR sortie by the Orion P-3C aircraft (NZ4204 ICAO:C87F0A) of 5 Squadron on 28th March 2014. The NZDF Mission Start Date-Time included the briefing and started on 27th March 2014 at 21:43:25 UTC and the estimated time of departure from Pearce AFB was planned 28th March 2014 00:00 UTC.
The aircraft took off from Pearce AFB just before the planned time and the actual position on 28th March 2014 00:00 UTC was at 31.707754S 115.726430E overhead a point just north of Burns Beach on the coast of Western Australia 30 km north of Perth.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h2wa09mkfez70qn4mhlhl/RNZAF-Orion-P-3-Return-to-Pearce-AFB-28032014-18235267.jpeg?rlkey=1lq1gvt2hu23bdrf8wbffhf8n&dl=0
I am also grateful for the help of Brian Anderson, from the IG, who obtained the RNZAF flight data and photo library under a Freedom Of Information request. I have 183 high resolution pictures of items of possible debris.
Bernard Lagan reported the story in The Times on 27th March 2016.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/s49q3l498gwcaf5fhqk4r/Times-27032016-Bernard-Lagan.pdf?rlkey=kvslvr6ufloxc2az0z1g1hk1m&dl=0
@Duncan – After the 2018 search was completed, Malaysia’s final SIR report could be published end of July 2018. The report had been delayed for that. By early 2019, Independent Group consolidated on their new recommended hot spot 34s…part of the purpose of that hot spot choice was OI was stating intertest in continuing search. I would reflect that Ocean Infinity’s 2018 search was extremely successful in terns of ruling out a great number of proposed “hot spots” near Arc7, so there was some need to go back to the “drawing board” . We have really been waiting almost 6-7 years, but it is not clear that OI’s new fleet was available all that time. In 2018, I supported the close-to-Arc7 assumption, today I do not think so.
@TBill, thanks for the info.
@Richard
OK, so if we assume that the rectangular white flotsam was from MH370, where does the drift analysis put it twenty days earlier? (Apologies if that question has already been asked and answered elsewhere in the blog.)
I don’t have any knowledge of the subject, but intuitively drift analysis over twenty days seems much more likely to be accurate than drift analysis over sixteen months.
Let’s hope that this search is successful in locating the wreckage, in order to help bring closure for the families and friends of the passengers and crew, but also as a matter of respect for those civilians who died that day.
Given that Armada 7806 is registered in Singapore, that the event or decision that caused Captain Shah to fail to contact Ho Chi Minh ATC took place as the aircraft was about to leave Singapore’s FIR (delegated to KL), and that it was Singapore who nudged Malaysia to declare the aircraft missing (following a query from Hong Kong ATC), it would seem most appropriate if the recovery and analysis of any data could be performed by Singporean authorities.
If Singapore currently lacks the technological capacity and expertise to do so, perhaps that situation could be remedied before Armada 7806 completes its search.
@TommyL,
If the accident occurred in a location under the jurisdiction of Singapore, then they would be the “state of occurrence” of the accident.
Malaysia is the “state of registration” of the aircraft.
Australia may prove to be the state where wreckage is found.
France is the state where there are ongoing criminal proceedings.
US is the state where the aircraft was manufactured.
UK is the state where the engines were manufactured.
These are plenty of reasons for the ICAO to take over the investigation and involve Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, France, US and UK as they see fit.
Re:These are plenty of reasons for the ICAO to take over the investigation and involve Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, France, US and UK as they see fit.
I agree that an international co-operative investigation would be much better than a more parochial approach.
Also, the passengers and exporting businesses had legal air transport contracts on a flight to Beijing. Some of these contracts were with Malaysia Airlines, and others were with China Southern Airlines, code share CZ748.
As the nation that suffered the highest number of deaths, China should, arguably, be at the top or close to the top of any list of participating stakeholders in any international co-operative investigation.
@All,
Armada 7806 is around 300 nmi from the MH370 search area and will arrive on Sunday 23rd February 2025 at around 20:00 UTC (Monday 03:00 local time) as planned:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8r8su9bkq9i9cqvcpql00/Armada-7806-Vessel-Finder-22FEB2025-0742-UTC.png?rlkey=h56r82wnxm15wp2vnnp7mg2zm&dl=0
Armada 7806 is no longer heading for the Captain Patrick Blelly and Jean-Luc Marchand hot spot first, but is currently heading for the IG high priority area first as of 22FEB2025 11:00 UTC.
There are a large number of Chinese fishing vessels in the vicinity of the MH370 search area and Armada 7806 had to take avoiding action earlier today, possibly due to fishing nets or lines.
With the large number of fishing vessels permanently in the area, which are serviced by several mother ships, it is surprising that none observed the crash of MH370 in 2014.
The fishing vessels were a problem for Ocean Infinity back in 2018, let us hope that these vessels do not get in the way of the current search.
Richard,
After the 15 days of searching at IG hotspot and MH370 is still not found, I wonder how OI would informed the experts of IG hotspot before moving on to Blelly/Marchand and WSPR..
Hi Richard,
Not been on the page for a few weeks but do you have any details you can share on the latest.
>Has the search resumed?
>If so, when did the search vessel arrive at the search location
>What is the total expected duration in days to cover the full search area?
Thanks,
Chris
@Chris L.,
The search for MH370 has resumed.
Armada 7806 arrived in the MH370 search area on 23rd February 2025 at 20:30 UTC and launched the first AUV on 24th February 2025 at 03:00 UTC.
Ocean Infinity has estimated the full search area at 15,000 km2.
They have so far covered between 860 km2 and 1,040 km2 in 4.6 operational days on site.
Armada 7806 is currently on the way to Fremantle, Australia for provisions, refuelling and crew change.
It returns to the search area on 11th March 2025.
We can expect at least another 17 operational days on site, but Ocean Infinity want to search until they find MH370.
The proposed contract with Malaysia, which is still not signed, foresees an 18 month timeframe.
Thanks for the information again Richard.
I hope the find the aircraft on this time 🤞
@All,
An update today on the MH370 search from Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUHnOAPJGrs
In today’s update we discuss why no debris field was found for MH370 during the 42 day surface search in March and April 2014.
28 aircraft were involved, conducting 345 flights with a total of 3,177 flight hours, flying at around 600 feet above the ocean’s surface.
Ships from the navies of 5 nations and a number of merchant ships conducted the surface search.
A total area of 4.7 million km2 was covered.
By the end of the surface search, 52 days after the crash of MH370, the floating debris had dispersed to an area of 3.6 million km2.
@Jafni,
The IG high priority area (HPA) is only 30.5 km2.
Ocean Infinity cover 170 km2, each day, with each AUV.
The IG HPA can be covered in just a few hours.
I expect Ocean Infinity to cover other areas, which they believe may not have been thoroughly covered before, either by Fugro in 2015/2016 or by Ocean Infinity in 2018.
The AUV technology deployed by Ocean Infinity is improving all the time.
@Richard
‘With the large number of fishing vessels permanently in the area, which are serviced by several mother ships, it is surprising that none observed the crash of MH370 in 2014.’
These fishing vessels are south of the LEP which is S34.2 E93.8, the position estimated by the Independent Group.
If the aircraft came down closer to S29.1 then it would not be surprising at all that it was not seen.
How confident are you that MH370 will be found at your WSPR location?
@Godfrey Jack,
I am well aware of the LEP in the UGIB paper, as I pulled the paper together with loads of inputs from Bobby Ulich, Victor Iannello and Andrew Banks. That was in 2020 before WSPR technology came on the scene. I would remind everyone that the UGIB area has been searched twice before. Of course MH370 could have been missed.
I have posted a MH370 video by Petter Hornfeldt, an airline training Captain, better known as Mentour Pilot and recommended his proposal to search the two relatively small areas areas defined by Captain Blelly/Marchand (1,200 km2) and Godfrey/Coetzee/Maskell (2,800 km2). Of course MH370 could be missed in these areas.
https://www.mh370search.com/2024/03/16/mh370-a-new-hope/
You are correct that the fishing vessels operate at more southerly latitudes. I could not identify any ships around the WSPR area at 29.128°S 99.934°E on 8th March 2014 at 00:28 UTC.
I am quietly confident that MH370 will be found in one of the areas defined by the experts. I think the chances that MH370 will be found in the coming weeks is 50/50, but it will be found eventually. I am quietly confident that the WSPR location is a realistic possibility, but I respect the efforts by other expert analysts.
Hi Richard,
First time poster, but been following your blog for awhile. I’m just wondering if you could clarify if any of the suggested search areas that the 4 experts have pointed out, have already been searched before? And if any have been, how likely is it that the plane could have been missed?
Thanks
@KD,
Welcome to the blog!
The search area defined by the IG has been searched twice before, but they believe that MH370 was missed.
The Blelly/Marchand and the WSPR areas have not been searched before.
All three search areas were not on the original search area, as designated by Ocean Infinity in March 2014:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/9fgadj8f0yxawn1kjotj1/Ocean-Infinity-Search-Proposal.png?rlkey=q71b4kyqol52e2bmtdpeah3ml&dl=0
Here is a map with the 3 current search areas versus the March 2024 proposal:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/b5vbj11paq87nablcj8bw/Ocean-Infinity-Search-Proposal-with-Latitiude-and-Longitude.png?rlkey=je9ch2qmogipoxwtti80oerl3&dl=0
@ Richard,
Thank you very much for keeping the community around the world so well informed! We are glued to your website and the videos on Airline News. As everybody else here, we also watch the ship’s progress every hour.
May I ask: You also discussed with Mr Geoffrey Thomas what can be expected to be found. Concerning memory (SD) cards from mobile phones or cameras; What is the expectation: Is there a chance that any of the records (either the incident related of just simply images from the last normal hours such as boarding and take-off) would survive all those years in salt water, please? Thank you.
@David Smidek,
Welcome to the blog and many thanks for the kind words!
Mobile phones are not designed to withstand over 10 years in the ocean at extreme depths.
The Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) are designed to withstand a catastrophic impact and over 10 years at extreme depths.
MH370 is believed to be resting at a depth of up to 4,000 m, where there is extreme pressure, complete darkness and a water temperature just over freezing point.
@Duncan,
I preface my remarks with a quote from Rosemary Morrow and Pierre-Yves Le Traon: ”The ocean, like the atmosphere, is a fundamentally turbulent system.”
A large aerial and surface search was initiated covering 3.6 M km2 of the SIO, but no confirmed signs of a crash location were found. It is therefore risky to speculate.
You are correct that 21 days is better than 508 days. On 29th July 2015, more than 16 months after the flight MH370 disappeared, a section of a wing – a flaperon – washed up on Reunion Island in the western Indian Ocean. The flaperon was confirmed by BEA France as being from MH370.
A variety of statistical methods have been employed, taking into account the spatial and temporal dispersion of drift items in the ocean due to winds, currents and eddies.
UWA used the surface currents predicted by the HYCOM global ocean model as input to a particle tracking model to track debris over a 16-24 month period to coincide with the finding of the flaperon on Reunion Island. The origin of the debris was specified along the 7th arc at 25 different locations extending from the south (-39.258298°S 87.515653°E) to north (-22.815421°S 103.829706°E). For each model run, 50,000 particles were released and tracked over the period 8th March 2014 to 28th July 2015.
These results from the oceanographic drift modelling indicate that in terms of the timescales involved in the transport of the debris to Reunion Island the most likely location for the origin would be between locations 11 (33.171678°S, 96.294832°E) and 18 (28.297439°S, 100.503580°E). Results of the oceanographic drift modelling indicate, that if a new search is to be conducted, then a priority region to target would be the area between 33°S and 28°S along the 7th arc.
This result over 17 months fits the possible MH370 white flotsam observation at 32.52°S 97.74°E after 21 days. However, the possible range of dispersion after 52 days was 3.6 million km2 according to AMSA.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ajfbbl63o0gb8pa98499m/Day-52-Drift-Area-3.6-Million-km2.png?rlkey=mbk0969ya45b5w1kgsl3kfl3j&dl=0
I am not an oceanographer, but I will ask Prof. Charitha Pattiaratchi his opinion on the matter. I will be speaking with him tomorrow evening.
@Richard
Yes, do please ask Prof. Pattiaratchi this:
Irrespective of where and when debris eventually washed up, and based on the time and location of this particular piece of flotsam only, what is his best estimate of where this flotsam was at the time MH370 is believed to have crashed?
I realise I’m coming to the party at the eleventh hour here, but the answer to that question is my prediction of where MH370 went down. Modesty prevents me using my surname, but I shall call it the Duncan hotspot!
By the way, it’s much closer to 20 days than 21. According to Wikipedia the final handshake was at 00:19:37 UTC on 8 March and you say the photograph was taken at 04:48:07 UTC on 28 March, so 20.186 days to be precise.
Blaine and Chari’s debris finds, an extraordinary contribution to trying to solve MH370, were based on a hypothetical crash location at 32.5s/96.5e. Basically Blaine and Chari feel MH370 is probably north of 33s, but they cannot really pin down longitude. Those that favor crash points south of 33s (eg; 34 to 40 south) take an adversarial position, feeling there is such near certainty of a farther south crash site, and that this “certainty” requires recognition that Chari’s model is wrong. But I question that adversarial argument as biased and wrong itself. Too many are condemning Blaine and Chari, when those are the only two guys who have scientifically assessed where the aircraft may have crashed and went out and discovered debris based on that.
@Duncan,
The SIO is not a well behaved system and therefore does not fit a normal Gaussian distribution. There is a large degree of variability of speed and direction of drift current, wind and eddies. In my approach, I consider both the spatial and temporal dynamic, both locally and regionally. The mesoscale ocean circulation is dominated by the generation, evolution, interaction, and decay of eddies.
https://www.mh370search.com/2021/01/21/mh370-debris-drift-analysis/
The average speed (measured over 24 hours) of the generic trials on the move in the Indian Ocean is 0.426 knots. In 20.186 days the floating debris is likely to have moved around 15.9 km, but we don’t know the precise speed and direction.
A Duncan hot spot centred on 32.52°S 97.74°E with a radius of say 16 km is noted and added to the list.
I have asked Prof. Charitha Pattiaratchi and we will see what he says. Unfortunately my meeting with him later today has been cancelled, due to a scheduling conflict by another person in the meeting.
There are meanwhile almost 150 hot spots from the MH370 community, so someone will get it right.
@Richard
Thanks for asking him.
Re “A Duncan hot spot centred on 32.52°S 97.74°E with a radius of say 16 km is noted and added to the list.”
That’s where the photograph was taken. My hotspot is where the drift analysis boffins think that this piece of flotsam would have been 20.186 days earlier.
I’m willing to call it the “Duncan-Pattiaratchi hotspot” if that will inspire him to take a look at this!
@Richard
I’ve just re-read your last post.
Re “The average speed (measured over 24 hours) of the generic trials on the move in the Indian Ocean is 0.426 knots. In 20.186 days the floating debris is likely to have moved around 15.9 km”
Er, no.
20.186 days at 0.426 knots is 206.4nm, or 382.2km.
@Duncan,
My apologies, my stupid mistake!
I should know there are 24 hours in a day, I have been awake for most of the last 24 hours.
You are quite right, so you have to draw a circle with a radius of 382.2 km or wait for the drift analysis boffins.
I will go and get some sleep …