TransGlobalGold wrote:

AirstairFear wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Did Boeing ever spent a dime on this?

Why should they? Boeing does not want the plane to be found. Current information points to rogue pilot, so new information can only harm them. Or best case, it will do no good.

flyingcat wrote:

I guess this will be the Amelia Earhart mystery for our generation.

I honestly do not see what is mysterious about a known p*ss-poor pilot getting lost and crashing into the ocean.

Boeing would most likely want to know what happened to determine if its disappearance was mechanical or do to human intervention. The 777 has been a remarkably safe aircraft over the years.

Airbus did pay (in part) for the search for the AF447, didn't they?

Dutchy wrote:

Airbus did pay (in part) for the search for the AF447, didn't they?

While a sad situation, too much has been spent. It is time to let it join other great mysteries.

In AF447, it was believed to be an A330 defect that crashed the plane. Airbus needed to find the root cause and fix what turned out to be a pitot tube issue that caused an incorrect set of situations that doomed the plane.


Boeing has no reputation or technical issue to fix here. What could happen:
1. Plane found and top theories of a rouge pilot are proven. Boeing paying just extends the time people here about a missing 777...
2. Plane found and a technical issue that *might* have contributed to the plane crashing is found. Even if the pilot is at fault, Boeing will be raked in the press.
3. Plane found and Boeing is found to be at fault. Billions lost...
4. No plane found (most likely scenario). Boeing at fault for not continuing to pay.

AF447 was a very different scenario.

Lightsaber

aerorobnz wrote:

They have learned nothing and prevented nothing

Says who?

aerorobnz wrote:

whether I die in a "related" 777 crash is irrelevant to the discussion and an overemotional response

Perhaps, but certainly amusing to consider the potential irony.

vhtje wrote:

aerorobnz wrote:

I still question the value of it all. As soon as the pings stopped pinging they began just sending good money after bad if it still doesn't solve the "why"?They aren't going to retrieve the FDR or FVR so they won't solve it, the Bodies aren't going to be retrieved because they're long since fish food and they have discovered more from sitting and waiting on beaches for bits to wash up.

That is the most callous and dispassionate post I have read on this forum in a long time. Not to mention, extremely thoughtless as well.

How do you know the FDR and FVR are not going to be retrieved if the wreckage was found?

Because if they have been at -3000 m for 3 or 10 or 30 years (well above their tested longevity/durability limits) they will likely have nothing retrieveable even if they find the remains of the boxes. Callous or not it is realistic and pragmatic to expect nothing beneficial will come from spending 200million+ on wild goose chase.. that's a lot of money to drop on the aviation equivalent of be8ng struck by lightning and then buying the winning powerball ticket.

lightsaber wrote:

Boeing has no reputation or technical issue to fix here.

?!?

Without knowing what happened to the aircraft there is no possible way you can state that as a fact!

Despite all the blowhard rhetoric, there is every chance that this was caused by technical issues...

AF447 was a very different scenario.

Yes, because AF447 ended up not being a serious fault in the aircraft, but MH370 could still turn out to be!

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Boeing has no reputation or technical issue to fix here.

?!?

Without knowing what happened to the aircraft there is no possible way you can state that as a fact!

Despite all the blowhard rhetoric, there is every chance that this was caused by technical issues...

Somebody,
Why would Boeing pay to find that out? Right now, all the PR is that there isn't. I'm not speaking as an absolute, but the return on investment.

Airbus had to put to rest serious concerns it was their fault for the crash. For MH370, everyone pretty much subscribes to the rouge pilot theory.

There is a chance this was a technical issue. Please tell me the advantage to Boeing to pay to find that out? I can't think of a return on investment for Boeing? So Boeing shouldn't fund the search as at best new information confirms peoples opinions that have already exonerated Boeing and at worst... Make Boeing look really bad.

LIghtsaber

lightsaber wrote:

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Boeing has no reputation or technical issue to fix here.

Without knowing what happened to the aircraft there is no possible way you can state that as a fact!

Why would Boeing pay to find that out?

Oh right, you mean like that... (cynical) point taken.

tmu101 wrote:

I think this is very plausible and while trying to get back to Kuala Lumpur something incapacitated everyone on board but the plane kept flying for hours afterwards until exhausting all fuel, similar to the Payne Stewart tragedy.

Or the loss of the Helderberg due to an inflight fire. It took a few years to find the black boxes, too.

FlyBTV wrote:

I would suggest that the reason for the greater visibility of the Titanic was that the passengers carried and losses of life were orders of magnitude greater than the Waratah. Titanic carried 2,224 of whom over 1,500 perished - the Waratah carried 211.

Plus, it was the most luxurious vessel of its time and it many of its passengers were wealthy and influential.

No news regarding MH370 but Geoscience Australia published some data they collected during the seach:

http://marine.projects.ga.gov.au/mh370- ... lease.html
https://geoscience-au.maps.arcgis.com/a ... 1cc6ff3214

Some pics: