Possible MH-370 debris found on Reunion Island?

a reply to: Zaphod58

I don't see anything wrong with keeping traditions alive. In fact, I think its a great thing. But I can also appreciate the fact that I don't have to sacrifice my heritage to use a blender once in a while.

It was a little humor and a little sarcasm. Take it easy...

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: Zaphod58

You know, I'm done with this.

Just now that I have posted enough visual proof to disprove your claims? How coincidental.

There are ways to identify the flaperon, they are being used. It's that simple.

I still see no proof of actuators in the debri piece though.

So what, exactly, is your point?

Do you even have one?

Hmmmmm????

No, he doesn't. It's basic ATS trolling. Keep trying to split some hair that does not even exist until someone who actually knows what they are talking about gets tired of playing your little game so that you can then claim some sort of "victory." It runs contrary to the point of this site and it's getting way too common around here, IMO. . .

a reply to: YouPeople

And you don't know where to look?

Then maybe you should learn how!
If you're so intent on knowledgeable people providing details, why don't you try looking it up yourself if you evince such doubts and would prefer sources which are basically irrefutable? Ten seconds of googling "777 flaperon" would give you plenty of detailed images, both photos and detailed drawings and (for example) US patent "US 7766282 B2Trailing edge device catchers and associated systems and methods" assigned to the Boeing Company. Also with design diagrams.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I responded to a claim that was made tthat I think is incorrect. You guys can whine all you want to, but I have every right to.

Zaphod could just shut me up by proving his claim. Simple as that.

a reply to: YouPeople

The part can be traced and identified. You wanted to argue, page after page, on one and only one specific method for doing so. And nothing that was posted was enough to sway you.

So no, you subjected everybody here to multiple pages worth of watching you nip at another member's heels for something that doesn't change the end result: the part can be identified.

Get over it.

a reply to: YouPeople

All Boeing jets with flaperons have some kind of actuator inside the inboard flaperon.
The B777-300ER, B747-400 and 800 also have a PCU, Power Control Unit inside the inboard flaperon.

a reply to: JustMike

Can you post or link me to the one that shows a 777 flaperon with actuators in it? You really think I didn't look for it?

What is the problem. Someone made a claim, I asked him to back it up. And I tried to back up my point.

Is this a hierarchy thing?

a reply to: YouPeople

Must not have looked very hard. I found multiple sources and articles that reference actuators in flaperons.

www.wired.com... Even has a pretty picture with a diagram.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I hope the forensics can tell us more

Oops, I was quick but my boss is quicker, signing out from work

Greg

a reply to: Shamrock6

Ahem, I just posted that pic with the drawing. It shows the actuator fitting on the flaperon. You know why they call it an actuator fitting? Because it is connected to the actuator that is located on the wing.......

From your link,

The drawing clearly shows the actuator fitting—the motor that moves the flap up and down—which Tytelman says perfectly matches the pictures. That would mean the wing came from a Boeing 777, and because exactly one Boeing 777 has ever been lost at sea…

He is clearly refering to the actuator on the plane, a fitting is not a motor obviously.

By the way the Diego Garcia base where everyone thought the plane was taken to is not that far from Reunion Island! It's North and slightly east!

a reply to: Nova937

How slight is slight?

a reply to: YouPeople

By god you're right, and Zaph explained it! And then explained it when you posted another picture! But dammit that's just not good enough!

By the way I noticed you completely ignored my comment about finding a number of articles that reference what you're looking for.

To borrow a phrase, "how coincidental."

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Nova937

How slight is slight?

Diego Garcia is 1,469 miles away from Reunion Island on a North East heading. MH-370 was last seen flying South over the Maldives toward Diego Garcia on the day it disappeared.

Question is did it crash and the debris washed up South West or did it land as per the pilots coordinates on his computer and was dumped down that way later?

a reply to: Shamrock6

By god you're right, and Zaph explained it! And then explained it when you posted another picture! But dammit that's just not good enough!

In my opinion, the explanation was wrong. So yeah, I consider that not good enough, goshdarned.

By the way I noticed you completely ignored my comment about finding a number of articles that reference what you're looking for.

I would say qoute some passages that say that there are actuators in the flaperon. Also, the first article you did post, actually supported my point.

I was hoping that with the discovery of this part that questions would get answered, it seems to be the total opposite. if this ocean current map is correct I would be more inclined to believe that this part has come from the northern part of the Indian Ocean www.physicalgeography.net... rather than from the far western coast of Australia as I just think the time needed is to short if this was indeed found in May.

So I am more inclined now than ever before to believe that this flight was heading "in the area" (maybe not to however) of Diego Garcia and I had totally forgot about the reports of the pilot having this location and flight path inputted into his flight sim at his home, again another story that seemed to come and go and of course it could be a total coincidence.

However with the Inhabitants of the Maldives stating they witnessed the plane flying low in the area plus the eye witness report from the female on the deck of the sail boat and now with the ocean current data it seems plausible that the current search location is 1000s of miles off course. I am also starting to think if this plane is every meant to be found?.

a reply to: YouPeople

You said you searched on your own.

I searched and found any number of articles. Perhaps you should actually search this time instead of demanding others do it for you. Google is pretty easy to use, and you can find articles, discussion boards, and websites that all make reference to the actuators in flaperons. It almost made me say "how convenient" again. That's how easy it was.

I'll be back when there's new information or you're done making a spectacle of yourself over what is one of many different ways a flaperon can be traced to an aircraft. Hopefully that'll get the thread back to where it should be as opposed to getting dragged along for some personal vendetta.

a reply to: Shamrock6

i think I provided enough evidence to show that the flaperon has no actuators inside of it.

If you want to contest that, be my guest, prove it to me.

a reply to: Shamrock6

get the thread back to where it should be as opposed to getting dragged along for some personal vendetta.

Seems like you are creating all the drama......

I searched and found any number of articles. Perhaps you should actually search this time instead of demanding others do it for you. Google is pretty easy to use, and you can find articles, discussion boards, and websites that all make reference to the actuators in flaperons. It almost made me say "how convenient" again. That's how easy it was.

What is keeping you from posting the proof to shut me up then?