It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flaperon IS from MH370

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I tried to add this to a previous thread but it is closed.

It's conclusive according to the French investigators.



(Reuters) - The piece of wing found on the shore of Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean has been formally identified as part of the wreckage of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370, the Paris prosecutor said on Thursday. The part, known as a flaperon, was found on the shore of the French-governed island on July 29 and Malaysian authorities have said paint color and maintenance-record matches proved it came from the missing Boeing 777 aircraft. The French prosecutor, who had until Thursday's statement been more cautious on its provenance, said a technician from Airbus Defense and Space (ADS-SAU) in Spain, which had made the part for Boeing, had formally identified one of three numbers found on the flaperon as being the serial number of the MH370 Boeing 777. "It is therefore possible to confirm with certainty that the flaperon found on Reunion island on July 29, 2015 corresponds to the one from flight MH370," the prosecutor said in a statement.

here

So, what shall we we debate now that this chapter is closed? We can speculate/debate where the main wreckage is. I read in a different article early this morning that said if the flaperon is from MH370, then the plane probably went down 2000 miles north of the current search area off the Australia coast. Unfortunately, I didn't save a link when I read it.

There must be a way to backtrack 15 months of current to some degree of (in)accuracy. If I knew something about ocean currents, I'd give it a shot.

edit on 3-9-2015 by LogicalGraphitti because: Fixed link




posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Try this thread.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Hey there was an article in The New Zealand Herald yesterday nz time ', I get all confused with date time world differences. So thursday 3rd. If it wasn't yesterday it was the day before. Anyway the article was I think..... about some french group talking about the crash site off the coast of Java I think. Way more north than where they have been searching.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Maybe the key to finding this plane is in the crustaceans/animal/plant life attached to the flaperon.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Cloudbuster

They've used current modeling and tracked it to a general area, that puts it further north of the current search area, but there's a very large margin for error in the models due to some of the odd eddies and currents in the area.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I'm surprised no bodies have washed up. Either the Sharks have had a feast or the plane went in Hudson River style and the Bodies are still in the main fuselage.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

the plane crashed in a huge area of ocean so its no surprise no bodies have washed up

if the plane broke up on impact all the floating debris would have attracted lots of small fish with would attract the predators
edit on 3 9 2015 by Ozsheeple because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Try this thread.


www.abovetopsecret.com...


Hmmm... I did a search and didn't come up with that one! This thread can be closed or deleted.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Flaperon IS from MH370. How can it be when it weighed that much it took 4 blokes to carry it but not one barnacle was broken and I say boken as as in only a part of the barnacle remained stuck to the flaperon?

To a rational person with a bit of expereince in life, the finding reported by OP must be taken with some gains of salt. Ask yourself did someone 'need' that finding and why might they need it?



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 04:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Flaperon IS from MH370. How can it be when it weighed that much it took 4 blokes to carry it but not one barnacle was broken and I say boken as as in only a part of the barnacle remained stuck to the flaperon?

What are you suggesting? It's a fake (or fake barnacles)?



To a rational person with a bit of experience in life, the finding reported by OP must be taken with some gains of salt. Ask yourself did someone 'need' that finding and why might they need it?

I have plenty of "experience in life" and every once in a while, I believe what I read in the news. This is all very plausible and even though I could read something sinister into it, I just don't see the point. If it's a clue that will get us one step closer to finding the plane and finding out what happened to all those people, then let's make the most of it.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Flaperon IS from MH370. How can it be when it weighed that much it took 4 blokes to carry it but not one barnacle was broken and I say boken as as in only a part of the barnacle remained stuck to the flaperon?

To a rational person with a bit of expereince in life, the finding reported by OP must be taken with some gains of salt. Ask yourself did someone 'need' that finding and why might they need it?


The flaperon has a high usage of composites with honeycomb construction so it will float. You have incorrectly assumed that the flaperon is a solid object made entirely from metal alloys and aluminium. It might have floated vertically with a pocket of air trapped at one end and aided by the honeycomb composite pockets? Nothing unusual about it being able to float.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

You think a piece the size of the flaperon won't float? Two of these are larger and heavier than the flaperon, yet they're sitting at the surface quite nicely.








posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 04:44 AM
link   


The flaperon has a high usage of composites with honeycomb construction so it will float. You have incorrectly assumed that the flaperon is a solid object made entirely from metal alloys and aluminium.



Firstly you have NO evidence that I assumed any such thing, you have made an allegation you cannot sustain;

(Some on this forum have complianed to the mods about my posts for much less than this so take care to ensure you do not make allegations you cannot prove.)

I knew damn well it was floating. I also have read that it was filled with foam and that according to what I read by somebody who seemed to know that it also had a deliberate hole in the flapperson to enable air pressure to equalise when in fight. I also know it washed ashore on a STONY beach so its very likely that it washed/bumped up and down the stones several times before being deposited by the wash. Its highly likely therefore, that there would be at least ONE broken barnacle.

Moreover, I also am highly aware that its highly unlikely that the flaperon would have washed up and down the stony beach in the vertical posiiton.



posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue




Moreover, I also am highly aware that its highly unlikely that the flaperon would have washed up and down the stony beach in the vertical posiiton.


In all that awareness you know what happens when things wash up onto a shore...and yet it happened, guess you weren't aware enough.



posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

How do you know there are no broken barnacles? Have you seen a detailed picture of every bit of it?



posted on Sep, 5 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

Well stop getting all worked up about it. You can't possibly know that there were no broken barnacles. It is a ridiculous assumption. Some barnacles, or clusters of them, may have broken off completely as it moved along the beach and collided with objects. We get it though! Your "awareness" allows you to be all seeing and lets your conspiracy minded imagination to run away with you.

One eyewitness back in May stated that the barnacles were alive when he sat on it in May and used it as a table for fishing.


He also saw the wing which washed up on Wednesday – although in May, the barnacles encrusting its side were still alive. By the time it washed ashore again this week, the crustaceans were dead. “Like the seat, I didn’t know what it was. “I sat on it. I was fishing for macabi (bonefish) and used it as a table. I really didn’t pay it much attention – until I saw it on the news.” His story is backed up by that of another local woman, named only as Isabelle, who spotted the same object while walking on the beach in May, accompanied by her 10-year-old son.


www.telegraph.co.uk...










edit on 5/9/2015 by tommyjo because: Additional info added



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: tommyjo
a reply to: Azureblue

Well stop getting all worked up about it. You can't possibly know that there were no broken barnacles. It is a ridiculous assumption. Some barnacles, or clusters of them, may have broken off completely as it moved along the beach and collided with objects. We get it though! Your "awareness" allows you to be all seeing and lets your conspiracy minded imagination to run away with you.

One eyewitness back in May stated that the barnacles were alive when he sat on it in May and used it as a table for fishing.


He also saw the wing which washed up on Wednesday – although in May, the barnacles encrusting its side were still alive. By the time it washed ashore again this week, the crustaceans were dead. “Like the seat, I didn’t know what it was. “I sat on it. I was fishing for macabi (bonefish) and used it as a table. I really didn’t pay it much attention – until I saw it on the news.” His story is backed up by that of another local woman, named only as Isabelle, who spotted the same object while walking on the beach in May, accompanied by her 10-year-old son.


www.telegraph.co.uk...



For what its worth it seems that Boeing has said that its not from MA370.

82.221.129.208...



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue




For what its worth it seems that Boeing has said that its not from MA370.


Care to provide something directly from Boeing, because there is nothing there that backs the claim.

One person writing it on his web page doesn't make it true.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

Except that Boeing didn't identify it as more than from a 777. It was CASA that had to identify which plane it was from since they built the part. And they said it was from MH370.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Azureblue

Except that Boeing didn't identify it as more than from a 777.

It was CASA that had to identify which plane it was from since they built the part. And they said it was from MH370.



Thanks for the acknowledgement that: "... Boeing didn't identify it as more than from a 777..."
that was the news scroll I read off the TV on a NEWS source station.

CASA I think has 'Inferred' the part ID'd is from the 'missing' 777...but to prove that alleged fact in a court-of-law...I don't think they are ready to do that...

I still go with my inclination the part was swiped from the downed MH17 in Ukraine, hackers switched the ID numbers from a still missing & intact MH370 with possibly the only part without obvious missile shrapnel damage to it from flight MH17...the flaperon


Boeing probably has some deeper evidence to couch the flaperon identity to just a 777 aircraft



thanks

edit on th30144155180006032015 by St Udio because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join