[ventus45]

Re the flaperon, I am not convinced it is from MRO.

Although I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory, it has been "suggested" by "some" people, that the barnacles may suggest that the flaperon may have originated from a more "equatorial location" than 34S-94E.  See chapter 13 below.

However, I stumbled over this.
It may serve as a useful quick and dirty primer for some "aero-people" on the subject of Indian Ocean currents etc.
Three chapters - 11 - 12 & 13.
http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/re...Indian.pdf
http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/re...Indian.pdf
http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/re...Indian.pdf

For those with a "deep" (pun) interest, the entire textbook can be downloaded here:
http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/re...rsion.html

And for those who really want to study the sea ........
http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocn...s/book.pdf

And on another matter, that of the 6th and 7th arcs (00:11z and 00:19z).
I still wonder, indeed, I have a nagging feeling, that those two arcs, as published, may be wrong.
Have they been determined, and plotted, as precisely as Beaker would have us believe ?
After all, the entire deep sea search depends on the precision of the arcs.
Not withstanding the 20us BTO quantisation issue, and the method by which the 7th BTO was "determined", it is of note that the aircraft was near local dawn at 00:00z, and funny things do happen to L band signals around dawn in the ionosphere.
The question is, are the 6th, and particularly the 7th arc BTO's and hence their arc radius calculations correct ?  
So far as I can determine, Beaker's Bugle Boys have never "air truthed" or "sea truthed" the predictions in the area of interest in the SIO, at dawn.
Food for thought.
http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/69...95_A1b.pdf