[Peetwo]

Captain's Log 20.12.16: 1st Principles report released -  

A rehash on the 1st Principles review:

First Principles- indeed?

ATSB – “For the First Principles Review, the ATSB has assembled experts from around the world to reassess the data available. A report detailing the findings of the First Principle Review will be made available following the meeting.”

Principles – an interesting, oft abused word; and, a strange choice for describing the three day ‘gabfest’ of ‘experts’ intent on reassessing the ‘available data’.

‘Available data’ – this could be put on the back of a coaster and dissected in about 30 seconds by a bunch of dyslexic five year olds; well it could.

In the beginning, apart from the aircraft being ‘in the vicinity’ of the IGARI waypoint there is no conclusive data indicating where the aircraft went after that; best guesses and some fairly wispy satellite data emerged to place the aircraft ‘in the Southern Indian Ocean’. This data provided the ‘Seventh Arc’ – depicted as a fine line, drawn across half a hemisphere – somewhere along that line, it is said, marks the end of the flight: the experts think. Has the ‘available data’ changed in the time between IGARI and the end of the search? In short – No, it has not. Has there been any refinement of the ‘mathematics’ which indicated the terminal zone for the flight – again - No, there has not. Ergo, the ‘available data’ has not significantly changed. We are left only to wonder at what the ‘experts’ will be discussing – if the radical data has not been refined; or re-defined.

The ‘Flaperon’ throws a wee spanner into the works, as does some of the ‘drift’ models being presented – the excellent, logical work done by Chillit for example.  The ‘pilot dunit’ debate rages, but then you have the Howard analysis to contend with, the logic reasonable and worthy of consideration; and yet we see no careful dissection of this data by the ‘expert’ panel, no public discussion, rebuttal or even a begrudged acknowledgement that perhaps the ‘theory’ presented has ‘some merit’.

First principles -

Marcus Aurelius.  6. The nature of the universal has this work to do, to remove to that place the things which are in this, to change them, to take them away hence, and to carry them there. All things are change, yet we need not fear anything new. All things are familiar [to us]; but the distribution of them still remains the same.

The first principle objective was to question – the why, the how and then the where. Without the why and then the how – the ‘where’ becomes little more than flawed guess, based against incomplete information. The rest has simply been window dressing; look at the photograph above – there is no one there with anymore idea now of the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ as they stand there than they did in the beginning.

Marcus Aurelius. This, what is it in itself, and by itself, according to its proper constitution? What is the substance of it? What is the matter, or proper use? What is the form, or efficient cause? What is it for in this world, and how long will it abide? Thus must thou examine all things that present themselves unto thee. (disputed translation).

There has always been a certain flavour of ‘corruption’ associated with this ‘mystery’, a natural response to a serviceable aircraft, disappearing, without semblance of logical explanation; or, witness. There has always been an odour of ‘conspiracy’ associated – again, where credible explanation is not provided, the imagination is left to fill the void and the charlatans, seekers of fame and hopefully fortune will begin to spin the yarn into the fabric of their fancy. I believe the stench of incompetence spoils this feast for the imagination. Plain, pure and simple.  This, of itself, is human and was forgivable until the beasts of ‘vested interests’, national, political and financial raised their ugly heads.  I digress.

‘We’ are no closer to understanding what, why and who now, than we were in the beginning. ‘We’ are probably reasonably sure that the aircraft is not within the search zone.  Despite the Chester claims of ‘heroism’ and extraordinary efforts etc. (Yuk) ‘We’ are no wiser or further on than we were in the beginning.  I, for one, would like to know why not; or, alternatively be informed, honestly and openly that no one, not even the ‘experts’ has a blind clue. It matters not a wit, whether the aircraft ‘plunged’ at high speed into the stygian depths; or alighted like a butterfly on a flower, into the wind swept SIO to float about for while. Only the what, the why and the how of it remain as important now as they were – in the beginning.

So, my ramble ends where I began a long time ago; someone, somewhere, knows the why and the how. Find that person and you’ll find your aircraft. The alternative is to admit that unless fate takes a hand; there is little chance of the wreck being discovered without solid, tangible evidence.

Selah.

Captain's Log 11.11.16: MH370 Aussie spin & BS continues -

From that man 'Iggins in the Oz yet another MH370 HSSS  archive entry:

MH370 review faces lengthy wait
12:00amEAN HIGGINS
A report by experts reviewing the strategy to find MH370 may not be produced until after a current search is complete.

..The federal government’s Joint Agency Co-ordination Centre for the search conceded the review group’s report may not be produced until after the underwater search of 120,000sq km in the southern ­Indian Ocean is completed, due by January or February.

JACC spokesman Roger Gott­lob said the report “is currently being drafted and will be released in the coming months” but would not say whether it would be complete before the search ended. “The main focus for all concerned will continue to be finding the aircraft to assist the Malaysian investigation team and to bring closure to the families of the passengers and crew of MH370,” Mr Gottlob said...

“is currently being drafted and will be released in the coming months”

From the official ATSB book of word weasels & obfuscation, 'currently being drafted' can mean anywhere as short as 6 months or, in the case of the PelAir cover-up or Mildura Fog cock-up, 2 to 3 yrs (24 to 36 months).
But hang on wasn't there a commitment from miniscule 4D NFI Chester...  
 

Reference 4D PRESSER: MH370 First Principles Review Summit

“The First Principles Review Summit brings together the extraordinary team of Australian and international experts, who have been involved in the search for MH370, to review all the available data and analysis associated with the search to date,” Mr Chester said.


“There are currently more than 20 items of debris of interest to the investigation team which have been located on the coasts of Africa, Madagascar, the island of Mauritius, Reunion and Rodrigues.

“The experts will also inform the remainder of the search effort, and develop guidance for any future search operations.

“A report detailing the findings of the review will be released after the meeting.

   
See another clever use of weasel words to convey a false impression of efficiency and transparency. Apparently the hand-puppet 4D Chester kept within the limitations of the Department prepared WW script, as confirmed by this from the ATSB 'correcting the bollocks' webpage:

..For the First Principles Review, the ATSB has assembled experts from around the world to reassess the data available. A report detailing the findings of the First Principle Review will be made available following the meeting...

   
So another day, another MH370 fairy tale coming out of the Can'tberra spin and bollocks sausage factory -

Hmm...I wonder how quickly the report would be drafted and finalised if China called for an urgent MH370 Tripartite next week?

Although I am very suspect about the timing, it would seem that wonders will never cease, with the ATSB today releasing the 1st Principles review report... :

Media release
Title
MH370 First Principles Review and CSIRO reports
 
Date: 20 December 2016
Today the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) released its report MH370 – First Principles Review and CSIRO’s supporting report The search for MH370 and ocean surface drift.
The First Principles Review report summarises the outcomes of a meeting conducted in November and attended by Australian and international experts in data processing, satellite communications, accident investigation, aircraft performance, flight operations, sonar data, acoustic data and oceanography.  
The purpose of the First Principles Review was to reassess and validate existing evidence and to consider any new analysis that may assist in identifying the location of MH370. The CSIRO report, which should be read in conjunction with the ATSB report, was commissioned by the ATSB earlier in 2016 and was considered by the experts attending the First Principles Review.
The experts confirmed their agreement that the analysis of the last two SATCOM transmissions, the likely housed position of the main flaps at impact, and results from the recent flight simulations indicate with high probability that the aircraft lies within 25 NM of the 7th arc that had been derived from analysis of the last satellite communications with the aircraft.
Given the high confidence in the search undertaken to date, the experts agreed that the previously defined indicative underwater area is unlikely to contain the missing aircraft between latitudes 36°S and 39.3°S along the 7th arc.
The experts also agreed that CSIRO’s debris drift modelling results present strong evidence that the aircraft is most likely to be located to the north of the current indicative underwater search area. When considered together with updated flight path modelling, the experts concluded that an unsearched area between latitudes 33°S and 36°S along the 7th arc of approximately 25,000 km², has the highest probability of containing the wreckage of the aircraft.
MH370 disappeared on 8 March 2014 with 239 people on board. Australia, Malaysia and People's Republic of China have been working together to find the aircraft since that time.
Given the international protocols for aircraft recovery scenarios such as this, Malaysia will continue to take the central role in the determination of any future course of action in the search for MH370.
This report has been provided to the three principle Governments involved in the search effort for their consideration.
 
Read reports: MH370 – First Principles Review [/url]and [url=http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ae-2014-054/][i]The search for MH370 and ocean surface drift.[/i]

 


Last update 20 December 2016 

 
What next an urgent request for miniscule DDDD_MNFI to attend an impromptu Tripartite meeting in Beijing prior to Xmas, with the aim to get the immaculately manicured & coiffured (M&Ms) Department hand-puppet back in time for the MCG boxing day test...  
The reason I surmise this is because in the conclusion of the 1stPR report, amongst other things, it says:

4. The participants of the First Principles Review were in agreement on the need to search an additional area representing approximately 25,000 km² (the orange bordered area in Figure 14). Based on the analysis to date, completion of this area would exhaust all prospective areas for the presence of MH370.

    
And from the latest accompanying CSIRO drift analysis report:

There is a region within the 36-32°S segment of the arc, near 35°S (see Fig. 3.3.3) that is most consistent with all of the following lines of evidence, taken together:

1. absence of detections during the 2014 surface search
2. absence of findings on the WA coastline
3. July 2015 arrival time of the flaperon at La Reunion
4. December 2015 and onwards (only) arrival times of other debris in the western Indian Ocean.

We therefore conclude that while the whole 36°-32°S region (outside the searched area but within the latest estimates of maximum likely off-arc distance) is prospective, the subset region near 35°S appears to be the most likely location of the aircraft.

Can we rule out other locations? Of course not, especially the 33-32°S shoulder region which appears likely from some considerations (lack of WA debris, flaperon finding timing) but less likely from others (African debris timing, surface search). Regions beyond that are much less consistent with available information than the relatively-small remaining prospective region. They are also spread over a very wide region (north, south, east and west) that is far too large to search with present technology.

Off you go to Beijing with cap in hand 4D. Get going now you'll be back well in time for Xmas chow and the 1st ball to be bowled at the Boxing day test...L&Ks MT (big smile)

MTF...P2

Ps P2 comment in regards to the above and this quote from the Negroni blog piece: ref MH370 & the Beaker effect

Here’s an example. In July 15, 2015, I contacted Martin Dolan, the then chairman of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau asking why, in light of all the money being spent in the sea, the ATSB had not also tried an aerial search of the shoreline where debris might be expected to wash up. Mr. Dolan replied that local authorities were responsible for that.

Relying on the attentiveness and current affairs awareness of residents in some of the world’s most remote communities, seemed a lethargic approach but more puzzling was Mr. Dolan’s statement that debris would offer little of value.

So is this a sign that the ATSB, CSIRO etc. has finally stepped out of the cloak & dagger, secret squirrel and beyond all sensible reason methodology of the top-cover Beaker years?? - Nah couldn't be, could it -

Pps Q/ After the Beaker comment to Negroni how do we know that the WA coastline does not contain other flotsam and jetsam from MH370. I can't even remember a BOLO notice going out, let alone a full blown NW to SW Cape beachcombing search -