This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/31/world/asia/debris-alone-may-not-solve-mystery-of-malaysia-jet-experts-caution.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Debris Alone May Not Solve Mystery of Malaysia Flight 370, Experts Caution Debris Alone May Not Solve Mystery of Malaysia Flight 370, Experts Say
(about 1 hour later)
Though the piece of airplane debris found on a remote Indian Ocean beach may yield the first tangible proof that a Malaysian jetliner that vanished almost 17 months ago crashed into the sea, experts said it may not be much help in solving the vexing mystery of where to find the plane’s wreckage.Though the piece of airplane debris found on a remote Indian Ocean beach may yield the first tangible proof that a Malaysian jetliner that vanished almost 17 months ago crashed into the sea, experts said it may not be much help in solving the vexing mystery of where to find the plane’s wreckage.
The length of time since the crash and the complex dynamics of ocean currents and fickle sea winds make it impossible to determine with any precision where the object that turned up on the French island of Réunion on Wednesday entered the water, experts said.The length of time since the crash and the complex dynamics of ocean currents and fickle sea winds make it impossible to determine with any precision where the object that turned up on the French island of Réunion on Wednesday entered the water, experts said.
Officials said on Thursday that it would probably take several days to establish whether the object is what it appears to be — a wing flap from a Boeing 777 aircraft — and that it came from Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. French officials said on Thursday that the object was being shipped to a laboratory near Toulouse for analysis.Officials said on Thursday that it would probably take several days to establish whether the object is what it appears to be — a wing flap from a Boeing 777 aircraft — and that it came from Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. French officials said on Thursday that the object was being shipped to a laboratory near Toulouse for analysis.
But even if the object is authenticated, experts said, nothing about its discovery would either confirm or contradict the crash investigators’ belief, based on radar data and satellite signals, that Flight 370 went down somewhere in an empty stretch of the Indian Ocean, southwest of Australia, an area that search crews have been scouring fruitlessly.But even if the object is authenticated, experts said, nothing about its discovery would either confirm or contradict the crash investigators’ belief, based on radar data and satellite signals, that Flight 370 went down somewhere in an empty stretch of the Indian Ocean, southwest of Australia, an area that search crews have been scouring fruitlessly.
What the discovery would confirm, according to David G. Gallo, the director of special projects at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, is “that they’re actually looking for a plane that went into the water.”What the discovery would confirm, according to David G. Gallo, the director of special projects at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, is “that they’re actually looking for a plane that went into the water.”
From what oceanographers know about current patterns in the search area, “it’s certainly feasible that wreckage could have made it all the way to La Réunion island,” said David L. Mearns, an oceanographer and the director at Blue Water Recoveries, a British salvage company. Blue Water has been involved in several high-profile searches for aircraft that crashed at sea, including an Air France jet that went down in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in 2009.From what oceanographers know about current patterns in the search area, “it’s certainly feasible that wreckage could have made it all the way to La Réunion island,” said David L. Mearns, an oceanographer and the director at Blue Water Recoveries, a British salvage company. Blue Water has been involved in several high-profile searches for aircraft that crashed at sea, including an Air France jet that went down in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in 2009.
But he added, “it’s just not possible to backtrack it, or calculate a plunge point with any level of precision that would be useful” to the search teams.But he added, “it’s just not possible to backtrack it, or calculate a plunge point with any level of precision that would be useful” to the search teams.
Barry A. Klinger, an oceanographer at George Mason University, calculates that surface debris in that area of the ocean could have drifted at speeds of 1,500 to 6,200 miles a year, making a landfall on Réunion, roughly 2,300 miles from the search area, well within the realm of possibility.Barry A. Klinger, an oceanographer at George Mason University, calculates that surface debris in that area of the ocean could have drifted at speeds of 1,500 to 6,200 miles a year, making a landfall on Réunion, roughly 2,300 miles from the search area, well within the realm of possibility.
Similarly, Dr. Gallo said his calculations showed that currents could have carried Flight 370 wreckage to Réunion by now. “That fits,” he said in an interview.Similarly, Dr. Gallo said his calculations showed that currents could have carried Flight 370 wreckage to Réunion by now. “That fits,” he said in an interview.
Within that broad general trend, though, surface winds and local currents vary constantly, and a particular floating object can be driven in erratic and unpredictable ways from day to day. The longer the object is in the water, the more difficult it becomes to determine its point of origin with any precision.Within that broad general trend, though, surface winds and local currents vary constantly, and a particular floating object can be driven in erratic and unpredictable ways from day to day. The longer the object is in the water, the more difficult it becomes to determine its point of origin with any precision.
“In truth, it’s not like a steady conveyor belt,” Dr. Gallo said. “You’ve got to take monsoons and typhoons into account. And the currents don’t usually flow like rivers, but more like eddies — swirling, sometimes fast and sometimes slow, and sometimes even reversing course.”“In truth, it’s not like a steady conveyor belt,” Dr. Gallo said. “You’ve got to take monsoons and typhoons into account. And the currents don’t usually flow like rivers, but more like eddies — swirling, sometimes fast and sometimes slow, and sometimes even reversing course.”
By way of analogy, Mr. Mearns imagined a shipload of toy rubber ducks dropped into the current search area, which was determined by analyzing automated satellite signals from Flight 370 in its last hours of flight.By way of analogy, Mr. Mearns imagined a shipload of toy rubber ducks dropped into the current search area, which was determined by analyzing automated satellite signals from Flight 370 in its last hours of flight.
Though the ducks would all start out together, he said, “they would gradually fan out along the surface, following the counterclockwise gyre of the Indian Ocean.” He continued, “Ultimately, you would expect some would reach land, and it’s certainly possible that would include La Réunion as well as some other smaller islands.”Though the ducks would all start out together, he said, “they would gradually fan out along the surface, following the counterclockwise gyre of the Indian Ocean.” He continued, “Ultimately, you would expect some would reach land, and it’s certainly possible that would include La Réunion as well as some other smaller islands.”
“The only thing I find surprising is that something like this hasn’t been found sooner,” Mr. Mearns said of the object.“The only thing I find surprising is that something like this hasn’t been found sooner,” Mr. Mearns said of the object.
Government officials and families of passengers lost on the flight, which vanished in March 2014 with 239 people aboard, responded warily on Thursday to the news of the discovery in Réunion, reluctant to fan hopes after more than a year of fruitless searching and false rumors.Government officials and families of passengers lost on the flight, which vanished in March 2014 with 239 people aboard, responded warily on Thursday to the news of the discovery in Réunion, reluctant to fan hopes after more than a year of fruitless searching and false rumors.
Prime Minister Najib Razak of Malaysia said in a statement that his government was sending teams to Réunion and to France to examine the object and meet with French aviation safety officials.Prime Minister Najib Razak of Malaysia said in a statement that his government was sending teams to Réunion and to France to examine the object and meet with French aviation safety officials.
“We have had many false alarms before, but for the sake of the families who have lost loved ones, and suffered such heartbreaking uncertainty, I pray that we will find out the truth, so that they may have closure and peace,” Mr. Najib said in the statement. “I promise the families of those lost that whatever happens, we will not give up.”“We have had many false alarms before, but for the sake of the families who have lost loved ones, and suffered such heartbreaking uncertainty, I pray that we will find out the truth, so that they may have closure and peace,” Mr. Najib said in the statement. “I promise the families of those lost that whatever happens, we will not give up.”
The fact that no trace of debris from Flight 370 had been found before now led most investigators to believe that the plane hit the water more or less intact and then submerged relatively quickly. In that event, certain lighter parts of the plane with a large surface area, like sections of the wings or tail, might be expected to break off and float on the surface, while the heavier structural components, including the fuselage, would sink to the ocean floor fairly close by.The fact that no trace of debris from Flight 370 had been found before now led most investigators to believe that the plane hit the water more or less intact and then submerged relatively quickly. In that event, certain lighter parts of the plane with a large surface area, like sections of the wings or tail, might be expected to break off and float on the surface, while the heavier structural components, including the fuselage, would sink to the ocean floor fairly close by.
Typically in an ocean crash, investigators are able to locate numerous pieces of debris on the surface relatively quickly, making it possible to estimate fairly reliably where the plane went down. Using a technique called reverse drift analysis or leeway analysis, investigators have often been able to use those finds to look back in time and focus the undersea search.Typically in an ocean crash, investigators are able to locate numerous pieces of debris on the surface relatively quickly, making it possible to estimate fairly reliably where the plane went down. Using a technique called reverse drift analysis or leeway analysis, investigators have often been able to use those finds to look back in time and focus the undersea search.
However, even then, the task is not easy.However, even then, the task is not easy.
In the 2009 Air France crash, search teams discovered roughly 600 pieces of floating debris within weeks, and dozens of victims’ bodies surfaced within days. Search teams were distracted by several false leads and the search took almost two years, but in the end, the wreckage was found a short distance from where Mr. Mearns’s computer models estimated it would be, based on the floating debris.In the 2009 Air France crash, search teams discovered roughly 600 pieces of floating debris within weeks, and dozens of victims’ bodies surfaced within days. Search teams were distracted by several false leads and the search took almost two years, but in the end, the wreckage was found a short distance from where Mr. Mearns’s computer models estimated it would be, based on the floating debris.
Confirming that a single component from Flight 370 had turned up on Réunion would not be sufficient to make any reliable estimates, Mr. Mearns said. “It’s a little bit like someone who went missing from the East Coast who, a year later, turns up dead in California,” he said. “Without any additional information, you have no idea how they got there, what roads they would have taken.”Confirming that a single component from Flight 370 had turned up on Réunion would not be sufficient to make any reliable estimates, Mr. Mearns said. “It’s a little bit like someone who went missing from the East Coast who, a year later, turns up dead in California,” he said. “Without any additional information, you have no idea how they got there, what roads they would have taken.”
He added, “It’s the same kind of thing we are dealing with here, only there are no roads in the ocean. There is an infinite number of routes that debris could have taken.”He added, “It’s the same kind of thing we are dealing with here, only there are no roads in the ocean. There is an infinite number of routes that debris could have taken.”