(October 20, 2015 at 7:01 pm)mralstoner Wrote: Preliminary MH370 Flaperon Failure Analysis
http://www.duncansteel.com/archives/2026

These two experts seem to be leaning towards the flaperon being torn off in mid air, and floating down to the ground separately from the plane. (If I'm interpreting them correctly).

So we have 3 data points:

1. The flaperon was ripped off in mid air, and floated down separately from the plane.
2. Nonetheless the flaperon was tethered to something that kept it below the surface for 4 months.
3. And then it broke free and floated thousands of miles away.

Is it making sense? Nope. Not at all. That's why foul play is a very plausible explanation. (Muslims and Obama not required. All that's needed is a wind tunnel, a water tank, and a courier to make the drop).

So a huge multinational force failed to find the rest of the plane, but hypothetical perpetrators managed to find a relatively small portion of it despite no knowledge of where it came off?

(October 20, 2015 at 7:06 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: What if it was tangled in kelp for a while, close to the surface, before being wrenched free by a storm? Has that possibility been explored?

It sounds reasonable, except that the satellite data suggests the plane ended in the Southern Indian Ocean. I presume that's too deep for kelp (a quick google says that kelp grows in shallow rocky coastlines). That's the first time I've heard of the kelp theory.

Another theory is that the flaperon was not submerged but constantly flipping, but that was discounted because of the shape of the flaperon, and barnacles don't like exposure to air for even short periods.

(October 20, 2015 at 7:08 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: So a huge multinational force failed to find the rest of the plane, but hypothetical perpetrators managed to find a relatively small portion of it despite no knowledge of where it came off?

No, Jeff Wise's theory is that the satellite data was faked by the hijackers, leaving a false trail in the southern direction, while the plane actually flew north towards China/Russia.

If so, MH370 landed somewhere, and they could easily take the flaperon off the plane, stick it in a wind tunnel at high speed so that it rips off, and then dunk it in a water tank for 4 months to cover it with barnacles, and then drop it off a container ship. Or something like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKUVg4AHuJI

(October 20, 2015 at 7:24 pm)mralstoner Wrote:

(October 20, 2015 at 7:06 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: What if it was tangled in kelp for a while, close to the surface, before being wrenched free by a storm? Has that possibility been explored?

It sounds reasonable, except that the satellite data suggests the plane ended in the Southern Indian Ocean. I presume that's too deep for kelp (a quick google says that kelp grows in shallow rocky coastlines). That's the first time I've heard of the kelp theory.

Another theory is that the flaperon was not submerged but constantly flipping, but that was discounted because of the shape of the flaperon, and barnacles don't like exposure to air for even short periods.

Except that in your post above it is suggested that the flaperon separated from the plane prior to loss. The final resting place of the plane itself would not necessarily be relevant under that assumption.

(October 20, 2015 at 7:31 pm)mralstoner Wrote:

(October 20, 2015 at 7:08 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: So a huge multinational force failed to find the rest of the plane, but hypothetical perpetrators managed to find a relatively small portion of it despite no knowledge of where it came off?

No, Jeff Wise's theory is that the satellite data was faked by the hijackers, leaving a false trail in the southern direction, while the plane actually flew north towards China/Russia.

If so, MH370 landed somewhere, and they could easily take the flaperon off the plane, stick it in a wind tunnel at high speed so that it rips off, and then dunk it in a water tank for 4 months to cover it with barnacles, and then drop it off a container ship. Or something like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKUVg4AHuJI

How easy or hard is it to hack that data? And I assume you mean they stick the flaperon in a tunnel until it tore up, not off, because you'd just sais it'd been remover in that hypothesis.

What sort of wind speed would be needed to damage an integral piece like that?

(October 20, 2015 at 7:34 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: Except  that in your post above it os suggested that the flaperon separated from the plane prior to loss. The final resting place of the plane itself would not necessarily be relevant under that assumption.

I've only heard the flaperon "ripping off in mid air" theory discussed as part of the final moments of the plane's descent when running out of fuel. Because of the torsion/force during such an uncontrolled descent, the flaperon flutters and then rips off. So, the flaperon and the plane are still at the same location. There's no reason for a flaperon to fall off under normal flight conditions.

If the flaperon remained attached to the plane when it crashed, they say it would have suffered more damage, especially to the leading edge (which is not damaged, only the trailing/lower edge is damaged which is consistent with flutter stress).

Running out of fuel is not necessarily an uncontrolled descent.

(October 20, 2015 at 7:38 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: How easy or hard is it to hack that data? And I assume you mean they stick the flaperon in a tunnel until it tore up, not off, because you'd just sais it'd been remover in that hypothesis.

What sort of wind speed would be needed to damage an integral piece like that?

No, you could easily construct a surrounding structure on which to remount the flaperon, so it could rip off at high speeds in a wind tunnel. I have no idea about wind speeds or wind tunnels. I know that NASA has some, so I presume that China/Russia has them.

How hard is it to hack the data? Tricky one. It requires a few conditions (1) access to the electronics bay via a hatch at the front of first class (2) you would need to plug in some fake hardware/software and (3) only certain planes and certain satellite units are hackable. So, it's not easy, but it is possible. The hackers would have to be very "sophisticated" and know exactly what plane they were hijacking.

(October 20, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: Running out of fuel is not necessarily an uncontrolled descent.

Good point. There are different crash scenarios: a steep descent, or a low glide. Presumably a glide would be under pilot control, whereas a steep descent would be if the plane was on auto-pilot, the crew are dead, and the plane runs out of fuel at altitude.

That technical paper I linked to goes into analysis of the broken hinges on the flaperon, and the types of force that would cause it. It may have the speeds required.