Well, there really is no such things as a "water landing" unless you're a seaplane. The point that Kadri was making vis a vis Transair Flight 810 is that we have a case where a ditching plane was detected at a distance of 3,600 km -- about twice as far as the distance from the 7th arc to Cape Leeuwin. So definitely should have heard.
water landing - sorry, i meant an emergency landing on the ocean like hero sully did successfully on hudson river. with intact fuselage. the pic of the wreckage of Transair Flight 810 underwater in its wikipedia-article looks like fuselage was damaged during that landing. though either engllish nor german article says something about that detail of this landing. interesting that such an emergency landing is dectable in that way.
Everywhere the plane should have been, it isn’t! Thanks for staying on the case Jeff, looking forward to your next episode
Thanks Michael! It really is wild how every time we ask the magic eight ball we keep getting the same answer...
If MH370 made a sucessfull Water Landing there, then what would the Hydrophones have heared?
Well, there really is no such things as a "water landing" unless you're a seaplane. The point that Kadri was making vis a vis Transair Flight 810 is that we have a case where a ditching plane was detected at a distance of 3,600 km -- about twice as far as the distance from the 7th arc to Cape Leeuwin. So definitely should have heard.
water landing - sorry, i meant an emergency landing on the ocean like hero sully did successfully on hudson river. with intact fuselage. the pic of the wreckage of Transair Flight 810 underwater in its wikipedia-article looks like fuselage was damaged during that landing. though either engllish nor german article says something about that detail of this landing. interesting that such an emergency landing is dectable in that way.
there is an entire paragraph of hydrophones in a final report (Australia?), some noise has been detected but not conclusive