Nearly a year after embarking on a
multi-million dollar quest to solve one of aviation's greatest unsolved
mysteries, authorities and search teams are being criticised over their
approach to finding Flight MH370 in the remote southern Indian Ocean.
The shadow of a Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) P-3 Orion maritime search aircraft is seen on low-level cloud, as it flies over the southern Indian Ocean looking for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, in this March 31, 2014 file photo.
The Australian-led search, already the
most expensive in aviation history, has found no trace of the Malaysia
Airlines jet or its 239 passengers and crew, prompting calls for a
rethink into the way the mission is conducted.
Experts involved in past deep water
searches say the search to find MH370 could easily miss the plane as
Dutch company Fugro NV, the firm at the forefront of the mission, is
using inappropriate technology for some terrain and inexperienced
personnel for the highly specialized task of hunting man-made objects.
Heightening concerns, Australian
authorities said on Wednesday that another search vessel, the Go
Phoenix, which is using the world's best deep sea search equipment and
crew provided by U.S. firm Phoenix International Holdings Inc, would
pull out within weeks. No reason was given for withdrawing the vessel
from the quest.
"Fugro is a big company but they don't
have any experience in this kind of search and it's really a very
specialized job," said Paul-Henry Nargeolet, a former French naval
officer who was hired by France's air accident investigation agency BEA
to co-ordinate the search and recovery of Air France Flight AF447 in
2009.
"This is a big job," Nargeolet told
Reuters. "I'm not an Australian taxpayer, but if I was, I would be very
mad to see money being spent like that."
Fugro, which was contracted by the
Australian government to operate three ships pulling sonar across the
vast 60,000-km search zone, has rejected claims it is using the wrong
equipment, saying its gear is rigorously tested.
Still, Nargeolet's concerns are echoed
by others in the tightly held deepsea search and rescue industry, who
are worried that unless the search ships pass right over any wreckage
the sonar scanning either side of the vessels won't pick it up.
Experts also question the lack of data
released by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) on the
activities of the Fugro ships.
Three of the bidders rejected for the
MH370 contract, U.S. firm Williamson & Associates, France's ixBlue
SAS and Mauritius-based Deep Ocean Search Ltd, have taken the unusual
step of detailing their concerns - months down the track - directly to
Australian authorities in correspondence viewed by Reuters.
Several other experts are also critical,
including some who requested anonymity, citing the close knit nature of
the industry which has just a few companies and militaries capable of
conducting deepwater searches.
"I have serious concerns that the MH370
search operation may not be able to convincingly demonstrate that 100
percent sea floor coverage is being achieved," Mike Williamson, founder
and president of Williamson & Associates told Reuters.
Diving into the unknown
Australia took over the search for the
missing plane from Malaysia in late March last year, three weeks after
MH370 disappeared off the radar during a flight from Kuala Lumpur to
Beijing.
The search area was determined by
satellite data that revealed the plane turned back sharply over the
Malaysian Peninsula and flew undetected for another six hours before
crashing into the inhospitable southern Indian Ocean.
The unchartered waters, buffeted by the
Roaring Forties winds, stretch as deep as 6 km, hiding old volcanoes and
cliffs in their depths. Australia, Malaysia and China earlier this
month agreed to double the search area to 120,000 sq km.
Whether Phoenix International, which has
U.S. navy contracts and found AF447, will be part of that extended
search area is unclear after the ATSB said that Go Phoenix, owned by
Australian firm Go Marine, will cease operating on June 19. Phoenix
International, which was contracted separately by the Malaysian
government, did not immediately return calls about its position. The
Malaysian government also did not reply to requests for comment.
Two of the Fugro ships traverse up and
down 2.4 km-wide strips of the sea floor, pulling via a cable a
"towfish" that contains sonar equipment, in a technique often called
"mowing the lawn".
The towfish coasts around 100 meters
above the sea floor, sending out sound waves diagonally across a swath,
or broad strip, to produce a flattened image of the seabed.
The Fugro ships are using sonar provided
by EdgeTech, the same U.S. company whose sonar was used successfully to
find Air France AF447 after it crashed in the Atlantic Ocean.
However, experts say while the type of
sonar equipment being used by Fugro gives good results in flat surfaces,
it is less well-suited to rugged underwater terrain, a world of
confusing shadows.
The ATSB has routinely released detailed
data from Go Phoenix, but has not done so for the Fugro ships. Experts
have cobbled together an analysis from glimpses of the sonar use and
data in videos and images posted to the ATSB website. From that, they've
gauged the EdgeTech sonars are operating at swathes beyond their
optimum capabilities, resulting in poor quality images and leaving side
gaps in coverage.
"It makes no sense to be using fine
scale tools to cover a massive area; it is like mowing an entire wheat
field with a household lawnmower," said Rob McCallum, a vice-president
at Williamson & Associates.
Fugro deputy managing director Paul
Kennedy said the sonar is running within its capabilities, noting the
system identified five "debris-like" objects in 700-metre deep water at a
test range off the West Australian coast.
"The test range gives us full confidence the sonars will see the debris field when we cross it," he said.
Wild weather
Fugro is known for its expertise in
high-quality low-resolution mapping of sea floors but has far less
experience than some of the rejected bidders in deepwater aircraft
searches. It has been involved in 17 search and recovery efforts for
aircraft or ships over 15 years, compared with some of the bidders who
search for 4-5 aircraft every year.
Kennedy pointed to the find earlier this
month of a previously uncharted shipwreck as evidence Fugro was capable
of finding the plane.
Concerning experts further is the fact
that the third Fugro vessel, which was being used to scan the gaps
between the other two ships with an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV),
was this month taken out of action because of encroaching wild winter
weather.
That leaves the daily search without an
AUV, a much more nimble piece of equipment that was vital in successful
search for AF447.
"We are continuously reviewing the
search data as it comes in and we are satisfied that the coverage and
detection standards we have specified are being met or exceeded," ATSB
Chief Commissioner Martin Dolan said in an email.
Source: Reuters
