Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Plumley
|
Be cautious.
It's not news that the plane sent engine data to Rolls Royce automatically. The information is typically sent four times during a flight--in thirty minute " packets" of accumulated data--during take off, after climb to altitude, during cruise, and during landing. It is not real time streaming.
Now to the story in the WSJ. Rolls Royce had the data reports since the plane was missing and never indicated they received more than two data reports, indicating no more we're received after radar contact ended. Spokesperson for them claim confidential agreements with accident investigators prevents confirmation of data information but that they have given all info to the investigators. The Journal uses anonymous sources who may have misinterpreted the reporting system or the reporter misunderstood them and they were just speculating about flying four more hours. The article quotes no one, and uses terms like, "speculates" and "believes" to frame the point.
Bottom line, there is no official information coming from Rolls Royce or the investigators that engine data, past the radar loss time, was received. Until more reliable information is given, I would be very skeptical about the accuracy of that one report,
which is now being repeated by other news sources (taking on the appearance of internet validity due to repetition of the same
single story.) Too many misleading/conflicting stories already out there.
As an aside, should it prove to be true that Rolls
did receive data indicating a longer flight and they
did share it with Malaysia Air, it would border on criminal incompetence to keep that quiet, given it absolutely defines the kind of search this would become. Only slightly less criminal would be waiting until now to ask Rolls for the data records.