Rescue 116 Crash at Blackrock, Co Mayo(Mod note in post 1)

elastico wrote: »

I checked marine traffic and its still there. Last speed 9knts.

Just wondering why would the time stamps of when the position was received be different on the two MT-related images?

The top left one shows time of last update as 00:46:06, while the one at the bottom right shows 00:45.

JimWinters wrote: »

Around 4pm on the 15th or 16th EI-ICG travelled from Blacksod directly to Blackrock where it either hovered for several minutes or landed. It returned to Blacksod and landed. Moments later there were pictures tweeted with a number of people removing a section of 116's tail from the ramp.

This section could have been winched up but looking at the effort made to remove it, it's likely it was loaded on the ground. Can't publish the pic unfortunately sorry...

It must have hovered as it cannot land there.

Call me Al wrote: »

Many years ago three men were caught by a freak wave at the foot of the Slievemore mountain in Achill. That's the big black mountain that you sometimes see on the media reports based to the south of Blackrock. Their bodies were recovered across the other side of that bay to the northside of Blackrock a month later.
There is hope that this crew will be found. I would think it's very premature to be cancelling a coordinated search of any kind yet. Yes the authorities may move away from the rock now and scale back on the extent of the resources being used, but there is every reason to believe these men will also be found.

Until today, a lot of faith and hope was being placed in the recovery activities at Blackrock that the two men would be found there. That hope is now dashed, and it must be assumed that their recovery is now at the mercy of the sea giving them up in due course. Shoreline searches are probably the only realistic way for this to happen. Unfortunately the length of shoreline involved is expanding daily and is likely to shortly extend into Scotland and the western Isles, assuming their immersion suits remain intact. As a result the intensity of the search efforts that do not involve local shoreline will need to be scaled back.

Discodog wrote: »

I am not questioning it's authenticity but it certainly raises a lot of questions. Is it possible that speed was after hitting the rock?

I dunno. I'm wondering about the last update times as posted above. I dont see a normal AIS update being likely to have been made after the accident, do you?

Steve wrote: »

MT collect and log AIS data through an enthusiast network - a bit like liveatc. I wouldn't rely on timestamps to be accurate or the entries to be forensically valuable.

2 images relating to the same data (ie time of last update) should present the same data though? Yes/No? If no, then how could the reported speed be relied upon either?

Steve wrote: »

I disagree, they stated they haven't found anomalies, not that there aren't any.

I don't think they could have fully analysed all of the data yet.

As reported:

We have recovered all of the data from the flight data recorder...it takes a significant amount of time to analyse. As we said our opinion is that there were no mechanical anomalies and we must now focus on the operational side. It's a long arduous investigation which will take several months," Mr Wyhte said.

"There's a lot more evidence to gather and there's a lot of interviews to do...a lot of procedures and we must talk to the different players involved. That takes time; takes time to gather facts, time to analyse and time to come to a conclusion," the senior investigator added.

TomOnBoard wrote: »

2 images relating to the same data (ie time of last update) should present the same data though? Yes/No? If no, then how could the reported speed be relied upon either?

Even now when I look it up on MT on iPad (paid version), I get this:





I don't think the data is reliable for the purposes of this discussion.