RMR: Rick's Rant - Brad Butt's Lie

Malaysia Airlines Accidents and incidents

Accidents and incidents

There have been three accidents involving passenger fatalities on Malaysia Airlines, with a total of 134 confirmed fatalities:
4 December 1977 - Malaysian Airline System Flight 653, a Boeing 737-200 (9M-MBD) was hijacked and crashed in Tanjung Kupang, Johor, killing all 100 people on board. It remains the deadliest crash of all time in Malaysia to this day.
18 December 1983 - Malaysian Airline System Flight 684, an Airbus A300B4 (OY-KAA) leased from Scandinavian Airlines crashed 2 km short of the runway in Subang on a flight from Singapore. There were no fatalities, but the aircraft was written-off.[74]
15 September 1995 - Malaysia Airlines Flight 2133, a Fokker 50 (9M-MGH) crashed during approach in Tawau, Sabah due to pilot error. Of the 53 people on board, 34 were killed.[75]
15 March 2000 - Malaysia Airlines Flight 85, an Airbus A330-300 (9M-MKB) was damaged by a chemical called oxalyl chloride, which leaked from canisters during unloading after its arrival at Kuala Lumpur from Beijing; causing damage to the fuselage. The five-year-old Airbus was sufficiently damaged to be written-off.[76]
1 August 2005 - A Boeing 777-200ER 9M-MRG operating Malaysia Airlines Flight 124 departed Perth for Kuala Lumpur. Climbing through 38,000 feet a faulty accelerometer caused the aircraft's Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU) to command changes of altitude. The flight crew overrode the ADIRU and manually returned to land the aircraft at Perth. Subsequent NTSB investigation led the US FAA to issue emergency airworthiness directive 2005-18-51 on the fly-by-wire software.[77]
8 March 2014 - Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (9M-MRO) carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew went missing on a flight to Beijing Capital International Airport from Kuala Lumpur International Airport.[78][79]

777-200ER

777-200ER

The 777-200ER ("ER" for Extended Range), the B-market version of the -200, was originally known as the 777-200IGW for its increased gross weight.[72] The -200ER features additional fuel capacity and an increased maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) over the -200.[169] Aimed at international airlines operating transatlantic routes,[18] the -200ER's maximum range is 7,700 nautical miles (14,300 km).[169] In addition to breaking the eastbound great circle "distance without landing" record, the -200ER also holds the record for the longest ETOPS-related emergency flight diversion (177 minutes under one engine), on a United Airlines flight carrying 255 passengers on March 17, 2003, over the Pacific Ocean.[172][173]

The first -200ER was delivered to British Airways on February 6, 1997.[73] Singapore Airlines, one of the type's largest customers,[1] ordered over half of its -200ERs with reduced engine thrust specifications (de-rated) for use on medium-length routes.[174][175] The de-rated engines lower MTOW, which reduces the aircraft's purchase price and landing fees, and can be re-rated to full -200ER standard for long-haul operations.[174] As of August 2013, -200ER deliveries to 33 different customers totaled 422.[1] As of July 2013, 418 examples of the -200ER were in airline service.[170] The competing aircraft from Airbus

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 The aircraft (9M-MRO)

This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses. (March 2014)

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370

The aircraft (9M-MRO) at
Missing aircraft summary
Date 8 March 2014
Summary Missing
Passengers 227
Crew 12
Aircraft type Boeing 777-200ER
Operator Malaysia Airlines
Registration 9M-MRO
Flight origin Kuala Lumpur International Airport
Destination Beijing Capital International Airport


Malaysia Airlines flight 370 (MH370/MAS370), also marketed as China Southern Airlines flight 748 (CZ748) under a codeshare agreement, is a scheduled flight from Kuala Lumpur International Airport, Malaysia, to Beijing Capital International Airport, China. On 8 March 2014, the aircraft operating the flight, a Boeing 777-200ER, registration 9M-MRO, disappeared en route with 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board. The cause remains unknown and is under investigation.

The aircraft departed Kuala Lumpur for the six-hour flight at 00:41 MST (UTC+08:00) on 8 March (16:41 UTC on the 7th). Subang Air Traffic Control Centre lost contact with the aircraft at about 01:22 while it was over the Gulf of Thailand, and reported it missing at 02:40.[1][2] A joint search-and-rescue effort, focusing on the Gulf of Thailand, Straits of Malacca, and the South China Sea, is being conducted by co-operating agencies of numerous national governments.[3][4][5]

At least two passengers were using false identities.[6][7][8][9] The head of Malaysia's Civil Aviation Authority says officials had not ruled out hijacking as a cause of the plane's disappearance, adding that all reported sightings of debris from the plane in the seas south of Vietnam were unconfirmed.[10]

Despite an ongoing search and rescue operation, China has urged Malaysia to intensify their efforts.[11]



Contents [hide]
1 Incident
2 Search
2.1 Location
2.2 Response
3 Aircraft
4 Passengers and crew
4.1 Crew
4.2 Passengers
4.2.1 Passengers using false identities
5 Investigation
6 Notes
7 References
8 External links


Incident[edit]

Origin and destination airports for MH370 and last known position over the Gulf of Thailand

The flight departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport on 8 March at 00:41 local time (7 March, 16:41 UTC) and was scheduled to land at Beijing Capital International Airport at 06:30 (7 March, 22:30 UTC). The aircraft ceased all communications and the transponder signal was lost[12] just before it was to be passed off to the Ho Chi Minh Area Control Center.[1][2][13] The aircraft's last known position before disappearing off ATC radar was 6°55′15″N 103°34′43″E.[14]

Malaysia Airlines issued a media statement at 07:24 confirming that contact had been lost at 02:40[15] and that search and rescue operations had begun.[2] The plane relayed no distress signal, indications of bad weather, or technical problems before vanishing from radar screens.[16] When radar contact with the aircraft was lost, it was carrying enough fuel for about an additional 7 1⁄2 hours of flying time.[17] Relevant authorities in China and Thailand informed their Malaysian counterparts that the aircraft had not entered their airspace.[18]

The Aviation Herald website reported that Subang Air Traffic Control lost radar and radio contact with the aircraft at 01:22 and officially advised Malaysia Airlines at 02:40 that the aircraft was missing.[1] However, a Malaysia Airlines spokesperson said that the last conversation between the flight crew and air traffic control in Malaysia had been around 01:30, and stated that the plane had not disappeared from air traffic control systems in Subang until 02:40, which is long enough for the plane to have been flying across Vietnam.[19] ATC requested another Malaysia Airlines flight, this one en route to Japan and about half an hour ahead of MH370, to try to contact the unresponsive 777. The captain established contact with the crew of MH370 just after 01:30, but could only hear "mumbling".[20]
Search
Location

According to Admiral Ngo Van Phat of the Vietnamese Navy, military radar lost the plane "some 153 nautical miles" (283 km; 176 mi) south of Thổ Chu in the Gulf of Thailand.[5][21] The Vietnamese government initially reported that the aircraft had crashed at sea in the Gulf of Thailand, although the airline denied this claim,[22] and the claim about the known location of the aircraft by the Vietnamese Navy was rejected by the Malaysian Minister of Transport, Hishammuddin Hussein.[23][24] The Vietnamese Navy later clarified that the admiral had actually been referring to the location where contact was last made, rather than indicating a crash site.[1]

The search for the missing jetliner located oil slicks in the Gulf of Thailand on 8 March, about 50 nautical miles (93 km) south of Vietnam's Thổ Chu Island.[25] During the search, the Vietnamese Navy reported spotting at least one oil slick, between 10 and 20 km (6–12 mi) long, which was believed to be that of the missing aircraft.[26][27] The Vietnamese Civil Aviation Department aircraft also reported they spotted two large oil slicks that authorities suspect are from the MAS jetliner. The slicks, each between 10 and 15 km (6–9 mi) long, and 500 metres (550 yd) apart, were spotted 140 nautical miles (260 km; 160 mi) south of Thổ Chu Island off southern Vietnam, and were consistent with the kind that would be caused by fuel from a crashed jetliner.[28] Another report that an oil leak about 80 kilometres (50 mi) long was clearly seen from a Vietnamese search and rescue AN-26 aircraft at 08:35 on 9 March, approximately 150 kilometres (93 mi) away from Cape Cà Mau.[29] Officials investigated the possibility of mid-air disintegration.[30] However, after tests on 10 March, it was found that oil samples from the slicks were not from an aircraft.[31][32]

Debris was also reportedly found on 9 March about 80 kilometres (50 mi) south of Thổ Chu Island. The debris, which was claimed to include a composite inner door and a piece of the aircraft's tail, was located at a point along the planned flight path of MH370.[33][34][35] The following day, however, DCA Malaysia reported these claims were untrue.[36]

The Royal Thai Navy shifted its focus in the search away from the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea due to the request of its Malaysian counterpart, which is investigating the possibility the aircraft turned around and could have gone down in the Andaman Sea, near Thailand's border.[37] The chief of the Royal Malaysian Air Force, Rodzali Daud, claimed that military recordings of radar signals did not exclude the possibility of the aircraft turning back on its flight path.[38][39] The search area has been widened to the Straits of Malacca along the west coast of theMalay Peninsula; so that both waters to the east of Malaysia in the South China Sea, and in the Straits of Malacca along Malaysia's west coast, are being searched.[40] The Indonesian Navy also focused the search on the Straits of Malacca after a request by the Malaysian Armed Forces.[41]

The Malaysian and Vietnamese search and rescue teams were criticized in the Beijing Times of March 10, with the countries being called "relatively backwards." A spokesperson for the US Navy's Seventh Fleet, however, told the New York Times that the Malaysians were "very efficient, very professional."[42]
Response

In response to the incident, the Malaysian government mobilised the Civil Aviation department, air force, navy, Maritime Enforcement Agency, and requested international assistance from Integrated Area Defence System (IADS) and neighbouring states. Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, China, and the United States set aside territorial disputes to mount a search and rescue mission in the region's waters.[43][44] The French Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la Sécurité de l'Aviation Civile (BEA) and India offered their services to help with rescue and investigation.[45][46]

Lekiu class frigate of the Royal Malaysian Navy also participate in SARMalaysiaThe Royal Malaysian Air Force dispatched a CASA/IPTN CN-235 transport aircraft, a Beechcraft Super King Air B200T aircraft, four Lockheed C-130 Hercules military transport aircraft, two Bombardier Global Express aircraft, two Agusta A109helicopters, and four Eurocopter EC725 long-range tactical transport helicopters.[24] Six Royal Malaysian Navy vessels have also been dispatched, in addition to three Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency vessels to search the waters off its east coast in the South China Sea.[24][47][48] Malaysia Airlines has also sent a team of caregivers and volunteers dubbed GoTeam to provide assistance towards family members of the passengers.[49] Malaysia has also established a coordination centre at the National Disaster Control Centre (NDCC) in Pulau Meranti, Cyberjaya, to monitor the development of the situation.[50]On 9 March, the Malaysian transport minister said in a media statement that rescue teams have widened their search area.[51] He also stated that the Malaysian intelligence agencies have been activated, while counter terrorism units in all relevant countries have been informed, adding that he has met with officers from the FBI, who have arrived in Malaysia. He has also noted that no Malaysian submarines will be deployed as they are "not equipped for search and rescue".[52]

Australian RAAF AP-3C Orions are participating in the searchAustraliaThe Australian government provided two Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Lockheed AP-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft to join the search and rescue operation.[53] The first RAAF P-3C long-range maritime surveillance aircraft departed for the search from Darwin on 9 March.[54]ChinaTwo Chinese warships, Jinggang Shan and Mianyang, were dispatched to assist in the search. Jinggang Shan has two helicopters, 30 medical personnel, ten divers, and 52 marines, as well as life-saving and underwater detection equipment.[55]On the afternoon of 9 March, another two Chinese warships, Kunlun Shan and Haikou, were dispatched to the suspected site of the missing plane.[56] On 10 March, China adjusted the operations of orbiting satellites to help in the search of the missing flight. [57]IndonesiaThe Embassy of Indonesia in Kuala Lumpur announced the country would send five ships to help Malaysian authorities in the search and rescue mission.[4] The country has deployed its first two PC-40 fast patrol vessels, the KRI Matocra andKRI Krait, as well a CASA C-212 maritime patrol aircraft.[58] Currently, Indonesia has deployed one corvette, and four rapid patrol vessels, which was on patrol around the island of Penang in the Straits of Malacca.[41]PhilippinesThe Philippine AFP Western Command has sent BRP Gregorio del Pilar, BRP Emilio Jacinto, BRP Apolinario Mabini and a search-and-rescue aircraft to the South China Sea or West Philippine Sea to help in the search efforts.[21][59]

RSS Steadfast is participating in the search.SingaporeWithin a day of the 777 going missing the Republic of Singapore Air Force assisted with a Lockheed C-130 Hercules.[60][61] Subsequently, two other C-130 Hercules were dispatched, with the Republic of Singapore Navy sending its Formidable-class frigate RSS Steadfast, with a Sikorsky S-70B Naval helicopter on board; and a submarine rescue ship (MV Swift Rescue) with divers on board; as well as the Victory-class corvette RSS Vigour.[62]ThailandThe Royal Thai Navy has also prepared to send three vessels and one aircraft to join the search and rescue mission.[63][64] The Royal Thai Navy has dispatched a Super Lynx helicopter and a patrol ship to the Andaman Sea, west of Thailand, to help in the search. It has also put two other ships on standby in the Gulf of Thailand, awaiting a request for assistance from Malaysia.[65]

USS Pinckney was deployed to the southern coast of Vietnam to assist in the search.United StatesThe United States sent a P-3C Orion aircraft from Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, and diverted a guided missile destroyer USS Pinckney carrying two Sikorsky MH-60R Seahawk helicopters which can be equipped for search and rescue.[66][67] USNS John Ericsson is en route to the scene to provide fuel and logistics replenishment.[66] The US also dispatched a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) team in advance, ready to start work immediately should the aircraft wreckage be discovered.[68] The U.S. Navy also ordered a second destroyer, the USS Kidd, to the scene.[69]

The Vietnam Coast Guard CASA C-212-400VietnamThe Vietnamese participated with three Antonov An-26s, two CASA C-212, one DHC-6 Twin Otter, two Mil Mi-171 and seven ships from the Navy (HQ-954, HQ-627), Coast Guard (CSB-2001, CSB-2003), Fisheries Control (KN-774) and Maritime Search & Rescue Coordination Centre (SAR 413).New ZealandThe New Zealand Government has deployed a RNZAF P3 Orion to help with the search, based at Butterworth Air Base in Penang along with two Australian P3 aircraft.
Aircraft[
The Boeing 777 is generally regarded by aviation experts as having an "almost flawless" safety record,[70] one of the best of any commercial aircraft.[71] Since its first commercial flight in June 1995, there have only been two previous serious incidents. In January 2008, 47 passengers were injured when ice crystals in the fuel system of British Airways Flight 38 caused it to lose power and crash-land just short of the runway at London Heathrow Airport. In July 2013, Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crash-landed on final approach to San Francisco International Airport. Three passengers died and 181 were injured as a result of the incident.[72] Both aircraft were damaged beyond repair.[73]



The aircraft was a Boeing 777-2H6ER,[a] serial number 28420, registration 9M-MRO. The 404th Boeing 777 produced, it first flew on 14 May 2002, and was delivered new to Malaysia Airlines on 31 May 2002. The aircraft was powered by two Rolls-Royce Trent 892 engines.[75] According to the airline, it had accumulated at least 20,243 hours and 3,023 cycles in service.[76][77] 9M-MRO had not previously been involved in any major incidents,[78]however, a minor incident while taxiing at Shanghai Pudong International Airport in August 2012 resulted in significant damage to one of its wingtips, which broke off after striking the tail of another plane.[79]Its last maintenance check was in February 2014.[80]

Passengers and crew
Nationalities of people aboard Flight 370NationalityPassengersCrewTotal Australia 6 0 6
Canada 2 0 2
China 152 0 152
France 4 0 4
Hong Kong 1[81] 0 1
India 5 0 5
Indonesia 7 0 7
Malaysia 38 12 50
Netherlands 1 0 1
New Zealand 2 0 2
Russia 1 0 1
Taiwan 1 0 1
Ukraine 2 0 2
United States 3 0 3
Unknown[A] 2 0 2
Total 227 12 239
Note

Jump up^ Two unknown passengers carrying stolen passports (from Italy and Austria).


Malaysia Airlines released the names and nationalities of the 227 passengers and 12 crew, based on the flight manifest.[2][82]
Crew[edit]

All crew onboard were Malaysian. The captain was 53-year-old Zaharie bin Ahmad Shah from Penang, who joined Malaysian Airlines in 1981 and had 18,365 hours flying experience.[2][83] Zaharie was also an examiner qualified to conduct simulator tests for pilots.[84] The first officer was 27-year-old Fariq bin Ab Hamid, an employee of Malaysia Airlines since 2007, with 2,763 flying hours.[2][85] Fariq recently switched to flying Boeing 777-200 aircraft after completing his simulator training.[85]
Passengers[edit]

Chinese police in Fuzhou, Fujian, have located a man whose Chinese passport number corresponds to one on the published passenger list. He was not on board and the name on the list next to the number was completely different. However, he had not lost his passport and police suspect the wrong number was published.[86]

The Chinese passengers included a group of 19 artists with six family members and four staff, returning from a calligraphy exhibition of their work in Kuala Lumpur.[87]

20 of the passengers were employees of the Freescale Semiconductor based in Austin, Texas. 12 of these employees are from Malaysia and 8 are Chinese. [88]
Passengers using false identitie

At least two of the passengers were traveling with passports stolen from citizens of European countries. An Austrian listed in the manifest had reported his passport stolen in 2012 and an Italian listed in the manifest had reported his passport stolen in August 2013; both were stolen in Phuket, Thailand, a popular tourist destination. This came to light when attempts were made to locate their next of kin; both men have been confirmed safe.[1][89] The tickets bought by the holders of those stolen passports were sold by China Southern Airlines.[90] The two tickets were bought at the same time and issued by a travel agent in Pattaya, Thailand, two days before the flight. The two itineraries began in Kuala Lumpur and continued via Beijing to Amsterdam. The itinerary for the Italian passport holder ended at Copenhagen and that of the Austrian passport holder continued to Frankfurt.[91] Malaysia’s Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi criticized Malaysian immigration officials for failing to stop the passengers traveling on the stolen European passports.[92] Interpol stated that both passports were listed on its database of lost and stolen passports, but that no check had been made against its database,[93] noting that very few countries consistently use the database.[92] It was reported that an Iranian man under the name Kazem Ali had purchased the tickets via telephone.[94][95]

On 10 March, Malaysia's Civil Aviation chief Azaharuddin Abdul Rahman reported that investigators had identified one of the people traveling with a stolen passport, but did not disclose any details about the person's nationality or identity, except that they were not Malaysian and that one of the men resembled Italian professional football player Mario Balotelli. This statement conflicted with an earlier report that described the passengers as having Asian appearance. [96]No connection between the stolen passports and the aircraft's disappearance has yet been reported.[97][98][99]
Investigation

Boeing has announced that it is assembling a team of experts to provide technical assistance to investigators,[100] in accordance with International Civil Aviation Organization protocols. In addition, the United States National Transportation Safety Board announced in an 8 March press release that a team of investigators had been sent along with technical advisers from the Federal Aviation Administration to offer assistance in the investigation.[68] The country that will lead the investigation will not be determined until the missing aircraft is found.[101]

The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation has deployed technical experts and agents to investigate the disappearance.[102] United States and Malaysian officials are reviewing the entire passenger manifest in addition to the two passengers who were confirmed as possessing stolen passports.[103]

Operations and safety editor at Flightglobal, David Learmount, said that it was "extraordinary" that the pilots did not make a distress call, and drew comparisons with the loss of Air France Flight 447 over the Atlantic in 2009, stating "This is a historical comparison and could be a coincidence. It also happened in the early hours of morning, after midnight in the dead of night, and disappeared without a call from the pilots."[104]

Notes
Jump up^ The aircraft was a Boeing 777-200ER (for Extended Range) model; Boeing assigns a unique alphanumeric customer code for each company that buys one of its aircraft, which is applied as a suffix to the model number at the time the aircraft is built. The code for Malaysia Airlines is "H6", hence "777-2H6ER".[74]
References

^ Jump up to:a b c d e "Crash: Malaysia B772 over Gulf of Thailand on Mar 8th 2014, aircraft missing". The Aviation Herald. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b c d e f "MH370 Flight Incident". Malaysian Airlines. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ Grudgings, Stuart. "Malaysia Airlines plane crashes in South China Sea with 239 people aboard: report". Retrieved 8 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b Tasnim Lokman (9 March 2013). "MISSING MH370: Indonesia helps in search for airliner". New Straits Times. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b "Vietnam Navy says Malaysia Airlines plane crashes off Tho Chu Island". Tuoi Tre News. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Passengers with stolen passports on board Malaysia Airlines flight". Malaysia Sun. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ DiBlasio, Natalie and Kevin Johnson (9 March 2014). "U.S. reviews possible terror links in missing Malaysian jet". USA Today. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Reports: FBI prepared to join investigation of missing Malaysia Airlines plane". circa. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Tania Branigan; Kate Hodal (10 March 2014). "Flight MH370: officials 'puzzled' by Malaysia mystery as search widens". The Guardian. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing Malaysia Airlines plane 'a mystery'". BBC News. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "China urges Malaysia to intensify search for flight MH370". BBC News. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Interview with Mikael Robertson of Fight Radar 24, Astro Awani, 8 March 2014". English.astroawani.com. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysian Airlines System (MH) No. 370 ✈ 08-Mar-2014 ✈ WMKK / KUL – ZBAA / PEK ✈". flightaware. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines MH370 Flight Incident – 4th Media Statement". Malaysia Airlines. 8 March 2014. Archived from the original on 8 March 2013. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "MEDIA STATEMENT released at 7.24am/8 Mar 2014 MH370 Incident". Facebook.com. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS flight: Last point of contact was east of Kota Baru".The Star. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ Tom Watkins; Chelsea J. Carter (8 March 2014). "Search intensifies for Malaysian airliner and 239 people, rescue ships head to sea". CNN. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines loses contact with plane carrying 239 people – Yahoo!!!7". Yahoo! News. 8 March 2014. Archived from the original on 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014. "Chinese and Thai authorities have said the plane did not enter their airspace."
Jump up^ "Conspiracy theories spiral around MH370's disappearance".The Malaysian Insider. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "MISSING MH370: Pilot: I established contact with plane". New Straits Times.
^ Jump up to:a b "Malaysian plane crashed off Vietnam coast: state media".Yahoo News. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Search planes scour sea for missing Malaysian jetliner".Chicago Tribune. 10:01 p.m. CDT, March 9, 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia's transport minister said there was no information on wreckage and he urged against speculation.". BBC News. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b c "Too early to come to any conclusion, says Najib". Daily Express. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Chelsea J. Carter and Jim Clancy (9 March 2014). "No sign of Malaysia Airline wreckage; questions over stolen passports". CNN. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Bradsher, Keith (8 March 2014). "Oil Slick Sighting Is First Sign Malaysia Airlines Plane May Have Crashed". The New York Times.ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Five young children among missing Malaysia Airlines passengers as air search called off". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS flight: Two giant oil slicks spotted off Vietnam coast". The Star. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Tiếp cận hiện trường khu vực máy bay Malaysia mất tích" (in Vietnamese). Tuổi Trẻ. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Exclusive: Probe into missing Malaysia plane looks at possible mid-air disintegration". Reuters. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing Malaysia Airlines Plane Remains Mystery". Sky News. 10 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Oil slick spotted by rescuers ‘not from missing Malaysia Airlines flight’, tests reveal". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 2014-03-10.
Jump up^ Sorin Adam Matei (9 March 2014). "Possible Disappearance Location of Flight MH370 50 miles south of Tho Chu Island is Right on the Flight Plan". Matei.org/Ithink. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Vietnam says it may have found missing jet's door".
Jump up^ "Did Missing Malaysia flight DISINTEGRATE at 35,000 feet? Search team find what they believe is part of plane door and tail as Interpol probes if four people boarded using stolen passports".Daily Mail. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Accident description". Aviation Safety Network. 10 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Jim Clancy and Mark Morgenstein (9 March 2014). "New leads explored in hunt for missing Malaysia Airlines flight". CNN News. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Pete Williams, Robert Windrem and Richard Esposito (9 March 2014). "Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet May Have Turned Back: Officials". NBC News. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Reports: Missing Malaysia Airlines plane 'may have turned back'". BBC News. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines: What we know about flight MH370". BBC. 10 March 2014. Retrieved March 10, 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b Bagus BT Saragih (09 March 2014). "RI deploy warships as search expands to Malacca Strait". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Fuller, Thomas (10 March 2014). "False Leads Set Back Hunt for Missing Malaysian Jet". New York Times. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "MISSING MH370: Malaysia welcomes SAR assistance from other countries". New Straits Times. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Wong, Chun-Han; Vu, Trong Khanh; Raghuvanshi, Gaurav (9 March 2014). "Countries Put Disputes Aside for Airliner Search".The Wall Street Journal
Jump up^ "French accident board offers help recovering missing flight MH370". The Malaysian Insider. Yahoo! News. 10 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "India offers help to trace missing Malaysia plane". BBC News. Retrieved 2014-03-10.
Jump up^ "Vietnam, Malaysia mount search for plane". Sky News Australia. 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia widens area of search for missing MAS aircraft".Bernama. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS flight: MAS team arrives in Beijing". The Star. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS flight: Malaysia grateful for assistance in search and rescue operations, says Anifah". The Star. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing Malaysia plane: Search area widened". BBC News. 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Plane may have made 'air turn back', counter terrorism units activated". Astro Awani. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Australia sending two P3C Orions from Darwin to Malaysia to aid with the search for missing Malaysian flight MH370". News Corp Australia. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Australia to send military aircraft to join search of missing Malaysian Airlines flight". 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Chinese warships on way to rescue mission". Xinhua News Agency. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "China dispatches more vessels for plane search". Xinhua News Agency. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "China deploys satellites for missing plane search". Xinhua News Agency. 10 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Fadli (9 March 2014). "RI deploys warships, aircraft to SCS to search for missing aircraft". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "PH joins SE Asia search for Malaysian plane". Rappler. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines missing flight: Live Report". Yahoo! News Malaysia. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysian Airlines missing flight MH370: Live Report". Digital Journal. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Additional SAF assets deployed in response to missing Malaysia Airlines Plane (09 Mar 14)". Ministry of Defence of Singapore. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Thai navy ready to deploy rescue vessels, aircraft for missing Malaysian plane: spokesman". CCTV News. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "MISSING MH370: Rescue efforts under way". New Straits Times. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Search for missing Malaysian jet involves 8 countries". The Nation. 10 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b "US P-3 and USS Pinckney helicopter over Malaysian Airlines search site". U.S. Seventh Fleet Public Affairs. 9 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "U.S. Sends Destroyer to Aid Search for Malaysia Airlines Jet".NBC News. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b "Press Release March 8, 2014: NTSB positioning team to offer assistance in investigation of Malaysia Airlines 777 event". Ntsb.gov. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Oil Slick Not From Missing Malaysian Jet, Investigators Say". NBC News. 2013-11-22. Retrieved 2014-03-10.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines: experts surprised at disappearance of 'very safe' Boeing 777". The Guardian. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines has one of Asia's best safety records".Reuters. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ 06.31 GMT. "Malaysia Airlines: experts surprised at disappearance of 'very safe' Boeing 777". The Guardian. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "NTSB Investigates Asiana 777 Accident in San Francisco".Aviation Week & Space Technology. 6 July 2013. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Pither, Tony (1998). The Boeing 707 720 and C-135. England: Air-Britain (Historians) Ltd. ISBN 0 85130 236 X.
Jump up^ "Malaysia Airlines 9M-MRO (Boeing 777 – MSN 28420)".Airfleets. Retrieved 7 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Boeing 777 at centre of Malaysia Airlines disappearance had clocked up 'normal' 20,000 hours' flying time". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Contact lost with Malaysian 777". Australian Aviation. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS 777-200 had no major prior incidents – 3/8/2014". Flightglobal. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "浦东机场滑行跑道内东航马航两飞机剐蹭 – 新华财经 – 新华网". Xinhua News Agency. 26 June 2012. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Toh, Mavis. "MAS 777 underwent maintenance in Feb". Flightglobal. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Ernest Kao (9 March 2014). "Hong Kong woman named as passenger on board missing Malaysia Airlines flight". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "MH 370 PASSENGER MANIFEST". Malaysia Airlines. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Missing MAS flight: Captain piloting MH370 a Penang boy". The Straits Times. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Koswanage, Niluksi (9 March 2014). "Pilot of missing Malaysian flight an aviation tech geek". Reuters. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
^ Jump up to:a b Watkins, Tom (10 March 2014). "First officer on missing jet was transitioning to 777-200s". CNN. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Wang Chunxiao (9 March 2014). "警方：马航福州乘客护照号对应姓名不符" [Police:Malaysian Airlines's Fuzhou Passenger Passport Number Corresponds to Different Name] (in Chinese). China Central Television.
Jump up^ "Behind jet’s passenger list is rich human tapestry". Associated Press (The Washington Post). 9 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "No sign of Malaysia Airline wreckage; questions over stolen passports". CNN (CNN). 8 March 2014. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Catherine E. Shoichet and Ray Sanchez (March 9, 2014 -- Updated 1337 GMT (2137 HKT)). "Plane bore painters, pilgrims, others from around the world". CNN. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
Jump up^ Keith Bradsher; Eric Schmitt (9 March 2014). "Passport Theft Adds to Mystery of Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet". The New York Times.
Jump up^ Jethro Mullen; Jim Clancy (9 March 2014). "Ticket purchase adds to mystery over plane". CNN.
^ Jump up to:a b Murdoch, Lindsay (10 March 2014). "Fake passports on Malaysia Airlines flight reveal flaw in airline safety". smh.com.au. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ "INTERPOL confirms at least two stolen passports used by passengers on missing Malaysian Airlines flight 370 were registered in its databases". Interpol. Retrieved 9 March 2010.
Jump up^ http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/10/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html
Jump up^ http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.578976
Jump up^ http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-fbi-launch-terrorist-attack-probe-into-vanished-plane-1439586
Jump up^ Brinded, Liana. "Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370: One Fake Passport-holder Identified". International Business Times. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
Jump up^ Cho, Joehee (2014-03-10). "Malaysia Air Passenger With Stolen Passport Caught on Video". ABC News. Retrieved 2014-03-10.
Jump up^ Bentham, Martin. "Flight MH370: Mystery passenger of Malaysian plane 'looked like Mario Balotelli'". The Evening Standard. Retrieved 2014-03-10.
Jump up^ "Boeing team to offer technical help to investigators". Deccan Chronicle.
Jump up^ Toh, Mavis. "NTSB sends team to assist in MH370 case". Flightglobal. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Serrano, Richard A. "FBI to investigate disappearance of a Malaysian Airlines jet." Los Angeles Times. 8 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ Simon Denyer, Robert Barnes and Chico Harlan (9 March 2014)."Four flew with false ID aboard Malaysia Airlines plane that vanished over South China Sea". The Washington Post. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
Jump up^ "Lack of distress call from missing jet 'extraordinary'". The Irish Times.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to 9M-MRO (aircraft).

Accident description at the Aviation Safety Network

Google NYC Tech Talk Series: How Google Backs Up the Internet

Elections watchdog Marc Mayrand fears there would no longer be a level playing field for all parties during an election under the Harper government's proposed overhaul of election laws.

  Elections watchdog Marc Mayrand fears there would no longer be a level playing field for all parties during an election under the Harper government's proposed overhaul of election laws.

The chief electoral officer told a House of Commons committee Thursday he's particularly concerned about provisions in Bill C-23 that would allow political parties to spend untold millions more during election campaigns.

"In Canada, electoral fairness has traditionally been understood to mean maintaining a level playing field among parties and candidates by the imposition of strict spending limits," Mayrand told the committee.


"By increasing those spending limits and, most significantly, creating an exception for certain fundraising expenses, Bill C-23 may well compromise that level playing field."

Mayrand did not specifically say which party would benefit most from the changes but New Democrats and Liberals have charged that the bill is designed to favour the ruling Conservatives, the party with by far the deepest pockets.

C-23 would hike the campaign spending limit for political parties by five per cent, to $22 million for each party that runs a full slate of candidates.

And parties would not have to count as a campaign expense any money they spend to solicit donations from supporters who've contributed at least $20 over the previous five years.

That exemption is a "particular concern" to Mayrand.

"For anybody who has ever seen one, there is no practical way of distinguishing a fundraiser mail-out from advertising and it takes little imagination to understand that other partisan communications can be dressed up as fundraisers," he told the committee.

Moreover, Mayrand said it would be "difficult, if not impossible" to enforce given that parties would be under no obligation to report details of who they contact for donations. And he noted that the bill does not adopt one of his long-standing recommendations, that parties be required to turn over invoices and receipts to Elections Canada.

"We remain the only jurisdiction in Canada where political parties are not required to produce supporting documentation for their reported expenses."

Mayrand also expressed concern that thousands of voters -- primarily youth, seniors and aboriginals, who often have no identification that includes their address -- would be disenfranchised by the bill.

The bill would prohibit the use of voter information cards as one of the documents voters can use to prove their identity at polling stations and it would eliminate the practice of allowing people to vouch for the identity of voters without proper documentation.

An estimated 120,000 voters relied on vouching in the 2011 election and Mayrand said "we can expect that a significant proportion of them would not be able to vote" under C-23.

In justifying the elimination of vouching, Pierre Poilievre, the minister responsible for democratic reform, has pointed to numerous procedural irregularities found in the vouching process in 2011.

But Mayrand countered that "the vast majority of these were strictly record-keeping errors by poll workers" who filled out the vouching paperwork.

Mayrand doubted that doing away with vouching and voter information cards as proof of address would do anything to improve the integrity of the voting process.

"However, we will have taken away the ability of many qualified electors to vote."

He suggested the government has its electoral reform priorities all wrong.

"It is essential to understand that the main challenge for our electoral democracy is not voter fraud but voter participation."

The bill would also separate the commissioner of elections, who investigates violations and enforces the Canada Elections Act, from Elections Canada and place him under the authority of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Mayrand said he is less concerned about where the commissioner is housed than whether he has the proper tools to do the job. He noted that the bill would not give the commissioner the power to compel witnesses to testify -- a hole that has impeded his ability to investigate complaints about misleading robocalls during the 2011 campaign.

He also expressed concern that both he and the commissioner would be muzzled by the bill, which would limit what they can say publicly. The commissioner, for instance, couldn't explain to Canadians why charges could not be laid in a particular case or reassure them when an investigation finds no evidence of voter fraud.

Mayrand is the first witness to testify about the bill. His appearance had been delayed for more than a week because of a filibuster at committee by the NDP, which had been trying to force cross-country hearings.

And it was delayed again Thursday when the Conservatives scheduled a vote in the House of Commons at the same time as Mayrand's presentation was to begin. He was left cooling his heels for more than 30 minutes.

New Democrats accused the Tories of deliberately trying to cut short Mayrand's testimony. However, the committee eventually gave the watchdog the full 90 minutes that had been scheduled for his appearance.



Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/elections-watchdog-says-proposed-election-law-damages-level-playing-field-1.1717148#ixzz2vDtFPWxh

1 I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised onFebruary 25, 2014, by the House Leader of the Official Opposition(Mr. Cullen) regarding statements made in the House by the Member

Full text of House Speaker Andrew Scheer's ruling on Brad Butt

1I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised onFebruary 25, 2014, by the House Leader of the Official Opposition(Mr. Cullen) regarding statements made in the House by the Member fromMississauga
—
Streetsville (Mr. Butt).I would like to thank the hon. House Leader of the Official Oppositionfor having raised this matter, as well as the hon. Leader of the Governmentin the House (Mr. Van Loan) and the honourable Members for WinnipegNorth (Mr. Lamoureux) and Kingston andthe Islands (Mr. Hsu) for theircomments. I also want to acknowledge the statements made by theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville.In raising this matter, the hon. House Leader of the OfficialOpposition claimed that the hon. Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville haddeliberately misled the House on February 6, 2014, during debate on BillC-23,
Fair Elections Act
, when he stated that he had witnessed evidence ofvoter fraud first-hand. He further argued that the matter was not resolvedby the statements made by the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville onFebruary 24 and 25 where he admitted that, contrary to his original claim,he had not actually witnessed what he had originally
claimed
to havewitnessed. In his view, this was not a simple case of someonemisspeaking; he argued rather that it was a case where the Memberdeliberately chose to take something he knew
not
to be true and present itas eyewitness evidence; something so egregious, it constituted contempt.The hon. Leader of the Government in the House noted that theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville had fulfilled his obligation to correctthe record so that no inaccuracies persisted. He suggested that in and ofitself this should be sufficient to
(quote) “
rebut any concern that there hasbeen a contempt
”
(unquote).This incident highlights the primordial importance of accuracy andtruthfulness in our deliberations. All Members bear a responsibility,individually and collectively, to select the words they use very carefully andto be ever mindful of the serious consequences that can result when thisresponsibility is forgotten.






2
In calling on the Chair to arrive at a finding of
prima facie
in this case,the hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition cited my ruling ofMay 7, 2012, where at page 7650 of the
Debates
, I reminded the Housethat, before finding that a Member had deliberately misled the House, threeconditions had to be met:
(quote) “…
one, it must be proven that the statement was misleading;two, it must be established that the member making the statementknew at the time that the statement was incorrect; and three, that inmaking the statement, the member intended to mislead the House
.”
(unquote) Arguing all three of these conditions had been met, he concluded thata breach of privilege had occurred.It was with these criteria in mind that I undertook a thorough review ofall relevant statements made in the House on this matter, focussingparticularly, of course, on the statements made by the hon. Member forMississauga
—
Streetsville:Originally, on February 6, he stated, (quote)
“
I have actuallywitnessed other people picking up the voter cards, going to the campaignoffice of whatever candidate they support and handing out these votercards to other individuals, who then walk into voting stations with friendswho vouch for them with no ID
.
”
(unquote) Later that day, he added:(quote)
“
I will relate
(…)
something
I have

actually

seen
”.
(unquote)It was only on February 24, that he rose to state, (quote)
“
onFebruary 6
(…)
I made a statement
(…)
that is not accurate. I just want toreflect the fact that I have not personally witnessed
(…)
[fraudulent activity]
(…)
and want the record to properly show that
”.
(unquote)On February 25, he returned to the House, characterized hisFebruary 6 statement as (quote)
“
an error on my part
”
(unquote) andapologized (quote)
“
to all Canadians and to all members of the House
”
(unquote), adding that (quote)
“
It was never my intention, in any way, tomislead the House
”

(unquote). The Chair takes due note that the Memberfor Mississauga
—
Streetsville has admitted that his February 6 statementwas not true and that he has apologized for his mistake.






3
As was noted by the hon. Leader of the Government in the House,we all recognize that there is an enduring practice here of giving Membersthe benefit of the doubt when the accuracy of their statements ischallenged. It is often the case that questions of privilege raised on suchmatters are found to be disputes as to facts rather than
prima facie
questions of privilege, primarily due to the high threshold of evidence thatthe House expects. Speaker Parent stated on page 9247 of
Debates
onOctober 19, 2000:
(quote)
“
Only on the strongest and clearest evidence can the Houseor the Speaker take steps to deal with cases of attempts to mislead
members.” (unquote)

From what the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville and otherMembers have revealed, it is quite clear that the House has been providedwith two narratives that are contradictory statements. At the same time, theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville stated that he had no intention ofmisleading the House.Speaker Milliken was faced with a similar set of circumstances inFebruary 2002 when the then Minister of National Defence, Art Eggleton,provided contradictory information to the House. In ruling on a question ofprivilege raised about the contradiction, Speaker Milliken stated onFebruary 1, at page 8581 of Debates:
(quote) “
I am prepared, as I must be, to accept the minister’s
assertion that he had no intention to mislead the House.
” (unquote)
In keeping with that precedent, I am prepared to accord the samecourtesy to the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville. At the same time, the fact remains that the House continues to beseized of completely contradictory statements. This is a difficult position inwhich to leave Members who must be able to depend on the integrity of theinformation with which they are provided to perform their parliamentaryduties. Accordingly, in keeping with the precedent cited earlier in which
Speaker Milliken indicated that the matter merited (quote) “
further

4

consideration by an appropriate committee, if only to clear the air 

”

 (unquote), I am prepared in this case for the same reason to allow thematter to be put to the House.I therefore invite the hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition tomove the traditional motion at this time