[Synthesist]

Thanks Drago for the link to the New Scientist article. Only two ACARS uploads without any further updates after the last confirmed position of the plane is consistent with all of the other *known* facts. No further updates also directly contradict this WSJ article assertion that the plane flew on for another few hours based on engine data from “two people familiar with the details” (a.k.a. anonymous sources). This WSJ “report” looks like very sloppy journalism.

[Bronzewound]

The article does not say the data was ACARS. The article doesn't mention ACARS. The WSJ reports the plane's engines sent information about airspeed and altitude for more than 4 hours AFTER the plane "disappeared."

The ACARS discussion was introduced by a Freeper, not the article. That does not necessarily indicated sloppy reporting. It seems clear that US inspectors are referring to something different.

[ArmstedFragg]

While AHM data uses the ACARS system, it’s not the data dumps you’re referring to. They’re two different things using the same radio system. So, there really isn’t a conflict between the reporting of there being two aircraft data dumps, and the several hours of ongoing AHM data transmissions.