[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.

[Synthesist]

I did NOT say that this WSJ “report” was based on ACARS data!!! And yes, the WSJ did NOT even bother to identify where their anonymous source for this engine data came from… which helps prove my point that this WSJ article IS sloppy journalism.

But, I did read the Marketwatch version of the WSJ article instead (thanks ElkGroveDan post #14):

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/missing-malaysia-jet-may-have-flown-on-for-hours-2014-03-13?link=MW_latest_news

And also read post #112 (thanks again Drago!)