Dangermouse was the authority on the subject a few days ago. Gone off the boil a bit now.
Good point. It would be awful if everyone was waiting for other countries to reveal their capabilities first, before showing their own cards, but sadly it's quite possible. If the plane really had been flying at very low altitude, each country with radar installations will be very cagey about revealing their capability at detecting low-flying aircraft...and there is good reason to believe that information might be withheld. Much of the data needed for the search would have to come from the latest surveillance equipment which naturally means it is rather secret. Sharing data gleaned from such systems provide other countries with information on what your own systems do and are capable of. In Europe, thanks to the EU, countries are nowadays less furtive about such matters than they are likely to be in the South China Seas.
In the world of defence and military, many, many types of operational capability data are highly classified e.g. max speed, max altitude, max depth, total number of missiles or torpedos, time to refuel, max range, time to reload. The list is almost endless, and military radar capability will be particularly closely guarded, as it is a first line of defence used to scramble jets when an incoming foreign aircraft is detected.Why?
You either know or you don't know.So how do you know?
I think I've said this before. There are lots of agencies and organisations, both governmental and non-governmental, that deal with classified information.So you work for MI6?
... What this disaster shows, if nothing else, is that surveillance might be everywhere in some form or other but it's a long way from comprehensive and omniscient.
If the satellite spotted something 24m long, it sounds as if they've found the plane; the wingspan is 61 m and the cabin about 6m wide. That would be where it ran out of fuel.
Sounds like they might have found something 1500 miles southwest of Perth, Australia. Might.