Search for Flight 370 Area Moves 600 Miles to Northeast
WOLF BLITZER, HOST: Jim, thanks very much. Happening now, the mystery of Flight 370 -- a whole new search zone. That's the target as aircraft get ready to take off for a fresh sweep of the area momentarily. Based on analysis showing the airliner could not have flown as far as originally thought, the search area moves hundreds of miles to the northeast. Objects spotted -- five planes quickly locate possible debris in the new search area. Their information immediately sent for analysis, as ships are moving in for a closer look. And pilot versus autopilot -- we have new details on the background of the airliner's captain, plus, a look at how ground controllers might automatically take charge of an airliner if there's trouble in the cockpit. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM. We begin with a stunning new turn in the hunt for Flight 370. Here are the latest developments. Forget the old search zone, there's a new search zone, 680 miles to the northeast, much closer to Australia. Authorities say a new analysis of data shows the airliner could not have flown as far as previously thought. Planes which were unable to confirm satellite images in the old search zone have already spotted multiple objects in the new area. We're awaiting the results of the scrutiny of those photos. We hope to get those results shortly. Right now, aircraft are getting ready to return to the search zone. China says one of its ships has arrived in the new area. Authorities hope it can retrieve at least some of the objects. Other ships, they are on the way right now. Our analysts and reporters, they're all standing by here in Washington, as well as around the world, with the kind of special coverage that only CNN can deliver. Let's begin with our aviation correspondent, Rene Marsh, for the very latest -- Rene.</s>RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, as you just said, today, a sudden shift in focus. Again, this search zone has moved. And authorities say that's thanks to a credible lead. That lead? More analysis of existing data, with an entirely new search zone in play. Does that mean crews wasted time searching the wrong area for more than a week?</s>MARSH (voice-over): The new zone, roughly 123,000 square miles, larger than the State of New York and 300 miles closer to the Australian coastline, a shorter trip for search planes.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is our best estimate of the area in which the aircraft is likely to have crashed into the ocean.</s>MARSH: So why change everything three weeks after the plane disappeared? More radar and satellite analysis makes investigators believe the plane was flying faster than previously thought as it moved between the South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca. A faster fuel burn early on means the plane can't go as far. But what about those satellite pings that first led searchers to the South Indian Ocean? Investigators say since the plane went faster, it used more fuel and there's no way it had enough gas to make it to the bottom of this arc. So now the search moves to the northeast.</s>JOHN YOUNG, AUSTRALIA MARITIME SAFETY AUTHORITY: It is now the most credible lead as to where debris may be located.</s>MARSH: Critics suggest we've heard that before. Previous leads such as satellite images of floating objects near the old search area, were called credible, too.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This area seems to corroborate some form of objects and debris.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have now had a number of very credible leads.</s>MARSH: None of them led to Flight 370. But Malaysian authorities still think they could be relevant.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because of ocean drift, this new search area could still be consistent with the potential objects identified by various satellite images.</s>MARSH: The hunt for Flight 370 started in the South China Sea, moved to the Strait of Malacca before expanding into the Andaman Sea and Northern Indian Ocean. Then came these arcs, the search stretching from South Kazakhstan to the South Indian Ocean. But even more data analysis refocused the search on the South Indian Ocean, until now. Were the last eight days of searching the old area a waste of time? Australian officials say no.</s>YOUNG: This is the normal business of search and rescue operations that new information comes to light, refined analyses take you to a different place. I don't count the original work a waste of time.</s>MARSH: All right. Well, meanwhile, today the NTSB had a show and tell at its laboratory here in Washington, DC, where Flight 370's black boxes may -- may be examined if and when they are recovered. You're looking at video from that show and tell. And the lab examines 650 flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders a year. About a third of them come from foreign governments. They're very hopeful that they'll be able to recover some information, if and when it's recovered. And someone actually asked, you know, what has been your luck as far as pulling information out of it If it's been submerged in water for a long period of time? Again, very hopeful. They couldn't think of a time when they weren't able to pull information off.</s>BLITZER: And this is it, a little -- a small box like this, what they're searching for.</s>BLITZER: The so-called black box, which is really orange, the flight data recorder. They've got a huge search underway. And there's -- that pinging is only going to go on if the batteries are still working.</s>MARSH: Right.</s>BLITZER: Maybe another 10 days or so. Rene, stand by. Thank you. Let's bring in our aviation a lot, Miles O'Brien, along with our CNN aviation analyst, Peter Goelz, a former NTSB managing director, CNN law enforcement analyst, the former FBI assistant director, Tom Fuentes. Let's start with you -- Peter. So is this new area the real deal or is this another false hope?</s>PETER GOELZ, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, I think it's the best deal that they can come up with today. I mean this is all new territory. The analysis is difficult. The analysis hasn't been done before. They had a fresh set of eyes looking at the data. They did it in a more extensive way. This is their best call right now. We've got to pursue it.</s>BLITZER: Tom, what do you think?</s>TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: I think the same thing. And also, you know, they're finding debris in the area with the airplanes rather than just five day old satellite images. So that's hopeful.</s>BLITZER: Yes, how long does it take, Miles, a pilot flying over, they see something white or something gray or whatever, how long should it take to determine, is wreckage from the plane?</s>O'BRIEN: Well, I mean once you get a ship on site, it should be very easy.</s>BLITZER: You can't just do it from the air...</s>O'BRIEN: That's...</s>BLITZER: -- even if a pilot goes pretty low, you couldn't make out that this is wreckage -- this is, you know, from the belly or the wing or whatever?</s>O'BRIEN: Well, I suppose if you saw something with a Malaysia logo on it, delivery, yes. But I mean in many cases, what we're talking about are small pieces where you need to look at serial numbers, that kind of thing. So, you know, they might get lucky and find a piece like that. Obviously, remember in Air France in 2009, that vertical stabilizer was floating in the water. It was quite obvious what that was.</s>BLITZER: Yes, is it -- is it impossible or is it likely that even if you don't get a ship in the area, a plane could fly at a relatively low level and make a decision, this is it?</s>GOELZ: No. They would not be able to do that. They've got to get their eyes and their hands on an actual physical piece of wreckage that has the serial number, that is clearly identified to the aircraft. The families, at the least, would not accept anything less.</s>BLITZER: And they shouldn't -- Rene, what are you hearing from your sources here in Washington? Are they encouraged? Are they upbeat or are they still tentative?</s>MARSH: Well, again, to echo everything that was just said here, it is the best case scenario now, just based on this data, they've been able to drill down even further. But nothing is 100 percent until you get to those pieces, you examine them very closely and you're able to definitively say, yes, this belongs to the plane. Other than that, you really can't get that excited, because look what happened. We're now looking in a totally different area than we were looking yesterday.</s>BLITZER: Some nearly 700 miles away.</s>MARSH: Yes.</s>BLITZER: Is it your assessment, Tom, that it's strictly the result of what they said publicly, the political leadership in Australia and Malaysia, that new arithmetic, shall we say, of the original data showed that the location was slightly different, 700 miles, not so slight? Or -- or -- I'm throwing this out as just a possibility -- was there some secret information out there maybe collected by the United States that shared -- that was shared with all the investigators, maybe you guys are looking in the wrong place?</s>FUENTES: If there is such secret information, I'm not aware of it.</s>BLITZER: I'm talking about, Peter, you know, the -- because the U.S. has satellites and has all sorts of high tech capabilities that it doesn't want to share with the world...</s>GOELZ: Right.</s>BLITZER: -- for obvious sources and methods, confidentiality, national security reasons. But if the U.S. did spot something 700 miles away, presumably, the U.S. would have told the NTSB, the FAA, hey, guys, you know what, do some more math.</s>FUENTES: Sure. I think that's possible. But remember, the South Indian Ocean, that was pegged by the NTSB and the U.S. off the bat as the most likely spot. I think it's a further refinement of their first analysis. They know the pinger is dying out. They made their last best guess at this point based on the facts that they had.</s>BLITZER: I can't tell you how many people have Tweeted me or e- mailed me. They're losing total credibility. They're losing total confidence in the credibility of all of these investigators, given this major, major shift.</s>O'BRIEN: Well, the thing is we just -- there's no transparency. So there could be some very good reasons for all this. And you hit on one of them. The data we're talking about here is sensitive for everybody, because we're talking about military radars and capabilities, and perhaps we might be able to identify some holes in their system. And so there -- there's a great reluctance, and couple that with natural rivalries between these countries. It took them a very long time to pull this together, to start herding the cats and start crunching this data. Certainly, if all of those complications hadn't been in play, we would have known a lot sooner that they were flying faster at 12,000 feet.</s>BLITZER: And what U.S. officials and everybody else involved in the investigation, they're really worried about right now, is that the longer it goes the less likely they will retrieve this flight data recorder or the cockpit voice recorder?</s>MARSH: Absolutely. And, you know, once they do retrieve this, we'll start getting that critical information relatively quickly. I mean they start releasing that information to investigators within 24 hours. So we'll start to get a picture of what is on there. But, again, of course, it goes back to finding the recorders first -- Wolf.</s>BLITZER: You know, we've heard some conflicting opinions from the Malaysian authorities and the Australian authorities earlier today, Miles. The Malaysians suggesting, well, some of the earlier stuff that was spotted in the old search area could have drifted toward the new search area, so it wasn't a total waste. The Australians saying all that stuff, the 122 pieces that were spotted by one piece of satellite, 300 spotted by another, that's all junk. It has nothing to do with the wreckage.</s>O'BRIEN: I think, you know, if, in fact, the Malaysians are correct, that would be hard to explain based on the ocean currents, unless they found some sort of</s>BLITZER: So you believe the Australians are right?</s>O'BRIEN: I do. I do believe the Australians.</s>BLITZER: Peter, what about you?</s>GOELZ: Yes. I think the Australians are speaking straight.</s>BLITZER: You accept the Australian version?</s>GOELZ: Hopefully, yes.</s>BLITZER: And you don't -- you have more confidence in the Australians than the Malaysians? You've worked with both when you were at the</s>FBI. GOELZ: Yes, well the Australians have a long-term relationship of sharing 100 percent with the United States on all intelligence matters, so there's nothing that's withheld from either country by the other. But just in terms of -- since we want to throw out wild speculation, ask the Navy if we could have had U.S. submarines with the acoustical array looking for that box. And if they found something, alert the people above and get out before they're located.</s>BLITZER: All right, we're going to talk about how they came up with this new calculation maybe late in the game, maybe still in time, but we'll get to that later. Guys, stand by. Up next, they spotted objects on their first mission over the new search zone, now, as aircraft prepare to head out again, we're going to show you the latest on this search. U.S. Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby, he's the Pentagon press secretary. He's walking into THE SITUATION ROOM right now.</s>REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: Hi, Wolf.</s>BLITZER: Admiral, thanks very much for coming in. We're going to talk about what's going on in a moment. Stand by. Also, he's been the object of a lot of scrutiny. We'll take a closer look at the captain of Flight 370 and his flight simulator, which has sparked a lot of curiosity and a lot of suspicion.