The Washington Post

How could the missing Malaysia plane have flown faster but covered less ground?

Authorities investigating the missing Malaysian airliner are now focusing their attention on a search area north of where they thought the plane may have crashed. The logic, according to Australian officials, is that the plane flew faster than first suspected, causing it to run out of fuel and plunge into the ocean miles before we previously thought.

Wait, you say. If a plane is flying at a faster speed, shouldn't it cover more ground? How does this make any sense? We're going to unpack some of the science behind flight to try to understand what may have happened.


There are two operative factors here: One is fuel consumption, and the other is altitude. (There's also a tricky third matter called weight, but we won't get too deep into that now.)

How far a plane can go is determined by what the Federal Aviation Administration calls endurance. Endurance is a way of describing how planes convert fuel into energy. It's a bit like how we calculate gas mileage for cars — only in the air, environmental conditions play a much bigger role.

Maximizing an aircraft's range means having it sip fuel, not gulp it. "If maximum endurance is desired, the flight condition must provide a minimum fuel flow," according to a pilot's manual published by the FAA.

Those conditions are most easily achieved when you're in stable, level flight. Climbing or descending are energy-inefficient activities that increase the fuel flow, which is bad if you're trying to fly as far as you can. That said, just like a car, going faster requires more power — and more fuel.

But fuel consumption is also affected by altitude. The higher up you are, the less drag produced by the air -- making your engines more efficient. Simon Weselby, an engineer for Airbus, explained in a 2012 presentation that flying just below the right cruise altitude can waste an enormous amount of fuel.

This also makes sense: It would take you longer to cross a given stretch of ground if you have to traverse it rather than fly over it.

We don't know what MH370's altitude was at the time that Malaysian authorities believe it crashed. But given that investigators now think the plane was both moving faster and crashed sooner, it's reasonable to think that the aircraft was flying inefficiently.

Brian Fung covers technology for The Washington Post, focusing on telecommunications and the Internet. Before joining the Post, he was the technology correspondent for National Journal and an associate editor at the Atlantic.



Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
Deaf banjo player teaches thousands
Perks of private flying
Drawing as an act of defiance
Play Videos
Husband finds love, loss in baseball
Bao: The signature dish of San Francisco
From foster homes to the working world
Play Videos
How soccer is helping Philadelphia men kick the streets
Here's why you hate the sound of your own voice
The woman behind the Nats’ presidents ‘Star Wars’ makeover
Play Videos
How hackers can control your car from miles away
How to avoid harmful chemicals in school supplies
How much can one woman eat?
Next Story
Andrea Peterson · March 28, 2014

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.