You'd think they would do their homework before posting pictures like that. Flight 370 is a Boeing 777-200ER. Which only has 2 engines. The one in the picture looks like a Boeing 747.

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You would think that something would be found by now but maybe not when you think how far it is from anywhere and any planes going there don't have much loitering/search time. Ships take a long time to get there and trying to find floating debris when your in 10 ft seas is not real easy. We may never know what happened though I bet someday something is found. It took 2 years to find the AirFrance plane lost in the South Atlantic but the area where it was lost was much more precisely known. As that Aussie said we are still looking for the haystack that the needle is lost in.

I agree with you on that one. IT IS A COMPLETE TOTAL COVER UP! they are just making up stories to buy time...

I don't think it is a cover up. Of course I could be wrong but Occams Razor suggest that a simpler explanation of what is known suggests that the flight is down in South Indian Ocean. Why it is down is more difficult. The evidence suggests Flight MH 370 flew until it ran out of fuel. The evidence suggests that Flight MH370 was under pilot control or possibly the pilot was under the control of some other person at least until final flight headings were entered into the autopilot. The fact that nothing yet has been found does not suggest there is a cover-up. The area of the world where the evidence suggests that the plane is lost is about as remote as one can get. This area of the ocean has been described as stormy with 8-10 ft seas and apparently there is a lot of floating debris especially plastic. Have you ever tried to fish in 8ft seas? I did this one time in a 60ft long boat and it was rough. Most of the other fishermen were throwing up and/or curled up in fetal positions. One thing that the evidence suggests is that the missing plane will be very difficult to find maybe never. I could be wrong though. If there is a cover-up what would the Malaysia Airlines have to gain over their analysis of total loss? Isn't total loss the worst condition?

What intrigues me is, a 777 isn't piloted by someone with just a few flight hours. No, they are flown by very experienced pilots. If the plane did run out of fuel, I would think it would be very possible to do what Sully did with a "just" as large plane in the Hudson. If he was able to land a plane and keep it mostly intact on the Hudson, then I'm sure a 777 pilot also could NOT being under duress.

So, either it was hijacked and it was purposely or not crashed into the ocean(unlikely because no one as admitted to it), OR, it was taken out by internal govt or an external government and its now in cover up mode.

Landing on the smooth Hudson river successfully is one thing.
Landing on the rough high seas of the Indian Ocean is completely another.
The 777 landing speed is aprox 160 Mph try to picture landing in even 4 foot waves...
I believe it is going to be a long time before they locate this jet.
And it will be with side scan sonar or even by submarine possibly by fluke.
The Indian Ocean has max depths up to 26,400 feet!! (8047 M)

Yeah an open ocean landing is definitely going to be rougher than a landing on the Hudson River. I am not sure what the autopilot would do when the plane runs out of fuel. I would guess that it would avoid flight controls allowing a stall so maybe it would go into a very shallow dive to keep up enough airspeed to avoid a stall and maintain as much altitude as possibleand it would almost land itself on the open expanse of ocean. At least that is how I would design it...