Malaysia's Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) had finally released the 47-page long raw data by Inmarsat through which search officials used to track the path of the missing Malaysia Airlines (MAS) flight MH370.
The DCA confirmed through a statement that it had cooperated with the British satellite company Inmarsat to come up with the raw communication data logs that hopefully shall shed light to the MH370 mystery.
"Inmarsat and the DCA have been working for the release of the data communication logs and the technical description of the analysis," DAC said in a statement released Tuesday.
The statement said that the 47-page data was released following instruction from Acting Transport Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein's instructions.
DCA added that those with relevant information that can be added to the released data or those with question could email the DCA at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The release of the raw data on Tuesday heeds the outcry from the families of the 239 passengers and crew aboard the plane.
On May 21, the families penned an angry letter to both prime ministers of Malaysia and Australia - Najib Razak and Tony Abbott. The letter came with an analysis of the preliminary report released on May 1 but was found to be written as early as April 9.
"The purpose of this analysis is to highlight discrepancies of facts or details in the report itself and consolidate the outstanding questions many people expected would have been addressed but were not. We request that a comprehensive interim report be issued as soon as possible detailing all the known facts, to include, but not be limited to, the many areas that we have enumerated in our analysis. We believe that eliminating wrong information and assumptions is as important as confirming correct information and assumptions," the families wrote.
"There is no mention on why they are so sure the Inmarsat data is highly accurate and reliable to the extent that they have thrown all resources there. There are no statements from the independent sources who supposedly looked at the edata as to what data they analysed or how they analysed it," the letter said.