Future technology is difficult to predict, but it would provide some closure for the affected families and I hope you are correct.
It is also possible that the plane broke apart so severely as to be indiscernible from other debris that litters the ocean floor. The one thing I have never understood fully is with all the surface radar and satellites watching the world we inhabit how or why was the aircraft’s location when it disappeared not better known. Perhaps I am naive’ to think that the skies are watched so thoroughly, but it seems that even one country would have some incidental data that would provide a better clue as to the location. One would have to guess that the aircraft was not on it’s assigned course given the lack of evidence that was found by the search raising even more questions about what happened to it.
I don't know if this really applies to the point you've made,however:
I subscribe to a website called "flightradar24".It costs about $10 a year and with it you can track just about every commercial flight on earth...in real time.One thing that I've noticed is that on a flight from,say,JFK to Tokyo the site seems to lose track of the aircraft for a while as it passes over northern Canada and Alaska.suggesting that to me,at least, radar tracking doesn't exist *everywhere* in the world.
It seems to me that a remote part of the earth like the expanse of the Indian Ocean between Australia and southern African just might be such an area.
It’s a big planet. Surface radar requires a surface. Satellites don’t generally pay attention to the middle of nowhere unless there’s reason to believe there’s something interesting there.
Google "Southern Ocean" and get back to us.
The lack of coverage of the remote reaches of the Indian/Southern Ocean reflects a conservation of radar and satellite equipment, computer, and human resources.
It costs time and money to monitor any particular patch of sky and the locations where you expect the most activity get the most attention (and resources).
Given the considerable performance capabilities required to operate in or simply transit those vast expanses of unbroken ocean, very few aircraft types can even enter the area. Imagine what the cost of developing, emplacing, maintaining and actively monitoring a full coverage radar or satellite surveillance system 24/7/365 would be.
Spending resources to stare intently at a big space where nothing is usually happening probably seemed like a good place to begin eliminating unnecessary expense.
Then MH370 happened.
Now you have dead people from multiple countries and energized politicians involved. The previous surveillance system cost/benefit analyses (i.e., very little return for a whole lot of expense), while still valid, are now irrelevant and “insensitive” politically.
Another post has already noted that the aircraft was probably very badly fragmented when it hit the ocean surface. Nothing is intact. Deep ocean organisms are well on their way to completely consuming what bits of the passengers survived the impact. The flight data and voice recorder batteries are long dead, so data might not be recoverable even if they are eventually found. In short, beyond the possibility of eventually declaring a field of shredded aluminum and steel nearly 4 miles deep in the ocean to be the aircraft, this is a story that already has no possible happy ending.
The question is how much additional money/effort/risk of loss of life and property will be required before those in charge admit that the book on the incident must be closed and all the lives that continue to be bound up in this tragedy are released so they can recover as best as they can`