The Jewish flood mythology is based on much older flood mythology that had been handed down through the Sumerians and Babylonians for generations (see The Epic of Gilgamesh, specifically Tablet XI and the story of Utanapishtim) which they had probably taken from from the oral historical myth traditions of still older peoples.
The Jews simply co-opted the myth and assigned its origins to their God rather than the gods it had been traditionally told around for several thousand years.
So even if the Ark is found it doesn't indicate that there is any truth to the Noah story and it doesn't grant any credibility to the Judeo-Christian religious traditions, it only proves that there was some truth to the much older stories that the Jews plagerized.
I don't think that there was a global flood of Biblical proportions in actual fact. I think it's very likely that there were numerous localized floods that account for the diversity of flood mythology from around the world.
We need to bear in mind that these floods occured, and myths originated, in prehistorical times when people were still very, very primitive - probably closer to cavemen than they were to modern man.
At that point in human development, when a flood occured that wiped out several local villages, it truly could have been said to have wiped out the "whole world" because all those people knew of the "whole world" extended probably no more than 100 miles from their homes in any direction (think of how people in the 14th and 15th centuries still thought the world was flat and how they considered what they knew of it to be the "whole world" - Elsewhere there be dragons).
A few local survivors or those living in villages just beyond the reaches of the flood began telling stories of what truly was the most devestating event to have ever occured in their lifetimes. Over time these stories took on supernatural proportions and assumed unrelated signifigances, the way stroies have a tendancy to once men start telling them. The more the story was told the more it was embelished and the more it was fableized.
Several thousand years later the story was only superficially similar to the original accounts and had taken on a life of their own, shrouded in religious signifigance and hung with ethical morals.
Maybe there was an ark that escaped one of these floods for one reason or another. If so, it was probably a boat that had been built for reasons completly unrelated to any personal message from the gods, or a God, to any specific individual. Some guy had simply been preparing a shipment of livestock when a post-glacial ice dam Between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean broke and flooded the surrounding region wiping out a few dozen, or maybe a hundred coastal villages.
But the boat survived and the man survived and the load of goats he was planning on transporting survived.
After the story of this lucky guy and his boat had been passed down for several hundred or a few thousand years it had morphed into a tale of divine intervention and retribution.
Regardless of what they may or may not find on Mt. Ararat I don't think it can possibly be said to stand for any sort of confirmation of any Bibilical story because the Biblical story itself didn't originate with Judaism. So maybe the gods of the ancient Sumerians caused a flood, but the God of Abraham and Isaac only rode the older god's coat tails, at best.
Further, I don't think those older gods really had any kind of hand in actual human affairs either because the stories can just as easily be explained by perfectly ordinary geoliogic events later embelished by human story telling.
Occam's rasor - why attribute to supernatural what can just as easily be explained by the natural.