Air France Jet Missing

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

?? Fragments of aircraft have been known to send signals back (transponder returns, ELT transmitter signals) as they descended.

You are talking apples and oranges. The data that was being sent tells me that the sensors, transmitters, wiring/fiber, controller, radio, antenna and power were intact or they could not have received what they did. An ELT is a totally self-contained autonomous unit.

Quote

A cabin pressure loss indication is a suggestion of a fairly traumatic structural event.

True and usually even with such events communications are maintained. Case in point.....THIS.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[billvon 2,380]

>The data that was being sent tells me that the sensors, transmitters,
>wiring/fiber, controller, radio, antenna and power were intact or they could
>not have received what they did.

Right. Aircraft have broken up in flight before and managed to send off a few transponder returns, indicating that for at least a short time the power source, power buses, transponder electronics and antennas were still working.

>True and usually even with such events communications are maintained.

Well, to be fair, there was communication maintained for a short time via ACARS. If the structural failure involved the cockpit, they may not have had time or the ability to send any voice communications.

[guppie01 0]

Unfortunately everything is speculation and none of us know the state of the crew or whether they were able to control/speak. Things can happen so quickly and dramatically that can incapacitate the crew, like Alaska Air 261.

It's such a shame, and a horrible loss. I hope that the recovery efforts provide some sort of closure.

g

"Let's do something romantic this Saturday... how bout we bust out the restraints?"
Raddest Ho this side of Jersey #1 - MISS YOU
OMG, is she okay?

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Right. Aircraft have broken up in flight before and managed to send off a few transponder returns, indicating that for at least a short time the power source, power buses, transponder electronics and antennas were still working.

But this was not like TWA 800 that lost everything instantly. Here the systems degrade over a 3+ min duration according to telemetry.

Quote

Well, to be fair, there was communication maintained for a short time via ACARS. If the structural failure involved the cockpit, they may not have had time or the ability to send any voice communications.

And the ability is what I am focused on. We know the plane was intact enough to send data for over three minutes. That is why I am saying that you have to consider options other than storm and reliability.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[billvon 2,380]

>But this was not like TWA 800 that lost everything instantly. Here
>the systems degrade over a 3+ min duration according to telemetry.

Right. This may have been more like JAL 123, which had a severe structural failure but managed to remain in the air for 30 minutes before crashing.

>We know the plane was intact enough to send data for over three minutes.
>That is why I am saying that you have to consider options other than storm
>and reliability.

Of course. It may have been a poor repair that finally failed (a la JAL 123) a fire onboard that rapidly incapacitated the crew (as in Swissair 111) etc etc. There are a lot of possibilities. However, just because the system was sending out messages does not mean the aircraft was still in one piece; it may have begun disintegrating even before the final cabin pressure warning.

[wmw999 2,116]

I don't know how those systems work, but it's also possible that there's more, possibly compromised data that analysts are going through right now.

I would imagine that Air France and Airbus personnel are working around the clock trying to determine what they can from the data that they have, as well as coordinating searches for wreckage.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

I'm wildly speculating, but if the pilots really wanted to communicate they probably could have worked out something, but that probably wasn't their priority at the time.

You have a great point. My first flight instructor told me something once. He said no matter what happens or whats going on, the first thing you have to do is fly the plane.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[billvon 2,380]

>He said no matter what happens or whats going on, the first thing you
>have to do is fly the plane.

Yep. The two serious problems I've had when I was flying resulted in some rapid 90 degree turns to locate outs, followed by some hurried diagnostics - only after I had a place to land and the plane under control did I call anyone to talk about it.

[quade 3]

Quote

You have a great point. My first flight instructor told me something once. He said no matter what happens or whats going on, the first thing you have to do is fly the plane.

It's what I used to tell my students as well.

Aviate, navigate, communicate. You can sort the shit out with ATC after you land, but to do that you have to stay in control of the airplane first, foremost and always.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[1969912 0]

From 27 May:

"The airport safety delayed an Air France flight this evening before departring for Paris immediately after the company received a bomb threat over the phone at the airport of Ezeiza.

The Federal Police, along the Firemen’s direction and the Airport’s Safety proceeded to inspect the plane, that arrived this morning from the French city and, after a brief stop, it was preparing to return.

The routine procedure lasted approximately one hour and a half and, as sources of the airport reported all the passengers are ok and they were not evacuated."


http://momento24.com/en/2009/05/27/bomb-threat-on-air-france-flight/

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Right. This may have been more like JAL 123, which had a severe structural failure but managed to remain in the air for 30 minutes before crashing.

JAL 123 had voice communications, flight 447 did not.

Quote

Of course. It may have been a poor repair that finally failed (a la JAL 123)

Possible but unlikely given that the plane was only four years old where JAL 123 was almost 12.

Quote

a fire onboard that rapidly incapacitated the crew (as in Swissair 111) etc etc.

Again unlikely given no telemetry to indicate that and also Swissair 111 like the other references you have made had voice communication.

Quote

However, just because the system was sending out messages does not mean the aircraft was still in one piece; it may have begun disintegrating even before the final cabin pressure warning.

Given the location of the ebay, com racks and functioning telemetry there is no reason for me to believe that all voice communications were out. I still don't by the fly before you talk scenario as in every case that you stated the pilots did both even with deadly catastrophic failures. My focus still remains on the lack of communication.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

As serious and intriguing as terrorist attacks are on aircraft, the truth is there's a lot more "normal" reasons that airplanes crash and a batch of those have to do with engineering issues and unfortunately those happen far more frequently.

You might want to read THIS.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

JAL 123 had voice communications, flight 447 did not.

Quote

Again unlikely given no telemetry to indicate that and also Swissair 111 like the other references you have made had voice communication.

Quote

Given the location of the ebay, com racks and functioning telemetry there is no reason for me to believe that all voice communications were out.

SO what are you trying to say? You keep saying these others had comm's so what are you getting at?

Quote

Given the location of the ebay, com racks and functioning telemetry there is no reason for me to believe that all voice communications were out.

Unless maybe a fire in the cockpit that took out the comm panel.


*** My focus still remains on the lack of communication.
***


And what does it tell you?

All this speculation is worthless. 9 time out of 10 we are wrong until the NTSB digs in to find out what happened. Just like the crash in Buffalo NY a few months ago. Everybody was screaming about ice. Come to find out it looks like the pilot just stalled it and fell out of the sky.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[quade 3]

Quote

You might want to read THIS.

Read it earlier today. Didn't convince me of anything.

1) Airlines get bomb threats on a fairly regular basis. The threat in question was a specific threat about a specific plane; didn't pan out to be anything at all.

2) Debris field is spread out in two major chunks 35 miles apart. Not really sure what that says other than the plane probably came apart at a significant altitude rather than on impact.

Still doesn't have to be a bomb. Can just as easily be a flight control system induced oscillation or departure from flight path that; either resulted in an inflight break up directly or cause an inflight break up in an attempt to recover.

A bomb actually would probably make people feel a whole lot safer about flying and help justify some people's world view. I can't help that second part even if it does make good TV for FoxNews to think so.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

SO what are you trying to say? You keep saying these others had comm's so what are you getting at?

That the lack of any attempt to communicate by the crew is unheard of. Other than flight 800 that exploded midair there has always been some type of communication from these types of catastrophic events.

Quote

Unless maybe a fire in the cockpit that took out the comm panel.

Don't think so. There are thermal sensors that would have picked up and reported an alarm and sent it on the telemetry stream. Also, the crew would have had to ignore any smoke prior and both sides (pilot and co-pilot) would have had to simultaneously been taken out.

Quote

And what does it tell you? All this speculation is worthless.

Fact and speculation (theory) are not worthless.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Read it earlier today. Didn't convince me of anything.

That clearly shows a lack of openness to consider all options. You don't think that finding that out that the investigators arn't going to go and check out everyone on the manifest, history of any other threats to both the airlines and people on board?

Quote

1) Airlines get bomb threats on a fairly regular basis. The threat in question was a specific threat about a specific plane; didn't pan out to be anything at all.

No, that threat was against the same airline for the same flight a few days earlier. Again, you don't think that it warrants going back and taking another look at it?

Quote

2) Debris field is spread out in two major chunks 35 miles apart. Not really sure what that says other than the plane probably came apart at a significant altitude rather than on impact.

I agree and we may never know given that the black boxes are sitting in 23,000' of water.

Quote

Still doesn't have to be a bomb. Can just as easily be a flight control system induced oscillation or departure from flight path that; either resulted in an inflight break up directly or cause an inflight break up in an attempt to recover.

No, it doesn't have to be a bomb but you can't rule it out either at this point. It should be noted though that the only modern day air disaster where there was no crew communication was flight 800 that exploded mid-air. Now that type of catastrophe would explain a lack of communication.

Quote

A bomb actually would probably make people feel a whole lot safer about flying and help justify some people's world view. I can't help that second part even if it does make good TV for FoxNews to think so.

Good TV? Are you saying that the reported bomb threat did not happen? The bottom line is all hypotheses must be studied.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

That the lack of any attempt to communicate by the crew is unheard of.

I'm affraid you are way off on that statement. I can post a lot of reports where planes have gone down without a wimper. It is not uncommon.

Quote

Don't think so. There are thermal sensors that would have picked up and reported an alarm and sent it on the telemetry stream.

Say what? What the hell does that mean?

Quote

Fact and speculation (theory) are not worthless.

The only problem is we have no facts and all speculation. A worthless thing to have but thats all we got now.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[piisfish 135]

sad news came in...
The brother of a skydiver who jumps at our club was on the plane. This MAN was a surgeon who performed his art on a friend of ours who broke his back on bad landing after a very nasty malfunction. This surgery saved his back and now our friend is learning to walk again.

All our thoughts to his family, and to the 200 other families which are suffering.

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

sad news came in...

Thats tough. Best wishes to the family. This has to be hard.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

I'm affraid you are way off on that statement. I can post a lot of reports where planes have gone down without a wimper. It is not uncommon.

No, lack of communication is uncommon. Like I said, flight 800 was an exception. I am talking about commercial flights only and not general aviation where it is common.

Quote

The only problem is we have no facts and all speculation. A worthless thing to have but thats all we got now.

Do you know what facts are? The following are known FACTS:

10:33 Last radio contact

10:48 Last radar contact

11:00 Plane enters storm zone

11:10 -11:14 ACARS messages sent indicating when the autopilot was disengaged, FBW system switch to alternate law, ADIRU fault, ISIS fault, PRIM 1 fault, SEC 1 fault, cabin vertical speed limit exceeded and GPS location altitude and speed during transmission.

Other flights flew through same area 10min before and after without incident

Plane debris found

number of passengers and crew are known

Planes age, flight and maintenance history, etc.
I could go on but do you not consider the above facts?

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[LongWayToFall 0]

To be accurate, twa800 didn't explode, it was hit by a missile that had no warhead, and the damage caused by the missile going in one side and out the other was enough to separate the nose from the rest of the plane. One of the biggest government cover ups of all time.

What did the planes that flew through the same area before and after note about the level of turbulence? These planes are built to handle a LOT of turbulence, to the point that people inside are dying because they are hitting the ceiling if they are not belted up. I doubt just bouncing around is what took it down. If it was indeed weather related, I would think it possible that it went inverted due to a severe updraft/downdraft and went past VNE, breaking up.

[quade 3]

Quote

To be accurate, twa800 didn't explode, it was hit by a missile that had no warhead, and the damage caused by the missile going in one side and out the other was enough to separate the nose from the rest of the plane. One of the biggest government cover ups of all time.

Credibility meter pegging left side of scale.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,380]

> I still don't by the fly before you talk scenario as in every case that you stated
>the pilots did both even with deadly catastrophic failures.

?? There is no question that any good pilot will put flying over talking. That's not even in question. And if the timeline was correct, within 3 minutes they had to deal with a loss of fly-by-wire augmentation, primary and secondary flight computers, all the data from the aircraft's sensor platform, and their backup instrumentation - and finally loss of cabin pressure. That's a lot to deal with, no matter what caused it.

Now, if they got the aircraft back under control, they might well try an HF call to an ATC facility, just to let them know what's going on and to give their location for a potential rescue. But there may not have been time for that, and in any case, HF coverage is nowhere near as reliable as VHF coverage - and that may have both discouraged them from trying and rendered any call they _did_ make unheard.

The lack of voice communication, to me, isn't the most unusual aspect of this incident by far. When AA 587 crashed, there was no intelligible transmission* from the aircraft, even though they kept flying (or were at least in the air) for 30 seconds after they lost their vertical stabilizer. And this was directly over JFK airspace, which has excellent VHF communications coverage - and where the crew was already on-frequency and talking.

Why? Because, as the CVR attests to, they were busy trying to fly an airplane that just lost part of its tail. They prioritized talking to each other to try to solve the problem over talking to air traffic control.

(* - there was a lot of clicking though as if someone was keying a microphone)

[quade 3]

Quote

Given the location of the ebay, com racks and functioning telemetry there is no reason for me to believe that all voice communications were out. I still don't by the fly before you talk scenario as in every case that you stated the pilots did both even with deadly catastrophic failures. My focus still remains on the lack of communication.

The other problem I see with your bomb scenario causing the lack of communication is that I'm confused as to when the bomb would have gone off.

Would that be at the very beginning of the electrical failure or did the bomber wait until 3-4 minutes later when the aircraft had the cabin pressure loss?

It just doesn't make sense.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[LongWayToFall 0]

http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/twa.html

Well, usually this conspiracy stuff is not my thing, but we know that the military was doing missile testing in the area, that many people saw a missile leave the surface of the water (from a submarine) and missile propellant was recovered from the seat fabric. The common excuse is that the damage is not consistent with an explosion, but if it was a missile test then it would be using a dummy warhead. Take the time to properly analyze the above link, it has some good data.