Printable View
I truly feel for these families and the people onboard; my condolences to them all.
I just have a question ..why does Air France continue to use flight number 447, even in these few days after the accident? I remember after the ditching of flight US Airways 1549, the airline cancelled AWE1549 in the following days and replaced it with AWE1543, if I recall correctly..
Are they really? That IS very surprising.Quote:
Originally Posted by fly.mcs
Found this on Anet forums. Very detailed meteorological analysis for those interested:
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/
Thanks Mel for posting that - it is the most amazing read!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellyrose
Well first of all re US you are correct. The following days and beyonds flight number was changed to 1543 LGA-CLT-SEA about 3 hours after the accident. It was already scheduled to change to Flight 1867 and upgrade back to the normal A-321 in that time slot for the Feburary schedule.Quote:
Originally Posted by fly.mcs
This is standard industry practice and at most airlines the flight number is permantly retired.
Re Air France 447 is not daily, for example today only 443, the daily 744 is operating. In my CRS computer, 447 still shows operating tommorow, this is unaccapetable, and Air France should have acted with in hours of this tragedy to change the number. The time it takes to update to other airline's CRS systems should be able to be changed in a matter of hours, 24 at the most, not days. I just tried to book a flight from GIG to CDG on airfrance.com for late June on the days two flights operate it still offers me Flight 447, UNBELIVABLE Air France, you dropped the ball here big time !
Regards
LGA777
Yes, I was tracking AFR447 last night (02JUN09).. It departed GIG at 19.06, arriving CDG at 11.19. And while AWE1549 was a successful ditching with no fatalities (thank God), that number was still changed. I hope AF decides to change it very soon! Some might not be so thrilled..
Till this day I don't understand why they don't design a blackbox attached to a floating device with an ejecting capability (built close to a fuselage panel). Upon water impact (liquid sensor), the box would get detached from the panel, and ejected to float up to the surface... Attach it/paint it to something that can be seen from a distance and it can be spotted and retrieved easily.
...Doesn't sound like rocket science to me. :?
commercial aircraft have VHF radios, which do have a limited range. i'm not sure on how the whole ACARS system works but i know it doesn't suffer the same range issues as VHF radios do.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluejuice
That sounds like a solution in search of a problem. People are focusing on this because this crash is in the news, but in the grand scheme of things, how many times has this been an issue? Going back over the last 25 or so years you have the KAL 007 shootdown, the Air India 182 bombing, the SAA Helderberg crash, TWA 800, Swissair 111, EgyptAir 990, and probably a few more that I've missed. The point being, even if it's a dozen crashes in that time, it's against how many millions of airline flights that were conducted over the past 25 years. Compare that to the cost to re-design and retrofit a different set of CVR and FDR boxes to the civilian airliner fleet, and I don't see where there is much to gain. Remember, the boxes are designed to withstand a crash and fire, and are typically housed in a secure location near the tail. Having them near the outer skin of the airliner may not provide sufficient protection in all crash scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPEEED
ACARS uses VHF for primary transmission of data (that's how so many people can have an ACARS monitoring set up at home) but when out of range of VHF, it can also use HF or SatCom to transmit data. You don't really need ACARS for voice communications - aircraft such as this one are equipped with HF radios, and may even have voice SatCom. The situation here likely wasn't that the crew had no way of contacting controllers, it was was probably a case of no time for communications. If they had several minutes, they could have attempted an HF call.Quote:
Originally Posted by cancidas
Also keep in midn that the CVR is not only used for crashes. They will use that data to research other incidents and issues that pertain to aircraft control and cockpit conversation.
Chilling details emerge...string of messages indicating multiple systems failures echo those transmitted by Shuttle Columbia as it disintegrated...
Furthermore, a number of ships have finally made it to the recovery area, only to be hampered by rough seas.Quote:
If they can't be recovered, investigators will have to focus on maintenance records and a burst of messages sent by the plane just before it disappeared. Officials have released some details of these messages, but a more complete chronology was published Wednesday by Brazil's O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper, citing an unidentified Air France source.
Air France and Brazilian military officials refused to confirm the report. But if accurate, it suggests that Flight 447 may have broken up thousands of feet in the air as it passed through a violent storm, experts told The Associated Press.
The report said the pilot sent a manual signal at 11 p.m. local time saying he was flying through an area of "CBs"—black, electrically charged cumulo-nimbus clouds that come with violent winds and lightning. Satellite data has shown that towering thunderheads were sending 100 mph (160 kph) updrafts into the jet's flight path at that time.
Ten minutes later, the plane sent a burst of automatic messages, indicating the autopilot had disengaged, the "fly-by-wire" computer system had been switched to alternative power, and controls needed to keep the plane stable had been damaged. An alarm also sounded, indicating the deterioration of flight systems, according to the report.
Three minutes after that, more automatic messages indicated the failure of two other fundamental systems pilots use to monitor air speed, altitude and direction. Then, a cascade of other electrical failures in systems that control the main flight computer and wing spoilers.
The report repeats a detail previously released by Brazil's Air Force: that the last message came at 11:14 p.m., indicating loss of air pressure and electrical failure. The newspaper said this could mean sudden de-pressurization, or that the plane was already plunging into the ocean.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1
Popular Mechanics:
Quote:
Diving Robots Could Recover Air France 447's Black Box
By Mark Huber
Published on: June 4, 2009
After officials pinpointed the location of Air France's Airbus A330 crash site, they turned to the difficult task of recovering the black boxes, which hold the official recordings of events that happened before the plane went down. Black boxes, which are actually painted orange, can give investigators the missing bits and pieces of data needed to determine an accident's probable cause. To help officials find the boxes, embedded technology sends sonarlike signals, which can be detected for up to 30 days provided listening equipment can get within approximately 1 mile of the box, according to a spokesman for the National Transportation Safety Board. In the case of Flight 447, the crash area in the Atlantic Ocean is too deep for divers to reach.
In instances such as this, where the site is not accessible, side-scan sonar can be used to locate the boxes underwater and map the wreckage to guide remotely operated deep-sea vehicles (ROV) for recovery. The Brazilian navy, now on the scene, does not possess the equipment necessary to take on recovery, but sonar and robots are available through several other governments, oil companies, independent service contractors, and nongovernmental organizations, according to Al Bradley at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts. On Sunday, Woods Holes' latest ROV, the $8 million Nereus, dove down 35,768 feet at the deepest surveyed point in the oceans, Challenger Deep in the Pacific's Mariana Trench. With this dive, the ROV became the world's deepest-diving robot. The highly maneuverable Nereus can be controlled by a fiberoptic connection or can swim autonomously when switched to a "free swimming" mode. [Full Article]
I guess someone in Congress had the same idea...Quote:
Originally Posted by SPEEED
BusinessWeek:
From an interesting article about technology that already exists that would make these difficult black box searches obsolete, or at least less crucial...if only the airlines would pay for them...Quote:
To date, attempts to get beyond reliance on a single black box have gone nowhere. One example: U.S. legislation that would have required a second cockpit voice recorder, flight data recorder, and emergency beacon on commercial airliners that would automatically get jettisoned from an aircraft in trouble. Such a requirement was referred to a congressional aviation subcommittee on infrastructure and transportation in 2005. The requirement never went farther.
:arrow: Beyond the Black Box: Accidents Needn't be so Mysterious
^^ Interesting read :)
The landing of US1549 in the Hudson was great and all, but now it seems that people are unrealistically holding on to hope when there's a water crash. This is the third time I've read something like "What is clear is that there was no landing. There's no chance the escape slides came out." Really? Gee, all signs pointed to these guys arriving on Gilligan's Island after a successful water landing.
Also, the FoxNews headline reads "Was It Pilot Error? Reports emerge that Air France jet that went down in Atlantic may have been flying too slowly." Even if the plane was going slow...that doesn't mean it was pilot error. In heavy turbulence, you slow down the plane so you don't "hit the bumps" as hard. A heavy nosewind in a heavy storm and even then I doubt you'd be that close to stall speed at cruise.
Air Comet pilot nearby said the following: "Suddenly, we saw in the distance a strong and intense flash of white light, which followed a descending and vertical trajectory and which broke up in six seconds," the captain wrote.
This would indicate a bomb a little bit more I guess.
Phil is this an "eyewitness" report? Sounds like a burst of lightning. If this was a bomb a terrorist group would have come forward by now. They don't destory things without letting the world know..otherwise it defeats their purpose of putting real fear into the minds of the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
I'd give a pilot a little more credit on being able to determine explosion versus lightning. You may well be right, but I can't think up an explanantion for an in-flight explosion, if it was in fact one.
I'm curious to hear more people's ideas as to what may have possibly caused this. Anyone?
interesting pictures..Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
http://translate.google.com/translate?j ... e0=&swap=1
http://74.125.159.132/translate_c?hl=da ... incPkksrxA
IMO it was either lightning or turbulence. what happenned to flt 447 had to happen suddenly and catastrophically and for electrical systems to fail that means that either a generator shorted out or was altogether lost. could turbulence or lightning take out an engine? maybe, if the turbulence is severe enough. lightning could have hit an engine itself too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Very interesting...reminds me of an incident off the coast of Long Island back in the 90's.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76interesting pictures..
[url="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fekstrabladet.dk%2Fnyheder%2Fkrigo gkatastrofer%2Farticle1176619.ece&sl=da&tl=en&hist ory_state0=&swap=1
YOU TOOK THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH!
I have been reading lots of possiblities all over the place. One of the best ones I read happens to be a blog that I read frequently - Dave is a US Airways A319 pilot - with a lot of experience from all his blog entries. In his words, lightening or turbulence can bring down an aircraft. For those that are interested, his blog is at:
http://flightlevel390.blogspot.com/
As always, we may never know, OR BE TOLD, the truth :roll:
That's the bottom line......Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingColors
I'm not quite sure what this is about, but this is one of the latest headlines on BBC:
"LATEST:Debris recovered in the Atlantic is not from Air France jet, says Brazilian air force official"
Here is the link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8083474.stm
THey said they picked up a wooden pallet and the A330 had no wooden pallets - also, the oil slick could have come from a ship - very mis-leading......
Gran Canaria is along the flight path, but about 1500-1800 miles northeast of where they think the plane went down. Hmmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Brazil this morning claimed they had found a 23 foot long chunk of plane. What's wrong with them?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkLawrence
CNN is now reporting that NONE of the debris, including the seat, are from the A330:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/ ... index.htmlQuote:
On Wednesday, searchers recovered two debris fields and had identified the wreckage, including an airplane seat and an orange float as coming from Flight 447. Officials now say that none of the debris recovered is from the missing plane.
WTF? This investigation is turning into a "comedy of errors" so-to-speak... Someone needs to take charge and do it right.
It's all well and nice to speculate on what could have caused the crash. Was it a bomb? Was it lightning? Was it turbulence? We may never know - especially if the black box is never recovered...
The aircraft's flightpath was through a region known as the ITCZ (inter-tropical convergence zone - I was a meteorology major; yes I know a geek)... This region is known as a breeding ground for very severe storms - some of which eventually become cyclonic. Storms in this region can - and do - grow as high as 50,000+'. For a storm to grow that high, it has to have strong updrafts associated with it (overshooting tops are a perfect example of storms with strong updrafts that generally are severe). Mother Nature is a beast and will have her way. With all our modern technology sometimes we feel like we are completely invincible against her - but too many times people find out the hard way that if you f**k with her you more than likely will always get burned and come out the loser.
If it's true the pilot sent back a report that they were entering a cell or cluster of CBs, not only does this point to the fact that the crew probably saw the weather on radar, but had enough visual cues outside to confirm what their wx radar was painting. Flying over the Atlantic like they were, I'd imagine they were following certain tracks at hemispheric altitudes. I would also imagine deviations from these established tracks happen quite regularly due to the frequency of severe storms in these area.
So the question becomes, did the crew try to avoid any type of convective activity they were picking up in-front of them? These were surely experienced pilots, who had probably flown this route numerous times and dealt with weather conditions similar to the ones they were facing that night on previous flights.
This is where all my questions come into play. If they didn't deviate around the storms, why did they choose not to?
Fuel comes to mind. Maybe they ran their numbers, saw how much they would have to deviate, and decided that doing so would put them either too close to minimum fuel or even with not enough fuel to continue to their destination without having to divert.
Experience comes to mind as well. There's a "saying" that the most dangerous pilots out there aren't "new" guys because they are too scared to try anything remotely dangerous or dumb and are usually with someone who will slap them if they try. And the really experienced guys have been scared one too many times to try anything dangerous/dumb again or to let anyone else try it. It's the guys who are mid-level with enough experience, who get into a routine and who get comfortable, but who haven't done anything too stupid to have scared the living $hit out of them, who pose the greatest threat. Being A330 guys, you'd have to think these guys were probably pretty senior, but who knows, they'd probably done the trip many times, maybe had personal factors (i.e. get-home-itis) and thought, "hey this won't be too bad".
There are way too many questions that come to mind to write down here, but all are valid and any one - or more than likely a combination of them - could be the culprit of the crash. If it was in fact a bomb that went off, well then the fate of everyone on that aircraft was sealed the minute they boarded it.
It's always easy to Monday morning quarterback any incident involving two HUMAN beings charged with a job of safely operating a multi-million dollar piece of equipment through the skies, sometimes filled with as many as 300 people. Criticism and critique are necessary to an extent after any flight - if we just shrugged off any incident we wouldn't really be doing a good job of trying to mitigate future similar accidents from occurring. But jumping to rash and/or radical conclusions is not. Hopefully in due time, and with due process we will learn of all the facts (namely CVR transcripts/FDR information) and be presented with a logical and solid conclusion of what caused this aircraft to crash. In turn we can all learn something from it, and prevent future similar occurrences from happening.
My guess is that if it wasn't an explosive device, pilot error will probably end up being the main culprit (as it is with most crashes).
Two simple reasons for this....France and Brazil.Quote:
WTF? This investigation is turning into a "comedy of errors" so-to-speak... Someone needs to take charge and do it right.
Very interesting insight, Clark.
Tom, agreed. Brazil especially...their recent history of post-crash information distribution (see Gol 1907) is abysmal.
Latest theory: the plane broke up due to an overspeed condition resulting from an airspeed indicator malfunction, perhaps due to ice.
Airbus, apparently deducing some strong theories about what happened from those automated messages, today issued an advisory to operators of all its aircraft, reminding them to follow established procedures when pilots suspect airspeed indicators are not working correctly.
:arrow: Clues Point to Speed Issues Before Air France Crash [NY Times]
Here's another, more detailed story about the pitot tube theory, and a history of accidents involving pitot tube problems.
:arrow: Jet Sensors Are Probed in Brazilian Air Crash [WSJ, no login needed]
Flight 447s ACARS messages:
http://www.nycaviation.com/hosting/acars447.png
Sorry to say, but there may never be a trace found of this airliner or anyone/anything that was on it.
In defense of Brazil & French authorities, the media is desperate for hourly and daily updates. Everything that *might* be or mean something is getting thrown out there before it has a chance to be vetted .... These guys need some time, and again, they may never find *anything*.
Gone... like Amelia Earhart.
Tom
Wow , looking at those ACARS messages. It it didnt come apart at altitude, they almost certainly lost control of it. Just about everything needed failed.
CNN reporting some bodies have been found.
So far 2 bodies have been found.
According to MSNBC, another 3 bodies. I'm guessing they are close to the crash site, but with currents, weather, etc, it might be a big search area still.
http://www.fab.mil.br/portal/voo447/...609/foto_2.JPG
17 bodies now recovered according to Brazilian news agencies.