Moderators From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 427 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 49158 times:
1 Happylandings: I've asked this before, maybe no-one knows... is there any useful source for the supposed ground incident which might have damaged F-GCZP's wing?[Edit
2 FuturePilot16: Is there any new devolpments about the aircraft? Any chance of finding those black boxes?
3 Bwphoto: How would the investigators know or have derived the airspeed? Is it included in ACARS data?
4 NAV20: Made this post about ten seconds before the Mod closed the thread. So her it is again - just to keep the discussion gonig. Quoting PanAm1971 (Reply 23
5 WILCO737: If the windspeed changes 50 knots in a really short time, the airspeed drops as well. The airflow over the wing is not the same anymore. If you fly w
6 NAV20: Sure - except that, if it was from the front, I'd LOSE the 20 knots of groundspeed. In about three minutes in my case, twenty seconds in Pihero's..
7 David L: ... Eventually, yes, but not immediately. The aircraft has a lot of inertia and would take time to slow down to the original airspeed. The result wou
8 WILCO737: Initially you gain 20 knots in Indicated airspeed, but the groundspeed decreases 20 knots. wilco737
9 MarSciGuy: If #1 is achieved and they get a good - and I mean quite good - fix on the location then retrieval is no problem even after the pinger stops - Remote
10 KingFriday013: I know I'm a bit of a n00b here, but what does 120/340 and 70/290 mean? -J.
11 WILCO737: He just used them as examples. 120 knots (for a smaller airplane) or 340 knots for a bigger plane. And 70 knots with a 50 knots headwind and 290 with
12 JBirdAV8r: He's just differentiating the "little guys" in slower aircraft from the "big guys" in faster planes. See here:
13 Wjcandee: Not if the airspeed INCREASES in the gust, no? Isn't it largely that one offsets the other? If you get a gust strong enough to increase the airspeed,
15 Trystero: There are two different things about the boxes. One thing is finding the other is retrieving them. You could locate with precision, but can you taken
16 WILCO737: When I fly let's say 250 knots with no wind, lets say gives me a ground speed of 300 knots (easiert to calculate). And then the wind suddenly increas
18 NAV20: No problem, KingFriday013. "Knots' - nautical miles. 2,000 old-fashioned yards. So-called because - believe it or not - the way that Nelson and Co. u
19 Richierich: Part 10 with no end in sight, this thread might be the one that unseats Peter Max for the longest topic discussion in a.net history! Back to seriousne
20 KingFriday013: Thanks guys! I misunderstood the post, got a little caught up by the slashes. Appreciate the help How much of an [adverse] impact do negative ch
21 Richierich: Edit to my previous post - somebody has updated the St. Peter and Paul Rocks page on wikipedia to include a short paragraph about AF447 debris being f
22 YWG: A very convincing article if you ask me.... Didn't know the last 4 mins of the FDR were uplinked via satellite. That's very important. http://www.time
23 PanAm1971: Ok-layperson trying to communicate-could a sudden extreme wind speed change cause a stall? Could we be looking at that here?
24 Mcg: I don't understand how the 'authorities' are so quick to eliminate terrorism as a potential cause of this accident. It would seem to me that until the
25 WILCO737: Depends how intense it is. If it is a drop in speed of 10 knots, then no big deal as there is enough margin to the stall speed. maybe even 30 knots i
26 KingFriday013: Like wind shear? (Just to further clarify PanAm's question and ask my own) -J.
27 SEPilot: Perhaps. The reason we use nautical miles in aviation is thanks to Juan Trippe. He was fascinated by all things nautical and was the one who introduc
28 LHR380: Am I wrong in thinking though Its kinda hard to stall an airbus aircraft? If the computers were going offline I guess it could have happened. What's t
29 Katekebo: Off-topic comment - The reason we use nautical miles is because it's convinient. One nautical mile equals one arc minute of latitude. So, if you are
30 David L: In the examples above we're talking about a tailwind suddenly becoming a headwind. If a strong headwind suddenly moves round to hit you from the side
31 ULMFlyer: Wilco, please forgive my ignorance, but how does the magnitude of horizontal windshear encountered at cruise while flying through a cell compare with
32 Mrocktor: The purpose of terrorism is to cause fear and to exploit that fear for political ends. Anonymity defeats the purpose of terrorism. Since no one claim
33 Pihero: No, the principles are not clearer and it's time I chime in : First of all, 50 kt gusts are quite severe and in your example, a 50 kt tail wind follo
34 Breiz: The "Nautile", manned exploration sub, can reach 6 000 m. She is on her way o/b the French oceanographical vessel "Pourquoi pas?".
35 WILCO737: The effect at low altitudes is a lot higher and worse. From my experience. I try to avoid CB's at all times. I don't like to be near them at all. Dur
36 VirginFlyer: I'm pretty sure they're referring to the ACARS messages we have been hearing about, not the FDR. V/F
37 TommyBP251b: Could it be possible that the Captain wasn't at the Stick during this tragical accident due to crew rest times? How are the AF regulations regarding
38 PanAm1971: This is what I've been trying to communicate-and doing it badly.
39 Nomadd22: Nice story, but that's not what a nautical mile has ever been. It's one minute of latitude, or a tad under 2027 yards. The old term "knots" was just
40 ULMFlyer: And folks, please stop listening to what the Brazilian defense minister says. He's a lawyer by training and a joke by choice. To Americans, I could de
41 Tugger: But the manned submersibles won't be the hero's here, it will be the 4-6 ROV's working almost non-stop at the bottom, investigating whatever the surf
42 ChrisK2: Hello, No, they weren't. Nothing from the FDR was uplinked via satellite (FDRs don't work that way - not in this day and age, anyway), and the article
43 David L: Yes. If the aircraft is flying, for example, at 30 kts above the stall speed in a 40 kt headwind and that headwind suddenly drops to 0 kts then the a
44 LongHaul67: Let's say AF447 was flying into the main cell at 35.000 feet doing 350 knots. Let's also assume the plane is hit by upward winds of 88 knots as stated
45 HawkerCamm: Gusts and sudden wind direction and speed changes upset the equilibrum of Thrust=Drag and Lift=Weight. This induces an oscillation called the phugoid
46 Dragon6172: Would that sort of updraft be enough to unsettle the airflow into the engines?
47 ChrisK2: Hello, Yes! Exactly. Yes! What people seem to be forgetting quickly: The whole term "terrorism" has been used soooo many times the last eight years or
48 Mir: Other way around. At the momet you encounter the change in wind, your groundspeed will still be 120 or 340. Your airspeed will jump to 170 or 390. Yo
49 BA84: May I suggest, if you have time, turn off the phone, get a cup of coffee, and read ALL of Tim Vasquez' weather analysis. http://www.weathergraphics.co
50 C010T3: Air France is making some alterations to the second GIG-CDG flight. Tonight leaves the last AF447, which will become AF445 effective June 7th. The sch
51 Smcmac32msn: " target=_blank>http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/ You're probably the 400th link to this now since these threads have came to be. Thanks.
52 ChrisK2: I second this. Tim's article is quite an excellent read. And, before I forget ... thanks a lot for this one: It's good to read something from the ligh
53 FCA767: How does the Black Box know when the last 4 minutes of flight will be? If it can do 4 minutes when it's settled on water then why not send all the re
54 747MegaTop: Black Box recovery - I really hope that the black boxes are recovered. Given the fact that deep sea submersibles have reached Mariana Trench ...the de
55 BA84: Yes, but how many members have read it all? It's a very daunting article. BA84
56 David L: As you said earlier in that post... Yes! Exactly. That's what I tried to say several times before but you summarised it much better than I did.
57 David L: It wasn't the last 4 minutes of FDR data, it was ACARS messages from the last 4 minutes before transmissions ceased. The FDR doesn't transmit any dat
58 NAV20: [quote=Pihero,reply=33]First of all, 50 kt gusts are quite severe and in your example, a 50 kt tail wind followed by a 50 kt head wind is the sign of
59 Readytotaxi: I was wondering what percentage of of the population think that there is total radar coverage on the globe, would they be shocked at the gaps out ther
60 FCA767: Thanks David but also then I thought someone said they always transmit the last 4 minutes but how would they know the last 4 minutes was coming...I'm
61 David L: I have to say... you got the whole thing wrong in principle (well, you did ask). If the wind changes speed and/or direction suddenly then the airspee
62 Hywel: I haven't read all of the posts in the 10 threads so far, so apologies if this has already been mentioned. Has anyone thought about the possibility of
63 Famfflores: A Brazilian ship has just picked up the first piece from the water. It´s a pallet used in the cargo hold compartment. They should confirm that it is
65 David L: Interesting question, Grasshopper - they "just know". Well, it could keep transmitting untill it lost power and the receiving station could buffer 4
66 MarSciGuy: I know this is nitpicky, but being a hydrographer I'll nitpick - a nautical mile is actually 6076 feet, so SLIGHTLY over 2,000 yards.... I was going
67 Gniou: So I understand that once balck boxes are located, it's technically possible to retrieve them with such submersible (or other types mentioned in othe
68 LongHaul67: I never really understood why the northbound flight # was out of sequence with the southbound to begin with.
69 PhB95: Just saw in the french newspaper site "20 minutes" that the first debris have been retrieved, and none of it is from the missing plane: "La tâche de
70 PanAm1971: Perhaps a SURTASS vessel could be sent to find the boxes if they're having trouble hearing the pinging bacuse of the depth and layers.
71 Carls: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/images.inc Take a look to this picture and then tell me that a lightning can"t bring an airplane dow. This pi
72 Famfflores: hum.... An "expert" just gave an interview. His name is Gustavo Tavares da Cunha Mello. I guess his is not from this forum. He just said that the ADIR
73 SwivelHeadLAX: The lightning pictured cannot bring a plane down. Actually the link didn't work. But my answer would probably remain the same.
74 PRAirbus: Perhaps the breaking up in mid-air theory is the result of that particular AF A330 collision with a AF A321 in 2006? The following link mentions that
75 HaveBlue: That link does not work Carls, and as SwivelHeadLAX said I doubt lightning brought down the plane.
76 JBirdAV8r: That was in a (HOAX) forwarded email. That damage was purportedly caused by a lightning strike, but was instead actually an electrical fire. Skin dam
77 LongHaul67: CNN is reporting that helicopters have started to lift pieces from the water and dropping them on three naval vessels.
78 Klwright69: No. In AA587, the pilots overcorrected, stressing out the rudder and breaking off the tail. Watch the Crash Investigation documentary on youtube. But
79 Honeythief: If the above report is correct, would that imply that the search has been concentrating in the wrong area or has further debris already been found at
80 NAV20: Utterly wrong; but, oddly, also right, Famfflores. By which I mean that, as far as I know, the ADIRU just feeds information to the 'central' Flight D
81 MarSciGuy: If the signal is heard in several different locations it should be fairly easy to triangulate it to a fairly small region of the seabed. I'm not sure
82 FCA767: true they would store the info ah yeah i wouldnt know that reference Yeah I read the Acars at home
83 David L: I still want to see the images but, nevertheless... I can think of someone from here... ... ah, maybe not, then. Seriously, on how many incidents is
84 Mir: It's possible, but it wouldn't have led to this. Even if the pilots were incapacitated, the aircraft would keep going on its programmed route, and it
85 Famfflores: Very different from what´s being reported here. it´s mentioned that the ship Constituição just removed the first piece and it´s a part of a pall
86 Osiris30: Since *when* does this happen.... oh shit I'm going to crash in 4 minutes, better uplink everything... this whole thing sounds like a crock to me. Ve
87 Keta: Even more, just a stall wouldn't cause all systems to fail in cascade as the ACARS transmission suggests, I mean it couldn't be the cause.
88 Sailfly: First hello to all this will be my first post. I work in the drilling industry and have enjoyed reading in the news and the posts the uncertainty surr
89 David L: AF have details of the ACARS messages transmitted via SATCOM over the last 4 minutes. The messages are almost certainly stored and/or printed out so
90 A388: New generation aircraft apparently have this feature. The systems on board the A332 of AF apparently also have a constant link to the maintenance and
91 Honeythief: There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The 'four minutes' of data is a reference to the ACARS messages that were sent over a four minute period a
92 Carls: The picture was sent to me as a lightning strike, and I have to admitte that I did not confirmed if it was true or not. But if you say that a lightni
93 Oroka: What if they decreased airspeed a bit late and over did it in their rush, stalled, and encountered sever downdrafts? You go from a stall to a plunge.
94 MoMan: No. There is also AA 903, a sister A300 which suffered a pilot-induced stall near Miami, the pilots used excessive rudder inputs, and the vertical st
95 Adam42185: That is my initial reaction as well due to the skin effect of electricity. The electric charge from the lightening would remain on the outside of the
96 JBirdAV8r: No problem--I wasn't accusing you of trying to hoax us Actually the damage from a lightning strike is generally much smaller than even 1/4ths of this
97 YYZYYT: According to the report, the aircraft had had a prior turbulence incident, but had undergone a thorough inspection (including the tail). No findings
98 PhB95: Yes, this has just been said minutes ago on french TV. Let's hope it's indeed a part of the plane. It would be awfull to have to start all over searc
99 ThrottleHold: Turbulence penetration speed for the A330-200 at this altitude is M0.80. Managed cruising speed would be around M0.80 to M0.82, depending on the varia
100 PRAirbus: Quoting MoMan: No. There is also AA 903, a sister A300 which suffered a pilot-induced stall near Miami, the pilots used excessive rudder inputs, and t
101 Dougbr2006: The ACARS system sends a signal at a fixed time interval this data is a maintenance tool and does not represent data from the Data Recorder though th
102 UltimateDelta: I suppose that if the plane was in a wildly uncontrolled stall while being thrown around in midair by the storm it could have been just ripped apart.
103 Pihero: No. This system transmits via Acars a message for every fault that is sensed by all systems, when it happens -there is a time stamp on each message i
104 Dougbr2006: It was reported that way and even some internal AF sources said as much!
105 7673mech: Been skimming the thread and I have not seen it mentioned - something being overlooked. The aircraft could have sustained ground damage - a errant bag
107 N905TW: While it may be clarified later on, I am fairly certain that Air France is like other airlines in that they have a priority system for these messages
108 KingFriday013: Or maybe a broken window panel? I know I've been on at least two flights (once a 757, the other a Dash 8) where the window panel was broken and i cou
109 ChrisK2: Hello, Yes, that's the way I understand it, too. It's a store-and-forward service, with queues, and with the focus on reliable transmission, not neces
110 Ikramerica: I mentioned crack propagation a few threads back as a possible scenario for break apart when I suggested that the storm isn't necessarily the cause o
111 FCA767: Welcome to the forum...and thanks for your info it was interesting about the currents
112 FlyLKU: That is true if the change is direction is reasonably gradual. If it is very quick then the airspeed indicator will momentarily register this differe
113 MakeMinesLAX: With all the prior incidents this one is being compared with, it's interesting the company among which the aerodynamic stall theory places AF 447: the
114 Wexfordflyer: Wow this topic keeps going and going!!! Great news to hear that they are collecting some of the debris. Hopefully soon we will have confirmation that
115 FCA767: About the Plastic Window on your 757...I used to wonder why it was plastic...but I read somewhere that it is a cosmetic type window...and that the ou
116 Famfflores: I remember early in this discussion the possibility of an electrical failure. What about that, with some/all systems doing down and screens going blac
117 AAMDanny: Yes, However. Would it not cause more terror by not telling anyone who's doing the attack's. Anomity will spiral into Confrentations, Accusations, Me
118 Mandala499: I have a bit of a tech question on this... What can cause the A/P to disconnect? An SEC/ELAC disagreement? If so, would the aircraft degrade to alter
119 Ukair: Does anyone think the outcome of this disaster would have been different if the flight was in daylight? As the pilots could see what was coming as app
120 EMA747: I've not been able to get on the net all day so can someone kindly write a quick summary of what has happened since yesterday evening? What's all this
121 LongHaul67: This has already been mentioned on previous threads, but I am convinced that this accident will push forward changes in how flight data is handled irr
122 Rj777: I have a feeling that the FDR that can be jettisoned will eventually make their way onto commercial jets. Also, were the black boxes from 9/11 ever re
123 Happylandings: I'd like that one confirmed also - it's on some news and also some other forums but I've not been able to get a source yet. Help, anyone?
124 Oakmad: If that were truly the case I don't think the perpetrators would select a flight where there is likelihood of their act not being exposed as delibera
125 AverageUser: It really does not matter if they did not. Modern units store the data in semiconductor memories not unlike your USB data stick. In military/aviation
126 Canoecarrier: So where is all this data going to be stored? With the airline or an agency? With the thousands of commercial airline flights each day the amount of
127 David L: A single stall at low altitude probably has very different consequences from a single stall at cruise altitude, though. But I'm hardly an expert. But
128 CasInterest: This would make sense. I work in Telecom, and this would be entirely possible. The MTC hangers would have to have a serious data system though. The b
129 GlobeEx: WEll, however, if you are dealing with other problems at the same time (malfunctioning ADIRU, thrust controll, A/P or whatever doesn't help to minimi
130 Chumley: Was just reading more from USAToday and came across this quote: "There was some kind of in-flight violent" incident, said Bill Waldock, an air-crash e
131 Bond007: Not so sure. They'll find the boxes, and it's not the first time it's taken a while to find them. The bandwidth required to transmit every parameter
132 MadameConcorde: PPRuNe post French Air Force has just reported that most of the debris found by SAR didn't belong to AF 447. Fuel patch most probably comes from some
134 Canoecarrier: To follow up on what Bond is saying. It isn't that often that the boxes are not recovered. A high percentage of aircraft crashes occur on take off or
135 Decoder: Does that mean that AF flight 447 is still missing?
136 FCA767: I'm not trying to be funny...but I used to think about Ejecter seats for all passengers like fighter planes have...This is a serious question I am pu
137 Osiris30: ACARS is NOT the FDR. I know all about the ACARS messages. The OP said FDR data uplinked via SATCOM, that's what I'm calling BS on. Correct. An *extr
138 SEPilot: I believe that some of them were, but perhaps not all of them. And I think I read that data was recovered from them.
139 Osiris30: With both engines running a flat spin *shouldn't* occurr without an *extreme* set of circumstances. At 35/37K ft a non-flat spin should be recoverabl
140 David L: Don't forget that only a few of many messages have been made public. Well... not really. Think about the weight, the cost, the larger seats, the poss
141 FCA767: True True too...we really need to know what's happened...the wait is the worst...I'm always analysing things...
142 KingFriday013: The mechanics of that are near impossible. And it would be extremely heavy, and expensive. It's probably safer to leave them out than risk a malfunct
143 RedFlyer: Best explanation I've heard thus far on why this probably isn't terrorism related. Maybe this is also why the authorities haven't focused on terroris
144 GlobeEx: Well, if ADRIU failure, PRIM, SEC, etc. heavy winds up to 160 mph, thats pretty extreme to me. Well 35/37K ft.... check the Pulkovo flight, it went u
145 David L: My apologies. It was worded very similarly to a post from someone who did think it was from the FDR. While replying, I do remember thinking "I though
146 BAPILOT2B: Let alone the possibility of multiple ejects at the same time leading to some tangled parachutes if this method would ever work.
147 SixtySeven: The bottom line is these guys ended up in a thunderstorm in a place where they can be difficult to detect but are very, very powerful. The airbus with
148 Aero145: I would guess ”most” is what they’re certain isn’t AF447, and the other things they have no idea what is... makes sense?
149 Boeing747_600: Didnt one of the ACARS messages establish that the aircraft was under ALTN LAW (Alternate Law) ?
150 Adam42185: in lay-mans terms... what is the difference between alternate law and direct law? Does alternate still have some flight protection against stalls/ove
151 Wexfordflyer: IIRC the ones from the twin towers were not but I am not sure about any of the others. Do correct me if I am wrong. There seems to be lots of conflic
152 Rj777: Ya know, CNN is making parallels to the titanic disaster. (difficulty of recovery). That almost makes this sound similar as well.. (crew's overconfid
153 StasisLAX: Some interesting news from the Associate Press regarding the "black box" recovery efforts: "Remotely controlled submersible crafts will have to be use
154 SixtySeven: I wouldn't say any crew I have ever been on could be called "overconfident" in terms of the actual aircrafts abilities to penetrate storms. The crew t
155 Toulouse: Very conflicting indeed. Basically, what I'm hearing here in France this evening, is that so far everything the Brazilians claimed to have been piece
156 Hardiwv: Breaking news: Brazilian media is now reporting headlines that the debris found and collected during today's operations are not related to AF A330. Am
157 Antskip: "potentially faulty readings may have prompted the crew of the Air France flight to mistakenly boost thrust from the plane's two engines and increase
158 Toulouse: Oh God, well that puts a dampener on my last post just a minute or so before you with latest news from France.
160 YWG747: This coming just hours after an article saying the craft may have stalled and crashed.... I don't know what to believe anymore....
161 Hardiwv: Here is the link: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/cotidiano/ult95u576640.shtml According to Brazil authorities the material collected today bears
162 Keta: Yes, that's why I said it couldn't be the cause, not the other way round
163 AF2323: My only source is internet, but here's what I found : http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/06/...rieving-debris/UPI-35751244148300/
164 PPVRA: Don't get hung up on that quote, all they know at this point is that it isn't obvious the debris are from AF or from an A330. They are gonna have to
165 JSquared: I’ve been following the threads about this accident form the beginning, and it still makes me sick to think about how a large modern jet like the A3
166 Pihero: WE have seen all on A.net : armchair aviators, 20,000 hour-experienced sim pilots and now self-appointed accident investigation experts ! I have seen
167 757GB: You beat me to it. I was reading the article in Portuguese but I'm a little rusty on it What it says is very different from saying that the parts do
168 747MegaTop: What are the chances (meaning..does it happen) of lightning strike happening at cruise altitude..at 35000feet in the case of AF 447? If that is possib
169 LongHaul67: Cost of data storage today is next to nothing. Take a look at how Youtube can store enormous amounts of data - for free. In addition it is easy to ap
170 DL752: Do you think this was similar to DL 191? My prayers go to the family and friends of the passengers and crew. DL752
171 SpeedbirdA380: I always give it a week or two before after something like this happens before I start taking info I read in the press seriously. After every crash o
172 Canoecarrier: Storage may not be the problem but transmission most certainly would be. YouTube sends and receives information via the internet. What people are sug
173 757GB: That's a wise attitude. I have to admit it's hard though. We all want so much to know what happened that a lot of times we can't help it. You end up
174 Antskip: My thoughts also - opposites - though both scenarios suggest faulty speed - too little (causing stall) or too much (causing breakup). Interesting tha
175 ChrisK2: Hello, Well, when you suggest some action (like, moderators taking action to forcibly lower the "noise" on a forum), the question is: Will it improve
176 BAViscount: Agreed. I can't believe that this topic has got to "Part 10" - yes, it's one of the most tragic accidents of recent times, but once you get past the
177 Bramble: I think the media is over speculating about the cause of this tragedy. They need infomation and will interview anyone with an opinion. So far we have
178 Richierich: That's correct - this mystery has brought out every possible explanation known to man although I'm still waiting for the "collision with an alien cra
179 ThrottleHold: An ADR 1 + 2 + 3 Fault results in Alternate Law. The A330 does not have ELAC's. It has PRIM's and SEC's. From the A330 FCOM: Alternate Law..... ALTN
180 Ikramerica: That's what mysteries do. But it's educational, because people learn what is and isn't possible from the limited data points by asking questions and
181 Micstatic: Amen. I think dialog is the reason we are all on a.net
182 Adam42185: awesome thanks for all that, didnt know there was so much involved
183 757GB: Thank you very much for the detail. I have to admit I saved it in my notes because I really want to read it slowly and understand it when I get some
184 Trystero: Is this a forum for experts only or for enthusiasts? If it's pilots only, I'm out of here! You may know a lot more, but previous cases showed us that
185 KBUF: Brazil Recovers first AF447 debris FERNANDO DE NORONHA, Brazil – A Brazilian helicopter crew recovered the first wreckage from Air France Flight 447
186 BMIFlyer: Last minutes of doomed plane "Doomed Air France Flight 447's last terrifying few minutes in the air have already been pieced together by accident inve
187 PPVRA: I find it hard to believe that the plane disintegrated anywhere when there's so little evidence floating around. Maybe there's more somewhere, we jus
188 QFMel: Main issue remains locating it, recovery likely to be less problematic; though that's not to say less time consuming. As has been suggested in previo
189 Iflyatldl: Yeah, they had the same account on ABC Nightline last night. Scary stuff! It kind makes me wonder: if the computer on the Qantas jet was acting on ba
190 ThrottleHold: Screenshots of AF447 ACARS Mx messages. Print format means that the first message received is at the bottom of the lists.
191 QFMel: I couldn't agree more with the tone of your post. My first post on this site was a few threads back and I said pretty much the same thing. I've tried
192 LTBEWR: Part of such a belief is to in part be honest, not putting out false hope. It may also suggest that the people on this flight didn't suffer, probably
193 EZEIZA: Apparently the debris recovered was NOT from the A330!!! http://infobae.com/contenidos/452719...ales-encontrados-no-son-del-Airbus (spanish only, sorr
194 Sidneys: http://www.airbusdriver.net/airbus_fltlaws.htm The link above should help you to undestand what's the diference in between the Airbus Flight Control
195 EMA747: Please point me to where it says we cannot discuss this topic, because I can't see it. I am sure there is a pilots only forum somewhere so why not ju
196 ComeAndGo: Radar in itself is essentially useless. It's old technology nothing more. Merchant vessel show up on radar screens. Most of the information used by A
197 TUNisia: WELL SAID! It's the holier than thou crowd that really gets under my skin. This is an AVIATION FORUM, of course people are going to debate and share
198 757GB: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...o-confirm-origin-of-retrieved.html This report from Flightglobal says that confirmation has not been made yet,
199 Osiris30: See this is the type of crap people should be complaining about. That article reads as if it's pure fact! Does: "NAV ADR DISAGREE" have anything to d
200 PPVRA: Looks like the military doesn't believe the wooden "pallet" is anything important. Being considered just "trash". Really not part of this accident.
201 AlitaliaMD11: According to the link EZEIA posted, the cargo pallet retrieved from the water was made of wood and not of aluminum which is 'not the material of norm
202 ThrottleHold: Possibly, I don't have that AD to hand, but here's the FCOM procedure..... This caution is triggered by the PRIMs, when they only use 2 ADRs, and the
203 757GB: Correct. Now that I read it again I realize I didn't express myself correctly. It's perfectly possible that some debris recovered might not be from A
204 Rj777: I think it's a little too early to determine definitively that the plane broke up in mid-air. It's only been 4 days since the plane disappeared.
205 Zvedava: In your opinion then - how would the aircfraft behave if it - let say penetrated the turbulence with airspeed lower than recomended (for whatever rea
206 ComeAndGo: From ATWonline.com June 4, 2009 - http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=16803 How do wing spoilers fail ?? Maybe by a failing or bent wing
207 QFMel: I agree with Pihero's point not because it implicitly condones expert comment only or elitism. The issue is more that there is a qualitative differen
208 Jbernie: Something I found online: http://www.hursts.eclipse.co.uk/airbus-nonnormal/html/ar01s10.html 10.4. ADR disagree [QRH 2.14, FCOM 3.2.34, FCOM 1.34.10.
209 ThrottleHold: Some spoilers become U/S due to the failure of PRIM1 (spoilers 5 and 9) and SEC1 (spoilers 1 and 10) which control them.
210 EMA747: I see what you are saying and agree with you. Totally wild speculation without even trying to understand the issues is not good. The point I was tryi
211 Tietkej: It's frustrating how the media is going back and forth with headlines. Check this excerpt out from the Sydney Mroning Herald: "Other debris spotted so
212 ARGinLON: this is getting pretty spooky now... http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/04/plane.crash/index.html RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian
213 AlitaliaMD11: CNN is now reporting that NONE of the debris, including the seat, are from the Air France A330. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/04/plane.cra
214 PPVRA: From what I gather, not all debris have been recovered. They are still after other ones previously spotted. So far the recovered ones are not believed
215 Adam1115: If the black boxes are sitting at 12,000 feet, is it even possible they will still be functional...?
216 JBirdAV8r: Yes. In theory they should be fine and retain their data indefinitely. The "pingers," however, are life-limited.
217 Tietkej: Yeah, from what I understand they were basically saying that none of the recovered debris is from AF447. But apparently there is more still in the wat
218 Btblue: So none of the debris is from the AF A330. Question is, where is it from then? I believe they found an airline seat, in the middle of the ocean but no
219 Bridogger6: Has anyone thought of the possibility that maybe the debris is coming from a jet that the AF aircraft may have struck middair? Some plane on some type
220 SkyHigh777: CNN is now reporting as well that the Brazilian air force is saying the debris is not from Flt 447... If it's not, how is it possible to lose such a l
221 Canoecarrier: The oceans of the world are littered with trash. Ships run into cargo containers all the time dropped from ocean going ships. As busy as the airways
222 Tonytifao: I had a gut feeling when they first announced they found debris it wasn't from the plane. I just knew they hadn't found. Not one image was made public
223 Rj777: What I'd like to know is, how is this going to affect the families? This has got to be a big blow to them.
224 Johningrr: What I don't understand is that we are talking about the Brazilian Navy here pulling part out of the ocean. They would have to know what this stuff is
225 Tonytifao: That is brazil for you. You have our president bragging something like ... "if we can find oil at such level, we can find an aircraft". I personaly t
226 CuriousFlyer: If they are finding parts from a different airplane (if this seat is not from the AF A-330), maybe there is a second plane which collided with it... I
227 Canoecarrier: Most major airlines have crisis response teams. When I worked for an airline I was part of one. Like AF they are all volunteer. We used to train by b
228 757GB: I tend to agree with this. There is a void of information and every tiny bit of it triggers instant conclusions or far fetched theories. I'll read ev
229 Matheus: I think some people didnt realize how big and how far from the land the search area is. Its almost half way from Brazil to Africa, even the fastest bo
230 777den: Satellite comms are not much cheaper. International phone calls are almost all over undersea and underground fiber cables, which have gotten much che
231 LipeGIG: Thanks for the info. Allow me to disagree. Not that we have technology, but experience for sure our Navy and Air Force have a lot, and they are using
Ualcsr From United States of America, joined May 2006, 482 posts, RR: 1 Reply 232, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 18025 times:
Sorry for my lack of technical knowledge (CSR background) but I've been curious about something. If the message about the autopilot disengaging came approximately four minutes before the last messages, then I think we can make two assumptions: 1) the aircraft was still in the air during those four minutes, 2) the crew must've known something was wrong if the autopilot disengaged. (Just assumptions) If this is the case, why was there no communication from the cockpit during those four minutes? Again, excuse my ignorance here as I don't know if cockpit communication is possible with loss of power, when flying in certain remote areas, etc., and I understand the crew was probably frantic, but if communication was possible, I would think they would have attempted to communicate. Any help with this?
Tonytifao From Brazil, joined Mar 2005, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 233, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 17669 times:
Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 231): Allow me to disagree. Not that we have technology, but experience for sure our Navy and Air Force have a lot, and they are using it. To recover plane wrackage on the middle of Atlantic is another monster, a situation that i doubt any one can say " i'm expert "
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard they had 2 planes searching. I don't think 2 planes are enough for this search. I'm not sure how much night vision and other types of technology they have to apply to this search.
What is US participation in this search, do you know?
Tietkej From Germany, joined Jun 2009, 71 posts, RR: 1 Reply 235, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 17237 times:
Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 232): I think we can make two assumptions: 1) the aircraft was still in the air during those four minutes, 2) the crew must've known something was wrong if the autopilot disengaged. (Just assumptions) If this is the case, why was there no communication from the cockpit during those four minutes?
Loads and loads of theories have been posted in this thread, mate. Do take some time to browse through the posts if you're interested. There's 10 parts to this, 250 posts each....
FuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1995 posts, RR: 0 Reply 236, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 17252 times:
This report states that an agency spoke out againsty hasty speculation because the french newspaper "Le Monde" stated that the aircraft was flying at the wrong speed. Does anyone else think that extremely hasty speculation like this should be able to result in a lawsuit. Because I do. People read stuff like this and they start to wonder "is AF safe?" Are airbus aircraft safe? Stuff like this just really gets to me.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
Gasgh From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 237, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16970 times:
All this talk of airspeed and groundspeed - aren't any of the licensed pilots on this forum paying attention???
My knowledge and experience comes as a private pilot, below 10,000 feet, flying single engine under VFR rules. Air density at low altitude means that in calm air, airspeed and groundspeed are almost identical. This changes dramatically the higher you fly due to reduced air density. In still air, at higher altitude, a 270 knot indicated air speed can translate to a 550 knot ground speed.
In a zero wind situation, at low altitude, it's a simple exercise in graphing to calculate the effect of a wind. It affects both Heading (where you point the airplane) vs Track (where the airplane actually flies), and speeds. With a perfect headwind of, say, 10 mph, your 120 mph airspeed translates into a 110 mph ground speed. With a perfect tailwind, the opposite occurs. Your 120 mph air speed yields a 130 mph ground speed, Any wind from any other direction will yield results somewhere in between.
Now, winds are never perfectly calm for long, nor are they steady in terms of speed or direction. In particular in storms or close to the ground.... and especially both! This is why wind shear is of such concern at airports during storms. Winds can quickly shift both speed and direction very, very quickly and suddenly. Think the Delta Tristar at DFW and the Allegheny (I think) DC-9 at Detroit. Approaches tend to be flown at a particular airspeed, The wind changes speed, direction, or both, and very quickly the airspeed can change, changing the amount of lift being generated by the wings. When a relative nosewind changes to a relative tailwind, the aircraft looses air speed, and with it lift, and perhaps stalls. The result is an increase in the rate of descent, and if too close to the ground, insufficient time for the crew to react. This is why aircraft try to avoid landing when thunderstorms are in the area, and, why the crews will approach at a higher airspeed, to give some measure of safety margin.
To put it really simply, once the wheels leave the ground, ground speed is irrelevant to the flight of the aircraft except as part of the calculation to know if you have enough fuel to reach your destination. Distance divided by Ground Speed equals flight time. Fuel load divided by rate of fuel burn equals engine time. If engine time is greater than flight time - you will make it! The other way around you'll land some distance short of the runway.
Air Speed is what keeps a plane in the air. Enough of it, and the wings generate lift that keeps you airborne. Not enough, and you are going to descend. You can play around with angle of attack (attitude) to a degree... but aircraft have a max service ceiling,and it has little to do with the engines. It's simply the max altitude at which the wings can generate just enough lift to stay level at max engine thrust. It's pretty rare that the engines are the limiting factor, though as a Northwest Jet Airlink CRJ200 crew discovered, the engines sometimes do have a max altitude.
Now, the jet pilots among us will tell you there is a phenomenon known as high speed stall. At altitude, and I mean 30K and above, jet airliners fly at an indicated air speed not much above the stalling speed of the wing. Most pilots, as part of their big jet training, get to fly the sim (and perhaps the real thing) without the autopilot. They are told to keep the plane straight and level. Straight is relatively easy, level is not, and most cannot do it. Jet pilots know (and as passengers, we've all experienced this), when you fly into turbulence, you slow down. To do this you pull the nose up,and simultaneously to maintain altitude, you reduce engine power.
Now comes the part that might be what happened to the Air France jet. You slowed down, you are flying an increased angle of attack. You are flying at an airspeed closer to the stall speed of the airplane. Suddenly the wind speed and direction, not to mention updraft / downdrafts in the thundercloud change. The airplane goes into a high speed stall. In calm air, fairly easy to recover - increase power and lower the nose. Quite possibly in a bad storm as was experienced that night, the airplane did not stay straight and level, and in the violence of the storm, as the crew tried to recover control, over stressed the airframe. Think the American Airlines A.300 out of JFK that lost its fin. Perhaps it shed control surfaces -there are reports the airplane signaled loss of wing spoilers a minute before the final transmission that seem to indcate airframe break-up. Either way, the aircraft would be uncontrollable.
Condolences to the families of all aboard the Air France flight.
Ualcsr From United States of America, joined May 2006, 482 posts, RR: 1 Reply 238, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16873 times:
Quoting Tietkej (Reply 235): Loads and loads of theories have been posted in this thread, mate. Do take some time to browse through the posts if you're interested. There's 10 parts to this, 250 posts each....
Thanks for the advice Tietkej but that's just it; from someone who loves the industry but who is "technically challenged", I was curious as to why there was no human communication during the last four minutes. I've read a good deal of the posts and perhaps skipped the ones that answered my question, but again, I just wonder whether human communication would have been feasible, or even possible, if the crew suspected something was wrong when the autopilot disengaged.
YWG From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 1137 posts, RR: 3 Reply 239, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16127 times:
Quoting ChrisK2 (Reply 42): No, they weren't. Nothing from the FDR was uplinked via satellite (FDRs don't work that way - not in this day and age, anyway), and the article you quoted in its entirety (a few lines might have been sufficient) doesn't state that, either.
Quoting A388 (Reply 90): New generation aircraft apparently have this feature. The systems on board the A332 of AF apparently also have a constant link to the maintenance and/or operations control center. This is nothing uncommon as KL also has this. Everything from engine behavoir, fuel consumption etc is constantly send to the headquarters with aircraft which have this new feature. I do admit that I don't know how detailed the data is that is being transmitted. The A380 also has this feature as far as I know.
I think you should stick to playing computer games rather than commenting on systems you are clearly unfamiliar with.
Quoting ChrisK2 (Reply 42): Please, don't interpret stuff into news reports (which may already be inaccurate) that isn't in there.
For Airbus to have already issued a directive to operators, means they have some sort of information as to the cause of the crash. When they amend the turbulent air penetration speed, then something has obviously spurred this on.
ADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 959 posts, RR: 0 Reply 240, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 15417 times:
Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 232): why was there no communication from the cockpit during those four minutes?
I would think the crew would want to figure something out - rather than ATC, this is ABC123 and we just had some lights come on.
If they were busy in rough weather or other problems what good does calling some guy 1,000 miles away do you when you could be flying the plane or figuring out what is wrong?
Also HF communication is not 100% reliable, esp near thunderstorms. They may have tried to make that call and it just did not get thru.
The CVR will provide more data on this issue.
As a point of comparison UA232 which had total flight control system failure in level flight on a clear sunny day took 4 minutes to call in on VHF.
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 8468 posts, RR: 40 Reply 242, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15114 times:
Ualcsr, the likelihood is that the pilots spent every second of those four minutes desperately trying to work out what had gone wrong and bring the aeroplane under some sort of control. On the basis of the automated fault reports (which is all we have to go on) the autopilot disconnecting was only one symptom of a mounting series of electrical and system failures which would certainly have included many of the instruments they needed to fly the aeroplane.There'd have been no point in getting on the radio - they were on their own, trying to save the lives of everyone on board.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
ManuCH From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 2903 posts, RR: 52 Reply 243, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 14404 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
Quoting FuturePilot16 (Reply 236): Does anyone else think that extremely hasty speculation like this should be able to result in a lawsuit.
I don't think so. There is freedom of press after all. That journalists can write random stuff is well known, but that shouldn't make it illegal for them to speculate. It's up to the (hopefully informed) public to distinguish rubbish from real news.
Of course there will always be people who blindly believe what newspapers write, but that still doesn't make it a crime for the journalist to speculate IMHO.
ManuCH From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 2903 posts, RR: 52 Reply 244, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 14371 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
Is there a way to obtain the directive Airbus issued to the operators, with its exact wording? It would probably be more useful this way than reading it after having it re-phrased by a journalist.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2845 posts, RR: 4 Reply 245, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 14236 times:
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 242): Reply 242, posted Thu Jun 4 2009 21:55:35 your local time (37 secs ago) and read 0 times:
Ualcsr, the likelihood is that the pilots spent every second of those four minutes desperately trying to work out what had gone wrong and bring the aeroplane under some sort of control. On the basis of the automated fault reports (which is all we have to go on) the autopilot disconnecting was only one symptom of a mounting series of electrical and system failures which would certainly have included many of the instruments they needed to fly the aeroplane.There'd have been no point in getting on the radio - they were on their own, trying to save the lives of everyone on board.
I'm not sure this is the case. Its possible that the system kicked off the autopilot, and the pilots were relatively unconcerned at the time. The "cascade failure" could be one single failure that took the diagnostics far too long to run through so you see it kick offline different parts at different times. Given the failure of the very devices that translate raw sensor data into what is displayed on the screen... they might not have had a clue how badly degraded the systems were if the problem was returning valid data.
We see this in the recent 737 crash where the radar altimiter no longer functioned correctly but returned a valid response as far as the rest of the plane was concerned.
Takes far longer to understand things are broken if they tell you the right thing. The 737 returned a valid altitude thus there was nothing to flag the diagnostics. Where is a pilot with one or more chip failures going to find accurate contrasting data for what the busted one is putting out? In the 737's case there is a window to look out of and a still functioning radar altimiter on the other side. Oh and a lack of currently experiencing a belly landing. In the AF447 case, how do you tell if you are doing M.82 if the nav system is telling lies to your displays? Do you stick your hand out the window? You have no clue, and in the middle of a storm the "seat of the pants" isn't going to tell you just how close the fan is from the manure.
Quoting Gasgh (Reply 237): Think the American Airlines A.300 out of JFK that lost its fin. Perhaps it shed control surfaces -there are reports the airplane signaled loss of wing spoilers a minute before the final transmission that seem to indcate airframe break-up. Either way, the aircraft would be uncontrollable
Might have been out of the pilots control too. Look at the report on the Qantas A330. Now imagine the plane does this violent manuver in turbulence that hits the plane greatly inflating the stress on the plane. Worse yet, you level out after this and resume controled level flight. In turbulence you can then overstress your now damaged wings and/or fuselage without anything the pilot does being wrong. I am *NOT* saying this is what happened or is likely, just that structural failure is possible despite the design rules in place.
PanAm788 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 249 posts, RR: 0 Reply 247, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 14041 times:
Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 222): I had a gut feeling when they first announced they found debris it wasn't from the plane. I just knew they hadn't found. Not one image was made public.
That's what I thought too. This is certainly the strangest plane crash I can remember. I can smell the conspiracy theories brewing.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined exactly 7 years ago today! , 20630 posts, RR: 62 Reply 248, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13655 times:
The theory that old damage to the aircraft may have been missed and when faced with design load limit forces caused by a sever storm, the wing failed, has gained a little traction in my mind with the revelation that this aircraft had a ground accident 3 years ago that lead to damage to the other aircraft. That's plenty of time for the damage to propagate and to weaken the structure, and it would no longer have the same structural strength it was designed to have. That means design limit loads would be higher than the loads the wing could take. Again, in theory.
It will be interesting to learn more about what the A321 traffic accident entailed and what inspections were done after the fact.
Quoting QFMel (Reply 207): and there have been more than a few instances of 2+2=5.
Very few. Can't read all 2500 posts, but most speculation has been in form of a QUESTION. There is nothing wrong with asking questions.
Quoting EMA747 (Reply 210): I see what you are saying and agree with you. Totally wild speculation without even trying to understand the issues is not good.
Could you tell us who's doing that?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
KingFriday013 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1221 posts, RR: 11 Reply 249, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13676 times:
Quoting Tonytifao (Reply 246): Look at this image released LOL. It sure looks like an airplane.
Flood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 800 posts, RR: 1 Reply 250, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13439 times:
Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 193): Apparently the debris recovered was NOT from the A330!!!
Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 201): The BBC is now reporting... Debris recovered in the Atlantic is not from Air France jet, says Brazilian air force official"
Quoting ARGinLON (Reply 212): RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian air force said Thursday night that debris picked up near where officials believe Air France Flight 447 crashed Monday into the Atlantic Ocean was not from the plane.
Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 213): CNN is now reporting that NONE of the debris, including the seat, are from the Air France A330.
Quoting SkyHigh777 (Reply 220): CNN is now reporting as well that the Brazilian air force is saying the debris is not from Flt 447...
Quoting Superhub (Reply 241): Now the Brazillian Air Force says that the debris in the Atlantic does not come from the Air France jet.
Got it, thanks
We're approaching part 11 and it's hard enough to keep up with this thread as it is. As such, just an appeal for people to check previous posts to avoid the same news being posted over and over again.
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 8609 posts, RR: 96 Reply 251, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13658 times:
Quoting GlobeEx (Reply 129): My theory included the failure of the ADIRU, also based on the QF72 incident.
The trouble is, we don't yet know if such a failure is a cause, or a consequence. It's easy to see where most people's view defaults to, and its easy to see that that's because it's easy.
Personally I find it objectionable until such time as more reliable evidence comes to light.
Quoting Pihero (Reply 166): and an ADIRU theory, the merit of which is that it contains the only documents pertaining to a fault in the aircraft but suits a lot of agendas that are better called "slightly biased".
Couldn't agree more
Quoting Pihero (Reply 166): Where are PhilSquares, Zeke, Bellerophon, TYdscanuck, OldAeroGuy, pilotaydin... and many more ? (see tech-ops, they're still alive !)
The answer will be about professionalism, a decent attitude towards the dead occupants of that airplane and their relatives and friends...and a refusal to speculate when we have basically nothing to bese a theory on.
All I'll say to that is that I welcome yours (and their) input to continue to damp the obscene speculation flying wildly about
Quoting BAViscount (Reply 176): The only reason I keep looking is in the hope that there may be some more official news that might help clear up what happened
Thanks for a very informative post. (What did it mean? )
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 180): I've yet to read anyone claim they KNOW what happened, or try to blame on thing or another
Fair do's on the "know" bit, but half of these threads have been about either directly or indirectly laying the blame in specific places - else we're reading different threads....
Quoting EMA747 (Reply 195): the rest of us are trying to get find out what went on whilst also having to learn about how these complex machines are operated/designed
And the threads are well worth it for that. Unfortunately you have to sift through a heap of crap peddled as "knowledge" by people who don't actualy have knowledge, but agendas. And really sadly, lay members, or new members of the forum may not be in a position to differentiate
Quoting QFMel (Reply 207): I agree with Pihero's point not because it implicitly condones expert comment only or elitism. The issue is more that there is a qualitative difference between informed speculation and speculation masquerading as fact, and there have been more than a few instances of 2+2=5.
Totally agree
Quoting EMA747 (Reply 210): The point I was trying to make is I didn't like the I'm a pilot/I know best tone of the post.
I'm not a pilot, but could easily have written Pihero's post word-for-word. There's nowhere in his post where he says "pilots know best". What he actually says is "the guys that do this for a living avoid speculation like the plague, and professionally (and rightly IMO) await more substantive findings"
.
As this is a free forum I have no desire to dictate policy - there will be those that delight in the speculation. There will even be those that delight in peddling agends - which is frankly astonishingly disrespectful to those unfortunate souls who lost their lives and their families. Distateful.
But - they're entitled to do that. They're members.
I don't have to like it, and there's nobody on here that's going to dictate to me that I have to
727forever From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 756 posts, RR: 5 Reply 252, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13397 times:
Quoting ULMFlyer (Reply 31): but how does the magnitude of horizontal windshear encountered at cruise while flying through a cell compare with that encountered at low altitudes when flying, say, under a CB on approach? You said you have, thankfully, only encountered 20 kts shear. Was that at cruise or approach? I would have thought that at altitude the shear would be primarily in the vertical direction, but that's why I'm asking the question.
Generally shearing aloft is not as severe as closer to the surface. Winds aloft are generally much stronger. Winds of 145 knots are not at all uncommon in the jetstream. The highest that I have seen was 180 knots. High wind is not really the problem. It is the shear that is. Most modern airplanes have a windshear detection system that works at low altitude to alert of a W/S condition warranting a go around. Shear at altitude is generally not as strong but is what gives much of the moderate chop that you feel in cruise sometimes. An observant pilot can look at the contrails of other aircraft and see what kind of ride he is getting by what the shear does to the contrail. If it is really wavy that says lots of small shear and you don't want to be at that altitude. Usually shear aloft is horizontal, but in convective activity vertical shear is common and very dangerous. The worst horizontal shear that I've flown through was +50 knots and -50 knots for a 100 knot swing. To say that we had severe turbulance is an understatement. I had slowed to rough air penetration speed and I'm glad I did. The Autopilot disconnected and it was Mr. Toads wild ride. In the end we pushed through and I wrote up the airplane and the FDR was pulled. All of that was still only 2.5+ G's and -0.5 G's. An inspection wasn't even required.
I have seen vertical shear once and it was inside of a powerful thunderstorm. Our radar failed and we were vectored into the area by ATC. We had been told that the thunderstorms were further out but this turned out to be bad information. The result was inside of this thunderstorm the airspeed was impossible to control. To keep the airspeed above a stall and under the Vmo was crazy. I was power on and power off quite a bit and didn't really worry about altitude but just maintained a wings level attitude and as close to 0 pitch as I could. The airplane altitude and vertical rate was all over as well. We were lucky in that we just brushed the edge and made it out within 2 minutes. The airplane had extensive hail damage and did receive structural damage to the internal structure of the wing. This airplane type was notorious for radar failure and I certainly learned that day to never fly into the clouds when convective activity could be present with a cranky radar.
Quoting Chumley (Reply 130): Is a 100mph wind enough to break a wing? I didn't realize that was possible.
100 mph wind in and of itself, no. A 100 mph shear will not either should not either. 200 mph probably would.
AAden From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 823 posts, RR: 0 Reply 253, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13225 times:
Quoting CuriousFlyer (Reply 226): If they are finding parts from a different airplane (if this seat is not from the AF A-330), maybe there is a second plane which collided with it...
It would explain why one of the planes was seen falling in flames by the Air Comet pilots while the other aircraft fell intact and broke up on contact with the ocean, leaving the oil slick...
Going further (I'm speculating) since no other plane was reported missing, it could be one belonging to smugglers, flying with its lights of and thus could not be spotted by the AF pilots.
Correct me if I'm worng but the air comet flight was 2,000km away from where AFs messages were reported from....
They couldn't havce seen AF 447.
So the idea that Airbus is going to warn operators to speed up during sotmrs is false correct? That was just crap from the media...
Does anyone know if the subs are in the water yet?
QFMel From Australia, joined Jun 2009, 79 posts, RR: 0 Reply 254, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13111 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 248):
Very few. Can't read all 2500 posts, but most speculation has been in form of a QUESTION. There is nothing wrong with asking questions.
Having read all 2500 posts, I think it's safe to say things like 'I think it's a bomb because x' (not knowing whether or not x has actually happened) are not questions, hence my earlier comment about 'speculation masquerading as fact'. I don't think there has been too many instances but I wouldn't describe them as remarkably few, either. I'm fairly confident of my ability to be able to distinguish one from the other- questions for instance, are, or should, ordinarily be framed as questions, as opposed to statements.
There's been plenty of plenty of exploration of hypotheticals which has been particularly interesting and informative- at no point has there been discouragement of asking questions, and nor should there be.
Learning more is rarely a bad thing, it's just unfortunate that it has to happen as a result of such a tragic event.
Tsaord From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 255, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12754 times:
I just want them to find that plane and as many victims as possible. The families and friends will have no closer if they don't. All of a sudden their loved ones are just missing and feared dead. Nothing to bury. Just the thought of a watery grave. I feel for them.
Doesn't make me feel any better about getting on planes again. I always have an uneasiness. When just like this happens its just hard not to imagine what occurs and what they went through.
Moderators From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 427 posts, RR: 0 Reply 256, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 13197 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 427 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Mar 2005, 866 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jun 2009, 71 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 1137 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2006, 475 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 8468 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 2903 posts, 
, 20630 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 8609 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
){kind=link}
![_](javascript:compressPost('4436197','2','1','249','KingFriday013',' " target=_blank>http://oglobo.globo.com/fotos/2009/0...s.jpg What is that? -J.','3')){kind=link}