Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AF447 Wreckage Found, Part 3  
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 48549 times:

Continuing the discussion from the following thread:

AF447 Wreckage Found (Part II) (by LipeGIG Apr 6 2011 in Civil Aviation)

228 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 48492 times:

A very little ( heavily compressed ) summary of the key developments from the last part of the previous thread :

Recovery Operation in progress. One of the black boxes is located ( probably they already lifted by now ? ). However, apparently there are missing parts in the box ( is hard to determine since the picture is small and the box is still in the bottom of the sea ).

Search in progress for the other box and all of us with the fingers crossed and anxiety disorders growing...

Rgds.

G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 48454 times:

Quick summary of search to date. The search vessel Ile de Sein arrived at the wreckage spot early Tuesday morning to start Phase 5 recovery operations. This was after the debris field was surveyed with over 100,000 photos taken during the Phase 4 search which the Woods Hole Institute located the crash site.

The Ill de Sein is a private cable laying ship contracted to perform the work. The search team is directed by Investigator-in-Charge Alain Bouillard, assisted by three BEA Safety Investigators, made up of:

* A Safety Investigator from AAIB (British equivalent of the BEA) ;
* A Safety Investigator from CENIPA (Brazilian equivalent of the BEA) ;
* Three experts from Airbus ;
* An expert from Air France ;
* An American specialist in sonar imagery who participated in phase 4 of the sea searches;
* A psychologist.

On board the vessel there are four Officers from the French Judicial Police, assisted by three specialists from the French Gendarmerie institute of criminal research (IRCGN).

If the CVR/FDR are found they will be sealed and sent by a french naval vessel to probably Cayenne and flown to France. The search team located the FDR housing today.



But, the crash survivable memory unit was not attached. This also would be where the locator beacon would be.



They do plan on retrieving bodies and important aircraft components as part of the investigation. Second dive was today, no word as of yet on any results.

Gonzolo beat me to it!

[Edited 2011-04-27 16:33:02]


The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 48278 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 2):

On board the vessel there are four Officers from the French Judicial Police,

The *judicial police* doesn't in fact have a reality : It exists only as an activity of *officers with a judicial police priviledge*.
One doesn't really need to be a policeman to be an *Officer of the Law* as mayors and their deputies, and gendarme officers... and quite a few other categories of officials could have the function.
Their powers are those of investigators and in this field they only answer to the appointed judge in charge of an investigation.
Their role on the "Ile de Sein" is about legal processing of everything recovered from the site and protection of any item deemed necessary for the judicial investigation.
We already know that two of them will be escorting the recorders when they are retrieved.
The closest translation for the *officier de police judiciaire* could then be just *Officers of the Law*



Contrail designer
User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3070 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 48083 times:

Quoting comorin,previous thread:
Thanks for the cutaway diagram. I am hoping that some big fish didn't swim by and swallow the nice shiny round part. Hopefully there are no such critters at that depth - too dark?

There are several species of shark that inhabit extreme deep water environments. They locate food primarily via the electroreceptors called "Ampullae of Lorenzini" located on their snouts.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1613 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 47955 times:

So the flight data recorder is found but the memory unit is missing -- what exactly does this mean? Here are my specific questions:

1. What, if anything, can the flight data recorder tell investigators without the memory unit?
2. Is the flight data recorder and memory unit designed to separate?
3. What does a memory unit weigh - is there any air in it, is it boyant at all?


User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 47936 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 2):
Gonzolo beat me to it!

Well, maybe I posted faster, but you definately posted better !! Your summary is much more complete, thanks for posting.

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
Quoting comorin,previous thread:
Thanks for the cutaway diagram. I am hoping that some big fish didn't swim by and swallow the nice shiny round part. Hopefully there are no such critters at that depth - too dark?

There are several species of shark that inhabit extreme deep water environments. They locate food primarily via the electroreceptors called "Ampullae of Lorenzini" located on their snouts.

I know we all have the image in our mind of car plates being recovered from dissected sharks, but I can't imagine a shark ( or any other animal for that matter ) that could swallow an entire CSMU... I am very confident that they would find all the missing parts sooner or later, and I have also hope for the chance of reading the information contained in it.

Rgds.
G.

[Edited 2011-04-27 18:01:10]


80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 47913 times:

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
There are several species of shark that inhabit extreme deep water environments. They locate food primarily via the electroreceptors called "Ampullae of Lorenzini" located on their snouts.

I read that at that depth the bacteria that causes decomposition is inactive and there are no fish that would eat any of the bodies (hence why they are still there), so I don't think those sharks are there. I doubt any fish would eat something made of metal.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 2):
But, the crash survivable memory unit was not attached. This also would be where the locator beacon would be.

At least it means that they are that much closer. If the FDR is the size of a shoebox then the memory unit must be the size of a soda can. Finding a soda can in a wide area, even a flat and barren one, is going to be tough.



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 47838 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 5):
1. What, if anything, can the flight data recorder tell investigators without the memory unit?
2. Is the flight data recorder and memory unit designed to separate?
3. What does a memory unit weigh - is there any air in it, is it boyant at all?

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK :

1.- Nothing except maybe some idea of the impact forces that affected the casing.
2.- No, the CSMU is attached by screws to the casing ( you can see the screws in the scheme provided by Canoecarrier )
3.- Don't know the weight, but definitely is not designed to float at all.

Rgds.
G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3283 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 47727 times:

How much protection does the outer "orange" FDR casing provide? This seems to indicate an extremely hard impact if the FDR has been ripped from it's usual housing structure? I mean, the FDR/CVR are supposed to be virtually impossible to destroy, are they not? A full separation from the a/c structure and then the recording data assembly is separated from the rest of the damn black box. All I can say is "wow". Sounds like the industry needs to design a new "blackbox" that is "more' rugged.

[Edited 2011-04-27 18:36:52]


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 47728 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 3):
The *judicial police* doesn't in fact have a reality : It exists only as an activity of *officers with a judicial police priviledge*.

Thanks for the clarification. I pulled that off the english version on the BEA site though. I can't blame google translate on that one.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 5):

1. What, if anything, can the flight data recorder tell investigators without the memory unit?
2. Is the flight data recorder and memory unit designed to separate?
3. What does a memory unit weigh - is there any air in it, is it boyant at all?

all you ever want to know about a similar unit is here. Last thread we had someone with more knowledge of electronics and pressure, maybe this will clarify is questions.
http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/comm...s/Flight_Data_Recorder_(SSFDR).pdf

Finding the FDR casing tells us nothing.

Maybe Pihero can shed a little light on what brand of FDR would be on an AF A330. I can't 100% say that this is the design of the unit specific to AF 447, but I would bet that it's either the schematic I posted or a honeywell made unit.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 47419 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 9):
All I can say is "wow". Sounds like the industry needs to design a new "blackbox" that is "more' rugged.



The current modular design is a result of lessons learned from past crashes and how well, or poorly, the FDR/ CVR survived.

The concept of a separate CSMU is an additional safety factor. The FDR / CVR is firmly mounted in the aircraft. If impact forces distort the structural elements around the FDR and CVR - in the past that has caused corruption of data.

If the memory medium is located within that FDR / CVR case, there have been many instances of the case being distorted and the seams fractured by a crash. In the times of tape - this led to the tape being damaged or destroyed. In case of fire, the memory located within the FDR / CVR would have a higher chance of being damaged than a CSMU.

The separate CSMU provides a complete protect able unit for the memory. Yes in the case of crashes in water, it can make recover more difficult. That is why the pinger is attached to the CSMU, not the FDR itself.

Also separated CSMU modules are usually recovered without major additional difficulty - the most recent I can think of is the CVR from the Ethiopian B738 which crashed off Beirut.


User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3070 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 47378 times:

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 7):
I doubt any fish would eat something made of metal.
Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 6):
I know we all have the image in our mind of car plates being recovered from dissected sharks,

That image comes from tiger sharks which are known to bite at and swallow almost anything, but tiger sharks are generally found in shallow, warm water.

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 6):
but I can't imagine a shark ( or any other animal for that matter ) that could swallow an entire CSMU.

Several could, but it's highly doubtful that one did.

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 6):
I am very confident that they would find all the missing parts sooner or later, and I have also hope for the chance of reading the information contained in it.

As do I.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 7):
I read that at that depth the bacteria that causes decomposition is inactive

Correct, as far as I know.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 7):
and there are no fish that would eat any of the bodies (hence why they are still there),

Not correct. Sharks, hagfish, very large amphipods, crabs, and polychaete worms all exist at great depths, and all are happy to feed on whatever drops down from above. However, all of those creatures rely on the water-bourne scent of decaying flesh to locate food in a lightless environment, so they may not have been attracted to the wreck site due to the lack of decomposition of the bodies there.

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 7):
so I don't think those sharks are there.

They're there, but they are relatively few in number and may not have been attracted to the wreck site/debris field.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 46967 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 9):
How much protection does the outer "orange" FDR casing provide?

Essentially none...the orange box just covers the interface electronics. It's the memory module that gets protected, since that's the part you care about recovering.

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 9):
I mean, the FDR/CVR are supposed to be virtually impossible to destroy, are they not?

Yes. And, in this case, they appear to be...after all, one piece is found and the other, though as yet unfound, has no particular reason to think it's destroyed.

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 9):
A full separation from the a/c structure and then the recording data assembly is separated from the rest of the damn black box. All I can say is "wow". Sounds like the industry needs to design a new "blackbox" that is "more' rugged.

More rugged in what way? The only thing that's wrong with the CSMU is that it's missing...it's just dumb luck that they found the chassis and not the CSMU first. Both are detached from the aircraft so it's not a ruggedization problem.

Tom.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 43577 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 13):
Both are detached from the aircraft so it's not a ruggedization problem.

We knew somewhat earlier that the CVR and FDR were probably detached from the aircraft.

The BEA reports show that not only the vertical stabilizer separated from the aircraft, but a largish section of the lower aft fuselage under the VS attachment points, which was near where the CVR and FDR are mounted, was among the floating, recovered wreckage.


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 43543 times:

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
Quoting comorin,previous thread:
Thanks for the cutaway diagram. I am hoping that some big fish didn't swim by and swallow the nice shiny round part. Hopefully there are no such critters at that depth - too dark?

There are several species of shark that inhabit extreme deep water environments. They locate food primarily via the electroreceptors called "Ampullae of Lorenzini" located on their snouts.

Thank you for explaining. I looked at the link- the Ampullae are a very cool feature indeed! That puts the kibosh on the 'Shark Ate the CSMU' theory...


User currently offlinepilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2539 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 42757 times:

I am very very excited at this point, it's funny, I have spent today in the office preparing an unreliable airpseed briefing for all pilots at the airline, and i was looking at an AF 447 pic, wondering and wishing the FDR/CVR could be found and one step closer to it all...and I really think it's going to happen, I hope that all the missing components will be found, just a matter of patience, and well, if the data is not alive for some reason, then I have nothing to say, but It would have been much worse in the name of aviation if we couldn't find them in the first place...let's wait and see!!!


The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5476 posts, RR: 30
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 42487 times:

It's all the different levels of not knowing that I find sad and frustrating. Not knowing where the recorders are means we don't know what happened to the plane which means we don't know how the crew reacted which means we can't specifically prevent a tragedy like this from repeating.

Patience is difficult.



What the...?
User currently offlinecaptainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 41470 times:

Does anyone think this will lead to more fortifications/a change in the exterior design of the FDR/CVR/CSMU? That is, if there is any practical room for improvement. They are pretty much as tough and protected as they can be without becoming incredibly heavy, so I don't believe much can be done about it.


Long Live the Tulip!
User currently offlinebreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 41259 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 17):
It's all the different levels of not knowing that I find sad and frustrating. Not knowing where the recorders are means we don't know what happened to the plane which means we don't know how the crew reacted which means we can't specifically prevent a tragedy like this from repeating.

Patience is difficult.


I share your frustration.
At least, the French government, Airbus and Air France are showing dedication to bring this difficult search to a happy end.
If the CSMU is on the seabed, it will be picked-up by the scanning sonar of the ROV. I remember the fantastic echoes created, in similar circumstances, but much less deep, by a set of cooking pans lost overboard by an unfortunate cook. Even the smallest one was very visible on the sonar.
Now if the CSMU is buried or covered by some other wreckage, that's going to be more difficult.
Does anybody know if the locator beacon is only active, or if it would ping back if illuminated by a sonar?


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1389 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 40845 times:

Quoting breiz (Reply 19):
Now if the CSMU is buried or covered by some other wreckage, that's going to be more difficult.

Difficult, yes. But they will find it if it's there. In fact, I don't think they will stop any salvage operation before either both recorder memory devices are found or the last bit of metal on the seabed in the area is on a vessel off to France.

[Edited 2011-04-28 07:35:45]


WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 40192 times:

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 18):

Does anyone think this will lead to more fortifications/a change in the exterior design of the FDR/CVR/CSMU?

I personally don't...what about this accident would suggest they need more fortifications? From all the descriptions here and in the prior thread, it sounds like the FDR/CSMU performed exactly as designed.

Tom.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 38533 times:

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 18):
Does anyone think this will lead to more fortifications/a change in the exterior design of the FDR/CVR/CSMU?

Why? just because the housing separated? If you look at the diagram of the machine I posted above, the memory unit appears to be almost a solid block of metal. I'm with Tom on this one.

CNN had an interview today with the owners/operators of the submersible today, each round trip for the Remora takes some 14 to 16 hours, taking over two hours to descend to the wreck site.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5476 posts, RR: 30
Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 37877 times:

Quoting breiz (Reply 19):
At least, the French government, Airbus and Air France are showing dedication to bring this difficult search to a happy end.

That is the ray of hope...there seems to be real dedication to finding the answers.



What the...?
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 37829 times:

Quoting breiz (Reply 19):
Does anybody know if the locator beacon is only active, or if it would ping back if illuminated by a sonar?


Is only active, and for a limited period of time ( certification is for 30 days ). Besides, any feature like a ping reacting to an external signal would require some source of energy, and after two years separated from the rest of the unit is definitely too much time.
This time, we must pray for luck and for the good work of the professionals doing this recovery operation.

Rgds.
G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlinejonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 673 posts, RR: 1
Reply 25, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 38344 times:

I have a question what would happen if they made an airplane that floats? I don't mean a flying boat or a a Cessna with the little water skis but i mean an airplane with materials that can cause it to float in case of a crash in the water? Has this ever been considered? Is it econimacally viable? Would it mean making it heavier?

User currently offlineiflykpdx From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 287 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 37912 times:

Has there been any discussion of adding a passive pinger technology like RFID to the memory unit? If you could get 70 feet of range out of it underwater, it could make finding it a lot easier once the active pinger battery dies.


Airport Management - UND
User currently offlinerikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1661 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 38504 times:

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 25):
I have a question what would happen if they made an airplane that floats?

The few planes that have survived a water landing have tended to float, at least for a while.

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 25):
I don't mean a flying boat or a a Cessna with the little water skis but i mean an airplane with materials that can cause it to float in case of a crash in the water?

The shape of the bottom of the fuselage is crucial, which is why hull shapes are used for "flying boats". Also note most flying boats are high-wing... both options on a larger commercial aircraft wouldn't necessarily be viable.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Aldo Bidini

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 25):
Has this ever been considered? Is it econimacally viable? Would it mean making it heavier?

I am sure many variations have been considered for safety devices for planes used for overwater routes. Obviously the economics would be staggering for the amount of planes used for overwater operations. A big deterent would not only be the weight, but the loss of aerodynamic "smoothness", resulting in higher operating costs



AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlinedougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 393 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 37590 times:

I wonder if they have ever thought of a secondary memory unit fed with the same data as the CVR/FDR with a digital stream , which in the case of an emergency with various parameters aligned (extreme vertical speed / inertia switches / float switches / crew choose to jettison) would be jettisoned from the side or belly of the aircraft with a parachute and locator's buoy style body like those ELTs used on helicopters (PUMA) operating over the North Sea so that it floats.

It would sure help if this type of accident were to occur again and recently there have been quite a few aircraft going into the drink. The normal CVR/FDR would still be used this would be a more easy to find backup and would help narrow down a search area after calculating tides and wind speeds/direction.


User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 29, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 36562 times:

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 25):
I have a question what would happen if they made an airplane that floats? I don't mean a flying boat or a a Cessna with the little water skis but i mean an airplane with materials that can cause it to float in case of a crash in the water? Has this ever been considered? Is it econimacally viable? Would it mean making it heavier?
Quoting iflykpdx (Reply 26):
Has there been any discussion of adding a passive pinger technology like RFID to the memory unit? If you could get 70 feet of range out of it underwater, it could make finding it a lot easier once the active pinger battery dies.
Quoting dougbr2006 (Reply 28):
I wonder if they have ever thought of a secondary memory unit fed with the same data as the CVR/FDR with a digital stream , which in the case of an emergency with various parameters aligned (extreme vertical speed / inertia switches / float switches / crew choose to jettison) would be jettisoned from the side or belly of the aircraft with a parachute and locator's buoy style body like those ELTs used on helicopters (PUMA) operating over the North Sea so that it floats.

It would sure help if this type of accident were to occur again and recently there have been quite a few aircraft going into the drink. The normal CVR/FDR would still be used this would be a more easy to find backup and would help narrow down a search area after calculating tides and wind speeds/direction.

With all due respect, all this topics has been discussed to the level of real sickness in the 8 previous threads regarding this accident, from June 2009 to now.
It has been clearly stablished, and is the general consensus, that the number of accidents ( in the past, and in the future should be even less ) where an airliner ended at 13.000 ft. underwater is way too small to make changes to the actual technology in use in the industry. Is it possible to make changes ? Sure. With the modern technology you can do a lot of things. But sometimes is just simply pointless to do anything. The reality is, if you want to keep the prices of flying in a range where flying is not a luxury only for a select group of celebrities and tycoons, you need some balance between the cost of production and the level of safety. Can we make an aircraft 100 % safe, that can float, land in a mountain, and cut the grass in the garden if you want to do ? Probably we can using the proper technology and materials ... Is it viable from a commercial point of view ? NO.

Rgds.

G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlinecaptainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33936 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 22):
Why? just because the housing separated? If you look at the diagram of the machine I posted above, the memory unit appears to be almost a solid block of metal. I'm with Tom on this one.

Actually, that was kind of where my thoughts were going. Say the pieces stay attached, is there not (even just a little bit) better of a chance of it being found, just due to it's size? If they are separated (like in this case), doesn't that (in theory) make it harder to find the CSMU, as it is smaller than the whole device? I mean, it'd be a small chance, but in this case had they stayed together the whole thing would be on its way to the surface for analysis.

I'm not an engineer, so I'm sure there's a perfect reason for the construction to be the way it is - this is just me trying to further my knowledge of why it's built so.



Long Live the Tulip!
User currently offlinedirtyfrankd From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 191 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33893 times:

So, what exactly is within the FDR casing? Electronic equipment used to "power" the whole device and allow the CSMU to actually capture the data?

User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 32, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 33622 times:

Quoting dirtyfrankd (Reply 31):
So, what exactly is within the FDR casing?

The graphic in Post #2 on this thread shows that information.

Most of the FDR bulk is a power supply, and the flat base is a circuit board which takes the various data inputs and puts them into memory in correct sequence.

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 30):
Say the pieces stay attached, is there not (even just a little bit) better of a chance of it being found, just due to it's size?

Somewhat. Normally when they are separated, the CSMU is found first because the pinger is attached to the CMSU, not to the base.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1327 posts, RR: 52
Reply 33, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 33571 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting dirtyfrankd (Reply 31):
So, what exactly is within the FDR casing? Electronic equipment used to "power" the whole device and allow the CSMU to actually capture the data?

The power supply, computer, communications buffering devices, etc. Data comes from that aircraft and is formated/processed then written to the memory.

This link (repeated from above) is an example.
http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/comm...s/Flight_Data_Recorder_(SSFDR).pdf
-> Although, I don't know how current this device is (the manual appears to be 2000) "/00"

The most surprising thing I saw from the data here was the incredibly slow data of communications.

"64, 128 or 256 words per second." A "word" is 2 bytes- or 16 bits.

So we are talking about 512 Bytes/second, or 4096 bits/sec. I haven't seen data rates like that since early modem days....

The "download time" for the 32 MByte memory in this Honeywell was
"Readout (data transfer) time for the entire 4X model memory contents is less than 20 minutes."

Imagine if it took you 20 minutes to read your 32Mbyte camera memory card (can you even buy one any more?)
-----

BTW - this kind of kills the comments about data rate from the FDR not being able to be sent via radio. That is nothing....

Course - as I mentioned, I don't know how current that Honeywell document is.



rcair1
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 34, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 33470 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 33):
Course - as I mentioned, I don't know how current that Honeywell document is.

You tell me if this is any different. They don't have a date on their documents. This one is even more technical.

http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/comm.../Data_-_Digital_Communications.pdf



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3630 posts, RR: 12
Reply 35, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 33410 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 29):
It has been clearly stablished, and is the general consensus, that the number of accidents ( in the past, and in the future should be even less ) where an airliner ended at 13.000 ft. underwater is way too small to make changes to the actual technology in use in the industry.

Most changes in aviation safety have come about because of a single accident that revealed a larger problem.

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 29):
Is it viable from a commercial point of view ? NO.

Ask yourself how much this accident search, recovery and investigation is costing and compare that with the cost of tweaking the FDR system with any or all of the suggestions you quoted. My bet is it would be a wash at worst.

FDR's on airplanes have changed many times over the years in response to accidents. The system can and will be improved further still. To suggest it won't happen because it's "not commercially viable" is frankly just incorrect. You could have just as easily made a blanket statement like that in 1967 and we'd still be using analog tape in barely protected housings that practically shatter on impact.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 36, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 33275 times:

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 35):
Most changes in aviation safety have come about because of a single accident that revealed a larger problem.

At the present stage of the investigation process for this accident, nothing points yet to anything like a "larger problem".
( The pitot probes are already redesigned and the older models were being replaced even before this crash )
The cause could be a UFO or a meteor impact, we don't know yet. Still, I can agree with you in the general concept, the safety can, should, and WILL BE improved after this accident IF some of the causal factors are related with some design flaw or similar. But the people here is asking for aircraft that can float, black boxes that can send a signal responding a sonar wave... a lot of changes and redesigns that are expensive ( and very hard to implement to say the least ), and like I said before, after thousands of posts, and the expert opinion of people working day by day in the industry, the general consensus here is, we don't need major changes to improve the capability of the typical wide-body aircraft to survive a ditching in the mid of an ocean, or any major change in the black boxes, because is not a common occurrence that a jet ends in the middle of an ocean at 13.000 ft of depth.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 35):
Ask yourself how much this accident search, recovery and investigation is costing and compare that with the cost of tweaking the FDR system with any or all of the suggestions you quoted. My bet is it would be a wash at worst.

Ask yourself how much an average passenger is prone to pay extra for a device or aircraft feature that can prevent a situation that happens once every 20, or 30 years or less. The answer is ZERO. This is like design and pay for a cover to you car capable of resist hail of the size of a basket ball. You don't pay for that because the chance of being hit by that is extremely remote.

In any case, I will be the first to change my point of view if the final report shows that a major change is needed, no matter how many billions could cost. But not for the moment, sorry.

Rgds.

G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlineGBan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 37, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 33176 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 36):
But the people here is asking for aircraft that can float, black boxes that can send a signal responding a sonar wave... a lot of changes and redesigns that are expensive ( and very hard to implement to say the least ),

The suggestion of adding a RFID device would cost a couple of cents per airframe. An additional memory unit in another place of the aircraft (maybe on the top of the vertical stabilizer?) wouldn't be that expensive either.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 56
Reply 38, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 33124 times:

Quoting GBan (Reply 37):
The suggestion of adding a RFID device would cost a couple of cents per airframe.

There's a reason these things have acoustic pingers and not RFID tags. It has to do with the physics of propagation (or nearly complete lack thereof!) of electromagnetic waves in a conductive medium such as sea water.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 39, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 33102 times:

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 25):
I have a question what would happen if they made an airplane that floats? I don't mean a flying boat or a a Cessna with the little water skis but i mean an airplane with materials that can cause it to float in case of a crash in the water? Has this ever been considered? Is it econimacally viable? Would it mean making it heavier?

You'd have to make it a lot heavier. You have to assume a crashed aircraft will break up on impact, so the only way to make sure it floats is to make it from materials less dense than water. There are lots of materials like that, but their specific strength (strength divided by density) is terrible so you end up needing a lot more of them to reach the required strength.

Quoting iflykpdx (Reply 26):
Has there been any discussion of adding a passive pinger technology like RFID to the memory unit? If you could get 70 feet of range out of it underwater, it could make finding it a lot easier once the active pinger battery dies.

Does RFID work underwater? Even if it does, we're now talking about a very very specific crash scenario where you've managed to find the wreckage but not the CVR itself but we can still get within ~70' of it.

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 30):
Say the pieces stay attached, is there not (even just a little bit) better of a chance of it being found, just due to it's size? If they are separated (like in this case), doesn't that (in theory) make it harder to find the CSMU, as it is smaller than the whole device? I mean, it'd be a small chance, but in this case had they stayed together the whole thing would be on its way to the surface for analysis.

The problem is that if you fix the CSMU to firmly to the structure, the structure can tear it apart. It's a balance between keeping the memory unit where you can find it against having it intact enough to be useful.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 33):
The most surprising thing I saw from the data here was the incredibly slow data of communications.

"64, 128 or 256 words per second." A "word" is 2 bytes- or 16 bits.

Actually they use 12-bit words for that recorder.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 33):
BTW - this kind of kills the comments about data rate from the FDR not being able to be sent via radio. That is nothing....

Not really. It's nothing *for a single aircraft*. For the global fleet, which is what you have to do if you want the system to actually be effective, you're talking about a sustained data rate in excess of 30 megabits/s. Even that isn't insurmountable over a single data stream but you're talking about doing it over 10,000+ simultaneous data streams, 24/7/365.

Tom.


User currently offlinerwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 40, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 32937 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 39):
The problem is that if you fix the CSMU to firmly to the structure, the structure can tear it apart. It's a balance between keeping the memory unit where you can find it against having it intact enough to be useful.

It's not necessary that all the recording units be exactly the same.

The USN has flight recorders that detach on impact (presumable at some G load), and then float. I think with semi-modern technology having two or three recorders, all recording all of the data (no more of this silly CVR/FDR dichotomy*), you can place two data units in the semi-traditional locations, and install another with a breakaway fitting on top of the fin or something like that, and enclose the that data unit/beacon assembly in some floatation foam and another reasonably tough shell. That third unit would have a good chance of remaining afloat after a crash at sea, as well as being thrown clear of a post impact fire on land. The first two would continue to survive "conventional" impacts, but improve odds even there, given the additional duplication, and possible increased separation.

A radio link continues to be an interesting enhancement, but data volume and communications reliability are huge issues. Reliability in satellite communications, particularly at high data rates, and while an aircraft maneuvers violently, is going to be a problem no matter what. A thinner channel, with omnidirectional broadcasts, might be a nice backup, a couple of kilobits per second could tell you a lot about an aircraft, although again, depending on that would be tough, and costs would be high, especially if you had to deploy a new satellite network to support it. By way of comparison, you could just use Iridium data service, which gets you a couple kb/s, with only a modest number of dropouts, for about $1.25**/minute – or about $150K for a 2000hr/year aircraft. So that’s obviously not going to happen until costs come down considerably.

There is room for improvement here, especially as technology improves, particularly for improving onboard storage devices. Global communications should also become cheaper in the future, but high reliability/high bandwidth communications will remain expensive. So a low bandwidth system, with modest reliability, serving as a backup to the main onboard data records, is at least plausible in the reasonably foreseeable future.


*which is already ending

**you could probably do better buying minutes in bulk, but not all that much.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 41, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 32906 times:

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 35):
Most changes in aviation safety have come about because of a single accident that revealed a larger problem.

True. But so far no larger problem has been revealed, other than what we already knew...finding something the size of shoebox under several miles of water isn't easy.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 35):
Ask yourself how much this accident search, recovery and investigation is costing and compare that with the cost of tweaking the FDR system with any or all of the suggestions you quoted. My bet is it would be a wash at worst.

The recover and investigation costs would have happened no matter what...the only thing that an easier-found CVR would have provided is, perhaps, a shorter search. Although if the CVR broke lose it wouldn't have done anything to help find the airliner, so even that isn't a given.

The problem is that there are essentially an infinite number of "so small it should hardly matter" tweaks. Any one, individually, is trivial. But, cumulatively, they're completely unworkable. So you need a way to chose which ones you do and which ones you don't. A fix that, to the best of our knowledge, would have paid off in perhaps 5 accidents in the history of aviation (and, in every case, wouldn't have prevented the accident) has to be way way way down the priority list of things to work on.

Quoting GBan (Reply 37):
An additional memory unit in another place of the aircraft (maybe on the top of the vertical stabilizer?) wouldn't be that expensive either.

No, but it's weight. Weight is everything. People struggle far harder to remove far less weight than another CSMU.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 40):
The USN has flight recorders that detach on impact (presumable at some G load), and then float. I think with semi-modern technology having two or three recorders, all recording all of the data (no more of this silly CVR/FDR dichotomy*), you can place two data units in the semi-traditional locations, and install another with a breakaway fitting on top of the fin or something like that, and enclose the that data unit/beacon assembly in some floatation foam and another reasonably tough shell.

Yes, you can. And that will do nothing to prevent another AF447 but the next time an AF447 happens (in 15-20 years, based on averages) it will be some other problem that causes us to not find or recover or use the data.

Tom.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19943 posts, RR: 59
Reply 42, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 32837 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 39):

Not really. It's nothing *for a single aircraft*. For the global fleet, which is what you have to do if you want the system to actually be effective, you're talking about a sustained data rate in excess of 30 megabits/s. Even that isn't insurmountable over a single data stream but you're talking about doing it over 10,000+ simultaneous data streams, 24/7/365.

Don't most engine OEM's monitor each and every engine in real time world-wide? I can't imagine that the data in the FDR are that much more voluminous that a similar program couldn't be used. Both A and B could monitor all aircraft in real time world-wide. If one goes down, then the record is...well...recorded.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 43, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 32850 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 39):
Not really. It's nothing *for a single aircraft*. For the global fleet, which is what you have to do if you want the system to actually be effective, you're talking about a sustained data rate in excess of 30 megabits/s. Even that isn't insurmountable over a single data stream but you're talking about doing it over 10,000+ simultaneous data streams, 24/7/365.

Great post as always Tom. Thanks for stopping by. Is that Honeywell link I found the kind of FDR they're looking for?



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1627 posts, RR: 7
Reply 44, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 32648 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 33):
So we are talking about 512 Bytes/second, or 4096 bits/sec. I haven't seen data rates like that since early modem days....

The modem with wich I first ventured onto the Internet in 1994 was a 14.4K modem, 3 times faster than the data rate of the FDR  Wow!



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently onlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 32112 times:

http://www.phmsociety.org/sites/phms...phm_submission/2009/phmc_09_63.pdf

The data rate is actually very high, it seems.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 46, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 31913 times:

Quoting GBan (Reply 37):
The suggestion of adding a RFID device would cost a couple of cents per airframe.

The cost would be several thousand dollars per airframe. Nothing in avaition is a 'couple of cents' after testing and certification. And retrofitting thousands of aircraft around the world.

Do you want the retrofits done during regularly scheduled maintenance like was being done with the pitot probes for the Air France A330 fleet? or stop use of all aircraft worldwide until the retrofits are done?

Quoting GBan (Reply 37):
An additional memory unit in another place of the aircraft (maybe on the top of the vertical stabilizer?) wouldn't be that expensive either.

As discussed extensively in the previous threads the newest generation aircraft have more than one FDR / CVR placed at widely separate locations on the aircraft. If not multiple FDR/CVR, newest aircraft are bring designed with CSMU type data records for the flight computers which also record the same data as the FDR and CVR


User currently offlineGBan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 47, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 31657 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 46):
The cost would be several thousand dollars per airframe. Nothing in avaition is a 'couple of cents' after testing and certification. And retrofitting thousands of aircraft around the world.

Do you want the retrofits done during regularly scheduled maintenance like was being done with the pitot probes for the Air France A330 fleet? or stop use of all aircraft worldwide until the retrofits are done?

Certainly not, I'd just add it in future devices - if it makes sense.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 46):
As discussed extensively in the previous threads the newest generation aircraft have more than one FDR / CVR placed at widely separate locations on the aircraft. If not multiple FDR/CVR, newest aircraft are bring designed with CSMU type data records for the flight computers which also record the same data as the FDR and CVR

I did read this thread, but to be honest I haven't read the previous threads. Anyway great if that is already done - and shows that the weight and cost penalty of multiple devices seems to be bearable.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1327 posts, RR: 52
Reply 48, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 31544 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 34):
You tell me if this is any different. They don't have a date on their documents. This one is even more technical.

Interesting. I note two things (I'm looking at this as an EE, not an aircraft CVF/FDR designer - so if there is somebody out there who is one - and I'm wrong - please chime in!)

First, the data rate must be more related to the aircraft presentation rate than the memory ability. In this device, it supports up to 512 words/second, or 1Kbyte/sec for FDR. However, this device (unlike the previous one), also supports working as a DCVR. It records 3 mic channel and 1 area channel, including digitization (non-linear mu law) and compression using a relatively standard codec to 3 bits per sample per channel. The 3 mic channels are sampled at 8KHz (8000 samples per second) and the area at 16K. By the way - this excludes many high frequencies - the area mic can record up to 6000 hz sound.

Total audio samples in 40K/sec, each is 3-bits after compression, so 15Kbytes of data/second (7.5Kwords). Obviously the memory can handle that.



rcair1
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 49, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 31260 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 42):
Don't most engine OEM's monitor each and every engine in real time world-wide?

If they're on power-by-the-hour, they often do. Not as a general matter of course though. However, they're monitoring their engines at far less than FDR data rates and doing it over ACARS (just like the FMC position reports of AF447). People are already complaining how that was inadequate.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 42):
I can't imagine that the data in the FDR are that much more voluminous that a similar program couldn't be used. Both A and B could monitor all aircraft in real time world-wide. If one goes down, then the record is...well...recorded.

It all depends what you mean by "monitor". If you mean a few key parameters every few minutes, which is what the current monitoring systems do *when there's an available datalink*, yes, it's easy. It's done now. But what people on this thread are asking for is full-time FDR streaming from every aircraft in realtime from every location...that's a much bigger deal. Not insurmountable, but not as trivial as just flipping some switches.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 43):
Is that Honeywell link I found the kind of FDR they're looking for?

As far as I can tell, yes. If it's not exactly the same one, then it's of a very similar family.

Tom.


User currently offlinetom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3
Reply 50, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 31313 times:

A new update about the search:

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/info29april2011.en.php

Apparently, more parts are being identified, such as the APU. However, the pieces are not arranged in a linear manner i.e. the front and rear parts are mixed together, meaning the search has to be much more in depth and systematic. Nothing will be raised for the time being; the focus is on finding the CVR and the CSMU from the FDR.

Hoping things take a positive turn soon - can't wait for the news that they've been located!      



on Twitter @tombeckett2285
User currently offlinesxb From France, joined Sep 2008, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 31321 times:

Latest update a/o 04/29

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info29avril2011.en.php


The search for the CVR and the FDR memory unit are continuing, exploring the airplane debris field with the ROV. New parts have been identified, such as the Auxiliary Power Unit which is situated at the aft of the airplane.

The forward and aft parts of the airplane are broken apart and mixed up, which means that a time-consuming systematic search is required.

No lifting operations have yet been undertaken as priority has been given to the search for the flight recorders.



SXB
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 52, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 31358 times:

Quoting tom355uk (Reply 50):

Apparently, more parts are being identified, such as the APU. However, the pieces are not arranged in a linear manner i.e. the front and rear parts are mixed together, meaning the search has to be much more in depth and systematic. Nothing will be raised for the time being; the focus is on finding the CVR and the CSMU from the FDR.

I have a feeling they could be there a while. I don't recall any kind of schedule being released. But, at this point they haven't lifted anything. So, even if they find the FDR/CVR in the next week (being optimistic) and get them to the surface they'll still have to retrieve bodies and part of the wreckage.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinetrigged From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 31191 times:

Quoting sxb (Reply 51):

Latest update a/o 04/29

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info29avril2011.en.php


The search for the CVR and the FDR memory unit are continuing, exploring the airplane debris field with the ROV. New parts have been identified, such as the Auxiliary Power Unit which is situated at the aft of the airplane.

The forward and aft parts of the airplane are broken apart and mixed up, which means that a time-consuming systematic search is required.

No lifting operations have yet been undertaken as priority has been given to the search for the flight recorders.

Lifting operations and CVR/FDR search need to be parallel operations. If the search for the CVR/FDR is first and not found, could it be laying underneath a piece of wreckage not moved? They need to lift large pieces AND look for the data recorders at the same time.


User currently offlineAdmiralRitt From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30960 times:

In addition to the possibility that the CVR is covered or burried itself in the mud (It must be the densest
assembly on the plane with all that reinforcement armor)


It may also lie underneath existing debris, which means they will find it the later stages.
I wonder when they will default to this search assumption. Large portions of the wreckage
would tend to sink/glide a bit slower than a single weight-like part of the plane


User currently offlinegatorman96 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 874 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30949 times:

Quoting trigged (Reply 53):
Lifting operations and CVR/FDR search need to be parallel operations. If the search for the CVR/FDR is first and not found, could it be laying underneath a piece of wreckage not moved? They need to lift large pieces AND look for the data recorders at the same time.

I would imagine the lifting of aircraft parts would cause large silt clouds, obscuring the search and possibly burying the CVR/FDR. But I'm with you, after a certain period of time, they'll have to begin the lift...



Cha brro
User currently offlinebreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 56, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30955 times:

Quoting trigged (Reply 53):
They need to lift large pieces AND look for the data recorders at the same time.


Sorry, but they must NOT do lifting and search at the same time.
First of all, we are talking of 4 km deep lifts. You do not want to entangle the lifting line around the ROV umbilical or vice-versa.
Then, attaching the lifting line to the parts to be brought back to surface can be a messy job, propelling lots of silt in the water and reducing visibility.
Finally, no ROV operator in his right mind will have the ROV staying under anything being lifted to surface. And debris have the tendency to brake apart while being lifted.


User currently offlineglacote From France, joined Jun 2005, 409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 57, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 30553 times:

Flight Global has pictures of the APU here:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-auxiliary-power-unit-located.html


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 58, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 29993 times:

Quoting glacote (Reply 57):
Flight Global has pictures of the APU here:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html

Airliners.net has the same picture on this thread here:

Quoting sxb (Reply 51):
Latest update a/o 04/29

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....n.php

and here:

Quoting tom355uk (Reply 50):
A new update about the search:

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flig...n.php


User currently offlinevaustralie From Australia, joined Jul 2010, 182 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 27843 times:

Hiya,
I've been following this thread on and off and am not 100% sure if it has been mentioned, but I'll mention it anyway.
When they find the CVR and the FDR Memory Unit, I remember watching an Air Crash Investigation about SA Flight 259, which crashed into the sea after an onboard fire. They found the CPR (I think they never found the FDR), but as IIRC it was 2 years later and the salt water had corroded some recordings.
So, my question is when these are found will the investigation team find a similar problem as SA 259? They've both been (nearly) two years and I'm just wondering if they will be able to recover decent amounts of recordings

Again, apologies if this has been discussed, like I said I haven't been following this everyday.



a346
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 60, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 27767 times:

Quoting vaustralie (Reply 59):

There's about 40 posts discussing exactly this in Thread 2. I suppose we could repost them all here ... or you could go read for yourself.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlinevaustralie From Australia, joined Jul 2010, 182 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 27726 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 60):
r you could go read for yourself.

like i said, I hadn't been following this daily. I really only started this thread.
Again, my apologies.



a346
User currently offlinewexfordflyer From Ireland, joined Jun 2009, 550 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 27245 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 60):

There's about 40 posts discussing exactly this in Thread 2. I suppose we could repost them all here ... or you could go read for yourself.

No need to be so nasty about it. He only asked a question.

vaustralie, that's the question on everyones lips. Everyone hopes that all of the data can be recovered but there is a worry that it may not be. Only time will tell.



Come with me, there's a place I want you to see, where the leaves are dark, I've got a hiding place in central park.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 63, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 26906 times:

Quoting vaustralie (Reply 59):
They found the CPR (I think they never found the FDR), but as IIRC it was 2 years later and the salt water had corroded some recordings.

While there was some degredation of the data - the CVR provided some important information.

It fixed the time at which the fire alarms sounded, and identified that circuit breakers started being opened. The sounds of near 80 circuit breakers popping was identified. At 81 seconds after the fire alarm, the CVR recording stopped recording data - indication the cable to the CVR from the cockpit was severed by the fire.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 64, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 26858 times:

Brazilian media reporting that the memory unit has been found. No links yet, just a headline.


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2759 posts, RR: 25
Reply 65, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 26813 times:

Great news if it turns out to be true! Thanks PPVRA for the information!

User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 66, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 26937 times:

Le Monde has a statement with a picture of the unit:

http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/articl...o-paris-repechee_1515416_3224.html

[Edited 2011-05-01 11:00:46]

Another picture: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidia...ia-de-caixa-preta-do-voo-447.shtml


[Edited 2011-05-01 11:03:58]

More from the BEA: http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info01mai2011.en.php


[Edited 2011-05-01 11:08:00]


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3790 posts, RR: 11
Reply 67, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26717 times:

The flight recorder with its memory unit has been lifted and is being shipped to Paris for analysis.


Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2759 posts, RR: 25
Reply 68, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26981 times:

Here the picture we have been waiting for so long:


Source: http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info01mai2011.en.php


User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1627 posts, RR: 7
Reply 69, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26477 times:

This is great news! Kudos to the recovery team. Somebody has any idea how fast they can determine if it still holds data or not?


Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineaviators99 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26229 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 68):
Here the picture we have been waiting for so long:

This picture brings tears to my eyes. This could save lives in the future. I'm trying not to get my hopes up too much, but it's hard. I never thought I'd see this day.


User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8455 posts, RR: 10
Reply 71, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26169 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vaustralie (Reply 59):
I remember watching an Air Crash Investigation about SA Flight 259, which crashed into the sea after an onboard fire.

I saw that too, I lost interest in it when they used a 747-300, if they couldn't even get that right what else was inaccurate. And it was SA295.

Anyway, the CVR had a 30 minute cycle and it was determined during the inquest that only the last 1:14 had any relevance to the investigation. The rest of the tape was deemed personal and irrelevant.

The FDR was indeed never recovered.



After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineGarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 72, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26104 times:

That unit looks as good as new!
It also looks 100% intact. There is a good chance there has been no water penetration, which means the data will be perfect, save for any recording blips cause by any equipment malfunctions.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineiflykpdx From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 287 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25976 times:

Fantastic news! Making having the flu this weekend a little bit easier to take. Was the CVR located near the FDR (originally on the plane)?


Airport Management - UND
User currently offlineAlasdair1982 From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2008, 468 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26000 times:

Here is the article from the BBC about the discovery

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13255673


User currently offlineboacvc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 615 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25872 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 2):
But, the crash survivable memory unit was not attached. This also would be where the locator beacon would be.

In general, why would the memory unit have sheared off like that? What kind of forces would it have encountered to "break apart" like the picture shows ... when it seems that it came down on the sea bed in a relatively calm area with no other mechanisms / structures on top of it? Normally four sets of bolts have to be unscrewed for it to be released from its carrier, AND, most specifically, the umbilical multiconductor cable has to be detached --- I can understand the shearing potential (of the bolts) but the ribbon cable also shows yanked connectors, indicating forceful damage, and it may have had locking mechanism as well (screw on posts) .. how could they pop out as well ? A plastic cable tie, for example, is very mechanically strong when properly fixed up.

Can someone identify which DFDR unit this is, and post a service/user manual link with diagrams, please?

Thank you..



Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineTaromA380 From Romania, joined Sep 2005, 334 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 25146 times:

I hope they will find the CVR too.

User currently offlinemicstatic From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 781 posts, RR: 1
Reply 77, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 25378 times:

Wonder how long it will take to get an initial press release on the info it contains? Should we expect something in the next week?


S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 78, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 25459 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 68):
Here the picture we have been waiting for so long:

GREAT NEWS !!!!!!!!!!
Looks almost intact...

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 75):
Can someone identify which DFDR unit this is, and post a service/user manual link with diagrams, please?

Look at the photo... it's a Honeywell, your link is already posted, Post N° 10 :

all you ever want to know about a similar unit is here. Last thread we had someone with more knowledge of electronics and pressure, maybe this will clarify is questions.
http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/comm...s/Flight_Data_Recorder_(SSFDR).pdf

Rgds.
G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlineBatBowlField From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24759 times:

This is just great news. I hope enough info can be extracted from it to determine what happened.

Just out of curiosity, who is invited/involved to study the contents of the FDR apart from BEA? Is either Airbus/Honeywell supposed to be present when BEA goes over everything?


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 80, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24454 times:

  

Most Impressive.

What happens next in Phase 5? If the DFDR (and CVR) provide all the answers, will they still continue salvage?


User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 81, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24156 times:

Just to clarify folks, according to the BBC, it's the CVR that's been recovered, NOT the data recorder:

Experts say the data in the flight recorders - which records cockpit conversations - is the only hope of finding out why the plane crashed into the sea.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13255673


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 82, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24131 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 69):
Somebody has any idea how fast they can determine if it still holds data or not?

From a purely technical standpoint, someone with the right equipment on a fully intact FDR can tell you within a few minutes. However, since this is an accident investigation and there's probably damage to the connectors and wiring, they'll treat it like what it is...precious one-of-a-kind evidence in an investigation. Could be weeks, since they'll want to make sure they don't do any further harm in the process of trying to read it.

Quoting Garpd (Reply 72):
There is a good chance there has been no water penetration, which means the data will be perfect, save for any recording blips cause by any equipment malfunctions.

That particular unit is rated for something like 18 days at 20,000'...it's *way* beyond its spec for underwater survival. That said, the guys who build these things know what they're doing and it wouldn't surprise me if they survived unscathed.

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 75):
In general, why would the memory unit have sheared off like that?

It's built to. It prevents loading on the chassis (from airframe brakeup) from compromising the armour and insulation around the memory chips. It increases the chance that the data survived.

Quoting BatBowlField (Reply 79):
Just out of curiosity, who is invited/involved to study the contents of the FDR apart from BEA? Is either Airbus/Honeywell supposed to be present when BEA goes over everything?

Normally you'd have BEA, Airbus, Honeywell, and EASA. Maybe the engine OEM too, although they haven't been implicated in this as far as I know.

Tom.


User currently offlinefca767 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 1
Reply 83, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 23977 times:

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 81):
Just to clarify folks, according to the BBC, it's the CVR that's been recovered, NOT the data recorder:

Experts say the data in the flight recorders - which records cockpit conversations - is the only hope of finding out why the plane crashed into the sea.

The BBC or any news media is the last place I would go to for any news...I believe what the BEA says and the picture which says on the Tin "Flight Recordor"

[Edited 2011-05-01 13:58:31]

User currently offlineferminbrif From Venezuela, joined Dec 2010, 102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24008 times:

here´s another link found in Yahoo about the AF447 black box......

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110501/...re_eu/eu_france_brazil_plane_crash


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 85, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 24006 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting comorin (Reply 80):
What happens next in Phase 5? If the DFDR (and CVR) provide all the answers, will they still continue salvage?

The investigators would need to find the CVR, so that's next.
Then, it will be the heavy task of bringing the passengers to the surface, their identificatio and handing over to their families..
The investigators, after the initial read-out of the recorders would want some data confirmation, so they'd require a few pârts of the wreckage to be brought back up, but the recovery of the debris will be, IMO, minimal as the site will then be returned to being a graveyard, as I really do not believe everybody will be accounted for.

Quoting BatBowlField (Reply 79):
who is invited/involved to study the contents of the FDR apart from BEA?

Your choice of the word *invited* is the right one.The BEA is responsible for the technical investigation and they'll probably keep on working with the different authorities they've so far been involved with, i.e the Brazilians and the Brits.
It looks as if the judicial authority will not interfere - too much - in granting full transparency of the investigation.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed on that aspect.

Quoting micstatic (Reply 77):
Wonder how long it will take to get an initial press release on the info it contains? Should we expect something in the next week?

Those are, as far as the investigators are concerned, totally unrelated aspects :
- They will have within a few days of the read-out a fairly good idea of what happened.
- The final report won't be published for another year, although we'd get some info on the progress about every month



Contrail designer
User currently offlinefca767 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 1
Reply 86, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 23742 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 85):
Those are, as far as the investigators are concerned, totally unrelated aspects :
- They will have within a few days of the read-out a fairly good idea of what happened.
- The final report won't be published for another year, although we'd get some info on the progress about every month

Do you think they will show the actual flight path? Sometimes we get this info, however we still haven't had any from the US airways on the hudson. So I'm just wandering. Sometimes agencies give that away.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 87, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 23487 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fca767 (Reply 86):
Do you think they will show the actual flight path?

Yes, on the final report at the latest.
The reproduction of the final path will be done. We have many examples of that aspect of the investigation. See the Perpignan 320 accident for instance.

Quoting fca767 (Reply 86):
we still haven't had any from the US airways on the hudson. So I'm just wandering. Sometimes agencies give that away.

As far as I know, the final report of tha accident is still pending.



Contrail designer
User currently offlinefca767 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 1
Reply 88, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 23342 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 87):
Yes, on the final report at the latest.
The reproduction of the final path will be done. We have many examples of that aspect of the investigation. See the Perpignan 320 accident for instance

Thankyou for that information, I'll have a look.


User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 23306 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 68):
Here the picture we have been waiting for so long:


I'm sincerely choked up after seeing this picture - it truly is a testament to mankind's determination to find answers despite almost impossible odds - WELL DONE to all those involved in the search...



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 90, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 23235 times:

Good news !

Quoting comorin (Reply 80):
What happens next in Phase 5? If the DFDR (and CVR) provide all the answers, will they still continue salvage?

They'll at least bring up the bodies, that's what has been promised when the wreckage was found.

Quoting fca767 (Reply 83):
I believe what the BEA says and the picture which says on the Tin "Flight Recordor"

I think FLIGHT RECORDER (and French ENREGISTREUR DE VOL) is written on both "black boxes", with DO NOT OPEN. However the BEA does mention a Flight Data Recorder so that should indeed be data and not voice.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 91, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 23045 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Part147 (Reply 89):

I'm sincerely choked up after seeing this picture

Welcome to the club and I'd guess we're quite a few in the same case.
I've been waiting for nearly two years for this moment.
The emotion is even stronger than I ever thought.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineAsturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 2156 posts, RR: 16
Reply 92, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22847 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 90):
I think FLIGHT RECORDER (and French ENREGISTREUR DE VOL) is written on both "black boxes", with DO NOT OPEN. However the BEA does mention a Flight Data Recorder so that should indeed be data and not voice.

BEA even goes as far as to write it in two different ways:

«The investigation team localized and identified the memory unit from the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) at 10 h UTC this morning. It was raised and lifted on board the ship Ile de Sein by the Remora 6000 ROV at 16h40 UTC

Incidentally, I had very low hopes of ever reading those words, regarding this flight. I am more impressed than words can convey.

This accident can never be taken back, and though it is surely little comfort to those who live and never saw their loved ones again, it is still something - perhaps a way of closure.

Finding the CVR is dotting the i, but just the sheer effort of finding the wreckage and locating the FDR, it will surely close some questions people may have on what happened.

Que descansan en paz en los brazos de Dios.

asturias



Tonight we fly
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 93, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22806 times:

I wish the mods would please merge the other and unnecessarily separate thread on the recovery - thanks!

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5476 posts, RR: 30
Reply 94, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22727 times:

With the advances in electronics in the past decade, I wonder if it is possible to have both recorders record everything, data and voice, to have complete redundancy.


What the...?
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 95, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22641 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 94):
With the advances in electronics in the past decade, I wonder if it is possible to have both recorders record everything, data and voice, to have complete redundancy.



Such advances in technology are being reflected in new aircraft design.

Embraer Jets use a 'combination' device which includes FDR and CVR data in one unit and one memory storage. There are two such devices on each aircraft at separate locations.

The A380 backs up FDR/CVR data into some of the flight system computers.

The B787 will use EAFR units which record both FDR and CVR data in the same device, but also cockpit imagery and data link messages. One will be located in the tail, and one in the nose of the aircraft.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 96, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22554 times:

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 81):
Just to clarify folks, according to the BBC, it's the CVR that's been recovered, NOT the data recorder:

What great news! One would think as we've discussed before that there has to be a few support ships from the French Navy there to carry this off immediately. Regardless of whether or not it's the CVR or FDR they will dispatch it off to west Africa immediately. I would also think that they would continue searching for the other recorder before they start retrieving bodies and/or the important parts of the plane. Then leave another support vessel to carry the other recorder off when they find it.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 85):
Your choice of the word *invited* is the right one.The BEA is responsible for the technical investigation and they'll probably keep on working with the different authorities they've so far been involved with, i.e the Brazilians and the Brits.

Agreed. The national makeup of the team involved in Phase 5 infers that they are including several other countries investigators so that there is no appearance of inappropriate behavior. Fantastic news!



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinecaptainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 22437 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 39):

The problem is that if you fix the CSMU to firmly to the structure, the structure can tear it apart. It's a balance between keeping the memory unit where you can find it against having it intact enough to be useful.

Makes sense, like saying, "We don't intend for it to break, BUT just in case it does we're installing points that will most likely break first so the info stays readable".

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 32):
CSMU is found first because the pinger is attached to the CMSU, not to the base.

True, I momentarily forgot how rarely (in modern crashes at least) the pingers go dead because the CMSU can't be found.



Long Live the Tulip!
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5476 posts, RR: 30
Reply 98, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 21712 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 95):

Excellent...thanks.



What the...?
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 99, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 21552 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 68):
Here the picture we have been waiting for so long:

Phew!!! Another sigh when it is read and it starts to make sense. But still   


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 100, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 21435 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 94):

With the advances in electronics in the past decade, I wonder if it is possible to have both recorders record everything, data and voice, to have complete redundancy.

Already happening.

Quoting fca767 (Reply 86):
Do you think they will show the actual flight path? Sometimes we get this info, however we still haven't had any from the US airways on the hudson.

It's available:
http://flightwise.com/pu/info/newss.aspx?ni=317

Tom.


User currently offlinevaustralie From Australia, joined Jul 2010, 182 posts, RR: 0
Reply 101, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 21210 times:

Quoting wexfordflyer (Reply 62):
vaustralie, that's the question on everyones lips. Everyone hopes that all of the data can be recovered but there is a worry that it may not be. Only time will tell.

And that time has come!! Great news!

Quoting wexfordflyer (Reply 62):
No need to be so nasty about it. He only asked a question.

And thank you  



a346
User currently offlinefca767 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 1
Reply 102, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 21117 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 90):
I think FLIGHT RECORDER (and French ENREGISTREUR DE VOL) is written on both "black boxes", with DO NOT OPEN. However the BEA does mention a Flight Data Recorder so that should indeed be data and not voice

oops sorry...yes i would trust BEA more than BBC

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 100):
It's available:

Thanks, just it's not the actual FDR

[Edited 2011-05-02 00:30:51]

User currently offlineComeAndGo From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1041 posts, RR: 0
Reply 103, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 20982 times:

Quoting fca767 (Reply 102):
Thanks, just it's not the actual FDR

Of course it is.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 104, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 20845 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fca767 (Reply 86):
Sometimes we get this info, however we still haven't had any from the US airways on the hudson. So I'm just wandering. Sometimes agencies give that away.

I beg your pardon : the NTSB report has been published and not niticed;
Verry good reading.
You have a description of the whole flight path and a diagram
You have it here
I'll have some reeading this next weekend !



Contrail designer
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 105, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 20747 times:

Jean-Paul Troadec, director of the BEA, says they are hopeful the data will be readable, quoting specialists. The unit appears to be in good physical condition.

According to Alain Bouillard, who is leading this investigation, reading this data will take several days, possibly weeks if damaged.

http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/bbc/909...aixa-preta-poderao-ser-lidos.shtml



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 352 posts, RR: 0
Reply 106, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 20586 times:

Excellent news!.

Like many others I can't wait for the transcript of the FDR to get a better picture of what really happened on that fateful night.

I have one question though. When does the FDR/CVR stop recording? Is it a certain G-force that stops the recording of the parameters? Would it be at all possible that the unit would keep recording during the descent to the bottom of the sea? I know that the legal minimum is 20 minutes of recording but I believe I've read somewhere that newer planes have 60-90 minutes, what about this specific model?

TIA,
A-firm



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 107, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 20462 times:

Been hanging on these threads, first to find the wreck, then the box and now to know what is in the box. And being pessimistic (it is "what keeps me going" as Mrs Mop famously said) I suppose even after it is read, there is going to be another p pause while the conclusions are more finely balanced.

Got "a bit of an over water flight" on Friday too!


User currently offlineGBan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 108, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 20462 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 106):
I have one question though. When does the FDR/CVR stop recording? Is it a certain G-force that stops the recording of the parameters? Would it be at all possible that the unit would keep recording during the descent to the bottom of the sea? I know that the legal minimum is 20 minutes of recording but I believe I've read somewhere that newer planes have 60-90 minutes, what about this specific model?

I'm no expert, but I am sure nothing will be recorded after loss of electrical power...


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 2003, 14072 posts, RR: 62
Reply 109, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 20463 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 106):
I have one question though. When does the FDR/CVR stop recording? Is it a certain G-force that stops the recording of the parameters?

It stops recording when (in the air) the power supply to it fails.

Jan


User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 352 posts, RR: 0
Reply 110, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 20416 times:

Quoting GBan (Reply 108):
I'm no expert, but I am sure nothing will be recorded after loss of electrical power...
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 109):
It stops recording when (in the air) the power supply to it fails.

Thanks!

I thought they had some additional power source as well.

//A-Firm



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 111, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 20258 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 110):
Quoting GBan (Reply 108):
I'm no expert, but I am sure nothing will be recorded after loss of electrical power...
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 109):
It stops recording when (in the air) the power supply to it fails.

Thanks!

I thought they had some additional power source as well.

The problem is to add backup power without adding to the weight of the units. Adding weight increases the likelyhood of damage. I think, but cannot confirm, on some newer aircraft designs that if the circuit breakers are pulled, the FDR and CVR still receive power.

Another reason they stop recording data is when the data cables are broken, though the device may continue to record nothing.

We've seen cases like Swiss Air 111 where the FDR/CVR stopped recording about 11 minutes before the crash - due to loss of power, and cases like South African Airways 259 where the CVR stopped recording data 81 seconds after the first fire alarm, apparently due to the cables being broken.


User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 112, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 19973 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 96):
they are including several other countries investigators so that there is no appearance of inappropriate behavior

The investigation team is made up of representatives of states/parties with an interest in the investigation and others who can contribute technical expertise - it's all governed by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Period. Nothing whatsoever to do with "inappropriate behaviour" or chauvinism.

[Edited 2011-05-02 05:43:24]


Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineCuriousFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 700 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 19839 times:

Congratulations to the search team! They did a very impressive job.

User currently offlinesxb From France, joined Sep 2008, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19422 times:

update a/o 02/05 - the link provides 3 pictures

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info02mai2011.en.php

The Remora 6000 made a further dive yesterday evening. The search operations are continuing in order to localize the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR).

After the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) was raised, the BEA, as agreed, asked the French Navy to send a patrol boat to transport the recorders to Cayenne (French Guyana), from where they will be transferred by airplane to the BEA in Le Bourget.

The BEA Investigator-in-Charge, an officer from the French judicial police and an investigator from CENIPA (the Brazilian equivalent of the BEA) will be present during the transfer from the Ile de Sein to the BEA, which should take around ten days.

At present, there are 69 people on board the ship, an officer from the Brazilian Navy having joined last Friday (29 April).

[Edited 2011-05-02 09:34:21]



[Edited 2011-05-02 09:36:54]


SXB
User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1327 posts, RR: 52
Reply 115, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19206 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

I thought the practice was for FDR/CVF removed from the ocean to be continuously emerged till transported to the facility that actually tries to read it. This is to prevent oxidation. I can't tell from the photo in 114 it it is in a filled container. Does anybody know?


rcair1
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5675 posts, RR: 10
Reply 116, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19175 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 90):
I think FLIGHT RECORDER (and French ENREGISTREUR DE VOL) is written on both "black boxes", with DO NOT OPEN. However the BEA does mention a Flight Data Recorder so that should indeed be data and not voice.

So now my question is: What does the CVR look like? Is it identical to the FDR but with a different label or is there something particularly different/unique about it (I realize that it is essentially the same thing, just wondering).

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 95):
The B787 will use EAFR units which record both FDR and CVR data in the same device, but also cockpit imagery and data link messages.

When you say "cockpit imagery" do you mean video from the cockpit? I have always thought that would be an important thing to have so that investigators can see what actions actually occurred rather that just having to infer them by what is spoken and what system actions were recorded (I know bandwidth was an issue but obviously technology has eased that).

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 97):
Makes sense, like saying, "We don't intend for it to break, BUT just in case it does we're installing points that will most likely break first so the info stays readable".

Yes, that is a very important part of critical systems engineering: Making sure that if something does break, it breaks where you want it to and prevent it from breaking in a place that will cause damage that is unacceptable. Of course you can't control the actions that occur that cause a system to fail and 100% prevent a break from occurring in "the wrong place" but you try.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinegiopan1975 From Greece, joined Jun 2009, 269 posts, RR: 0
Reply 117, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19187 times:

It should be very rewarding for the manufacturer (Honeywell) to see this unit come out almost intact.

User currently offlineSXI899 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2008, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 118, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19224 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 115):
I can't tell from the photo in 114 it it is in a filled container. Does anybody know?

If you click on the picture in question on the BEA site, the full sized version certainly gives me the impression that the module is still immersed.



Any Type, Any Time, Anywhere
User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 119, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 19197 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 115):
I thought the practice was for FDR/CVF removed from the ocean to be continuously emerged till transported to the facility that actually tries to read it. This is to prevent oxidation. I can't tell from the photo in 114 it it is in a filled container. Does anybody know?

All I'm basing my comment on is from my own experience - it looks like it IS filled with water, look at the 'refraction'/mirror effect on the side of the container.



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 120, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19067 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 112):
The investigation team is made up of representatives of states/parties with an interest in the investigation and others who can contribute technical expertise - it's all governed by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Period. Nothing whatsoever to do with "inappropriate behaviour" or chauvinism.

I'm not suggesting that there would be, but with almost every crash investigation A or B a number of conspiracy theories emerge that presenting a diverse investigation team would discredit. I think they're being prudent.

Someone on the other thread made an interesting observation that the pinger didn't seem to be attached to the unit when they found it.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinechuchoteur From France, joined Sep 2006, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 121, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19037 times:

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 115):
I thought the practice was for FDR/CVF removed from the ocean to be continuously emerged till transported to the facility that actually tries to read it. This is to prevent oxidation. I can't tell from the photo in 114 it it is in a filled container. Does anybody know?

In water

Quoting tugger (Reply 116):
When you say "cockpit imagery" do you mean video from the cockpit? I have always thought that would be an important thing to have so that investigators can see what actions actually occurred rather that just having to infer them by what is spoken and what system actions were recorded (I know bandwidth was an issue but obviously technology has eased that).

I presume they mean the cockpit displays, in order to know what information was available to the pilots.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 122, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19031 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 116):
When you say "cockpit imagery" do you mean video from the cockpit? I have always thought that would be an important thing to have so that investigators can see what actions actually occurred rather that just having to infer them by what is spoken and what system actions were recorded (I know bandwidth was an issue but obviously technology has eased that).

The article I saw said 4 or 6 frames per second of cockpit imagery.

I did not find anything which specified what imagery would be included, whether duplication of the FBW primary displays or actual camera captured video.

"Cockpit Video Surveillance" is a standard part of the B-787 data network.

The EAFR, which the B-787 will carry two - one in the traditional aft location and another near the nose. It includes an independent power supply module - it will provide 10 minutes of power to the forward located EAFR and the cockpit area microphone.

[Edited 2011-05-02 10:44:17]

User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 18690 times:

It certainly looks like the unit has been kept submerged - and it definitely stands to reason. I would imagine that they would want to keep it in as steady-state as possible until it's final arrival at the laboratory that will attempt the data recovery.

Does anyone know how they go about beginning the data recovery process? Specifically, I am curious about how they initially "dry the unit out". Drying saltwater would of course leave a highly undesirable salt crust on a lot of surfaces - could they initially attempt to rinse or flush it with freshwater/distilled water?

..Trin..



"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 124, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 18625 times:

On the evening news we could see a video of the scene showed by the third picture. Under the wood boards, what you can see is a tank filled with water, the CSMU was in it, and put into the plexiglas container under water, then they got that container out and put a wax seal on it (which is what is happening on the picture).

There was also a video of the team joy when they found the CSMU, and of the ROV grabbing it.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinerailker From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 171 posts, RR: 0
Reply 125, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18211 times:

Here's a couple of links for some video, not sure which was aired:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWSRfM38XZo

http://www.wat.tv/video/principale-boite-noire-af-3ms3v_2eyxv_.html

[Edited 2011-05-02 15:11:07]

User currently offlinewnbob From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 169 posts, RR: 0
Reply 126, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17936 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 123):
Does anyone know how they go about beginning the data recovery process? Specifically, I am curious about how they initially "dry the unit out". Drying saltwater would of course leave a highly undesirable salt crust on a lot of surfaces - could they initially attempt to rinse or flush it with freshwater/distilled water?

If I were to design this thing, the hard drive platter would be in a sealed casing (if they haven't gone all solid state already), so they just pull the casing out, clean the contacts, slap on a new electronic "reader" controller and start reading the data. Better yet, there are no wired contacts, the controller "talks" to the storage media via proximity magnetic contacts.

But I sure hope the custody agency is independent and in no way is swayed by government or manufacturer to "interpret" the data.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 127, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 18294 times:

Quoting wnbob (Reply 126):
the hard drive platter would be in a sealed casing

There is no hard drive. It is a solid state memory unit - similar to an SSD drive or a thumb drive - encased in multiple layers of protective foam.


User currently offlinemicstatic From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 781 posts, RR: 1
Reply 128, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 18270 times:

Quoting wnbob (Reply 126):
But I sure hope the custody agency is independent and in no way is swayed by government or manufacturer to "interpret" the data.

I hope so also. That's why if they recover the voice recorder, it should be analyzed by a different entity.



S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25652 posts, RR: 22
Reply 129, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 18296 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 123):
I am curious about how they initially "dry the unit out". Drying saltwater would of course leave a highly undesirable salt crust on a lot of surfaces - could they initially attempt to rinse or flush it with freshwater/distilled water?

The Canadian TSB report into the Swissair 111 MD-11 crash near YHZ in 1998 says the FDR and CVR were placed in distilled water after recovery. Brief excerpt below re the FDR.

The aircraft's FDR was recovered by divers on 6 September 1998 in approximately 50 m of water. It was escorted to the TSB Engineering facility in Ottawa for analysis. The FDR was transported in distilled water to minimize oxidation from exposure to salt water.

The FDR was an L3 Communications (formerly Loral/Fairchild) Model F1000, SN 00898, which recorded approximately 250 parameters in solid state memory. The F1000, which uses data compression techniques to store data, contained approximately 70 hours of continuous flight data.

The ULB for the FDR was intact and attached to the crash-protected memory module. The brackets that held the beacon were damaged substantially, but still held the beacon in place.

The recorder was rinsed in a fresh water bath and then disassembled. The crash-protected memory module was kept submerged in water as much as possible, to minimize the effects of oxidation. The internal crash module was removed from the outer dust cover and internal housing. The internal crash module was in good condition, with no signs of impact damage.

The internal solid state memory devices are encapsulated in a foam material for this model of FDR. The foam-encased memory module was relatively dry and undamaged.

As a precaution, a new ribbon cable connector was spliced onto the memory module and the module was placed in one of the TSB's F1000 bench units for downloading. Power was applied to the memory module and the data was successfully recovered and copied into the TSB's computer systems.


etc. etc.

Links to the relevant sections of the report here (includes links to various photos):
http://tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-report...htrecorders.asp#flightdatarecorder
http://tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-report...recorders.asp#cockpitvoicerecorder

Photos of the FDR and CVR in distilled water-filled containers after recovery. The small silver object on the right in the FDR photo and on the left in the CVR photo is the ULB (underwater locator beacon).



User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 130, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 17914 times:

Over on pp some folks are convinced the aircraft hit the sea in a flat spin with no 'forward' momentum. How would an large jetliner get into a situation like that?

Thanks


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 131, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 17937 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 122):
"Cockpit Video Surveillance" is a standard part of the B-787 data network.

That's video of *outside* the cockpit so the flight crew can see who wants in...it doesn't tell you anything about what's going on inside the cockpit.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 122):
I did not find anything which specified what imagery would be included, whether duplication of the FBW primary displays or actual camera captured video.

There are no cameras in a production 787 cockpit that I can find any mention of...the FBW doesn't actually have any displays of its own, but it would be relatively easy to take screen shots of whatever is on the primary displays and MFD's.

Quoting wnbob (Reply 126):
If I were to design this thing, the hard drive platter would be in a sealed casing (if they haven't gone all solid state already),

They're already solid state. I don't think anyone used a hard drive, too fragile...I think they went straight from tape to solid state.

Quoting comorin (Reply 130):
Over on pp some folks are convinced the aircraft hit the sea in a flat spin with no 'forward' momentum. How would an large jetliner get into a situation like that?

Loss of the vertical fin is about the only way you could do that. And, given that the fin was attached, that seems unlikely.

Tom.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 56
Reply 132, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 17666 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 130):
How would an large jetliner get into a situation like that?

With every day that passes, there's less and less need to speculate about theories like that.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 56
Reply 133, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 17778 times:

CVR found and recovered, with pinger still attached:

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/info03mai2011.en.php


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 134, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17573 times:

Since most of us on this thread have been watching this for almost 2 years, the fact that they found the CVR and the FDR is a momentous event. What great news! Hopefully we'll have some answers in the coming weeks and maybe Zeke and Pihero can check their theories against the data we'll find. Congratulations to all those involved in the search!


The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinemoriarty From Sweden, joined Jan 2006, 188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 135, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17442 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 134):

Since most of us on this thread have been watching this for almost 2 years, the fact that they found the CVR and the FDR is a momentous event. What great news! Hopefully we'll have some answers in the coming weeks and maybe Zeke and Pihero can check their theories against the data we'll find. Congratulations to all those involved in the search!

I can only concur. I am amazed by this achievement and do hope it will lead to information on how to prevent things like this to happen again.

My thoughts not only to all the people involved in this recovery operation that has been going on for almost 2 years, but to all the ones affected by the tragic crash.



Proud to part of www.novelair.com.
User currently offlineGarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 136, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 17197 times:

Both recorders now found! Excellent.

One hopes their data is undamaged and will shed light on this mystery.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5675 posts, RR: 10
Reply 137, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16955 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 131):
There are no cameras in a production 787 cockpit that I can find any mention of...the FBW doesn't actually have any displays of its own, but it would be relatively easy to take screen shots of whatever is on the primary displays and MFD's.

I think that actual in cockpit video of the crews actions and interactions would be a good thing. It can certainly augment and provide insight into what happens during and possibly exacerbates an accident.

Quoting Garpd (Reply 136):
Both recorders now found! Excellent.

Excellent indeed! To think what once was lost and thought to potentially be beyond discovery, for that to now be found and "in hand' is simply amazing. Now of course we have to wait and see if significant data can be recovered. I do think things look good and that they will recover what is needed but I am keeping my hopes in check.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 138, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 16204 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 130):
Over on pp some folks are convinced the aircraft hit the sea in a flat spin with no 'forward' momentum. How would an large jetliner get into a situation like that?

It didn't. Look at Pihero's posts in thread 1 of this discussion (not to mention the extensive discussion in the threads following the accident and the BEA interim report).

Quoting micstatic (Reply 128):
Quoting wnbob (Reply 126):
But I sure hope the custody agency is independent and in no way is swayed by government or manufacturer to "interpret" the data.
I hope so also. That's why if they recover the voice recorder, it should be analyzed by a different entity.
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 112):
The investigation team is made up of representatives of states/parties with an interest in the investigation and others who can contribute technical expertise - it's all governed by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

You might want to read it.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2759 posts, RR: 25
Reply 139, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 16147 times:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 133):
CVR found and recovered, with pinger still attached:
http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....n.php

From that press release

Quote:
The investigation team localized and identified the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) at 21h50 UTC on Monday 2 May, 2011. It was raised and lifted on board the Ile de Sein by the Remora 6000 ROV at 02.

I think I am falling in love with a robot...


User currently offlineBEG2IAH From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 973 posts, RR: 18
Reply 140, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 15737 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Congratulations to the teams! I still can't believe they found both CVR and FDR.

Many will say this is all done for litigation, insurance or whatever purposes, but people who achieved something like this give us hope that there is still some humanity left in us. I sent a thank you email to BEA.

BEG2IAH

[Edited 2011-05-03 08:33:29]


FAA killed the purpose of my old signature: Use of approved electronic devices is now permitted.
User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 141, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 15657 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 129):
The Canadian TSB report into the Swissair 111 MD-11 crash near YHZ in 1998 says the FDR and CVR were placed in distilled water after recovery. Brief excerpt below re the FDR.

Thank you very much for the links, photos and information! I guess now that both the CVR and FDR have been recovered, I am just going down the list of remaining pitfalls that could prevent us from retrieving the data. Pretty high on that list (at least for me - a newbie) was the potential effects of saltwater on the units. I am relieved to find out that it has been done successfully before.

..Trin..



"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 142, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 15507 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 141):
Pretty high on that list (at least for me - a newbie) was the potential effects of saltwater on the units.

The salinity of ocean water is higher at the surface than it is at depth. Hopefully that will help.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinespacemanuk From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2009, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 143, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 13664 times:

Just seen this update from sky news.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Wor...Article/201105115986067?lpos=World

Tony


User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 648 posts, RR: 0
Reply 144, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13125 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 106):
I know that the legal minimum is 20 minutes of recording but I believe I've read somewhere that newer planes have 60-90

Legal minimum is 30 minutes, and was for a long time. Newer build a/c have a minumum of 2 hours, with some going much longer than that (e.g A380, as fair as I remember, it records the entire flight.)



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12634 posts, RR: 46
Reply 145, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12894 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tugger (Reply 137):
I think that actual in cockpit video of the crews actions and interactions would be a good thing.

It would, but try convincing pilots of that.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineJONukl From Sweden, joined Jun 2009, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 146, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 12795 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 142):
The salinity of ocean water is higher at the surface than it is at depth. Hopefully that will help

Are you sure, The data I have on the deep atlantic waters gives salinity between 34.6 and 34.7. Typical surface water is about 35. Near the top of Greenland freezing of surface water is usuallt assumed to produce an increase in salinity and the more saline water sinking to the bottom and then moving south.

Regards


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 147, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 12763 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 145):
Quoting tugger (Reply 137):
I think that actual in cockpit video of the crews actions and interactions would be a good thing.

It would, but try convincing pilots of that.

Considering how CVR recordings which should have been kept out of the public domain have surfaced here and there just for the kicks of a few sick morbid individuals, and that the official institutions should have guaranteed their secret status, thus constituting for all to see a breach of faith between government agencies and us, there is absolutely no chance of seeing a camera in the flight deck.
We are entitled to our privacy, too, you know.



Contrail designer
User currently offlinefrmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1729 posts, RR: 1
Reply 148, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 12617 times:

One does not have all that much rights to privacy at work. Established legal principle.


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 149, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 12560 times:

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 148):
Established legal principle.

Don't assume that U.S. law applies everywhere in the world.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlinerobffm2 From Germany, joined Dec 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 150, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12432 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 147):
We are entitled to our privacy, too, you know.

Yes you are.

But when 228 people died the public has rights too.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 151, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12434 times:

Quoting robffm2 (Reply 150):
But when 228 people died the public has rights too.

Actually, they don't. The investigating bodies have public obligations, typically limited to releasing the final report, and that's it. The public has no direct rights over the accident itself, the investigation, or the remains.

Tom.


User currently offlinerobffm2 From Germany, joined Dec 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 152, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12427 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 151):
Actually, they don't. The investigating bodies have public obligations, typically limited to releasing the final report, and that's it. The public has no direct rights over the accident itself, the investigation, or the remains.

I disagree on this. As soon as it is a public investigation the public itself has all rights to know about it.


User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 153, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12413 times:

Quoting robffm2 (Reply 152):
I disagree on this. As soon as it is a public investigation the public itself has all rights to know about it.

You can disagree all you like - it's all governed by Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 154, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12307 times:

Quoting robffm2 (Reply 152):
As soon as it is a public investigation the public itself has all rights to know about it.

It's not a public investigation. As Kaiarahi very correctly notes, it's all governed by existing treaties. There clearly established law on it, and making the investigation public has no part of it.

Tom.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12634 posts, RR: 46
Reply 155, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 11903 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pihero (Reply 147):
We are entitled to our privacy, too, you know.



If you were the only person flying, no issue. But when the flight crew are responsible for the lives of hundreds of passengers, what is the REAL argument against cockpit video recording?

I get next to no privacy at work - everything I create is owned by the company I work for. I can use email and phone for personal matters, but me emails and calls can be monitored. I'm subject to random drugs and alcohol tests. My company has a zero-tolerance policy - one test failure or misuse of company resources and I'm toast.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3630 posts, RR: 29
Reply 156, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 11418 times:

A constant recording of the employees would be at least problematic according to German law.

I think the CVR is already a pretty huge break of privacy, but it is necessary. I think you can only get an insignificant amout of further information by adding cameras.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 157, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 11243 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 155):
I get next to no privacy at work

Are there cameras pointed at your face or your head and mikes recording everything in your office?
No,
So why do you want that for us, especially when only one in ten thousand people could understand what's happening in that cockpit ?
And you'd try to make me believe it's going to be done to improve safety ?

Quoting scbriml (Reply 155):
one test failure or misuse of company resources and I'm toast.

You don't have the beginning of a clue on what we're going through in terms of surveillance and monitoring. Starting with all the tests - whether medical or technical - we have to pass at each season.



Contrail designer
User currently offlinepilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2539 posts, RR: 51
Reply 158, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 10976 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 155):
what is the REAL argument against cockpit video recording?

Simple...

people have different goals, some are there to inspect incidents and accidents and fly planes such as myself
some are there to suck you dry of money, connect evertyhing you do with safety of flight, send you to court and then demoralize you...

if you video what people are doing, you are giving groups of people reasons and means to do harm to your profession...
we have nothing to hide, but most people are looking for something to find against us pilots



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlineciaran From Ireland, joined Aug 2005, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 159, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11019 times:

NYT Article


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/magazine/mag-08Plane-t.html?hpw


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12634 posts, RR: 46
Reply 160, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10868 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pihero (Reply 157):
Are there cameras pointed at your face or your head and mikes recording everything in your office?
No,

You'd be surprised just how much is recorded at my place of work. Regardless, I'm not responsible, on a day-to-day basis, for the lives of hundreds of passengers.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 157):
You don't have the beginning of a clue on what we're going through in terms of surveillance and monitoring. Starting with all the tests - whether medical or technical - we have to pass at each season.

And is the system perfect? No! Pilots with forged qualifications? Pilots turning up for work drunk? Pilots deliberately erasing VCR/FDRs at the end of a flight? Yes, I fully appreciate these are the very small minority, but it happens. Any way, cockpit video recording wouldn't help much in these cases, but possibly in 1% of accidents a visual record of what the crew were doing might provide the one extra clue to explain what happened.

So, if it was in the pilot's control such that at the end of an uneventful flight, the PIC takes possession of the recording? In 99.99% of flights, nothing happens. In an event like AF447, there's a chance that the video would provide some extra information that the CVR & FDR don't.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12634 posts, RR: 46
Reply 161, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10869 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 158):
some are there to suck you dry of money, connect evertyhing you do with safety of flight, send you to court and then demoralize you...

Who is when 99.99% of your flights are totally uneventful?

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 158):
but most people are looking for something to find against us pilots

I'm sorry, but this just sounds like paranoia. Who are these "most people"?



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 162, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10634 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 160):
Any way, cockpit video recording wouldn't help much in these cases, but possibly in 1% of accidents a visual record of what the crew were doing might provide the one extra clue to explain what happened.

So, if you recover the FDR/CVR what would a visual record give you that either of those two recording devices already are?

Take this C-5 Galaxy that crashed at Dover 5 years ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI5xTmmPbsY

You already have what the crew were saying, communication from the ground controller, and via the FDR recorded what their control inputs were. I'd love to know what this 1% you're looking for would give you other than what is already being recorded.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinegiopan1975 From Greece, joined Jun 2009, 269 posts, RR: 0
Reply 163, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10440 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 162):
So, if you recover the FDR/CVR what would a visual record give you that either of those two recording devices already are?

   But still, a 2 year search for answers is a big call for improvements. If not a video recording, then uninterrupted streaming of the FDR data to the airliners' HQs and not to some shoebox in the plane's tail.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 160):
And is the system perfect? No! Pilots with forged qualifications? Pilots turning up for work drunk? Pilots deliberately erasing VCR/FDRs at the end of a flight?

I would have to add fatigued pilots, some of them cannot help sleeping in the cockpit. But who are really to blame in these cases of overtired pilots?

Quoting scbriml (Reply 160):
You'd be surprised just how much is recorded at my place of work. Regardless, I'm not responsible, on a day-to-day basis, for the lives of hundreds of passengers.

The way planes are flown nowadays, I think crews are not the main responsible for the passengers' lives. Manufactures and software engineers have already deprived pilots of a great deal of this responsibility.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 157):
You don't have the beginning of a clue on what we're going through in terms of surveillance and monitoring. Starting with all the tests - whether medical or technical - we have to pass at each season.

Are pilots randomly tested for alcohol consuption before flying? If not, I think they should be.


User currently offlineGarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 164, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10351 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 161):

Who is when 99.99% of your flights are totally uneventful?
Quoting scbriml (Reply 161):
I'm sorry, but this just sounds like paranoia. Who are these "most people"?

I completely agree with you scbriml.
A visual record of the actions of those up front is no more intrusive that an audio recording.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 157):
Are there cameras pointed at your face or your head and mikes recording everything in your office?

You make it sound like the camera will be right in the face of the pilots.
It won't be, and for the most part they won't even know it's there.
You're already on camera for most of the time you're on the ground at your place of work. I see no objections being raised about that.

I remember reading similar arguments when the CVR was introduced. "It's installed to spy on us", etc ,etc.
If a visual recording is deemed to be advantageous enough to help in investigations, I'm all for it.

Don't want to get caught doing something you shouldn't? Don't do it!

[Edited 2011-05-08 23:56:47]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinepilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2539 posts, RR: 51
Reply 165, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10347 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 161):
I'm sorry, but this just sounds like paranoia. Who are these "most people"?

Paranoid? I'm not the one who wants to record every action, it sounds to me that wanting to find the 0.01% of the people in the cockpit who are drunk and not following SOP is paranoid to me...

Take a look at people on this forum, you will see the lack of trust towards pilots and what we do in the cockpit...see for yourself, hardly paranoia, seems quite real to me...

Almost every switch that is touched has an efffect that is seen on the FDR....

tell me for which accident would have a video recording changed anything? and then ratio that accident to the other accidents...



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlinegiopan1975 From Greece, joined Jun 2009, 269 posts, RR: 0
Reply 166, posted (3 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10299 times:

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 165):
it sounds to me that wanting to find the 0.01% of the people in the cockpit who are drunk and not following SOP is paranoid to me...

That is not so low, 0.01% of all pilots drunk while flying