Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Theory Of CI611 Crash: Gigantic Turbulant  
User currently offlineJiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2152 times:

Taiwanese Media today reported a new theory of CI611 crash according to ASC.

The investigation team of the crashed CI611 found out that the 747-200 was raising its altitude at 3400ft/min from 1200ft/min. At this rate of speed, the 747 was flying as fast as a military fighter jet.

This leads to a brand new theory, saying the doomed CI611 may not be hit by anything. It was the sudden-created gigantic turbulant that caused the crash. This turbulant was believed to raise the aircraft's altitude suddenly, and it was very strong and huge (otherwise a normal turbulant won't send the plane upwards).

A suggestion for this turbulant is that there was a brand new missile was in the process of testing. This new missile exploded RIGHT BELOW the doomed 747. With the explosion of the missile, it causes the gigantic turbulant and sends to plane upward.

However, this was only the suggestion at the early stage, as only 20% of the wreckage found so far. The team needs at least 70% of the ripped-fuselage in order to find a clue what cause the crash.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4986 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2115 times:

3400ft/min rate of climb is certainly quite high for that aircraft, but it is certainly not impossible although that rate could not be sustained. And who was behind the missile testing, PRC or ROC?

User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11557 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2035 times:

Its very mysterious that strange things happened minutes before the breakup, yet the Cockpit-crew didn´t express any sign of stress or shock.
What could be the reason for the strange movements of the aircraft, strange noises in the cockpit, one engine running a bit rough, still not a single word from the pilots?

User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2027 times:

Normal day in the office for a crew on CI ?

User currently offlineA320FO From Austria, joined Oct 2000, 211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2020 times:

3400 ft/min is actually not very uncommon, also at high altitudes. CI 611 was on a (for a 747) fairly short flight, so a climb with a high fixed thrust setting (climb thrust) combined with a low weight (low trip fuel for flight) will yield otherwise uncommon performance.

User currently offlineKHI747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1621 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2004 times:

Why the F**k would some one be test firing missiles,in the path of commercial jetliners of all places!!!!!! If they did that....i would be mad pissed at the Military....

User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6805 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

We achieved 5000ft per minute rate of climb today in the 777 sim, just by flying our Max Angle Speed. You wouldn't normally do it, but of course, it is possible to. As for the missile, that really is a little far fetched!!

User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1893 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1897 times:


You will get no argument from me that CI's safety standard is appalling. But your comment is totally uncalled for. Do you think all of the pilots involved in those CI crashes did it intentionally? No, they didn't. They made unfortunate decisions and mistakes. Please have some respect for other human beings. When it comes to China Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and Boeing, you always make immature comments!

User currently offlineWannabe From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 681 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

3400 feet per minute for how long??? 1 second? 30 seconds? What was the rate of climb and the crew inputs to controls just prior to that rate of climb? Where did the Taiwanese Media attribute their sources to? Releasing mere tidbits of information just raises more speculations.

User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1863 times:

Sorry Teacher !!

I'll never do it again.

User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1820 times:

I don't buy this theory at all. If there were a sudden fit of violent, unexpected turbulence, I think at least one of the three in the cockpit would have reacted with an expletive or comment. Probably all three would have uttered at least a groan. Also, someone in the cabin inevitably screams with the lightest turbulence. The CVR did not catch any of that.

The missle theory does not make sense. If a missle exploded near the plane, the plane probably would not disintegrate without some evidence of fire. Even if missle debris hit and disabled the plane, they would have had time for a mayday call. KAL 007 flew for over 10 minutes after a direct hit by a missle. It seems that some people are convinced that a PLA missle is somehow responsible.

My latest unscientific guess is that the plane started disintegrating gradually with parts failing in sections. The sudden climb towards the end could have been caused by the separation of the trim tab. The whole thing might have been precipitated by metal fatigue and a perhaps an unusually hard landing on a recent flight.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Brand New Series Of Air Crash Investigation posted Sun Feb 4 2007 18:10:03 by 9V
New Theory In AA 587 Crash? posted Tue Dec 9 2003 21:05:39 by Galvanair777
New Series Of "Air Disaster" On Nat Geog. posted Fri Feb 2 2007 20:01:41 by Kaitak
AW: A New Class Of Aircraft Debuts - The PLJ posted Fri Jan 26 2007 08:55:20 by Baron95
Bethune As New Chairman Of A Merged Delta? posted Mon Jan 15 2007 23:38:51 by Nycfly75
New Pics Of DL's B767-400 W/ BE posted Fri Dec 29 2006 17:43:28 by N808DE
New Pics Of 747 LCF posted Wed Dec 20 2006 22:56:54 by NYC777
Martin George To Be New CEO Of Gulf Air? posted Sat Nov 18 2006 21:17:14 by GF-A330
Virgin Gets A New Coat Of Paint posted Thu Nov 16 2006 23:27:05 by YYZYYT
Protesting Or A New Kind Of Terror? posted Wed Sep 6 2006 02:58:26 by Mandala499