SeaKing4 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Having read the Flightglobal item, we now know only slightly more than before.

However, IMO the size of the debris field would seem to indicate that it was in one piece until impact.

In that’s the case then where is the fuel. Very little fuel contamination reported on the ground.

Oh come on, the plane was on approach for landing - would not have been carrying much fuel at that point. This is historically typical of crashes during approach and landing phases[/quote]

I’m looking up fuel consumption & Anet is say approximately 5500 litres per hour short haul - So if I said the was 1375 litres for 15 minutes flight plus 1 hour (5500 litres) for alternate plus 45 minutes & minimum land on fuel ( no idea but I will say another 5500 litres). Even if I’m wildly out 12375 litres is a lot of fuel to loose. Even if it was half that 6187.5 litres is still a lot of fuel. So where is it.

SeaKing4 wrote:

Even if it was half that 6187.5 litres is still a lot of fuel. So where is it.

Probably stuck in the mud.

If you're suggesting fuel starvation, running out of fuel does not cause airliners to drop out of the sky like a stone. Pilots are in fact trained on how to glide their aircraft, and every aircraft is designed to glide. The 767 has had fuel starvation incidents in the past, some of which are quite famous, and it's more than capable of gliding down safely.

Even if this plane ran out of fuel, that would not cause it to crash like this.

I sense some urgency in the ATC recordings, yet they did not report any problems. This is a weird one, what a shame.

spacecadet wrote:

SeaKing4 wrote:

Even if it was half that 6187.5 litres is still a lot of fuel. So where is it.

Probably stuck in the mud.

If you're suggesting fuel starvation, running out of fuel does not cause airliners to drop out of the sky like a stone. Pilots are in fact trained on how to glide their aircraft, and every aircraft is designed to glide. The 767 has had fuel starvation incidents in the past, some of which are quite famous, and it's more than capable of gliding down safely.

Even if this plane ran out of fuel, that would not cause it to crash like this.

Nope I’m not suggesting fuel starvation at all. I’m just asking where is the fuel as it’s not on the surface at the accident site where I would expect to see it. Plus I’m not saying the wings broke apart inflight. I don’t make assumptions prior to investigative reports but it’s strange as I said above there was nothing showing on the water surface at the accident site. I did forget to say RIP the crew & condolences to the families. Last comment from me on this.

The tail was found among the rest of the debris. This suggests the tail was attached at impact. In my view there are only two possibilities left here; one is an elevator runaway "hard nose down" and the other is a deliberate CFIT by someone in the cockpit. The track available does not deviate laterally after the final descent began. To me this is a huge red flag...

FWIW, we have imperfect audio from LiveATC (which nobody seems to be crediting on their videos as the source), but the FAA will have complete tower tapes without any jumping around from scanner-channel-to-scanner-channel. Interestingly, at the conference yesterday, Mr. Sumwalt described the last communication, which seems to be exactly the last communication that we have from liveatc. So it is worthwhile to know there was nothing else.

Maybe at the next press conference, someone could ask whether they had identified anything unusual at the end of that last transmission; sometimes he will answer factual questions. Clearly, the NTSB lab will have better source material to work with on that, while they are waiting for the CVR/FDR.

On the 763, these are on the aft left, inside the pressure vessel. Hopefully they will be in the main debris field with the bulk of the fuselage and can be recovered quickly.

KICT wrote:

The tail was found among the rest of the debris. This suggests the tail was attached at impact. In my view there are only two possibilities left here; one is an elevator runaway "hard nose down" and the other is a deliberate CFIT by someone in the cockpit. The track available does not deviate laterally after the final descent began. To me this is a huge red flag...

There are myriad other possibilities, including a couple that I would think to be more likely. But I'm gonna wait quietly and see what they find.

For what it's worth, if it were I, I would be more interested in my vertical track than my lateral track in this particular situation...

AirlineCritic wrote:

I think people on this thread should chill... we should all get off our high horses. Or zebras

IIRC no one on this thread has claimed to have made a definite conclusion of what happened. I believe discussion of the list of possible theories that fit the observed event and current information is fine. I have found it valuable to discuss what things are in practice possible on such a short timespan.

Besides, that list of causes that even in theory fit the situation still has some variation in the likelihood of events. We discussed earlier whether a bird impact could have caused this accident. Maybe... in theory, should the bird enter through the cockpit windshield or jam the horizontal stabilizer. But, as far as we know, no such accident has ever occurred, so that's a pretty thin odds for that theory. Would need something to happen that we've not seen before... possible, but very, very unlikely. Same with fire, as we've never seen so quick effects from fire.

And I'd put the malicious behaviour in the same bucket as well, something that should be kept on the list of possible causes but it isn't a perfect fit either: odd phase of flight, no evidence of any motive or problem behaviour.

The problem is of course, that many of the possible causes on the list are also very unlikely. Like the tail suddenly breaking off. Possible, but we've never seen it happen. I do think though that momentary spatial disorientation in IMC conditions rises a bit higher in the odds, either as the root cause or as the reason why an otherwise benign other incident in the flight lead to this outcome. Another one with maybe a bit higher odds than the rest is some kind of runaway trim situation.

But we don't know what the reason is yet. And should openly say so, rather than claim "it was the butler"

However, I for one would like to defend the ability of the board to discuss -- it is a discussion board, after all -- possible theories.

You have the right to discuss whatever you want. It’s a free country. But as a former 767 Captain and a professional airline pilot for over 25 years, the suggestion that one of the three men who died a tragic death caused the crash intentionally is going to cause me, and many of us in the community to defend their legacy. It’s entirely possible their family members and close friends are reading this because there is a lot of good information here that the average person wouldn’t otherwise be able to procure. The NTSB will certainly be looking all possible causes, and nobody is suggesting they should do otherwise. But the way the topic has been tossed about on here is insulting and classless. Don’t care a hoot whether you agree or not.

PS, bird strike at 7,000 in thick IMC and moderate turbulence? HIGHLY doubt it. That’s not where you’re going to smack a bird.

buzzard302 wrote:

I sense some urgency in the ATC recordings, yet they did not report any problems. This is a weird one, what a shame.

I agree very short replies and towards the end you can sense a nervousness in the voice of the person communicating with ATC.

If you fast forward to 1:45, you can hear all the alerts from the FMS on the 767.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMI3JhfurKY

This one is scary and interesting,

Total amateur here but I do enjoy the crash investigation shows and almost always there seems to be a series of small issues that build or a series of issues plus a series of human decisions that build up to a major issues. Especially in modern aviation, one specific major issue coming up in a matter of minutes late in a flight that brings down a modern jet in 20 seconds would be incredibly rare!

Looking at all the speculation, one thing that hasn't been discussed in details- Weather.

There was a line of showers and thunderstorms moving across the area. The storm in the path to the NW of the aircraft's position was sub-severe but had a special weather statement for gusty winds (30mph) and small hail. The cell was the reason for the turn to the west in the final moments and it's mentioned in the ATC conversation. As the plane traveled NW towards the Trinity Bay, the line of storms weakened and the storms collapsed causing an outflow boundary to show on weather radar heading SE over the bay at the time the plane went down.

Although the storms weren't severe, they were along the trailing cold front to a winter storm in the Midwest with a lot of wind energy in the upper Mississippi and Great Lakes. It's possible that the sub severe storms outflow boundary was stronger than expected. A wind shear line, microburst, outflow boundary or combo of the weather phenomena could bring down a jet, especially if it was combined with another mechanical or human decision. 6-7,000ft would be higher alt than a lot of the previous microburst crashes but it could happen or could be a factor. I don't think it was a coincidence that the crash happened at the exact time a thunderstorm fell apart.

[list=][/list]

usxguy wrote:

If you fast forward to 1:45, you can hear all the alerts from the FMS on the 767.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMI3JhfurKY

Great. Thanks. None of those are ever heard in the audio clip.

Regarding people hearing "pull", there is huge opportunity for confirmation bias here. As well, psychoacoustics shows us that that low quality bits of signal or even noise can easily be mistakenly interpreted as particular speech. Remember yanny/laurel? https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/al ... wrong.html

Whiplash6 wrote:

[list=][/list]

usxguy wrote:

If you fast forward to 1:45, you can hear all the alerts from the FMS on the 767.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMI3JhfurKY

Great. Thanks. None of those are ever heard in the audio clip.

I still hear “pull” and it sounds similar to the voice in that video.

When the CVR/FDR are found, I hope they are functional. As hard of an impact this appears to have been based on the wreckage visible, it is concerning to me that the boxes may not have survived intact. There have been previous accidents where one or both were severely damaged and the contents were partially or completely un-recoverable. Hoping that's not the case here as it would be a difficult task to determine the cause otherwise - the ATC tapes are inconclusive with no mayday call and with the plane so badly shattered, examining pieces of the wreckage to look for clues is tough

Silver1SWA wrote:

Whiplash6 wrote:

[list=][/list]

usxguy wrote:

If you fast forward to 1:45, you can hear all the alerts from the FMS on the 767.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMI3JhfurKY

Great. Thanks. None of those are ever heard in the audio clip.

Actually listening to that only confirms, in my opinion, it’s very possible that’s what can be heard in the clip.

It’s not. I don’t need a YouTube clip to tell me that either because I fly those very planes. You’re hearing it because you want to hear it. If “PULL UP” was an activated aural warning you would hear it clear as day and very loudly. Also, “PULL UP” would’ve been preceded with a “TERRAIN” aural warning. I appreciate your tenacity to help solve what happened to my colleagues but this isn’t a valid clue. Thanks.

Whiplash6 wrote:

Silver1SWA wrote:

Whiplash6 wrote:

[list=][/list]

Great. Thanks. None of those are ever heard in the audio clip.

Actually listening to that only confirms, in my opinion, it’s very possible that’s what can be heard in the clip.

It’s not. I don’t need a YouTube clip to tell me that either because I fly those very planes. You’re hearing it because you want to hear it. If “PULL UP” was an activated aural warning you would hear it clear as day and very loudly. Also, “PULL UP” would’ve been preceded with a “TERRAIN” aural warning. I appreciate your tenacity to help solve what happened to my colleagues but this isn’t a valid clue. Thanks.

I modified my original statement. I’m only saying I can hear it. Whether it’s there or not, I don’t know.

I do not wish to offend.

Whiplash6 wrote:

Silver1SWA wrote:

Whiplash6 wrote:

[list=][/list]

Great. Thanks. None of those are ever heard in the audio clip.

Actually listening to that only confirms, in my opinion, it’s very possible that’s what can be heard in the clip.

It’s not. I don’t need a YouTube clip to tell me that either because I fly those very planes. You’re hearing it because you want to hear it. If “PULL UP” was an activated aural warning you would hear it clear as day and very loudly. Also, “PULL UP” would’ve been preceded with a “TERRAIN” aural warning. I appreciate your tenacity to help solve what happened to my colleagues but this isn’t a valid clue. Thanks.

As said above it doesn’t have to preceded with “TERRAIN” can also be “SINK RATE”. You also have to realize the pilot can have easily spoken over the first portion of the aural alert. Look I and others can hear the word “Pull” just after the FO says “Ok”. We aren’t hearing it because we want to. I hope the CVR and FDR are found to assist investigators and see a transcript.

ikolkyo wrote:

Whiplash6 wrote:

Silver1SWA wrote:

Actually listening to that only confirms, in my opinion, it’s very possible that’s what can be heard in the clip.

It’s not. I don’t need a YouTube clip to tell me that either because I fly those very planes. You’re hearing it because you want to hear it. If “PULL UP” was an activated aural warning you would hear it clear as day and very loudly. Also, “PULL UP” would’ve been preceded with a “TERRAIN” aural warning. I appreciate your tenacity to help solve what happened to my colleagues but this isn’t a valid clue. Thanks.

As said above it doesn’t have to preceded with “TERRAIN” can also be “SINK RATE”. You also have to realize the pilot can have easily spoken over the first portion of the aural alert. Look I and others can hear the word “Pull” just after the FO says “Ok”. We aren’t hearing it because we want to. I hope the CVR and FDR are found to assist investigators and see a transcript.

That was the captain speaking.

I don't hear anything. This one is a very odd one for sure. As for those saying something intentional, it won't be discounted, but the timing makes no sense IMO. There is nothing to point that direction at this point. And while it has happened in the past the NTSB will rule it out and I am sure given how rare of an incident like this is, this is one of the higher items on the NTSB's board.

I just hope they find the CVR and FDR quickly, a lot of questions will be solved by those two devices.

It’s entirely possible that “pull” is in that recording, but it’s unlikely to be the warning system.

It may have been one of the other two in the cockpit saying “pull”. Maybe it was “pull back” and that’s why we see the very shallow climb prior to the sudden dive.

Or could have been anything “pull” related before the radio transmission ended. “Pull out the QRH” or “pull circuit breaker XYZ” etc.

ikolkyo wrote:

Whiplash6 wrote:

Silver1SWA wrote:

Actually listening to that only confirms, in my opinion, it’s very possible that’s what can be heard in the clip.

It’s not. I don’t need a YouTube clip to tell me that either because I fly those very planes. You’re hearing it because you want to hear it. If “PULL UP” was an activated aural warning you would hear it clear as day and very loudly. Also, “PULL UP” would’ve been preceded with a “TERRAIN” aural warning. I appreciate your tenacity to help solve what happened to my colleagues but this isn’t a valid clue. Thanks.

As said above it doesn’t have to preceded with “TERRAIN” can also be “SINK RATE”. You also have to realize the pilot can have easily spoken over the first portion of the aural alert. Look I and others can hear the word “Pull” just after the FO says “Ok”. We aren’t hearing it because we want to. I hope the CVR and FDR are found to assist investigators and see a transcript.

Well- I’ll concede I don’t know for certain. Perhaps it was windshear.

mm320cap wrote:

AirlineCritic wrote:

I think people on this thread should chill... we should all get off our high horses. Or zebras

IIRC no one on this thread has claimed to have made a definite conclusion of what happened. I believe discussion of the list of possible theories that fit the observed event and current information is fine. I have found it valuable to discuss what things are in practice possible on such a short timespan.

Besides, that list of causes that even in theory fit the situation still has some variation in the likelihood of events. We discussed earlier whether a bird impact could have caused this accident. Maybe... in theory, should the bird enter through the cockpit windshield or jam the horizontal stabilizer. But, as far as we know, no such accident has ever occurred, so that's a pretty thin odds for that theory. Would need something to happen that we've not seen before... possible, but very, very unlikely. Same with fire, as we've never seen so quick effects from fire.

And I'd put the malicious behaviour in the same bucket as well, something that should be kept on the list of possible causes but it isn't a perfect fit either: odd phase of flight, no evidence of any motive or problem behaviour.

The problem is of course, that many of the possible causes on the list are also very unlikely. Like the tail suddenly breaking off. Possible, but we've never seen it happen. I do think though that momentary spatial disorientation in IMC conditions rises a bit higher in the odds, either as the root cause or as the reason why an otherwise benign other incident in the flight lead to this outcome. Another one with maybe a bit higher odds than the rest is some kind of runaway trim situation.

But we don't know what the reason is yet. And should openly say so, rather than claim "it was the butler"

However, I for one would like to defend the ability of the board to discuss -- it is a discussion board, after all -- possible theories.

You have the right to discuss whatever you want. It’s a free country. But as a former 767 Captain and a professional airline pilot for over 25 years, the suggestion that one of the three men who died a tragic death caused the crash intentionally is going to cause me, and many of us in the community to defend their legacy. It’s entirely possible their family members and close friends are reading this because there is a lot of good information here that the average person wouldn’t otherwise be able to procure. The NTSB will certainly be looking all possible causes, and nobody is suggesting they should do otherwise. But the way the topic has been tossed about on here is insulting and classless. Don’t care a hoot whether you agree or not.

PS, bird strike at 7,000 in thick IMC and moderate turbulence? HIGHLY doubt it. That’s not where you’re going to smack a bird.

Concur.

One was a former coworker of mine and respected. Very tiring to read some of these comments.

The final path responded to elevator or stab position. I doubt that the stab fell off. If the pilots were disoriented, after they broke out of IMC into VFR, if they had stab/elevator control, they would have pulled up. Therefore, I think the stab/elevators were inop after somehow ending up in a steep descent position.

SeaKing4 wrote:

SeaKing4 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Having read the Flightglobal item, we now know only slightly more than before.

However, IMO the size of the debris field would seem to indicate that it was in one piece until impact.

In that’s the case then where is the fuel. Very little fuel contamination reported on the ground.

Oh come on, the plane was on approach for landing - would not have been carrying much fuel at that point. This is historically typical of crashes during approach and landing phases

I’m looking up fuel consumption & Anet is say approximately 5500 litres per hour short haul - So if I said the was 1375 litres for 15 minutes flight plus 1 hour (5500 litres) for alternate plus 45 minutes & minimum land on fuel ( no idea but I will say another 5500 litres). Even if I’m wildly out 12375 litres is a lot of fuel to loose. Even if it was half that 6187.5 litres is still a lot of fuel. So where is it.[/quote]

I refrained from saying so on Page 1, but it's Trinity Bay. Theirs debris and petroleum products everywhere on a good day.

What recordings are you guys listening to where you claim to hear “pull”? I’ve listened to a few of the ATC recordings available and there is literally nothing on those except the deviation request, stepping on each other, a quick “3591” readback and that’s literally it. What other tapes are there at this point?

trnswrld wrote:

What recordings are you guys listening to where you claim to hear “pull”? I’ve listened to a few of the ATC recordings available and there is literally nothing on those except the deviation request, stepping on each other, a quick “3591” readback and that’s literally it. What other tapes are there at this point?

The above YouTube video. But if you slow it down to half speed you can tell it is not said as some perceived.

This might be a really dumb question but do we know if the gear were down?

They're not gonna lower the gear 30 miles away.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Have the other pilots names been released yet?

I listened to the ATC audio clip, and in the background I'm fairly certain I heard one pilot address the other by his first name.

"Paul"

It's very difficult to hear clearly, so I could be wrong; it might be something else.

But Shirley it's a possibility?

usxguy wrote:

If you fast forward to 1:45, you can hear all the alerts from the FMS on the 767.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMI3JhfurKY

There are no "alerts" produced by the FMS. Those would be generated by the WEU or EGPWS. But please continue commenting.

To be honest with all the stepping over going on in the ATC recordings I've heard so far it's hard to say anything in those recordings isn't from another transmission stepping over the one between ATC and 3591. Another thing to consider in those recordings is the setup that is receiving them and bleed over from possible adjacent radio channels.

yoshua16 wrote:

They're not gonna lower the gear 30 miles away.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

True, but wouldn’t that be at least a decent clue as to how much the descent was expected?

My two cents.....

But first, terrible tragedy in Houston. I can't imagine what the crew members families are going through right now. No matter your religion, pray for those folks tonight.

I remember some crew members from a couple companies I used to work for say that controllers tend to slow aircraft down quite a bit on approach into IAH. With that being said, is a scenario where the crew was coming in hot, advised to slow down, makes a maneuver due to traffic, continues to slow down even further. Along with solid IFR conditions, possible convective activity in the area, loss of situational awareness, and then stall.

Western727 wrote:

estorilm wrote:

Okay - I understand the controversy about possibly hearing "pull" or GPWS, but what does that have to do with anything?

Two problems with that - 1) Someone implied it was heavy rain-related returns triggering the GPWS, which seems unlikely. 2) Wasn't its final VS somewhere over 30,000FPM?! GPWS wouldn't even have time to make a single peep, and I kinda doubt they'd key the mic staring straight at the ground.

I think a few flights just talked over each other for a second.

I have doubts about how heavy the rains were in that cell. The doppler radar image didn't have any of the dreaded pink or to a less-serious extent, dark red. There was only a small amount of red in the cell, and it was mostly green-yellow-orange.

I haven't looked at the radar very closely yet regarding this crash yet, however, I will point out that many of the worst phenomenon of a thunderstorm (hail, tornadoes, microbursts, extremely heavy rain) do not occur in the red parts, often these occur where there are little/no returns at all.

Judging by some of the responses on here about weather not being a big deal, I beg the differ. Here is everything laid out. I put this together using Level 2 dual-pol data which is the highest resolution radar data available. The images are valid at 18:38:25Z and is the .5 degree base reflectivity and Spectrum Width from the Houston KHGX that was downloaded from the NOAA archive and opened in Gibson Ridge's GR2 Analyst.

It clearly shows the cold front (black arrows) draped SW to NE across the Houston area and its movement to the SE at around 10-12kts. Before the cold front passed over the area, surface observations show that Ellington Airport (KEFD) and Scholes International in Galveston (KGLS) both had winds varying from 200/210 varying between 12 and 15kts. As the front passed over IAH, EFD, and finally GLS, winds immediately shifted to 310 at 10-15kts with IAH Gusting to 24kts at 18:02Z along with a temperature drop of around 10 degrees from around 77 to 67/68.

At the time Atlas began to show signs of trouble it was positioned directly on top of this front. NWS Mesoanalysis Data shows that the entire area had at least 60kts of bulk windshear at the time of incident along and just ahead of the cold front. (Graphic Included)

Continuing along, the observed 18Z Sounding from Lake Charles, LA had a wind profile that I will lay out below.
10,000ft - [email protected]
9,000ft - [email protected]
8,000ft - [email protected]
7,000ft - [email protected]
6,000ft - [email protected]
5,000ft - [email protected]
4,000ft - [email protected]
3,000ft - [email protected]
2,000ft - [email protected]
1,000ft - [email protected]
Surface - [email protected]

Finally I have enclosed another dual-pol radar product called Spectrum Width. Spectrum Width depicts a measure of velocity dispersion. In a radar bin, it provides a measure of the variability of the mean radial velocity estimates (movement) due to wind shear, turbulence, and/or the quality of the velocity samples. The proper use of Spectrum Width can help the severe thunderstorm and tornado warning decision process. It is used to estimate turbulence associated with low-level boundaries, thunderstorms, mesocyclones in supercells, and mesovortices in quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs)

Low values = smooth flow
High Values = depict variability in movement, turbulence, and chaotic flow.

The SW values along the cold front at 18:38Z in the exact location of Atlas 3591 show pretty high values that would be consistent with moderate to severe turbulence and a disrupted, chaotic air steam.

I am usually not the speculative type, but after looking at and analyzing the weather data, I feel very confident weather played a part in this terrible accident. Only time will tell as the NTSB works the investigation. Hope this information is helpful to any and all.

My thoughts and prayers are with the families of the flight crew. Godspeed.

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

Have the other pilots names been released yet?

I listened to the ATC audio clip, and in the background I'm fairly certain I heard one pilot address the other by his first name.

"Paul"

It's very difficult to hear clearly, so I could be wrong; it might be something else.

But Shirley it's a possibility?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texa ... 639542.php
I don't think that's "official"... but...

No Pauls.

I think the person speaking in the final moments is the FO, if he was from antigua. The voice has a bit of an accent.

I'd really like to know how long after the last communication with ATC the aircraft crashed. I'm surprised no one has tried figuring this one out yet.

Edit: apparently those names are official now

SeaKing4 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Having read the Flightglobal item, we now know only slightly more than before.

However, IMO the size of the debris field would seem to indicate that it was in one piece until impact.

In that’s the case then where is the fuel. Very little fuel contamination reported on the ground.

Y'all are assuming that fuel acts like crash debris ... it's a liquid ... at the speed (and energy) of this kind of impact, the fuel was atomized on impact.

It's there ... but it's all spread out, possibly even already dispersed with the tidal actions and/or rain.

SCFirefighter wrote:

Judging by some of the responses on here about weather not being a big deal, I beg the differ. Here is everything laid out. I put this together using Level 2 dual-pol data which is the highest resolution radar data available. The images are valid at 18:38:25Z and is the .5 degree base reflectivity and Spectrum Width from the Houston KHGX that was downloaded from the NOAA archive and opened in Gibson Ridge's GR2 Analyst.

It clearly shows the cold front (black arrows) draped SW to NE across the Houston area and its movement to the SE at around 10-12kts. Before the cold front passed over the area, surface observations show that Ellington Airport (KEFD) and Scholes International in Galveston (KGLS) both had winds varying from 200/210 varying between 12 and 15kts. As the front passed over IAH, EFD, and finally GLS, winds immediately shifted to 310 at 10-15kts with IAH Gusting to 24kts at 18:02Z along with a temperature drop of around 10 degrees from around 77 to 67/68.

At the time Atlas began to show signs of trouble it was positioned directly on top of this front. NWS Mesoanalysis Data shows that the entire area had at least 60kts of bulk windshear at the time of incident along and just ahead of the cold front. (Graphic Included)

Continuing along, the observed 18Z Sounding from Lake Charles, LA had a wind profile that I will lay out below.
10,000ft - [email protected]
9,000ft - [email protected]
8,000ft - [email protected]
7,000ft - [email protected]
6,000ft - [email protected]
5,000ft - [email protected]
4,000ft - [email protected]
3,000ft - [email protected]
2,000ft - [email protected]
1,000ft - [email protected]
Surface - [email protected]

Finally I have enclosed another dual-pol radar product called Spectrum Width. Spectrum Width depicts a measure of velocity dispersion. In a radar bin, it provides a measure of the variability of the mean radial velocity estimates (movement) due to wind shear, turbulence, and/or the quality of the velocity samples. The proper use of Spectrum Width can help the severe thunderstorm and tornado warning decision process. It is used to estimate turbulence associated with low-level boundaries, thunderstorms, mesocyclones in supercells, and mesovortices in quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs)

Low values = smooth flow
High Values = depict variability in movement, turbulence, and chaotic flow.

The SW values along the cold front at 18:38Z in the exact location of Atlas 3591 show pretty high values that would be consistent with moderate to severe turbulence and a disrupted, chaotic air steam.

I am usually not the speculative type, but after looking at and analyzing the weather data, I feel very confident weather played a part in this terrible accident. Only time will tell as the NTSB works the investigation. Hope this information is helpful to any and all.

My thoughts and prayers are with the families of the flight crew. Godspeed.

This is exactly what I’ve been looking for. Thank you!

Squall lines can be very nasty.

litz wrote:

SeaKing4 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Having read the Flightglobal item, we now know only slightly more than before.

However, IMO the size of the debris field would seem to indicate that it was in one piece until impact.

In that’s the case then where is the fuel. Very little fuel contamination reported on the ground.

Y'all are assuming that fuel acts like crash debris ... it's a liquid ... at the speed (and energy) of this kind of impact, the fuel was atomized on impact.

It's there ... but it's all spread out, possibly even already dispersed with the tidal actions and/or rain.

Jet fuel is an hydrocarbon. You need just a small drop to create a visible trace on water: think about the irisation you see in parking lots from engine and transmission leaks. So, unless it's burnt, it should leave a trace when it falls back on water, even as tiny droplets.

SCFirefighter wrote:

Judging by some of the responses on here about weather not being a big deal, I beg the differ. Here is everything laid out. I put this together using Level 2 dual-pol data which is the highest resolution radar data available. The images are valid at 18:38:25Z and is the .5 degree base reflectivity and Spectrum Width from the Houston KHGX that was downloaded from the NOAA archive and opened in Gibson Ridge's GR2 Analyst.

It clearly shows the cold front (black arrows) draped SW to NE across the Houston area and its movement to the SE at around 10-12kts. Before the cold front passed over the area, surface observations show that Ellington Airport (KEFD) and Scholes International in Galveston (KGLS) both had winds varying from 200/210 varying between 12 and 15kts. As the front passed over IAH, EFD, and finally GLS, winds immediately shifted to 310 at 10-15kts with IAH Gusting to 24kts at 18:02Z along with a temperature drop of around 10 degrees from around 77 to 67/68.

At the time Atlas began to show signs of trouble it was positioned directly on top of this front. NWS Mesoanalysis Data shows that the entire area had at least 60kts of bulk windshear at the time of incident along and just ahead of the cold front. (Graphic Included)

Continuing along, the observed 18Z Sounding from Lake Charles, LA had a wind profile that I will lay out below.
10,000ft - [email protected]
9,000ft - [email protected]
8,000ft - [email protected]
7,000ft - [email protected]
6,000ft - [email protected]
5,000ft - [email protected]
4,000ft - [email protected]
3,000ft - [email protected]
2,000ft - [email protected]
1,000ft - [email protected]
Surface - [email protected]

Finally I have enclosed another dual-pol radar product called Spectrum Width. Spectrum Width depicts a measure of velocity dispersion. In a radar bin, it provides a measure of the variability of the mean radial velocity estimates (movement) due to wind shear, turbulence, and/or the quality of the velocity samples. The proper use of Spectrum Width can help the severe thunderstorm and tornado warning decision process. It is used to estimate turbulence associated with low-level boundaries, thunderstorms, mesocyclones in supercells, and mesovortices in quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs)

Low values = smooth flow
High Values = depict variability in movement, turbulence, and chaotic flow.

The SW values along the cold front at 18:38Z in the exact location of Atlas 3591 show pretty high values that would be consistent with moderate to severe turbulence and a disrupted, chaotic air steam.

I am usually not the speculative type, but after looking at and analyzing the weather data, I feel very confident weather played a part in this terrible accident. Only time will tell as the NTSB works the investigation. Hope this information is helpful to any and all.

My thoughts and prayers are with the families of the flight crew. Godspeed.

This Atlas flight was not the first nor the last flight to fly through this area. If you’re suggesting they encountered up to severe turbulence or a squall line, it would have been reported. That’s particularly true if it were pax jets encountering the severe conditions. Most pax jet pilots are hypersensitive to any turbulence above the light designation.

Max turbulence speed in a 767 is around 280-290KIAS. At 7000’ they would have been at 240-250KIAS or slower if directed by ATC before something went wrong. Structurally speaking there was no danger if or when the severe bumps started.

Lastly, these storms were not nefarious. There was no squall line just a max reported precip level of “heavy” as reported by ATC. The max is “extreme.”

I’m still of the belief these storms were far enough away to not have played a major role. Just because their last recorded task was a weather deviation doesn’t mean that’s the main cause.

Regardless, you’ve provided a good breakdown of the weather. However, this is the type of weather aircraft fly through and around every day all over the world without incident.


ILL

dtwpilot225 wrote:

All these posts about bird strikes, fires, flight control issues and what not are pointless. The crew would have had time to radio in something, anything. Why are we so impatient and self proclaimed ntsb investigators. Within 2 weeks all boxes will probably have been reviewed and we will know

If it was a sudden elevator jam or hardover, the crew may have been too busy trying to control the airplane to radio it in.

In the case of Alaska 261 they had time and momentarily got it under control. But once the plunge started we heard nothing.

My deepest sympathies to all for this loss.

While we won’t ever determine the accident cause here, I am thankful for the education from the speculation and shared knowledge. I’ve learned so much about emergency procedures, systems and redundancy in transport aircraft, the 767 in particular, and how we have implemented lessons-learned over the years. I’ve learned a lot about shipping policy, procedures, security and operations at a large cargo carrier. All of this education...all the information about the robustness of the aircraft, it’s systems, and the people behind it...makes the incident even more puzzling.

ilovelamp wrote:

SCFirefighter wrote:

Judging by some of the responses on here about weather not being a big deal, I beg the differ. Here is everything laid out. I put this together using Level 2 dual-pol data which is the highest resolution radar data available. The images are valid at 18:38:25Z and is the .5 degree base reflectivity and Spectrum Width from the Houston KHGX that was downloaded from the NOAA archive and opened in Gibson Ridge's GR2 Analyst.

It clearly shows the cold front (black arrows) draped SW to NE across the Houston area and its movement to the SE at around 10-12kts. Before the cold front passed over the area, surface observations show that Ellington Airport (KEFD) and Scholes International in Galveston (KGLS) both had winds varying from 200/210 varying between 12 and 15kts. As the front passed over IAH, EFD, and finally GLS, winds immediately shifted to 310 at 10-15kts with IAH Gusting to 24kts at 18:02Z along with a temperature drop of around 10 degrees from around 77 to 67/68.

At the time Atlas began to show signs of trouble it was positioned directly on top of this front. NWS Mesoanalysis Data shows that the entire area had at least 60kts of bulk windshear at the time of incident along and just ahead of the cold front. (Graphic Included)

Continuing along, the observed 18Z Sounding from Lake Charles, LA had a wind profile that I will lay out below.
10,000ft - [email protected]
9,000ft - [email protected]
8,000ft - [email protected]
7,000ft - [email protected]
6,000ft - [email protected]
5,000ft - [email protected]
4,000ft - [email protected]
3,000ft - [email protected]
2,000ft - [email protected]
1,000ft - [email protected]
Surface - [email protected]

Finally I have enclosed another dual-pol radar product called Spectrum Width. Spectrum Width depicts a measure of velocity dispersion. In a radar bin, it provides a measure of the variability of the mean radial velocity estimates (movement) due to wind shear, turbulence, and/or the quality of the velocity samples. The proper use of Spectrum Width can help the severe thunderstorm and tornado warning decision process. It is used to estimate turbulence associated with low-level boundaries, thunderstorms, mesocyclones in supercells, and mesovortices in quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs)

Low values = smooth flow
High Values = depict variability in movement, turbulence, and chaotic flow.

The SW values along the cold front at 18:38Z in the exact location of Atlas 3591 show pretty high values that would be consistent with moderate to severe turbulence and a disrupted, chaotic air steam.

I am usually not the speculative type, but after looking at and analyzing the weather data, I feel very confident weather played a part in this terrible accident. Only time will tell as the NTSB works the investigation. Hope this information is helpful to any and all.

My thoughts and prayers are with the families of the flight crew. Godspeed.

This Atlas flight was not the first nor the last flight to fly through this area. If you’re suggesting they encountered up to severe turbulence or a squall line, it would have been reported. That’s particularly true if it were pax jets encountering the severe conditions. Most pax jet pilots are hypersensitive to any turbulence above the light designation.

Max turbulence speed in a 767 is around 280-290KIAS. At 7000’ they would have been at 240-250KIAS or slower if directed by ATC before something went wrong. Structurally speaking there was no danger if or when the severe bumps started.

Lastly, these storms were not nefarious. There was no squall line just a max reported precip level of “heavy” as reported by ATC. The max is “extreme.”

I’m still of the belief these storms were far enough away to not have played a major role. Just because their last recorded task was a weather deviation doesn’t mean that’s the main cause.

Regardless, you’ve provided a good breakdown of the weather. However, this is the type of weather aircraft fly through and around every day all over the world without incident.


ILL

Thanks for the kinds words about the breakdown! I really appreciate that. I would just like to clarify I wasn't trying to specifically say it was "storms" that caused this incident. The only correlation I was attempting to make was the aircraft issue happening at the same time, in the same location as some turbulent air along the leading edge of the cold front.

I think it's also important to say that atmospheric kinematics on Saturday were pretty intense. While no single number or value exceeds the capabilities of any modern airliner, I do think weather played a part in the accident, but I am not saying it was the contributing cause of the accident. I am really curious about the horizontal stabilizer as I am sure everyone is. I am just wondering if there may have been a preexisting, unknown issue that some mod/sev turbulence contributed to it completely failing. It's all speculation at this point and my thoughts are no different.

Like I said before thanks for the props, it took me about an hour and a half to bring all the data together. If anyone ever needs anything weather related, shoot me a message. Cheers!

mm320cap wrote:

You have the right to discuss whatever you want. It’s a free country. But as a former 767 Captain and a professional airline pilot for over 25 years, the suggestion that one of the three men who died a tragic death caused the crash intentionally is going to cause me, and many of us in the community to defend their legacy. It’s entirely possible their family members and close friends are reading this because there is a lot of good information here that the average person wouldn’t otherwise be able to procure. The NTSB will certainly be looking all possible causes, and nobody is suggesting they should do otherwise. But the way the topic has been tossed about on here is insulting and classless. Don’t care a hoot whether you agree or not.

I can understand why you would feel this way, and I also do think it's fairly ridiculous to suggest with this little evidence. Statistically, there are many causes with a higher likelihood. However, I do think that anyone who intentionally chooses to crash an airplane is not acting rationally, and that those instances where a pilot has intentionally crashed a plane are more tragic than disgraceful. No one chooses to feel like that (and if I'm not mistaken, there are drugs that can make people feel suicidal almost out of nowhere).

Silver1SWA wrote:

I still hear “pull” and it sounds similar to the voice in that video.

As Whiplash stated, any GPWS callout - even a run-of-the-mill altitude readout - is loud. The whole point of them is that they can be heard clearly and unambiguously above the cockpit din, speech, wind nose, engine noise and so on. Even more so, the actual wording used, the tone and stress of the speaker, the rate of speech and volume are all intended to "get to the crew" in situations where they get too disoriented or focused/preoccupied with one thing to notice their proximity to terrain - which is why GPWS callouts in general sound so unnatural, forced and commanding.

For lack of a better comparison, the GPWS is a Marine drill instructor - and not a shy boy tugging at your jacket sleeve trying to get your attention. If it has something to say, trust me, you'll know it!

For what it is worth in the "pull" discussion. For comparison the BA crash on Heathrow, here you can also here the "pull up" on ATC at 00:47. It is quite clear to hear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJNVVlBPi8M

My understanding is that the ATC recording indicates that more than one person was in the cockpit as this unfolded.

Unless we consider that there was some conspiracy between them, (which is straight out of Hollywood) then deliberate pilot action is ruled out.

Pilot suicide/murder was a possibility which has been considered here and ruled out.

I would expect that NTSB have now also ruled it out.

bennett123 wrote:

I would expect that NTSB have now also ruled it out.

Without access to the FDR or CVR, I doubt the NTSB has ruled out anything yet.

bennett123 wrote:

My understanding is that the ATC recording indicates that more than one person was in the cockpit as this unfolded.

Unless we consider that there was some conspiracy between them, (which is straight out of Hollywood) then deliberate pilot action is ruled out.

Pilot suicide/murder was a possibility which has been considered here and ruled out.

I would expect that NTSB have now also ruled it out.

No, it most certainly has not been ruled out. Nothing has been ruled out.