User avatar
Miami
Topic Author
Posts: 6099
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 8:37 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:13 pm

Please continue the discussion here as part 4 is getting too long.

Previous thread: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Missing - Part 4 (by American 767 Dec 29 2014 in Civil Aviation)

RIP to the 162 people on board.   

-Miami   
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible. - Eddie Rickenbacker
 
User avatar
Miami
Topic Author
Posts: 6099
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 8:37 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:16 pm

Some debris:



Photos via CNN.
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible. - Eddie Rickenbacker
 
Trin
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:45 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:53 pm

Quoting heyjoojoo (Reply 259):

Since it seems that most of us are leaning toward the weather being the cause of this incident, I still don't know why a captain and/or first officer would take his passengers in or near such a wild set of cells. Seems to be a huge risk....

Absolutely not! There are many instances of clear-air turbulence that is far worse than that experienced in-storm. Do you remember AF447? That flight experienced nothing more than mild-moderate turbulence (before the loss of airspeed, the flying pilots had only just talked about the possibility of a bit more 'moving around' with the cabin crew, and the fact that they MIGHT want to put the seatbelts on) - absolutely nothing that was cause for alarm, and nothing that could be described as "wild". The only thing that occurred that caused problems was the icing of the pitots.....which uncovered the very unfortunate fact that the flying pilots were lacking even basic skills/experience to deal with a loss of airspeed indications and the possibility of a high-altitude stall. The precipitating factor was the icing of the pitots (in a not overly-wild storm/cloud layer); the deadly factor was the crew's response and the man-machine interface between them and the Airbus. One of the compounding factors that added to their confusion (due to their lack of training, apparently) was the fact that every time they nosed-down, the stall warnings sounded, and every time they nosed-up, the stall warnings stopped. Very confusing environment, but some basic high-altitude aerodynamic stall training for their aircraft type should've put that confusion to rest.

[Edited 2014-12-30 08:55:54]

[Edited 2014-12-30 09:00:55]
 
hivue
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:10 pm

From previous part of this thread:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 264):
Sorry . I forgot the most important picture : that of the nearby radio-sounding.

I assume the temperatures on the x axis are difference from ISA?
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
hivue
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:19 pm

Quoting Trin (Reply 2):
but some basic high-altitude aerodynamic stall training for their aircraft type should've put that confusion to rest.

I believe it was established in the AF447 discussions that this is not possible. No one is going to intentionally stall a commercial airliner at cruise altitudes, and aerodynamic behavior after stall cannot be modeled in the simulator for lack of data. The training would be aimed at avoiding stalls altogether.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:20 pm

Based on pictures so far it seems like passenger's bodies & stuff like luggage are rather intact so this definitely doesn't seem to be a very high velocity crash like Adam Air 574 for example. It seems like the wreckage is concentrated in rather small area so seems like there wasn't a significant in flight breakup either. Radar speed data points towards a stall.

Perhaps it's indeed something similar to AF447.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:21 pm

Reuters offers this video based on a scenario in which Air Asia suffered inflight depressurization:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/sudden-c...ization-affects-air-153618505.html

It's an interesting vid, but did I miss something? Is depressurization now considered a factor, based on some serious evidence?
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:26 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 6):
It's an interesting vid, but did I miss something? Is depressurization now considered a factor, based on some serious evidence?

Some victims seem to be lacking clothes, something that can be a sign of in flight breakup. However if the wreckage is indeed concentrated within relatively small area that sounds unlikely, it could be just the impact with sea that could have ripped some of the clothes off.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2584
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:27 pm

It's a shame this part has been opened before the Mods closed part 4, as there are some very relevant charts at the end of the previous, still open, part.

Rgds
Flying around India
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:32 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 3):
I assume the temperatures on the x axis are difference from ISA?

No these are actual temperatures and the axis is the slanted green lines : they keep on diminishing but you have to interpolate : the one between 800 and 700 mb is the -40°C line... and so on.

The altitudes ( in hPa ) are horizontal : you just plot the temp vs pressure level.
Contrail designer
 
smokeonreadynow
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:30 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:38 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 4):
and aerodynamic behavior after stall cannot be modeled in the simulator for lack of data. The training would be aimed at avoiding stalls altogether.

The training and simulation industry is beginning to address this gap. A google search for "Stall Box" will show you a few products that can be retrofitted onto simulators that allow them to replicate stall conditions within the aerodynamic model, though I will not post a direct link due to the "no advertising" rule.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:42 pm

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 8):

It's a shame this part has been opened before the Mods closed part 4, as there are some very relevant charts at the end of the previous, still open, part.

Here they are, again :

1/- Surface Chart :

http://www.weathergraphics.com/awq8501/awq8501-sfc.jpg

2/- 300 mb ( FL300 ) Chart : Temperatures are quite high - STD + 16°C - and the winds very light

http://www.weathergraphics.com/awq8501/awq8501-300.jpg

3/- Satellite Visible Pic : 8 minutes after QZ8501 crossing . As a matter of fact, the thunderclouds were in their majority behind the aircraft

http://www.weathergraphics.com/awq8501/awq8501-2332vis.jpg

4/- Emagram ( Radio sounding ) of the area : look at the winds on the extreme right : they rise from 15 to 25 kt between 32 000 and 36 000 ft ( Last SSR screen picture if one wants to believe it ) ; That means that in fact the indicated airspeed was around 167 kt / M = .52
That's as close to a stall one would like to be.

http://www.weathergraphics.com/awq8501/awq8501-skew.jpg

...and lastly comments from Tim :

"Conclusion: Based on the available data and a close correlation of thunderstorm activity at the last received location, it appears that weather was a factor, or was a compounding factor. The most likely hazard, if weather was a factor, appears to be icing."

The appearance of a *supercell* is not backed by this analysis and certainly not by the sat picture.
Cirrus clouds were way above the flight level (some 17 000 ft higher )

That said I do not believe in a repeat of AF447, mainly because that accident has generated too many discussions and training concerns.

AS the accident onset was very quick and drastic, look elsewhere for explanations.
Contrail designer
 
cpw
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:55 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:45 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 6):
Is depressurization now considered a factor, based on some serious evidence?

They're likely just re-running the videos they generated during the months of 24-hour breaking news coverage of the Malaysian flight.
 
SimonDanger
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:51 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:02 pm

from the previous thread...

Full disclosure, I'm not a pilot. But I love flight, and things that fly, it's why I like this site. As I commented on the MH370 threads (what was the last count?), I am facinated with the flight deck management environment, or Cockpit Resource Management, and in particular the Aviate - Navigate - Communicate protocol.

Here's my concern/question: Why isn't communicating a higher priority?

Any first responder, fireman, policeman, or military commander knows that the sooner you ask for help the sooner resources are going to come your way. They may not save your own butt, but they will let others know that there is a really big problem. I'm just flumoxed that if I were at the helm of a craft that I wouldn't key the thumb switch to ATC (emergency channel or not) and announce I have a problem, ala, "Houston, we have a problem".

If anything, the communication of the onset of emergency conditions would alert nearby aircraft to give a wide berth to the stricken aircraft, enabling its freedom to make any necessary maneuvers to avert a disaster. And as one commentor mentioned above (in thread 4), were the PIC to declare an emergency, he/she would be able to pretty much fly where ever they needed to in order to save the aircraft and passengers. My sense is that there is some inherent stigma in declaring an emergency that prevents pilots from announcing they are losing control of their aircraft. Not trying to be controversial or a troll, just curious if some of the pilots here feel the same. Or not.  

[Edited 2014-12-30 10:07:38]
 
hivue
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:09 pm

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 13):
Here's my concern/question: Why isn't communicating a higher priority?

Any first responder, fireman, policeman, or military commander knows that the sooner you ask for help the sooner resources are going to come your way.

I don't know about you but if I'm about to have a wreck in my car I'm stepping on the brakes first ("aviate"), trying to avoid the crash ("navigate"), and then calling 911.

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 13):
were the PIC to declare an emergency, he/she would be able to pretty much fly where ever they needed to in order to save the aircraft and passengers.

They're going to do that anyway. No need to declare an emergency first.

[Edited 2014-12-30 10:12:13]
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4141
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:13 pm

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 13):
were the PIC to declare an emergency, he/she would be able to pretty much fly where ever they needed to in order to save the aircraft and passengers.

If the pilot deems it is the best course of action, he does not need to ask permission to do this.
 
djm18
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 6:19 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:17 pm

clearly this is all speculation and certainly there are some amongst this forum that present great data and insight...i am for the most part a casual reader. but as i make a laundry list of potential causes i would give some consideration to terrorist activity or pilot suicide; are there others? in any investigation we can leave no stones unturned. the good news is that the wreckage and relatively shallow waters, we should soon see recovery of the fdr which will guide this investigation down the right path.

my thoughts and prayers with the family of the victims, may they rest in peace.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:17 pm

On Dec 30th 2014 Indonesia's Search and Rescue Services reported, that they have located the wreckage of the fuselage at the floor of the Java Sea, about 97-100nm southwest of Pangkalan Bun. The aircraft is broken up into several large parts but well recognizable.

From the avherald report.

So it should not be long until they have the recorders.
 
SimonDanger
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:51 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:18 pm

User hivue:

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 13):
Here's my concern/question: Why isn't communicating a higher priority?

Any first responder, fireman, policeman, or military commander knows that the sooner you ask for help the sooner resources are going to come your way.

I don't know about you but if I'm about to have a wreck in my car I'm stepping on the brakes first ("aviate"), trying to avoid the crash ("navigate"), and then calling 911.


If you are the only one in the car this makes perfect sense, but in at 32,000 ft. there is more time to do both, and you would have the resources of another pilot or two to allocate those resourses to. I truely get that a life-threatening emergency tends to focus one's mind on the problem at hand, but it just seems that an alert can be as direct and efficient as "emergency...loss of engines...attempting restart..." for example.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9946
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:20 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 14):

I don't know about you but if I'm about to have a wreck in my car I'm stepping on the brakes first ("aviate"), trying to avoid the crash ("navigate"), and then calling 911.

My car will call 911 for me. Why can't airplane do the same?
http://support.ford.com/sync-technology/911-assist-overview-sync
This amazingly new technology has existed in 1998.
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/may/12/business/fi-48799
 
idlewildchild
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:38 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:20 pm

Am I missing something?

1/ Wasn't the AF447 issue the fact they lost awareness of true speed (frozen pitot) and the inexperienced co-pilot pushed the nose up that led to a stall?

2/ And isn't the theory that seems to be emerging for QZ8501 that the pilot (or co-pilot) pushed the nose up to climb when he may have hit a massive storm that brought him to a stall?

Help me understand where things are different at this point, please.
 
michi
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:21 pm

Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 267):
What I'm wondering is if we're seeing the weather pattern intensive (global warming) as exemplified by 50,000 CB storms which are normally unheard of.


Storms reaching that high are quite common and well known in the industry. Nothing new for the pilots.


Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 163):
I'm not a pilot, not even close. I'm just someone who has flown a lot and again will say that in the last 10 years I continue to notice an increasing amount of turbulence on my flights, whether they be transatlantic or domestic USA.


Maybe you just had bad luck?
 
idlewildchild
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:38 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:24 pm

Quoting michi (Reply 21):
Maybe you just had bad luck?
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/scien...-could-mean-more-turbulence-n33956

Or perhaps ahead of a curve! Happy New Year!
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:24 pm

Quoting cpw (Reply 12):
They're likely just re-running the videos they generated during the months of 24-hour breaking news coverage of the Malaysian flight.

I'm sure Malaysian was an inspiration for the concept, but the latest vid shows an Air Asia A320 as part of the animation. As things play out, it will be interesting to see if there was inflight breakup, or whether it hit the ocean relatively intact.
 
Toni_
Posts: 272
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:56 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:31 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 251):
Quoting Toni_ (Reply 238):
Are those Altitudes accurate? FL370 and 380 are pretty high for 737 and A320. Is this routine in region or due to storms?

I double-checked the altitudes of all the flights on FR24 beforehand and the data appears the be correct. FL380 seems to be a routine cruising altitude for QZ502 on the last 7 days.
 
bellancacf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:51 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:34 pm

I do not see why we have to wonder where a downed plane ended up to the extent that we do. This point was discussed early on in this thread and it has come up elsewhere: a steady reply is "well, it's the cost". I am sorry to be angry, but let's see an airline scratch its head if it is told that it is responsible for just 10% of the cost of keeping a dozen ships and scores of airplanes at sea for days or even months. And the real cost, of course, is human lives. A body, a slide, a life vest, and we arrive three days later!! I do not even want to say what I am thinking. I do not want to imagine the despair and frustration that may have been felt by a pilot and crew who may have wrestled their aircraft to the surface of the water, initiated an evacuation, and then known that --cost!! -- no one knew where they were and that no one was going to arrive in time.

We need to talk about "cost".
 
michi
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:35 pm

Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 20):
2/ And isn't the theory that seems to be emerging for QZ8501 that the pilot (or co-pilot) pushed the nose up to climb when he may have hit a massive storm that brought him to a stall?

We don't know if the pilot pulled up (not pushed) for whatever reason. The data which was presented so far isn't very reliable.

Climbing to avoid a storm would not be the best course of action. Maybe the climb request was not related to a storm ahead but something else like optimum flight level or simply (clear air) turbulence?

A storm avoidance would have been done laterally. It was published before, that the crew requested a course deviation before. That request was granted by ATC.
So they must have had an idea what kind of weather was prevailing along their routing.
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:36 pm

Just heard the news. Well at least they found this plane, thank God. I take my earlier conspiracy suspicions back.
 
AirCalSNA
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:35 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:38 pm

What role do you think the Airbus Flight Control Laws played in this, or the design choice to have independently operable joysticks? A la AF447. I often wonder if the Habsheim crash was a precursor of things to come. (On the other hand the A320 is a much more comfortable plane than the 737.)
 
Trin
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:45 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:42 pm

Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 20):

Am I missing something?

1/ Wasn't the AF447 issue the fact they lost awareness of true speed (frozen pitot) and the inexperienced co-pilot pushed the nose up that led to a stall?

2/ And isn't the theory that seems to be emerging for QZ8501 that the pilot (or co-pilot) pushed the nose up to climb when he may have hit a massive storm that brought him to a stall?

Help me understand where things are different at this point, please.


I sure can't. I've been saying all along that this reeks of AF447, and it seems that everybody else has the utmost faith in the 'training' that was implemented after AF447 being adequate to avoid another tragedy like it. I, on the other hand, have no such faith and seriously doubt that - should an Airbus encounter a high-altitude stall again due to loss of airspeed data - the crew would react any differently. Intermittent stall warnings which only come when nosing down, stall warnings stopping when nosing up, and the aircraft having no way to tell the pilots what is wrong ("I have lost all airspeed data") are major, major problems that haven't been addressed in the slightest since F-GZCP.

These crashes are all tragedies, and random tragedies that are so nuanced that we possibly cannot foresee how to guard against them......but this event could serve to show us just ineffective training for an eventuality is.
 
lowbank
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:46 pm

Pihero,
I am trying to build a picture of events in my mind from all the things that have been written about this tragic event and also from readings lots of other events.

We have a crew that know the area and it's weather, it's not new to them.
We have a pilot who flew fighters according to earlier reports.

They requested a course change which was granted, a height change was not immediately granted and we can see why from one of the graphics shown as there were several planes around but higher.

There is also information that suggests the plane climbed and the speed dropped.

If the airspeed did indeed drop blow the flight envelope, the recovery, from what I read about AF447 is to go nose down and recover your airspeed. In the report Dubois realised he did not have enough height to recover the situation when he did put the nose down, what surprised me at the time was how high they were at that point, I cannot find the report now but I am sure it was over 10,000 feet. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Why it dropped will not be known for while, I don't wish to speculate either as there could be a hundred reasons.

So if they did climb and the plane slowed to a stall, a pilot of his experience may have put the plane nose down.

That could explain the rapid loss of height, would it take say 10,000 feet to get the speed back, after that again we need to wait to see what comes from the black boxes.

I am not going with the broke up at altitude due to the small items of debris and the fact so many people have been found in such a small time frame.

[ Edit Post ]
Every days a school day.
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:51 pm

Joining the discussion late so sorry if this has already been discussed.

Given the radar plan views showing the highest intensity storm cells shown by CNN weather commentators (I don’t have the raw data yet), it appears that a diversion flight path Westerly at a significant distance before directly encountering the T’storm cell (surely being painted on the onboard WX radar) would have been a (much preferred) clear path diversion instead of climbing to a higher flight level. If as is being reported by some in the media that the storm tops were around 50-53K feet, then any climb (and in this case to only around FL360) is futile, and places the aircraft into the most violent portion of a t’storm cell.

I’ve yet to see in the media any meteorologist confirm decisively via volume representation (3D representation and associated elevation view) of the specific storm cell which would indicate the storm top, reflectivity, relative velocity, precipitation intensity, hail shafts, anvil, etc. relative to the aircraft lat/long and altitude position. The volume signature of the specific storm cell encountered would clearly show what this flight likely encountered and definitively confirm a potential grave error in climbing versus (what appears from the information to date) a likely wiser decision of a diversion to the West as far as possible to avoid the storm by the required normal aviation lateral distance or a return to the departure airport.

It’s difficult given the to-date reported storm cell conditions to understand a decision to climb if the storm tops were truly at the noted 50-53K feet unless of course the WX radar was not working, was not working properly, or radar signatures were misinterpreted by the pilots. Was there not any communication with ATC (or Company) regarding storm tops along the original flight path before departure or after?
 
michi
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:51 pm

Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 22):
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/scien...-could-mean-more-turbulence-n33956

Or perhaps ahead of a curve! Happy New Year!

This article isn't backed up scientifically. It is more like a possible future scenario, which is related to the climate change.

It might fit the perception that bad weather happens more often. But is this really the case?

- More people are affected by bad weather. But there are a lot more people living on planet earth that 50 years ago.
- Weather recording has advanced a lot. With the help of the internet everybody can gather data from around the world. It looks like bad weather is happening more often. Or is it only recorded much better?
- Media will always report tragedies (bad weather) in favor of scientific approaches. Sells better.

I am not denying any climate change. But I really would like to see a more scientific approach to that matter. This NBC article is not an scientific approach.


Happy new year!

Cheers,

Michi


PS:
Climate change related aviation weather phenomena deserve a new thread in my opinion.
 
michi
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:54 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 34):
Joining the discussion late so sorry if this has already been discussed.


Then start to feel sorry! Sorry, might sound a bit harsh. But a lot of your questions have been discussed before.



Edit: Explanation added!

[Edited 2014-12-30 10:58:01]
 
idlewildchild
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:38 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:58 pm

Quoting michi (Reply 27):
We don't know if the pilot pulled up (not pushed) for whatever reason. The data which was presented so far isn't very reliable.

Climbing to avoid a storm would not be the best course of action. Maybe the climb request was not related to a storm ahead but something else like optimum flight level or simply (clear air) turbulence?

A storm avoidance would have been done laterally. It was published before, that the crew requested a course deviation before. That request was granted by ATC.
So they must have had an idea what kind of weather was prevailing along their routing.

I appreciate your approach of keeping options open and also believe the evidence of serious CB storms with a 50,000 foot ceiling being right in their path plays a part. We will know far sooner than AF447.

I expect they'll have the boxes within 3 days since the water is so shallow and it appears the wreckage is in a somewhat contained space. Maybe a week.
 
UA787DEN
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:59 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:10 pm

Hopefully AirAsia handles this better than AdamAir, and recovers the black box first before asking money questions later...at least these black boxes are shallow enough for *hopefully* easy recovery.

Just to confirm, no black box pings have been detected yet, correct? (But the general location where they are at has been determined from wreckage).
 
nottarockstar
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:54 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:13 pm

Images coming back are showing bodies without clothing - Can anyone here suggest what that means?
 
Brick
Posts: 1680
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 1999 11:08 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:24 pm

Quoting nottarockstar (Reply 39):

Images coming back are showing bodies without clothing - Can anyone here suggest what that means?

This has been discussed many times in Part 4 of this thread.
A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man...
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3614
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:26 pm

Quoting UA787DEN (Reply 38):
Hopefully AirAsia handles this better than AdamAir, and recovers the black box first before asking money questions later...at least these black boxes are shallow enough for *hopefully* easy recovery.

I'm sure they will, Air Asia is a serious, respectable company unlike Adam Air.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:27 pm

Quoting michi Reply 36 "Then start to feel sorry! Sorry, might sound a bit harsh. But a lot of your questions have been discussed before."

In that case can you please provide the reference(s) in these threads to previous posts you note where I can see the volume radar signature of the storm cell they apparently encountered just before loss of communications.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3532
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:29 pm

Quoting nottarockstar (Reply 39):
Can anyone here suggest what that means?

On its own and without context, it doesn't actually suggest anything. Clothes can be removed both by rushing air (in-flight breakup) and by water waves (a crash intact). Looking at the injuries to the passengers will clear up which of those it was.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:29 pm

Quoting UA787DEN (Reply 38):
Just to confirm, no black box pings have been detected yet, correct? (But the general location where they are at has been determined from wreckage).

I understand there are visual signs that the aircraft may be largely intact on the seabed, in 65-100 feet of water. If that's the case, it could be salvaged and/or the boxes located and removed, though that might not be easy under water. I suspect that this may be in range of divers (can anyone confirm?).
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1370
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:31 pm

Quoting idlewildchild (Reply 33):
I so agree! Unfortunately there are still many doubters.

Before I read a post where you stated storms reaching FL500 and higher are almost unheard of...huh?!? First off where are you getting your information because storms REGULARLY hit those altitudes and higher. Im an air traffic controller and in the summer and it seems almost daily we have storms reaching those altitudes.
 
JoeCattoli
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 1:06 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:37 pm

As the plane's not missing anymore, I would deem appropriate a change in thread title.

Ciao
Joe
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:48 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 44):
n 65-100 feet of water. If that's the case, it could be salvaged and/or
the boxes located and removed, though that might not be easy under water. I suspect that
this may be in range of divers
(can anyone confirm?).

It is according to Wikipedia.
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
WingBuff
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:30 pm

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:54 pm

Ok so the wreckage area's radius is quite narrow, in such cases the aircraft hits the surface largely or fully intact. from that we can speculate that:

1. It stalled (for whatever reason. frozen/blocked pitot tubes, flight crew effort or whatever)
2. Turbulence/weather. I'm thinking microburst ala DL 191 in 1985.

Anything else?
 
mcoatc
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:23 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:07 pm

Quoting trnswrld (Reply 45):
Before I read a post where you stated storms reaching FL500 and higher are almost unheard of...huh?!? First off where are you getting your information because storms REGULARLY hit those altitudes and higher. Im an air traffic controller and in the summer and it seems almost daily we have storms reaching those altitudes.

   Exactly, nothing unusual for this part of the world. Unfortunately, there are a lot of uneducated opinions being thrown around these forums. Questions are one thing, saying something definitively is another.

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 34):
It’s difficult given the to-date reported storm cell conditions to understand a decision to climb if the storm tops were truly at the noted 50-53K feet unless of course the WX radar was not working, was not working properly, or radar signatures were misinterpreted by the pilots. Was there not any communication with ATC (or Company) regarding storm tops along the original flight path before departure or after?

I'm not incriminating this flightcrew, as the their actions will come out shortly, and then everyone can make judgements. Understand, though, that the usage of onboard WX radar is truly a skill. I've had the opportunity to be a part of some fascinating presentations from airline pilots, and the FAA, about the constraints of onboard WX radar. There can be pretty significant differences between what the aircraft radar is showing, and what ATC ground-based radar is showing. Of course, there are limitations on our end as well. That's why pilots and controllers work together to disseminate what we are both looking at. A captain with 20,000+ hours was, without a doubt, knowledgeable on his equipment. Still, every year perfectly good airplanes are crashed by veteran pilots who "should know better", so nothing would shock me.

I would be very interested in what ATC provided in the way of weather guidance, if anything. It seems that none of the other flights in the vicinity, all at higher altitudes, had serious issues that we have been made aware of. ATC might not have had anything negative to advise the crew of.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:08 pm

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 13):
If anything, the communication of the onset of emergency conditions would alert nearby aircraft to give a wide berth to the stricken aircraft, enabling its freedom to make any necessary maneuvers

TCAS exists also for that kind of event.

Quoting lowbank (Reply 32):
We have a crew that know the area and it's weather,

Yes

Quoting lowbank (Reply 32):
information that suggests the plane climbed and the speed dropped.

Not confirmed that the screeshot is valid and part of the ATC records

Quoting lowbank (Reply 32):
Why it dropped will not be known for while, I don't wish to speculate either as there could be a hundred reasons.

Yes. Including explosion

Quoting lowbank (Reply 32):
So if they did climb and the plane slowed to a stall, a pilot of his experience may have put the plane nose down.
I would try to do so, yes.

That could explain the rapid loss of height, would it take say 10,000 feet to get the speed back

5000 ft is a good ballpark figure... provided you have full pitch authority

Quoting Trin (Reply 31):
I've been saying all along that this reeks of AF447, and it seems that everybody else has the utmost faith in the 'training' that was implemented after AF447 being adequate to avoid another tragedy like it. I, on the other hand, have no such faith and seriously doubt that - should an Airbus encounter a high-altitude stall again due to loss of airspeed data - the crew would react any differently. Intermittent stall warnings which only come when nosing down, stall warnings stopping when nosing up, and the aircraft having no way to tell the pilots what is wrong ("I have lost all airspeed data") are major, major problems that haven't been addressed in the slightest since F-GZCP.

.
Please explain in simple technical terms why the stall warning would be different on a Boeing plane and how a Boeing plane would not - ever ever - get into a similar situation. I'm really curioius.

Quoting AirCalSNA (Reply 30):
What role do you think the Airbus Flight Control Laws played in this, or the design choice to have independently operable joysticks? A la AF447. I often wonder if the Habsheim crash was a precursor of things to come.

Same question as above to Trin : Explain how this event could be related to the Habsheim farkup.

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 44):
I suspect that this may be in range of divers (can anyone confirm?).

As a PADI sport diver, using compressed air, I'd have more than 30 minutes at 100 ft without a decompression stop.
A lot more if I used a mixture.
Contrail designer
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:16 pm

Quoting mcoatc (Reply 49):
the usage of onboard WX radar is truly a skill.

All radar manufacturers issue a booklet on how to use their sets.
It is certainly not arcane science. Just a matter of discipline.
Of course, some souls would be able to extract more info than other crews ( antenna pitch tweaking , gain optimisation...).

Remember, all our on-board equipment is for average people.

That said, looking at Tim Vasquez's study, the flight was out of the worst convective area. ( See my post #11 above, image #3 )
Contrail designer
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:18 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 17):

What type of crash would this imply??
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos