Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:04 pm

Quoting asetiadi (Reply 198):
many of them, here's one of them

I expect the "holding hands" is just bodies that drifted together and became entangled.
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:06 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 195):

Where is this story coming from????
 
asetiadi
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:05 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:07 pm

One of the leading investigator told in our local news that the're no way the plane broke up in mid-air / free fall from 32000 feet because he saw the condition of the bodies during evacuation process.
 
cpqi
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:08 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 194):

Thanks for the note. I do believe though that he was already at FL363 on the last communication which is someway above the approved height, so the question remains. Pilots increase altitude in cruise to avoid something, either turbulence or objects (excepting ATC command).

Why the deviation from command if not to avoid storm cells ?
I hate turbulence
 
asetiadi
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:05 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:13 pm

Quoting heyjoojoo (Reply 201):
Where is this story coming from????

I've been following the news here from our local station and news media as well. The local Tv really showed some disturbing images earlier and they now decided to not showing the images again to respect the families.

I'm just reporting what's been told from the local Tv news here. Nothing is concrete until they find the black boxes. but again, let's not to forget, the people who are reporting all of these news came from the rescue team first hand look.
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8307
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:19 pm

There seems to be be too much conflicting information out there, at one point we are told 40 bodies have been recovered, then it is 6, all fully clothed, yet we have seen pictures of a body with just their underpants on.

I'll be glad when they recover the FDR's so we can really find out what went wrong.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
asetiadi
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:05 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:23 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/data-point-unb...ash-source-132236864--finance.html

Data point to 'unbelievably' steep climb before AirAsia crash: source

SURABAYA, Indonesia (Reuters) - Radar data being examined by investigators appeared to show that AirAsia Flight QZ8501 made an "unbelievably" steep climb before it crashed, possibly pushing it beyond the Airbus A320's limits, said a source familiar with the probe's initial findings.

The data was transmitted before the aircraft disappeared from the screens of air traffic controllers in Jakarta on Sunday, added the source, who declined to be identified.

"So far, the numbers taken by the radar are unbelievably high. This rate of climb is very high, too high. It appears to be beyond the performance envelope of the aircraft," he said.

At 6.12 a.m. on Sunday, 36 minutes after taking off from Surabaya's Juanda Airport on a flight to Singapore, the pilot asked for permission to climb to 38,000ft from 32,000ft and deviate to the left to avoid bad weather.

Two minutes later, Jakarta responded by asking QZ8501 to go left seven miles and climb to 34,000ft. There was no response from the cockpit. The aircraft was still detected by the ATC's radar before disappearing at 6.18 a.m.

An image that was reportedly leaked from AirNav Indonesia, which manages the country's air space, and shared on several websites, appeared to show QZ8501 at an altitude of 36,300ft and climbing at a speed of 353 knots.

The source declined to confirm if that image was accurate. Officials from AirNav Indonesia declined to comment.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8349
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:25 pm

The rescue team workers probably couldn't tell the difference in a body from a mid air break up and a ocean surface break up to be honest.

Time for us to wait for the actual press briefings rather than here say.

Time for others to also read the threads. As I suspected earlier the life vest story was debunked here already.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18817
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:28 pm

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 205):
There seems to be be too much conflicting information out there, at one point we are told 40 bodies have been recovered, then it is 6, all fully clothed, yet we have seen pictures of a body with just their underpants on.

Sadly it's the same every time there's a crash. The media is largely to blame - in their desperation to be the first to 'break news' they'll report anything without verification or confirmation.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:28 pm

Quoting heyjoojoo (Reply 201):
Where is this story coming from????

It was going around early on.

You can google "air asia holding hands".

I suspect it is just a misinterpretation.
 
hivue
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:48 pm

We've been assuming the crew made no emergency call but consider this from someone who apparently flies the area regularly:

Quoting dehowie (Reply 145):
Firstly communications throughout Indonesia are problematic in some large areas.IE..in some areas you still have little to no VHF comms due to repeaters creating a large howl blocking out comms with ground stations ie ATC.
Quoting dehowie (Reply 172):
fortunately the company i work at has most FO's with more experience than the Captain on this flight.Hell 2000 hours here wont get you a job in a bottle shop let alone an A-320

I think you've had a 0 go on a walkabout there, mate. 

[Edited 2014-12-31 06:51:43]

[Edited 2014-12-31 06:53:08]

[Edited 2014-12-31 06:53:59]
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3544
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:50 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 195):
I don't find the "holding hands" story believable.

Me neither - I doubt it's even possible for bodies in water to be "holding hands" long enough for rigor mortis to set in (so they'd be permanently linked) before the water itself pulls them apart. Even a calm sea would do that very quickly.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:53 pm

All speculation on the condition of bodies. Autopsies will clear this up quickly....Massive internal trauma versus ingestion of water versus clear fractures from impact.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1842
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:57 pm

Quoting asetiadi (Reply 204):
I'm just reporting what's been told from the local Tv news here. Nothing is concrete until they find the black boxes. but again, let's not to forget, the people who are reporting all of these news came from the rescue team first hand look.

And we know that news stations can be wrong with their information. Let us wait for official confirmation. I think that even then sometimes the official figures get their wires crossed. There is nothing as yet to suggest what happened, whether the aircraft broke up or it was ditched.
 
frostyj
Posts: 1786
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:04 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:58 pm

Quoting asetiadi (Reply 181):

I'm really sorry but you are confusing me with your English. Are you saying they found a passenger alive?
[url=http://m.maploco.com/details/5f34zxvq][img]http://www.maploco.com/vmap/s/8395334.png[/img][/url]
 
AngMoh
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 3:04 pm

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 212):
All speculation on the condition of bodies. Autopsies will clear this up quickly....Massive internal trauma versus ingestion of water versus clear fractures from impact.

  
There are way too many rumours and too few facts - Indonesia is always a country where rumours fly around easily. Even the statement that one of the victims was wearing a life jacket is now denied by SAR. And there is no official statement at all that there are "bodies holding hands". I think only about 6-8 bodies have been recovered. It seems that the authorities are quite careful in their remarks.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739/ER 742 743 744/M 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 3:53 pm

A couple of items showing up on the internet, that appear to be based on actual data:

Sonar has located the main wreckage underwater, but it is not clear how intact the remains actually are.
There are reports indicating a rapid increase in altitude prior to falling off radar.

Apologies in advance if these have been mentioned here before. Things are changing very rapidly.
 
trnswrld
Posts: 1373
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 2:19 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 3:53 pm

Ugh, this is the part that I hate after a crash reading all these threads and false news....person alive, people holding hands, person with a life vest on.... Come on people, as horrible as I feel for the people on that plane and the families involved, something happened to this airplane at high altitude. Even if the plane remained intact until impact it got to ground very quickly. Even though yes its an assumption, I think its pretty safe to say nobody was holding hands here.
 
IADCA
Posts: 2125
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:04 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 102):
Pardon the aside, but I don't think it's entirely technical ignorance. I'm not involved in aviation (except playing flight simulator) but I try to employ some common sense plus listen to the pros who we are fortunate enough to have posting on this site. I think that's what's missing, especially with some of the more far-out posters (and it seems to be particularly bad on this thread). I've had a good education in both the sciences and the humanities. One of the most valuable lessons I've learned is that we inhabit a rational universe. I'm afraid a lot of posters on this forum don't understand that.


I think a lot of people live in narrow worlds in which they are relatively smart and make an assumption that this means they are smarter than an equivalently large percentage of people in the wider world, then further assume that the assumption applies to all other narrower populations. In other words, they mostly interact with dumb people and assume that because they are smart relative to that group that they're smart relative to all groups. Unfortunately, they can't seem to be disabused of this assumption.

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 141):
Somehow I don't think you are...This is exactly the kind of defensive response that CRM was designed to deal with...a PIC who insists that they have nothing to learn from subordinates, that the PIC is the smartest man in the room, and that he should never be questioned, even in emergencies. It will indeed be interesting to learn what CRM issues arise from the analysis of this truly tragic accident.

No, he suggested that he has nothing to learn from someone who clearly has no expertise in any of the relevant fields. One of the major reasons CRM works the way it does is because multiple responsibilities are extremely taxing and increase stress (and degrade performance) in a non-linear fashion. The problem with adding "communicate" higher on the list is that its marginal benefit in perhaps finding a crashed plane sooner is more than offset by the degradation in cockpit performance resulting from talking to some guy in a chair dozens of miles away who can't do anything to help you at present (and making the effort to distract yourself from the immediate situation by thinking even through the simple process of pressing the button, talking, and then listening to the response) thus making that crash much more likely. It's the same reason cockpits are sterile in critical flight phases.

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 160):
I openly stated I was not a pilot, and merely questioned why communications wasn't a higher priority, and for this high crime I am to be ridiculed by a guy I don't know in a field that I love and admire. I build furniture out of aircraft parts, I paint pictures of aircraft, and i have flown many planes with my father and friends. I talk enthusiastically about flying to my 19 y.o. son, who always asks what it would be like to be a pilot and, up until this very night, I have never sought to dissuade him from that dream. But tonight I want to thank Russ for his convincing argument that maybe it's just not that great a place to work anymore. And with that I'll say good night.

I think you probably need a thicker skin, to be completely honest. What he said was a bit sardonic, but as someone with a fair amount of expertise in a narrow field, it's extremely exasperating to deal with people who know absolutely nothing post something pretty naive, then insist upon continuing in that line when the reasons for their folly are pointed out, and then get mad when people with thousands of hours of training insist on further correcting them. In other words, reading your posts annoyed me - a third party to this dispute - a lot more than his did. Hope that helps.

Quoting asetiadi (Reply 202):
One of the leading investigator told in our local news that the're no way the plane broke up in mid-air / free fall from 32000 feet because he saw the condition of the bodies during evacuation process.

The fuselage condition and internal injuries to the bodies are a lot more important to this evaluation than external conditions. Pan Am 103 exploded at altitude and came apart further as it came down and many of the bodies were in very good condition (at least externally). Also, I really appreciate your feeding local media reports to us here. Thanks.
 
lnglive1011yyz
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:23 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:07 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 19):
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

THANK YOU! I do not know why there is such push-back amongst us here on having an automated distress call when an aircraft is in a potentially lethal position.

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 119):
But I'm open to any other safety suggestions you may have. Really!

As a pilot, if your aircraft was in a potentially unrecoverable situation, would you prefer that the plane automatically notify ATC via whatever method they design (text, audible pre recorded message, etc) that there is a serious concern on your aircraft? Would it alleviate one concern that you have on a list of things to do while you attempt to correct the dire situation?

(keeping in mind, I'm talking about *serious* upsets.. not a general stick shaker or larger than normal bank angle.. I'm talking about incidents where the plane is definitely outside it's flight envelope?)

1011yyz
Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
 
AngMoh
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:14 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 216):
Sonar has located the main wreckage underwater, but it is not clear how intact the remains actually are.
There are reports indicating a rapid increase in altitude prior to falling off radar.

It was stated this evening by SAR that the wreckage has not yet been found and that any report that it has been found is incorrect.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739/ER 742 743 744/M 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
AngMoh
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:26 pm

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 219):
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

THANK YOU! I do not know why there is such push-back amongst us here on having an automated distress call when an aircraft is in a potentially lethal position.

It works in a car because the crash normally happens at 100km/h or below and a car is not completely and utterly destroyed in such a crash unlike a plane crash. A car crash is more like a plane overshooting the runway. And if you crash a car at 200+ km/h into a granite wall, it will not call 911. The airbag going off activates a 911 call and the main structure of the car as well as battery power needs to be in tact for that to work. 911 is called after a crash has happened. You tell me how any system would have worked in the Superjet crash in Indonesia...
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739/ER 742 743 744/M 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
User avatar
Miami
Topic Author
Posts: 6146
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 8:37 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:35 pm

No victim was wearing a life jacket, Indonesian official said

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/articl...wreckage-after-debris-bodies-found
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible. - Eddie Rickenbacker
 
D L X
Posts: 12668
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:36 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 19):

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?

your car will call 911 when you brake hard?
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19823
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:39 pm

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 219):
I do not know why there is such push-back amongst us here on having an automated distress call when an aircraft is in a potentially lethal position.

You'll notice that those pushing back are mostly the professional pilots on the board. They have the expertise required to make such evaluations, as do the regulators and manufacturers.

Aviation professionals have had experience from thousands of accidents over decades to figure out procedures that work. Procedures do change and develop over time, but the industry is resistant to change for good reasons. Will we see better tracking? Sure. Tracking is already orders of magnitude better than it was a few decades ago.

It sounds easy to "just push a button", or "just install a system", but these things are not so simple in real life.

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 219):
As a pilot, if your aircraft was in a potentially unrecoverable situation, would you prefer that the plane automatically notify ATC via whatever method they design (text, audible pre recorded message, etc) that there is a serious concern on your aircraft?

As a (non-airline) pilot, unless it actively helps me save the plane, I don't want anything going on during an emergency that isn't helping me solve that emergency. Having said that, airplane diagnostic systems already send data wirelessly to those airlines that pay for the service.

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 219):
Would it alleviate one concern that you have on a list of things to do while you attempt to correct the dire situation?

It is not alleviating my concern as a pilot because in an emergency my job is to save the airplane first, not let the world know that I am in trouble. There have been numerous crashes where the pilots did not do things in the correct order. The Everglades Tristar crash is a classic example.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
bellancacf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:51 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:08 pm

We need to be able to go directly to a downed airliner. Everything else is details.
 
CO953
Posts: 523
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:05 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:09 pm

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 219):
As a pilot, if your aircraft was in a potentially unrecoverable situation, would you prefer that the plane automatically notify ATC via whatever method they design (text, audible pre recorded message, etc) that there is a serious concern on your aircraft? Would it alleviate one concern that you have on a list of things to do while you attempt to correct the dire situation?

(keeping in mind, I'm talking about *serious* upsets.. not a general stick shaker or larger than normal bank angle.. I'm talking about incidents where the plane is definitely outside it's flight envelope?)

This was my thought, too. Given the fact that along with the general increase in Asian aviation, we are starting to see repeated accidents over water where it is taking many days to find the wreck, one thing that's indisputable is that the first time a pilot manages to pull off a semi-Sully in the situation and people do manage to escape the plane out at sea, but die because no one knew where the plane was, it will be an incredibly sad, infuriating event.

It seems so very doable to add an automatically ejectable buoy that will eject if the plane's computer can definitely tell the craft is about to hit. And sure there will be some false alarms, but what does it hurt if a beacon gets ejected and ATC calls up the pilots and find that they're alive and well?

I know there are plenty of financial angles to work out with this, but I can't think that overall, even as a non-pilot, that I'm totally wrong.

[Edited 2014-12-31 09:11:10]
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19823
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:16 pm

Quoting bellancacf (Reply 225):
We need to be able to go directly to a downed airliner. Everything else is details.

The devil is in those details though. It's not like the industry doesn't want to solve these problems. It's that they are not cheap or simple to solve.

If nothing else, large parts of the world have no radar coverage and streaming data costs money, meaning many airlines don't want to pay it.

In most cases, as indeed with this accident, it is known, or at least known within a reasonably small margin of error, where an airliner lost contact. However from there the possible range of locations is rather large. Say you have a break-up at 35000 feet. Huge search area. Say you have a catastrophic failure at cruise with no breakup and said failure kills your tracking gear. Again, huge search area.

Despite what we might want to think, large parts of the world are uninhabited and inaccessible, including all that blue stuff.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
o0OOO0oChris
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 10:27 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:19 pm

Interesting comment on pprune.
Violent pitch up beyond flight envelope - very fast decent in just 1 Minute - maybe a load shift? Like Flight 102?
Does AirAsia use LD3's?
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19823
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:25 pm

Quoting CO953 (Reply 226):
the first time a pilot manages to pull off a semi-Sully in the situation and people do manage to escape the plane out at sea, but die because no one knew where the plane was, it will be an incredibly sad, infuriating event.

That's a different scenario. Assuming a "Miracle on the Hudson" type event, there would be time for distress calls both during and after the event. You'll recall that Sully did call ATC. The plane was under control during the entire event so there was time to do so even though they lost the engines at rather a low altitude.

If the plane is intact after ditching, the radios work, the ELTs are above the waterline, people have cell phones that can be homed in on, etc...
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
bellancacf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:51 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:26 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 227):
The devil is in those details though. It's not like the industry doesn't want to solve these problems. It's that they are not cheap or simple to solve.

Never said it wasn't. That's what keeps life interesting. But, still, events this year alone I believe demonstrate that it's got to be done.
 
lnglive1011yyz
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:23 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:40 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 224):
It is not alleviating my concern as a pilot because in an emergency my job is to save the airplane first, not let the world know that I am in trouble. There have been numerous crashes where the pilots did not do things in the correct order. The Everglades Tristar crash is a classic example.


I think the problem with the idea that I'm suggesting is that the Professionals here are making an assumption that the plane will be able to be saved. I'm specifically talking about instances where it's VERY unlikely that the aircraft is able to be saved.

Right now, ALL we have is the last blip of radar data, and if the aircraft has ACARS, the last bit of data transmitted to the manufacturer/airline - That all takes TIME to pull down and disseminate and communicate. Right now, ATC has to attempt to put a picture together, which takes up precious time in organizing SAR.

It just makes sense to me that something should notify the ATC controller other than some indistinguishable tiny bit of information. ANYTHING that can help in the recovery of injured/dead relatives should be a priority.

I would rather know that IF we ditched / crashed and that there was a chance that I survived, that information was ALREADY in the hands of the people who effect my rescue.

I get the push-back from a pilots perspective, when you put it the way you have though, and I also understand the cost associated with these types of things.

Was there a similar push-back when TCAS was being suggested as a future collision avoidance system?

1011yyz
Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:41 pm

Quoting asetiadi Reply 206 “SURABAYA, Indonesia (Reuters) - Radar data being examined by investigators appeared to show that AirAsia Flight QZ8501 made an "unbelievably" steep climb before it crashed, possibly pushing it beyond the Airbus A320's limits, said a source familiar with the probe's initial findings.”

If this report is accurate…Every pilot has been trained to understand that flying through or inadequately above a thunderstorm cell can result in encountering updrafts that can potentially exceed the ability of an aircraft to resist that updraft. Again, initial reports noted t’storm tops at 50-53K feet in the area (which typically indicates a powerful t’storm cell and with high rates of updraft).

This “unbelievable” rate of climb could actually be the result of powerful updrafts and not just the climb of the actual aircraft only, or the effect of both simultaneously…trying to climb to get away from the updrafts/turbulence along with the addition of the storm high updraft velocity (if) encountered.

But without knowing from detailed radar data including the volume/3D signature relative to the last aircraft position, it’s difficult to assess the likelihood of the above possibility, as well as if they also may have encountered very high rates of precipitation and hail shafts leading to engine flameout, extreme rates of supercooled condensate encountered leading to icing beyond design capability, excessive and dangerous altitude resulting from inability to resist updrafts, etc.

IMO just way too much media conflicting reports and not enough objective data being presented, including real time, and more detailed meteorological data relative to the last aircraft position.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:48 pm

Quoting o0OOO0oChris (Reply 228):
maybe a load shift?

According to the load and trim sheet there was 1258 kg of luggage in hold 3 (just aft of the wing box). Nothing else. What would be the effect of 1258 kg suddenly shaking loose and moving all the way aft?
 
RetiredWeasel
Posts: 779
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:55 pm

Quoting lnglive1011yyz (Reply 231):
Was there a similar push-back when TCAS was being suggested as a future collision avoidance system?

TCAS was developed and installed to prevent accidents much like warning horns and stick shakers. I don't know any pilots that pushed back against the concept although the additional training may have irritated a few. There were probably a few company execs/bean counters that may have fought it due to cost. However,I don't know how your concept of post accident communication relates to accident prevention i.e. TCAS .

[Edited 2014-12-31 09:59:30]
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:05 pm

Here’s what I posted after the Air France 447 crash, and again after the MH370 crash, and now seems appropriate again (with still no appreciable movement on proactive measures to quickly find downed aircraft in large bodies of water):

Forty five years after the USA landed a man on the moon with navigation, communication, etc. technology much antiquated compared to the technology today, and despite the obvious lessons that should have been learned from the past Air France incident in the Atlantic, it’s still an unbelievable SAR game of effectively trying to find a needle in a haystack. The available technology to make all of this currently archaic method of finding a lost aircraft via reactive technology a thing of the past, with instead using proactive, real time, position reporting technology continues to not be proactively implemented obviously due to so called “bandwidth costs.”

Proven technology currently exists, as well as the methods to make it secure and foolproof, utilizing ACARS, etc. transmissions to report at necessary and appropriate (and affordable) intervals altitude, lat./long., and speed data to assure that every aircraft transiting large bodies of water at significant flight times, if encountering emergency situations, can be quickly found (and any survivors getting immediate medical attention). That would take the ICAO to declare that as a requirement for transiting such over-water flight paths. But it’s not happened, supposedly because of the ‘ol “bandwidth costs.”

So, if searches take $ multi millions (in the MH 370 case $ hundreds millions) to find aircraft, what’s the ROI of the real time, proactive ACARS, etc.type solution (and obvious 2014 technology solution) instead of this continuing archaic, reactive, expensive, and non-real time method currently being used? “Bandwidth costs”? If it’s too expensive to require constant ACARS, etc. reporting, then make it a requirement for all aircraft to trigger the ACARS, etc. transmissions to automatically report 3D position data only upon unusual (abnormal) flight situations and flight emergencies to save on the so called…”bandwidth costs.”
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:06 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 232):
This “unbelievable” rate of climb could actually be the result of powerful updrafts and not just the climb of the actual aircraft only

40 years ago, when I was flying C-130s over the S. China Sea, we occasionally encountered sudden powerful updrafts seemingly out of nowhere. WX radar was much less sophisticated than now, and we attributed them to very rapidly forming early stage CBs that we were unable to detect.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
michi
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:19 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 235):
That would take the ICAO to declare that as a requirement for transiting such over-water flight paths. But it’s not happened, supposedly because of the ‘ol “bandwidth costs.”

It is happening. See post 186 in part 4:

Quoting pressclub (Reply 186):

Dear all,

Many of you raised questions about aircraft tracking and even suggested that the aviation industry is not learning lessons from the recent tragic accidents,

In the wake of the MH370 disappearance an Aircraft Tracking Task Force (ATTF) convened. This is a cross industry work group involving the most important industry parties (icao, Iata, Atc, ...). ATTF led the effort to identify what is currently available, develop standard criteria and provide recommendations. This Task Force produced a report containing tracking performance criteria and a series of recommendations for airlines, air navigation service providers and governments. The Task Force met several times and has proposed short, medium and long term actions.. Technologies and services are available today to improve tracking, there is flexibility to use a performance based approach, more options available as ATM systems are modernized and focus is on areas without radar coverage. This is now high on the Icao agenda.


Cheers,

Michi

[Edited 2014-12-31 10:19:28]
 
DaveRL
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:13 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:21 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 229):
Violent pitch up beyond flight envelope - very fast decent in just 1 Minute - maybe a load shift? Like Flight 102?
Does AirAsia use LD3's?


Seems to me to be similar to Perpignan except for the low altitude:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...20-crew-in-perpignan-crash-347457/
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:25 pm

Quoting bellancacf (Reply 225):
We need to be able to go directly to a downed airliner. Everything else is details.

You could have bad weather in the area, preventing you from doing much even if you know exactly where the plane is.

If your tracker stops position reports at FL380 due to a catastrophe, the plane can still travel a long ways before coming to rest, so you still won't be able to go directly to the crash site.

If the airliner is only down, and not crashed to bits, then we already have ELTs which the crew will activate to give a precise location.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:29 pm

If you are out of control in an airliner at FL-VDH, there is no help at all coming from a radio or a telephone.

None.

All you are doing by trying to call someone is devoting resources and time away from saving the plane.

*VDH - Very Damn High
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4527
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:31 pm

If there are survivors and they are in a raft or something, then the locating beacons will be easily visible since it would be above water
 
savethequads
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:55 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:35 pm

This brings to mind a recent incident involving and AF A332 over the ITCZ in Africa a few months ago.

The Air France pilots responded properly but the Air Asia pilots may not have.

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=477d6182&opt=0

An Air France Airbus A330-200, registration F-GZCG performing flight AF-3575 from Antananarivo (Madagascar) to Paris Charles de Gaulle (France), was enroute at FL360 over Tanzania, the crew rejected clearances by air traffic control to climb to FL380 twice in order to maintain sufficient safety margins while flying through the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). The autopilot and autothrust systems as well as flight directors were connected, the autopilot was in LNAV and ALT mode, the autothrust in SPEED mode maintaining 0.81 mach. There were no returns on the weather radar with various tilt angles and ranges varied between 40 and 160nm, when the crew noticed that the speed began to increase. Shortly after a flash and a cloud was spotted at the right hand side. The speed reached 0.83 mach, the crew reduced the commanded speed without success, then extended the speedbrakes for about 15 seconds which reduced the speed to 0.79 mach, after the speedbrakes were retracted the speed quickly returned to 0.82 mach. Another flash ahead of the aircraft occurred and the aircraft encountered severe turbulence, the pilot monitoring activated the fasten seat belt signs.

*During the turbulence the pitch angle continued to increase until the autopilot disconnected, the pilot flying provided nose down inputs, the pitch continued to increase however. The autothrust system disconnected automatically.

The pilot flying was finally able to arrest the climb at FL380 and after 10 seconds at that peak level began to descend the aircraft back to assigned FL360. The pilot flying re-engaged the autoflight systems. The remainder of the flight to Paris went without further incident and was completed with a safe landing. A flight attendant and a passenger were treated for minor injuries received in the turbulence encounter.

- pitch attitudes between -6 and +11 degrees
- mach varying between 0.77 and 0.83
- angle of attack varying between -0.7 and +10.2 degrees
- roll angles between -16 and +31 degrees
- vertical speed reaching a maximum of +8500 feet per minute
- vertical accelerations between +0.02 and +2.28G
- lateral accelerations between -0.16 and +0.16G
- flight director bars were removed several times and re-appeared
- the pilot flying applied mainly nose down inputs, especially during the first 10 seconds after the autopilot disconnected



I think it's odd that the autopilot and autothrottle disconnect during a severe pitch up, that seems dangerous at a critical time at a critical altitude where the air is super thin. These pilots recognized what was happening but if the Air Asia pilots did not they could have been pitched up steep with decaying air speed auto pilot off and total confusion. Especially with FD bars dissappearing and re-appearing. That was a hell of a roller coaster. Also of note: No indications on weather radar, The sat photo shows the storm a few miles west of the aircraft. 15 mins later the storm was gone and 15 mins prior it was not there. These sat captures are just one short moment in time usually 15 mins apart. A lot can happen in 15 mins on the ITCZ.

I'm surprised this incident did not get more attention.

[Edited 2014-12-31 11:18:10]
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:38 pm

Sanity check :

A lot of bandwidth has been concerned with all sorts of means to communicate the last position and the complete recorded data - CVR and FDR like.
An other farking waste of bandwidth was about communicating a mayday.

May I remind those posters that the accident happened in a radar-covered area with equipment very probably superior to what exists in the old US of A ?
The last position is known to a hundredth of a mile... and all the parameters pertinent to ATC : speed / altitude and evolution of these.
Once the accident is known, we're back to basic eyeball and ears on choppy seas and inclement weather : low visibility ... etc...

Two possibilities :

1/- The accident was not survivable. Pilots have a lot do other than telling Joe / Ahmad or Rafik they are in a bind... SSR knows where we are, and probably some military radar in the vicinity.

2/- A ditching was successful : passengers would leave the aircraft, the automatically triggered ELT would start squealing, the purser would have activated the portable beacon alongside rafts and life is just a matter of stoically sittting as comfortably as possible waiting for rescue.
All aircraft in the area would pick up the emergency beacon and start advising ATC... etc...

Another aspect is that the sea is very shallow... the recorders will be retrieved and the investigation will commence in earnest.

Unfortunately, the second scenario is very unlikely.
May I remind you that a ditching happens because the aircraft isn't flyable any more ?... total loss of engines / airframe damage / total loss of electric power... those are not the easiest scenarios to cope with, especially in choppy shallow waters.

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 232):
Quoting asetiadi Reply 206 “SURABAYA, Indonesia (Reuters) - Radar data being examined by investigators appeared to show that AirAsia Flight QZ8501 made an "unbelievably" steep climb before it crashed, possibly pushing it beyond the Airbus A320's limits, said a source familiar with the probe's initial findings.”

That aspect has been published here on A.net, discussed by some posters... and the fact that that radar screen, on its own, was showing the flight in a very dire situation, past buffet limits after a clkmb of more than 8600 ft/min.
Problem is that on its own, it's just a partial pinpoint of what happened. Soon, the whole data, probably down to a few thousand feet will be published...
I don't really think we'll see a pretty picture from these read-outs.

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 232):
MO just way too much media conflicting reports and not enough objective data being presented, including real time, and more detailed meteorological data relative to the last aircraft position.

You have enough weather data to make your own mind... of course you have to see them in a knowledgeable and open mind : You seem to be stuck on the freak weather scenario... which is certainly not the case of this accident.
Contrail designer
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:42 pm

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 220):
Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 216):
Sonar has located the main wreckage underwater, but it is not clear how intact the remains actually are.
There are reports indicating a rapid increase in altitude prior to falling off radar.

It was stated this evening by SAR that the wreckage has not yet been found and that any report that it has been found is incorrect.

Thanks for that info, but I do believe the rapid increase in altitude as reported here:

http://news.yahoo.com/data-point-unb...ash-source-132236864--finance.html

may be genuine.
 
heyjoojoo
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:28 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:47 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 229):

How long would that particular model jet stay afloat?
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:49 pm

Quoting savethequads (Reply 242):

I think it's odd that the autopilot and autothrottle disconnect during a severe pitch up, that seems dangerous at a critical time at a critical altitude where the air is super thin.

They have lost the data they need to do the job.

It's like removing the temperature sensor from your oven, or having the sensor go bad, and expecting the temperature controller to somehow keep controlling the temperature of the oven...
 
hivue
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:11 pm

Quoting cat3appr50 (Reply 235):
despite the obvious lessons that should have been learned from the past Air France incident in the Atlantic, it’s still an unbelievable SAR game of effectively trying to find a needle in a haystack.

AF447 surface wreckage was found in about 37 hours. We're talking the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. The main wreckage was in about 12,000 ft of water. That it was ever found, let alone within 2 years, is astounding.

If the needle you're after is in a haystack then...well, your just going to have to find a needle in a haystack.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
D L X
Posts: 12668
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:15 pm

Quoting bellancacf (Reply 230):
Never said it wasn't. That's what keeps life interesting. But, still, events this year alone I believe demonstrate that it's got to be done.

The fact that it's only this year should suggest that it's an outlier year.

If anything, things may need to be beefed up in the area around Malaysia and Indonesia. But Pihero suggests that that area does a better job than the USA though, so I'll defer to him.

ADS-B is pretty good, isn't it? We got to the wreckage within 3 days, despite the plane being on the sea floor. Most of the suggestions I've seen on this forum over the years basically amount to ADS-B, which when it's turned on, works pretty well, no?
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3404
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 5

Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:20 pm

As this thread has gotten long, Part 6 has been created and can be found here Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 6 (by jetblueguy22 Dec 31 2014 in Civil Aviation) .

All posts made after the lock will be removed for housekeeping purposes only.

Regards,
Pat
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club

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