Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
29erUSA187
Posts: 1277
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:34 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:09 pm

I have been reading these threads for a while now, and I have finally decided to chime in.

It its "good news" that they found the tail section, but worse news that it is outside of the search area.

Hopefully the search area was off, and the plane hit mostly intact. I seriously doubt there was a mid-air break up, because the ocean would have been littered with debris, and the bodies may have not been intact. Either way, its not a good situation, and this search has become a bit of a joke. They estimated they would have it in a few days, and its been over a week and a half
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:13 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 142):
So how did the aircraft report a position 30km beyond the location of the empennage wreckage?

Let's also not forget that the ADS-B data appears to indicate a left turn during the descent.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:15 pm

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 145):
That was my point - the only large part of the aircraft found so far is the empennage (can we agree it is indeed that?), and that was found on its own, suggesting that the other large parts are not close by...

a bit premature, maybe. The tail was only found this morning. Other large parts may be somewhere near but still to be found. We will see.

Quoting Finn350 (Reply 146):
It might very well be that they have located the tail based on the pinger signals. At least that would not surprise me giving that the information regarding the search has not been too forthcoming.

Iirc, it was reported that it was found by sonar, not the pingers.

We need more patience, at least a little bit more.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:17 pm

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 150):
I seriously doubt there was a mid-air break up, because the ocean would have been littered with debris, and the bodies may have not been intact

There were intact bodies recovered after both PA103 and MH17. So far as I know, there have been no official reports on the state of the bodies recovered from this flight.

[Edited 2015-01-07 14:18:17]
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2381
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:25 pm

A question on the data recorders ... everyone concentrates so hard on the pingers ...

Isn't it possible that the pingers were damaged in the crash, and are not functional?

They are outside the crash-resistant housing of the data module, after all ...

Also - what activates them? Simple water immersion?
 
AIRWALK
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:33 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:37 pm

Quoting litz (Reply 154):
Isn't it possible that the pingers were damaged in the crash, and are not functional?

Its possible, but they are designed to survive accidents.

Quoting litz (Reply 154):
Also - what activates them? Simple water immersion?

Yes, immersion into water activates it as the water closes the circuit.
I'm sure this thread will take off soon
 
hivue
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:40 pm

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 150):
but worse news that it is outside of the search area.

If it's outside the area they were searching, how did they find it?

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 150):
They estimated they would have it in a few days, and its been over a week and a half

To a lot of people that's "a few days." Compared to MH370 that's "a few days."
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
Rivet42
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:48 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 152):
Iirc, it was reported that it was found by sonar, not the pingers.

That's what I had in mind when I said it seems the empennage/tail is on its own - wouldn't the sonar have also detected large metal objects nearby?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 149):
Just consider that by empennage, we are describing the tail of the aircraft with the fin + rudder, the tailplane + elevator + stabilizer.
Is it what has been found ?

Well, seems to be - we've seen photographic evidence of the inside and outside of the tail section, and the fin; they've not said the tailplane wasn't there too... I'm sure initially there was some video of the wreckage, but that now appears to have been replaced by the stills. Pity. The video might tell us more.

Riv'

[Edited to clarify last paragraph]

[Edited 2015-01-07 15:02:14]
I travel, therefore I am.
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:50 pm

Quoting litz (Reply 154):
A question on the data recorders ... everyone concentrates so hard on the pingers ...

Isn't it possible that the pingers were damaged in the crash, and are not functional?

Of course. Ultimately nothing in completely invulnerable. AFAIK, none of the FDRs from 9/11 were recovered. OTOH, even a high speed crash in to water should give the recorders at good chance at survival.

Quoting litz (Reply 154):
They are outside the crash-resistant housing of the data module, after all ...

They are themselves crash resistant. They're bolted to either the data module or to the same frame as the crash-resistant data modules. Although at least in one case in AF447, the data module was actually separated from the beacon.

Quoting litz (Reply 154):
Also - what activates them? Simple water immersion?

Yes. There's usually a small port at one end, with some sort of water activated switch inside. There are a variety of ways that might be done. A couple of interesting descriptions of a beacons:


http://teledynebenthos.com/_doc/main...asheets/elp362D__001815__rev_L.pdf

http://www.novega-sea.com/files/acou...nance%20PT9%20NINETY_E_Rev.1.2.pdf
 
675kts
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:00 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:54 pm

Too many people are taking information and putting their own interpretation on the situation. We still don't have any news on the other larger objects as yet and also if this was one of the 5 large objects picked up on sonar. The empennage is not 30kms away from the main sight, its 30kms away from the initial search area based on where floating debris was first discovered. Floating debris is just that - bits than can/have been carried in the current.

The way that information has been so slow to be released about this incident is the way the Indonesian authorities are handling things in the light of recent happenings in the aviation world. They are thoroughly vetting everything for accuracy and detail before releasing to the media. My guess is that they have observed parts of the fuselage already but do not wish to broadcast pictures/detail out of respect of the families of the deceased.

As for the sensationalists, I get the impression that some of you are almost wanting this to be an inflight break up. I refer to my earlier post about the Ethiopian 767 hitting the water even at a relatively shallow angle. If you have seen the video, you will will see how easy the plane breaks up on impact.
 
flightsimer
Posts: 1092
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:08 pm

Quoting rwessel (Reply 158):
Of course. Ultimately nothing in completely invulnerable. AFAIK, none of the FDRs from 9/11 were recovered. OTOH, even a high speed crash in to water should give the recorders at good chance at survival.

Actually, both the FDR and CVR of both United Flight 93 and American Flight 77 were recovered.

Both units from United 93 were readable and allowed complete data recovery until impact. The CVR from American 77 was destroyed as the magnetic tape had fused together in the fire, however all data was recovered from the FDR.

It is quite possible that United 175's and American 11's CVR and FDR also survived their impacts and were either destroyed in the collapse or possibly passed through the building and out the other side and have not been recovered yet. This is possible as just a year or two ago a part of one of the planes (can't remember which) was found in between two buildings a few blocks away.
Commercial / Airline Pilot
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:16 pm

Quoting 675kts (Reply 159):
As for the sensationalists, I get the impression that some of you are almost wanting this to be an inflight break up. I refer to my earlier post about the Ethiopian 767 hitting the water even at a relatively shallow angle. If you have seen the video, you will will see how easy the plane breaks up on impact.

Ethiopian 767, and now likely this accident, are literally at odds with the ideas people have about airliner physical heartiness since the world witnessed airliners penetrating structural steel on 911. This can be displayed by people instinctively laying their vote with what is still largely unknown to them (in-flight breakup). I don't think this is their fault, or they have some macabre sensationalist streak ... just a human reaction to shockingly inconsistent data inputs.

I first noticed this trend a few days ago here on A.net ... when a few members were asking if, in the event of a nose-down plummet into the sea, could the forward fuselage have managed to stay together intact and become stuck in the muddy silt below.

We should remember that building airplanes is a business, one that strives to NOT overbuild where it is not necessary. Airplanes are made to only fly through air ... no other physical medium was considered. Water is 880 times more dense than air, soil and rocks even more. One cannot logically hope to see airliners survive high speed contact with any of these unless by the keen skill of the operator and a huge dose of luck by the Big Guy above.   

[Edited 2015-01-07 15:17:43]
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:27 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 149):
Are the engines still attached to the wings ?

Doesn't Airbus use fuse pins in the engine mounts.. if so a high speed water entry would have sheared the engines.. and low speed entry might leave them intact..
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8825
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:28 pm

Quoting 675kts (Reply 159):
The way that information has been so slow to be released about this incident is the way the Indonesian authorities are handling things in the light of recent happenings in the aviation world. They are thoroughly vetting everything for accuracy and detail before releasing to the media.

Then why leak ATC screen shots.

Thorough or not they specifically asked Russians to recover CVR/FDR and later Chinese. One working theory they have a good working relationship with Russian team (recent SSJ100 investigation), and may be Russians have ROV readily available. May be US Navy contractors couldn't bring the equipment quickly.

Other theory they want to control the information, keeping the West out of that portion or investigation initially.

Most countries have ability to "read" the recorders, Honeywell sold equipment to whoever asked. Can they analyze, different story.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:39 pm

Quoting 675kts (Reply 159):
They are thoroughly vetting everything for accuracy and detail before releasing to the media

Consider some of the miscues that come out of other incidents.. it's only prudent to vet everything especially so politicians aren't eating crow two days later.. besides there are enough self deluded experts to keep the waters muddied.
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2193
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:55 pm

dtw2hyd, they are not trying to keep the west out. The UK gov. offered their assistance &
Singapore/Indonesian authorities accepted the offer.

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/latest_news/air_asia_qz_8501___update.cfm

[Edited 2015-01-07 16:05:40]
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:07 am

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 135):
By the way, is this the correct orientation of the jackscrew shot, if oriented vertically?

I don't think so. It's upside-down and you are looking at the lower attachment to the fuselage frame.
 
yaps30
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:02 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:17 am

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 157):
Well, seems to be - we've seen photographic evidence of the inside and outside of the tail section, and the fin; they've not said the tailplane wasn't there too... I'm sure initially there was some video of the wreckage, but that now appears to have been replaced by the stills. Pity. The video might tell us more.

Have we actually seen the rudder and the elevators?

On a somewhat related note, I believe AF 447's horizontal and vertical stabilizers separated from one another. Not so here.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:31 am

Quoting rwessel (Reply 74):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 62):
I have a question regarding the black box pinger batteries: do the batteries that power the pingers ever get changed?

If not, I am assuming that the life of the batteries and thus pings would slowly decline over time as the aircraft ages, with a 30 day ping life being the minimum. Given that the plane involved in this accident is only just over 6 years old, what is the longest time that the pings could last for? 6 week? 8 weeks? Longer?

AFAIK, there are no black box acoustic beacons that get recharged. The old standard was that the beacons needed to operate at the end of the battery's service life for 30 day in 4 degree water. The new standard is 90 days, but most aircraft still have older beacons. There are some beacons which can meet the 90 day standard with just an upgraded battery.

As to the exact lifespan of the battery in the beacon, it varies, I've seen numbers from three to seven years. Nor are the exact self-discharge characteristics knowable without knowing the exact battery installed, or the current draw (if any) while the beacon is armed, without information about the specific beacon. Also, if the battery was in storage for an extended period before installation, it may have a shorter service life. The beacons undergo periodic maintenance, and the battery output is checked then, and if low, the battery will be replaced. So without knowing the exact model and history of the installation, we don't really know how fresh the battery is.

But as a WAG, it would be reasonably to assume that a fresh battery in warm water would have perhaps 50% longer life than the same battery at the end of its life in cold (4 degree) water.

Thank you for that informative and detailed reply  
Quoting rj777 (Reply 100):
OK......... now we have found wreckage. Now here's all that's left to do (in order)
1)Recover the black boxes
2)Recover the rest of the wreckage
3)Recover the rest of the bodies (I'm about 99.9% sure nobody survived)
4)Find out the cause of the crash

And once all that is done.....
FIND MH370!

Once all that is done???

Find MH370 regardless of this tragedy...

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 112):
If the tail is 30kms away from the other parts, it should be a very big news story.

Even a CNN anchor would get the implication.

Well at least the tail fin hasn't been spotted floating somewhere by itself. We all remember what the media and armchair air crash investigators said when the AF447 tail fin pics came out given what happened to AA587...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1590
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:42 am

Quoting Rara (Reply 143):
What's the implication?

For the media/CNN it is "TAIL BROKE OFF DOOMED PLANE IN VIOLENT WEATHER!"
 
Rivet42
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:12 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 149):
Considering the number of data that the FDR continuously keeps recording, I find that statement difficult to agree with.

Yeah, and I'm having 2nd thoughts too...
The premise of my thoughts there was on the basis that all was fine, technically, right up to the point of failure (or the point at which the transponder stopped sending data).
However, I've just seen a diagram on a Brazilian news website from last week that showed the point at which the ADS-B signal was lost being many miles before the last radar contact. What might cause one transmitting device to cease several minutes before another? Maybe after all there was an evolving technical crisis, the origins of which we would need the FDR contents to understand.

Quoting yaps30 (Reply 167):
Have we actually seen the rudder and the elevators?

The photos that have been released show neither the presence nor the absence of the rear control surfaces. I suspect there are plenty more photos that would clarify that, but those are not yet public.

Riv'
I travel, therefore I am.
 
yaps30
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:02 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:44 am

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 170):
However, I've just seen a diagram on a Brazilian news website from last week that showed the point at which the ADS-B signal was lost being many miles before the last radar contact.

Did they happen to note if it was primary or secondary radar?
 
User avatar
Pohakuloa
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:28 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:18 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 151):
Let's also not forget that the ADS-B data appears to indicate a left turn during the descent.

Not a pilot so not sure if the information I heard in passing is correct, but in regards to a nose up stall theory as some claim may have happened....

The National (102 I believe?) crash when it stalled on cg shift after take off, tuned toward the starboard as it fell. Either in those threads or from a few pilot friends(I can't remember which) I remember someone saying that when jets stall that way (nose up) they have a tendency to turn to the starboard or right. This seemed to be normal to those feeding the information at the time. Now is this true for all jets? Big jets? or simply hogwash spewed out? If it is true and the information from ADS-B is indeed correct and not a glitch, could this in and of itself rule out a nose up stall? Obviously my memory isn't great or I would not be posing this relatively simple question.

I reiterate what I posted early on in these threads, God have mercy on the souls who perished and the living dealing with the reality at hand.

Respectfully,
Pohakuloa
Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22100
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:19 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 144):
That seems therefore to be contradicting the quick climb to 36 300 ft

Yes it does. Where on the aircraft is the altimeter?

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 170):
The photos that have been released show neither the presence nor the absence of the rear control surfaces. I suspect there are plenty more photos that would clarify that, but those are not yet public.

I believe one image showed the tailfin, but not the rudder itself.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 158):
There's usually a small port at one end, with some sort of water activated switch inside.

The simplest way would be to simply allow the water itself to close a circuit. Most water (unless its deionized, which is not found in nature) conducts electricity quite well.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7143
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:23 am

Quoting Pohakuloa (Reply 172):
I remember someone saying that when jets stall that way (nose up) they have a tendency to turn to the starboard or right.

When a plane rapidly changes pitch, for instance when it drops the nose after a stall, then the gyro effect of the rotating engines will have a gearing effect. If that gearing effect isn't immediately countered by rudder input, then it will impose a roll to one side or the other.

Left or right, that depends on which way the engines are turning. I haven't ivestigated whether the CFM56s on an A320 will mean roll to the right, neither do I know if all different engine types are turning the same way, so it will always be roll to the right.

Some new engine types have contra rotating spools, which eliminates or greatly reduces this gyro effect.

The reason for contra rotating spools isn't reduced gyro effect at stalls. It is rather improved efficiency - at least the internal drag of one stage of guide vanes can be eliminated.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
maxpower1954
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:14 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:27 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 174):
When a plane rapidly changes pitch, for instance when it drops the nose after a stall, then the gyro effect of the rotating engines will have a gearing effect. If that gearing effect isn't immediately countered by rudder input, then it will impose a roll to one side or the other.

Left or right, that depends on which way the engines are turning. I haven't ivestigated whether the CFM56s on an A320 will mean roll to the right, neither do I know if all different engine types are turning the same way, so it will always be roll to the right.

Some new engine types have contra rotating spools, which eliminates or greatly reduces this gyro effect.

The reason for contra rotating spools isn't reduced gyro effect at stalls. It is rather improved efficiency - at least the internal drag of one stage of guide vanes can be eliminated.

Sorry guys, there is no "gyro effect" of a jet engine having an affect on the stall or anything else on a jet aircraft. None whatsoever.

Any wing drop in a jet aircraft stall would be due to slight slip or skid or minor differences in the wings.

Even on a propeller aircraft any turning effect is due to P-factor, not gyro effect.
 
SimonDanger
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:51 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:28 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 129):
Technology has given people this false sense that life is ordered and controlled at all times. It isn't. It never will be, and no technology will make it so. If that were the case - if we could know in an *instant* where any crashed plane is down to the square foot anywhere in the world - then why did the plane even crash in the first place? Why isn't our amazing, infallible technology being used to prevent that accident, rather than just mopping up afterwards?

If I owned an $85 million piece of equipment you can be damn sure I'd want to know where that thing was every second. FedEx and UPS track their trucks pretty well, as well as almost all semi-trailers and trains. Thirty years ago I probably would not have believed that today I could wear a watch that communicated with satellites to tell me where I'm standing anywhere on the planet, that I could view weather radar in my car, and that Google would build self-driving cars.

With no disrespect intended, I simply can't get my head around accepting that it's just not possible to keep track of such a sophisticated piece of equipment, especially one filled with my paying customers. ADS-B, ACARS, secondary and primary radar, EPIRBS, and FDR pingers all exist, and yet somehow it takes us almost two weeks to find this plane. I don't expect all accidents to be eliminated from air flight, but I do expect to know where an accident happened, and how it happened. After MH370, waiting two weeks in 2015 to find a missing state-of-the-art, $85 million aircraft filled with 162 souls should compel our best and brightest engineers to make this the very last missing flight.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:38 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 176):
If I owned an $85 million piece of equipment you can be damn sure I'd want to know where that thing was every second. FedEx and UPS track their trucks pretty well, as well as almost all semi-trailers and trains. Thirty years ago I probably would not have believed that today I could wear a watch that communicated with satellites to tell me where I'm standing anywhere on the planet, that I could view weather radar in my car, and that Google would build self-driving cars.

Lets clear one thing up. Airlines know exactly where there airlines are at all times while they are flying. We are having an issue when the airline is at the bottom of the ocean.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:57 am

Quoting Pohakuloa (Reply 172):

The National (102 I believe?) crash when it stalled on cg shift after take off, tuned toward the starboard as it fell. Either in those threads or from a few pilot friends(I can't remember which) I remember someone saying that when jets stall that way (nose up) they have a tendency to turn to the starboard or right. This seemed to be normal to those feeding the information at the time. Now is this true for all jets? Big jets? or simply hogwash spewed out?

I'd go with "hogwash". The National 747 initially rolled left followed by a rapid roll to the right probably due to the right wing stalling first naturally or from pilot inputs to correct the left roll.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 174):
When a plane rapidly changes pitch, for instance when it drops the nose after a stall, then the gyro effect of the rotating engines will have a gearing effect. If that gearing effect isn't immediately countered by rudder input, then it will impose a roll to one side or the other

I'm not sure how much if any the "gearing effect" has to do with any wing drop which is due to greater loss of lift on one wing versus the other. Properly designed/trimmed modern airliners would ideally exhibit very little wing drop -- which would be countered with ailerons not rudder.

Stalling Transport Aircraft

http://www.sfte2013.com/files/75234188.pdf
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:11 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 176):
Thirty years ago I probably would not have believed that today I could wear a watch that communicated with satellites to tell me where I'm standing anywhere on the planet, that I could view weather radar in my car,

and do those technologies alter anything you do? and if you dropped into a manhole would they do anything to alert someone to find you?

tech is only good in some instances.. and crashing into the ocean in a major storm isn't one of them..
 
SimonDanger
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:51 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:29 am

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 177):
Lets clear one thing up. Airlines know exactly where there airlines are at all times while they are flying. We are having an issue when the airline is at the bottom of the ocean.

MH370?
 
ComeAndGo
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:58 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:38 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 176):
With no disrespect intended, I simply can't get my head around accepting that it's just not possible to keep track of such a sophisticated piece of equipment, especially one filled with my paying customers. ADS-B, ACARS, secondary and primary radar, EPIRBS, and FDR pingers all exist, and yet somehow it takes us almost two weeks to find this plane. I don't expect all accidents to be eliminated from air flight, but I do expect to know where an accident happened, and how it happened. After MH370, waiting two weeks in 2015 to find a missing state-of-the-art, $85 million aircraft filled with 162 souls should compel our best and brightest engineers to make this the very last missing flight.

Most airlines have a 3% profit margin and are not interested in more expensive satellite communication bills.
EPIRB goes off when it floats in the water. If it's stuck in the fuselage of a sunken aircraft then it doesn't work.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:42 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 180):
MH370?

All comms were turned off, again this is not normal operation. No system will work with deliberate modifications, or total system failures.
 
CO953
Posts: 523
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:05 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:30 am

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 177):
Lets clear one thing up. Airlines know exactly where there airlines are at all times while they are flying. We are having an issue when the airline is at the bottom of the ocean.

In that case, then I would like to know exactly where the aircraft was at altitude 5 feet above sea level. That would speed rescue significantly, in my opinion, in case of a survivable crash at sea.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:32 am

Quoting CO953 (Reply 183):
In that case, then I would like to know exactly where the aircraft was at altitude 5 feet above sea level. That would speed rescue significantly, in my opinion, in case of a survivable crash at sea.

I wouldn't classify that as flying. Some comments on here make it seem like the airplanes aren't even equipped with GPS. To add, if the aircraft was in flying condition and operating at 5 feet they would know where it is, there would have been radio, there would have been tracking, there would be a floating mass and rafts, which all have locators.

[Edited 2015-01-07 22:58:27]
 
CO953
Posts: 523
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:05 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:56 am

removed by poster - duplicate

[Edited 2015-01-07 22:57:47]
 
CO953
Posts: 523
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:05 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:02 am

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 184):
I wouldn't classify that as flying. Some comments on here make it seem like the airplanes aren't even equipped with GPS.

Then I guess I'm not understanding this at all. I'm told that airlines know where the planes are at all times when flying. But then I'm told that as soon as they stop flying they disappear. I'm not sure whether I'm overthinking things, or maybe others are overthinking things, but, bottom line, I'm learning that if your plane goes in the drink and you survive you will drown or die of exposure because no one knows where you stopped flying.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:05 am

Quoting CO953 (Reply 186):
Then I guess I'm not understanding this at all. I'm told that airlines know where the planes are at all times when flying. But then I'm told that as soon as they stop flying they disappear. I'm not sure whether I'm overthinking things, or maybe others are overthinking things, but, bottom line, I'm learning that if your plane goes in the drink and you survive you will drown or die of exposure because no one knows where you stopped flying.

No because if you were in a survivable crash there would be radio comms, life rafts, life jackets, All the life rafts have locator beacons that are effective ABOVE water. If you are above water it works, if you are below water it doesn't, if you are below water you are dead.
 
airnorth
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:38 am

I'm in the camp of people that are surprised that there is no real time tracking. I realize that there is a cost, but really, the cost of not having some kind of technology in place on all planes has probably been easily eclipsed by the cost of the search for MH 370 alone. Sure, these costs are borne by governments, maybe insurance companies, families in some cases etc., but nonetheless, it is still burning up currency and more importantly time. Time is always the crucial element when searching for survivors.
There has been a lot of discussion around this type of tracking, and technology, what is available, what works, and who uses it lately, and I do think we will see it happen sooner than later.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/...black-box-data-streaming-1.2891893

The interim option seems to be adding additional reporting requirements from the flight crew, I think this might cause a lot of false alarms due to not reporting, but maybe its a good start.

http://www.thestar.com/business/2015...ort_position_every_15_minutes.html
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:01 am

For goodness' sake, there *is* real-time tracking. This plane was being tracked. MH370 was being tracked.

Tracking doesn't work if the tracking system (ADS-B) gets switched off or breaks. And either of those will *always* be possible. Nobody has yet to invent any machine of any kind that cannot be switched off and cannot possibly break. You can put 100 failsafes in place; if a plane breaks up at 30,000 feet over an ocean, that tracking just broke too.

FDR streaming might help to deduce the cause of an accident without having the plane there to look at, but it will not help you find the plane. If a plane's in the process of crashing, it's as likely the FDR will quit before the transponder as the opposite.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:07 am

Quoting airnorth (Reply 188):
The interim option seems to be adding additional reporting requirements from the flight crew, I think this might cause a lot of false alarms due to not reporting, but maybe its a good start.

I don't see what this would add. IF the plane is no longer a plane, there will be no reporting.
 
michi
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:18 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:12 am

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 150):
It its "good news" that they found the tail section, but worse news that it is outside of the search area.

It was not outside the search area. However it was located not in the primary search area. Small difference.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 149):
Is it what has been found ?


See here:

http://video.viva.co.id/read/37555-e...ia-segera-diangkat-dari-dasar-laut

There are a lot more pictures in this video. Looks like the rudder is still attached to the vertical stabilizer.

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 157):
The video might tell us more.

See above.

01:18 Vertical Stabilizer leading edge
01:37 Vertical Stabilizer with rudder
02:10 FLY (left fuselage) with windows
04:04 ? I have no idea what this might be…

Lots of pictures from the registration as well.

Quoting 675kts (Reply 159):
As for the sensationalists, I get the impression that some of you are almost wanting this to be an inflight break up.

I also get the impression. On the other hand, nothing should be ruled out at this stage.

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 163):
Then why leak ATC screen shots.

It is called leak for a reason.

Actually I am quite impressed how the Indonesian SAR team is controlling what is released at what not.

Quoting yaps30 (Reply 167):
Have we actually seen the rudder and the elevators?

Rudder only.
 
User avatar
Aquila3
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:18 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:19 am

Quoting EK413 (Thread starter):
should compel our best and brightest engineers to make this the very last missing flight.

I am an engineer. Engineers have these systems arleady done. I have worked myself to very similar systems to what you are asking. Why they are not there on civil airplanes? Ask the beancounters and the politicians, not me.
chi vola vale chi vale vola chi non vola è un vile
 
User avatar
Pohakuloa
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:28 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:25 am

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 175):
Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 178):

Thank you sirs

Pohakuloa
Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
 
Rivet42
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:15 am

Quoting michi (Reply 191):
There are a lot more pictures in this video. Looks like the rudder is still attached to the vertical stabilizer.

Well found! I searched quite a bit but had to go to bed in the end.

A lot more interesting photos, as one would have expected, and much more detail on the 'scratch' marks - showing even more clearly how the aft fuselage skin appears to have been deformed outwards at the 'scratches'. giving the impression that it is 'inside-out'.

It looks like they've already attached cables in preparation for a lift, subject to the weather.

Quoting yaps30 (Reply 171):
Did they happen to note if it was primary or secondary radar?

No, just radar. I can't find the link now, but there is a similar map in Wikipedia, courtesy of Andrew Heneen, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indones...viewer/File:QZ8501_flight_path.png

Seems pretty helpful, except that it doesn't include the tail debris... I'm taking the end of the FlightRadar24 track as the last ADS-B transmission. Would that be a fair assumption?

Riv'
I travel, therefore I am.
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 871
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:03 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 179):
tech is only good in some instances.. and crashing into the ocean in a major storm isn't one of them..

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but for the right technology it is. See the red disc behind the MLG of this helicopter?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Leith


It's the ADELT (Automatically Deployable Emergency Locator Transmitter for Helicopters). Similar things are on fighter and transport aircraft and will shortly be available on the A350 and A380. I'm mystified why the media is so obsessed with real time tracking, with all its potential issues (antenna orientation at the point of disaster being one) when we have a workable and mature solution out there. I'm with those that are not impressed that had there been survivors in this incident, the chances of rescue were pretty much none existent.
Down with that sort of thing!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8825
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:35 pm

Quoting ComeAndGo (Reply 181):
Most airlines have a 3% profit margin and are not interested in more expensive satellite communication bills.
EPIRB goes off when it floats in the water. If it's stuck in the fuselage of a sunken aircraft then it doesn't work.

What are the chances

A cabin crew member will activate a portable ELT.
A fixed ELT will activate on impact with dry antenna.
A SLB on raft opens and contacts salt water but antenna will be dry.
An ULB (CVF/FDR) successfully transmits under water.

MX kept batteries on all these in good condition.

Slim to none.

MH370 had close to 11 location transmitters/beacons. Each probably $800-$1000, none worked.
I don't think even MH17 sent out any signal
QZ8150 same story.

In a controlled test environment they may have worked as planned, but in real life they are not working.

So either
1) Keep same11 bad LT/Bs for $11,000
2) Build a better universal location transmitters/beacon which performs
3) Use proven deployable locatable recorder for $17k-$25k
4) Real time transmission for $100k one time and recurring bandwidth charges

If I have to use a sales pitch, 1 minute lost tracking will result in 1 week search effort. It will grow exponentially.
All posts are just opinions.
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1590
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:38 pm

ADELT sounds interesting, but I'm not sure it's suitable for an airliner, or that it would survive an airliner crash.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CASPEC16.PDF
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14919
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:39 pm

Quoting baconbutty (Reply 195):
I'm mystified why the media is so obsessed with real time tracking, with all its potential issues (antenna orientation at the point of disaster being one) when we have a workable and mature solution out there.

Can you point to any survivable accident involving a transport category airplane where the lack of similar technology has resulted in injury or loss of life? If the current technology works in survivable crashes, I'm not sure we need something new.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
LTC8K6
Posts: 1590
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:36 pm

RE: Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8

Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:15 pm

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 196):
In a controlled test environment they may have worked as planned, but in real life they are not working.

I agree with that. They do not seem to be helping to find the planes or the wreckage in the real world.

Would they help to find the planes in survivable crashes?

Are there any examples of survivable crashes where the plane could not be located?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: adambrau, Badstig, Baidu [Spider], BigGSFO, Eirules, gr8slvrflt, jbs2886, RexBanner, Rifitto, Scoreboard, smh747, Tkt96, Tommo4828, VS11, YMHBSpotting, YXD172 and 130 guests

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