Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 9

American 767 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:05 pm

Please continue to post here.

Air Asia QZ8501 SUB To SIN Crash - Part 8 (by EK413 Jan 4 2015 in Civil Aviation)

May all the victims rest in peace.

Ben Soriano

rcair1 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:26 pm

From the previous thread, reply 198

Quoting cubsrule:
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

Actually, I believe there are a number of cases of CFIT where there were survivors on the ground for some hours while waiting for rescuers to find them. I believe that it is likely that some died during the wait. Now - in many of those cases, terrain/weather would have precluded more rapid access even if there was an ELT active at the site - so it is not a clear cut case.
If I have some time, I'll dig up some concrete examples. Watched a video about one just the other night - flying into somewhere in Columbia IIRC

LH707330 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:39 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 199):
Are there any examples of survivable crashes where the plane could not be located?

Yes, the Andes crash in 1972: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Andes_flight_disaster

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 202):
Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 200):
All this talk of tracking is after the fact. Money is better spent in prevention of crashes, IMHO.

I agree. Don't spend money if it does not save lives.

It may not save lives in the crash where it happens, but knowing what happened sooner could prevent similar crashes from occurring. A streaming FDR would be a pretty good way to narrow down a search area: look where the transmission stopped and 5 km in all directions. If some catastrophic failure takes out most of the plane's systems including the FDR, it's probably not going far beyond that point.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 1):
If I have some time, I'll dig up some concrete examples. Watched a video about one just the other night - flying into somewhere in Columbia IIRC

This one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Andes_flight_disaster

spacecadet · Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:22 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 2):
A streaming FDR would be a pretty good way to narrow down a search area: look where the transmission stopped and 5 km in all directions.

How is this different from what an ADS-B transponder already provides?

YoungMans · Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:45 pm

The discussion in these threads seems to confirm that the technology exists to track aircraft in real time over all oceans and remote areas; that is not the problem. The only question is one of costs.
Luckily there is a solution to this ....

Get all the governments in the world to reduce their military budgets by, ... how much, lets say by 0.00001%, and divert the saved funds to a worthy cause. And if that is still not enough, cut NSA's budget by the remaining smidgin.

It would seem that aircraft which should have that level of technology could then all be fitted with the appropriate equipment - free of charge..!!

Wouldn't that be lovely ....

md80fanatic · Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:48 pm

Quote:
You are dead wrong - I can think of three open ocean ditchings with 100% survivor rates. Two were Northwest and one was Pan Am. Also a DC-9 with about an 85% survival rate back in 1970. Here's a little movie showing the Pan Am Stratocruiser ditching in 1956.

What has changed since 45-60 years ago in commercial airplane manufacturing? Planes have gotten less robust, as the extra strength was not needed in day to day operations. These days, with fuel savings being all the rage, every last ounce of weight is being removed. Were you aware had Sully's plane been rescued from the water, even moments after splashdown, it would have still be a write-off? The structural damage was -that- bad, and he landed on a river well shielded from waves.

sparky35805 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:58 pm

The DC-9-30 that ditched was out of fuel and in a storm.It was an ONA aircraft leased to ALM.

md80fanatic · Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:59 pm

To everyone who still thinks it takes mega waves to wreck a modern airliner in a ditching scenario ... take another wise poster's advice and watch again the Comoros Islands 767 ditching and watch it closely. I spent some time motion stabilizing that video and now can't find it for the life of me ... but anyway, in it you can easily see just how much force was imparted to that plane from the moment the port engine took it's first gulp of water. The result? The entire left wing (from root to tip) sheered completely clean of the wing box and all 70 feet of it was sent straight up into the air in one piece (sans engine). With no left wing the entire fuselage was allowed to roll over to port side, which put negative stress on the right wing causing it to fracture in two places. By the time the aircraft had come to rest on the reef it had been ripped wide open.

Had the left wing remained attached, things would have transpired differently.

LH707330 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:04 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 3):
How is this different from what an ADS-B transponder already provides?

More parameters on what's going on, so that in cases like this, there's more of a breadcrumb trail to the wreckage. From an implementation standpoint, one could either add parameters to the ADS-B when they go outside of certain "normal" ranges, and then do the same offshore but have it satellite based.

7BOEING7 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:24 pm

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 7):
Had the left wing remained attached, things would have transpired differently.

Had the hijackers not tried to crash the airplane, a wings level impact, things would have transpired differently.

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 5):
What has changed since 45-60 years ago in commercial airplane manufacturing? Planes have gotten less robust, as the extra strength was not needed in day to day operations.

Less robust???? Look at Asiana 214, cartwheeled and it's wings are still attached.

LTC8K6 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:41 pm

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/ffcf/nqogfqz9p05he886g.jpg

Pic of the partially inflated slide in the water.

rcair1 · Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:43 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 2):
This one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Andes_flight_disaster

Nope - this was much more recent. Watched it on "why planes crash" on the weather channel just the other night.
I'll dig it up....

rcair1 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:00 am

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 11):
Quoting LH707330 (Reply 2):
This one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Andes_flight_disaster

Nope - this was much more recent. Watched it on "why planes crash" on the weather channel just the other night.
I'll dig it up...

American Airlines 965 - a Boeing 757 flying from Miami to Cali Columbia. 1995
CFIT after the flight management computer was programmed to go to the wrong beacon.

From the report:
"The airplane impacted the ground approximately 100 feet below a ridgeline of the mountain, and wreckage continued over the ridge where it came to rest and burned. Due to the extremely rugged terrain and low visibility, search and rescue operations were unable to locate and reach the crash site until the next morning. Only four of the 163 people aboard the airplane survived."

I could not find data on if survivors of the crash perished in the delay, but I recall it being mentioned I think.

And - as I said - it is not clear that:
1) there was no ELT (there could have been one - or not)
2) Had there been one - would it have made a difference.

The location and access was limited by terrain and visibility - probably it would have taken that long regardless.

My point is that I'm pretty confident that survivors of air crashes have perished during the delay before rescue. In fact, BUT - that better ELT/GPS may not have made any difference.

CO953 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:35 am

The night that Titanic sank the ocean was nearly like glass. This condition was cited in the inquest as one of the reasons that lookouts spotted the iceberg too late: the lack of water breaking against the berg and reflecting white made it harder to spot. Just the fact that a plane goes down in the ocean does not mean the crash is by definition unsurvivable. I can also see some conceivable scenerii where ELTs don't work, or survivors don't know how to trigger them, or pilots can't get off a distress call, and people still survive. I think that what has some people other than me unhappy with the current situation is that it seems that the industry has decided it's not worth being able to close the last loopholes that prevent quickly locating a plane that crashes/ditches at sea. Especially with the growth in Asia, where a lot of flights are over water, twice in a year should be a signal that the current system needs updating. I hope that the preponderance of industry people are not satisfied with the current situation - satisfied that it's OK not to be able to reach potential survivors as quickly as possible.

ComeAndGo · Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:48 am

Quoting CO953 (Reply 13):
the industry has decided it's not worth being able to close the last loopholes that prevent quickly locating a plane that crashes/ditches at sea.

If the plane ditched it would send a EPRIB message to the Coast Guard immediately and the location would be known to emergency responders.
The current UN proposal is to have airplanes report their position every 15 minutes

777Jet · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:39 am

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 1):
Actually, I believe there are a number of cases of CFIT where there were survivors on the ground for some hours while waiting for rescuers to find them. I believe that it is likely that some died during the wait. Now - in many of those cases, terrain/weather would have precluded more rapid access even if there was an ELT active at the site - so it is not a clear cut case.

JAL123 is such an example.

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 4):
The discussion in these threads seems to confirm that the technology exists to track aircraft in real time over all oceans and remote areas; that is not the problem. The only question is one of costs.
Luckily there is a solution to this ....

According to an article just posted in another thread, cost is not as much of an issue as many think:

Interesting News Piece On Live Aircraft Data Steam (by CanadianNorth Jan 8 2015 in Civil Aviation)

maxpower1954 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:15 am

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 5):
What has changed since 45-60 years ago in commercial airplane manufacturing? Planes have gotten less robust, as the extra strength was not needed in day to day operations. These days, with fuel savings being all the rage, every last ounce of weight is being removed. Were you aware had Sully's plane been rescued from the water, even moments after splashdown, it would have still be a write-off? The structural damage was -that- bad, and he landed on a river well shielded from waves.

Actually, piston-engine airliners were considerably less robust than a jet transport. Jet fuselage skins are thicker because of the higher differential pressure loads and wing structures are much heavier because of the near sonic cruise speeds and high speed flutter issues.

If you had watched the Coast Guard film of the Pan Am ditching by Ocean Station November you would have seen that the B-377 broke in half behind the wing and the rear fuselage sank after the ditching. One of the NW DC-7C ditchings broke the tail off as well and one entire wing detached, which remained afloat for hours. Yet these were successful open ocean ditchings (the NW one was at night in a thunderstorm!) Luck is of course a factor but if the odds are as terrible as you said why does my airline even bother to train ditching procedures?

Yes, I'm quite aware of the damage N106US suffered in the Hudson River ditching. I flew my last trip as an A320 F/O ten days before in that very aircraft. I've inspected the damage first hand at the museum in CLT and the rear fuselage is ripped open from the wheel wells to the APU firewall. I'm amazed it floated as long as it did. It was very similar to the damage sustained by a National 727 ditched at PNS in 1978. It looked great until it was hoisted out of the water.

The point is an aircraft doesn't have to come through a ditching intact to be highly survivable.

md80fanatic · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:21 am

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 9):

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 7):
Had the left wing remained attached, things would have transpired differently.

Had the hijackers not tried to crash the airplane, a wings level impact, things would have transpired differently.

Sure, both wings might have departed then. We'll never know, will we?

Quoting 7BOEING7, reply=9:

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 7):
What has changed since 45-60 years ago in commercial airplane manufacturing? Planes have gotten less robust, as the extra strength was not needed in day to day operations.

Less robust???? Look at Asiana 214, cartwheeled and it's wings are still attached.

So you are going to reference an accident where the wings barely touched the ground as an example of how strong modern wings are? Okay.

md80fanatic · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:28 am

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 16):
Yet these were successful open ocean ditchings (the NW one was at night in a thunderstorm!) Luck is of course a factor but if the odds are as terrible as you said why does my airline even bother to train ditching procedures?

Luck is a major factor, as I stated when this sub-thread began. I imagine they train procedures as a requirement of the insurance they hold, mainly, and because there is still a chance, as slim as it actually is. Also ... how classy would it be for your FAs to simply announce the pax -real- odds while heading for a water landing? Everyone hopes for the best, but prepares for the worst.

maxpower1954 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:50 am

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):
Luck is a major factor, as I stated when this sub-thread began. I imagine they train procedures as a requirement of the insurance they hold, mainly, and because there is still a chance, as slim as it actually is. Also ... how classy would it be for your FAs to simply announce the pax -real- odds while heading for a water landing? Everyone hopes for the best, but prepares for the worst.

Actually, it's the FAA that requires it. It was not an uncommon event in the piston era, but the 1970 ONA DC-9 accident is the ONLY open ocean ditching of a jet transport I'm aware of in 55 years of jetliner operations and it was successful.

fooflyboy · Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:34 am

Is the fuselage skin of an A320 aluminum?

motif1 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:38 am

The Guardian just reported that pings have been detected by the search teams!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...s-detected-in-search-for-black-box

M1

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:54 am

Sounds like the source of the pings is not near the "tail section" of the plane.

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:03 am

AirAsia Tail Location Mystery: Solved?

http://jeffwise.net/2015/01/08/airas...rasia-tail-location-mystery-solved

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:53 am

“(Indonesian vessel) KN Jadayat received pings estimated to be 300m away" from the location where the tail and other parts of the plane were first found, armed forces chief General Moeldoko said on Friday.

Straits Times.

LovesCoffee · Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:34 am

Just a suggestion. The thread seems to have been hijacked by the 'pinpointing crashes exactly and immediately' discussion. On thread 8, almost all of the last 50 posts (176-226) were on this topic and it seems we have started this thread in a similar fashion. Make no mistake, the idea of being able to do this is a very good idea for many reasons, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the reason for the crash of QZ8501. It might be time to start a thread on the topic of a newer AC location technology for a couple of reasons:
1) It hijacks this thread.
2) It's a good topic, and shouldn't end when the reason for the QZ8501 crash is found.
Like I said, just a suggestion.

rj777 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:36 am

That must have been a heck of a breakup. I wonder if they're going to bring any of the wreckage up.

LovesCoffee · Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 24):
“(Indonesian vessel) KN Jadayat received pings estimated to be 300m away"

Don't forget MH370 and the pings - turned out not to be pings from the black boxes. AFAIK.

aklrno · Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:19 am

Quoting rj777 (Reply 26):
That must have been a heck of a breakup. I wonder if they're going to bring any of the wreckage up.

No, they will leave all the wreckage just out of sight so they don't spoil the suspense on a.net.

Since when is any aircraft wreckage that can be salvaged not salvaged?

Thunderboltdrgn · Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:39 am

Quoting rj777 (Reply 26):
That must have been a heck of a breakup. I wonder if they're going
to bring any of the wreckage up

They will.

Quoting FlightGlobal:

“Depending on weather conditions, the tail will be lifted using either a crane with a
maximum capacity of 70 tons belonging to a ship, or by using floating balloons,” adds
the head of Barsanas, Fransiskus Bambang Soelistyo in a statement.

lancelot07 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:45 am

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 23):
AirAsia Tail Location Mystery: Solved?

http://jeffwise.net/2015/01/08/airas...rasia-tail-location-mystery-solved

What mystery ? Did i miss something ?

SimonDanger · Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:58 am

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 25):

Just a suggestion. The thread seems to have been hijacked by the 'pinpointing crashes exactly and immediately' discussion. On thread 8, almost all of the last 50 posts (176-226) were on this topic and it seems we have started this thread in a similar fashion. Make no mistake, the idea of being able to do this is a very good idea for many reasons, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the reason for the crash of QZ8501. It might be time to start a thread on the topic of a newer AC location technology...

Since I was partly (entirely?) to blame for that vignette I will provide this public service...A new thread was started yesterday on this very subject:

Interesting News Piece On Live Aircraft Data Steam (by CanadianNorth Jan 8 2015 in Civil Aviation)

In the thread is linked an article about Arctic Air installing a live data streaming service on all it's fleet. From the article...

"Up in the High Arctic, there is no radar," Charlebois. "It is very difficult to communicate with aircraft. To add to the safety monitoring of the aircraft, to have the black box data streamed to the ground and have an accurate position should something happen to our aircraft was just the natural evolution and growth of the product and what we wanted out of it."

Problem solved!

b747400erf · Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:17 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 31):

Problem solved!

In this case, the transponder was lost at around FL260. This probably means power was lost. So unless the tracking systems have their own backup power, it will not solve the problem at least in this case.

Rivet42 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:53 am

Quoting SimonDanger (Reply 31):
Since I was partly (entirely?) to blame for that vignette I will provide this public service...A new thread was started yesterday on this very subject:

Thoughtfully done, however, I think perhaps an entirely new official thread 'QZ8501 - Wreckage Found' might be better, and abandon this one altogether. It seems most of the really useful contributors have already given up on this thread, which is a great shame...

Riv'

flyingturtle · Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:40 pm

Quoting fooflyboy (Reply 20):
Is the fuselage skin of an A320 aluminum?

Yes. The vertical stabilizer as well as the wing-body fairing might be CFRP, though.

David

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:48 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 30):
What mystery ? Did i miss something ?

The mystery of the written coordinates and how they should be read, I think.

Plus, they are saying it is not 30kms from the last known position, but only 2.5nm from it?

Quote:
This is about 2.5nm South East of the last SSR/ADS-B location

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:02 pm

http://i59.tinypic.com/xmiu8k.jpg

Diagram of transponder positions and tail location?

From a pprune poster.

dtw2hyd · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:02 pm

Quoting rj777 (Reply 26):
I wonder if they're going to bring any of the wreckage up.

In three weeks they will have clear weather with clear waters, even local salvage contractors can bring up the wreckage. They don't need specialized equipment or teams to salvage for 100 ft.

This went down at the worst possible weather season.

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 24):
“(Indonesian vessel) KN Jadayat received pings estimated to be 300m away" from the location where the tail and other parts of the plane were first found, armed forces chief General Moeldoko said on Friday.

Thats probably one of the Chinese test ULBs, they tend to drop at will. If the tail split exactly where FDR where is and it slipped out, I guess it is a 2014 accident, any thing is possible.

galleypower · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:11 pm

Some information is confusing, can somebody with knowledge shed some light on it?

The black box (es) and the locator beacon are apparently not one device, the beacon is said to be separate from the box. In an unlucky event (maybe here) they could end up at two different locations. Is this true??

Kaiarahi · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:22 pm

Quoting galleypower (Reply 38):

See the photos in Part 8.

LovesCoffee · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:32 pm

Quoting galleypower (Reply 38):
The black box (es) and the locator beacon are apparently not one device, the beacon is said to be separate from the box. In an unlucky event (maybe here) they could end up at two different locations. Is this true??

Possible, but highly unlikely. The beacon is simply located outside the black box, but very securely attached to the unit's framework.

frostyj · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:33 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 36):

Does that mean the tail came off before crashing??

LovesCoffee · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:52 pm

Quoting Frostyj (Reply 41):
Does that mean the tail came off before crashing??

We don't know yet if the AC hit the water largely intact or in pieces.

therealswede · Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:59 pm

Quoting Frostyj (Reply 41):

Does that mean the tail came off before crashing??

Maybe it means the plane may have went down doing a 180 degree turn!?
Or simply that current moved the tail a bit before it fully sunk to the bottom!?

LTC8K6 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:13 pm

Quoting Frostyj (Reply 41):

Does that mean the tail came off before crashing??

I think it means that the tail is roughly where we would expect to find it, not that far away from the LKP.

If it's an accurate map.

We really can't speak of a break up until we know the location(s) of the rest of the pieces.

Moose135 · Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:24 pm

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 23):
AirAsia Tail Location Mystery: Solved?

I guess we know why Warren Platt hasn't been on these threads - he has an airplane to find.

AIRWALK · Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:34 pm

Quoting Moose135 (Reply 45):
I guess we know why Warren Platt hasn't been on these threads

Just to keep you in suspense, without letting on too much, this is actually incorrect.

[Edited 2015-01-09 07:46:13]

TheRedBaron · Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:25 pm

Quoting Moose135 (Reply 45):
I guess we know why Warren Platt hasn't been on these threads - he has an airplane to find.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 46):
Just to keep you in suspense, without letting on too much, this is actually incorrect.

I can live without the suspense, thank you!

I wonder *this is a question for our experts here/ Pihero, Mandala,Starion etc etc , could they had problems with the trim of the horizontal stabilizer due to icing and the Autopilot mode engaged, and then for some reason the Aircraft goes to an ALT mode or they switch off the Autopilot (let´s say for getting to a lower speed in order to penetrate the turbulence reported) and in the moment they switch it off, the plane goes up uncontrollably and they lose the tail in the process, a explosive decompression and the loss of control, the aircraft then loses speed and falls down almost without horizontal speed.

I know its farfetched, but it suits in some way the data Mandala Posted, and also the torn tail.

Is there an scenario in which the Ap will try to control the Stabilizer and then and you an out of control Aircraft *also seeing the wreckage pic the jackscrew is in a position that could give a hint on how far was the trim...

Thanks in advance for the info..

TRB

rwessel · Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:02 pm

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 40):
Possible, but highly unlikely. The beacon is simply located outside the black box, but very securely attached to the unit's framework.

It happened on one of AF447's recorders.

fooflyboy · Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:18 am

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 34):
Quoting fooflyboy (Reply 20):
Is the fuselage skin of an A320 aluminum?

Yes. The vertical stabilizer as well as the wing-body fairing might be CFRP, though.

David

Thanks David.

The reason I asked is that I am going to suggest that those are not "scratches" as such in the photos we've seen. If they were scratches, I would expect to see bare metal exposed - and that doesn't seem to be apparent.

To my eyes it looks like the skin buckled in those areas - maybe inward and then (partly) back outward? It kinda looks like paint that has popped off of an automobile bumper cover or fender sheet metal - exposing primer and/or sealer beneath.

I don't know what this would mean, or even if I am right. But they just don't look like physical scratches to me.

[Edited 2015-01-09 18:32:18]

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net