Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

China Eastern 737 Down in Guangxi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • China Eastern 737 Down in Guangxi

    737NG has crashed into mountainous terrain. Appears to be unsurvivable. 132 souls on board.

  • #2
    Whatever happened appears to have happened at top-of-descent.

    Comment


    • #3
      No clue what happened yet. FR24 shows the last few min it went to -30000fpm and dived into the ground. RIP

      Comment


      • #4

        Originally posted by AvHerald comment section (paraphrased)

        ”Looks like Germanwings.”

        “That’s grossly-premature speculation.”
        Yes.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 3WE View Post


          Yes.
          Looks nothing like Germanwings. Speculation should begin by asking what might occur at TOD. The AFDS switches to VNAV SPD or VNAV PTH, thrust is moved to IDLE, at some point elevator is commanded (and stabilizer trim?) to maintain selected speed/path. If this was due to a system failure, that seems like the first place to consider.

          Or TOD is entirely coincidental here.

          Comment


          • #6
            The video is interesting. It doesn't tell much but there are a few things beyond a thing falling vertically:
            - All we can see is a cigar shape falling almost vertically. No sign of wings, horizontal stabilizer or vertical stabilizer. A side view could make the wings and horizontal stabilizer invisible, but then the vertical stabilizer would be visible. Maybe it is just poor video quality, maybe what we see is not even the plane but a big chunk of an already broken up plane. I don't know.
            - The "think" is not falling straight but describing an arc. It doesn't look like a ballistic parabola. It's like there is lift, as if the plane is (almost vertical but still a bit) upright and pitching down (negative lift) or inverted and "pulling back" (positive lift) which given the inverted position still means pitching down. If there is significant lift, there are wings.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              - All we can see is a cigar shape falling almost vertically with no tumbling cork-screwing or roll.
              Fixed (with very deliberate use of bold font).

              The hunk of metal is ‘under control’ (see footnote)

              Footnote: Technically an arrow is ‘under control’ from its tail feathers. Which actually further supports human control as a broken airplane will tumble as will most cylindrical shapes that lack ‘tail feathers’. I don’t know how to perfectly break off both wings and just enough of all tail planes to make them invisible but still effective.
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Evan View Post

                Looks nothing like Germanwings.
                Absolute statements.

                Almost always wrong.

                And absolutely wrong here.

                Edit: AND, a reflection of your extreme need to blame Boeing or Pilot screw ups…

                Of course, we probably need those ongoing mental health screenings you suggest, and continuously-downloading cockpit cameras, and rescue boats and divers…
                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Let's hope NTSB and Boeing investigators are allowed unfettered access.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    The video is interesting. It doesn't tell much but there are a few things beyond a thing falling vertically:
                    - All we can see is a cigar shape falling almost vertically. No sign of wings, horizontal stabilizer or vertical stabilizer. A side view could make the wings and horizontal stabilizer invisible, but then the vertical stabilizer would be visible. Maybe it is just poor video quality, maybe what we see is not even the plane but a big chunk of an already broken up plane. I don't know.
                    - The "think" is not falling straight but describing an arc. It doesn't look like a ballistic parabola. It's like there is lift, as if the plane is (almost vertical but still a bit) upright and pitching down (negative lift) or inverted and "pulling back" (positive lift) which given the inverted position still means pitching down. If there is significant lift, there are wings.
                    Low quality video remains the first rule of aviation crash investigations. Despite 2022. It is also the first rule of fakes. I'm not considering any video until it has been verified by some reliable source. At this point we should focus on what could cause what we see on the ADS-B. The flight is uneventful until a point around (or beyond) TOD for the flight plan. The vertical track suggests something catastrophic or an upset that results in a stall or nose-dive attitude. The lateral track suggests loss of roll control as well.

                    The other possibility is that this was a malicious act. The timing would coincide with the cabin announcement to prepare for descent. But, unlike Germanwings, this was not a controlled, steep descent. It is more like EgyptAir 990. But this possibility doesn't interest me yet. It's too obvious.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      The video is interesting. It doesn't tell much but there are a few things beyond a thing falling vertically:
                      - All we can see is a cigar shape falling almost vertically. No sign of wings, horizontal stabilizer or vertical stabilizer. A side view could make the wings and horizontal stabilizer invisible, but then the vertical stabilizer would be visible. Maybe it is just poor video quality, maybe what we see is not even the plane but a big chunk of an already broken up plane. I don't know.
                      - The "think" is not falling straight but describing an arc. It doesn't look like a ballistic parabola. It's like there is lift, as if the plane is (almost vertical but still a bit) upright and pitching down (negative lift) or inverted and "pulling back" (positive lift) which given the inverted position still means pitching down. If there is significant lift, there are wings.
                      at the very start of the video which captured the falling plane, you can see the wings and stabilizer.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        A comment in the AvHerald article:

                        On another site they have a good comparison of this same flight from a previous day.
                        This flight went FAR past normal top of descent. They were close to destination before the very abrupt dive.
                        Interesting.
                        If that's true (which I can't confirm), that might change Evan's initial views.

                        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          There is a second, dash cam video.

                          https://youtu.be/-K8-tqHI_lA

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There is data ADS-B that shows the near-vertical descent being arrested and some altitude being regained around 8000ft before the near-vertical descent resumes. I wonder if this is a data error. The other thing I wonder is if the crew somehow did manage to recover but overstressed the airframe in the process, causing structural failure that would explain the apparent lack of wings and enpennage in those videos.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                              A comment in the AvHerald article:



                              If that's true (which I can't confirm), that might change Evan's initial views.

                              Best I can ascertain from FlightRadar24: the flight typically reaches cruise altitude around 5:30 with TOD around 6:20. The accident flight reaches cruise at around 5:30 and the near-vertical descent occurs almost exactly at 6:20.

                              The comparison below might look like what you are describing until you look closely at the actual timelines, which are not to the same scale.

                              Click image for larger version  Name:	Screen Shot 2022-03-22 at 1.50.37 AM.png Views:	0 Size:	91.1 KB ID:	1133578Click image for larger version  Name:	Screen Shot 2022-03-22 at 1.49.26 AM.png Views:	0 Size:	88.9 KB ID:	1133579
                              Attached Files

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X