737NG has crashed into mountainous terrain. Appears to be unsurvivable. 132 souls on board.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
China Eastern 737 Down in Guangxi
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by 3WE View Post
Yes.
Or TOD is entirely coincidental here.
Comment
-
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
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View Post- All we can see is a cigar shape falling almost vertically with no tumbling cork-screwing or roll.
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
-
Originally posted by Evan View Post
Looks nothing like Germanwings.
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
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostThe 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.
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
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostThe 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.
Comment
-
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.
--- 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
-
-
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
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostA 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.
Comment
Comment