Air France plane missing?

[swissair]

FDR's - Water pressure - depth limitations?

Can anyone share this info please:

What is the design spec maximum water pressure of those black boxes? Arguably most items simply implode get crashed in say 6000 to 8000 meters under or even less for that matter.

[mfeldt]

Mfeldt: "Aircraft data block anomalies were found just prior to the disappearance of the block from the screen. Heading, airspeed and altitude deviations could be either software anomalies within the Thales system, or may represent actual movements of the aircraft."

The quote refers to the ACT screen, correct? The deviations could have been actual A/C movements or ATC software glitches.

Yes, its from sec 1.18.16 "Radar". So probably, the Thales system is the ground-based radar, but I was intrigued by the mentioning of "data block"s, which I assumed to originating from the aircraft's transponder units and thus from the on-board systems..

m.

[mfeldt]

Winds really have nothing to do with airspeed. If your doing 300 knots airspeed. and you have 100 knot headwinds your ground speed is 200 knots. Say the wind suddenly changes to a 100 knot tailwind. You are still flying at airspeed of 300 knots, but the ground speed with go from 200 knots to 400 knots.

Well, there is still the mass of the aircraft that needs to be accelerated - to accelerate 200 tons by 100mph you need to transfer about 200 MJ of energy - that doesn't happen in an instant!

m.

[Window-Seat]

Gabriel's theory reminds me very much of the Birginair Crash in 96...

does anyone think that

a.) the CVR / FDR still will be found and

b.) if not the mystery will be solved at all?

One or both engines should have a fair chance to be seen by scanners. That would narrow the area to look at for the recorders. And if an engine could be retrieved it might answer a lot of questions; I would think, no?

[Evan]

Sorry to bring up old battles But You CAN use A/T on the 737NG with an MEL'ed Radalt. I very clearly states in the MEL that the onside A/T should not be used on Approach. The maintenance guys have no legal obligation to point this out to the pilots as it is their legal obligation to read and be aware of any known defects with the aircraft and acknowledge and follow any limitations that known and legally defered defect may refer.

If the pilots used the onside A/T with out considering the limitations of an MEL then they have been negligent. Alongside the fact that they stopped flying the aircraft at 2000ft.

I MEL Radalts every other week, our pilots have never expressed any concern with that. They read the limitations and fly appropriately.

Ok, good on the maintenance crew (I still say a MEL notation is not enough, but that battle ended in trench warfare). Do you agree with my basic philosophy? That both sides of the partnership need improvement? You can't use that A/T on approach with a faulty RA and they need to know this without referring to the MEL. Pilots need to know how these systems interact on a deeper, engineering level.

[HalcyonDays]

Can anyone share this info please:

What is the design spec maximum water pressure of those black boxes? Arguably most items simply implode get crashed in say 6000 to 8000 meters under or even less for that matter.

The South African 747 recorder (one of them, not two) was recovered from around 5000 metres. In the Air France case the terrain varies greatly in the general area from as little as 1000 metres to 6000 metres in some places.

[WhiteKnuckles]

I just read that this is the first crash experienced by an A330 in 15 years. Is this true?

[Jason]

I just read that this is the first crash experienced by an A330 in 15 years. Is this true?

not quite. that is the first one in commercial service.

during the testing and before the first delivery, airbus lost of A330.

[SYDCBRWOD]

How come an Atomic submarine with the most sensitive sensory equipment is unable to locate the wreckage, it is also clear that that kind of sub has depth limitations, but its sensors can go wide and deep.

The systems on the submarine are passive - if the pingers are not working then the sub could be right on top of the boxes and not know they were there.

[SYDCBRWOD]

One or both engines should have a fair chance to be seen by scanners. That would narrow the area to look at for the recorders. And if an engine could be retrieved it might answer a lot of questions; I would think, no?

What scanners are you talking about and why are the engines more likely to be found?

[WhiteKnuckles]

The near-crash of China Airlines 006, featured on Air Emergency, provides a scenario for a belly landing with the plane intact. 006 leveled out from a disastrous spiral at 9,000 feet. Take another plane, let it fall 9,000 feet more, then level out, and you have a belly landing, perhaps with enough downward speed to destroy the aircraft. They said during the leveling out, occupants of the 006 had tremendous g-forces smashing them into the seats. Only think I'm wondering is when wings and other exterior structures are subjected to the forces creating those g-forces, are they able to withstand them? Recent news said Boeing had to put off release of the 787 to the market because of concerns about attachment of wings to the fuselage. Maybe a sudden descent for 10's of thousands of feet would do something to the A330? Don't know. The hint is that with China Airlines 006 there were operating mistakes in the cockpit (haven't finished the program, so what they were, I don't know....though I'm sure someone here already does.)

[Window-Seat]

What scanners are you talking about and why are the engines more likely to be found?

I would think any and all present day and yet to be invented underwater scanners might at some stage be used. Engine debris is normally larger and more metallic than other debris in a high speed impact. If the impact was not so much "high speed", then large fuselage parts might be discovered first. I say there is only a "fair" chance that anything will be found because of the extensive treacherous terrain. And then there is the cost factor.

[Window-Seat]

The systems on the submarine are passive - if the pingers are not working then the sub could be right on top of the boxes and not know they were there.

The sub I was on had active sonar, but it was "forward looking", and I don't think it would be sensitive enough to delineate anything "small" lying on the bottom from anything else. More importantly, large naval subs don't go that deep, and don't ask me how deep (classified). Add to that the fact that no-one would want to maneuver a huge sub around those mountains.

[swissair]

Engines

The systems on the submarine are passive - if the pingers are not working then the sub could be right on top of the boxes and not know they were there.

And the high profile solid engines? wont they be spotted by ultra secret sensory?

[swissair]

Engines

What scanners are you talking about and why are the engines more likely to be found?

The Turbines are large, alloy and hardened and most probably lie in tact in one piece offering a rather echo........so where are they?