Air France plane missing?

[SYDCBRWOD]

Probably been developing this for years. What airlines maybe need is something to cool down competition and restore some profitability so that adding innovations doesn't lead them to bankruptcy court. Fewer people flying, sure, but fewer mass funerals, too.

Good info, thanks.

[P3_Super_Bee]

Probably been developing this for years.

Ahh, Yeah, this is nothing new... Only to the commercial aviation world. Been brought up before...

[Gandalf123]

Have the black boxes been found yet?

[SYDCBRWOD]

Have the black boxes been found yet?

Hasn't been reported that they have.

[Harding]

Have been away on holyday for some time - to be specific 58 pages. Can someone fill me in quickly? Whats new?

[Deadstick]

Nothing. Same old arguments and speculation. Sadly, evidence and facts are lacking.

[Evan]

Have been away on holyday for some time - to be specific 58 pages. Can someone fill me in quickly? Whats new?

Investigations have revealed a significant number of unreported experiences of unreliable airspeed on A330, all in the ITCZ. The new Thales -BA probe has proven to be unreliable as well. EADS is now mandating (all? or just A330?) Airbus a/c to be refitted with Goodrich probes.

No further evidence or findings on the cause(s) of AF447. No boxes.

[Highkeas]

As of 31 July the search for the aircraft is ongoing (the second phase). It sounds like there may be a third phase of searching.
Source BEA
The Ifremer oceanographic ship “Pourquoi pas?” is currently on site in the area for the second phase of the search for the flight recorders from AF 447. Work to survey the ocean floor has begun in the area considered to be the most likely, with the aid of a side-scan sonar device and the Victor 6000 ROV and Nautile submarine. The flight recorders’ locator beacons having now ceased transmitting, the next step is to identify the place where the airplane wreckage is located, then to search for the recorders.
The BEA recognizes Airbus’ commitment to participate financially in a continuation of the search if a third phase, over a wider area, appears to be necessary.

[EconomyClass]

I wonder how high the odds against ever finding the recorders have become with weeks past since the second phase has started. I think if their final report is guesswork, some people are just gonna think again about flying this airline and/or flying across the equator. So they changed the pitot tubes. Does that guarantee anything at all?

[Harding]

The new Thales -BA probe has proven to be unreliable as well.

Well, thats a bummer!

I wonder if this investigation will be yet another "ten year investigation"..

[Jpmkam]

I wonder how high the odds against ever finding the recorders have become with weeks past since the second phase has started. I think if their final report is guesswork, some people are just gonna think again about flying this airline and/or flying across the equator. So they changed the pitot tubes. Does that guarantee anything at all?

Can you be "guaranteed" anything when flying?

[P3_Super_Bee]

Well, thats a bummer!

I wonder if this investigation will be yet another "ten year investigation"..

But anyone with half a brain knew it wasn't going to work... The reason for the upgrade/improvements on the -BA wasn't the same type of problem 447 had. Nothing more than a token effort to shut the unknowing up... Problem is it didn't last very long...

[Evan]

But anyone with half a brain knew it wasn't going to work... The reason for the upgrade/improvements on the -BA wasn't the same type of problem 447 had. Nothing more than a token effort to shut the unknowing up... Problem is it didn't last very long...

I find it particularly strange that those half-witted engineers you refer to at Airbus, Thales, and a number of airlines including Air France thought it necessary to "shut the unknowing up" by replacing the old probes with the -BA probes on their A330's long before the AF447 incident even occurred.

The -BA was designed to overcome the conditions that AF447 encountered through improved drainage and a more icing resistant design, but the potential magnitude of those conditions in the ITCZ was underestimated and relatively unknown until recently. We are talking about rapid solid ice crystal ingestion in supercooled air where ice formation should not be possible. The problem would seem to lie in the probe heat capability as well as the drainage capability. The Goodrich probes seem to be more robust under those conditions, but we have yet to learn why and how they are different in design, or even if this is true.

One hopes that new tests are being done to ensure that all pitot probes are designed to perform in these previously untested environments. In the meantime, (and given the relatively cheap procedure) anyone with half a brain would advocate replacing the unreliable existing probes with the best probes currently available.

[Highkeas]

...................................One hopes that new tests are being done to ensure that all pitot probes are designed to perform in these previously untested environments. In the meantime, (and given the relatively cheap procedure) anyone with half a brain would advocate replacing the unreliable existing probes with the best probes currently available.

I am an aerospace engineer and I can tell you that aerospace companies have to test equipment they develop to all anticipated environments, with a margin, to satisfy a host of requirements demanded by customers, govt bodies (such as FAA, DOD, and non-USA equivalents), insurance companies, and company policies.

Flight sensors (such as pitots, static ports, AOA sensors, temperature sensors, etc) have to located in the optimum position on the aircraft and be calibrated. If you look at test aircraft they usually carry an instrumented nose boom and trailing cone to act as primary calibration standards. You see one nose boom in figues 1, 2 & 3 of this report: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/p...main_H-779.pdf

However no design is perfect and situations develop during service which mandate design and test updates. For example the 777 that crashed in London a year or so ago had both fuel feed lines freeze up - the first time in many flight hours. This design has been modified.

[P3_Super_Bee]

I find it particularly strange that those half-witted engineers you refer to at Airbus, Thales, and a number of airlines including Air France thought it necessary to "shut the unknowing up" by replacing the old probes with the -BA probes on their A330's long before the AF447 incident even occurred.

Yeah I'd say half witted.... This is what the 4th set of pitot tubes???? and they haven't figured it out yet? The good ole Lockheed P-3 has been flying with the SAME pitot design that was originally designed for the aircraft. This isn't rocket science...

Ahhhhhhhh AGAIN..... When the BA came out it was stated that it was not need for the long range fleet because the long range fleet didn't and STILL don't have an issue during the take-off and landing phase of flight...

The -BA was designed to overcome the conditions that AF447 encountered through improved drainage and a more icing resistant design

During take off and landing phase of flight NOT cruise.. I like the way you continuously conveniently forget this... EVERYTIME......

Obviously, the -AA probe wasn't working for the longrange fleet other wise they wouldn't have been changing them out prior to 447... I'm betting someone was like try the -BA and see what happens, maybe it will fix the problem... The problem was 447 came along and opened the eyes to the world... So since they were already changing them... "Hey lets shut these whining, know knowing idiots up by putting out we are changing them out already." Problem was the hole just got deeper when it became publicly known the BA wasn't working either... And guess what. No 447, There would be NO nothing in the press on the message boards about pitot tubes. Even with the recent decision to now switch to the Goodrich pitot tubes.

What gets me is why is the Thales and Goodrich pitot tubes different? Didn't those wonderful engineers at Airbus put out specs these things need to be made to? Guess not..

For us, we can have two manufacturers making the same part for our airplane, but we have a little thing called a spec drawing, and no matter how many people want to make the thing, they better all be to the specs on the drawing. The only time there are differences is when a upgrade is being implemented. But once this starts the old part is removed from the supply system, so not to be put back into the fleet.