If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The BEA is currently carrying out a review of the three undersea search phases that have been undertaken since the accident. May/10
Its now November, half a year later and no updates!! I really feel for the relatives, shame on France for not putting in a stronger effort, this is the second tragety.
Is there any remote possibility that they might be totally wrong about where the wreckage could be?
Please, someone give me a feasible alternate hypothesis as to where the plane might have gone.
I do work for a domestic US airline, and it should be noted that I do not represent such airline, or any airline. My opinions are mine alone, and aren't reflective of anything but my own knowledge, or what I am trying to learn. At no time will I discuss my specific airline, internal policies, or any such info.
Is there any remote possibility that they might be totally wrong about where the wreckage could be?
Please, someone give me a feasible alternate hypothesis as to where the plane might have gone.
All you have to do is determine where the recovered wreckage originated from , i.e. where it was at the moment of impact, by determining what the currents and winds were doing for the time between the crash and the discovery of said wreckage, and from there determine the effect currents may have had on the wreckage that sunk, and then go two or three miles under the sea, where you can start hunting through the mountains for it in total darkness with a tiny submersible robot. Honestly, what's taking them so long...?
Of course, if you get the first part wrong, the second part is going to be an expensive exercise in futility.
Has there been any recent pitot tube icing events over the ITCZ (or anywhere else)? If not, can one assume that the (Airbus) pitot replacement programme has now been completed?
And Simpleboy, here's the kicker - EC works in the IT industry, and yet cannot do his own searches to gain info...
This isn't aimed at anyone in particular but........ are you lot actually capable of having a sensible civilized conversation about anything? This forum is really a bit of a playground isn't it? It's a shame because there do appear to be people on hear who are genuinely knowledgeable....
I read today that another search was going to be done. I hope this one has more success. It's unnerving to not know how a jet traveling such a common route appears to have just fallen out of the sky.
A new operation will begin next year to find the debris of Air France Flight 447, which mysteriously crashed into the southern Atlantic Ocean last year, French officials said.
Last edited by Just a passenger; 2010-11-27, 00:52.
Reason: Added the link
It's the first time I am posting on this thread, so please bare with me for a couple of lines.
I am a Flight Dispatcher, also undergoing ATPL course training, so I have reason to believe I think I know what I'm talking about.
At the Academy where I'm syudying, and working at the same time, we have had the chance to study in depth some of the more misterious air crashes of the past decades, and some conclusions have arose, after discussions with many of my fellow workers, and friends on the topic of AF447.
Now, the most plausible to point out (I was also a bit skeptical about it at the beginning, myself), is that, in such a convective thunderstorm cell, especially in the ITCZ, thunderstorms regularly imply vaste releases of energy, in the form of thunder and electrical discharge! Now it is not uncommon, for such thunderstorms or thunderstorm system (which is the case here), to produce ball lightning, which, is known to have a particular attraction to metals, an have a reasonably higher voltage than regular bolt lightning. It is also known to have entered into flying airplanes! Now correct me if I'm wrong, but a ball lightning strike (or, call it what you want), could reak havoc into a plane's sitems, in less than a second. It could fry the radio comms, screw up the flight computers (so vital to an Airbus, as we all know), allowing the PIC very few seconds to react, and also cause all the errors in the flight systems, seen on the ACARS messages.
Now, faced with such a daunting task, it is easy to "forget" to fly the airplane, and instead try to trouble-shoot! Which is wrong! First fly the airplane, and then troubleshoot as much as you like! Now I'm not saying they didn't fly the plane, or didn't do so in a correct manner, but, as we all know, at night, in turbulence, low visibility - to none, there is ample time, and oportunity to make mistakes! Especially as this was a long haul, and the captain was probably not in the cockpit, and things happening very fast... pilots are in a more relaxed state, and they tend to get a bit complacent, and the list can go on and on.
Please correct me if I'm wrong! I am waiting on some input.
I am a Flight Dispatcher, also undergoing ATPL course training, so I have reason to believe I think I know what I'm talking about.
I'm not sure how that qualifies you to discuss this accident in any depth, but let's set that aside for a moment.
Originally posted by VANGHELL
Now, the most plausible to point out (I was also a bit skeptical about it at the beginning, myself), is that, in such a convective thunderstorm cell, especially in the ITCZ, thunderstorms regularly imply vaste releases of energy, in the form of thunder and electrical discharge! Now it is not uncommon, for such thunderstorms or thunderstorm system (which is the case here), to produce ball lightning, which, is known to have a particular attraction to metals, an have a reasonably higher voltage than regular bolt lightning. It is also known to have entered into flying airplanes! Now correct me if I'm wrong, but a ball lightning strike (or, call it what you want), could reak havoc into a plane's sitems, in less than a second....
To say that a ball lightning strike is the most plausible cause here is quite a stretch. For one thing, very little is known about ball lightning in general, for another thing, this would be the first-ever reported case of a ball lightning at high altitude.
Your theory is colorful and exciting, but it is contradicted by the evidence. Read the interim reports and get back to us.
how so? the interim reports are filled with a lot of nothing. a few acars messages, the results of the examination of a paltry number of jet parts, the post-mortem on a few bodies...not to mention that it was drafted by potentially biased folks (haven't the french quite clearly showed the world how biased they are with their deplorable actions and rulings re the concorde crash??? yeah, i thought so!)
this tells the world what exactly? that the "authorities" have ZERO clue as to what really happened.
now mind you, i'm not defending vanghell's theory, but from what i recall from reading the "interim report" (which will most likely be the final report) i'm not sure that you can say the "evidence" contradicts his theory.
this tells the world what exactly? that the "authorities" have ZERO clue as to what really happened.
now mind you, i'm not defending vanghell's theory, but from what i recall from reading the "interim report" (which will most likely be the final report) i'm not sure that you can say the "evidence" contradicts his theory.
TeeVee, you obviously don't understand what is presented in the report. The ACARS messages alone are quite revealing and valuable, and display a sort of fingerprint, a telltale cascade of interdependent systems, that is similar to other recorded unreliable airspeed events. More importantly, they are useful in revealing what did not occur, such as a catastrophic bus failure due to electrostatic discharge. To be sure, they do not provide conclusive findings, but they provide a great deal more than you seem to understand.
...................................
Please correct me if I'm wrong! I am waiting on some input.
...........
I do not know about the A330 but many other commercial transports have non-electrical back-up for airspeed, altitude, and roll-pitch position (The A330 does appear to have this).
These should be unaffected by lightning.
Incidentally the company I worked for tested avionics in a lightning lab for susceptability.
I do not know about the A330 but many other commercial transports have non-electrical back-up for airspeed, altitude, and roll-pitch position (The A330 does appear to have this).
These should be unaffected by lightning.
Incidentally the company I worked for tested avionics in a lightning lab for susceptability.
This A330 had a "small PFD" display that combined attitude, airspeed, altitude and heading info. AFAIU it is stand-alone with its own bat backup. The pitot info, however, is provided by one of the two pitots also used for the Capt and FO displays.
--- 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 ---
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment