Air France 447 - On topic only!

[Myndee]

LOL...that's MY line!! A little off topic but since the last time I was here and working on the ramp with a Boeing fleet...I am not working for an airline with an all Airbus fleet!

Nice typo. That was supposed to say I am NOW working for an airline with an all Airbus fleet. Durrrr......

[Myndee]

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flig...es.du.site.php

I would love to give you credit for "Scarebus", but I think it is an established name. Also, I don't think anyone working with the Buses would call them that

I never claimed credit or originality. I was just in the habit of using that term. A while back in this thread I was given some things to study regarding the Airbus. I'm not 100% convinced, but I am taking my first ride in an A319 in June. No other option on this airline. Thanks for the link.

[tone]

No cover up, no placement, just perfectly normal images IMHO.

You are quite right.
Currents at those depths are probably unlikely to be strong.

In fact I was not going the conspiracy or cover up way of thinking (I am not really that kind of person).
I was just surprised to see the CVR and FDR detached and isolated from any other nearby debris.
I would expect it to be securely fastened to the remainder of the structures where they are mounted.

When I mentioned "made up scenario" I was thinking about the recovery team detaching it from the structures they were attached to and then placing it in a way that they would easily and clearly be able to take a picture for the media and, why not, for their customers.

Thanks for your insight.

[Peter Kesternich]

Nice typo. That was supposed to say I am NOW working for an airline with an all Airbus fleet. Durrrr......

Hmmmm - which airline in the States has an all-Airbus fleet? Virgin America?

I don't quite get what's so scary about Airbus. I am not a fan of Airbus, but I still think Airbus are well-designed aircraft. Also, as far as I know, no statistic to date proves that Airbus aircraft are less safe than Boeing.

[Joe H]

You are quite right.
Currents at those depths are probably unlikely to be strong.

In fact I was not going the conspiracy or cover up way of thinking (I am not really that kind of person).
I was just surprised to see the CVR and FDR detached and isolated from any other nearby debris.
I would expect it to be securely fastened to the remainder of the structures where they are mounted.

When I mentioned "made up scenario" I was thinking about the recovery team detaching it from the structures they were attached to and then placing it in a way that they would easily and clearly be able to take a picture for the media and, why not, for their customers.

Thanks for your insight.

Hiya Tone, you are welcome.
I think any current as such at these depths are in reality non existent without, say, volcanic or hot water spewing springs etc. what you see is the device as landed, ie, it impacts the bottom, a small cloud is disturbed of bottom material, this then settles, and remains just as it is for many years.
I am not judging conspiracy, press friendly images etc.. I am also not judging you. Just trying to say it as it is, like you are, so more power to your elbow...

These forums are no real difference to others. There appears to be the odd infighting - some who feel a 'pilot' is needed to add appropriate comment, some who think that without a certain piece of paper qualification then it is innapropriate to comment etc..
The reality is -
Many pilots are not in the least aware of other aspects, many engineers are not in the least aware of the thought processes of the pilots. Many have a crossover, also many are just thoughtful, intelligent peope, who read and ingest the information, with an appropriate degree of scepticism... and then comment... when anyone asks for MY personal qualifications, they can go whistle - it is bugger all to do with them... If they had lived my life, then they can comment, but they have not, so they cannot. Same as I cannot comment on others 'experience' - I see more intelligent input here from people who are not even in the 'industry' than some who are.
There will always be an aspect of speculation, and doubt as to official reports etc, that is good and healthy, yes, some go slightly overboard, but that is also understandable...
You have a great day Sir.

[Evan]

I am not so hopeful for any radical theory from the FDR, but I am extremely interested to see if the super-cooled rain droplets/frozen pitot theory is proven. The FDR will certainly show us that.

The FDR won't certainly show us that. We already know from ACARS that there was probe failure on at least two pitots, but we don't know why they failed. The two leading theories are (a) ice crystal ingestion beyond the heat/drainage capability of the probes, and (b) ice accretion due to the presence of supercooled water, beyond the heat/drainage capability of the probes. Theory (b) is unlikely unless the air temperature was unusually warm for the altitude, but this could have occurred due to an emergent warm air mass within the weather system. That's the theory anyway.

What the FDR will tell us is outside (static) air temperature. If that temperature is not significantly warmer than usual, the supercooled theory cools off. The other clue lies in knowing what the pilots might have observed. The FDR will tell us if the bleed-air anti-ice is selected on. This would indicate that icing was observed (unless it is SOP to leave it on at all times, or whenever entering weather systems at cruise altitude, which I don't know).

The CVR may be more telling. If ice accretion is observed, it will be indicated on an ice detection device on the forward cockpit windows. I think this is just a visual indication, so it won't show up on the FDR (however on the Colgan FDR for the Q400, ice detection is included in the FDR plots), but it may be mentioned by the pilots as an observation on the CVR.

Theory (a), involving ice crystal ingestion, is more difficult to prove because dry ice crystals will probably not accrete on the indicator, and can be very tiny and hard to detect. If the OAT is significantly below 0°F, it is the more likely theory though.

So, off the cuff, I would say if the FDR and CVR indicate that the crew had observed ice accretion, supercooled water is the stronger theory, whereas if there is no indication of ice accretion, ice crystal accumulation is more likely.

But even with both recordings, 'what caused the pitots to fail' might be one of the enduring mysteries of this crash. And one of the most important questions to answer. UAS (unreliable airspeed) in itself is considered manageable and should not result in a crash, but it is still an extremely dangerous situation, so anything we can learn about the cause to help prevent it from reoccurring is vital to the investigation.

[Evan]

Hmmmm - which airline in the States has an all-Airbus fleet? Virgin America?

I don't quite get what's so scary about Airbus. I am not a fan of Airbus, but I still think Airbus are well-designed aircraft. Also, as far as I know, no statistic to date proves that Airbus aircraft are less safe than Boeing.

Spirit Airlines.

Save your breath Peter. The Scarebus cult is deaf to reason.

[guamainiac]

Joe H, I like to have a brief "summary" of or at least reasonable insight to a person and it tells me from what direction they may be coming.

I know of one person who was involved in the cockpit design of the B-2 and quite frankly I hope they tossed her stuff into the shredder. Knowing her most of my adult life the gal can't pack a lunch box. Hold steam, my best flight instructor or perhaps second best was a woman this is not an anti fem rant. Right out of school, she got her "Piled higher & Deeper in psych.

I once had a "roomie" who after a bit of chat knew a bit about skiing. I was not totally enamored with his talk but commented that he must have done quite a bit of skiing. He also bantered on and was quite good on the MG. Well he had never been on skis nor, had he ever had an MG but explained later that we Brits are great readers.

Now, really why. Despite taking months of courses in flight theory, mechanics and whatever the USN tossed at me I knew little to nothing. After my first lessons years later it hit me. Hell, they should just toss us in a Bird Dog for an hour and show us what stuff really happens.

I and many other were dangers to the pilots. If you have never been in a spin you damned well may be clueless. "Book Learnin", well I am not against it but if you think that will get you by, you are wacky.

I will listen and like Evan, he comes out with some amazing stuff.

But I need to know where you are coming from to weigh what is being said.

[Joe H]

Joe H, I like to have a brief "summary" of or at least reasonable insight to a person and it tells me from what direction they may be coming.

I know of one person who was involved in the cockpit design of the B-2 and quite frankly I hope they tossed her stuff into the shredder. Knowing her most of my adult life the gal can't pack a lunch box. Hold steam, my best flight instructor or perhaps second best was a woman this is not an anti fem rant. Right out of school, she got her "Piled higher & Deeper in psych.

I once had a "roomie" who after a bit of chat knew a bit about skiing. I was not totally enamored with his talk but commented that he must have done quite a bit of skiing. He also bantered on and was quite good on the MG. Well he had never been on skis nor, had he ever had an MG but explained later that we Brits are great readers.

Now, really why. Despite taking months of courses in flight theory, mechanics and whatever the USN tossed at me I knew little to nothing. After my first lessons years later it hit me. Hell, they should just toss us in a Bird Dog for an hour and show us what stuff really happens.

I and many other were dangers to the pilots. If you have never been in a spin you damned well may be clueless. "Book Learnin", well I am not against it but if you think that will get you by, you are wacky.

I will listen and like Evan, he comes out with some amazing stuff.

But I need to know where you are coming from to weigh what is being said.

Hi Sir
I can understand your interest, I really can, but I also value my privacy. That said, I am willing to reveal the following, but that is it - again, becuase I value my privacy.
As I said to TeeVee, I retired at 47, and am now a full time liveaboard Yachtsman. Our Yacht is our home. I live within the EU, maybe 1 month, 1 week, one year in any one country.
I held a senior management position in the IT (Government) industry in the UK (That is how I can now afford to be a layabout lol )
I WAS an electronics and IT consultant by trade. Also a Private Pilot. I have built several of my own aircraft (Microlight) and flown them.
I have flown Helicopters - for a brief time - I have spent time at United Airlines with their 737 commercial course. again for a brief time - I have had a 20 year interest in air crash investigation. I have a sound and documented background in IT, Electronics and Mechanical engineering. My last aircraft was G-MVGE, a great pic on here somwhere, but after I owned her - and no - it was not me that wrote it off haha...
I have trained in aerobatics with a C150A. flown single engine cessnas, King air 200 turboprop (albeit in a slightly naughty sense). I do not proclaim any expertise, just a logical and often well founded approach. I have even built small home made gas turbine units, but that is another story... and was a dive master (subaqua), Amateur Rally driver, At one point I made sea shell ornaments to sell in my parents Aquarium, not that that has anything to do with anything

I also love cats, want to save humanity, and would give all my earnings to charity if I won the Miss World competition -

Thats it really, the rest is ancient history.. I am a professional layabout now who never intends or will never need to work again...

Hope that's enough, 'cos it's all I am prepared to say.

I have followed your post's for years, and was an original AD member also. You have revealed aspects of your experience, and I value your input.

The thing is, I do not judge people by their resume / CV. I have met some of the so called best 'qualified' in the world, as you say and intimate, and most of them are 'questionable' - this is a faceless medium of communication.. yo get what you get and at the end of the day only you can judge.. I understand your question, and have given a factualy accurate account with a slight tounge in cheek answer.

[guamainiac]

What can I say?

Thanks.

[guamainiac]

By the way, this is perhaps the most serious comment I will make on this forum. If you have any influence at your airline or command:

Every mechanic should be given about an hour of demo or stick time.

It is not real until it is real.

There is not a day goes by I don't thank God I didn't kill someone with some of the stupid things we did.

Reading is a wonderful academic exercise but no substitute for reality.

I did not really (and still don't), understand flight till it happened years later.

[Joe H]

What can I say?

Thanks.

Hope we are on the same page now Sir haha...

And great points on your last post re stick time.. !

Joe.

[Joe H]

Totally OT, but you asked, this is my last toy....
A few years after I owned her... a very very nice flying machine... 3 cylinder radial two stroke (Koenig)... beautiful and whisper quiet...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/AMF-Chevvron-2-32/1249778/L/&sid=c844828110ae1a88e38373c5ac49b799

[Myndee]

Hmmmm - which airline in the States has an all-Airbus fleet? Virgin America?

I don't quite get what's so scary about Airbus. I am not a fan of Airbus, but I still think Airbus are well-designed aircraft. Also, as far as I know, no statistic to date proves that Airbus aircraft are less safe than Boeing.

You are correct sir!!

The jury is still out on Airbus (for me.) I have heard some compelling arguments for and against.

[Myndee]

The FDR won't certainly show us that.

But even with both recordings, 'what caused the pitots to fail' might be one of the enduring mysteries of this crash. And one of the most important questions to answer.

Sorry. Lack of sleep contributes to typos and posts that don't make sense.


What I was meaning to say is that the FDR will certainly show if the the pitots failed, and if so, the super-cooled droplets theory could be proven a likely suspect.

The Nova program that explained the super-cooled droplets was pretty convincing.