Air France 447 - On topic only!

[MCM]

Gday Evan,

You make the assumption that you are not trying to maintain altitude, which is a big assumption to make. Most of the time that is what a crew is trying to do.

It is not the correct thing to do when you know you have unreliable airspeed information, however that relies on rapid and accurate recognition of the situation.

[SYDCBRWOD]

Would have been easier to reply if the questions were numbered



I believe the pitots played a part, but were not the only cause. They were part of the chain of events that led to the crash.



No, unless it turns out after all, that somehow a bomb on board was responsible. I believe AF447 did not crash because of overloads caused by turbulence or flight control inputs.



While it would reflect pretty poorly on the airmanship of the AF447 crew, it is quite possible that the crash resulted from mismanagement of erroneous airspeed indications. Wouldn't be the first one in history. I hope (for several reasons) that this was not the cause of the crash, but I believe that it is quite likely the cause and that the investigation will eventually confirm that.



None that are both realistic and supported by the facts known so far.



You're welcome

Agreed on all counts.

[Jpmkam]

Drying process raises questions and debate.

The two cylinders containing the data cards were transported from the salvage ship in demineralized water to avoid the risk of further corrosion.



BEA experts will first remove the chips from the casings and wash them to remove all traces of salt. The memory cards will then be dried in a special oven for at least 12 hours. They will be inspected with a microscope for damage and tested to see if they still function, Mr. Menez said.

The drying process has sparked debate among technical experts about the best and safest way to handle the recorders without jeopardizing data. Some specialists say the memory cards and chips should dry gradually, over several days, to prevent delamination—separation into layers—or other internal damage. Since the intense pressure on the seabed may have pushed microscopic quantities of water inside the recorders, these experts advocate keeping the devices in special ovens for as long as five days, with the temperature hovering around 100 degrees, and only then hooking them back up to electric power.

Both engines and avionics bay have been recovered.

The plane's two engines and its avionics bay, which have already been retrieved, also contain memory chips. They may also be analyzed, especially if the black boxes aren't fully readable.

[KurtMc]

Peace

[Joe H]

Auto cad imagery in conjunction with the debris field, in post by Dreamy here. Pics of some of the parts retrieved are posted a few pages earlier in that thread.

Thanks for that KurtMc

The original is here (BEA) http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....n12mai2011.pdf

I think whoever did the overlay in Autocad has his left and right confused. (but it is early here lol) - unless of cause it is a BEA autocad image, but it doesnt appear to be ?

The direction of the aircraft at impact would also be debatable, the autocad overlay shows a right to left (almost due west) direction.. but that woud have meant the wings and engines crossed over after impact.. I think it may well have been an easterly impact, left to right with the heavier items travelling much further and the aircraft breaking up at impact into it's 3 main sections.. but would be interested in your thoughts. ?

[KurtMc]

Peace

[Joe H]

Hi Kurt, thanks for the reply.
I have been looking more at the distribution of the Debris and I still come to the same conclusion -
the impact was west to east - left to right on the image,
It was tail low nose high,
the impact seperated the aircraft into it's 3 major components, wing box area, aft section, and forward section, at impact.. as the moment the tail hit, the whole aircraft turned downwards leading to the so called 'flat' impact, at this point, the rear section goes, the forward section goes due to the impact force added to the turning downward 'belly flop' force.
The engines, and heavier items, landing gear etc, wing box area and central areas, continued tumbling along with the various parts that had disintegrated.

The 'rear' of the debris field is not the forward scattered items (imho), but the lighter items that were more current induced, the heavier items are at the right of the field.
I just cannot see the eng 1 and 2 and left and right wing areas overturning and flying in opposite directions to the impact, however, all is possible.

It certainly adds (to me) the theory that the aircraft was in a nose high low forward speed, high downward speed attitude, in other words, fully stalled.

The bodies recovered, I have been considering this - without appearing to be morbid, what would tend to happen is that the body may well have died at impact, however, the heart keeps on circulating blood containing gasses for several minutes. The body sinks rapidly into a depth where all the gasses, Nitrogen, O2 and CO2 are super compressed and then effectively put into a freezer or at least cooler. The blood, tissues etc congeal, or effictively mumify. Every part of the body has these gasses in the skin and tissues... now, we decide to 'raise' them, the effectively mumified corpse now releases these super compressed gasses breaking up the mumification and hence tissues. leading to a self sustaining 'explosion' and hence disintegration of all tissues as the body is raised. Gas tranfer in the lungs is a product of partial pressures of contrasting areas, As the lungs fill with water at higher pressures the gas has nowhere to go, until, you try to raise them..

Sorry if that is too much detail. (I was also like TeeVee a paramedic in an early life)

[Joe H]

I think the post by 'Bear' on the other forums is almost spot on.

[Theoddkiwi]

There are moments in this sort of analysis where the shear terror of the even comes the fore in my mind
And to me this is it, imagining this machine literally falling straight down in the darkness, engines probably screaming trying to get this thing to start flying again. Pilots wondering what the hell they are supposed to do to fix this and passengers gripping their seats trying to work out what they hell is happening.

I hope the impact took them before their their sad silent journey to the bottom of the sea.

[Joe H]

There are moments in this sort of analysis where the shear terror of the even comes the fore in my mind
And to me this is it, imagining this machine literally falling straight down in the darkness, engines probably screaming trying to get this thing to start flying again. Pilots wondering what the hell they are supposed to do to fix this and passengers gripping their seats trying to work out what they hell is happening.

I hope the impact took them before their their sad silent journey to the bottom of the sea.

I fully agree, but I often doubt that that is the case, the harsh reality is that in many of these 'events' there are many passengers and crew fully aware of what is happening, not necessarily in the context of the actual accident and outcome, but in the fact that they ARE going to die, and it will NOT be simple or peaceful.
TWA800, PA 103 etc, there is good evidence to indicate many passengers were fully aware of the situation. The JAL 747 with the rear presuure bulkhead 'repair' - where passengers even had time to write last words to loved ones on scraps of paper, 9/11 where telephone calls were made etc.
It is one thing to die in an instant that you are not aware of, but another to suffer minutes or often longer of agonising distress.
Almost always the 'authorities' tell the family ' hey !, it was instant, no suffering' because that is the easiest. but the truth is that it is often not the case.
I wish I could say differently. but I cannot.
It is not just aircraft crashes of course, the people in the twin towers who decided to jump rather than fry. !!! what the hell was going through their mind ? , not in the wrong sense, as if they had any option, it was the reality that they DID NOT have any option.

It is all down to finance, compensation and numbers. Also the organisations protecting their interests along with public desire for 'cheap' travel. A hard act to balance. Make airlines FULLY responsible for their mistakes and compensation in the event of negligence unlimited, thenm no one will fly.

The airlines being the 'safest' way of travel is one of lies, bloody lies, and statistics as the old saying goes. If one were to put it in terms of recompense or cuplability / negligence payouts, and suffering, then it may be statistically safer, but a far more horrible way to die.. but no one want to hear that, and the industry does not want you to hear that..
Catch 22.. both sides to blame.

[TeeVee]

Joe H: where exactly did you get your medical training from? the body dies but the heart keeps pumping for a few minutes? gases in the tissue explode as the body is raised?

here are a couple of problems.

1: impact great enough to essentially shatter the aircraft most likely killed all on board "instantly" which includes their hearts. rapid deceleration found in high speed collisions tends to separate internal body parts and cause aortic tears, brain stem separation etc etc. recall that the bodies are strapped to the seats, which are bolted to the airplane which came to a rapid stop, while the internal organs are essentially suspended and continue to travel forward, at least until they tear, leading to death in seconds not minutes.

2. once the heart and lungs stop the gas exchange in the body stops.

3. anyone who has taken a real scuba course will remember Boyle's law and the law of partial pressures. assuming you held your breath from the point of entry into the water (which is the case here since everyone died at the surface or was already dead at impact), although gases in the blood at the surface remain dissolved in the blood their concentrations in the tissue remain the same as depth increases, since no new gas is being introduced. if no new gases are introduced your "exploding" bodies theory fails. now you may think that the small volume of air in the lungs at impact could theoretically become dissolved into the tissue by shear force, but i think that is error. the immense pressure of the water during the descent would have collapsed any airspaces within the body. releasing the air into the surrounding water rather than force it into dissolving into the bodies' tissues.

ok morning rant over!

[TeeVee]

I fully agree, but I often doubt that that is the case, the harsh reality is that in many of these 'events' there are many passengers and crew fully aware of what is happening, not necessarily in the context of the actual accident and outcome, but in the fact that they ARE going to die, and it will NOT be simple or peaceful.
TWA800, PA 103 etc, there is good evidence to indicate many passengers were fully aware of the situation. The JAL 747 with the rear presuure bulkhead 'repair' - where passengers even had time to write last words to loved ones on scraps of paper, 9/11 where telephone calls were made etc.
It is one thing to die in an instant that you are not aware of, but another to suffer minutes or often longer of agonising distress.
Almost always the 'authorities' tell the family ' hey !, it was instant, no suffering' because that is the easiest. but the truth is that it is often not the case.
I wish I could say differently. but I cannot.
It is not just aircraft crashes of course, the people in the twin towers who decided to jump rather than fry. !!! what the hell was going through their mind ? , not in the wrong sense, as if they had any option, it was the reality that they DID NOT have any option.

It is all down to finance, compensation and numbers. Also the organisations protecting their interests along with public desire for 'cheap' travel. A hard act to balance. Make airlines FULLY responsible for their mistakes and compensation in the event of negligence unlimited, thenm no one will fly.

The airlines being the 'safest' way of travel is one of lies, bloody lies, and statistics as the old saying goes. If one were to put it in terms of recompense or cuplability / negligence payouts, and suffering, then it may be statistically safer, but a far more horrible way to die.. but no one want to hear that, and the industry does not want you to hear that..
Catch 22.. both sides to blame.

again, here you go speaking with some false authority. "lies, bloody lies..." the fact is, in the US alone, more people die in traffic accidents every year than have died in the history of aviation. forget about the rest of the world. in 2009 in the US alone there were over 33,000 traffic deaths. how many have died in aviation accidents since the Wright brothers? of few thousand?

since you claim to have been a paramedic, how many folks to you watch die slowly after they were involved in a traffic accident? how many of them lingered on for hours or days after the event--sometimes sedated but sometimes not?

exactly what "good evidence" is there that people on TWA 800 and PA 103 were aware of what was going on? i might agree that there were some folks on PA 103 that survived the initial blast but recall that the aircraft was at 31,000 feet so everyone that survived would have been unconscious within 30 seconds or so, if not sooner. as for twa 800, the ntsb report claimed that the vast majority of the people were killed instantly as a result of the initial blast. with a force strong enough to cause that kind of trauma, i suspect the remaining people were at the very least rendered unconscious immediately.

too much morbidity for such an early hour...

[3WE]

again, here you go speaking with some false authority. "lies, bloody lies..." the fact is, in the US alone, more people die in traffic accidents every year than have died in the history of aviation. forget about the rest of the world. in 2009 in the US alone there were over 33,000 traffic deaths. how many have died in aviation accidents since the Wright brothers? of few thousand?

since you claim to have been a paramedic, how many folks to you watch die slowly after they were involved in a traffic accident? how many of them lingered on for hours or days after the event--sometimes sedated but sometimes not?

exactly what "good evidence" is there that people on TWA 800 and PA 103 were aware of what was going on? i might agree that there were some folks on PA 103 that survived the initial blast but recall that the aircraft was at 31,000 feet so everyone that survived would have been unconscious within 30 seconds or so, if not sooner. as for twa 800, the ntsb report claimed that the vast majority of the people were killed instantly as a result of the initial blast. with a force strong enough to cause that kind of trauma, i suspect the remaining people were at the very least rendered unconscious immediately.

too much morbidity for such an early hour...

Ok, Joe is definately "over the top", and I too would like to know what "good evidence" there is too.

But, in Joe's defense, there is not that great of evidence either direction to know with certaintly went on before impact with the ground or water with many of these crashes- espeically if we start making blanket statements that "everyone" was killed by an in-flight explosion.

What we do know is that in some crashes (and some fairly horrific ones), some folks survive. So, it's not that far out that folks at the far front or far back of 103/800 might have survived the explosion. And TWA 800 was at an altitude where unpressuried planes are allowed to operate- i.e. plenty of breathable, keep-you-conscious air!

I recall the TWA 800 experts first saying that "it appeared that everyone died almost instantly from the explosion." Later, they discovered a few folks with "too much" water in their lungs and recanted that "probably some people" lived till impact with the water. Of course, "alive" does not neccesarily mean "awake and aware", but who knows.

It's ALL speculation on our part, but I would fear that there was a horrific time period on Air France- especially given that the plane does seem to have hit the water largely in-tact (as evidence before and after the discovery suggests). 800 and 103, less likely, but who knows if a few out of the 250+ on board might have gotten "to experience" the event.

[TeeVee]

on 103 it is probable that some if not many survived the blast. but like i said, at 31,000 feet, they would have been unconscious in seconds--30 more or less.

also with 800, i was going on ntsb statements in the final report which stated that there were a number of pax with moderate trauma from the blast, leaving me to conclude that they survived the blast but were possible unconscious from the shock wave--i hope for their sake they were.

since it is still unclear what happened on 447, it may well be that they were unconscious prior to impact. wasn't there an acars message regarding loss of cabin pressure?

[Black Ram]

wasn't there an acars message regarding loss of cabin pressure?

I think the acars message was about change in the pressure difference inside and outside the cabin, a rapid equalization consistent with the rapid descent. It's all about the cabin vertical speed. I don't think there was a message regarding loss of cabin pressure.