AirAsia flight missing

[Evan]

Let's wait for the information from FDR, but apparently they stalled the airplane:

SURABAYA, Indonesia (Reuters) - Radar data being examined by investigators appeared to show that AirAsia Flight QZ8501 made an "unbelievably" steep climb before it crashed, possibly pushing it beyond the Airbus A320's limits, said a source familiar with the probe's initial findings.

The data was transmitted before the aircraft disappeared from the screens of air traffic controllers in Jakarta on Sunday, added the source, who declined to be identified.

"So far, the numbers taken by the radar are unbelievably high. This rate of climb is very high, too high. It appears to be beyond the performance envelope of the aircraft," he said.

I'm leaning towards the updraft/vertical windshear theory.

[AVION1]

I'm leaning towards the updraft/vertical windshear theory.

Should they reduce speed, before flying into a thunderstorm? "turbulence air speed"?

[guamainiac]

I guess the old Len Morgan technique of getting the airframe dirty as possible by extending the gear so it can't over speed has gone the way of the buggy whip now? Avion, that was one of the "tricks" to keep the speeds in check.

[Jpmkam]

QZ8501 was likely upside down when it crashed according to report.

Doomed AirAsia flight QZ8501 would have been upside down when it hit the water, if reports of the plane's current condition are true.

It has been reported that the Airbus A320-200 has been found largely intact but upside down at the bottom of the ocean.

Former British Airways pilot Stephen Buzdygan told the Telegraph the 24m-deep crash site would have been far too shallow for the plane to flip after submerging.

"I would suggest that there was some sort of upset to the aircraft – severe downdrafts or clear air turbulence," he said.

"They have had some sort of upset and not been able to control it."

A source close to the investigators' initial findings has told Reuters that QZ8501 made an "unbelievably" steep climb before the crash.

December 31, 2014: AirAsia has confirmed overnight that the wreckage of flight QZ8501 has been located in the Java Sea.

"So far, the numbers taken by the radar are unbelievably high," he said.

"This rate of climb is very high, too high.

"It appears to be beyond the performance envelope of the aircraft."

In his last communication at 6.12am pn Sunday, pilot Irianto asked for permission to climb and deviate from the set path to avoid bad weather.

When Jakarta traffic control responded two minutes later, there was no response from the cockpit.

Aviation experts say that a plane is likely to stall if it climbs suddenly and starts to lose spee


Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2015/0...jltC0wQWZKo.99

[Gabriel]

QZ8501 was likely upside down when it crashed according to report.

Nonsense:

Doomed AirAsia flight QZ8501 would have been upside down when it hit the water ... [...] ... the Airbus A320-200 has been found largely intact

Yea, sure, I want to see an A320 impacting the water upside down and remaining largely intact.

[Alessandro]

Swedish media reports that 10 bodies has been recovered, one of crew member included.

[3WE]

I guess the old Len Morgan technique of getting the airframe dirty as possible by extending the gear so it can't over speed has gone the way of the buggy whip now? Avion, that was one of the "tricks" to keep the speeds in check.

This is an Airbus.

How dare you suggest non checkist procedures based on airmanship fundamentals? And who in the hell is Len Morgan?

Also, I'm tired of everyone posting "stall stall stall stall stall".

Airbii are unstallable for practical purposes, suggesting something bigger caused a loss of control.

[brianw999]

This is an Airbus.

How dare you suggest non checkist procedures based on airmanship fundamentals? And who in the hell is Len Morgan?

Also, I'm tired of everyone posting "stall stall stall stall stall".

Based on the lack of smilie use to indicate tongue -in-cheek comments I'll assume that you REALLY don't know who Len Morgan was. Here's a little reference to him for your interest and education..... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Morgan

Airbii are unstallable for practical purposes, suggesting something bigger caused a loss of control.

Everything that flies can be stalled. They just respond differently. My Piper Cherokee dropped the nose and one wing and would go into a spin if not recovered. An Airbus, and for all I know any other airliner that you care to name will fall out of the sky in a stall if the airflow over the wings stops creating sufficient lift to keep it airborne. It is a fact that Airbusses have extensive anti stall protection and it generally works very well. To see it in action search YouTube for "Bruce Dickinson, Airbus" and watch the resulting video.

All this however relies on the air surrounding the aircraft behaving itself and not turning into a howling, twisting maelstrom of destruction. The aircraft could well be technically speaking "flying" in that it has sufficient airspeed and is creating lift but if the mass of air that it is doing it in happens to be in "houses are getting bigger....quickly" mode....which is very possibly what happened to Air Asia then it will "fly" until it hits the ground.
We will find out once the true experts have analysed all available data. Until then, speculation, while being a conversation point remains largely pointless.

[3WE]

What I'm trying to say is that 1) we're overly fixated on stalls, and 2) an inadvertent, pilot caused stall is unlikely.

Extreme turbulence and/or a broken airplane or control surface sure... The plane could have stalled. But post after post after post saying that the pilots stalled it or that a stall was the primary cause...I bet otherwise.

[3WE]

...We will find out once the true experts have analysed all available data. Until then, speculation, while being a conversation point remains largely pointless.

In that case, shut down the safety forum and lets talk liveries and lighting.

[elaw]

Actually I think if speculation were completely banned, 90% of the content on the Internet would disappear overnight! Well, 90% of the textual content... there would still be plenty of photographs of cats and naked women.

On a related (to the main topic) note that may be completely unrelated: does anyone know how the computers in an airbus would react if the plane were to become inverted?

[brianw999]

3WE,
You miss my meaning. I said "speculation, while being a conversation point"
.....which is what is happening here. By all means speculate, by all means have the conversations that are posted here but too many folks take speculative comments seriously. It's a bit like saying "it must be true, it said so in the Sun newspaper !" (For our American friends, all the Sun editor cares about is the size of the tits on the next prime minister).
The truth is that the true experts will determine the official cause. No doubt, even then, someone will disagree with them and construct yet another spurious theory.
So far we have gone through....
Wind shear.
Stall.
Vertical drop with no airspeed.
Dive into the ocean.
Inverted impact.
Belly ditching/landing.

About the only thing that can be said with any degree of certainty is that one or more of those will feature in the eventual result.

For the record....I'm going for a windshear of some kind putting them into an unrecoverable attitude.
Why ?
The aircraft was flying in a region known for severe, suddenly developing storms at this time of year. The flight crew had requested a diversion because of known severe weather conditions.
There was no distress call indicating that they were taken by surprise and/or were too busy to make a radio call.

[Gabriel]

For the record....I'm going for a windshear of some kind putting them into an unrecoverable attitude.
Why ?
The aircraft was flying in a region known for severe, suddenly developing storms at this time of year. The flight crew had requested a diversion because of known severe weather conditions.
There was no distress call indicating that they were taken by surprise and/or were too busy to make a radio call.

Or had a massive airplane failure of some sort (due to weather, technical or human reasons).

It's hard to me to believe that weather alone can put the plane in an unrecoverable attitude (alone again).

The AF-type scenario, where a weather related "minor" incident is turned into a major disaster by the pilot's way of, hmmm..., "managing"... the situation is not crazy either.

[Peter Kesternich]

I'm still not quite sure what to make of the fact that the SSR stopped working at altitude. Is that really confirmed?

[Gabriel]

I'm still not quite sure what to make of the fact that the SSR stopped working at altitude. Is that really confirmed?

Not AFAIK.

There is a photo taken from the radar monitor that reportedly is from this flight and shows the plane at FL 363 (higher than cleared), at a very slow speed, and climbed.

However, there are other reports that the last radar contact (secondary only, primary had been already lost) had the plane at FL290 (lower than cleared, I'm guessing that in a descent some point after the photo described above).

I think that they have a bunch for radar info that they are not releasing.