Originally posted by 3WE
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AirAsia flight missing
Collapse
X
-
Stall while climbing?
One expert offered CNN a less sinister theory about what might have happened: The plane stalled mid-flight.
A screen grab purportedly leaked by an Indonesian air traffic controller appears to show that Flight 8501 was rising in altitude but was losing speed at a velocity that was too slow to sustain flight, said Geoffrey Thomas, managing director at the aviation industry site airlineratings.com.
The data taken from the screen grab comes from an Indonesian pilot who was given the screen grab anonymously by an air traffic controller who had been tracking the flight, according to Thomas.
Thomas added that the typical procedure for a pilot is to push the nose of the plane down to gain airspeed and exit the stall, but in very rare circumstances atmospheric conditions can make that impossible, leading to a situation that is not recoverable.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Evan View Post
But then where is it...
Don't panic.AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008
Originally posted by orangehuggythe most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jpmkam View Post353 knots wing stall climbing to 36,000 ft. is the latest theory on CNN.
--- 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 ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostAnd it's the most logical speculation, except for the lack of radar returns after that.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostYep...Stalls don't turn off the transponder. AND they take at least a few minutes to get all the way down to the ocean...last time the captain got up and walked into the cockpit to ask what's going on...and help troubleshoot everything but relentless pull ups for a fair bit of time.
Comment
-
OK,
My turn for wild speculation...
Capt requests higher alt, then plane hit by lightening, this causes all sorts of anomalies including incorrect ALT 'pings' on radar.
So while the plane appears to be climbing at slow speed it is actually falling at high speed.
Very implausible, and by occams razor not real, but it seems as good an explanation as any right now
VAZ
Comment
-
Originally posted by vaztr View PostOK,
My turn for wild speculation...
Capt requests higher alt, then plane hit by lightening, this causes all sorts of anomalies including incorrect ALT 'pings' on radar.
So while the plane appears to be climbing at slow speed it is actually falling at high speed.
Very implausible, and by occams razor not real, but it seems as good an explanation as any right now
VAZ
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quench View PostIf the static ports were blocked then the altitude shown by the SSR would be incorrect. It is possible that SSR was indicating a much higher altitude than the aircraft was actually at.
Firtst of all static ports are very hard to block in flight because ice do not tend to accumulate in areas where the air flows parallel but in areas where the air "hit" (leading edge, the nose, the engine inlets, the pitot tube).
Second, for the altitude to show a higher value than real, you would need the pressure inside the blocked static port to be lower than real. So how did this low pressure get into the static port in the first place?
--- 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 ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by vaztr View PostOK,
My turn for wild speculation...
Capt requests higher alt, then plane hit by lightening, this causes all sorts of anomalies including incorrect ALT 'pings' on radar.
So while the plane appears to be climbing at slow speed it is actually falling at high speed.
Very implausible, and by occams razor not real, but it seems as good an explanation as any right now
VAZ
That the lightning affected the ground speed reading of the radar? (if that's what you meant, I'm not sure) Impossible. The ground speed is determined by distance between consecutive radar blips divided by time. Not by information sent by the airplane (the radar could measure the ground speed of a chunk of metal fitted with no device whatsoever)
--- 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 ---
Comment
Comment