Prev Page 3 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 Next » This topic is locked Go to first unread post 386 replies to this topic

[Datsun240Z]

41.000 feet is the A330's maxium, cruising altitude. But it can go higher as up to 70.000. Anyhow, it's likely to have a storm at this altitude. Anyhow weather stations and sattelite images, can show if there was a storm.

Here a video of TAM flight in thunderstorm:

Edited by Datsun240Z, 2009-06-02 19:53:02.

[jackdanielsesq]

What are you talking about man?
This might be too technical for you, but there is not one iota of any political mumbo-jumbo in here.
Not from anyone. .
A little temperance might be the order of the day, not castigation.
Read the entire piece, please.
BR>Jack
BTW - another is one word.



Do you mind keeping your politically motivated comments for an other thread?

[Reimar]

Foxnews reported that the Airforce has found wrack part 400 miles of the cost.

The latest report on Foxnews Website could be read here: http://www.foxnews.c...,524263,00.html

On report now, the news tell that an Airforce Pilot has captured electronic signals from the sea app. 400 miles north of the brazilian coast. An Rescue Vessel is on it's way and will be at that area shortly.

[jackdanielsesq]

Hoo Boy - damage control has just been set in motion!!
What has the defense minister got to do with a civil aviation issue?
One wonders why there are no EPIRB activation codes received - they go off immediately there is water activation and are
received by every plane & satellite?
BR>Jack



French Defence Minister Herve Morin has stressed there is still "no evidence whatsoever" as to the cause of the plane's loss

"We cannot, by definition, exclude a terrorist attack, because terrorism is the main threat for all Western democracies," he added.

[sunsamourai]

churchill, on 2009-06-01 20:50:13, said:

The flight captain had a record of 11,000 flight hours and had already flown 1,700 hours on Airbus A330/A340s.

Of the two first officers, one had flown 3,000 flight hours (800 of which on the Airbus A330/A340) and the other 6,600 (2,600 on the Airbus A330/A340).

No wonder the plane crashed : they should let the pilots rest sometimes !



Isn't the supposed "crash area" known as the "Bermuda triangle" ?

[noahvail]

sunsamourai, on 2009-06-02 22:19:16, said:

No wonder the plane crashed : they should let the pilots rest sometimes !

Isn't the supposed "crash area" known as the "Bermuda triangle" ?

The triangle has had many definitions over the years, spanning vast distances to support one theory or another. My understanding is that many ships were lost in a roughly-triangular shaped area of the seas and oceans thereabouts back in the 1600s and early 1700s due to violent storms. It really has no modern significance, despite the many advocates of a multitude of often-conflicting theories.

Speculation...as well as a not very good time for attempts at humour.

[Carmine6]

noahvail, on 2009-06-02 09:21:36, said:

sunsamourai, on 2009-06-02 22:19:16, said:

No wonder the plane crashed : they should let the pilots rest sometimes !

Isn't the supposed "crash area" known as the "Bermuda triangle" ?

The triangle has had many definitions over the years, spanning vast distances to support one theory or another. My understanding is that many ships were lost in a roughly-triangular shaped area of the seas and oceans thereabouts back in the 1600s and early 1700s due to violent storms. It really has no modern significance, despite the many advocates of a multitude of often-conflicting theories.

Speculation...as well as a not very good time for attempts at humour.

The Bermuda triangle extends out from Florida and the Southeastern part of the US. It extends out to Bermuda and down to Puerto Rico. This plane was nowhere near that area. It was closer to Africa than North America.

[Mosha]

A bit of a task to get the black boxes, though not impossibble. The water is at least 12000' there where wreckage has been found.

[jackdanielsesq]

Latest Updates:
Bomb threat received several days prior to - the same flight to Paris, but which landed safely.
Still much discussion over it being known fact that there are frequent violent storms in that area - why then deliberately fly that route? Seems like an absurd argument! Or stupidity. Or more damage control, as all the lawyers circle. The QANTAS flight mishap in OZ is front & centre again, as that flight nosedived without provocation. This is a known, documented problem with Airbus. There was apparent outside electrical interference - the point being that the autopilot tripped up whilst in cruise mode. Flight 447 would have been in a similar cruise mode.
Remember - the Airbus does not have a mechanical redundancy built in - once the electronics or fly-by-wire go AWOL, its game over. One must further presume that Airbus did have electronic redundancy, but that did not work for whatever reasons.
We were discussing this very same redundancy vis-a-vis pleasure boat controls on another forum, where an entire family was killed on a Sunday pleasure cruise, simply because the captain entrusted the safety of his ship & passengers to a electronic autopilot, which went berserk, and turned the pleasure craft into an on coming tanker. The captain was, along with everyone, standing on the bow, waving at the tanker, with nobody minding the helm. Possible extraneous electrical interference from said tanker as cause. Again, another very tragic result, caused by a series of avoidable blunders.
We all felt very strongly, that there is no substitute for manual/human control of any craft, and that there is ultimately only one pilot in control - the Captain.
BR>Jack

[churchill]

AP: French investigator unsure whether chief pilot was at controls when Air France jet went down

[churchill]

AP: French investigator "not optimistic" about finding black boxes of Air France jet

[jackdanielsesq]

They are in full damage control mode now - even spinning the future.
Time to call the lawyers, maybe ground the A330 until this is resolved.
BR>Jack


AP: French investigator "not optimistic" about finding black boxes of Air France jet

[Datsun240Z]

Datsun240Z, on 2009-06-02 19:02:57, said:

Although boeing stil uses cables trough the plane for basic control functions for the pilots, Airbus does not have something like that. If the computers fail, the plane fails.... Technology is nice, but sometimes to much is dangerous, you can't rely 100% on computers.

@ Jack: What I explained before. AF477.

Edited by Datsun240Z, 2009-06-03 17:02:29.

[Datsun240Z]

jackdanielsesq, on 2009-06-03 16:53:19, said:

maybe ground the A330 until this is resolved.

Not only A330 uses fly-by-wire systems, mostly all the newer types of Airbus. Never the mention the new A380, which faults can be expected sooner or later. ( Imagine that bird crash ) Airbus actually did several tests with the 300 series, completly flying it by computer, without pilot! That where the future is going is guess.

Fly-by-wire system is also used for technical unstable planes, which mechanicly cannot be hold steady, which computers can do.

[sibeymai]

If the black boxes are not recovered any cause determined will be speculation based on whatever can be determined from the physical evidence.

The reported 5km long debris trail should give an experienced investigator some clue as to whether the plane broke up in flight or on impact with the ocean, or during descent. Breakup at altitude would easily spread debris over a wide area. Impact with the ocean would need the sea conditions to spread the debris. Was the extent and direction of the debris trail consistent with surface or altitude breakup ? The pilots of another aircraft reported seeing what they thought was fire on the ocean (orange spots) at the time and in the location of the crash. This might also provide clues as to where the aircraft broke up. Text messages reportedly sent by passengers indicates the aircraft did not break up suddenly while in cruise.

Should be simple for an investigator who has access to the evidence to determine what happened, but harder to say why without the black boxes.

Edited by sibeymai, 2009-06-03 17:12:03.

[churchill]

churchill, on 2009-06-03 16:47:37, said:

AP: French investigator "not optimistic" about finding black boxes of Air France jet

Lost jet data 'may not be found'

continued at http://news.bbc.co.u...cas/8080669.stm
-- BBC 03/06/09

[TAWP]

There was no SMS sent, it was faulty info being reprinted.

(See correction: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Passengers_on_...ane_disappeared )

[cloudhopper]

An Airbus demonstrating fly by wire at the Paris Air Show:



All of the flight and engine controls are commanded by a computer with NO cable or hydraulic backup. Even if the computer and electrical system are working OK malfunctioning sensors (e.g. due to bird strikes or hail) can cause loss of command.

[SMEEERE]

There is definatly something odd here as even in a nosedive from that altitude it would take minutes for the plane to impact,. that would have ( you would think ) given the pilots time to report and update on the problem,for total electrical failure ( to not be able to transmit ) it would have had to be blown out of the sky, lightning ?.

[jackdanielsesq]

I believe that the lack of mechanical backup or redundancy is going to be where the lawyers go.
And then watch EADS retrofit all their craft. Will be interesting to see the FAA & NTSB wade in on this.
And yes - the mind boggles at an A380 wreck.
BR>Jack

[meom]

SMEEERE, on 2009-06-03 19:00:48, said:

There is definatly something odd here as even in a nosedive from that altitude it would take minutes for the plane to impact,. that would have ( you would think ) given the pilots time to report and update on the problem,for total electrical failure ( to not be able to transmit ) it would have had to be blown out of the sky, lightning ?.

It would take about 3-4 minutes and I would guess both pilots would have their hands full with the controls trying to get out of a nose dive.

Alaska Airlines flight 261 went down in a nose dive in 2000; link here with full report
http://en.wikipedia....ines_Flight_261

Edited by meom, 2009-06-03 19:26:35.

[cgjtt]

I'm reading a lot of things on this post and a lot of it just makes me crack up.
The A-330 has been around for a while and has a very good safety record. This fly by wire thing has been around for a long time and is a proven concept . The B-777 is FBW . Just remember that hydraulics still power the actual control surfaces. Failure of the computers means that the system reverts to " direct law" meaning no protection against a pilot pulling too hard and doing damage.
Now, while total electrical failure doesn't mean loss of control, it could possibly mean loss of radar, communications and navigation. Flying around blind may ruin you day, especially where they were. The last thing anybody whats to do is fly through a cell. If so, the airframe may have been overstressed. Hopefully they will find the CVR and the data recorder. If indeed they did loose electricals, the question is why.

[jackdanielsesq]

We are so glad for you !!



I'm reading a lot of things on this post and a lot of it just makes me crack up.

[harleyclarkey]

Word here is that they are looking at a really bad storm which caused the plane to crash. The debris is spread over miles which suggests a mid air break up.
The black boxes may never be recovered as the depth here is 6,000 metres.
God help the passengers and their loved ones left behind.

[Jimjim]

You're all saying that there is no backup if the electronics fail but I've seen on the news that's not true. It has a backup system (yes, electrical also) that kicks in to place if the main system fails, and they said if that fails there is a third fail-safe with manual controls, and I guess that means hydraulics but they said even that is enough to fly the plane.

SMEEERE, on 2009-06-03 19:00:48, said:

There is definatly something odd here as even in a nosedive from that altitude it would take minutes for the plane to impact,. that would have ( you would think ) given the pilots time to report and update on the problem,for total electrical failure ( to not be able to transmit ) it would have had to be blown out of the sky, lightning ?.

Lightning doesn't blow planes out of the sky. Please educate yourself.

Edited by Jimjim, 2009-06-04 03:40:58.