EgyptAir 804 disappears from radar Paris-Cairo

[skridlov]

Why have the ACARS messages that have been repeatedly posted here been deleted almost immediately? Obviously they may be totally invented for whatever malicious reason but equally they may be genuine. Given the amount of "noise" here why not leave them in place and let someone knowledgeable cast doubt upon their veracity?
Their immediate removal - whilst all sorts of dross remains - seems a little suspect to me.
One has just re-appeared...

[andrasz]

Why have the ACARS messages that have been repeatedly posted here been deleted almost immediately?

I believe mods - just like me - took it to be a hoax given lack of confirmation from any credible source. Simon posting them on AVH definitely puts more weight behind them.
If they ARE true, it is an incomprehensibly poor show from MS as they had this information since the beginning, and releasing would have avoided much of the uncertainty over the past two days. There is nothing in the data that would be any more damaging than the accident itself.

[mockingjay]

If MS have had the data, why did the authorities quickly point the blame at terrorists?

[Smott999]

It would seem AVH has published this more than a day ago, yet it has not been confirmed anywhere...?

Perhaps that is our Mods' reluctance, but if the info is true it would indeed be the most important details we have thus far.

[Alain67]

We would need someone familiar with ACARS to tell us whether these messages, written exactly like that, could have been sent by a real ACARS facility.

[andrasz]

It would seem AVH has published this more than a day ago

No, it was only published on AVH an hour ago. It was circulating on the net without source since yesterday, I would assume Simon has means to verify before posting.

[fox niner]

So the acars messages are sent at 0026z.
Radar contact is not lost until 20 minutes later. At 0046z.
Fire.....

[Smott999]

Apologies you're spot on.
Only just appeared on AVH but had been referred to prior in other forums.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Alain67

We would need someone familiar with ACARS to tell us whether these messages, written exactly like that, could have been sent by a real ACARS facility.

Yes, they could certainly have been.

Whether they were in this instance is another question.

[andrasz]

@ Fox Niner, contact was lost at 00:30Z, a minute after the last ACARS transmission. S&R was launched 00:46.

[Turbavykas]

00:26Z 3044 ANTI ICE R WINDOW
00:26Z 561200 R SLIDING WINDOW SENSOR
00:26Z 2600 SMOKE LAVATORY SMOKE
00:27Z 2600 AVIONICS SMOKE
00:28Z 561100 R FIXED WINDOW SENSOR
00:29Z 2200 AUTO FLT FCU 2 FAULT
00:29Z 2700 F/CTL SEC 3 FAULT

I would say very rapid change in pressure(explosion) knocked out sensors and very fast decompression caused fog(condensation) witch was detected by fire sensors

[Airbubba]

So the acars messages are sent at 0026z.
Radar contact is not lost until 20 minutes later. At 0046z.
Fire.....

The PPRuNe banned ACARS messages and the ADS-B data from FlightAware and Flightradar24 all show the last transmission at about 0029Z.

[3Greens]

Fire sensors are actually smoke detectors. They aren't triggered by fog or condensation. They are actually a kind of particle detector. That's not to say they wouldn't have been triggered by an explosion of some kind.

[rugmuncher]

If Ionisation sensors are fitted they may be affected..

[nicolai]

Fine mist can trigger fire sensors - including such mundane things as spray-on deodorant in an airline lavatory, especially if aimed upwards at the sensor.

I'm not sure whether decompression could cause sudden mist in the cabin; you have to decrease pressure sharply in an already-saturated atmosphere to get large-scale cloud condensation, and aircraft cabins at 37000ft are very dry. So I think it is unlikely. Does anyone have any contrary data?

[Local Variation]

Both optical and ionisation detectors can and will trigger on fog. I doubt the types fitted have algorithms to compensate.

[GCharlie]

Given the ACARS report, does ACARS have sensors that would differentiate an explosion from a fire? If it does, would this rule out a bomb on the plane?

Does the presence and absence of data reports help to rule in or out anything?

[ILS27LEFT]

Sudden event

We all probably agree that this was a very sudden event however we cannot exclude that the trigger was an external object going straight into the cockpit through the windshield, terrorism obviously should not be excluded but the Acars messages, if confirmed, are also compatible with various other events beyond terrorism including , as an example, sudden loss of cabin pressure after compromised windshield. I know it is extremely unlikely but we all know that it is not totally impossible for an aircraft to hit something...a tiny object can cause a total loss of aircraft if the impact point is vulnerable e.g. badly damaged windshield at max altitude, high speed, can easily lead to a catastrophic series of events. Acars messages look genuine. Terrorists look for maximum carnage: this was a very late flight, low nr of pax, and why wait such a long time into the flight?... more likely an incident caused by an external object or internal interference, including an explosion, but probably nothing to do with terrorism, unless something went very wrong in this individual's plan hence the illogical delay. No terrorist group has claimed responsibility neither which is unusual.

[Pace]

The media are all claiming this was terrorism a bomb. I am not convinced for a number of reasons firstly if the aircraft left Paris is would expose a very serious security hole at Paris which would have implications for thousands of aircraft operating out of there

Secondly there do not appear to be any terrorist claims to have committed such a thing itself very strange.

That doesn't mean there was no explosion in the aircraft which may have depressurised the aircraft and caused handling problems.
The aircraft had a light passenger load and it would be interesting to know more on what they were carrying in the hold other than Passenger bags?

To the guy who posted on putting communicate before aviate? The absolute number one above everything where there is a problem with the aircraft is to aviate. No one on the ground will help you one jot in that situation

Ok if you have a problem where you need to land then Yes ATC can relieve some of the pressure so you can aviate by taking over some of the work load giving you steers etc, But frankly if you hit the sea vertically the last thing on your mind is going to be helping the authorities piece together why. You will be 100% on saving your skin and the PAX and aircraft and that means aviating till the end

[IcePack]

Wouldn't Acars report "low cabin differential" or similar if aircraft had a decompression.