I think some explanations is due from this "crosslinkage"...
Indeed, what is the source of this detail? Was it obtained from the original transmissions, or?
There was a post on eurocokpit, and there was a link providing "their" own translation of the ACARS...
http://www.eurocockpit.com/images/PFR447.php
This was then put into the original ACARS headers list available at
http://www.eurocockpit.com/images/acars447.php (this was the one that got everyone going).
Someone came with the answer to my question at last.
Be warned! There's no way of guaranteeing the content source (linked above) is correct.
Bye Bye dual/triple pitot failure hypothesis...
More reading needs to be done because NAV ADR DISAGREE came up, which shouldn't put the A/P and A/T off, but an 2 ADR fault would. Intermitten failures???
Dunno yet.
Any more messages preceding 0210Z sculling around anywhere
I haven't found any either
A single pitot failure unlikely downs an A330.
Correct... neither should a dual or triple Pitot failure. The reordered ACARS is only an attempt to piece together a possible sequence of events between 0210 and 0214 UTC... beyond that, it's speculation... but, speculation with some basis can be good for discussion, baseless ones are not... which caused the original AF447 topic here to be locked, and this one opened under heavy moderation (but the mods seemed to have been overwhelmed some of the time... they can't be everywhere at all times)... I've monitored this topic and the one at a.net but has so far refrained from posting on this one until someone put up that reordered ACARS list.
This is way too much reading into this ACARS sequence. ACARS are only triggered for post-flight maintenance once landed. They are not a kind of FDR giving the full data flow involved behind each events, neither they are a sequential explanation of the in flight cockpit events.
Agree and disagree...
Agree in that the ACARS is not the FDR, and the CMCs rely on various sampling rates of the components... intermitten failures can be missed, faulty or rogue items can go back online in sync and the CMC wouldn't report if it went and returned quickly. And there reason why one should not rely on this as an absolute factual basis of the chain of events is in the order in which it was listed... the timestamps has 1 minute resolutions... which is clearly not good enough (but then, can't win it all can we?)... and heck, I resequenced it to make sense TO ME!
Disagree in that... what else do we have? If stuff like that aren't useful, then why did it take >100 pages of what seemingly was running around in circles (at least about 10 pages worth continuously at one time)... The stuff can be useful for discussion purposes, and may allow some of us to get a better idea in the meantime. The list and the work done on it is far far from finished... and might never be... They can find the FDR and CVR tomorrow and provide information whether the understanding from the list is correct or totally wrong... but then, I guess we can't just sit and wait in the forums can we?
I for one would be disappointed the stuff to be used by Doombus or Glorybus preachers for their own agendas...
There are quite a bit of background discussions leading to the reordered list... so when just looking at the list, one must take extreme care, otherwise...
How can you get a fault of a inertial reference unit out of conflicting raw air data ? Isn't inertial reference data independent from air data ?
And isn't this fault detected by simple comparison involving INERTIAL DATA only ?
A mess indeed... but look at the Qantas case, the preliminary report if I understand correctly reveal some potential problem linkage between the ADR and IR part of the boxes... which needs to be looked at....
Sorry, not able to post the image.
U mean this?
That BUSS ???
But from what we have, there is no reason to believe that F-GZCP crashed at 0214Z.
Agree... that's why the list was worked at... the simplest conclusion is that it was unlikely the plane hit the water (whether in 1 piece or nor) at 0214Z. The chain of events listed, and other cases such as the Air Caraibes F-OFDF incident, indicate that although the situation in the flight deck may be one of total confusion, the chain of events one can extrapolate/depict from the ACARS indicate that
something else must have happened afterwards...
In the Air Caraïbes case (I am a bit monomaniac but we have a real time sequence described there, not seen through the ACARS):
Yes, but that case is no way a twin of F-GZCP, a cousin at best... more work on the ACARS list is needed to even have a fair comparison of the two cases. I'm not rushing because I do not want to fall into the trap of railroading objectivity...
In the mean time, I'll drop into this topic once in a while...
PK-KAR (a.k.a. MDL499
"On the other place")