Noted.
No comm with ACARS. Hands full? Sudden onset of emergency? Or was tha a/c out of range?
In a short period of time, 447 went from controlled cruise to Sea Impact.
Almost certainly the upset was coincident with what had been seen multiple times in the preceding months.
Radar. What you see from space is almost never what you confront in flight. Looking through weather is quite different than looking down through it. What is trouble is the big cylinders of developing or developed energy. These must be avoided. To say something did or didn't happen, and this way or that, is called conjecture, and no harm no foul.
With a demonstrated vulnerability (Thales), and evidence of the very thing, this would seem to be the foundation for any attempt at further explanation.
The autopilot disconnected, indirectly and without (?) warning, followed by Alternate Law II. Once the pitots packed up, certainly in this case, other anomalies were hitchhikers, not causative. No outside cues, too much kinesthetic cueing in the cockpit, noise discrepancies that added to the puzzle, etc. Add to that the fact (?) that relief pilot was aviating, and had probably less than an edgy SA, etc. Possible.
From the outset, autopilot is suspected. If the a/c had encountered sufficient turbulence prior to a/p disconnect, one assumes the pilots are instantly alert, and in the process of disconnecting autoflight, since the challenge to its limits are at hand. To say other would mean that the "problem" was encountered instantly, and instantly caused auto drop, the limits having been reached. Further, if the ASI was skittering, this too would mean the pilots would have started handflying, so the onset was instant, and immediately overwhelmed the PF. (!). Although to be honest, at cruise, it's more like Two Pilots Monitoring.
A reasonable conclusion is that whoever was flying, whether with anticipation or necessity (a/p drop), the a/c was beyond recovery.
Also, relative to the spoiler, had it remained stowed, and not deployed, it would not have exhibited such profound damage. The piece of Elevator recovered, (some claim it is aileron), seems in fairly good shape. If the VS/Rudder separated with resultant sparse damage, it is reasonable to say the Elevator (aileron) separated from the airframe prior to impact as well.
Which is to say that it is at least possible that more of the empennage was lost at altitude than just the Vertical assembly. This of course would again challenge the "conclusion" of the BEA as to the completeness of the a/c at impact.
I note the authority has not continued to include "flight" or line of "flight".
Absent a reason for this, I assume they still hold to that finding.
Otherwise, they spoke too quickly? I don't accept that "En ligne de Vol" is not subject to understanding by non French speakers. I have researched this, with a phD in French linguistics, and a French pilot. Both say the expression is "In Line of Flight". It is not in any way idiomatic, and is clear on its face. There is the possibility that the French have a quirky conclusion as to what the word Flight may mean, but I think not.
bear
Last edited by bearfoil; 27th Feb 2010 at 17:59.