PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF 447 Search to resume (part2)
View Single Post
Old 9th May 2011, 02:02
  #972 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
takata

howdy. The limits accepted and proposed in your post differ from A330 A/P limits only in ND. The 330 a/p limit for ND is nine degrees. This I recall from data posted by PJ2. I think that given the data supplied by ACARS and the requisite times, it is premature to eliminate other than ICE in Pitot Tubes as the cause of 'upset', a/p drop, or LOC. Something is not right about PF allowing a/p to exceed its limits and decouple involuntarily. He knew what was in store (ITCZ), was alert, and something happened to paint both pilots into a corner. ACARS suggests an attitude locking with the satellite for those four minutes.

At the impact point I think 447 was travelling as slow as she ever did; iow, she was decelerating perhaps continuously from upset and/or loss of control??

Still she could have been travelling at 160knots down, and 80knots forward for an actual airspeed of ~220Knots?? At this speed, with perhaps an AoA of 80 degrees plus, does this fit??

JD-EE I think the debris field we see, from the few photos, suggests that it is composed of mostly "heavy stuff" so lighter objects would be well to the West, elsewhere, or may have left prior to impact. An A330 at touchdown and flaps extended carrying 140 knots with a deck angle of 16 degrees (17 is tailstrike time) has an angle of attack (Flap) of 45 -50 degrees. At 210plus knots (AF447), even with flaps stowed (BEA), and an AoA of 80 degrees, well, one starts to see the stress on the Flap. If the Flap is Prised loose and leaves, the spoilers will follow quickly, having lost their "Prot" from the massive flap. Their plane of stress is opposite stress from beneath.

This is as close as I'll get (at this point, having softened my admitted alarmist views at the outset) to suggesting that the a/c was other than completely intact at impact. My suggestion is that as much as I appreciate and admire your courage in suggesting it, not even bear thinks this airframe had greater than 90 degreees of AoA ('backward' flight)...

Last edited by bearfoil; 9th May 2011 at 04:03.