Air France A330-200 missing
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lost in Saigon:
I would very much argue this to be a climb, i. e. pressure loss. If it would be a descent, there had two independent computers to be failed *and* a source of overpressure to be present (aircraft descent, increased bleed air pressure), because the outflow valves would have to be stuck in their present position or being closed. But still to be verified, agreed.
Even if there was no failure of any system at all you would still get a "advisory regarding cabin vertical speed" once the aircraft descended in a dive below the pressure altitude of the cabin (6000-8000 feet)
You would have "caught the cabin" in descent resulting in a very high descent rate for the cabin.
The fact that the "advisory regarding cabin vertical speed" was the last message sent prior to impact tends to support my theory.
Does it not?
Guest
Posts: n/a
A summary of the final messages from Flight 447
The Associated Press: A summary of the final messages from Flight 447
French and Brazilian officials have described a "burst" of messages from Flight 447 just before it disappeared.
A more complete chronology was published Wednesday by Brazil's O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper, citing an unidentified Air France source, and confirmed to The Associated Press by an aviation industry source with knowledge of the investigation:
11:00 p.m. local time — The pilot sends a manual signal saying the jet was flying through CBs — towering cumulo-nimulus thunderheads.
11:10 p.m. — A cascade of automatic messages indicate trouble: The autopilot had disengaged, stabilizing controls were damaged, flight systems deteriorated.
11:13 p.m. — Messages report more problems: The system that monitors speed, altitude and direction failed. The main flight computer and wing spoilers failed.
11:14 p.m. — The final message indicates a loss of cabin pressure and complete system failure — catastrophic events in a plane that was likely already plunging toward the ocean.
French and Brazilian officials have described a "burst" of messages from Flight 447 just before it disappeared.
A more complete chronology was published Wednesday by Brazil's O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper, citing an unidentified Air France source, and confirmed to The Associated Press by an aviation industry source with knowledge of the investigation:
11:00 p.m. local time — The pilot sends a manual signal saying the jet was flying through CBs — towering cumulo-nimulus thunderheads.
11:10 p.m. — A cascade of automatic messages indicate trouble: The autopilot had disengaged, stabilizing controls were damaged, flight systems deteriorated.
11:13 p.m. — Messages report more problems: The system that monitors speed, altitude and direction failed. The main flight computer and wing spoilers failed.
11:14 p.m. — The final message indicates a loss of cabin pressure and complete system failure — catastrophic events in a plane that was likely already plunging toward the ocean.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jo90:
Quote:
Q. Which part of your aircraft is most likely to be struck?
A. The nose.
No, lightning bolts do not come from upfront like birds.
Actually from experience lightning pretty much always hits at the front of the aircraft. Normally strikes in a pattern along the airframe but definately starts at the front. Radomes seem to cop a lot which is why they have such massive lightning diverter strips.
Quote:
Q. Which part of your aircraft is most likely to be struck?
A. The nose.
No, lightning bolts do not come from upfront like birds.
Actually from experience lightning pretty much always hits at the front of the aircraft. Normally strikes in a pattern along the airframe but definately starts at the front. Radomes seem to cop a lot which is why they have such massive lightning diverter strips.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A more complete chronology was published Wednesday by Brazil's O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper, citing an unidentified Air France source, and confirmed to The Associated Press by an aviation industry source with knowledge of the investigation:
_ 11 p.m. local time — The pilot sends a manual signal saying the jet was flying through CBs — towering cumulo-nimulus thunderheads.
_ 11:10 p.m. — A cascade of automatic messages indicate trouble: The autopilot had disengaged, stabilizing controls were damaged, flight systems deteriorated.
_ 11:13 p.m. — Messages report more problems: The system that monitors speed, altitude and direction failed. The main flight computer and wing spoilers failed.
_ 11:14 p.m. — The final message indicates a loss of cabin pressure and complete system failure — catastrophic events in a plane that was likely already plunging toward the ocean.
_ 11 p.m. local time — The pilot sends a manual signal saying the jet was flying through CBs — towering cumulo-nimulus thunderheads.
_ 11:10 p.m. — A cascade of automatic messages indicate trouble: The autopilot had disengaged, stabilizing controls were damaged, flight systems deteriorated.
_ 11:13 p.m. — Messages report more problems: The system that monitors speed, altitude and direction failed. The main flight computer and wing spoilers failed.
_ 11:14 p.m. — The final message indicates a loss of cabin pressure and complete system failure — catastrophic events in a plane that was likely already plunging toward the ocean.
The problem is that this and all other "reports" are not reporting facts. They are simply interpretations of the various news media trying to put it into layman's terms.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Torquay UK
Age: 95
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
post 776 triple bravo
Small point you say lightning strike doesnt come on the nose.Sorry, ive had one like that, build up of static ,then a discharge explosion straight forward off the nose , broke the radome and disabled weather radar.
Lost in Saigon;
[removed comment]
I know that there are a number of reports "out there" concerning such messages but they are not "fact" until they are in-hand and available. If you have an actual source, perhaps it could be provided? As I posted earlier, any ACARS message will have a time stamp, a reference to the ATA System Chapter and a text message describing the failure(s).
I'm not disputing that they exist but am disputing, until we see these messages, their timing and content. I simply don't trust the media, Air France's press information or anyone else's information. There are too many guessers, speculators and interested parties to trust anything but original sources.
On a related matter upon which I earlier posted, hopefully too, the copies of the last logbook page were pulled before departure as is standard procedure, so we can learn what, if any, snags the aircraft had and either cleared or MEL'd before departure.
We have absolutely no other evidence upon which to base speculation so everything is possible and therefore nothing is privileged as probable.
The actual aircraft course and position has still yet to be determined. The Vazquez presentation itself states that the line shown is "extrapolation".
PJ2
Lost in Saigon - post edited to respond to your last message:
Precisely, and very poor layman's terms at that. The imprecision is entirely misleading and distracting and is of no use whatsoever.
The fact that the "advisory regarding cabin vertical speed" was the last message sent prior to impact tends to support my theory.
I know that there are a number of reports "out there" concerning such messages but they are not "fact" until they are in-hand and available. If you have an actual source, perhaps it could be provided? As I posted earlier, any ACARS message will have a time stamp, a reference to the ATA System Chapter and a text message describing the failure(s).
I'm not disputing that they exist but am disputing, until we see these messages, their timing and content. I simply don't trust the media, Air France's press information or anyone else's information. There are too many guessers, speculators and interested parties to trust anything but original sources.
On a related matter upon which I earlier posted, hopefully too, the copies of the last logbook page were pulled before departure as is standard procedure, so we can learn what, if any, snags the aircraft had and either cleared or MEL'd before departure.
We have absolutely no other evidence upon which to base speculation so everything is possible and therefore nothing is privileged as probable.
The actual aircraft course and position has still yet to be determined. The Vazquez presentation itself states that the line shown is "extrapolation".
PJ2
Lost in Saigon - post edited to respond to your last message:
They are simply interpretations of the various news media trying to put it into layman's terms.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lost in Saigon;
When you say "the fact that..." in reference to the ACARS messages, to what documents do you refer as "fact"?
I know that there are a number of reports "out there" concerning such messages but they are not "fact" until they are in-hand and available. If you have an actual source, perhaps it could be provided? As I posted earlier, any ACARS message will have a time stamp, a reference to the ATA System Chapter and a text message describing the failure(s).
I'm not disputing that they exist but am disputing, until we see these messages, their timing and content. I simply don't trust the media, Air France's press information or anyone else's information. There are too many guessers, speculators and interested parties to trust anything but original sources.
When you say "the fact that..." in reference to the ACARS messages, to what documents do you refer as "fact"?
I know that there are a number of reports "out there" concerning such messages but they are not "fact" until they are in-hand and available. If you have an actual source, perhaps it could be provided? As I posted earlier, any ACARS message will have a time stamp, a reference to the ATA System Chapter and a text message describing the failure(s).
I'm not disputing that they exist but am disputing, until we see these messages, their timing and content. I simply don't trust the media, Air France's press information or anyone else's information. There are too many guessers, speculators and interested parties to trust anything but original sources.
Lost -Sorry, we're overlapping one another here.
Yes, I think so.
I suspect when the ACARS messages are finally released in some form, there will be dozens of them trying to keep up with a degrading situation and therefore all within a very short period of time. The FWC's (flight warning computers for others) would be generating these until the power was no longer available. Such a point may or may not be a structural failure point - we just can't determine that yet.
It appears to me that many(but not all) subsequent reports added "loss of pressurization" on their own.
I suspect when the ACARS messages are finally released in some form, there will be dozens of them trying to keep up with a degrading situation and therefore all within a very short period of time. The FWC's (flight warning computers for others) would be generating these until the power was no longer available. Such a point may or may not be a structural failure point - we just can't determine that yet.
Last edited by PJ2; 4th Jun 2009 at 02:01.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I the only one that thinks WTF? ? the PIC or indeed anyone in the flightdeck is doing bothering to send a "manually entered" message to some ops bod sat in an office several thousand km away in CDG saying they are having a rough ride ? with the greatest of respect so F? W ? Did they expect them to call Sarko and ask if he could ask Obama to have the clouds eliminated ? this strikes me as either so much BS. . . OR I am seriously worried that any crew of an A 330 could waste valuable time "texting" OPS instead of concentrating on where they were pointing the airframe. . .Pleeeaase tell me this isn't true.
Jeezuz, what next, beam me down Scotty it's rough up here. . . . Nah ? you are joking , right ?
Jeezuz, what next, beam me down Scotty it's rough up here. . . . Nah ? you are joking , right ?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 16
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with captplaystation: never once going through turbulence have I thought of ACARSing ops to let them know its bumpy. Why would you? It doesnt achieve anything. ... Seems very bizarre.
re Huck reply below: Yes I agree - but it is a different story advising Air Traffic control for Weather deviation purposes, compared to the company. As for other company traffic on that route - maybe - but I would be surprised if they operate that route that frequently to make it worthwhile.
re Huck reply below: Yes I agree - but it is a different story advising Air Traffic control for Weather deviation purposes, compared to the company. As for other company traffic on that route - maybe - but I would be surprised if they operate that route that frequently to make it worthwhile.
Last edited by blueloo; 4th Jun 2009 at 03:06.
md-100;
The ACARS transmits on VHF frequencies when in range of VHF reception and automatically switches over to SATCOM when required.
The SATCOM antenna is on the top of the fuselage and can transmit to satellites in all but very high roll angles.
The ACARS is powered by the AC1 bus. The #3 VHF is powered by the DC1 bus.
Only #1 VHF is powered by the DC Essential bus. There are no communications equipment powered by the Hot Battery Bus.
The ACARS transmits on VHF frequencies when in range of VHF reception and automatically switches over to SATCOM when required.
The SATCOM antenna is on the top of the fuselage and can transmit to satellites in all but very high roll angles.
The ACARS is powered by the AC1 bus. The #3 VHF is powered by the DC1 bus.
Only #1 VHF is powered by the DC Essential bus. There are no communications equipment powered by the Hot Battery Bus.
Last edited by PJ2; 4th Jun 2009 at 02:19.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
never once going through turbulence have I thought of ACARSing ops to let them know its bumpy. Why would you? It doesnt achieve anything. ... Seems very bizarre.
2. Maybe he wanted to warn other company aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree completely - thats why I asked the question. It sounded strange to me, and it still does. More over, this information surfaced very late in the thread, leading to suspicion that it is even factual.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no information of a message being sent out of a radar or any WX related failure. I'm sure that by now AF would have said so if they had it, cause then it would only help their cause. So for now I am disregarding anything to do with that idea.
It's interesting that spoilers are reported as failing in the last set of messages. This would suggest they were still intact till this time (and other things were not falling off). Personally the biggest hint lies with the Qantas/Unknown Airline events. These reports stated while the incorrect readings started the chain, the computers analysing them failed as well. While there maybe be three different types of computers, but they are all progamed to operate the same algurithims. So if there is a problem in thier reasoning, all three computers will act on it (which is was the Qantas incidents have showen). Turbulents can induce strange reading, and if these computers algurithims has some error in them or do not account for cirtain inputs, then it will create uninticapated outputs (like the systems turning off).
It's interesting that spoilers are reported as failing in the last set of messages. This would suggest they were still intact till this time (and other things were not falling off). Personally the biggest hint lies with the Qantas/Unknown Airline events. These reports stated while the incorrect readings started the chain, the computers analysing them failed as well. While there maybe be three different types of computers, but they are all progamed to operate the same algurithims. So if there is a problem in thier reasoning, all three computers will act on it (which is was the Qantas incidents have showen). Turbulents can induce strange reading, and if these computers algurithims has some error in them or do not account for cirtain inputs, then it will create uninticapated outputs (like the systems turning off).
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed very early the "report" concerning the ride, was that the pilot reported "hard turbulence". He obviously thought it important to get it on the CVR and apprise company of his situation. I know the "hard" was the word used, as I thought it may have been a mistake in translation.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: kansas
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever happened...it's obvious to all now that the crew didn't have enough time to address the problem in hand on time. So please, to the Mr. know it all 
...please reserve your smart comments to yourself or at least help shed some light to the crash investigation agency as to what might've happened...or at least help in locating the ELT!!...
And with ACARS?!?...I wonder how long before a better system is implemented?
...please reserve your smart comments to yourself or at least help shed some light to the crash investigation agency as to what might've happened...or at least help in locating the ELT!!...And with ACARS?!?...I wonder how long before a better system is implemented?
Guest
Posts: n/a
some thoughts 2nd time around!
Given all (little) evidence avaliable i'm not discounting anything, but given the flight path and the weather info, the fact that af447 flew into a storm cell which as i understand it was at or approaching peak intensity it seems logical that the weather is the primary candidate for the cause/contributing cause/s of the crash.
Must say however that the public relations annoucements of AF re: early call of lightening as cause and the 'the black boxes may never be found' does not sit well with me........
Must say however that the public relations annoucements of AF re: early call of lightening as cause and the 'the black boxes may never be found' does not sit well with me........
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must say however that the public relations annoucements of AF re: early call of lightening as cause and the 'the black boxes may never be found' does not sit well with me........
Originally Posted by TripleBravo
If anyone could provide me with the MSN number of the cited Qantas A332 (AF447 being MSN660), then I could check the make and model of the ADIRU of these two.
Also from the ATSB report, the ADIRU's fitted to the aircraft at the time were as follows:
Model name: LTN-101 Global Navigation Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (GNADIRU).
Part Number: 465020-0303-0316.
ADIRU 1 Serial Number 4167
ADIRU 2 Serial Number 4687
ADIRU 3 Serial Number 4663.
ADIRU 1 Serial Number 4167
ADIRU 2 Serial Number 4687
ADIRU 3 Serial Number 4663.
