Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

Old 31st Dec 2014, 10:41
  #721 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
How does bank angle limiting work in the bus at high altitude? On the 73, one has to manually select the bank limit in HDG SEL - I assume the bus is more sophisticated and does it automatically, or can one bank the aircraft into buffet at high altitude like you can in brand B?
There is a 67 degree limit as long as you are in normal flight envelope. However unlike in Boeings, this is a "hard limit" (maximum achievable) which the pilot cannot override under normal flight.

The protection tightens to 45 degrees if High Speed protection mode is activated. Plus there is a separate AOA protection.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 11:14
  #722 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 49
Posts: 250
nothing can be ruled out, BUT you can make a good assumption that it wasn't a ditching and therefore some may have got out, solely due to the fact that there was no further communication from the pilots. if you are struggling to regain control you don't bother trying to contact anyone. if you are going to try and ditch then you sure as h**l let someone know so you can have some help on the way.

so all this speculation that there may have been survivors after a ditching is
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 11:27
  #723 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 151
@-golf_seirra #726
@ Mr.Peabody #727

As I said Im not familiar with the A320 so thanks for info.

On the other hand I am very familiar with A330, A340 and A380. None of these have sliderafts that will still have the gas cylinder attached after disconnection. So it must be different on A320 from what you are saying.
Also, since you told me that A320 uses chemical generators for the cabin drop out oxygen system we can rule that out too.
From your info, to me it looks like that is indeed the gas cylinder responsible to provide the inflation of the evacuation device.

As I posted earlier, the authorities will be able to establish pretty fast if that slideraft was likely to have been deployed and inflated by human intervention or not. They for sure will check if any gas was released into the raft and if it was actuated or accidental upon impact.
skytrax is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 11:39
  #724 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Cohoes, NY
Posts: 23
@highflyer re: possible "ditching". Ditch vs. Crash is a false dichotomy. Possible that pilots barely managed a barely-survivable touchdown. Also, lack of attempted comm is not a certainty. Blackboxes will tell.
jientho is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 11:42
  #725 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,742
Chipping into the why cannot we track airliners reliably in the 21st century argument. I have a back of the cigarette packet idea that is in no way validated so be gentle...

How about a switch which forces FDRs and CVRs to start bleeping? They could even begin audibly/digitally broadcasting positional data on some defined frequency.

In fact go one step further, make it happen automatically and as soon as an "emergency" condition is sensed for at least the following:
  • Stall condition (lasting more than 10 seconds)
  • Engine Failure
  • Overspeed (VMO + 30)
  • VS below -7000fpm
  • Transponder off or set to emergency codes
  • Stuck mic (>2 minutes)
  • etc

A few stations tuned into the said frequency could then alert the authorities. In this day and age, I agree, it seems nonsensical that we must wait for impact before positional data or pings are broadcast. Better that position data is sent before impact whilst the aircraft still has the benefit of radio range, right?
Superpilot is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 11:54
  #726 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by peekay4 View Post
Yet numerous other aircraft were in the vicinity & flying the same exact route as QZ8501 just minutes before and after, with no issues -- not even strong turbulence.
Cb formation and the updrafts that cause them are far more rapid than most people understand. You may think that what you are looking at is a large stable storm, but it is more like a high speed lava lamp sometimes with a longer lasting core cell with shorter lived cells bubbling up around it and actually strengthening the core storm cell. The aircraft radar will show the rain that will be mainly in the downdraft part of the storm cells. It is perfectly possible for an aircraft to fly through an area with no or slight turbulence and a few minutes later a following aircraft experience severe turbulence. Updraft speeds can be of the order of 100Kts vertically. Put just one wing into a severe updraft and things can become too exciting rather rapidly. Unfortunately, the updraft is less likely to show as significant on radar and it may be associated with a short lived storm cell alongside the main storm, so the aircraft ahead had nothing remarkable and the one behind may not experience much either - you are the lucky one that found the updraft.
Ian W is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:04
  #727 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 49
Posts: 250
jentho-

I disagree. any survivable ditching is going to require a fairly stable, fairly shallow glide to impact with the water, in which case one of the pilots would have been broadcasting a mayday and position report.

I seriously think the ditching theory can be put to bed.
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:05
  #728 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 9
After the Air France Flight 447 accident, the BEA recommended that EASA and the FAA should consider making it mandatory to have an angle of attack indicator directly accessible to pilots on board aeroplanes, has this happened????

Aviation safety expert and accident investigator C.B Sullenberger suggested that pilots would be able to better handle upsets of this type (Air France Flight 447) if they had an indication of the wing's angle of attack.
727forever is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:10
  #729 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,950
I can't find it but on one of the documentaries about AF447 there was a company in Canada who were developing an onboard system which would screen all flight parameters and then start transmitting data if those parameters showed the aircraft going outside the normal envelope.

This would obviate the need for continuous transmission of data but would alert the relevant agencies that an aircraft was in difficulty together with GPS position.
fireflybob is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:11
  #730 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Italy
Age: 51
Posts: 35
Ian W.

I do agree. It would be interesting to understand why they flew in such weather in the first place. Why the dispatchers didn't reroute the flight plan, I mean ..they should be used to that kind of weather in that area.
butterfly68 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:17
  #731 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,424
Why the dispatchers didn't reroute the flight plan, I mean ..they should be used to that kind of weather in that area.
Re-route where?

I'm no expert, I'm not a local, but I have flown across that part of the world more than once or twice going into/out of SIN. It's the tropics - it's pretty much a given that the sigmet chart will show a rather large area of Cbs/Turbulence/hail/dragons somewhere across your route, in fact chances are the forecasters have covered their collective ***** and depicted it over most of Indonesia, Malaysia and quite possibly over your departure/destination airport....so how are you going to design a re-route at the planning stage?

What's wrong with using the weather radar and making sure you carry the fuel to be flexible? The dispatcher (if your airline uses them) and/or the flight plan can't provide the solution to everything...I think the answer has to lie on the Flight Deck and the word I'm looking for is "Airmanship" (yeah, I'm that old..).

Last edited by wiggy; 31st Dec 2014 at 12:32.
wiggy is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:32
  #732 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Cohoes, NY
Posts: 23
@Super re: pre-crash broadcasting. Attractive concept. I would refine it away from CVR audio (creepy, controversial) and even FDR (too much info) though. All you want is continuous (or very frequent) GPS data, to aid in (at least) locating FDR/CVR more quickly later. The biggest barrier to success that I see is "who's listening?" You'd really have to code it in to an existing comm or transponder channel rather than setting up some new worldwide listening system. And even then, would an AF scenario be in range of anything? Any existing "emergency (civilian) satellite bandwidth" that could be quickly and reliably grabbed? I have no idea really.
jientho is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:34
  #733 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 49
Posts: 250
you don't just scrub the flight if the weather enroute is poor. you take extra fuel and plan for the worst and hope for the best.

this crew did take extra fuel I seem to recall?
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:47
  #734 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Cohoes, NY
Posts: 23
@highflyer -- We'll have to agree to disagree as to "stable" as a requirement I think. I'm positing a possible last-minute achievement of "shallow" (enough). (And again, lack of a comm attempt is not a certainty, and boxes will tell.)
jientho is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 12:48
  #735 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 52
Posts: 156
Any discussion about the position of found debris and passangers ? I might have missed it...
avherald.com had a position for wreckage, and it seems to be about 50 Nm from last known position. (also saw what I took as a position note on the slide Picture in post #722)


Thats a quite long distance...
AAKEE is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:04
  #736 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 49
Posts: 250
currents, wind, slight inaccuracies in the initial position report, very easy to be 50nm away after 3 days.

not to mention last position was when they were at 36000'. they could have gone in any direction and covered many NM while they were descending.
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:21
  #737 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,295
Originally Posted by Superpilot View Post
Chipping into the why cannot we track airliners reliably in the 21st century argument. I have a back of the cigarette packet idea that is in no way validated so be gentle...

How about a switch which forces FDRs and CVRs to start bleeping? They could even begin audibly/digitally broadcasting positional data on some defined frequency.
Better still, have a telemetry system where FDR and CVR data gets transmitted to a ground based station via satellite as soon as a master caution warning gets activated. Surely such a system wouldn't be that difficult to implement given that many aircraft these days including advance turbo-props eg (ATR -600) have ACARS capability.
training wheels is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:30
  #738 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 9
I know we have found this aircraft, but it still seems the organisation representing 84% of global traffic is in no big rush to come up with a solution to aircraft tracking, looks like as some have said the Govt (US in particular) will make the changes for them. As for the Transponder's I hear you ask?? yep no changes there, we won't be going to automated transponders, so a terrorist who accesses the cockpit (or the pilot) can still turn them off in flight.....seems like we have learn't nothing since 9/11.

The IATA needs to act sooner rather than later I think. Maybe the insurance companies might put some pressure on them to act?

From Wilkipedia:

The International Air Transport Association—an industry trade organization representing over 240 airlines (representing 84% of global air traffic)—and the United Nation's civil aviation body—the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)—are working on implementing new measures to track aircraft in flight in real time. The IATA created a taskforce (which includes several outside stakeholders) to define a minimum set of requirements that any tracking system must meet, allowing airlines to decide the best solution to track their aircraft. The IATA's taskforce plans to come up with several short-, medium-, and long-term solutions to ensure that information is provided in a timely manner to support search, rescue, and recovery activities in the wake of an aircraft accident. They were expected to provide a report to the ICAO on 30 September 2014, but on that day said that the report would be delayed citing the need for further clarification on some issues.

In May 2014, Inmarsat said it would offer its tracking service for free to all aircraft equipped with an Inmarsat satellite connection (which amounts to nearly all commercial airliners)
727forever is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:57
  #739 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,349
I have not had the "pleasure" of flying in that part of the world, however, a couple of very experienced colleagues that did, for some time, intimated to me that if you did not accept to routinely fly through weather that you assuredly would avoid in Europe, you wouldn't operate any flights.

I doubt (knowing the individuals & their experience) if this was too much of an exaggeration, I believe it is quite probably the day to day reality of ops in that part of the world.
captplaystation is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:00
  #740 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,313
Originally Posted by 727forever View Post
I know we have found this aircraft, but it still seems the organisation representing 84% of global traffic is in no big rush to come up with a solution to aircraft tracking, looks like as some have said the Govt (US in particular) will make the changes for them. As for the Transponder's I hear you ask?? yep no changes there, we won't be going to automated transponders, so a terrorist who accesses the cockpit (or the pilot) can still turn them off in flight.....seems like we have learn't nothing since 9/11.

The IATA needs to act sooner rather than later I think. Maybe the insurance companies might put some pressure on them to act?

From Wilkipedia:

The International Air Transport Association—an industry trade organization representing over 240 airlines (representing 84% of global air traffic)—and the United Nation's civil aviation body—the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)—are working on implementing new measures to track aircraft in flight in real time. The IATA created a taskforce (which includes several outside stakeholders) to define a minimum set of requirements that any tracking system must meet, allowing airlines to decide the best solution to track their aircraft. The IATA's taskforce plans to come up with several short-, medium-, and long-term solutions to ensure that information is provided in a timely manner to support search, rescue, and recovery activities in the wake of an aircraft accident. They were expected to provide a report to the ICAO on 30 September 2014, but on that day said that the report would be delayed citing the need for further clarification on some issues.

In May 2014, Inmarsat said it would offer its tracking service for free to all aircraft equipped with an Inmarsat satellite connection (which amounts to nearly all commercial airliners)
Back onto the hamster wheel again

Aircraft already have sufficient tracking. ADS-B and ADS-C and ELTs

The SATCOM companies will provide free comms for tracking.
After MH370 the SATCOM companies said that simple ADS-C tracking reporting would be free.
After AF447 the French BEA recommended a reporting rate of close to a minute for ADS-C when aircraft are on flights over ocean or sparsely populated areas.

There is more than sufficient bandwidth for tracking
. Both INMARSAT and Iridium (and several other satellite comms companies) have more than sufficient bandwidth for the tracking.

Iridium AIREON plans Space Based ADS-B tracking a hosted payload on Iridium Next low-earth-orbit comms satellites will be looking down and receiving the normal ADS-B transmissions from the mandated ADS-B position reporting systems. This means that aircraft out of Line of Sight for ADS-B will still be seen from the satellites. So in the current case instead of ADS-B disappearing when the aircraft went below the horizon it would have been visible all the way to the surface or until power failed.

Engine Manufacturers Track their Engines The major aeroengine manufacturers have reporting from their engines that tell the manufacturer where the aircraft is amongst a whole host of other data.

Airframe Manufacturers provide Tracked Health Monitoring so that any maintenance problem is pre-declared to the destination airport so first line maintenance can be carried out quickly when the aircraft arrives

It is simplicity itself to track an aircraft the equipment is fitted to all recent aircraft and will be mandated as retrofit to older aircraft in the near future.

The problem is that the aircraft operators switch the tracking off or decide not to use it and in MH370's case the pilot (or someone in the cockpit) appears to have switched off the tracking. EVEN THEN the aircraft was tracked albeit laboriously by looking at the Network layer handshakes between the aircraft SATCOM and INMARSAT.

All this continual galloping on the tracking hamster wheel does is get avionics manufacturers salivating about the profits from providing yet-another-tracking-gizmo for all aircraft at huge expense to the airlines and to their passengers who will have to pay for the unnecessary electronics: it will NOT improve tracking of aircraft.

What would improve tracking of aircraft is mandating that the existing tracking systems are always used. This mandate action and the associated Notices of Proposed Rule Making are all working their bureaucratic way through the system. Mainly to assist in the future airspace ConOps than for the 2 or 3 occasions when aircraft are 'lost' in both meanings of the term.
Ian W is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.