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, 13:04
  #741 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 1,804
Two local fisherman have been the crucial links in finding the QZ8501 wreck site. One heard the aircraft crash, one other saw the panel wreckage in the water Sunday morning and dismissed it as unimportant flotsam.
Neither knew an aircraft had crashed - although the bloke who heard the 'BOOM!', thought it might have been an aircraft crashing.

Two other fisherman claim they saw an aircraft dropping towards the sea, but it went from their view before it crashed (no doubt due to heavy cloud).

Fisherman crucial factor in locating AirAsia wreckage site

"The missing Air Asia aircraft was discovered by a 38-year-old Indonesian fisherman named Mohammed Taha, who did not yet know a plane had disappeared and assumed the debris was ocean junk.
Mr Taha, from the small village of Belinyu, spent Sunday on his small fishing boat and spotted some metal objects in the water. But he did not return home until Monday night.
When he arrived in his village, he heard the news about the missing Air Asia flight QZ8501. He later said he was familiar with the airline’s red logo and recalled that some of the floating objects had been red.
“I found a lot of debris – small and large - in the Tujuh islands,” Mr Taha said.
“The largest was four metres [13 feet] long and two metres wide [seven feet]. They were red coloured with white silver. It looked like the Air Asia colours.”
Mr Taha immediately called Bagus Rai, his local police officer, and provided an account, including the location.
Officer Rai contacted the search authority, which organised an aerial search for the following morning. At 8.00am, the objects were spotted.
More air searches revealed that the objects included the exit door and were from the plane.
“The fisherman said he saw the debris looked like the body of a plane,” officer Rai said. “He did not bring the debris back. We then planned to do the search.”
Thousands of fishermen along the Indonesian coast have assisted with the search after being contacted by the authorities to keep a lookout for debris.
But Taha, who had not received the advice, was not among them, and had no idea about the multinational search. He subsequently volunteered to assist during Tuesday’s operations."


On that basis, the cheapest and simplest air crash feedback information system, would be to equip all local peasant fishermen with good communication devices, keep them all up to date on missing aircraft, and ensure they relate anything they have seen in that area, when an aircraft goes missing.
After all, aircraft that crash on land are usually found within a short space of time - it's the ones that disappear into large bodies of water that create all the angst, and the huge SAR costs.
onetrack is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:06
  #742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,721
Take a typical distress frequency in the HF range, by broadcasting a simple audible message such as "ABC123 position N50.12345 W020.12345" every 30 seconds during which the "emergency" conditions are being sensed, we'd have a very good chance of being received up to a 1,000 miles away and more at night. Also, other planes in the area will also have the opportunity to listen in and pass any information onto the authorities. Recorded replay of ATC messages another desperately lacking feature within modern airliner avionics (GA has had it for years).

The cost of the retrofit (pre-bureaucracy and certification) would be quite low IMO. We wouldn't need any subscription or ongoing running costs except that to run/man a handful of worldwide stations. Security-wise, i'm not sure if it requires security considerations to be honest. It would only ever be broadcast in an emergency anyway and besides ADS-B already gives the public far more than that!

A lot of re-inventing the wheel is being proposed here. My idea is simple, probably because I'm stupid!
Superpilot is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:15
  #743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 77
Posts: 4,580
I'm sure there's a stupid answer to this stupid question:

Does Airbus still put a "ditch switch" on their airplanes?
barit1 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:16
  #744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 9
Quote: Back onto the hamster wheel again

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

With all due respect Ian, MH370 is still missing so I would not call that sufficient tracking. Tracking devices that can be turned off by crew or other persons and render the aircraft invisible except to ground radar is out of date thinking.
727forever is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:29
  #745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: KUL
Posts: 432
Does Airbus still put a "ditch switch" on their airplanes?
Yes. And Sully Sullenberger did not press it. Some wise cracks claim that the airplane would have been salvageable if he had.
MrMachfivepointfive is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:30
  #746 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 7
Burst data

@Onetrack, There wasn't many Fishermens where AF447 went down.
And yes, MH370 was tracable by INMARSAT, although the tracking was turned off, but it took weeks to calculate last and probably position. If a successful ditch, time matters.

I agree with Superpilot, a burst of data, including position, at upset would certainly be useful, and maybe next time, could also save lives. If a successful ditch, time matters.

Last edited by MaxJack; 31st Dec 2014 at 13:41. Reason: Spelling
MaxJack is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:45
  #747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 49
Posts: 105
Along the current line of sarcasm, why not allow pax free wifi and let them post details and selfie's of the ensuing chaos ? Hang on, they already do....
Golf_Seirra is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:53
  #748 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London Under EGLL(LHR) 27R ILS
Age: 26
Posts: 489
Yes. And Sully Sullenberger did not press it. Some wise cracks claim that the airplane would have been salvageable if he had.
Impossible, the airframe twisted quite significantly - so much that the rear cargo doors had opened, not that the hole in the fuselage did anything more. It was an insurance write off as soon as s*** hit the fan.
HeathrowAirport is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:57
  #749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
training wheels

This photo is supposedly that of an evacuation slide that was retrieved from the debris found in the water. Whether it had actually deployed or not is unknown, unless some one can tell from the picture?

https://twitter.com/Malaysia_Latest/...03613365420032
If the slide/raft had deployed then it would still be inflated... so I'd imagine not.

Evacuation slide

Depending on type they often double as a life raft...

Here's a pic of a deflated slide/raft on an A320;

JSmithDTV is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 13:58
  #750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Bangkok
Age: 69
Posts: 1
Thumbs up

Does Airbus still put a "ditch switch" on their airplanes?
Yes. And Sully Sullenberger did not press it. Some wise cracks claim that the airplane would have been salvageable if he had.
Good writeup on that fact and that incident, ...here...
Pawpcorn is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:01
  #751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high in the sky....
Posts: 28
200kts IAS

well a 100 Kt/ even higher speeds are encountered in jet streams and often you have strong up/down drafts close to build ups.... why is this speed so important? after it is ground speed not aircraft speed... what have I got wrong?
aviator1970 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:17
  #752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,598
well a 100 Kt/ even higher speeds are encountered in jet streams and often you have strong up/down drafts close to build ups.... why is this speed so important? after it is ground speed not aircraft speed... what have I got wrong?
1. There wasn't a forecast jetstream for hundreds of miles; the accident was close enough to being right over the equator;

2. An updraft/downdraft does not knock 100kts off your groundspeed.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:19
  #753 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 55
Posts: 355
Tracking

Tracking would not have saved any lives here. And so you can argue that tracking is irrelevant.

On the other hand, it seems suboptimal to say 'We lost the aircraft at 24000 (or whatever it was) as it disappeared under the horizon. It could have hit the ocean very close to that point. It could have hit the ocean some distance away. Or something else may have happened." What relatives are going to find this acceptable?

With so many transoceanic flights, it is ridiculous that we repeatedly have the following situation:
1. We don't know exactly where the aircraft went down. The plane wasn't being tracked - although it could easily have been. The ELT should have activated on impact, but the antenna may have been sheared off and anyway ELTs can't be detected underwater.
2. The acoustic pingers are extremely short range, and if in deep ocean we will only hear them if we are directly overhead. In other words, the pingers rely on knowing the precise location of the wreck. That's on top of the inadequate battery life.

I accept that in an AF447 situation (and likely also AirAsia), pilots won't have time to communicate. Their priority is to try and recover the situation. But given this truism, it is equally ridiculous that automated systems are not activated until they are either destroyed by impact or rendered ineffective by sinking into deep water. Even a few hits from a 406 ELT during the final few minutes would be helpful in knowing something was wrong and knowing where the plane was at the time. Surely it is possible to come up with some parameters where this was triggered.

The fact is that the technology used today is really designed to find aircraft that have crashed on land or small bodies of water. They are completely inadequate for finding a plane in an ocean - which cover 2/3 of the planets surface.

I think most of us would agree (at least in principle) that this is suboptimal and frankly unacceptable. Surely we can do better than this.


IanW
ALL aircraft have tracking capability. All that is needed is regulation that mandates aircraft operators use the tracking capability that is already on the aircraft.
True, and this will come. All these systems can be turned off however, which I suspect was the thinking behind someones suggestion for an independent system not connected to aircraft power.

727forever
Tracking devices that can be turned off by crew or other persons and render the aircraft invisible except to ground radar is out of date thinking.
Probably a difficult call. On one side we have arguments about electrical faults and fire and needing the capability to isolate all electrical equipment. On the other side we have MH370 and I guess also 9/11.


Whatever we think here, IanW is right. This will happen - and sooner than many people anticipate.
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:34
  #754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high in the sky....
Posts: 28
"The storm's updraft, with upwardly directed wind speeds as high as 180 kilometres per hour (110 mph),blow the forming hailstones up the cloud."

from Wiki:
Atmospheric convection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


well I have been a turboprop most of my life, but from flying over India I know close to the equator these babies can be nasty.... so one shouldnt discount possibility of an updraft..... and there by downdraft.... in a regenerating CB both can co exist. Any answers?
aviator1970 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:39
  #755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South of France
Posts: 1,024
How much lower can humanity go? 20 years ago, we would have quietly kept our thoughts to ourselves about these poor people and waited to hear why such a tragedy happened. Now, their remains are discussed like carrion on the roadside. On newspaper websites, we see pictures of pixilated bodies and on TV, reporters breathlessly describe what might have occurred in dramatic and horrifying detail. What is it going to be like in ten years time?
strake is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:40
  #756 (permalink)  
caa
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Lounge
Age: 48
Posts: 35
Are you talking what on radar or on instrument? The Bus boy way earlier said why bus boys wont comment here. Read between the lines. (sure they all filled forms on this as he said that is why they will not comment). If it turns that way I hope he and others did not wait for many more soles to act on it. Being in training is worse a known or possible defect MUST be reported.

I hope they are wrong and bet they hope too. Inflight break up seems out as per crash site. A stall seems very possible and +20K hours on type/s and training and saying BE Quiet by a bus guys says volumes or is he just a troll?


On here it is simple focus on the pitot system - reality is that alone should not cause a crash. Key is to find all the factors. Lets start with the boss, military training (lots of it) is generally by the book, previous crashes of like type are well known by most that fly type, also weather this time of year is known to this operation.

What was different? I don't know If the ASI's went maybe but a cargo shift in turbulence could throw it all out the window? that floating first photos of a bit of wood certainly has no g rating for restraint.


If your C of G is stuffed so are you! Always more than 1 thing causes a accident.
caa is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:44
  #757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high in the sky....
Posts: 28
:-( we have learnt to live with being intrusive

You and I will become unwilling or willing participants in this nasty public display of private moments. I agree this is despicable.
aviator1970 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 14:49
  #758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,674
slats11,

This:

that we repeatedly have the following situation:

Is exactly the problem with the pro-"lets throw more money at un-necessary additional tracking mechanisms" brigade ....

These scenarios that occur "repeatedly" according to you and your colleagues, are infact rare.

How may flights have occurred globally over the last decade ? How many flights encountered a scenario where additional tracking would have helped ?

Exactly. We're talking statistically insignificant numbers here. We're talking about a minute proportion of rare events that are rare in themselves (i.e. "untraceable" crashes in a world where aviation is the safest mode of transport and therefore any sort of crash is in itself a rare event already... let alone an "untraceable" one).

So please guys, give it a rest with the stupid tracking hamsterwheel. Or at least if you want to continue chattering about it, start a new thread elsewhere on PPRuNe because the subject of tracking is now 100% irrelevant in the case of Air Asia.
mixture is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 15:01
  #759 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 16
As one track said, local people will soon find the site/debris in coastal waters.

Anyone who knows SE Asian water will testify that an aircraft coming down in day or night will be seen by someone.

I'm amazed at the obsession with speculation on possible scenarios when its fairly clear that the answers will be found in the wreck.
stonevalley is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2014, 15:18
  #760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,972
Aviation safety expert and accident investigator C.B Sullenberger


Although I would rather listen to Sully than scary mary or peter Goelz

The issue is credibility of the source of knowledge behind the words expressed. Like what real experts do they go to for their own briefing before being interviewed
lomapaseo is online now  

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.