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

Flaperon washes up on Reunion Island

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

Flaperon washes up on Reunion Island

Old 18th Aug 2015, 10:32
  #541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,202
Well, all the (valuable) aluminum items are missing, so they may have been removed. What was washed ashore is the remaining composites, which can not be recycled and is much cheaper to dump somewhere in a thirld world country...
There should be quite some 777 flaperons slowly rotting somewhere on this planet by now. There is still no use for old CFRP composites, and no way to recycle it.
However, the french should have some strong indication by now at which time this flaperon has been produced, and if none has ever been scapped of that batch, bingo!
I wonder what the chances are that any one flapperon would have barnacles on it with the appropriate DNA
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2015, 18:57
  #542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 77
Posts: 199
Well, all the (valuable) aluminum items are missing, so they may have been removed.
But do the usual methods of scrapping such a piece produce damage like the Reunion flaperon shows? The torn-off trailing edge and the torn-out hinges are easy to visualize as a result of ditching with the flaperon down.

There must be a few photos of deliberately scrapped flaps or flaperons around.
PersonFromPorlock is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 06:28
  #543 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 55
Posts: 702
But do the usual methods of scrapping such a piece produce damage like the Reunion flaperon shows?
Most probably not, and I'm sure that the investigators in charge, like most of us on this forum save for a few die-hard conspiracy theorists are reasonably convinced that this is indeed a part from MH370.

However in this case, for all the discussed reasons, 'beyond reasonable doubt' is not enough, 100% certainty is required. The task is to establish an unbroken and complete document trail between the flaperon and MSN 28420 which takes time to achieve.
andrasz is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 08:20
  #544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 934
the torn-out hinges
Have not seen any photograph showing this detail. I would assume more damage to the end ribs if the fittings would have been torn off, unless the design is very poorly balanced between composites, metall fittings and fasteners. (which might be because the fittings are optimized for fatigue, and hence very strong in static overload)

torn-off trailing edge
fully agreed, this is a strong indication for an in-flight (or "end-of-flight") damage. And the investigation by the french will for sure find out how it was torn off (upper skin failed in copression/bending, lower skin failed in tension if torn off by an upward acting force)

It is very, very likely, that this item is from MH370. But we should better be sure...

flapperon would have barnacles on it with the appropriate DNA
and other very distinctive bilogical / biochemical evidence. Like type of algae or diatom ar whatever distictive lifeforms existing in the ocean.
Volume is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 11:21
  #545 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 294
andrasz --
like most of us on this forum save for a few die-hard conspiracy theorists are reasonably convinced that this is indeed a part from MH370
I can't believe you know how 'most' posters think. As for 'conspiracy theorists' this case is so bizarre it's hard not to believe in something way out of the ordinary. This debris might be from MH370 then again, it might not. Putting probabilities on it is pretty pointless.
Lemain is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 11:48
  #546 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 76
Posts: 316
Think about it.!!

If they have posted their views and he has read them, then he knows what what they are
oldoberon is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 12:04
  #547 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 55
Posts: 702
oldoberon, could not have put it better myself

This debris might be from MH370 then again, it might not
This statement by itself is true. However one must look at it in a broader context. If it is NOT MH370 then it MUST be a scrapped piece, because we KNOW that no operational T7 is missing one. As unserviceable and irreparable aircraft components must be physically destroyed to prevent re-use (with associated documentation), unless there is evidence that a T7 flaperon withdrawn from service (or rejected at manufacturer) could have been dumped in the Indian Ocean in a location that would facilitate it ending up at Reunion, the most plausible explanation remains that it is from MH370, the host of the only set of flaperons known to be missing. As flaperons are not exactly consumables, I'm sure it will not be all that difficult to account for those which are not attached to an operating airframe.

Last edited by andrasz; 19th Aug 2015 at 12:40.
andrasz is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 12:41
  #548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 934
As flaperons are not exactly consumables, I'm sure it will not be all that difficult to account for all which are not attached to an operating airframe.
I am not too familiar with the 777, but if you would find an Airbus rudder, I would not be too sure that it must belong to a crashed aircraft. A lot of them have been scrapped. Same applies to Spoilers on several type of airplane. The first generation of composite parts have been consumables that were often found to be beyond economic repair...

Putting probabilities on it is pretty pointless.
unless probabilities are in the high 90% range

The point is: we need proof that this item is documented to be the last one installed on the MH370 airframe. We should not be happy that it "most probably is"
Volume is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 13:05
  #549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 55
Posts: 702
We should not be happy that it "most probably is"

In complete agreement there, this is what I said with different words. The issue at hand is that it might not be possible to make a direct link with MSN 28420, as the S/N placard is missing and the rest of the structure likely has no unique identifiers.


In absence of that, an equal proof is to account for all other such components ever built (and probably the range can be narrowed down to a specific manufacturing period). For the ones in service since airframe manufacture this is relatively easy, Boeing has them on file. It is the ones not installed that will be difficult to trace, dozens if not hundreds of withdrawal from service records will need to be collected from MRO stations around the world, then the found flaperon must be compared against the scrapping method used to eliminate each. This will take months (if not more) and easily explains the lack of further communication from the French investigators.
andrasz is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 15:17
  #550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 559
Well, where are all the other parts of scrapped aircraft?

I keep seeing supposition that the recently found flaperon is "possibly" from a scrapped aircraft and not MH370....

Let's try a little lateral thinking here.

Give that NO OTHER part of any aircraft type has appeared on ANY beach in say the last year (and I assume we would have heard about it, were that true - aircraft 'parts' do not routinely appear randomly around our beaches), it seems very far fetched that a flaperon from any other 777 would be the ONLY piece of wreckage that did appear. It just doesn't compute.

I totally agree that the investigators have to be 100%, but any other explanation for this part being found where it was seems implausibly concocted.

- GY
GarageYears is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 16:06
  #551 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
First Phase of French Inspection on Flaperon Concluded

The French led investigation team examining the flaperon has concluded the first phase of inspection work. French authorities will, in consultation with Malaysia, report on progress in due course. The French investigation team is working as quickly as possible in order to provide complete and reliable information.
https://www.atsb.gov.au/mh370-pages/...al-update.aspx

Furthermore, it is "proposed that officials from Australia, Malaysia and the People’s Republic of China will meet in Canberra in early September ... (to) focus on planning to ensure the search is conducted as efficiently as possible, taking advantage of expected better weather with the onset of summer."
peekay4 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 16:06
  #552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 934
Give that NO OTHER part of any aircraft type has appeared on ANY beach in say the last year
As we learned for this part of aircraft already, it has been found in May, and if it would have been smaller, it would have been burned already, just like all the other possible aircraft parts that are washed upon our shores every day.
Metal parts do have a value, so they are typically recycled. They do not float anyway. All other junk is typically just collected and burned, without bothereing what exactly it is.
Volume is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 16:16
  #553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: South Coast, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 53
At this point I would argue that it doesn't matter to anyone apart from the families, whether it is "probably" or "certainly" from MH370, because it makes no difference.

Searching is still going on at the same pace in the same area, and unless something conclusive is retrieved from the CVR/FDR when/if they are found the whole affair will always be punctuated with maybes.
catch21 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 17:53
  #554 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,319
Originally Posted by Aluminium shuffler View Post
Ian W

Ian W:
"It only takes one person to 'ditch' a 777 - perhaps someone who had been doing regular practice at landings at sea level in the Indian Ocean on his home 777 sim? "

Why would someone train themselves to kill all their pax, carry out a survivable ditching and then "go down with the ship"? That hypothesis makes no sense at all.
From a previous post in this thread a major cause of hull losses in recent years has been pilot suicide - which makes no sense but presumably did at the time to the individuals concerned.
Ian W is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 18:01
  #555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,319
Originally Posted by rh200 View Post
This statement is regurgitated occasionally, but is it technically correct?

For starters they will only be successful when activated above a non conductive medium (not submerged in water).

And what about some examples? Are the cases that they supposedly didn't work, accidents where they met the technical requirements for the ELT to activate? Another words did the ELT perform to the technical standards, its just that the standards trigger points aren't correct?

If the ELT perform to the standards, then its not their fault.
ELT's should operate on excessive g. The Scully Hudson ditching showed that the g involved was not sufficient. Perhaps someone can come up with cases where ELTs fitted to airframes have been useful in alerting to a crash. Not other personal systems like Sarbe etc which I know work as I have been involved in rescues that were initiated by their transmissions.
Ian W is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 20:04
  #556 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
The latest ELT system data we have (Cospas-Sarnat) is for calendar year 2013:

From January 2013 to December 2013, the system assisted in rescuing 2,156 persons in 720 SAR events (aviation, maritime & land).

In approx. 175 of those events, the Cospas-Sarnat system provided the only alert.

For the year, there were 153 aviation SAR events with 348 persons rescued.

For those interested, here's an interesting Synopsis of a Real ELT Incident, involving a Bell 206B tour flight which crashed in very rugged terrain in Alberta, Canada.

The 406 MHz ELT provided the first and only alert that an accident occurred. MEO satellites detected the crash within 4 minutes, and LEO satellites computed the crash location and sent an alert within 80 minutes of the crash. Subsequently a second helicopter was dispatched and was able to find the wreckage within the hour. All four tourists were rescued; the pilot unfortunately succumbed to his injuries later on that day.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 21:22
  #557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Valencia, Spain
Age: 77
Posts: 29
Quote: "internal components would only have part numbers."
In fact, many internal parts have MSN numbers (Manufacturers serial numbers). These may be ink-stamped or etched near the part number and are often on every part of an assembly that has room. They are not on the ID plate for an assembly but will normally be nearby, along with the assembly part number. One might see the format 285T 1234567 MSN 789 or similar. All these should be traceable through documentation. Its a long time since I worked with Boeing products, or any others for that matter and cannot now recall the precise format. It is almost certain that some of these numbers cannot be seen without completely disassembling a component, hence it may take a long time.
Not sure how old this is but it may contain some relevant info http://www.thermark.com/TM_Downloads...613-2_XXXX.pdf Page 23 shows the method of marking.
Boeing 777 would be 285Wxxxx not 285Txxxx

Last edited by Ka-2b Pilot; 19th Aug 2015 at 21:53. Reason: Added more info
Ka-2b Pilot is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2015, 23:47
  #558 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 31
the torn-out hinges
Have not seen any photograph showing this detail. I would assume more damage to the end ribs if the fittings would have been torn off, unless the design is very poorly balanced between composites, metall fittings and fasteners. (which might be because the fittings are optimized for fatigue, and hence very strong in static overload)
The photo shows the external sections of both fittings are missing, but the separation occurred just above their attachment to the skin, which appears to have little to no damage or deformation. There is more of the aft external flange remaining than the forward flange on both fittings. The outboard leading edge is deformed aft, which from other photos of that corner, looks more like external impact damage than damage caused by the missing part of the fitting. Mike

sardak is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2015, 01:43
  #559 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 77
Posts: 199
Quote:
the torn-out hinges
Have not seen any photograph showing this detail.
Mea culpa! I went back and looked more closely and what I took for shredded metal at the attaching points was barnacles. Blame it on old eyes and dirty glasses.
PersonFromPorlock is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2015, 02:17
  #560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 317
I'm not sure I see the practical need to be 100% sure, rather than 99% of 99.9%.

And those who are convinced there's a 777 sitting in a mountain somewhere will just imagine it with one less flaperon.

But, especially given the cost of the underwater search, it's well worth mining the flaperon for any possible clue it can give us.
Chu Chu is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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