Flaperon washes up on Reunion Island
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Fly By Wire computer would maintain a speed above stall speed for whatever the configuration was and a fairly constant descent rate of maybe 800-1200 feet per minute - even hands off!
Once power has been restored to the busses, ie. APU start (the RAT only supplies power though the C1 and C2 TRUs to the captain and FO instruments and the L and R flight control PSAs), then the flight control mode may be MANUALLY reset, and the autopilot re-engaged. Obviously APU start is not an option with no fuel...
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To prevent overuse of the hamster wheel, just rerunning the post by suninmyeyes on the original thread about the sim test performed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suninmyeyes View Post
As a 777 pilot I, like many others, have wondered how the 777 would perform in the scenario where the pilots were incapacitated and the aircraft ran out of fuel. I had my ideas but there is nothing like seeing it for "real" so we tried this in a 777-2 full motion zero flight time approved simulator.
We used a zero fuel weight of 175 tonnes. We let it run out of fuel at FL 250 in track hold and alt capture. However it would not make any difference what mode it was in as everything would drop out. In real life one engine uses fractionally more fuel per hour than the other and there is typically a difference between main tanks of a few hundred kilos, so we had a 300 kg difference between the contents of the left and right tank.
When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode. The speed initially came back to 230 knots but then the nose started to lower. The nose continued to lower and the rate of descent increased to 4,000 feet per minute, the nose kept lowering and the descent rate increased to 7,500 feet per minute with a bank angle that increased to 25 degrees. The speed at this point had increased to 340 knots indicated, above VMO but there was no horn as it was on limited electrics. About this point the RAT (Ram air turbine) chipped in and the CDUs and copilot's PFD (Primary flight display) came alive. The flight controls stayed in direct mode.The eicas screen was full of messages like pitot heat, flight controls, APU fault (The APU had tried to autostart due double engine failure but failed due no fuel to start it) low fuel pressure etc.
Then with a max descent rate of almost 8,000 feet per minute the nose started to slowly rise and keep rising. We had dropped to about FL170 but the nose slowly rose up to 6 degrees pitch up and we started climbing at about 3000 feet per minute and the bank angle reduced to only 5 degrees. It climbed back up to FL210 at which point the speed had come back to 220 knots and then the nose dropped down again and we were soon back to descending at 8000 feet per minute. So basically a series of phugoid oscillations with bank angle between 5 and 25 degrees and pitch attitude between about 9 degrees nose down and 6 degrees pitch up. It was losing about 8000 feet and then gaining about 3 or 4000 feet with airspeed fluctuating between 220 and 340 knots.
We didn't watch it all the way down due time constraints and stopped the experiment at 10,000 feet but it was consistent all the way down. Having watched it I can say with certainty that if the pilots were incapacitated and it ran out of fuel there is no way it could have landed on the water with anything like a survivable impact. Just passing on the info.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suninmyeyes View Post
As a 777 pilot I, like many others, have wondered how the 777 would perform in the scenario where the pilots were incapacitated and the aircraft ran out of fuel. I had my ideas but there is nothing like seeing it for "real" so we tried this in a 777-2 full motion zero flight time approved simulator.
We used a zero fuel weight of 175 tonnes. We let it run out of fuel at FL 250 in track hold and alt capture. However it would not make any difference what mode it was in as everything would drop out. In real life one engine uses fractionally more fuel per hour than the other and there is typically a difference between main tanks of a few hundred kilos, so we had a 300 kg difference between the contents of the left and right tank.
When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode. The speed initially came back to 230 knots but then the nose started to lower. The nose continued to lower and the rate of descent increased to 4,000 feet per minute, the nose kept lowering and the descent rate increased to 7,500 feet per minute with a bank angle that increased to 25 degrees. The speed at this point had increased to 340 knots indicated, above VMO but there was no horn as it was on limited electrics. About this point the RAT (Ram air turbine) chipped in and the CDUs and copilot's PFD (Primary flight display) came alive. The flight controls stayed in direct mode.The eicas screen was full of messages like pitot heat, flight controls, APU fault (The APU had tried to autostart due double engine failure but failed due no fuel to start it) low fuel pressure etc.
Then with a max descent rate of almost 8,000 feet per minute the nose started to slowly rise and keep rising. We had dropped to about FL170 but the nose slowly rose up to 6 degrees pitch up and we started climbing at about 3000 feet per minute and the bank angle reduced to only 5 degrees. It climbed back up to FL210 at which point the speed had come back to 220 knots and then the nose dropped down again and we were soon back to descending at 8000 feet per minute. So basically a series of phugoid oscillations with bank angle between 5 and 25 degrees and pitch attitude between about 9 degrees nose down and 6 degrees pitch up. It was losing about 8000 feet and then gaining about 3 or 4000 feet with airspeed fluctuating between 220 and 340 knots.
We didn't watch it all the way down due time constraints and stopped the experiment at 10,000 feet but it was consistent all the way down. Having watched it I can say with certainty that if the pilots were incapacitated and it ran out of fuel there is no way it could have landed on the water with anything like a survivable impact. Just passing on the info.
including something like the Helios slow decompression flight
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helios was not a rapid depresurization. We had the same thing happen in a Falcon 20 and I noticed at about 7,000 ft our cabin was climbing with the aircraft rate of climb so advised the captain. He didn't believe me so said the cabin altitude high light will come on at 10,000 ft. which it did. Since he kept climbing I said the masks will drop at 14,000 ft so finally he leveled off. After some troubleshooting with no sucess we returned for landing. The outflow valve was stuck open.
Radio New Zealand carried an item at 1700 NZDT saying that the flaperon had been found in May.
No explanation was given as to why it wasn't made public until now.
No explanation was given as to why it wasn't made public until now.
Chris2303 wrote
Sky News UK also ran a piece to camera from the island on the flaperon being spotted earlier. The claim was that others have come forward to say that they had seen the same aircraft part a month ago in the surf. The claim was that it was spotted at a different location further up the beach. Possibly the claim is true? Possibly the people that have come forward just dismissed it at the time as a piece of old boat wreckage?
Video at following link.
Video: MH370 Debris Found 'A Month Ago'
MH370: Man Describes Moment He Found Wing Piece
Radio New Zealand carried an item at 1700 NZDT saying that the flaperon had been found in May.
No explanation was given as to why it wasn't made public until now.
No explanation was given as to why it wasn't made public until now.
Another group of people told Sky News they saw what could have been the same debris a month ago, further up the beach, meaning it could have been floating around the Reunion coast for some time.
Video: MH370 Debris Found 'A Month Ago'
MH370: Man Describes Moment He Found Wing Piece
The flaperon was indeed found in May by someone else. He didn't realize what it was or the significance at the time so didn't bother to report it.
From what's been reported about the currents etc, to make it from the search area to that location by May 2015 is potentially impossible. Hence.... The search area may be way off.
From what's been reported about the currents etc, to make it from the search area to that location by May 2015 is potentially impossible. Hence.... The search area may be way off.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strange this piece kept buoyant crossing the entire indian ocean !
Not strange at all.
The CofG of this flapperon is hardly likely to be symmetric, and so it would not float in a flat position. It would float vertically, with a small pocket of air trapped at one end. And in that position, it would be quite stable and quite invisible from the air.
And if someone had pulled off a successful ditching, it is likely that the only debris would be the flaps. And that is what has been found.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old Carthusian
I will agree that you disagree with me there. A "sudden" suicide may take days or weeks of planning, yes, but the act itself will be as quick as possible. Persons driven by a mission can plan things for years but once the suicide bomb goes off, they are gone in fractions of a second. Ref. 9/11
This is obviously not the case here.
Blake777
I hear you. Deliberate ditching to minimise debris field after seven HOURS of agony just doesn't make sense... unless the person trying to ditch the plane had overcome the suicider and was hoping for some kind of rescue.
Anyhow, I read a very interesting article in Swedish about why there are so few parts of the plane and no oil spills. There is a whole simulation done, supporting those who earlier in the thread suggested that fuel exhaustion would be uneven and send the plane in a spin dive.
Link to simulation study: http://www.ams.org/notices/201504/rnoti-p330.pdf
Link to Swedish article: Därför hittas inga vrakdelar från MH370 - NyTeknik
This is a bit too long for me to translate on-the-fly but essentially a group led by Mr Goong Chen at the Texas A&M University in Qatar has simulated different scenarios of the airplane entering the water and found that an almost vertical dive would leave a very tiny oil spill/debris area above water.
How this correlates to the flaperon and the barnacles remains to be seen. Someone mentioned earlier in the thread there is a possibility this was a spare part being transported to/from India and somehow lost over sea.
I am very interested in how this pans out.
I will agree that you disagree with me there. A "sudden" suicide may take days or weeks of planning, yes, but the act itself will be as quick as possible. Persons driven by a mission can plan things for years but once the suicide bomb goes off, they are gone in fractions of a second. Ref. 9/11
This is obviously not the case here.
Blake777
I hear you. Deliberate ditching to minimise debris field after seven HOURS of agony just doesn't make sense... unless the person trying to ditch the plane had overcome the suicider and was hoping for some kind of rescue.
Anyhow, I read a very interesting article in Swedish about why there are so few parts of the plane and no oil spills. There is a whole simulation done, supporting those who earlier in the thread suggested that fuel exhaustion would be uneven and send the plane in a spin dive.
Link to simulation study: http://www.ams.org/notices/201504/rnoti-p330.pdf
Link to Swedish article: Därför hittas inga vrakdelar från MH370 - NyTeknik
Världen över fortsätter man att leta efter svaret på hur och varför Malaysia Airlines flight 370 kunde försvinna spårlöst. Vid tragedin, som skedde i mars förra året, förlorade 239 personer livet.Matematikern Goong Chen, vid Texas A&M Universitetet i Qatar, leder en tvärvetenskaplig internationell forskargrupp som tagit sig an mysteriet. Med hjälp av en matematisk modell och numeriska simuleringar på en superdator har de studerat fem olika scenarier för vad som händer med en Boeing 777 som störtdyker mot vattenytan. Allt beroende på den vinkel som planet bryter ytan med.
Resultatet visar att MH370 med största sannolikhet träffade vattenytan vertikalt, i 90-graders vinkel i förhållande till vattenytan och med nosen först. Då bryts vingarna och stjärtfenan av och sjunker inom någon minut, utan att de olika delarna någonsin flyter upp till ytan igen. Det skulle i sin tur förklara frånvaron av flygplansdelar eller oljefläckar i de delar av indiska oceanen där planet förmodas har kraschat och där eftersökningarna har skett.
- Det slutgiltiga svaret finns i planets svarta låda, men våra forensiska metoder stöder starkt att MH370 dök med nosen före rakt ner i havet, säger Goong Chen.
Resultatet visar att MH370 med största sannolikhet träffade vattenytan vertikalt, i 90-graders vinkel i förhållande till vattenytan och med nosen först. Då bryts vingarna och stjärtfenan av och sjunker inom någon minut, utan att de olika delarna någonsin flyter upp till ytan igen. Det skulle i sin tur förklara frånvaron av flygplansdelar eller oljefläckar i de delar av indiska oceanen där planet förmodas har kraschat och där eftersökningarna har skett.
- Det slutgiltiga svaret finns i planets svarta låda, men våra forensiska metoder stöder starkt att MH370 dök med nosen före rakt ner i havet, säger Goong Chen.
This is a bit too long for me to translate on-the-fly but essentially a group led by Mr Goong Chen at the Texas A&M University in Qatar has simulated different scenarios of the airplane entering the water and found that an almost vertical dive would leave a very tiny oil spill/debris area above water.
How this correlates to the flaperon and the barnacles remains to be seen. Someone mentioned earlier in the thread there is a possibility this was a spare part being transported to/from India and somehow lost over sea.
I am very interested in how this pans out.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
University in Qatar has simulated different scenarios of the airplane entering the water and found that an almost vertical dive would leave a very tiny oil spill/debris area above water.
Again complete nonsense.
At high speeds (mach 1 plus, for a vertical aircraft) water is as hard a concrete. At mach-1 the molecules of water cannot react fast enough to the impact, and so the water becomes a non-Newtonian fluid. Check out the custard/corn-four trick, for a good example of the behavior of a non-Newtonian fluid. So the aircraft would not penetrate more than the first few meters of the sea, without disintegrating into a billion pieces.
This was proven on Mythbusters, where a low-velocity bullet would penetrate a couple of meters into water, but a high-velocity full metal jacket round could not penetrate more than a few centimeters before completely disintegrating. So a high speed impact would result in a huge debris-field.
Unfortunately, it is getting to the point where if anything is claimed by a university, academic or scientist, you know for sure it is going to be a complete load of bull. And this is a prime example of the bull modern universities are putting out nowadays. I think someone needs to address the falling standards in education, before the rot becomes terminal.
(Note that while the university just modelled the problem, while Mythbusters devised a real experiment. And the experiment proved the model to be wrong. Now where have we heard that before........?)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Subterranea
Age: 70
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Blake777:
*: With reference to the Factual Information Safety Information for 9M-MRO, Issued on March 8, 2015, page 28 states the following on an engine related Deferred Defect, deferred to the DDL:
3) 07 Nov 2013: From Daily Engineering Operations Report (DEOR) - Right engine consumes average 1.5T more fuel per/hour compared to left engine.
What would the implications be with this open DD if the crew were incapacitated after approx. one hour into the flight? If left unattended for the remaining hours the aircraft flew (no cross feed actions performed), a considerable imbalance could have developed between LH and RH fuel tanks with the right engine flaming out considerably sooner than the left engine. As you mentioned, airspeed and altitude would reduce and if systems were still functioning correctly, TAC would apply rudder to compensate. No telling where the aircraft ended up if TAC failed to correct with a relatively heavier LH wing in this scenario . . . . . probably nowhere near the current search area.
For fuel state see page 30 of the report:
"The investigation estimated that the aircraft would have had 41,500 kg fuel remaining after 41 minutes flying from KLIA to IGARI."
We used a zero fuel weight of 175 tonnes. We let it run out of fuel at FL 250 in track hold and alt capture. However it would not make any difference what mode it was in as everything would drop out. In real life one engine uses fractionally more fuel per hour than the other* and there is typically a difference between main tanks of a few hundred kilos, so we had a 300 kg difference between the contents of the left and right tank.
When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode.
When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode.
3) 07 Nov 2013: From Daily Engineering Operations Report (DEOR) - Right engine consumes average 1.5T more fuel per/hour compared to left engine.
What would the implications be with this open DD if the crew were incapacitated after approx. one hour into the flight? If left unattended for the remaining hours the aircraft flew (no cross feed actions performed), a considerable imbalance could have developed between LH and RH fuel tanks with the right engine flaming out considerably sooner than the left engine. As you mentioned, airspeed and altitude would reduce and if systems were still functioning correctly, TAC would apply rudder to compensate. No telling where the aircraft ended up if TAC failed to correct with a relatively heavier LH wing in this scenario . . . . . probably nowhere near the current search area.
For fuel state see page 30 of the report:
"The investigation estimated that the aircraft would have had 41,500 kg fuel remaining after 41 minutes flying from KLIA to IGARI."
Last edited by Green-dot; 9th Aug 2015 at 18:30. Reason: typo.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the hamster wheel is spinning mightily again and making as much progress as before. 
A couple of points that don't seem to have been picked up or commented on, although I freely admit to not having read all of the first thread. Quite a lot though.
Phugoid oscillations are being stated here as the end result of the flight to fuel exhaustion based on a long ago post to this forum, recently reposted. However, the ATSB 's Flight Path Analysis Update report states that the likely end-of-flight scenario "resulted in the aircraft entering a descending spiralling low bank angle left turn and the aircraft entering the water in a relatively short distance after the last engine flameout." This was the result of simulator work conducted by Boeing and Malaysian. (page 8 of the main body of the report, although there are no page numbers, unfortunately.)
Numerous people have pooh-poohed the possibility of a hypoxia event at some stage, arguing that someone was in control to the very end. In this context, it is noteworthy that the ATSB's report: MH370 – Definition of Underwater Search Areas notes that: "the final stages of the unresponsive crew/ hypoxia event type appeared to best fit the available evidence for the final period of MH370’s flight when it was heading in a generally southerly direction" (page 34 & Appendices) This was based on a review of various accident types, although reasonably enough they caveat that this is a working hypothesis for search purposes, and that responsibility for a final determination lies with the accident investigating authority.
Yesterday, posting here, andrasz stated that:
I'd appreciate a link to that unambiguous statement. It's an important issue. It's not in the Malaysian authorities' Interim Statement, and I can't find it in the accompanying Factual Information Document. (This is 586 pages long admittedly, but I've looked in the likely places and quite a few others , and in any case, it isn't the sort of statement I would expect to find in a factual summary.)
If you are going to assume that the pilot planned a suicide flight, then you do need to take into consideration that the aforementioned Factual Information Document, is quite unambiguous that there is no evidence of disciplinary, financial, medical, behavioral, psychological or social issues affecting either the captain or crew. (pages 19-21). This report was issued a year after the loss, so there had been plenty of time for all sorts of investigations to flush problems out.
Somewhere I have seen similar reports about the passengers. A couple of aspiring illegal immigrants, and that's all, IIRC.
Personally, I'm in the "wait and see when there's data" camp. I understand the attraction of postulating that the course changes shortly after loss of contact imply some pilot control at that stage, but they don't speak to the motive for those changes, or, crucially, to the on-board events and circumstances, and certainly don't evidence pilot survival until the end of the flight some eight hours later.
A couple of points that don't seem to have been picked up or commented on, although I freely admit to not having read all of the first thread. Quite a lot though.
Phugoid oscillations are being stated here as the end result of the flight to fuel exhaustion based on a long ago post to this forum, recently reposted. However, the ATSB 's Flight Path Analysis Update report states that the likely end-of-flight scenario "resulted in the aircraft entering a descending spiralling low bank angle left turn and the aircraft entering the water in a relatively short distance after the last engine flameout." This was the result of simulator work conducted by Boeing and Malaysian. (page 8 of the main body of the report, although there are no page numbers, unfortunately.)
Numerous people have pooh-poohed the possibility of a hypoxia event at some stage, arguing that someone was in control to the very end. In this context, it is noteworthy that the ATSB's report: MH370 – Definition of Underwater Search Areas notes that: "the final stages of the unresponsive crew/ hypoxia event type appeared to best fit the available evidence for the final period of MH370’s flight when it was heading in a generally southerly direction" (page 34 & Appendices) This was based on a review of various accident types, although reasonably enough they caveat that this is a working hypothesis for search purposes, and that responsibility for a final determination lies with the accident investigating authority.
Yesterday, posting here, andrasz stated that:
the interim report quite unambiguously stated that provided the conclusions derived from the Inmarsat data are correct, only intentional human intervention could have placed the aircraft on its final course.
, and in any case, it isn't the sort of statement I would expect to find in a factual summary.)If you are going to assume that the pilot planned a suicide flight, then you do need to take into consideration that the aforementioned Factual Information Document, is quite unambiguous that there is no evidence of disciplinary, financial, medical, behavioral, psychological or social issues affecting either the captain or crew. (pages 19-21). This report was issued a year after the loss, so there had been plenty of time for all sorts of investigations to flush problems out.
Somewhere I have seen similar reports about the passengers. A couple of aspiring illegal immigrants, and that's all, IIRC.
Personally, I'm in the "wait and see when there's data" camp. I understand the attraction of postulating that the course changes shortly after loss of contact imply some pilot control at that stage, but they don't speak to the motive for those changes, or, crucially, to the on-board events and circumstances, and certainly don't evidence pilot survival until the end of the flight some eight hours later.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I've never known any pilot to go to an opposition leader's trial and then operate a flight the same evening. And, I'd really have to do some research to figure out how to make my plane go dark electronically all at once.
One of the pilots was an 'activist' and a computer geek and left YouTube videos as testimony. The other one was brand new on the 777. Hmmm...
U.S. intelligence assessment focuses on cockpit activities of MH370 - CNNPolitics.com
One of the pilots was an 'activist' and a computer geek and left YouTube videos as testimony. The other one was brand new on the 777. Hmmm...
U.S. intelligence assessment focuses on cockpit activities of MH370
By Evan Perez, CNN Justice Reporter
Updated 6:59 PM ET, Thu July 30, 2015
(CNN)—A preliminary assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies, produced in the wake of the MH370 disaster, suggested it was likely someone in the cockpit deliberately caused the aircraft's movements to go off course before the Malaysian airliner disappeared.
Two U.S. officials briefed on the matter said the assessment, which was not intended for public release, was prepared months ago and was solely based on available satellite and other evidence, and not based on more detailed findings by investigators. Another government official said the assessment is the most current view of U.S. officials based on what is known so far about the plane's fate...
By Evan Perez, CNN Justice Reporter
Updated 6:59 PM ET, Thu July 30, 2015
(CNN)—A preliminary assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies, produced in the wake of the MH370 disaster, suggested it was likely someone in the cockpit deliberately caused the aircraft's movements to go off course before the Malaysian airliner disappeared.
Two U.S. officials briefed on the matter said the assessment, which was not intended for public release, was prepared months ago and was solely based on available satellite and other evidence, and not based on more detailed findings by investigators. Another government official said the assessment is the most current view of U.S. officials based on what is known so far about the plane's fate...
MH370: ''Plane seat'' found washed up on Reunion Island three months ago
Yet Mr Ferrier had no idea of the significance of the object. Flotsam and jetsam washed up are part of his everyday life on the inhospitable beach, where nobody dares to enter the fierce waves and shark-infested waters.
“I found a couple of suitcases too, around the same time, full of things,” he said, almost in passing.
What did you do with them?
“I burnt them,” he said, pointing to the pile of ashes lying on the boulders. “That’s my job. I collect rubbish, and burn it.
“I could have found many things that belonged to the plane, and burnt them, without realising.”
.....
He also saw the wing which washed up on Wednesday – although in May, the barnacles encrusting its side were still alive. By the time it washed ashore again this week, the crustaceans were dead. “Like the seat, I didn’t know what it was. “I sat on it. I was fishing for macabi (bonefish) and used it as a table. I really didn’t pay it much attention – until I saw it on the news.” His story is backed up by that of another local woman, named only as Isabelle, who spotted the same object while walking on the beach in May, accompanied by her 10-year-old son. "It was the beginning of the holidays - around May 10," she told local news website Zinfos974 "I was walking with my son, Krishna. Then from a rock on which we were standing, he saw an object and shouted: 'Mum, that looks like the wing of a plane!'" Krishna then jumped on what looked like a suitcase. He managed to prise it open, and then spotted another suitcase buried in the black sand.
Yet Mr Ferrier had no idea of the significance of the object. Flotsam and jetsam washed up are part of his everyday life on the inhospitable beach, where nobody dares to enter the fierce waves and shark-infested waters.
“I found a couple of suitcases too, around the same time, full of things,” he said, almost in passing.
What did you do with them?
“I burnt them,” he said, pointing to the pile of ashes lying on the boulders. “That’s my job. I collect rubbish, and burn it.
“I could have found many things that belonged to the plane, and burnt them, without realising.”
.....
He also saw the wing which washed up on Wednesday – although in May, the barnacles encrusting its side were still alive. By the time it washed ashore again this week, the crustaceans were dead. “Like the seat, I didn’t know what it was. “I sat on it. I was fishing for macabi (bonefish) and used it as a table. I really didn’t pay it much attention – until I saw it on the news.” His story is backed up by that of another local woman, named only as Isabelle, who spotted the same object while walking on the beach in May, accompanied by her 10-year-old son. "It was the beginning of the holidays - around May 10," she told local news website Zinfos974 "I was walking with my son, Krishna. Then from a rock on which we were standing, he saw an object and shouted: 'Mum, that looks like the wing of a plane!'" Krishna then jumped on what looked like a suitcase. He managed to prise it open, and then spotted another suitcase buried in the black sand.
Video: MH370: ''Plane seat'' found washed up on Reunion Island three months ago - Telegraph
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please. Enough of non-Newtonian fluids and all that jazz. The subject is things found that might be from mh370.
Please.
The possible airplane seats that were burnt. How flammable would they be if they actually were airplane seats? Would there be metal frames in a 777 airplane seat? Do those frames have serial numbers on them? Or possibly any other kind of identification?
Please.
The possible airplane seats that were burnt. How flammable would they be if they actually were airplane seats? Would there be metal frames in a 777 airplane seat? Do those frames have serial numbers on them? Or possibly any other kind of identification?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N. California
Age: 80
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@DesparingTraveller
Rather than tedious debate about pheripheral issues, would you be willing to take the issue head on?
Do you believe that the known flight path (turnaround at IGARI, flight over the Malasian penninsula while skirting the Thai border, the turn towards VAMPI with the 330+ nm flight up the Malacca Strait, the turn towards Banda Achi, and then the turn at POVUS (all the while staying out of the Indonesian FIS) which brought the flight to a heading of almost 180 degrees) could have occurred as a result of anything other than human choice? If so, you are going against the consensus of opinion on the matter; thus, you really should explain your belief in detail.
I'd appreciate a link to that unambiguous statement. (that the flight path was dictated by human intervention) It's an important issue. It's not in the Malaysian authorities' Interim Statement, and I can't find it in the accompanying Factual Information Document. (This is 586 pages long admittedly, but I've looked in the likely places and quite a few others , and in any case, it isn't the sort of statement I would expect to find in a factual summary.)
, and in any case, it isn't the sort of statement I would expect to find in a factual summary.)
Do you believe that the known flight path (turnaround at IGARI, flight over the Malasian penninsula while skirting the Thai border, the turn towards VAMPI with the 330+ nm flight up the Malacca Strait, the turn towards Banda Achi, and then the turn at POVUS (all the while staying out of the Indonesian FIS) which brought the flight to a heading of almost 180 degrees) could have occurred as a result of anything other than human choice? If so, you are going against the consensus of opinion on the matter; thus, you really should explain your belief in detail.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please. Enough of non-Newtonian fluids and all that jazz. The subject is things found that might be from mh370.
Please.
The possible airplane seats that were burnt. How flammable would they be if they actually were airplane seats? Would there be metal frames in a 777 airplane seat? Do those frames have serial numbers on them? Or possibly any other kind of identification?
Please.
The possible airplane seats that were burnt. How flammable would they be if they actually were airplane seats? Would there be metal frames in a 777 airplane seat? Do those frames have serial numbers on them? Or possibly any other kind of identification?
Most older varieties have a metal frame, many modern ones are of composite construction. Fabrics and foam fillings are treated with flame retardants but they will burn eventually.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where are the moderators ?
YOYOY are we seeing the all of the speculations and consiracy theories again, all of that stuff was done to death in a previous thread and there is nothing new to change that.
Please, please, pretty please could we have a thread dedicated EXCLUSIVELY to the Flaperon and any subsequent debris discovered.
This is supposed to be a professional forum, not a home for daft speculation.
Please, please, pretty please could we have a thread dedicated EXCLUSIVELY to the Flaperon and any subsequent debris discovered.
This is supposed to be a professional forum, not a home for daft speculation.