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 10th Aug 2015, 21:08
  #461 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
WingNut, does AF447 set a precedent?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 21:14
  #462 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,789
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by WingNut60
However if it's found in the Australian (or French) SAR zone but in international waters, to which country does the responsibility for conducting an enquiry fall?
Annex 13 is perfectly clear: country of registration.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 21:38
  #463 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 71
Posts: 887
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
Investigation ... who does it?

Frankly, not sure.
As I understand it, by-and-large France conducted both the search, located the aircraft and conducted the investigation for AF447.
My apologies to Brazil and others involved, but France was the ring-master.
In addition to which it was their airline and their aircraft though the other nations involved had an acute interest in the processes and outcomes.

But what part of that gave them the "responsibility or right" to conduct the investigation? That's my point.

So my question is (or was), if Australia has responsibility for SAR, does it also have any responsibility for recovery?
Or does it actually fall 100% to Malaysia under international codes?
And, if so, are all concerned parties signatories to those codes and would they be happy about that prospect?
WingNut60 is online now  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 23:34
  #464 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Investigation ... who does it?
I can't answer that, but if the question was "Who pays for it?" (the search, at least), the answer would seem to be Australia.

Why is totally beyond me. Both China (with by far the largest number of citizens among the missing) and Malaysia (the operator of the missing aircraft) have been studiously slow in putting up any money towards the search, while Australia, if only because the aircraft MAY have flown into its SAR area of responsibility before crashing, continues to foot the very large bill for the search.

And in the grand tradition of 'you couldn't make this up', Australia has to borrow the money to pay for the search from.... China!
MTOW is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 00:22
  #465 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Age: 71
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Darkroomsource: "There is a theory that makes complete sense, but does not answer all the questions. The theory is of an undetected fire in the wiring in the cockpit area. If the fire melted wires in "the right order..."

Sorry Darkroomsource, there IS a theory that "makes sense", i.e. fits all the known facts, and it is NOT fire. It is "human intervention", which is now the official explanation.

For example, at 1 hr 43 minutes into the flight, the Satcom mysteriously logs on, 3 minutes after the last primary radar contact. The link is re-established after being lost at about the same time as the transponder and comms, 25 minutes into the flight. Did the wires unmelt more than an hour later, after the aircraft makes a bunch of left and right turns, flying past Penang, the pilot's home? That's like picking up a copy of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet and saying "This makes complete sense. It was randomly typed by monkeys."
PrivtPilotRadarTech is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 01:24
  #466 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Costa Rica
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exactly, but somehow many people don't want to accept this sad truth.
A320FOX is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 03:34
  #467 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PER
Age: 44
Posts: 22
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Could the alleged piece of debris with the red lettering on possibly be....STATIC PORT
Tom/PER is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 10:41
  #468 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 90
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No sign of the word PORT though

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9074621

Last edited by mmurray; 11th Aug 2015 at 11:04.
mmurray is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 11:06
  #469 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seriously, the Daily Fail?

3 photos of the same thing-

1st photo it is revealed to have actually come from a capsized barge.

2nd one it is described as another mystery part, resembling an aircraft wing which remains with the police on the Maldives.

3rd one it is a piece of metal which bears striking resemblance to the part found on reunion.
rondun is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 16:01
  #470 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rondun, just curious of your source that it came from a barge?
tlbrown350 is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 16:40
  #471 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pacific Basin
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
More Debris ?

Supposedly New Debris washed a shore at Reunion

Received via Twitter
@francetvinfo unverified. Also reported on airlive.net

cressidom is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 17:13
  #472 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Planet Claire
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What on earth is that?
Looks like a part of an aircraft structure, but I guess it could be from any high quality product.
AtomKraft is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 17:17
  #473 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no barnacles etc. seems not to have been in the water too long?

Could it be the inboard side of a motor boat rudder system? The tiller arm reminds me of one.
oversteer is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 19:46
  #474 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oxford, UK
Age: 45
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good call oversteer


There's talk on Twitter that the latest debris is from the 'Team Vestas Wind' yacht which ran into a reef off Mauritius last November - Vestas Wind crash report recommends navigational charting overhaul for Volvo Ocean Race | The National
igs942 is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 19:57
  #475 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The hunt for MH370 debris off Reunion

Romeo E.T. is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 22:12
  #476 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dorking
Posts: 491
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've been trying to remember which racing yachts have been lost down there! Vestas is a very likely candidate. Pretty sure that you're looking at a hull panel with a lower rudder bearing, and then the rudder stock and some or all of the top bearing. The white tiller is probably semi custom made to take a pushrod connecting to the steering pedestal.

Have a look at the rebuild video Team Vestas Wind Makes Progress as Hull Form Comes Together - gCaptain at 1:10 and you'll see the replacement aft hull with one of the lower rudder bearing mounts just behind the narrator's back. The distinct circular reinforcement is quite clear. You can also both rudder bearings from behind in the title page of the video.



And here Dongfeng breaks rudder on leg 1 of Volvo Ocean Race | The Daily Sail is the 'tiller' on her sistership, Dongfeng.


Last edited by boguing; 11th Aug 2015 at 22:50.
boguing is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2015, 00:08
  #477 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Near St Lawrence River
Age: 53
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boguing, Bingo!
It's quite clear that's a rudder of a yacht, maybe it was broken by rocks.
A lot of metal parts, I do not think it is buoyant. Good job for environment.
_Phoenix is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2015, 06:50
  #478 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SF, CA
Age: 70
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gents, that's one of the ptwo steering quadrants off of the Volvo 65 Vestas Wind that went aground on the Cargados Shoals last fall. There is a serial number on the part that starts with VO65. That's the std honeycomb cf construction. The stern of the boat was torn away in the 20+ kt grounding. Trust me, that isn't a triple 7 component.
SalNichols94807 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2015, 07:32
  #479 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But what part of that gave them the "responsibility or right" to conduct the investigation?
The basic Annex 13 rules:
  1. If an accident occurred within the territory of an ICAO signatory, then that country is responsible for the investigation ("State of Occurrence")
  2. If an accident occurred outside the territory of any country -- or if the location of the accident cannot be definitely established -- then the country where the aircraft is registered becomes responsible for the investigation ("State of Registration").
(There are exceptions to the above rules, involving accidents in non-ICAO countries, etc.)

AF447:
  • Since the accident occurred in international waters, due to #2 France as the "State of Registration" was responsible for the investigation.

MH370:
  • If the location of the accident were determined to be in Australia, then due to #1 Australia would be responsible for the investigation
  • Alternatively, if the location of the accident were determined to be in international waters -- or if the location of the accident cannot be established -- then due to #2 Malaysia would be responsible for the investigation.

Note: Any country may delegate an aircraft investigation to another country (by mutual agreement), in whole or in part.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2015, 09:02
  #480 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by peekay4
The basic Annex 13 rules:
  1. If an accident occurred within the territory of an ICAO signatory, then that country is responsible for the investigation ("State of Occurrence")
  2. If an accident occurred outside the territory of any country -- or if the location of the accident cannot be definitely established -- then the country where the aircraft is registered becomes responsible for the investigation ("State of Registration").
Note: Any country may delegate an aircraft investigation to another country (by mutual agreement), in whole or in part.

The first wreckage was found on French soil so that is where the accident happened.
The Ancient Geek is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.