Witnesses say it fell out of the sky silently before hitting the sea with a crash.
Do aircraft crashing into the sea or land mass <10 mins after takeoff tend to do it silently? gg |
Originally Posted by wheels_down
That’s what I don’t get. The speed in which it sunk is off the charts. It’s extreme.
They have just fallen out of the sky. Literally. Can you pull/push that severe that the tail or elevator rips off? Have any aircraft parts been found under the flight path away from the impact zone? |
Originally Posted by garpal gumnut
(Post 10296503)
Witnesses say it fell out of the sky silently before hitting the sea with a crash.
Do aircraft crashing into the sea or land mass <10 mins after takeoff tend to do it silently? gg |
WHEN can we finally expect an AOA indicator in the flight deck? This means in SEP initial flight training you do fly aircraft without AoA indication, so that becomes the standard of learning to fly. Very unfortunate, but practically impossible to change. A mix would probably be even more dangerous, than everybody relying on ASI... So unless somebody develops a modern AoA Instrument which reliably works on all aircraft (e.g. a laser doppler anemometer based AoA indication or something alike) and can be retrofitted to all training aircraft, there will be no quick solution. Back to topic.. Does anybody believe in the altitude dip recorded for both flights? For me this is indicating an issue with the static pressure measurement. I think this dip in altitude 23:21:40 to 23:22 for this flight and at 14:25 on the previous flight is an error in the data, and not the real flight path. Especially as the curve returns to an expected one after a short time with no remaining offset. Failure which occurs spuriously can not be created by a covered/blocked probe, such failures would intensify with altitude. |
Originally Posted by Homebrew1
(Post 10296462)
The 737 does a trim after liftoff. This is what I'm asking about. You don't have to be a dick about it. I was just asking a question re the new Gen 737's as the function of this trim may have or may not have been an issue. I haven't flown a 737 for 6 years.
From the FCOM the conditions for STS to operate is:
|
Originally Posted by Volume
(Post 10296521)
So unless somebody develops a modern AoA Instrument which reliably works on all aircraft (e.g. a laser doppler anemometer based AoA indication or something alike) and can be retrofitted to all training aircraft, there will be no quick solution. flight path. |
Originally Posted by Volume
(Post 10296521)
Does anybody believe in the altitude dip recorded for both flights?
For me this is indicating an issue with the static pressure measurement. I think this dip in altitude 23:21:40 to 23:22 for this flight and at 14:25 on the previous flight is an error in the data, and not the real flight path. Especially as the curve returns to an expected one after a short time with no remaining offset. After that they climb at a higher rate because they are faster and are reducing speed, trading speed for altitude. Someone even calculated total energy and graphed that to show that the data are consistent. But that does not mean that there were no problems with static pressure measurement as the plane has multiple sensors and only the output of one of them is transmitted in the ADS-B data. |
Originally Posted by garpal gumnut
(Post 10296503)
Witnesses say it fell out of the sky silently before hitting the sea with a crash.
Do aircraft crashing into the sea or land mass <10 mins after takeoff tend to do it silently? gg I see airliners all day and sometimes hear them, sometimes not, usually depending on wind direction. Because I dont hear them doesnt mean they are flying silently. |
The FZ accident at Rostov showed it was possible for a crew to get the aircraft horribly out of trim manually at low altitude and lose control. |
Originally Posted by Andrewgr2
(Post 10296571)
BBC are reporting that sonar is being used to locate the plane - Sonar Search I imagine they are trying to locate the pinging from the flight recorders.
For example: http://www.flpublicarchaeology.org/b...edia_Sonar.jpg |
Originally Posted by fox niner
(Post 10295866)
Air France A330 AirAsia A320 Lion Air 737 WHEN can we finally expect an AOA indicator in the flight deck? We need them. MAYDAY. |
Originally Posted by Retired DC9 driver
(Post 10296336)
What is CYA?
Cover- Your- A*s If Maintenance say "you're good to go", well take that with a grain of salt. Put a snag in the logbook, call maintenance so they " know" you have a snag in the log, then they have to answer it, consult the MEL, and sign off the snag with a signature. Then a copy is in the system, plus there is a answered snag in the aircraft logbook.. Or wait for a part/repair before the aircraft is good to go. Always keep a copy , if you can of any irregular ops , ie datalink messages from crew sked, "you are legal to fly an extra leg" or whatever.. In this case, we have a log book entry. Why photograph it? The next crew cannot legally accept the aircraft until that log entry is signed off. This was done (we hope IAW the correct FIM procedure/AMM reference) and then it was photgraphed again. Why? Ok I can understand perhaps photographing the completed log book entry the night before and using that image to enter the details in whatever database Lion's maintenance use. I have done that myself when the log book copy is left in the book overnight and removed after the departing crew have entered their detais and signed off the log the following morning. But the photos that are circulating around the interweb are apparently of the removed log 'copy'. Why photograph it? Strange. Sky news are also reporting that the 'Technician' who signed off the aircraft has yet to be interviewed. Hmmm. |
Originally Posted by billie
When the plane finally took off it seemed to be losing power in the first few minutes of flight and dropped suddenly a few times, passengers said.
|
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
(Post 10296743)
That would be the power being reduced during the Unreliable Airspeed procedure. Entirely "normal' and expected in this scenario.
|
Now this does not exclude the possibility of high g-loads or abrupt elevator movements, the data is not fine grained enough to really say something about that. |
Have any aircraft parts been found under the flight path away from the impact zone? control.If the flaps were not retracted in the confusion of a UAS event,they could become over-stressed and depart the structure.If one assembly departs before the other side.this would explain the sudden loss of roll control and the ensuing dive. The very last thing you'd do, confronted with a Unreliable Airspeed scenario, is try to race back to the field/"immediate return" and just "look out the window to land". These things provide NO seat-of-the-pants feedback like a bugsmasher does. With no other assistance, a UA landing is very difficult and requires careful planning. In short if the UAS is detectable near terra firma,land asap.You have radio altimeter up to 2500',you have IVSI,you have IRS GS,you know your attitude/thrust settings for S&L and approach.Never attempt to engage automation as it is fed with the same false data.Stay in the circuit,NO CHECKLIST,fly the plane,ignore ALL warnings except EGPWS and land. If its "single side" anomaly,you cross check the ASIs and hand over control to the pilot with the good data.You still return but now you have more time to play with,checklists may be done etc. |
Originally Posted by RifRaf3
(Post 10296161)
Re tech logs:
On a single seat aircraft, you had the privilege of viewing the tech log BEFORE you did the walk-around and this allowed for discussion with the ground crew so that you could pay extra attention to pertinent items during that inspection. This saved my bacon more than once. Transit to B747 and it was not until after the walk-around and battling through pax queues and climbing two floors that you got to see the tech log. If the pitot/static system had been worked on you were unlikely to go back down and have a second look. Perhaps with modern technology, the person signing off the tech log could simply transmit an image back to flight ops for the crew to peruse before doing the walk-around. |
Originally Posted by dmba
(Post 10296763)
Did you read the other quotes in the article? Saying about people vomiting, like being on a rollercoaster
|
Originally Posted by LaissezPasser
(Post 10296834)
In the original Detik article, the female pax was quoted as saying that elderly people were vomiting in the ground due to excessive heat in the cabin. Not while in the air. 'That happened several times during the flight. We felt like in a roller coaster. Some passengers began to panic and vomit.' |
Originally Posted by A Squared
(Post 10296750)
that's no proof of anything. If they were receiving terminal radar services on departure, yes, it's highly likely that the controller would have observed the "dip", if he was paying attention. no, it doesn't necessarily follow that he would have reported it.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....806fba8f88.jpg |
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:37. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.