AF 447 Search to resume
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gone Flying...
Age: 63
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My apologies if this was already posted:
Flight Paths of Flight AF 447 and of the flights that crossed the zone around the same time
Flight Paths of Flight AF 447 and of the flights that crossed the zone around the same time
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Paris, France
Age: 50
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Throught the storm
Hello,
Been reading posts here for months with interest, not posting so far as not a professional pilot/crewmember.
Some additional info on who went through the storm (thanks Agualdate) :
El Al flight ELY010 on the route UN886 went straight through (at least from available info) while other flights displayed on the same route made a deviation AF401/ KLM792/AF415
(Trajectoires du vol AF447 et des autres vols ayant parcouru la zone dans la même période de temps)
I wish I could find the comments of the El Al pilot on his flight conditions since he seems to have made the same kind of decision as the AF447 pilot. If someone has a source I would be more than interested btw...
I always wondered at this since to me understanding this choice is key in the process.
Been reading posts here for months with interest, not posting so far as not a professional pilot/crewmember.
Some additional info on who went through the storm (thanks Agualdate) :
El Al flight ELY010 on the route UN886 went straight through (at least from available info) while other flights displayed on the same route made a deviation AF401/ KLM792/AF415
(Trajectoires du vol AF447 et des autres vols ayant parcouru la zone dans la même période de temps)
I wish I could find the comments of the El Al pilot on his flight conditions since he seems to have made the same kind of decision as the AF447 pilot. If someone has a source I would be more than interested btw...
I always wondered at this since to me understanding this choice is key in the process.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CONFiture
On the same route that night, LH507 preceded AF447 by 20 minutes; deviated west pf the track by 10 NM
IB6024 followed AF447 by 12 minutes; deviated 30 NM to the east.
AF459 followed AF447 by 37 minutes; initially deviated 20 NM to the west of the track, then deviated 70-80 NM to the east of the track.
On the same route that night, LH507 preceded AF447 by 20 minutes; deviated west pf the track by 10 NM
IB6024 followed AF447 by 12 minutes; deviated 30 NM to the east.
AF459 followed AF447 by 37 minutes; initially deviated 20 NM to the west of the track, then deviated 70-80 NM to the east of the track.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: I am where I am and that's all where I am.
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GreatBear, re the many eyes approach, search for "astronomical "green pea"" without the outer quotes. This was an astronomical many eyes project result. They found a brand new type of object in the heavens because some one observer noticed something odd.
Amateurs does not mean inexperienced or ignorant garage mechanic. It more often means a dedicated practitioner with an excess of experience whether or not the education is there. It's an important technique.
If they open the database and its formats they can post the word to slashdot. That will result in an utterly overwhelming number of eyes, I am sure. Add a modest reward and some 15 minutes of fame to the mix and it'll be impossible to chase them away. If anything is there to find, it will be found.
{^_-}
Amateurs does not mean inexperienced or ignorant garage mechanic. It more often means a dedicated practitioner with an excess of experience whether or not the education is there. It's an important technique.
If they open the database and its formats they can post the word to slashdot. That will result in an utterly overwhelming number of eyes, I am sure. Add a modest reward and some 15 minutes of fame to the mix and it'll be impossible to chase them away. If anything is there to find, it will be found.
{^_-}
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: I am where I am and that's all where I am.
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jimbeetle, look for "Oceaneering" and "Perry Slingsby Systems". Both make ROVs good down to some 2000-4000 meters. I'm sure there are others. These two seem to be the ones in use at the BP site.
{^_^}
{^_^}
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: I am where I am and that's all where I am.
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
auv-ee
May I add to your remarks that ROVs are somewhat limited. They do not (usually?) work from a direct tether to the surface ship. They are lowered in a cage and turned loose with a tether back to their transit cage. The tether's length is limited. So their ability to move along in a search is limited. They'd have to search an area and come back to their cage to be moved to the next block lest cords get tangled.
They're ideal for working on drilling rigs. For wide area searches they would seem, to me, to be somewhat limited. (And I wonder when they will grow binocular vision.)
{^_^}
May I add to your remarks that ROVs are somewhat limited. They do not (usually?) work from a direct tether to the surface ship. They are lowered in a cage and turned loose with a tether back to their transit cage. The tether's length is limited. So their ability to move along in a search is limited. They'd have to search an area and come back to their cage to be moved to the next block lest cords get tangled.
They're ideal for working on drilling rigs. For wide area searches they would seem, to me, to be somewhat limited. (And I wonder when they will grow binocular vision.)
{^_^}
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soph_co, the El Al flight was on a different track, In that BEA interactive, only AF459 is on the same INTOL-SALPU-ORARO-TASIL route as AF447.
This interactive graphic was discussed on this board after the second interim report came out, including speculation on why the BEA did not include the tracks of the IB and LH planes flying the same track as AF447.
There is some belief that the Lufthansa flight was the plane that the BEA references as being equipped with AMDAR, so a plot of its track and corresponding meteorological soundings would be interesting. And which may be why the precise LH track is not being released at this time. Similarly, the transcripts of communications between controllers at ATLANTICO and other planes on this route regarding weather conditions that night have yet to be released, although the communication between AF459 and ATLANTICO regarding the extent of its deviation is mentioned.
This interactive graphic was discussed on this board after the second interim report came out, including speculation on why the BEA did not include the tracks of the IB and LH planes flying the same track as AF447.
There is some belief that the Lufthansa flight was the plane that the BEA references as being equipped with AMDAR, so a plot of its track and corresponding meteorological soundings would be interesting. And which may be why the precise LH track is not being released at this time. Similarly, the transcripts of communications between controllers at ATLANTICO and other planes on this route regarding weather conditions that night have yet to be released, although the communication between AF459 and ATLANTICO regarding the extent of its deviation is mentioned.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: bush
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crowdsourcing is a good option to consider, but only once professional people have gone through the sidescan sonar material to no avail. Keeping the data hidden after official investigators have given up wil only inspire conspiracy theorists. But lessons from the Fosset crowdsourced search must be taken in account:
1. Users need to trained before giving access to data - make them go through a online course of identifying various objects from sonar scan results.
2. Have *all* data available - debris findings and time, sound recordings from phase 1, etc.. Some people might find creative ways of combining data.
3. Make the reporting path non-intrusive. Instead of calling the investigators just click online of objects of possible interest, write a report of what you think you are seeing and let others comment on the credibility of finding.
Even if the crowd doesn't find AF447, one would presume something of scientific interest would be found. After all these seabeds are still not very well studied.
1. Users need to trained before giving access to data - make them go through a online course of identifying various objects from sonar scan results.
2. Have *all* data available - debris findings and time, sound recordings from phase 1, etc.. Some people might find creative ways of combining data.
3. Make the reporting path non-intrusive. Instead of calling the investigators just click online of objects of possible interest, write a report of what you think you are seeing and let others comment on the credibility of finding.
Even if the crowd doesn't find AF447, one would presume something of scientific interest would be found. After all these seabeds are still not very well studied.
Guest
Posts: n/a
With all due respect, this is a proprietary investigation. It is cloistered and corporate; it is not a democracy. I don't disagree with this format, it is no different than virtually every other Aviation accident exploration.
ACARS was a gift, most likely from someone who is now unemployed, or worse.
My hope is that given the tyrranical nature of the work, people do not lose interest in 447.
ACARS was a gift, most likely from someone who is now unemployed, or worse.
My hope is that given the tyrranical nature of the work, people do not lose interest in 447.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So let’s stop pretending getting the simple truth, when actually, it is all about damage control or how to spare everyone.
The BBC documentary has no other aim than formatting the general public mind and if a few lies can help why not ...
The BBC documentary has no other aim than formatting the general public mind and if a few lies can help why not ...
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London, UK
Age: 68
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS Input
GPS may only know Ground Speed, but isn't it true that some function of GS, Engine power and Pitch = Air Speed
f(Ground Speed, Thrust, Pitch)= Air Speed ?
GPS plus the other knowns could thus provide a pitot cross-check or alternative measure.
f(Ground Speed, Thrust, Pitch)= Air Speed ?
GPS plus the other knowns could thus provide a pitot cross-check or alternative measure.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TiiberiusKirk
KTAS (True Air Speed), i.e. the speed the aircraft is actually travelling through an air mass, has nothing in common with the GS (Ground Speed). Consider an aircraft with 250 KTAS and a tail wind of 100 KTS. It will have a GS of 350KTS, and likewise 150KTS if it was pushing a 100KT head wind.
The aircraft performs relative to the airmass which it is in.
mm43
KTAS (True Air Speed), i.e. the speed the aircraft is actually travelling through an air mass, has nothing in common with the GS (Ground Speed). Consider an aircraft with 250 KTAS and a tail wind of 100 KTS. It will have a GS of 350KTS, and likewise 150KTS if it was pushing a 100KT head wind.
The aircraft performs relative to the airmass which it is in.
mm43
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bearfoil
Why no Alvin? Three crew, 6 MkX eyeballs, 15,000 foot depth, no decompressing, visual (camera) recording, etc. She's 46 years old, but she found Titanic.
She works quickly. Just not cheaply.
She works quickly. Just not cheaply.
Alvin is even more limited than an ROV for wide area search. It moves at 1-2knts, and can only stay on the bottom 6-10 hours out of 24. The shorter time applying to dives with long transits, like searching.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was also a lot of discussion here about using weather radar. I thought the program made rather less of that than I would have expected.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wx radar
Originally Posted by HarryMann
the view in-use showed short-range weather blocking what was behind,
HN39
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HN38, three cabin crew seats were recovered, two from the area of left hand door 1, and one from the area of right hand door 2. The BEA stated none of the seats was occupied at the time of impact. There were nine cabin crew on the flight, there were 11 cabin crew seats. At least one of the cabin crew was not in his or her seat.
Bodies of four cabin crew, including the body of an "in-charge" flight attendant, were recovered and autopsied, as was the body of the captain. The BEA notes that the location of the captain on the aircraft cannot be determined from the autopsy results. There is no separate characterization of the autopsy results for the four cabin crew.
On can infer (but not conclude) from the unoccupied seats that there was no command for the cabin crew to be seated because of weather ahead. From the transcript of the communication between ATLANTICO and AF447, the crew did not make any inquiries about the weather. As the BEA has yet to release a transcript of the communication between the Lufthansa flight flying ahead (which deviated from the track) and ATLANTICO, we do not know what was said regarding this, and whether AF447 might have overheard if they were monitoring the frequency.
What should one expect with regard to preparing for meteorological conditions ahead when flying into a SIGMET area, and alerted by dispatch while enroute of convection in the vicinity of TASIL?
The captain had 16 rotations on the South American sector since 2007, 1.093 flying hours on the A330.
The co-pilot had 39 rotations on the South American sector since 2002, and had 1,882 flying hours on the A330.
The second co-pilot had five rotations on the South American sector since 2008, and 216 flying hours on the A330.
Their collective experience on these rotations with regard to conditions in the ITCZ, e.g., whether these rotations were mainly during January or July, is not given.
Bodies of four cabin crew, including the body of an "in-charge" flight attendant, were recovered and autopsied, as was the body of the captain. The BEA notes that the location of the captain on the aircraft cannot be determined from the autopsy results. There is no separate characterization of the autopsy results for the four cabin crew.
On can infer (but not conclude) from the unoccupied seats that there was no command for the cabin crew to be seated because of weather ahead. From the transcript of the communication between ATLANTICO and AF447, the crew did not make any inquiries about the weather. As the BEA has yet to release a transcript of the communication between the Lufthansa flight flying ahead (which deviated from the track) and ATLANTICO, we do not know what was said regarding this, and whether AF447 might have overheard if they were monitoring the frequency.
What should one expect with regard to preparing for meteorological conditions ahead when flying into a SIGMET area, and alerted by dispatch while enroute of convection in the vicinity of TASIL?
The captain had 16 rotations on the South American sector since 2007, 1.093 flying hours on the A330.
The co-pilot had 39 rotations on the South American sector since 2002, and had 1,882 flying hours on the A330.
The second co-pilot had five rotations on the South American sector since 2008, and 216 flying hours on the A330.
Their collective experience on these rotations with regard to conditions in the ITCZ, e.g., whether these rotations were mainly during January or July, is not given.
TiiberiusKirk
KTAS (True Air Speed), i.e. the speed the aircraft is actually travelling through an air mass, has nothing in common with the GS (Ground Speed). Consider an aircraft with 250 KTAS and a tail wind of 100 KTS. It will have a GS of 350KTS, and likewise 150KTS if it was pushing a 100KT head wind.
The aircraft performs relative to the airmass which it is in.
mm43
KTAS (True Air Speed), i.e. the speed the aircraft is actually travelling through an air mass, has nothing in common with the GS (Ground Speed). Consider an aircraft with 250 KTAS and a tail wind of 100 KTS. It will have a GS of 350KTS, and likewise 150KTS if it was pushing a 100KT head wind.
The aircraft performs relative to the airmass which it is in.
mm43
It would not be much of a stretch for GPS to be programmed to provide synthetic pressure altitude (as opposed to GPS alt) and also synthetic calibrated airspeed. This data could easily be compared to the triple air data sources that are measured by the pitot probes and static pressure sensors for validation.
I suspect that this or a very similar system will be part of the next gen aircraft.
Edit: Hazlenuts39 is correct (see next post). I used the term GPS when I meant to use IRS. IRS of course uses accelerations and integrates to achieve calculation of velocity and distance to give position. GPS of course knows position and works backwards to calculate velocities.
I still think it is merely an engineering problem to work a solution to provide synthetic airspeed and pressure altitude using normal air data and IRS/GPS information in conjunction to provide an alternative source of reliable data when an input sensor system is completely eliminated on a temporary basis (icing of all probes for example).
Last edited by FlexibleResponse; 8th Jun 2010 at 16:20. Reason: correction by Hazelnuts39
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Groundspeed and airspeed
Originally Posted by FlexibleResponse
GPS routinely provides wind and true speed and direction and distance and thereby navigation information.
For navigation, GPS does not add very much to IRS. The pros and cons of GPS versus IRS have been discussed earlier on this thread. GPS does not provide wind. The airplane computers (ADIRU or FMS?) derive wind by comparing groundspeed to airspeed.
However, the first priority after loss of airspeed indication is to keep flying. Pitch and power should keep airspeed and altitude within safe limits. Groundspeed isn't needed immediately, but could perhaps help in the longer term if the pilot knows what groundspeed he had prior to the loss of airspeed indication.
Why is GPS or IRS groundspeed no substitute for airspeed? The liftforce that keeps the airplane flying is the result of aerodynamic pressures around the wing. These pressures are directly related to the pressures measured by the pitot/static system. In fact, the needle of a pneumatic ASI indicates the dynamic pressure directly, only the scale markings on the dial behind it are 'calibrated' in airspeed units.
EDIT:: Similarly pressure altitude = static pressure. To 'synthesize' pressure altitude from GPS height, the computer needs to know the pressure at sealevel, and the temperature profile between sealevel and flight altitude.
HN39
Last edited by HazelNuts39; 7th Jun 2010 at 16:48. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was the big cell hidden by a smaller one on the Wx radar?
SaturnV;
thank you for the information from the BEA reports. Perhaps I did not explain my question very well, so let me rephrase it:
Is there any merit in the BBC claim to have solved (part of) the mystery of AF447, with the theory of an NOAA meteorologist that a small convective cell may have hidden the 'big' one behind it on the Wx radar screen? Wouldn't the crew have avoided the small cell, and thereby the one behind?
HN39
thank you for the information from the BEA reports. Perhaps I did not explain my question very well, so let me rephrase it:
Is there any merit in the BBC claim to have solved (part of) the mystery of AF447, with the theory of an NOAA meteorologist that a small convective cell may have hidden the 'big' one behind it on the Wx radar screen? Wouldn't the crew have avoided the small cell, and thereby the one behind?
HN39