AF 447 Search to resume (part2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, Don’t expect any quick news as a result of the recorder recoveries. They still have to be examined, and here lies a very big pit fall. So many things can cause this task to be delayed, or totally not possible. Decay, corrupted data, non exsistant data due to power disruption or failure, or some other reason…..and I hesitate to mention what we all know – A government investigating itself. One could say, BEA owns a big stake in Air France, their boss, the French Gov’t, owns a big stake in Air Bus, and I wonder what the connection between the French Govt and Thales might be. Oh well, just piggy backing on earlier posts.
I hope that I am way off base. The industry deserves a true and accurate accounting of all available information. Not another CO airplane part deal. There is still a way to go. This is not over yet.
I hope that I am way off base. The industry deserves a true and accurate accounting of all available information. Not another CO airplane part deal. There is still a way to go. This is not over yet.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by takata
I'm 95% sure that there was no direct stall down from 35,000 fts and that she was not crashed at the end of the ACARS sequence.
takata
Can someone explain how an aircraft may stall during five minutes from altitude without, at some early point, its engine stalling as well?
Can someone explain how an aircraft may stall during five minutes from altitude without, at some early point, its engine stalling as well?
On ground testing there is no airflow at all to the engine except the flow caused by the suction of the engine, and it works anyway. So if the engine stayed alive in the beginning of the upset, could it then continue running (even in a kind of reduced performance) during the ongoing stall? Would it make any difference, wether the engines operated in a rather low powersetting at the beginning of the upset?
The engine i´m familiar with from the F-4, the J79 could stall pretty hard and flame out as well in high angle of attack situations near slow-speed or accelerated stall conditions. I expierienced a lot of those. However, that happened almost certainly when changing power setting under such extreme conditions and rarely when the throttles been kept alone, regardless of powersetting.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine Stall or Not?
takata & sensor_validation
Relative to your questions regarding engine stalling, an engine in a test cell or on the ground without any forward motion behaves in a normal manner as it is sucking air in through the nacelle inlet in a normal manner. However, an engine in the air at high altitude dropping in a somewhat flat plane at some point will stall due to significant inlet distortion, blocking normal airflow. I would think there is a reasonable probability that some of the descent from 35k feet would be recorded, but the total descent (near the end) may not be. There is a possibility the descent had two vertical velocities, a lesser velocity to begin with and a much higher velocity at some point nearer to the sea.
There has be little information at this point about the engines other than what the BEA stated, "The engines were operating normally." However, there is much more information available, real time transmission of engine data back to the airline and probably GE.
There has been mention of searching for the engine electronic controls, but as they are typically mounted on the side of the fan casing and given the catastrophic damage observed on the one photographed engine, it is doubtful they survived.
I have wondered what the shape of the other engine might be in that the plane apparently hit the water with one wing lower than the other according to the BEA. Have we seen the worst damaged engine or are they both the same?
Relative to your questions regarding engine stalling, an engine in a test cell or on the ground without any forward motion behaves in a normal manner as it is sucking air in through the nacelle inlet in a normal manner. However, an engine in the air at high altitude dropping in a somewhat flat plane at some point will stall due to significant inlet distortion, blocking normal airflow. I would think there is a reasonable probability that some of the descent from 35k feet would be recorded, but the total descent (near the end) may not be. There is a possibility the descent had two vertical velocities, a lesser velocity to begin with and a much higher velocity at some point nearer to the sea.
There has be little information at this point about the engines other than what the BEA stated, "The engines were operating normally." However, there is much more information available, real time transmission of engine data back to the airline and probably GE.
There has been mention of searching for the engine electronic controls, but as they are typically mounted on the side of the fan casing and given the catastrophic damage observed on the one photographed engine, it is doubtful they survived.
I have wondered what the shape of the other engine might be in that the plane apparently hit the water with one wing lower than the other according to the BEA. Have we seen the worst damaged engine or are they both the same?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, Don’t expect any quick news as a result of the recorder recoveries. They still have to be examined, and here lies a very big pit fall. So many things can cause this task to be delayed, or totally not possible. Decay, corrupted data, non exsistant data due to power disruption or failure, or some other reason…..and I hesitate to mention what we all know – A government investigating itself. One could say, BEA owns a big stake in Air France, their boss, the French Gov’t, owns a big stake in Air Bus, and I wonder what the connection between the French Govt and Thales might be. Oh well, just piggy backing on earlier posts.
I hope that I am way off base. The industry deserves a true and accurate accounting of all available information. Not another CO airplane part deal. There is still a way to go. This is not over yet.
I hope that I am way off base. The industry deserves a true and accurate accounting of all available information. Not another CO airplane part deal. There is still a way to go. This is not over yet.
So far in this crash, BEA appear to have been fairly open with what they have got - although there is plenty of disagreement with some of their analysis and conclusion
Brazil were more of a problem early on - they took custody of the recovered bodies and then refused to release autopsy details (to the investigation, not just the public).In contrast, look at recent Airbus crashes at Tripoli and Comoros - boxes recovered, data read (allegedly), reports... not released at all. Nothing. Maybe BEA is more independent than some here are giving it credit for, and Airbus can actually buy more influence in African countries than at home ??
CVR at least powered whether engines or not
The Airbus SD documentation states:
I don't have time to dig through the full electrical schematics, but power is certainly more or less directly derived from the battery via an inverter.
So, unless battery power was lost, I would expect the CVR (and by implication SSDFR - I don't have that schematic to hand...) would remain powered.
The CVR is automatically supplied with 115VAC when the aircraft is in one of the configurations given below:
- In flight with the engines running or stopped
- On the ground with at least one engine running
- On the ground during the first 5 minutes following energization of the aircraft electrical network
- On the ground up to five minutes after second engine shutdown
- In flight with the engines running or stopped
- On the ground with at least one engine running
- On the ground during the first 5 minutes following energization of the aircraft electrical network
- On the ground up to five minutes after second engine shutdown
So, unless battery power was lost, I would expect the CVR (and by implication SSDFR - I don't have that schematic to hand...) would remain powered.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by takata
I'm 95% sure that there was no direct stall down from 35,000 fts and that she was not crashed at the end of the ACARS sequence.
Can someone explain how an aircraft may stall during five minutes from altitude without, at some early point, its engine stalling as well?
Can someone explain how an aircraft may stall during five minutes from altitude without, at some early point, its engine stalling as well?
The engines don't normally stall when the airplane stalls. The engines may stall or surge when the intake is exposed to extreme angles of attack or sideslip. The airplane in cruise configuration stalls at an angle of attack that varies between 14 - 15 degrees at low altitude, and 6 - 7 degrees at high altitude. I wouldn't expect the engines to stall at angles below 30 - 35 degrees, depending somewhat on power setting. And if they stall, they don't usually flame out immediately, more likely they will surge and overtemperature.
Last edited by Jetdriver; 5th May 2011 at 21:24.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: berlin
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wouldn't the RAT have deployed with no engines (but of course would have been no use with no airflow) - the picture of it on the seabed suggests to me it was still inside its closed doors.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's interesting GY, cannot see that in my documentation which I believe to be up to date ... !?
Would you have the reference please ?
For the in flight case, would it imply the APU is running at least even if engines are not ?
Would you have the reference please ?
For the in flight case, would it imply the APU is running at least even if engines are not ?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing in ACARS!
Originally Posted by sensor_validation
Takata - wouldn't the RAT have deployed with no engines (but of course would have been no use with no airflow) - the picture of it on the seabed suggests to me it was still inside its closed doors. Engines run on the ground or in testbeds without airspeed, wouldn't a modern FADEC with sensitive surge protection managing fuel flow maintain operation even where there is not enough air massflow/density to attempt re-light? And if engines not stalled at altitude why would they with increasing air density below 6000ft?
Previous posts suggest rate of fall fully stalled would be much greater than 6000ft/min, so a single event would have to have started later/higher, but could still end 2:14:30.
Previous posts suggest rate of fall fully stalled would be much greater than 6000ft/min, so a single event would have to have started later/higher, but could still end 2:14:30.
Hence, I'm quite far from being convinced that this airframe could have been for any length of time "fully stalled" (flat/ spin/ spiral/ whatever) during this particular time window without triggering a related ECAM warnings about some power plant issues due to abnormal attitude (outside her flight enveloppe, as it is the definition for an upset)
The full list of the related engine ECAM warnings is too long to be listed but there are some which are quite telling in this particular case:
. ENG THRUST LOSS
. ENG 1 (2) STALL
. ENG 1 (2) FAIL
. ENG ALL ENG FLAME OUT
Only the last one might be retained in the pipe as the ACARS would subsequently become inop due to SATNAV shutdown.
Moreover, A/THR was lost from the start, and the FADEC was also compromised by air data issues (as the ADRs are also playing their part in her runing cruise configuration). Then, any engine management after 02:10 would have been deprived of any automation able to optimise her power plants if there was a simultaneous full loss of control situation.
So, what I'm saying is that it is quite surprising that she could have dropped out of the sky at 02:14:30 while her engines were constantly monitored and given as operating inside a "normal" enveloppe up to this point.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not seen any real detail about GE real time monitoring of AF447 engines, but by 2006 they received "thousands of data messages from aircraft each day" with >9000 aircraft monitored http://geaviationservicesolutions.co...006/v06i01.pdf
I would be surprised if it was much more than the AF ACARS maintenance reports, with regular 10min status plus increased reporting 'by exception' and full data uploads when in airport (but even there I am not sure WIFI would have enough bandwidth?).
Of course 100s of parameters could be recorded every second and a DVD's worth per flight BUT as per discussion about FDR streaming this is not currently feasible/economical via satellite - and surely even less so when F-GZCP was designed/certified?
I would be surprised if it was much more than the AF ACARS maintenance reports, with regular 10min status plus increased reporting 'by exception' and full data uploads when in airport (but even there I am not sure WIFI would have enough bandwidth?).
Of course 100s of parameters could be recorded every second and a DVD's worth per flight BUT as per discussion about FDR streaming this is not currently feasible/economical via satellite - and surely even less so when F-GZCP was designed/certified?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
khashoggi - A very good point and quite correct. Yes, the irregular surface of the ocean did indeed play a large part in how the airframe and its contents were damaged and to what level.
Impact surface of a wave would be virtually the same given the vertical vs horizontal velocity of the airframe, thus the relative weight/surface area of the components would cause the differences...
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
Originally Posted by 3holelover
... I wonder if the press will ever stop calling them "black boxes"?
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
unmanned transport, regarding the streamers they are a better solution to acts of God.
Now, in engineering there is an ongoing effort to make equipment idiot proof. As I was growing into the field I encountered what was then a common phrase, "No matter how good our idiot proofing; but, God always generates better idiots."
I propose that God will provide better disasters that would strip off the streamer.
(And, of course, this is no reason to give up trying.)
Now, in engineering there is an ongoing effort to make equipment idiot proof. As I was growing into the field I encountered what was then a common phrase, "No matter how good our idiot proofing; but, God always generates better idiots."
I propose that God will provide better disasters that would strip off the streamer.
(And, of course, this is no reason to give up trying.)
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
It's a dirty job but somebody has to do it...
Originally Posted by bearfoil
I think what one infers as ambiguity may perhaps be sarcasm. An open mind is a fertile field.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Age: 79
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall that up until the 1960's, manufacturers of electronic enclosures provided their products in only one finish: black crinkle.
Any non-commercial prototype electronics were usually enclosed in one of these products; whence, black boxes.
Any non-commercial prototype electronics were usually enclosed in one of these products; whence, black boxes.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right here inside my head
Age: 65
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall that up until the 1960's, manufacturers of electronic enclosures provided their products in only one finish: black crinkle.
Any non-commercial prototype electronics were usually enclosed in one of these products; whence, black boxes.
Any non-commercial prototype electronics were usually enclosed in one of these products; whence, black boxes.
Sorry... that's a tangent this thread doesn't need.
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
RR_NDB, to get a feel for how the shape of the debris field was created perform a simple experiment. Take a deep glass pan or casserole and fill it nearly to the top with water. Let the water sit long enough to become still.
While the water is settling wander out to your back yard or any other place you can scoop up maybe a tablespoon of dirt. When you get back into the house drop the dirt a very little bit at a time. You'll see that some of it, the finer particles, spread out very widely. Some of it, the sand, settles quickly mostly below where you dropped your sample. Given dirt you'll see roughly three bands with sand in the middle and really fine particles spread out.
This is a variant on the test for soil used when estimating water needs for growing trees or plants. In that case you take a tall jar of water, put in about a 1/2 cup of dirt, shake it vigorously, and let it settle. Heavy stuff settles first etc. It gives a fairly good, cheap, soil quality analysis.
I think this experiment will settle in your mind where most of the distribution of the wreck likely came from.
While the water is settling wander out to your back yard or any other place you can scoop up maybe a tablespoon of dirt. When you get back into the house drop the dirt a very little bit at a time. You'll see that some of it, the finer particles, spread out very widely. Some of it, the sand, settles quickly mostly below where you dropped your sample. Given dirt you'll see roughly three bands with sand in the middle and really fine particles spread out.
This is a variant on the test for soil used when estimating water needs for growing trees or plants. In that case you take a tall jar of water, put in about a 1/2 cup of dirt, shake it vigorously, and let it settle. Heavy stuff settles first etc. It gives a fairly good, cheap, soil quality analysis.
I think this experiment will settle in your mind where most of the distribution of the wreck likely came from.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 81
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A first body of a victim of the Air France Rio-Paris flight was recovered Thursday from the bottom of the Atlantic, 24 hours after the start of operations. "The body, still attached to a seat of the aircraft, appears degraded, " said the General Directorate of Gendarmerie (DGGN). DNA samplings will be performed to try to identify the victim.
