Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

AF 447 Search to resume (part2)

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

AF 447 Search to resume (part2)

Old 17th May 2011, 16:39
  #1621 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Le BEA

"...Thus, any information about the investigation from any other source is null and void if it has not been confirmed by the BEA.".....

The authority has not denied the rumor. It is possible they merely wished not to respond to it, granting it a small credibility...... BUT, if they consider this possible, neither can they revoke it, they cannot foreclose what may be the conclusion in the end
 
Old 17th May 2011, 16:40
  #1622 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 67
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"At this stage of the preliminary analysis of DFDR Airbus has no immediate recommendation to raise to operators"

The question is much more WHY this bulletin was sent out by Airbus.

1. Because Airbus (with the approval of the French authorities) felt, now that the recorders data had been extracted, that many Airbus operators were expecting a bulletin?
(is it customary for the manufacturer to release such a bulletin immediately after data extraction if no new knowledge has been derived from the extraction?)

2 Because Airbus (again with the approval of the French authorities) wants to say something other than "no news so far"
vanHorck is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 16:41
  #1623 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Cytherea and others for the clarification. French is getting to be as bad as English with a certain lack of precision.

Les mesures de sűretÚ en bref
Concernant les articles interdits dans les avions, en soute comme en cabine :

Pour des raisons de sűretÚ ou de sÚcuritÚ, certains objets sont interdits au transport :
^^^^From Aeroports de Paris, sűretÚ and sÚcuritÚ in the same sentence.

In the above quote, I'd translate 'mesures de sűretÚ' as 'security measures', and 'pour raisons de sűretÚ ou de sÚcuritÚ' as 'for safety or security reasons'.

I sometimes have enough trouble with English, and disambiguation in English, without attempting to tackle French.
SaturnV is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 16:57
  #1624 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: on a blue balloon
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
vanHorck

Yes it is very customary for Airbus to issue such a bulletin. They often get many people asking "why did they say that?"
However when the investigators' reports come out the pieces of the puzzle match up.

Sometimes Airbus just means the plane performed as designed: "you crashed it but it wasn't our fault". Whether or not they issue a reminder of best operating procedures can also be significant.
oldchina is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:03
  #1625 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Security | Define Security at Dictionary.com

something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense.
glad rag is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:09
  #1626 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Airwise....

"Specifically, the investigation team has yet to synchronize readings from the data recorder with voice recordings taken from the cockpit, a crucial process expected to take several weeks.


It (BEA team) reacted angrily to a French report that pointed the finger directly at Air France or its crew, calling it "sensationalist" and premature."

Sounds like......

"How dare they impugn the crew, or the Carrier. Then again, we haven't analysed the Cockpit VOICE recorder, have we??" Dear.


We are watching the table being set.....

Zo..we cannot trust the Press.... If they are lying about the data, would they lie to protect Airbus?? In this country, it is not illegal for the Press to LIE.

What is it en France??
 
Old 17th May 2011, 17:20
  #1627 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can you select the FPV of one seat from the other seat?
If you are implying the other seat may have been unoccupied, what would be the point of this action?

Absent a specific DFDR parameter indicating such and such seat is unoccupied, I'd find it extremely hard to believe there were less than two fully qualified pilots on the flight deck at any time during the flight.

Last edited by CogSim; 17th May 2011 at 23:23. Reason: rephrasing
CogSim is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:22
  #1628 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I think there is one switch for both ? Center panel ?
 
Old 17th May 2011, 17:29
  #1629 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,783
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The button is on the FCU(autopilot control panel).
tubby linton is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:31
  #1630 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are watching the table being set.....

bear, with the greatest of respect, I think you are taking thigs a bit too far.
glad rag is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:32
  #1631 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
tubby linton

howdy Captain.
Does its location (FPVpb) have anything to do with a possible impatient a/p reselect?? Other. I noticed my favorite A300 on the ramp sporting four pitots last March, is that current install ?

glad rag

Define "a bit too far" ?? BEA has all the cards, all the power, and all the attention. They are not scrupulously objective. It would be nice, but perhaps superhuman to be that judicious. In an arena that allows, even fosters shading the data, there are billions of euros at stake here. It is perfectly possible a person could shade the truth without knowing s/he was in fact doing it.
Judges, agancies, etc. have recused their participation for far less than what we have seen in the past. These guys are BUDS, professionally deferential at the least, and no formal "conspiracy" need be suggested. The fact of the matter is that objectivity is compromised, on its face.

It will be interesting to see how much of the traces and other evidence will be supplied to the FAA. Once shared, it is in the public domain. I accuse no one, but I do notice the history, and it is not squeaky.

Last edited by bearfoil; 17th May 2011 at 17:44.
 
Old 17th May 2011, 17:37
  #1632 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 83
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There Will Be No Instant Coffee

There seeming is a great deal of desire for instant explanations of what caused the demise of AF447 now that the data has been recovered from the CVR & FDR. IMO, it isn't going to happen if the investigation is done properly by the BEA and the participating contributors. In fact, the next interim report by the BEA, thought to be forthcoming in mid-summer, may be a summary of general observations derived at that time, far from complete and only factual information without any speculation as to cause or where responsibilities may rest. I would be surprised if it turns out differently. To understand the complexity and the time it takes to draw the correct conclusions may be to examine another complex aircraft accident mystery and how the investigation was both organized and carried out to conclusion. I speak of TWA800. Here is the way that investigation and the organized teams were assembled:

NTSB - TWA800 exhibits on the web

Note the various teams and their areas of expertise and the work scope each had to accomplish to report their factual findings in a written report. For example, the powerplant report (my major area of interest) contains factual information and observations of each engine after recovery, photographing and tear down to inspect the various components. No speculations were made as to engine operating conditions in the report that was issued. Now multiply this by all the various teams working while thinking the time to accomplish. Granted, the teams and makeup will be different in the case of the AF447 investigation.

After this stage comes the step of putting all the reports together and examining one against the others to then begin the process of identifying the complete story as to what actually took place, if possible, in some instances. This leads a public hearing of sorts where the findings are revealed and if there might be any objections by the parties involved that could result in additional studies or investigations. Only after this will the final accident report be developed and issued with known causes and probable causes or unknown causes denoted along with proposed safety recommendations to be instituted, or not, by the responsible authority (EASA?)

There is no instant coffee, it is a process that takes time to get right and there is only one chance to get it right.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 17:46
  #1633 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
TurbineD

I take your point, so I will henceforth re-read AA587, instead. Then again, maybe Perpignan. No, Habsheim. Sabe amigo??
 
Old 17th May 2011, 17:50
  #1634 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TD

There is no instant coffee,
Agree, but there are leaks, and inevitably will find there way into hard print, and appear on this forum. Even the Canadians who are super sensitive to the voice recordings, could not keep the lid on the CVR transcript from SR111 - the WSJ printed it verbatum almost the day it was physically transcribed. We are already seeing it, and this is only the beginning. There will be more, but are they planned (?) .... and as the saying goes, where there is smoke .......
wes_wall is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:01
  #1635 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Boston
Age: 72
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bearfoil
"...Thus, any information about the investigation from any other source is null and void if it has not been confirmed by the BEA.".....

The authority has not denied the rumor. It is possible they merely wished not to respond to it, granting it a small credibility...... BUT, if they consider this possible, neither can they revoke it, they cannot foreclose what may be the conclusion in the end
I aggree. the BEA response is exactly what I would have expected whether the rumor contains elements of the truth or not.

Any other response would lead to an inevitable game of twenty questions.
MurphyWasRight is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:04
  #1636 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 58
Posts: 572
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why so long to synchronize?

Specifically, the investigation team has yet to synchronize readings from the data recorder with voice recordings taken from the cockpit, a crucial process expected to take several weeks.
I don't understand this?

From the CVR System Description Note:

The SSCVR is synchronized with the 2nd aircraft recorder (SSFDR) by means of an audio signal corresponding to the GMT sent by the FDIU to the audio system and received by the SSCVR on the third occupant channel.
Therefore the necessary time encoding information is embedded with the audio data. Having worked with several different synch systems (in particular IRIG B per Boeing data packages) and understanding the replay mechanisms to support reading the SSCVR would implicitly include the necessary decoding of the synch data, and would assume the same time stamping is available for all the SSFDR data, how can this "synch" task take several weeks???

Sorry, but I just do not buy that.
GarageYears is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:22
  #1637 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Egyptair 990 crashed Oct 31. CVR recovered Nov 9. Leaks of CVR content by Nov 16. Investigation turned over to the FBI shortly thereafter. ---And that certainly was a politically charged investigation.
____________________

With regard to the "fourth occupant seat" which was recovered along with the captain's and co-pilot's seats, why was it an item to be recovered? (The other jump seat is not on the list of recovered items.)

Possibilities:

a.) Had to be recovered to access/retrieve other parts of the wreckage; or,
b.) Non-essential item, but was useful for a practice run of recovery procedures on Ile de Sein; or,
c.) Source of valuable information for the investigation.
SaturnV is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:23
  #1638 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: My Stringy Brane
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
how can this "synch" task take several weeks???
They don't simply connect a laptop to the FDR and CVR and download a PowerPoint presentation.

It takes quite some time and effort to derive the most accurate transcription possible from the CVR.

Once finalised by the working team, the transcript may be matched up to the FDR traces using the synchronised time code.
Machaca is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:35
  #1639 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Machaca, that may be true, but one should presume the priority for synchronization would be from 02:08 until 02:15, which covers the period from before the first ACARS maintenance messages until impact. Surely that can't require several weeks. --Or is the transcription and synchronization process such that the BEA must start at the very beginning of the tapes?
SaturnV is offline  
Old 17th May 2011, 18:35
  #1640 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Machaca

"They don't simply connect a laptop to the FDR and CVR and download a PowerPoint presentation. "

I note the use of sarcasm, well done. A supercomputer, then, to analyse each bit on an audio analysis?? Time is no object, the 'correct' conclusion must be painstakingly crafted. After all, with so much at stake, and time being of the essence....etc.

BEA can have no hope of 100 per cent acceptance by the public of its ultimate position. There is a line between "Scrupulous" and foot dragging.

There is NO mystery to the process, only politics, imho.

It is inconceivable the reporter was the beneficiary of an inadvertent leak. Airbus responded, and BEA made comment. So quick, then, but the data, oh, let's wait for the final report...... No one likes a tease.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.