Standby, please...I just landed, finishing a four day. I need to sleep a couple of hours, then I will take a closer look at this disaster.
Later...
OK, now I feel better. The wife of my youth picked me up at the airport after flying all night, and then took me to my favorite breakfast joint. I spilled my coffee when I saw a breaking news report on the overhead TV about an A330 lost over the Atlantic. Say again, please...
I have been listening to the media talking heads and the aviation experts for about an hour since waking from my nap. Overall, I think the mainstream coverage is within the proverbial ball park on this one. I cannot believe I am saying this...
But, here are two things being reported with which I will disagree:
1. (Media says,"A bolt of lightning cannot, by itself, bring down a modern airliner.") A bolt of lightning could easily wreck an aircraft and cause a crash by itself. Yes, lightning strikes on aircraft occur everyday. I have been struck many times over my career. Usually, it is a non-event causing only minor damage or none at all. However, if an aircraft is in the vicinity of a very large thunderstorm, it could be struck by a super bolt of lightning wreaking total havoc with disastrous results.
2. (Media says,"Turbulence cannot, by itself, bring down a modern airliner.")Turbulence could easily wreck an aircraft and cause a crash by itself. Severe turbulence in the vicinity of a very large thunderstorm, or even a lesser one, has to be experienced to be believed. I have been inside thunderstorms several times in my career. It is unavoidable when you are a professional pilot. Anyone who disagrees with the previous sentence has not flown enough miles or has been very lucky. As a Line pilot, I go to great, even extreme lengths to stay out of thunderstorms for obvious reasons. Passengers pay me to deliver them safely to their loved ones.
A thunderstorm is a violent and scary entity. It has the power, and I mean real power, to easily rip the wings from an A330, or any other make or model of aircraft. No problem whatsoever.
On the automatic radio messages sent to Mother... Yep, Fi-Fi will send a message to the mainframe (think H.A.L.) when certain key malfunctions have occurred. It is a design feature of the Airbus Industries aircraft. Think you can hide a pesky malfunction from Mother so that you can do that last turn of the day and get home to Momma? You better be careful.
I will put forward two scenarios that may have happened to this jet:
First- Struck by a super bolt which fried the electronics causing depressurization, loss of electrical power and finally, a high altitude upset in IFR conditions (dark, turbulent, scary) leading to catastrophe.
Second- Encountered severe turbulence between or in thunderstorms. Airframe damage and/or failure leads to depressurization, loss of electrical power and finally, disaster.
Whatever happened, it was not pretty. The pax were terrified and the pilots were surely fighting until impact.
An A330 has crashed in the Atlantic... That fact is unbelievable.
Life on the Line continues...
128 comments:
Air France 447
As a layperson, being very careful not to jump to any conclusions, but I do have an Airbus question.
What would be the design reasoning to enable an aircraft to generate an automatic message, such as AF447? Quoting here from AP story this morning, the plane "sent an automatic message...reporting electrical failure and a loss of cabin pressure." Have seen other accounts, so taking this all with a grain of salt. Clearly loss of primary electrical power and cabin pressure means something is terribly wrong, but why the automatic message? Is the assumption that under such circumstances the aircraft is likely to be in such dire straits that emergency assistance is probably required? Is this unique to fly-by-wire a/c such as modern Airbus family, or do other a/c (Boeing) also offer such capabilities?
My deepest sympathies to all involved.
Bob in Minnesota
Hi Dave,
Long time reader, first time commenter. I've got to say that since the heartbreaking news broke this morning about AF447, I've been rather impatiently checking your blog, hoping you'd update. I'm no one of importance in aviation, just a frequent flyer, but as a frequent flyer who dearly loves aviation, I do feel a part (no matter how small) of the aviation community, and for some reason, there's an acute sense of loss with this flight. So with all the theories and media speculation going on, I'm very much looking forward to your take on it all. You're kind of the go-to source for first-person Airbus accounts. Keep up the great work, though I wish this was one blog post you didn't have to write.
-- Genevieve
Emergency descent due to loss of cabin pressure while crossing a line of heavy tropical thunderstorms: What would a pilot be supposed to do in such a case?
Dear Sir, as soon as i heard of the tragic news your blog is the very 1st place i went. man this is really sad, my condolences to the families of those affected.
@anonymous-
These machines are marvels of technology.
A fella I'm certain Captain Dave has been instructed by was instructor on the plane I drive for the same airline.
He told us a story from sitting in the jumpseat, while the flight crew asked a question about a subsystem. He had them turn off the autothrottles for a minute to answer the question.
Within a minute, Mother sent an email: Why are your autothrottles off?
God bless all involved. What a tremendous loss.
Looks grim. My fingers are crossed though. God bless them
Firstly, my heart goes out to all those who perished and all those they leave behind.
Secondly, I await Dave's considered and sensible verdict on such things. (I prefer his blog when its about 'Life on the Line' of course, but then I guess he does too.)
Thirdly, I wondered about this http://trueslant.com/milesobrien/2009/06/01/a-dark-stormy-night-over-the-atlantic/
And thought I would pass it up here for information.
Thanks for a great blog...
It's a good idea to wait. As of the time of this comment, we don't really know anything useful anyway, so get a good rest after your four days.
Automatic Messages:
Our fleet manager (737/CFM engines) at my airline receives these things on his Blackberry. Really amazing. He called a crew, following up on an engine failure alert. There was no engine failure, but a specific performance characteristic was exceded that sent the message. I believe it was low oil quanitity on Take Off (high power setting). Obviously the system has pro's and con's.
Lost a good friend and colleague on AF447, enroute to my office tomorrow morning, this is a sad day for all of us, our hearts are with all the loved ones out there.
C
A part from the intertropical front, the area of Guinea Bissau and Guinea are known for coke trafficking at very large scale. A plane going missing in the area of Sal (Cabo VErde) without any sign is suggesting mid-air collision with crook or surveillance police... but not a lightening strike :-(
The idea behind the automated messages is to have a mechanic waiting at the gate, with spare parts to fix the problem. (If it needs to be fixed before the next flight.) There might even be time to fly in the needed parts.
Chris, I'm sorry...
This has to be one of the most nightmarish disasters ever. Your in the back of a plane, over the water, in the pitch black dead of night, getting banged around like crazy, the airplane goes dark, depressurizes, and then breaks apart...and worse yet is that we may not ever find out what really happend.
Captain Dave- You were my last port of call tonight (with fingers crossed)before switching off at 0115 here in France. Since midday I've watched the AF A320s and 321s fly overhead on approach into Toulouse- made this tragedy feel very close. I too look forward to your considered postings in due course. To Chris- my thoughts and prayers for you and your friend. Leslie S-P France
I second what Dave said about thunderstorms.
I stumbled into a small storm cloud once in my Cherokee (with my entire family and dog on board). It was just big enough to have inner-cloud lightning -- still in the developing phase -- but even then, the experience was, quite simply, mind-blowing.
The plane shot up up 3,000 feet in a few seconds, then fell back down again. My stomach was in my mouth, the vertical speed indicator was pegged up and then down, and the wings were rocking uncontrollably into 60 degree banks left and right. I let the plane do what it wanted, making only gentle corrections after each movement to stay more-or-less upright. Until we got out, I completely gave on on trying to hold a heading and altitude, much less trying to stay on the localizer for my approach or to hold an altitude. There were no sharp bumps like one usually expects from turbulence, just huge, sweeping movements like the hand of god grabbing the 2,400 lb plane and tossing it up, down, and sideways as if it were a balsawood glider.
I think what I was in was still a TCU, since I'd started out on top before the approach and hadn't seen any anvil tops, or even anything that looked like it was topping out much about 20,000-25,000 feet. I can imagine what it might be like inside an actual CB, but I choose never to find out, and probably wouldn't live to tell you about it if I did.
david 0541- yep, I can tell from your description that you know what you are talking about. Good comment.
genevieve- thank you. I, also, wish I did not have to blog on this...
rich- fall back on sim training and experience and hope you can keep the shiny side up.
anonymous 0110- uh, we didn't turn the auto-thrust off, did we?
chris- what a nightmare. I am truly sorry.
uncleben- at 35,000 feet?
Thank you Dave for putting forward the pilots point of view. It really is a very sad tragedy, and I wonder if we will ever know what happened.
As you say, thunderstorms are violent things. I remember leaving Atlanta on a B744 heading for South Africa and flying through potential tornado weather with tremendous storms. A B744 dropping 500' in a storm is a scary thing. That is probably the worst weatherI hve ever flown in.
Those tropical thunderstorms can reach to 50,000' - the forces in those must be incredible. My only question I guess - did they attempt to avoid the storms? Who knows.
Our prayers go to all those affected by this tragedy.
I believe Dave's estimate of what could happen in bad weather. About 15 years ago I flew over the Gulf of Mexico from New Orleans to Miami. There must have been no way around the storm we flew through, or otherwise I have to assume he would have tried. It got black outside in an otherwise sunny day, and not everyone had seatbelts on. When we hit the first wave of turbulence, it was like being on a rollercoaster. Pax came out of their seats and hit their heads on the overhead compartments. How far does a plane have to fall for that to happen? I felt damn lucky to get off that plane in one piece.
I am an experienced passenger and private pilot..
I am having trouble understanding how this plane got into such a severe line of T-Storms... These things don't appear from nowhere and the state-of-the-art radar systems should have given the crew ample time to deviate
Now - what is the possibility of the crew that was on duty nodded off and didn't see what they were getting into before it was too late? 4+ hours into a routine and VERY boring overnight flight...even more boring as there is no longer any position reporting requirements..
Hope not as I am on a NY-HK transpac tomorrow .....
Missing Jet: 'Fire' Spotted On Atlantic Ocean
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Missing-Air-France-Jet-Pilots-Spot-Fire-On-Atlantic-Ocean-Near-Route-Of-Missing-Plane/Article/200906115293216?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15293216_Missing_Air_France_Jet%3A_Pilots_Spot_Fire_On_Atlantic_Ocean_Near_Route_Of_Missing_Plane
Dave thank you for your thoughts on AF447. I know there is a pall over T2 at LAX tonight.
One of the worst storms I have ever flown in was during monsoons and I was flying WN to PHX for a reunion. I have never in my life flown in such turbulence. We were fine until he put the flaps down. That was a bucking bronco of a 737. The PIC came on and said folks buckle in tightly this is going to be a ride. We made it down safely with the smell of ozone in the air all around us. I never take flying in weather for granted.
Bless you for your good thoughts.
amulbunny
Dave what is the possibility of dual flameouts caused by ingesting large amounts of ice/rain?? I'm not sure that would cause a loss of cabin pressure and would think they would have plenty of time for a restart from that altitude.
Thanks Dave for letting us all in on your thoughts. You're never one to dodge the tough topics on your blog (although usually, you keep it light around here). I've often wondered what actual pilots sometimes thought of these types of incidents. I look forward to your thoughts and analyses.
Also, on a more personal note, what does your wife (whichever one you want to talk about =0}) think when such things happen?
There is two kinds of lightnings in a storm, most often they are negative lightnings and planes survive it but, I read that rarely a lightning can be positive (charge) with a devastating effect such as simply destroying the plane. Any comment / knowledge about postive lightnings? Thanks. Francois
Most disturbing thing to me is that the electrical failure report was transmitted but no voice transmission accompanied it- either following or preceding it. Total and sudden power failure?
No warning?
Captain Dave - But the MSM timeline does not makes sense. Total electrical failure was broadcast fourteen minutes after first auto-transmission of turbulence. So why no MayDay during turn-off of auto pilot/descent and attempts to control the aircraft?
Aren't there back-up battery systems which also power communications? Plus, how could lightning override all of the buss wiring?
Isn't there manual back up of pitch, yaw, and roll on this magnificent state-of-the-art aircraft when electric power fails? Don't "fly-by-wire" planes have manual backup?
Break up of a big jet aircraft from turbulence, while at cruising altitude, is unheard of. How come there were no broadcasts?
This does not make sense at all, at least from a layperson's knowledge of air disasters. Your thoughts?
anonymous 642- state of the art radar systems, which I use on a regular basis, do not show the storms any sooner than an old mono-chrome system. They do, however, show the structure and dynamics of the storm much better. My job description includes penetrating lines of storms, which is usually done with minimum trouble, thanks to the awesome performance of modern jets.
Asleep in the flight deck? I think this is unlikely, but not impossible.
anonymous 737- yep, it is posible for a dual engine flame. Maybe even likely...
jay 743- we are glad it did not happen to us.
anonymous 819- the last thing I would be worried about is talking on the radio during an encounter with a thunderstorm.
anonymous 825- a super bolt of lighting could easily fry the buss system rendering the battery back uo useless. Manual back-up? Yes, of course... What good would that do if you are fighting severe turbulence? None at all.
There are several high altitude break-ups of jet airliners. In contemporary times, they are rare because we have better radar, ATC help, and overall training. Aviation knowledge is built on dead men's bones.
As far as the timeline goes, forget it. The central monitering system fails to deliver messages on a timely basis regularly. Air France is very lucky that they received anything. We are measuring with a micrometer and cutting with an axe, if you get my drift.
Thanks Captain Dave! Another question - Are these 2005 Airbus planes made out of a lot of composite materials (as opposed to the old total-aluminum fuselage) which may be a detriment to the Faraday Cage effect?
What a tragedy, devastating...
I haven't seen the map or locale of where the bird went down, wonder if it was in the vicinity of the Bermuda Triangle.
RIP 447.
Why aren't commercial airliners equipped with some sort of GPS transponder that can be used to track the path of flights outside of radar range? Planes already have GPS. They simply need to attach that GPS to a transmitter, maybe use the same transmitter that sends the distress signals we're reading about. Seems like this would be useful to find downed aircraft.
Hey Dave,
Thanks for your insight from the line.
I have a slightly different perspective to most in these circumstances as I work in both IT and as a weekend Pilot, so can see two distinct angles.
The general public has come to learn that computers are infallible and obviously want someone to blame for this tragedy, there are a barrage of questions that come thick and fast: is there some sort of system missing that could have prevented this? Did the systems malfunction? Did the crew not take advantage of these systems? I doubt it because modern information systems the cost of implementing a safety system is generally much less than any incurred liability and in a safety critical environment these things are implemented quickly and properly. And still the questions and finger pointing come.
I rode jump seat in a regional airliner last week when the fuel computer malfunctioned twice in flight, once shortly after takeoff and secondly as we were going through transition altitude and we were in messy IFR weather. Both critical phases of flight to have any system malfunction. To watch the crew respond with precision, decisiveness and situational awareness would probably enlighten most with how well trained all of aviation is.
This is a tragedy and the general public should treat it as such. We are all very clever little creatures, but we can not build machines that can win against the weather.
My sympathy to all of those involved.
Hi Dave
Sorry about the previous post...
I know this is the reason everyone doesn't want to know about or even think about, but could this possibly be due to an explosion of some sort that did not completely destroy the planes systems but did enough damage to seal its fate, hence that is why AF got the messages and then it dropped of radar? I know no terrorist groups have claimed responsibility so it is unlikely, but it is still a valid reason at this stage? Is it possible that the fuel within the tanks could have been ignited by any source i.e lightning?
Thanks
R.I.P Let us pray for a miracle.
Anonymous 11:44, you have good questions but we can only speculate about the answers unless we know more about what happened. Let's wait till more facts become available.
Anonymous 9:27, reliable communication is the biggest issue here: The plane was out of VHF range, HF frequencies are tricky and not the easiest to use for computer communication. Satellite communication worked here, but becomes less reliable near the poles (unless you have a network of polar satellites). And you can lose your antenna or transceiver through a lightning strike.
ek433, both are possible but unlikely. Let's wait till we have more facts and analyse from there.
Captain Dave
You seems to have pointed out the exact opposite of what aviation expert said about the safety of modern air travel. Basically, no matter what the airline or industry says, I believe tragic accident like AF447 is largely due to calculative gamble. Mother nature is something we don't mess around with. However, in current global economic crisis, I wonder if the Airline will put extra pressure to pilots to avoid deviating from their flight plan mainly on saving cost. This will be really dead scary, and I am sure that will bring alot of coverups. I hate turbulence but I was kind of lucky because I flew mostly with reputable airlines like Cathay Pacific. I still remember one of my trip from Tokyo to Hong Kong, the pilot noted the weather due to Typhoon, and deviates and causes extra 45 minutes in flight time. I like the pilots decision on this one, but will all pilots and other airlines do the same thing. AF 447 should have deviated, full-stop. Why are they flying over such bad weather from the start?
MathFox, If we ever salvage the reckage... I believe that the black box is gone, the ocean is so deep there, also with flames reported by the crew of that TAM flight, lets hope the rescue crews can get gain access to anything.
Cheers
My thoughts exactly. My uneducated knowledge is that twin engined flights across oceans have to be within 400 miles of a diverting airfield at all times in case of emergency. This, coupled with the need to reduce fuel burn could have given the crew little choice to reroute around the problem and ride it out instead....
Long time reader but first comment.
I'm a french pilot student,8 months away of having the ratings for jetliners. I feel deeply touched by this accident. With the time passing I'm getting woried about rescue teams not being able to find the crash site. Must have been a nasty situation for the guys ahead, remembering me the Swissair 111 pain. I'd just like to add to the last comment that words on TV are just assumptions for the moment. No causes can really be given. No question about AF pilots being given the opportunity of diverting such as Cathay would do. They would have done of course if they would have been aware of any danger but the question is certainly what the hell happened? Considering the mistery around it for the moment, I guess there is no pilot on earth who would say today, he/she could have handled the situation and taken everybody out...
I am reading all of this but the bottom line according to th assumptions we ar making is that the damage was done in a in a TStorm..
The question remains - WHY did he challenge this storm- especially with the advance radar that showed its ferocity with hundreds of miles warning???
Even with a huge diversion, he had to have had fuel to divert to another airport.
Unless they were snoozing or otherwise occupied and were simply not paying attention until it was too late!!
Now the other point - we are ASSUMING that this is a storm related issue - Maybe it was, like someone else mentioned that this was a in-flight collision with a rogue aircraft - which, I am assuming would not set off the TCAS..
Inasmuch as the first reports on all air disasters are usually totally inacurate we will have to wait...
Dave: I've been reading your blog for a long time because I enjoy your worldview, literally and metaphorically.
I was struck by what "anonymous" above said about composite materials. I don't know what percentage of the A330 is some sort of composite, rather than aluminum. But apparently composites do not conduct electricity as readily as aluminum or other metals and, instead, heat up. Maybe dangerously so. From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787#Composite_fuselage
"Another concern arises from the risk of lightning strikes.[103] The 787 fuselage's composite could have as much as 1,000 times the electrical resistance of aluminum, increasing the risk of damage during a lightning strike.[104] Boeing has stated that the 787's lightning protection will meet FAA requirements.[105] FAA management is planning to relax some lightning strike requirements, which will help the 787Anyone know more about this?
--k
Hi there,
@Itinerant: There's a long and hard discussion on all levels going on about composite materials in airliners (and smaller planes).
Composites usually have quite a large amount of copper (e.g. in form of a mesh of some kind) baked into their upper levels. So the argument with the resistance of the material is not accurate at best...
Btw, the capacity of the material/of the object ist by far of more importance regarding bolts than their resistance.
Bolts have doned metal airplanes at more than one 'opportunity', it's pure speculation to think about the composites in this case.
We'll all have to wait what the investigators will find out (and what they will be willing to share with the public - think of vital interests of the industry...)
From my point of view there is a large number of causes, from simple bad luck to a combination of circumstances that went downhill - which is the usual cause for a desaster like this. The information given by the company and the authorities at the moment doesn't rule out anything, it just makes weather and nighttime a large (contributing) factor in all scenarios.
My condolences to the person who has lost his/her colleague and my prayers to the souls onboard.
Kind regards,
Peter (red)
Anonymous: *all* flying, and in fact, all human activies, are what you call a "calculative gamble". You make a similar gamble if you decide to drive home on a rainy night, instead of taking a hotel room and waiting for safer, dry roads in the morning.
Anonymous and itinerant: I don't know about airliners, but I've heard that small composite planes have to have conductive wire meshes embedded to be certified for IFR flight. That's why you cannot fly a Diamond Katana IFR, for example.
"Super Puma helicopter operated by Bristow is struck by lightning":
http://apapele.ftiez.com/Helicopter_Down.wmv
Look at the end of the NG Film, cause of accident:
"Carbon fiber rotor blades, with a metal strip"
http://www.google.no/search?q=Airbus+A330+Composite+Wings
Death leaves a heartache no one can heal, love leaves a memory no one can steal. ~From a headstone in Ireland
My thought and prayers are with those families friends and colleagues who have been affected by this tragedy.
Though many of your correspondents are probably aware of this statistic would the A330 be considered as an outstanding, reliable, robust ‘modern generation' – aircraft?
Notable accidents and incidents involving the A330 – acknowledgements to Wikipedia.
On 30 June 1994, an A330 owned by Airbus on a test flight simulating an engine failure on takeoff crashed shortly after take-off from Toulouse, killing all seven on board. (See A330 test flight crash.)[14]
On 24 August 2001, Air Transat, Flight 236, an A330-243, performed the world's longest recorded glide with a jet airliner after suffering fuel exhaustion over the Atlantic Ocean. The plane flew powerless for half an hour and covered 65 nautical miles (120 km) to an emergency landing in the Azores (Portugal).
On 18 July 2003, B-HYA, a Dragonair A330-342 encountered severe turbulence associated with Tropical Depression Koni over the South China Sea, during the flight KA060 from Kota Kinabalu to Hong Kong.
On 7 October 2008, VH-QPA, an A330-303 operating Qantas Flight 72, suffered a rapid loss of altitude in two sudden uncommanded pitch down manoeuvres causing serious injuries while 80 nautical miles (150 km) from Learmonth, Australia. Initial investigations identified a inertial reference system fault. On receiving false indication of a very high angle of attack, the flight control systems commanded a pitch down movement, reaching a maximum of 8.5 degrees pitch down.
Hi Dave,
i read this on a forum. What is your point of view about?
Thanks a lot!
"Sources within Air France reported, that the automatic message did not only report an electrical short circuit, but also the loss of cabin pressure. This information has been confirmed by FAB, who also stated, that the position of the airplane was given as N3.5777 W30.3744 in that message.
New information provided by sources within Air France suggests, that the ACARS messages of system failures started to arrive at 02:10Z indicating, that the autopilot had disengaged and the fly by wire system had changed to alternate law. Between 02:11Z and 02:13Z a flurry of messages regarding ADIRU and ISIS faults arrived, at 02:13Z PRIM 1 and SEC 1 faults were indicated, at 02:14Z the last message received was an advisory regarding cabin vertical speed. That sequence of messages could not be independently verified."
First of all all my sorrow for the victims of this tragedy. and a close second my rage for those that are already trying to find the culprit in the cockpit given the assumption that "modern airliners don't fall out of the sky" BULLSHIT if I may say so.
As an airline pilot for the past 20 years with 11000+ hours of wich 5000+ on Airbus, my understanding is that on those planes I'd rather have an engine failure every single flying day of my life than one electrical failure OF ANY KIND!
None of the past failures in electrical systems in airbus FBW airplanes has ever evolved "by the book". The system sheer complication makes it unpredictable, so while the manuals list all kind of plain possibilities, truth is that the real thing will be different,unpredictable and very difficult to manage by pilots.
Investigation will be difficult, long and with so many parameters missing that at the end they will come up with something plausible that can not be excluded by factual evidence. NOT THE TRUTH.
Cap'n ~
Thanks for your insight on this tragedy.
I find my thoughts drifting more to the families/friends now rather than the cause (though still interested in that as a low-time private pilot).
God's grace for all thos impacted...
John I.
Prior XJ FA/Instructor
Saw the comment about never retreaving the black boxes. SAA Helderberg went down over the Indian Ocean, recorders were recovered in excess of 14000 feet. Flight data was recovered. the water in the suspected area currently being searched is believed to be around 15000 feet.
Guzzo, one engineering rule is "if the indicator shows a defect, it could be the indication system that is defect." Without access to the rumoured messages and analysis by system specialists it is all just rumour and conjecture, not a proper analysis.
With all respect to the experienced pilots: How does the reliability of (properly designed) electrical actuation compare to hydraulic or cable actuation (If cable is practical in a wide body.)
Cables may jam or break, hydraulics can leak and lose fluid; electricity can fail too. What is most likely to cause an accident in an airplane and why? (My gut feeling is that hydraulics and electricity are on par for a wide body, with proper design being more important than technology choice.)
Remember American 587, an A300 that crashed departing JFK in November, 2001? Investigators blamed the FO for causing structural failure by violently delecting the A300's quirky rudder during a wake turbulence encounter. Does the 330 share this rudder system with the 300?
Hello I am an avitaion fan and have interest in investigating air crashes. The probability of an aircraft getting struck by lightning is very high especially during thunderstorm..But even if AF-447 was struck by a bolt The arcrafts body is supposed to displace the current hence protecting the Avionics nd other electrical system...My opinion in this case is the Multiple instrument failure It was a very stormy night i guess nearly zero visibility if the altimeter or any important instrument would have failed the pilot's could have not did a tthing..but strnge thing they didnt send any distress calls
I would like to know your opinion about this case
Thank you
Captain - sincere condolonces to all involved in this tragedy. we trust our lives to you and your colleagues every day and seldom get the chance to thank you for your skill. Thank you!
Thinking outside the box ( I hate that expression) but the airbus A300 that went down in Roackaway New York in 2001 suffered a loss of vertical stab due to rudder inputs initiated by the 1st officer to counter jet wake. Would it be out of the question that an aircraft in severe turbulance from a tropical storm would require similar inputs? Just my point of view but I have ALWAYS been wary of composite materials especially on high stress engineering items no matter how precisely they are produced! With all due respect to you and your colleagues flying the Airbus Dave, I always give the outer skin an extra pat when I enter the cabin of an Airbus!!
Keep up the great blog and I hope that one day the family and friends of all those feared lost are brought closure
Your blog has made it to the BBC News website!
Anonymous June 01 8.25 -
Many of those airliners that get hit by lightning are so called fly-by-wire aircraft (meaning the controls in the cockpit are linked to the movable surfaces on the airplane by electrical wires and computers). Airbus pioneered FBW control systems in commercial airliners and the engineers in Toulouse have gone out of their way to demonstrate their products are safe in stormy weather. There are four fully redundant electrical systems on an Airbus – and if the worst happens, a manual flight control system that allows the crew to fly the plane (barely) using the rudder, differential thrust on the engines and horizontal stabilizer trim. [You may recall that is how the crew of United flight 232 managed to get a DC-10 on the ground in Sioux City, Iowa in 1989 after a complete hydraulics failure]
Here - http://trueslant.com/milesobrien/2009/06/01/a-dark-stormy-night-over-the-atlantic/
John Lee, you left out the parts about how you can leap tall buildings in a single bound, and, oh yes, the stuff about the grassy knoll.
I heard from an airline pilot friend of mine who told me that he & his pilot colleagues are sure as hell glad that they fly Boeing and not Airbus. He commented that "things go wrong with Airbus aircraft". I got the impression that Airbus have a reputation not only for being one of the most advanced aircraft in the skies but also for being susceptible to technical glitches. Is this true?
Wow.
As a previous commented mentioned, your views made it to the bbc news website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8079001.stm
Thanks for the tutorials on how these things work. May prayers for those involved and those surviving.
I've read a little bit about "super lightning" and "positive lightning" in the previous messages, but that was the first thing I thought of when I heard it went down in a storm.
According to the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning#Positive_lightning
Positive lightning is six to ten times more powerful than the standard negative lightning. It can also strike miles away from where it originated.
"The leader stroke of lightning issues forth in a nearly horizontal direction until it veers toward the ground. These usually occur kilometers/miles from (and often ahead of) the main storm"
I also believe I read that positive lightning was not even known when they set the FAA lightning specs.
Again, thanks for the blog.
Aviation Herald posts suspicions about parallels to an event with an Australian A330 which went into trouble when multiple ADIRU failures were reported. Gladly that flight ended safe on ground with "only" injuries. http://avherald.com/h?article=41a81ef1/0004&opt=0
Thomas
I fly very often, I love planes, and definitely not afraid of flying. Two years ago, same time just like now, I was on a TAM flight from Sao Paolo to Paris on a MD11. It was by far the very worst
trip I ever had. There was turbulence around the same area, that lasted a longer than I have ever felt before. My coffee cup was 1/3 full and within
a couple of minutes all of my coffee was gone. My colleague and co-traveler, vowed never to board a plane, and to this day he kept his word. The inbound leg was somewhat calmer, but the Sao Paolo to Paris leg made me pray for my life on a plane
Question:
Shouldn't Air France, via the ACARS AOC messages received, have by now a reasonable idea of what happened (even if not why it happened)?
Some critical systems parameters are usually included in such messages.Some of them are even user-defined.
My guess would be that they probably know more than they're disclosing.
Anton in the EU
Dave - Can you describe what happens when a fully "fly by wire" aircraft loses power? The backup sequences on the Airbus, etc.?
I think loss of power makes a very bad situation impossible?
Anonymous 10:50
I thinks it OK to question judgement and technique after an accident/incident. Thats how we learn. We don't know why this plane crashed yet. Just theories. I think you owe it to yourself to do more research on Transport Categopry Aircraft certification. After the AA crash in Queens alot of bulletins came out in the 121 world about "full" use of rudder input. In small airplanes Va will keep you out trouble mostly. If you think Va or 280/.78 in most jet liners is going to keep the wings on in a Level 5 thunderstorm, you will have a short career.
As a commercial pilot and instructor pilot with thousands of hours experience as both a pilot and ATC controller there is another scenario, which must be considered.
Hail! Large Hail will bring down any aircraft. It is not only possible but quite plausible that AF447 flew into unseen large Hail which could knock out the engines and windshields, with a loss of pressurization, electrical failure, followed by loss of control. The Airbus is totally controlled by a fly by wire system. If Lightning and/or Hail defeats the electrical system the pilot will loose control.
Henry
Me thinks that John Lee may have neglected to take his medication today.
Captain Dave...thanks for hosting this insightful, instructive and thought-provoking blog. As a serious FF (average 80K miles per year) I spend a lot of time wondering who exactly is sitting up front and always hope that the guys and gals driving Fi-Fi have the same level of experience and perspective.
Even small thunderstorms can wreck havoc. I think I set the world record for climb in a J-2 when I was learning to fly. Anything that wasn't attached to something in the cockpit - gone. It was summer and the window wasn't attached. My first cross country too, almost my last.
John Lee, I find your posts to be insulting and ridiculous.
I've been reading about this crash since yesterday. As a fearful flyer who has had to take courses to actually overcome my fear of flying, this is distressing. I have 6 flights scheduled in the next week myself.
For some reason, I'm leaning toward the possibility of an explosion of some kind. Now we're finding out that the automatic signals from the aircraft were more of a bunch of mixed messages, then anything specific. I can only hope that the passengers didn't know what hit them. I hope nobody knew their fate. To be in a dark, turbulent, crashing jet over the ocean, especially with your children onboard, is a fate nobody should have to suffer.
Dave! You've got FANS. So much that your words are being taken and posted on a BBC news article.
I agree with you 100%. Same thing I said about the lightning and an electrical failure to me says "Engine Trouble".
I hope in the end we can learn from this. Unfortunatly at the expense of 228 Souls.
anonymous 1050- Holy Moly! What a comment. Running my mouth? High and mighty asses? I will give you the benefit of the doubt; maybe you are having a bad day.
This blog is a hobby, not a pedestal where I pontificate on the airline business. I usually do not go negative because it is counter productive. As far as finding out what airline I fy for and then avoiding it, that would be silly for the following reason... I think I am one of the last of the silver haired captains that truly cares about his job and passengers.
Your comment on Va is not accurate. Thunderstorms can kill an aircraft at any airspeed if the conditions are right.
John Lee- Nazis? Come on, lets keep the comments under control, please.
Henry- without a doubt, that is something to consider.
Dave,
Seriously FF (about 150-200k year) and i look forward to each of your postings. While I am not a pilot and trust my life weekly to guys like you, here are 2 thoughts:
1.) Publicity (i.e. BBC coverage which has been mentioned) can be a double edged sword as we, your regular readers, see the influx of ... lets just call them irregular ... comments.
2.) A tragedy such as this is any flyer's (pilot and passengers) worst nightmare. Severe turbulence is a real fear of mine (fortunately having only experienced it once or twice) and I am sure a fear of many of those onboard. Storms and the pitch black, open ocean night would only compound this terror. Let us keep them in our thoughts and prayers as we patiently analyze the lessons learned.
Keep up the great work. And, to counter the posted that would avoid you as his Captain, I would just say that weekly, as I head to the airport, I pray to have a Captain upfront just like you.
Dave please don't let some of these JERKEYS get you down. I envy your skill and ability and am digging far into the FAR's and AIM to pass my commercial with colors. I can easily say I envy you and your fantastic ability to articulate it to us your readers.
Thank You Dave!
From a well trained private pilot.
Dave, new info:
New information provided by sources within Air France suggests, that the ACARS messages of system failures started to arrive at 02:10Z indicating, that the autopilot had disengaged and the fly by wire system had changed to alternate law. Between 02:11Z and 02:13Z a flurry of messages regarding ADIRU and ISIS faults arrived, at 02:13Z PRIM 1 and SEC 1 faults were indicated, at 02:14Z the last message received was an advisory regarding cabin vertical speed. That sequence of messages could not be independently verified.
source: http://avherald.com/h?article=41a81ef1/0004&opt=0
anonymous 1256- Hold on a second. You seem to be a flight instructor or light aircraft pilot, so I will concede that you probably know your stuff. I think we are talking about two different things here. Flying at or below Va will not protect you in a violent Trw++. There have been documented cases of airframe failure caused by vertical columns of air moving in excess of 10,000 fpm. Air foil stall or not, that is big time trouble.
I did not say that I know what the cause of the accident is; I am only speculating and say as much.
Correct my understanding of aerodynamics? I think I know my aerodynamics fairly well, maybe not as well as you, though. Since I have never met you, I will withhold opinion on that.
Ridiculous blog? Yeah, it might be a ridiculous blog, but it keeps me busy on overnights in crappy hotels.
Hi Dave, i found this interesting weather analysis about accident. Take a look if you've time!
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/
ps: your blog is great!
It seems to take multiple failures to produce crashes these days. At least two if not three or four. One combination of events here might be a nearly simultaneous lightning strike and turbulence upset. The first might introduce a spike to the electrical system while the other might inspire ADIRU pitch command. While the systems vote on which computer's got the bad data, the plane could exceed structural limits.
Wild Weasel
The only thing I know about aircraft is flying in them as a passenger.
However, you mentioned that the small lightning bolts are about 100Kv.
Such a small voltage would only be enough for a small spark as the breakdown of air is roughly 1Kv (1000 volts) per millimetre so the 100 Kv would only cause a small spark (breakdown of the air as a dielelectric) of about 100 mm or roughly 4 inches.
This breakdown path may be longer as one goes higher because of the rarified air and high condensation/humidity levels, but it certainly cannot qualify as lightning.
You can imagine how many millions of volts are required for a lightning strike which, if I remember correctly, has been measured to have been more than 50 miles long.
Hope this clears the bit about lightning.
lvcivs- thanks for the info. What a nightmare!
anonymous 1256- One more thing; your comment about the "two clowns who stalled a Q400 on approach" will come around and bite you in the butt. I am serious about this... I have been there and done that, as the old quip goes. I am assuming that you are an intelligent guy, so surely you must know haw fast an accident can happen. Like when you least expect it... Really, I am giving you some advice here (from an old Line captain); be careful with your criticism. There seems to be a cosmic connection between criticizing fellow pilots and your own screw-ups.
By the way, you are welcome to leave comments on this blog anytime, even if they are negative.
Dave, really liked your advice on Karma, or whatever one may choose to call it. Speaking in those terms about fellow aviators (regardless of their actions or inactions) is just plain COWARD, and extremely bad for one's bank account with destiny. Your post on this alleged tragedy was great. It stimulates the mind, and is educated. I say "alleged" because I am one to hope they are in an island eating coconuts and drinking rain water after a ocean ditching...afterall, they found pieces and objects floating, but has NOT been confirmed as the wreckage. I pray for the families and loved ones.
Dave, here is a link of the automatic messages sendt from the plane
http://blogs.news.sky.com/foreignmatters/Post:0fc148fa-4542-4246-99e7-c0a8824562e6
Your thoughs on this?
Greetings,
Not a regular reader, I one of the kids the BBC dragged in. I wanted to repeat a question to you, Dave, that I think might have got lost in all the mess.
What exactly would be the procedure for losing cabin pressure and power at cruising altitude in a plane like the 330, while also being in a sub-tropical thunderstorm?
It seems, from my limited knowledge a completely messed up situation. You have to get below 10,000 feet so you can breath, but being below 10,000 feet in a thunderstorm, while already struggling to control the aircraft, seems a recipe for catastrophe.
Hi Dave, I am a Commercial Pilot in Australia and have been reading your blog for a long time.
I thought your annalysis was really good with the information provided, there was no wild tangents that we are seeing come from armchair "aviation experts" and as most pilots are thinking, lets just wait and see the evidence before jumping to conclusions.
You write an excellant blog so I wouldn't give a second thought to the negative comments some people feel they need to express.
Keep Safe Flying the Line...
I have a bad feeling that the plane got blown out of the sky by a bomb!
scott- you would have your hands full. Foremost, the turbulence would be so bad that the instrument panel would be almost impossible to read. If you were in a TRW and flamed out both engines, the emergency generator( a little windmill called the RAT-ram air turbine) would come out of it's nook and power important electrics and a standby hydraulic system. The cabin would start to lose pressure as the bleeds from both engines are inop. The pilots put on their masks and drop the pax masks as they are beginning an emergency descent. All the while, the turbulence is severe or worse. Everything a pilot dreads about weather is inside a TRW; hail, torrential rain, ice, killer turbulence, lightning, and vertical columns of fast moving air. Forget about an engine restart until you are out of the storm, if you survive that long. The APU might start at lower altitude and possibly you could get cabin pressure... Maybe. It would not be pretty.
Andrew- thanks for the comment.
Anonymous said...
I have a bad feeling that the plane got blown out of the sky by a bomb!
Yes, the 'bomb' was probably as stated ' super bolt!'
In my 43 years of life i have only ever flown once - 1985 London to Newark,NJ.
Unfortunately it was the turbulance experienced during this flight that decided i would never fly again. It hurt that bad.
So here's to all you pilots, cabin crew etc - GOD Speed and may HIS love and presence help you all to continue to deliver your passengers safely around this beautiful world.
Lvcivs : 1:37 PM, June 02, 2009
Thanks. And Thanks Captain Dave. From a layperson who is frightened of getting on any commercial aircraft, but who loves flying on the A330 series versus the Dash 8, the comments on here are a tremendous help.
But today, Jun 2, we are now hearing of "more than ten" autotransmissions regarding, in the order MSM is stating: electrical circuitry problems, loss of cabin pressure, and ...what? One report was that the sequence lasted for four minutes. So am I wrong in thinking the catastrophe happened instantaneous, and the latter transmissions were just a byproduct of total structural failure?
I would like to see the data stream and its timeline. How hard is it to release 10 plus data lines?
Other forums indicate, within 2:11z and 2:13z: messages in this order, ADIRU, then ISIS:
ADIRU (from Wikipedia)
The Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU) is a key component of the integrated Air Data Inertial Reference System (ADIRS), which supplies air data (air speed and altitude) and inertial reference (position and attitude) information to the pilots' Electronic Flight Instrument System displays as well as other systems on the aircraft such as the engines, autopilot, flight control and landing gear systems.[1] An ADIRU acts as a single, fault tolerant source of navigational data for both pilots of an aircraft
(note there are 3 ADIRUs on the A330 for redundancy - loss of 1 should not bring down an aircraft)
ISIS - Integrated Standby Intrument System - separate basic 'artificial horizon and airspeed' indicator for cases where normal flight instruments become unavailable.
....All ADRIU fail? Did the 2 Quantas have this happen too?
It occurs to me that only a cool professional with a steady, patient gaze could manage this comment section.
A pat on the back, Dave.
Wasn't there a report that another pilot flying in that area see flames going into the water?
I think it is possible the fuel tank may have been hit, causing an explosion. Just like the Iran plane
a few years back. Flying through a storm and the fuel tank was hit.
I stay away from flying. Train, bus, car, any other way but not airplanes.
Far too dangerous.
USA
testing new comment moderation
Dave...thanks for bringing the comments section back online. I feared that some of the 'nuisance' comments would have given you cause to end the blog which would be a loss to those of us who fly or have a general interest in aviation. I see, however, that you no longer accept anonymous comments.
That said, do you have any thoughts regarding the possibility that the pitot tubes were iced over causing the pilots to make decisions based on bad data?
Hi Dave
120 hours and not one single piece from the A330 has been recovered, Thats strange.All we have is the 24 messages the a/c sent via ACARS. I believe the FAA should ground all A330 until the dual ADIRU failure can be fully explained.What do you think?
Has the definition of an 'aviation enthusiast' veered off to include 'wing-nut' with some of these comments???
Dave, I am interested to get your take on the latest information regarding inaccurate airspeed indications / blocked pitot tubes, static ports. What other intruments could one cross-check to determine airspeed malfunction?
I really get annoyed when the media reports half facts and semi-truths. The fact is that without the FDR, nobody really knows anything- all we have are educated guesses at best. The real pilots (not the kind you see on CNN 5 hrs after the incident that already know the cause) know that there's just no way of knowing what happened without the FDR.
I sincerely hope that the FDR is found before the ELT battery expires. Otherwise the fate of AFR447 will never be known.
Hi Dave
What about the possibility of the AF447 being struck not by a lightning but by a "blue jet" or an electronic pulse, going upward, well above the CB?
As a lightning researcher, I know there are not only downward lightning, but upward, to the ionosphere, too.
This event should fried all the AF47 electronics
Well now, it looks as though the jet had serious mechanical problems.
My first flight was from London to New York on a Super Constellation in 1959 - It took 24 hours and required refuelling twice (Shannon/Gander) - but we made it - just.
Thoughts as to AF447 'probable cause'.
No mayday message sent at all would seem to indicate that voice communications were totally severed by whatever initiated the sequence of events. Out there in the 'no man's land' area on a long haul, ship to shore vocal communication is simply 'out of range', but, what about ship to ship? Got to have been other flights within radio range no? What's the range of ship to ship - given 30,000 ft altitude? Or do the prevailing atmospherics at the time put paid to transmitting to anything that's not just about to physically hit you?
Positive lateral super bolt strike would seem to be the logical trigger perhaps? Enough power to melt the transmitting antennas right off the plane and most of the avionics systems along with it. I've experienced a lightning strike, not on a plane but on the ground and it's an experience I never would care to repeat. As a builder of computers, every component comes in an anti static bag... Don't want you fry something with a miniscule electrical discharge as you build your machine... How can ANYONE 'harden' electronics to withstand a power surge so strong as a direct lightning strike? Faraday cage or no Faraday cage it's still a 'hit' right? Secondary and beyond backup systems/computers must by definition be connected to the very same control destinations as the primaries in order for the controls to work right? I'd venture to say a massive surge took just about everything out in a second. And from that point all you,ve got is 230 tonnes of uncontrollable scrap falling to earth/ocean.
It amazes and sickens me that the service diagnostic advance auto messages are the ONLY snippets of information that got through. And they 'appear' to document a freefall.
Intensely sad. The human toll - totally unacceptable. I believe in this age of GPS/SatNav/Onstar etc that it's high time all aircraft have real-time global communication and perhaps 100% real time transmission of flight recorder data. Technology is a wonderful thing - Not implementing it for economical reasons (where transporting people 7 miles above the earth safely is the primary funtion) is to be considered criminal.
arthur- very good! Not many people know about the upward discharge. I have seen two in my career, both over Nebraska from 60,000 footers.
cindy- I am reasonably sure that the mechanical problems were caused by the thunderstorm.
christopher- I rode in a Connie when I was a kid. About 1959, I think.
As college students, my husband and I took our first transatlantic flight from Boston to London via Shannon, also in 1959, on Pan Am FL2. I failed to note the type of aircraft in my journal, or the duration of the flight -- although I have detailed notes on the food served. I didn't take another overseas flight until 1980, and not again until 1999, when I considerably picked up the pace.
My most recent flight was May 24 aboard Air France FL84, CDG to SFO 24. The bottom fell out of my stomach on word of the loss of AF 447, and my imagination goes to horrible places thinking of the terror the 228 souls aboard must have felt. My condolences to all.
Lee I.
Dave it's a pleasure to read an insightful blog such as yours. I fly constantly, and rarely get to thank the great pilots enough... however, EVERYTIME one has the door open... it's an honor to thank them for delivering me safely. I know at every moment, the flight crew is on MY Side 100% of the time, and I am endlessly grateful for THAT!
Many are quick to judge. Some show proper respect, and some don't (ie: statements like "Clowns and the Q400." Thanks for cleanin' THAT jerks clock)
Unfortunately these days, MANY do have distrust for Airline Officials. We hear all too often how Airlines PROFIT from crashes, because the airframes are aged, and insured for FAR more that were paid for them. (This is widely reported to be the case with AA#11 and AA#77, lost on 9/11) We also hear about how it's too costly to add new equipment, and less expensive (using insurance funds) to pay off claims if the lack of that 'new' equipment causes a crash. It's shameful.
How many more UA planes could have been updated with safety equipment, but for Stephen Wolfe's hideous BONUSES, and again with his partner in Crime Rakesh Gangwal at US. Economics my ass!
Many People expect a single cause for a crash. They don't understand, that something as small as a piece of tape, completely unrelated to flying, can bring down a Boeing 757. (AeroPeru 603. crashed into the Pacific due to faulty readings after the CLEANING crew left masking tape over the pitot tube.)
Naturally there are tons of guesses, speculation, wonders, queries, answers and statements... said with respect and without. BUT, we have to look and listen to them all.
Anyone of them could shed light, or alter an investigation. Such was the case of UA811 HNL-SYD, with the cargo door blow-out. It was covered up because of costs to correct it. The parents of one of the Victims actually STOLE FAA files from a briefing room and exposed it.
A sad state for our FAA/UNITED/BOEING to be put in, but thank GOD those parents wouldn't SETTLE for an inaccurate and implausible EXCUSE.
That being said, I hope and pray they find these victims, so the families have closure and some form of consolation. In this world where overwhelming corporate greed, dishonesty and disrespect for human life are quickly being exposed, I also hope and pray that Air France, the French Government, and Airbus don't find and cover-up the TRUE cause of this catastrophe.
There seem to be too many details which are “disappearing” or being disregarded;
A direct bomb threat to the exact carrier route, only days before the incident. That doesn't seem to be getting any attention. So they checked ONE Plane. Big Deal... AF has approx 20 roundtrip wide bodies PER Week and MANY more from cities in the region. Only 3 days later, a plane goes missing, from THAT Carrier, on THAT route, over the deeper parts of the Atlantic. NOW the report has been changed to show the bomb threat being on a EZE-PAR flight vs RIO-CDG. Additionally, Reported statements from “OFFICIALS” REPEATEDLY insist bombs can’t be the case, but they’ve BARELY found pieces of the airframe. How can they KNOW it’s not bomb related?
There have been MULTIPLE occurrences with ADIRU failures similar to the QF72 flight SIN-PER, also an Airbus 330. Many of those ADIRU had to be replaced, but it's been made clear the ADIRU on AF447 was not. (Was that too costly for AF?? It’s not like they didn’t have it in the hanger for major maintenance on April 16th!)
So yes, we can be upbeat and positive about finding the truth. And we can be supportive, understanding, and concerned for the families left behind. BUT we MUST be watchful of those who may try to hide the truth, for 'economic reasons' as has now been proven too many times.
OK Enough for me and my 2 cents worth.
Fly Safely, sleep well… and when the jerkface from the cabin wants to shake your hand after landing... Ask for my name!
T
The real question is: Why did the AF flight go straight into the turbulent weather while all other flights in the area circumvented the disturbence?
Lufthansa and Iberia in the area seemed just fine flying around that weather.
To Axel:
Possibly because the auto pilot was not working and they may have already approached the storm when they lost electrical cabin pressure and could not get out of it.
In any event, something seriously went wrong mechanically with the plane.
I do not believe there was any foul play. Mechanical failure brought the plane down.
I'm not convinced this plane was brought down due to human/mechanical errors.
What's the chances someone blew this plane out of the sky, whether it be via Anti-Air missles, or a bomb.
Dave, if this is too off color for your page, I fully understand you not posting it but in all honesty, I've been expecting this exact press release for a few days now and lo and behold - here it is.
Lifted from this morning's news.
Two passengers with names linked to Islamic terrorism were on board the Air France flight that crashed in the Atlantic Ocean, killing all 228 on board, it has emerged.
French secret servicemen established the connection while working through the list of those who boarded the doomed Airbus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on May 31.
You buying this? I don't think we should.
The distasteful odor of corporate (Airbus Consortium) and national (French) conspiracy to mask the truth is beginning to permeate insiduously into the ether.
I'm appalled (but not in the least surprised)
axel- the other flights did not circumnavigate the storms, rather they made slight heading changes to avoid the hardest part of the storms using weather radar or eyeballs. AF 447 probably flew into a radar shadow (so much water that microwave energy is absorbed) or had its radar disabled by lightning or turbulence.
rosscrispin & christopher- anything is possible, but I would bet this is a weather related accident.
@Christopher 9:53AM.
I couldn’t agree with you more, as noted in the last line of my post above & copied below.
As much as I believe that Dave is accurate, that this is weather related, and not terrorism... A bomb in the rear galley, restroom, or cargo hold, could certainly take out the tail section. However, it likely would have left evidence, which doesn't seem apparent yet, on the pieces of the tail section they've recovered.
I agree with you, it really is beginning to sound like AF is desperate & trying to distance itself in advance, from any blame. It's probably a Fear/Profit driven move from the muckey mucks at the top. The only ones who can fire THEM are Shareholders who see a quick/severe drop in profits after an event like this. They are probably doing their version of “Cover Your A$$.” The sad thing is that those moves at that level, could cover up a terrible truth, and allow this to happen again.
My referenced Clips copied from above:
Such was the case of UA811 HNL-SYD, with the cargo door blow-out. It was covered up because of costs to correct it. The parents of one of the Victims actually STOLE FAA files from a briefing room and exposed it.
A sad state for our FAA/UNITED/BOEING to be put in, but thank GOD those parents wouldn't SETTLE for an inaccurate and implausible EXCUSE.
[I Wonder how many crashes have been avoided because those cargo door locks have ALL been redesigned, & changed due to this families efforts. We often don't hear about THAT! How many hundreds of 747’s flew daily after the HNL Incident, with those faulty cargo door locks, until that family screamed bloody murder? And I bet the guy who locked that cargo door on UA811, can once again sleep at night. They’d tried to lay the blame on him, and he’d done NOTHING wrong.]
So yes, we can be upbeat and positive about finding the truth. And we can be supportive, understanding, and concerned for the families left behind. BUT we MUST be watchful of those who may try to hide the truth, for 'economic reasons' as has now been proven too many times.
Dave.
I was an airline pilot for 35 years I finished my carrier as a DC10 captain flying Toronto to Rio regularly.
I had 2 air-miss, one was certified by us, the other aircraft and ATC. The other one could never been proven.
Have you heard of GO Airline mid-air with an Ambraer few years back over the Amazon.
Could this be a Mid-air collision.
Military Russian aircraft are now prawling the sky now on their way to Venezuela.
I have hit by lightening many a time, I have been avoiding turbulence successfully and some time not so. But never felt that it could have been catastrophic.
Over the Andes between BA and Santiago de Chile. Violent if any thing but not as bad.
Your thoughts on the mid-air please when you have a minute.
Thank you.
Yves R Cellier Captain DC10-ER retired
yves- well, again, I guess anything is possible, but they were flying through a line of weather. Like you, I have seen storms that would be disastrous if you inadvertantly flew into one of them.
Somewhere I heard or read that the crew radioed that they were about to enter an area of trws. I sure hope they can find those flight recorders.
Dave... I believe you are accurate. There are many reports published that the pilot sent a "manual" message stating they were flying into "CB's". Here is just one (from Fox News.. so who knows if there is ANY Accuracy at all.)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,524835,00.html
First off, you can google the ACARS Faults that were downlinked from the a/c. If you know what youre looking at you will see that this aircraft had Rudder Travel Limter fault as well as the following, Air Data Disagree, most likely caused by whatever it was that upset the pitot tubes, be it debris or severe ice that the heat couldnt handle. Dont know. Also, the plane had Primary and secondary flight control computer failures. Not good. To add to this the a/c went in to Alternate Law. Anyone who works on or flys an Airbus knows all about Alternate law. Not a good thing. The ISIS failued, most probably due to IRU failure for whatever reason. The is an IRU-1 fault on the ACARS. Finding the Vertical Stabilizer floating on the sea appearing to have cleanly sheared off coupled with the fact of the Rudder Travel Limiter fault really concerns me. We all remember the sheared off Vertical stab on American Airlines ,Queens NY 2001.
If an airplane can send automated messages when in distress, why can't all the black box data (or perhaps less frequent packets of data) be beamed to the ground in real-time for all flights, distressed or not?
Seems authorities spend an excessive amount of time looking for these units, hoping they are damaged, etc.
Couldn't "Mother" (as you call her) be listening and logging 100% of the time?
Capt. Dave:
In regard to your cautioning Anon1256, which I have listed below... here is PROOF of the syndrome of which you speak. Check out the last line of the Wikipidia listing for CO1713 in 1987 out of DEN/Stapleton below your copied note:
anonymous 1256- One more thing; your comment about the "two clowns who stalled a Q400 on approach" will come around and bite you in the butt. I am serious about this... I have been there and done that, as the old quip goes. I am assuming that you are an intelligent guy, so surely you must know haw fast an accident can happen. Like when you least expect it... Really, I am giving you some advice here (from an old Line captain); be careful with your criticism. There seems to be a cosmic connection between criticizing fellow pilots and your own screw-ups.
By the way, you are welcome to leave comments on this blog anytime, even if they are negative.
===============================
Accident
Continental Airlines Flight 1713 was scheduled to leave Denver at 12:25 PM Mountain Time, but many flights out of Denver that day were delayed by inclement weather.[1] The flight was cleared for takeoff at 2:14 PM Mountain Time.
As the plane was taking off, it over rotated; the aircraft descended and the left wing struck the ground, causing the wing to separate. The left side of the plane and cockpit struck the ground next and the plane continued rolling, inverted. Of the 82 occupants on board (77 passengers and 5 crew), 28 were killed while 54 survived
Investigation
Four days of hearings regarding the crash were held in Golden, Colorado in March 1988.[3] [4] During the investigation, it was revealed that the captain had 166 hours on this particular type and the copilot 26 hours.[5]
In July 1988, Continental Airlines filed a report with the National Transportation Safety Board positing the causes of the crash as wake turbulence, poor snow plowing on the runway and errors by air traffic controllers.[6]
According to the FAA report, NTSB Number AAR-88/09 and NTIS Number PB88-910411:
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the captain's failure to have the airplane deiced a second time after a delay before takeoff that led to upper wing surface contamination and a loss of control during rapid takeoff rotation by the first officer. Contributing to the accident were the absence of regulatory or management controls governing operations by newly qualified flight crew members and the confusion that existed between the flightcrew members and air traffic controllers that led to the delay in departure."
After the crash, Continental Airlines reiterated its procedures for handling de-icing and developed a computerized assignment program that would keep pilots with less than 100 hours flying time in type from being assigned to the same flight.[5] Ironically, the cockpit voice recorder from this crash was discussed in the cockpit of another flight that crashed the following year - Delta Air Lines Flight 1141.
As always Capt Dave, you're right on the money!
Tim
@Dave, assuming that's not Capt.Dave.
I've wondered the same thing about having the FDR/CVR Black Box info transmitting live at all times for YEARS. I asked several of the pilots I worked with at QANTAS… It seems like a good idea, but even in this day and age there are plenty of flights, especially out of SYD/MEL/PER over the South Pole and OTHER regions where they are out of contact for periods of time. Could prove problematic.. but if they can get automated messages such as the last 4mins of AF#447, why not all. Interesting situation.
Then there's the situation & "Big Brother” Factor. Even though they are recorded at all times, many of today’s CVR/FDR's 'recycle' approximately every 30 mins. Some may be different now. So, most of what goes on, including personal conversations are never reviewed. I'd BET, you'd have a LOT of resistance from some of the stronger foreign (and maybe some US) Pilots unions. A lot is said in those cockpits, er..uh.. flight decks that is NOT meant for anyone’s ears except the person(s) in there at the time. We can't forget the Pilots who were discussing the previous nights escapades, right before they crashed the plane on take off. Very unprofessional, sadly the media talking heads RAN with that, instead of the investigation.
Then there's all the technical issues with monitoring the systems, delaying flights because the tech's can't connect to a particular plane that is waiting to take off... storage concerns, security concerns, how long do you keep the info, who has access to review it, and for what reason.. what happens when the signal is lost mid-flight and there is a subsequent emergency… on and on and on…
What seems like an excellent idea to some, may be a nightmare for others. I'm sure there are reasons it hasn't already happened.
What do you think Capt. Dave?
Tim
Hi Dave
I just wanted to say, thank god for well rounded, level headed intelligent pilots like you. Every day of a pilot's working life they face diversity of unimaginable proportions, one poor decision and lives are changed forever.
12 days on from this horrific accident, only 40 bodies have been recovered and no information regarding the black boxes. Maybe nothing can be learned from this appaling tragedy and all there will be is conjecture. The harsh reality is 228 lives have been cut short and the lives of their loved ones have been irrevocably changed forever. Thank you and every other pilot who takes their and our lives in their hands every day and get us home safely. I cannot commend you all strongly enough.
Ita in Ireland
Hello, Captain Dave. As a former student pilot and an aviation enthusiast, I can only congratulate you on your blog.
This is a tragic accident. I fly Air France most of the time, one of the safest airlines in service. I know from US and European pilots that the training of their pilots is outstanding and that pilot error in the case of that catastrophe is not a likely scenario.
One can only speculate. I personally do not believe at all in the explosion (bomb or ignited fuel) theory. What has been retrieved so far from the alleged crash site tends to prove that indeed there was no explosion but a real breaking apart of the craft at high altitude.
It could have been a combination of many factors:
Frozen pitot tubes feeding a false airspeed reading to the on board computers. The airplane could have gone too slow of too fast. It might have been hit by vertical lightning, positive strike or else.
It might have encountered major turbulence with sudden and violent up/down drafts. It could have encountered major hail, provoking a flameout of the engines, and breaking the cockpit's windshield, provoking a very rapid depressurization of the cabin..... It can be many things.
But again, I do not believe it was a pilot error. That was an experience crew and knowing the kind of training they receive all the time I doubt complacency and boredom would have been their modus operandi that night.
Now, we start reading some comments on the internet which have less to do with objective and even scientific and sober analysis but more to do with national egotism, ignorance and bigotism: Boeing vs. Airbus.....
Americans and Europeans make equally good planes and the A330 had until now one of the best safety records in the sky.
Another issue, more fundamental in my mind is the fact that we are led to trust and rely so much on technology that we believe that we are invincible and that because of our modern means of communications such a tragedy could be avoided.
Some are asking why can planes be followed by GPS? The fact is satellite transmission is severely affected by cloudy weather, let alone major TC weather. Also sat. trans, is not a linear thing. It changes from one place to the other, from one season to the other, from day to night etc...
HF radios are at best unpredictable over the ocean and yet ATCs have to rely on radio reporting by the pilots of their position and speed so as to maintain altitude separation.
Technology unfortunately does not spare us and shield us from the amazing power of Nature despite our belief.
That airplane flew in foul weather and for whatever reason could not make course alterations to avoid the worst of it.
Pat.
This is a fantastic collection of shared wisdom and knowledge. Am grateful to the blog owner for sponsoring this forum.
While perusing wiki I noticed that Underwater Locator Beacons (ULB's) manufactured by Teledyne Benthos can ping for up to 90 days if the optional lithium battery was purchased. Don't know if AF would have specified something in their contract about what ULB to install and what ULB options to purchase - but given the results of the search for the AF447 CVR/CDR, one can only hope this is the case.
The Teledyne ULB doc can be found on the WWW at:
http://www.benthos.com/pdf/362drevk.pdf
whiskey-papa-tango
Dave,
I hear thunderstorm can be as solid as concrete tower!. Is that true that this fateful aircraft smashed into, similar to the ones we saw that crashed into twin tower NY on 9/11?
My heartfelt condolences to the loved ones who had lost their dear ones...
uvm
"I hear thunderstorm can be as solid as concrete tower!."
Mohan, beware of hyperbole. I have been told by by water skiing friends that hitting the water at 60 mph is like hitting concrete. J've done both unfortunately. Given the choice. I'll take the wate rski crash every day for the rest of my life before repeating my concrete slide.
The T storm can destroy an aircraft easily, but not like a concrete tower.
Dave I have a comment that I like to leave on your blog, but I wonder if I will be restricted by its length.
I am a retired Airline Captain with quiet a bit of experience flying in and out of Rio and Sao Paulo.
Capt Yves R. Cellier
July 2: The BEA (French equivalent of the NTSB) published a first preliminary report. It appears that the airplane did not dislocate in flight but impacted with water at very high velocity and in a "normal" flight position. Did the pilots manage to regain some control over the aircraft? We can only speculate. I don't see how an airplane can fall from 10 kms in 4 mns and remain in that position.
Oh the other hand it appears that structurally the Airbus remained intact until impact.
Regarding the investigative board:
Since that plane had equipments from other countries, the BEA also includes in its inquiry members from other foreign investigative board especially from the US NTSB.
What is absolutely mind blogging is to find out, when reading the report that there was a total disorganization among the different ATCs on-route. For example, Recife (Brazil) had not transmitted the AF447 flight plan to Dakar ATC. Dakar ATC was not even sure that AF 447 even existed. Then there were a series of communications between all ATCs all the way to Brest (France), the last way point before Paris ATC that lasted for hours, until Brest decided that something was wrong and everyone agreed that a search and rescue operation should be launched. AF 447 was lost around 1:15-1:20 AM and the first rescue airplane took off from Dakar at noon the same day, almost 11 hours after the disaster.
When reading the report, I could not believe the total disorganization and chaos between all of those ATCs (Recife, Dakar, Cap Vert, Santa Maria, Brest etc...).
One final thing: it is very clear from reading the airport that AF 447 entered a zone of very severe tstorms and that one airplane ahead of it and two behind had to re-route around that line of tstorms. All three airplanes still reported very very severe turbulences.
Just read a summary of the BEA report wherein the lead investigator states that AF447 impacted the ocean intact. How then does he intend to explain the two distinct debris fields separated by over 50km.???
- whiskey papa tango
Probably a dumb question, but what are the odds that I've been on a plane or had the same pilot that has crashed? I flew on an AF airbus A330 from LAX to CDG in May and June of 2005 (departing/returning times). Weird to think that that same plane/pilot could've been involved in this incident. What a scary incident this is.
This pulled from the net last night - reads so plausible..
... their recovery relied on the pilots being brave enough to ignore the stall warnings.
Imagining, the crew of AF447, at their lowest alertness level, in the dark and potentially disorienting instrument flight phase of flight, suddenly loses reliable air speed in heavy turbulence. Multiple alarms start going off, the A/P and A/T disconnect, the ECAM reports multiple faults, and you get a stall warning telling you to nose down. If the pilots believed it, then they could get into a dive/overspeed situation, which could result in something like this that a forum poster posted (remember that the interim report says the plane impacted the water in normal flight position i.e. horizontal, but with a high rate of vertical speed - a high-speed belly flop):
"The aircraft, for whatever reason, is in a dive - the traditional nose pointing at the ground, airspeed increasing, altimeter unwinding dive.
"Now then, suppose the pilots bring the aircraft under control and attempt to recover from the dive. I don't know what the specific A330 procedure would be, but basic airmanship for getting out of a dive is "power idle, wings level, pull through nearest horizon without overstressing the aircraft, once in a climb attitude and with airspeed below the caution range, full power, climb out". Now, lets picture the aircraft doing that, so that we have the 'bottom of a loop' effectively, as the aircraft pulls up from a dive into a climb. At the bottom of this loop, the aircraft will be experiencing a high load factor, which means it will be flying at a high angle of attack. So, if the aircraft is at the bottom of the loop, at a high angle of attack, with the body angle of the aircraft roughly as it would be for normal flight (which the report suggests was the case in the final moment of AF447), what direction is the flight path vector? If you draw a picture, you will see it is pointing below the horizontal. So, at the bottom of the loop, the aircraft is not traveling horizontally, it is still descending. The pilots are conceivably in control of the aircraft at this point, and the problem is that they have run out of sky before they can complete the manoeuvre. Aircraft contacts the water in a roughly level attitude, at a high rate of descent.
"*IF* it was in this position of being in a steep dive towards the ground, I'd certainly want envelope protection functioning to give you the best chance of getting out. There is no point pulling too hard, as it were, increasing the load factor, and taking the angle of attack beyond the critical angle of attack - you stall and end up in the same place as if you hadn't pulled hard enough - in the ground. That is why it is critical you never put an aircraft into an intentional dive unless you know exactly how much sky you will need to play with to get it back out of it - you don't want to paint yourself into that nasty region where the only two options are not pull up enough and crash, or pull up enough, stall and crash.
Any rationale for not making black boxes that float?
Bob.... it's a good idea in theory... but then you'd have to assume that the black box could seperate itself somehow from the frame and rest of the several hundred thousand pounds of mostly metal equipment that has sunk.
Correct me if I'm wrong Captain Dave, but I believe most black boxes are located in th back of the tail section infrastructure, surrounded by metal, so as to be as protected as can be.
Even if the black box were designed to float... it could not float the weight of the rest of the structure it's fastened to.
Dave said...
If an airplane can send automated messages when in distress, why can't all the black box data (or perhaps less frequent packets of data) be beamed to the ground in real-time for all flights, distressed or not?
Seems authorities spend an excessive amount of time looking for these units, hoping they are damaged, etc.
Couldn't "Mother" (as you call her) be listening and logging 100% of the time?
DAVE (CAPS JUST TO SEPERATE THIS FROM YOUR QUERY ABOVE)
THOUGHT YOU WOULD FIND THIS INTERESTING. I TOO HAVE WONDERED ABOUT THIS FOR YEARS, SANS THE 'BIG BROTHER IMPLICATIONS' I THINK IT'S A FANTASTIC IDES. SEE THE WEB LINK BELOW:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/176136.asp?source=pimail
The Air France Flight 447 crash investigation will go on for another one and one half years. This is according to the French Investigation Director.
Amanda
my site
Post a Comment