Air France

[DenverJayhawk]

Is anyone else concerned that a very modern, fly by wire, double aisle jetliner seemingly fell out of the sky over the ocean after encountering routine weather and turbulence?

We all know that air is the safest way to travel. But I really hope they find the black box and data recorder so steps can be taken to prevent this tragedy again.

[fizzle]

yea lets pray for these families....sounds like something went bad that wasnt supposed to.

[JTdrivin1]

it wasn't the weather, they reported electrical issues before entering the storm.

[335e92tx]

As with most circumstances with airflights that go down, it is likely a combination of events that were not likely to be seen in any testing (let alone system design) scenario. They will find what were those series of events and implement a combination of technology and procedural changes to account for it.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by JTdrivin1

it wasn't the weather, they reported electrical issues before entering the storm.

A lightning strike could have shorted out the electronics.....

[Blake]

http://m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=268494

from my background where studying aviation accidents was part of the curriculum, this is a very puzzling accident. what is clear is the plane did suffer a mid-air breakup, but there are several things that could have led to that. weather, electrical, the pitot tubes, pilot error, or possibly a combination of several things. the black boxes will be need to be found to come up with an explanation, but i'm having severe doubts that they will be found at this point just due to their difficult geographic location on the sea floor.

[DenverJayhawk]

A jet like the A330 is absolutely state of the art. Everything is double and triple redundant, especially the flight control systems. It's scary to think an electrical gremiln can bring down a fully modern jet, even in bad weather.

Thank god airliners don't have HPFP problems.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by quagmire

A lightning strike could have shorted out the electronics.....

highly unlikely

[Mega Man]

Could it have been an external attack?

[DenverJayhawk]

Lightning strikes occur ALL the time. It NEVER brings down a jet, especially one cruising at 35k feet.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by Mega Man

Could it have been an external attack?

that's unlikely either. with a full load of fuel, the plane would have exploded catastrophically, preventing automatic trouble reports from going out.

[Joonsup]

i have a fear of flying and a couple months ago i flew out to kansas to see my gf but only after watching the fear of flying video online. One portion of the video explained how sturdy the plane was and how the wing couldnt just snap etc... and now after hearing that this plane broke apart midflight makes me pretty damn nervous again..esp with it happening to a modern jet. it took me so long to take a step forward in flying and it took reading about this crash to take a big step backwards. sucks

[Blake]

Originally Posted by joonsup

i have a fear of flying and a couple months ago i flew out to kansas to see my gf but only after watching the fear of flying video online. One portion of the video explained how sturdy the plane was and how the wing couldnt just snap etc... and now after hearing that this plane broke apart midflight makes me pretty damn nervous again..esp with it happening to a modern jet. it took me so long to take a step forward in flying and it took reading about this crash to take a big step backwards. sucks

you tell me if that's strong enough or not. although that is not an A330, i wouldn't be surprised if you saw similar results out of the A330. an A330 is the airbus equivalent of the 772/767, although the french made the A330. case in point, airplanes are very strong and capable of great loads. a 777 being able to carry 154% of it's designed maximum load is a staggering number.

[Joonsup]

Originally Posted by Blake

you tell me if that's strong enough or not. although that is not an A330, i wouldn't be surprised if you saw similar results out of the A330. an A330 is the airbus equivalent of the 772/767, although the french made the A330. case in point, airplanes are very strong and capable of great loads. a 777 being able to carry 154% of it's designed maximum load is a staggering number.

i need information like this to prepare myself mentally before getting on a plane. But once I hear news of a plane crash I go back to square one. It really sucks b/c my fear of flying has prevented me from traveling to places I have always wanted to go ie.. hawaii, new york, europe, asia, etc.. Well ok money would be a big factor to but still.

[MJC///M3]

in one of the reports I read they said the plane suffered from a massive depressurization....so something would have had to comprimise the integrity of the fuselage...which would have led to a mid-air breakup which most suspect. Are they for certain the plane broke up in mid-air?

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by MJC///M3

in one of the reports I read they said the plane suffered from a massive depressurization....so something would have had to comprimise the integrity of the fuselage...which would have led to a mid-air breakup which most suspect. Are they for certain the plane broke up in mid-air?

probably you have to do an autospy for the bodies found....see if they died due to lack of oxygen or just plainly drown when the airplane hits the water.....
not 100% conclusive...but it will give you some sort of idea.....

[TiAg335i]

gahh.....this is just so terrible....i can't even imagine the pain the families are going through.....

not only do they not know what happened to their loved ones, but the reality of it is it's something horrible...

[Blake]

Originally Posted by MJC///M3

in one of the reports I read they said the plane suffered from a massive depressurization....so something would have had to comprimise the integrity of the fuselage...which would have led to a mid-air breakup which most suspect. Are they for certain the plane broke up in mid-air?

based on the fact the debris fields are up to 50+ miles apart, the plane more than likely broke up in mid-air. if the plane hit the water intact, all the debris would be within maybe a few miles at the most. the oceanic currents don't deviate enough to drag things 50 miles apart.

one theory involves the questionable pitot tubes and their susceptibility to icing in high altitude storms. (a pitot tube measures ram air pressure which is then interpreted to airspeed) when your pitot tube ices over, you lose accurate airspeed indications, if you even get a reading at all. it is plausible that the pitot iced over and the pilots sped up to counteract the erroneous readings. overspeed at high altitude can be a critical situation which could lead to breakup, exacerbated by turbulence inside a storm.

at this point, the only thing we can do is guess. there are dozens of scenarios that are being played out, but no one will ever know without getting the onboard data.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by Blake

based on the fact the debris fields are up to 50+ miles apart, the plane more than likely broke up in mid-air. if the plane hit the water intact, all the debris would be within maybe a few miles at the most. the oceanic currents don't deviate enough to drag things 50 miles apart.

one theory involves the questionable pitot tubes and their susceptibility to icing in high altitude storms. (a pitot tube measures ram air pressure which is then interpreted to airspeed) when your pitot tube ices over, you lose accurate airspeed indications, if you even get a reading at all. it is plausible that the pitot iced over and the pilots sped up to counteract the erroneous readings. overspeed at high altitude can be a critical situation which could lead to breakup, exacerbated by turbulence inside a storm.

at this point, the only thing we can do is guess. there are dozens of scenarios that are being played out, but no one will ever know without getting the onboard data.

but what i'm worried is....if it is really that the pitot tube was iced over.....then the black boxes (FDR) will also have incorrent readings....it will only prove the airspeed reading is incorrect...but cannot prove anything otherwise....

or they can prove if the plane stalled or overspeed-stall (not sure the correct term)....something that cause the air flow to detach from the wing.....

[Blake]

Originally Posted by joonsup

i need information like this to prepare myself mentally before getting on a plane. But once I hear news of a plane crash I go back to square one. It really sucks b/c my fear of flying has prevented me from traveling to places I have always wanted to go ie.. hawaii, new york, europe, asia, etc.. Well ok money would be a big factor to but still.

there are still 50,000-70,000 commercial flights everyday. 99.999999%+ of those flights land without incident. most incidents that happen in aviation are things you never hear about, like runway incursions or a plane hitting something on the ground. the greater majority of reported accidents or mechanical failures happen on the ground versus in the air.

conversely, a person dies from a motor vehicle related accident every 13 minutes, 24/7, 365 days a year. kinda makes you want an airplane now, doesn't it?

the biggest reason people fear flying is because of the accidents and the associated anxiety of "it's going to happen to me!" but you have greater odds of getting hit by lightening TWICE than dying in an aircraft accident. flying is totally safe, but having said that, accidents do happen in any facet of life. yes, more people can die at once in plane accidents than cars, but the numbers are measly compared to, say, cars.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

but what i'm worried is....if it is really that the pitot tube was iced over.....then the black boxes (FDR) will also have incorrent readings....it will only prove the airspeed reading is incorrect...but cannot prove anything otherwise....

or they can prove if the plane stalled or overspeed-stall (not sure the correct term)....something that cause the air flow to detach from the wing.....

but then you would see that in the FDR. FDR will show throttle positions against airspeed indications. if they oversped, you'll see WOT with low airspeed indications, provided the pitot was frozen...we all know those engines are too powerful to be stalling at WOT. conversely, if they stalled, that would not cause the plane to breakup necessarily. an unrecoverable flat spin to structural terminal velocity would cause a breakup, but i just don't think we're dealing with a stall in this case.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by Blake

the biggest reason people fear flying is because of the accidents and the associated anxiety of "it's going to happen to me!" but you have greater odds of getting hit by lightening TWICE than dying in an aircraft accident. flying is totally safe, but having said that, accidents do happen in any facet of life. yes, more people can die at once in plane accidents than cars, but the numbers are measly compared to, say, cars.

that's why pay attention to safety video and listen to the flight crew if anything should happen....they might actually save ur ass....
example....Air France A340 that skid off runway in Toronto....