Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 http://fox8.com/2014/12/27/airasia-plane-loses-contact-with-traffic-control/ This is another plane that went missing, they never found the other one from a few months ago so I'm sure it's aliens now!!
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 RYE, was there ever any doubt? 'They' walk among us. And most of them live in and around Wash. DC. ..........Widder
Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 28, 2014 Author Posted December 28, 2014 RYE, was there ever any doubt? 'They' walk among us. And most of them live in and around Wash. DC. ..........Widder +1
Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 I think I'll avoid Indonesia.
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 I hope there wasn't any football players or fans on that plane heading over to the AT&T/ Capital One/ Cigna/ AARP/ WWF/ NRA/ IRS/ Winston Cup Indonesia Bowl. ..........Widder
Cypress Sun Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 Aliens is a bit far fetched........Iran is not.
Poet Jones 99980 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 Industrial Espionage...my two cents.
Trailrider #896 Posted December 28, 2014 Posted December 28, 2014 I think I'll avoid Indonesia. +1 We know about the Bermuda Triangle. Is there an Indonesian Triangle?
Caliope Cupcake #13981 Posted December 29, 2014 Posted December 29, 2014 I think it's the 3rd Malaysia Airline flight now.
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted December 29, 2014 Posted December 29, 2014 Not Malaysia Airlines, but Indonesia AirAsia Airlines. Based on what I've read so far, thunderstorms are a prime suspect. Nasty things that shred airplanes like aluminum foil.
Cat Brules Posted December 29, 2014 Posted December 29, 2014 There is not the same sense of urgency with finding this AirAsia Flt. QZ 8501 as their was with the missing Malaysia Airlines Flt. MB 870. Instead, the world is distracted with other, lesser news and meaningless speculation about 40000ft "thunderstorms." Looks like this one will be swept under the rug.
Utah Bob #35998 Posted December 29, 2014 Posted December 29, 2014 And now the breathless speculation and inane comments by anchorheads. Deja vu. They just told me what a "black box" was. For the hundrdth time.And they said it isn't really even black. And they think it's very unusual that such a large plane could just disappear like that. Somebody shoot me.
Harvey Mushman Posted December 30, 2014 Posted December 30, 2014 Given the area and circumstances, this one will likely be found. Far different circumstances than either of the Malaysian Airline incidents, Closest similarity is the French Airbus over Pacific where they tried to climb over a storm, lost most airspeed indicators, stalled and did not realize they stalled. Poor basic flight skills. There are real hazards with the near complete reliability on digital flight control systems and displays, combined with much less actually "flying" these birds. We shall see on this one. Harvey (Who has done a few aircraft mishap investigations)
Utah Bob #35998 Posted December 30, 2014 Posted December 30, 2014 Bodies and debris spotted. Mystery over.
Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022 Posted December 30, 2014 Posted December 30, 2014 So far recovered 40 bodies... Sad
Badlands Bob #61228 Posted December 30, 2014 Posted December 30, 2014 There's just something about an Asian discount airline that just does not inspire confidence in safety.
Cat Brules Posted December 30, 2014 Posted December 30, 2014 I heard last night that the pilot requested from ground control, a course deviation to fly above the bad weather, but was denied, due to other traffic in the area. Rather than me Tuesday morning quarterbacking this tragedy, if such information is accurate, you can draw your own conclusions.
SlicLee SASS #16638 Life Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 We all know how good radar is, I have used sonar and radar. Any object will be picked up by either mode. If in sonar the object wont be able to be seen if it is out of range if possible other wise only a Romulan cloaking device would make it disappear. Radar is good. A cheap set is good so the radar used to track aircraft in direct time has to be excellent. That plane was tracked by 3 or 4 different stations. When the nose came up the first time all stations knew it went from 32K feet to 33 K IMMEDIATELY. Suddenly, it disappeared from all radar as did the other planes also. Suddenly, what does that mean, the plane wasnt there any more, instantly GONE, the target is no longer there. It just fell apart just like the other planes did. Maybe, the tail section fell off just like the other ones did and the rest of the plane broke apart instantly. Take a 1911 where the frame and slide are the same metal, they dont get along. The air bus 320 has had all kinds problems we have no right to know. What I hear is they use 2 or 3 different compounds in one plane dont get along said one expert, the plane would suddenly fall apart. Notice they had to have seen the wreckage the first day but ignored it,Y Y something about the lungs would tell what killed the people. Why didnt they send divers to get the black box. Almost any decent scuba diver could have gotten them, the water is shallow there. Not a mystery some kind of cover up, we are expendable to them. You dont believe it, another example, the flue shots are all no good,some will die, some will ,get sick or worse, some might get better, they didnt care, use it up no matter what, even if it doesnt work, the wrong kind is what it is.
Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 31, 2014 Author Posted December 31, 2014 I didn't mean to lessen the sadness of all those people dying. It's a shame. Prayers are with all the families. Rye
Dusty Balz, SASS#46599 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 It's always easy to Monday-morning quarterback , the pilot would have been in contact with departure control, should he be concerned about weather he could (and did request ) deviation , if that was denied he should have declared an emergency this would have provided him with pilots discretion. My 02 the pots were flying in automation and a substantial weather encounter caused an unusual flight attitude that over stressed the autopilot by the time the pilots attempted to regain control structural damage had occurred Unfortunately many pilots now days are overly dependent on automation , especially foreign pilots
Dusty Balz, SASS#46599 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Sometimes, planes crash. Not for no reason UB
Harvey Mushman Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I'll say it again, this one seems to be VERY similar to the Air France Airbus crash in the Pacific where the pilots attempted to climb over a thunderstorm - usually a bad idea, particularly if your service ceiling is only 39000ft, as in this case. The Air France airbus had pitot-static tube iceover and lost airspeed indications. As these Airbus models are fly by wire with a joystick, both pilots could countermand each other without realizing it. The Air France plane was in a stall and co-pilot kept pulling the nose up in full stall while the pilot was attempting to drop it. They descended 35K plus feet in full stall, buffeting and mushing all the way down. I do not know if Airbus addressed this issue after the accident. Yes, the Airbus planes have more carbon fiber, load bearing structural members than most (although all do and are moving to more), but I am more concerned with their particular fly by wire automation methodology and glass cockpit. Harvey
Dusty Balz, SASS#46599 Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 I'll say it again, this one seems to be VERY similar to the Air France Airbus crash in the Pacific where the pilots attempted to climb over a thunderstorm - usually a bad idea, particularly if your service ceiling is only 39000ft, as in this case. The Air France airbus had pitot-static tube iceover and lost airspeed indications. As these Airbus models are fly by wire with a joystick, both pilots could countermand each other without realizing it. The Air France plane was in a stall and co-pilot kept pulling the nose up in full stall while the pilot was attempting to drop it. They descended 35K plus feet in full stall, buffeting and mushing all the way down. I do not know if Airbus addressed this issue after the accident. Yes, the Airbus planes have more carbon fiber, load bearing structural members than most (although all do and are moving to more), but I am more concerned with their particular fly by wire automation methodology and glass cockpit. Harvey Well said sir
Cat Brules Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 We should all understand that modern commercial aircraft have, for the most part, NO airframe as such, and are considerably more fragile than military aircraft. They're only built strong enough to handle the routine and the marginally stressful. Then, self insurance kicks in.
Harvey Mushman Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Well, that may be a might bit harsh, and seems to presuppose the Air Asia bird experienced in-flight breakup? Modern commercial aircraft are built to pretty exacting standards for their normal mode of flight - 1-3 G, plus gust loadings for WX, plus a safety margin. Yes, they are not built to take 7 positive and 4 negative G, sustained (with safety factor), but that is not their normal environment. I await the investigation on this incident, but I suspect it was NOT in-flight breakup, given the evidence thus far.
Cat Brules Posted January 2, 2015 Posted January 2, 2015 Well, that may be a might bit harsh, and seems to presuppose the Air Asia bird experienced in-flight breakup?Modern commercial aircraft are built to pretty exacting standards for their normal mode of flight - 1-3 G, plus gust loadings for WX, plus a safety margin.Yes, they are not built to take 7 positive and 4 negative G, sustained (with safety factor), but that is not their normal environment.I await the investigation on this incident, but I suspect it was NOT in-flight breakup, given the evidence thus far. Well all this, Harvey, is presupposition. I'm just stating, by my abbreviated reply above, that however exacting the standard may be, those AirBus vessels are built to a set of specs that make the craft survivable in maybe 80% of the conditions it could encounter and with the ability to avoid the other 20% of the conditions that could destroy them. I'm presupposing that perhaps the aircraft did not just break up, but was a victim of panic on the flight deck that left the cabin crew without leadership. As you say, we shall see.
Harvey Mushman Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Cat, If your 80/20 posit about civil aircraft design was correct, we'd see them falling out of the sky far, far in excess of actual experience. You are absolutely correct that they are not designed to tactical aircraft standards, but that is not the environment they experience 99% of the time. Flight deck leadership and command is indeed important - no, critical! - and often lacking in third world countries where pilots are often qualified based on social status and $, unlike the US and most Euro countries where it is much more skill/judgment based. Judgment is the more important of these, in my experience. In this case, the pilot in command had military experience (a good sign), but may have been mentally weakened by the loss of his brother and his funeral just before the flight. I look forward to the result of the investigation. As you know they can take months. They are usually published in Aviation Week as they become available. I still maintain the most likely scenario is that of the Air France Airbus over the Pacific. All presupposition at this time! LOL! Harvey
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.