Even given lightning strikes and violent turbulence, I have no notion of how a Airbus A330 goes down so suddenly that the flight crew cannot get a mayday message out.
Neither, as it turns out, has anyone else:
By some estimates, jetliners are typically hit by lightning at least once a year. But the strike normally travels across the plane’s aluminum skin and out the tail or a wingtip. Passengers are insulated in the nonconductive, largely plastic interior, and vital equipment is shielded.
A loss of cabin pressure could suggest a break in the fuselage, but planes are built to withstand buffeting from a storm’s updrafts and downdrafts. It could also be a consequence of an electrical failure, if the plane’s air compressors stop working.
Large hailstones created by some thunderstorms have been known to break windshields or turbine blades, though pilots would be likely to rapidly report something like that.
My first suspicion was an act of terrorism, Brazil being a spectator rather than participant in the GWOT, and therefore likely to have less stringent security standards than those with skin in the game.
But you’d have to time your device very carefully to match it to an area of severe weather, and in any case, no one credible has stepped forward to claim the event.
But jetliners do not just break up in flight.
Pretty much my first inclination. France has a large “disaffected youth” population, and Brazil’s security procedures are probably less than 5 star.
The storm may have just been a bonus. You know we’ll spend millions to find that black box. Alvin or some other ROV is probably loaded/being loaded on a ship or in transit as we speak.
It’s not like modern airliners are perfect. They make a damn good approximation of that, but there will always be untested situations. It could be a software bug or a structural failure due to lack of inspections or overhauls, or any number of one-in-a-billion things, or several one-in-a-billion things occurring within minutes of each other.
Unfortunately, unlikely is not impossible, but I know there will be lots of people very eager to look into that black box.
Like the Airbus that had the vertical stabilizer separate over Long Island a couple months after 9/11.
Turned out to be a combination of things, but yeah…
I would still place terrorism high on the list until something better turned up.
[Quote Aviation Herald]
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.
From pprune.com ‘Rumors & News’. Beware trolls and sciolists.
“…plane’s air compressors stop working ….
I think on jetliners those are called engines..
My guess is they meant the pressurisation system.
If the sensors that regulate the airflow into the cabin fail, the pumps that keep it pressurised will likely shut down as well, not getting a signal to indicate there’s any need to keep pumping.
Big biggie is of course: what can cause a total electrical failure in an A330 so quickly that the crew can’t get a warning out over their HF radio (they’d likely have been out of range of UHF or VHF).
I don’t buy the lightning strike theory either. If that were true, the A330 would be fundamentally unsafe due to a massive design flaw and the entire fleet would have to be grounded immediately, worldwide.
Where does that theory come from anyway? AFAIK it was started by some reporter after hearing that the aircraft had been struck some time prior to the crash and is now being perpetuated as fact by the press all over the world. Of course those press weenies are not hindered by any technical knowledge.
What surprises me most of all is the lack of conspiracy theories I’ve heard so far. Where are the stories that it was a Mossad bomb designed to blow up some former Nazi on the way back to Germany? I’m sure they will come, but it surprises me it’s taking so long for the lefties to try and blame Israel (can’t really blame Bush any more, so the #2 villain will have to do).
If the sensors that regulate the airflow into the cabin fail, the pumps that keep it pressurised will likely shut down as well, not getting a signal to indicate there’s any need to keep pumping.
The pumps that keep the cabin pressurized are called “engines.” If they stop working, there are bigger problems than cabin pressurization.
God bless all 228 souls lost.
As the weeks pass, hopefully the investigators can shed more light on the actual cause.
Compressors are part of the engine, not the entire engine. However, if they stop working, there is not doubt the engine ain’t gonna spin.
Millions should be spent to find the black box so we can look at the data. While airliners are built to sustain stresses in weather, they aren’t aerobatic aircraft by any means (yeah, a oeing test pilot rolled a 707, but that just means they had an adventurous test pilot).
There are combinations of up and down drafts that can destroy an aircraft. The germans found that out in the interwar years when the Luftwaffe flew gliders and used the up drafts in thunderstorms. Several got ripped to pieces in the process.
As an Engineer I agree that AC don’t “just” break up. There are solid reasons for it, and no one can design for every contingency. The things would never get off the ground. Some risk must be accepted when flying, and the objective hazards kill people occassionally.
“Gremlins.” If not a bomb, we may never know. In my admittedly short career I don’t know how many times I or others had the experience of a radio going out, writing it up, coming back with “gnd check ok” ans in the write up, take the ac up and the radio still inop. Repeat, rinse x2 or 3, finally jerk radio, send it to the “really smart” guys in avionics at Wing, put it on test bench and have it work flawlessly. Put it back in the ac, go fly, and it be a nojoy again. Ultimate solution: Toss and replace with a new box. Who knows what causes electrons to feel the way they do?
PS: This experience is also known as the “Michigan J. Frog” effect.
Heh,\
“Hello my baby, Hello my honey, Hello my Ragtime Gal!”
That was a great cartoon
To go into alternate law on the flight controls on an airbus, you must have two failures. There is no single failure that can cause alt. law. ADIRU’s, mentioned above are Air Data Inertial Reference Units – they basically are the “gyros” on the plane. There are three. Loss of two will give you Alt law.
It is possible to overstress the aircraft to the point of failure if you are in Mechanical Backup law (the next step down from Alt law if the gear is up). Basically in Mech. you have three controls: rudders, elevator trim wheel, and the engines. It is designed to keep the blue side up while you get flight control computers back on. (There are 7 FCC’s on a 319/320/321, not sure about 330/340).
Funny thing is, it ain’t our jet, probably not any Americans on board, but you know who will recover the orange boxes…
if the vertical stabilizer came off, would the hf radio antenna also be lost, thus explaining no pilot contact via hf radio ?
But airliners DO break up in flight due to turbulence-
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19660305-1
And lets not forget the American Airlines 587 Airbus, lost due to failure of the vertical stabilizer-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587
Brad, The AA flight lost its vert. stab because the PAC (can’t remember which one) used full rudder deflection and a rapid reversal, IIRC. It was not turbulance.
Nose – I believe you’re correct – the rudder movement came from trying to deal with wake from previously launching heavy, IIRC. Too tight on the launch intervals, I believe.
True, overcontrol due to wake turbulence. But who’s to say regular turbulence wouldn’t lead to that?
If the electrical failure, started at the radios… or pilots very busy trying to understand problem and stay aloft..or one pilot was asleep/or not in cockpit when it happened
I think a lack of ‘claim’ rules heavily against terrorism in this case.
Irrelevantly, there were reportedly a couple of Americans on board.
However… airliners might not “just break up” in midair, but they aren’t supposed to lose their vertical tails either – and an Airbus did just that in New York a week or two after 9/11. Came down in Queens. I think that was the last non-commuter airliner crash with fatalities in the US.
Lex, can you get me out of the spam bucket?
Just an Ex P-3 NFO, but are the Qantas A330 incidents in late Dec 08 relevant? Some conjecture about ADIRU/PRIM/SEC issues there.
http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/ADIRU_faults&Tolerances-2.htm
The airliner that came down in NYC came down in Nov 2001, two months after 9/11.
If a bomb takes out the Air France flight, how does the flight send an automated message? Did the bomb send the automated message? How does the bomber know where the violent weather is going to be on the flight’s path? What if the flight was delayed? What if the weather didn’t cooperate? Did the bomber use a Ouija board to determine the correct flight time / elevation / GPS coordinates? Doesn’t it seem strange that the bomb/hijacker strikes during a violent thunderstorm? What are these odds? Is this the first action by a member of the Praise be to Allah Chemistry and Meteorology Club?
Could the lightning or the turbulence be beyond the aircraft’s design? How many lightning strikes is the aircraft designed to dissipate in one minute? In ten seconds? In one second? How much is too much?
Could this tube filled with 228 civilians be safely flown through tornado strength winds? Could it do this and still make a profit? What strength winds are to strong for this aircraft to survive?
How about hail hitting the windscreen? What is the largest hailstone that could not bring down this aircraft? How many one percent smaller hailstones could this aircraft window survive in one minute? Ten minutes? One hour? How much is too much for the windshield?
How about a combination of lightning and turbulence? Turbulence and hail? Hail and lightning?
In folks talk of hijacking or bombing conspiracies, why no mention of Jews, the CIA, the Queen of England or Martians?
Now there’s a man who knows how to use a question mark.
Everything else will no doubt come in time.
But doesn’t know how to use the possessive apostrophe …
I give myself a 9.2 on the snark scale.
Scott –
Where did Patrick go wrong? My tired old eyes found one instance each of “flight’s” and “aircraft’s.”
Presuming Patrick is speaking of this specific flight and this specific aircraft, his use looks correct to me.
What am I missing?
“In folks talk of hijacking…”
Scott –
Good eye. I was looking for where Patrick used one incorrectly and missed where he failed to use one at all.
Confirms my tired old eyes comment.
He did use his daily quota of question marks.
Thanks
Scott/
Picky, picky, picky…..
Patrick,
I have no firm answers, but I can offer some wild speculation. Picture this:
1) Terrorists plant time bomb in a checked bag — ie, in the plane’s luggage compartment
2) Being stupid, the said terrorists plant too small a bomb — ie, not big enough to actually destroy the airplane. Alternately, the bomb somehow misfires and produces only a partial explosion.
3) When the bomb blows, it suffices only to damage the fuselage and the flight control systems. This damage triggers a series of failures that rapidly cascade beyond the flight crew’s ability to recover.
4) An uncontrolled dive puts the airplane over redline speed, and it breaks up. Scratch one A-330.
5) The fact that it happened in an area of severe turbulence, which would provide an alternate explanation for the crash, is entirely coincidental. (Never underestimate the awesome power of coincidence.)
If this is correct, then I further speculate that there’s been no claim of responsibility because whoever did it either doesn’t want to take responsibility, or is waiting until they know if they actually did bring it down.
why use windshields, just put aluminum structure instead, then series of cameras for pilots to use. Lighter weight, safer, more visibility……
why use windshields, put in an aluminum structure, stronger and lighter than thick reinforced glass, and provide cameras for pilots to use. More visibility also…..
I found this write up on the weather conditions at the time. Don’t know if you guys have seen it yet, but I posted anyway:
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/
Twas France’s Minister of the Environment who made the public claim that it was lightning that did in the airplane.
Lex postulates that terrorists would have had to be damned good planners to blow the plane up in the thunderstorms. Respectfully, that only applies if a bomb was timer detonated. If human detonated, as the last several aircraft brought down by terrorists were, weather wouldn’t apply.
Terrorism is one of only many possibilities, but it’s worth remembering that destroying the aircraft out over the water where the parts can’t be recovered and examined has been part of terrorist planning for almost 20 years. If the technique worked, they want to use it again, and in the meantime keep us guessing what really happened.
My two cents. Airbus= fly by wire. Electrical problems. Lightning strike. Fried circuit boards. Results similar to SwissAir flight off of Peggy’s Cove, Nova Scotia.
All flights from major airports in Brazil, including domestic flights have x-ray machines, metal detectors and Federal Officers to deal with pocket change, sharp pens and belt buckles.
They’re not very strick in domestic flights, we’re not a big terrorist target, but international ones are very, very strict. No liquids, hand luggage inspected, you name it.
I don’t really believe in the terrorist scenario.
Why detonate a bomb over the Atlantic, when one could do a better job blasting it over Paris?
Cardoso, not arguing for/against a terrorist act, but if Brazilian security is anything like security in Europe or North America, it only catches the incompetent. Let’s have no illusions that check-in harassment does anything to prevent terrorist attacks. Brazil is not a terrorist target, but it’s a damned safe place for a terrorist to plan. If your purpose is to sow fear, it doesn’t take much explosives in the right place to take down a flight and leave an industry wondering what happened. The Black Widows of Chechnya took down two Aeroflot jets with very small amounts (enough to be smuggled aboard in their, um, persons). Wait a month or so, and do it again. And another month or so, and do it again. You can speculate on the public response and whether it’s what terrorists desire.
Tailspin Tom noted the progressive nature of the ACARS messages. This seems to say it was not a sudden terrorist explosion.
Thunderstorms can be especially nasty. Then again, why fly into a super cell if they had a stormscope?
Speculation from ‘other pilots’ has included loss of radar caused by a lightning strike, which may have led to the aircraft inadvertently ‘flying into the teeth of the tiger’.
Wall to wall storm cells were reported topping out at FL500; last reported altitude was FL350.
Sad business losing folks like that.
I personally do NOT think it is terrorism either, but to play the devil’s advocate here, I think I can show false the main reason folks have offered up against it so far.
“How could the terrorist have timed his bomb to the storm/turbulence?”
As I understand it, that part of the Atlantic has near constant storms due to the latitude and prevailing weather patterns and such. It would not take much effort to figure out roughly when the plane would be in that region.
Failing that… Pure coincidence is not too great to rule out. A terrorist would want the bomb to explode some time into the flight after it was out over the ocean. This would just happen to coincide with the aforementioned “standing stormfront”
Personally I think it is a combination of bad weather coupled with possible poor maintenance. The weather may not in itself have been beyond the airframes design limits, But couple that with shoddy maintenance and you have a recipe for disaster.
I’m just thinking about how right here in the good ‘ol USA, that there is a huge number of Aircraft Mechanics that cannot “habla englese” and therefore cannot read the maintenance manuals!
I just don’t see enough information to support or discard system/airframe failure due to storm and pilot error.
The bomb scenario doesn’t make sense to me; terrorists want to be known, and hiding your act behind a force of nature doesn’t fit the profile.
As to the lack of comms, all the electrical disturbances could IMO garble voice traffic into illegibility. However, since computer data traffic is much faster, I could see some messages getting out between static bursts.
Data traffic isn’t any faster than voice — it all goes at so many bits-per-second. Data has the decided advantage of being able to ask for a re-transmission when the checksum doesn’t match the data received. If that retransmission happens is pretty much up to the condition of the transmitter.
I’m discounting a terrorist attack as well. Terrorism is a tactic. “See, we control the skies, not you.” Not claiming credit for the disaster doesn’t give one any street cred — if nobody is afraid of you, your tactic isn’t working.
On a fly-by-wire jet the loss of electrical across multiple busses could have done the job, be it induced by lightning (unlikely) or just the right amount of flying into stresses the airframe wasn’t meant to handle.
The question I have is, it took 2 days to find wreckage and debris. While they may have been beyond radar range and thus their crash position unknown, we’ve boomers and attack subs making like holes in the water with passive sonar listening to the shrimp eating.
One would think an aircraft hitting the water at a pretty good clip might have been heard by one of them. I’d bet the sosus lines picked up the crash. Couldn’t we have done a little triangulation and narrowed the search area a bit?
It’s a sad incident, made all the more so because until we can find and solve the problem that caused it, we know it may well happen again.
– Max
Air France 447 crashed in equatorial waters somewhere between the eastern point of South America and the west coast of Africa. The map with this article shows the approximate area. Does the USN even patrol anywhere near that region? How far away would the impact be audible? For that matter, since the airplane apparently broke up in the air and scattered wreckage over several square miles, how much of an impact noise would there be?
And if we did, is it worth giving away US capabilities to find a plane that went down in flames?
No, not really.
We may have way’s of knowing exactly where it is / was, but to give that information might compromise “sources and methods”.
Further, would the accuracy of a long range acoustic contact be any greater than just searching along the PIM?
FWIW, If memory serves me correctly, the “black boxes” are equipped with a “pinger” to help locate them if they become submerged.
The real question is not so much whether they survived impact, but the crushing depths of the ocaen.
It’s not so much the rate of data transmission as data generation. It takes me about ten seconds to say “Rio Center, Airbus 123 Heavy, passing 13.5 for FL 190, heading 025, requesting FL 370.” During that time, the computers collecting flight data for transmission would be able to send altitude, vertical speed, heading, airspeed, outside air temperature, wind speed and direction, and engine performance data, and probably repeat that process ten times a second.
The point I was getting at was that you would probably get several data bursts while HF might be only ” . . . Cen. . . oint fi . . . ro two . . . “
Patrick forgot the Bermuda Triangle and Russian submarines with laser cannons and/or SAMs.
I’ll throw my two cents worth in here. What about a lightning strike that took out the flight crew?
It fits the information that we have at this time.
The descriptions of the weather along the route renews my respect for the aircrew that ferried B-17s and carried cargo along these airways during WWII. Bet they’d have traded four engines & mechanical control for FBW, FCCs, radar, and twin turbofans.
Lex says:
Everything else will no doubt come in time.
You are very perceptive. I am impatient. Maybe if I had uniform experience, beyond Boy Scouts / Alter Boy and pilot experience beyond paper / balsa, that experience would help.
Scott says:
In folks talk of hijacking
Thanks for the lesson. You have correctly diagnosed my using a spell checker as a crutch.
Longboarder55 says:
I found this write up on the weather conditions at the time.
I found the same. But when I returned, I found you crossed the finish line first. Thank you.
Wilko says:
Then again, why fly into a super cell if they had a stormscope?
Could the super cell have moved and the flight crew found themselves boxed in by the storm. I’m not trying to be snarky. It is just that I have read that many accidents include a series of events.
CG-23 Sailor says:
As I understand it, that part of the Atlantic has near constant storms due to the latitude and prevailing weather patterns and such. It would not take much effort to figure out roughly when the plane would be in that region.
Thank you. I never thought of that.
Pure coincidence is not too great to rule out.
Again, thank you. Something else I discounted.
Jim Collins says:
Patrick forgot the Bermuda Triangle and Russian submarines with laser cannons and/or SAMs.
My imagination is slacking off.
I’ll throw my two cents worth in here. What about a lightning strike that took out the flight crew?
Thank you. I didn’t think of that either.
To all the members of the armed forces, thank you for my freedom. My freedom from fear of terrorism, my freedom to worship my creator on my sabbath and next to my bed at night, my freedom to speak here and my freedom from want. My grandparents came to this country for a better life, and you ensure that better life for all 300 million of us.
[...] JUNE 2009: Interesting unconfirmed details from the Aviation Herald website (via commenter Tailspin at Neptunus Lex). New information provided by sources within Air France suggests, that the ACARS [...]