Topic: French jet missing over the Atlantic

[MichaelA]

The fact that the captain went for a nap just as they were approaching a storm they didn't plot a course to avoid.

RIP to all.

That was the stand out fact for me. There is a big question about why they didn't reroute as other planes did.

[Tepid water]

That was the stand out fact for me. There is a big question about why they didn't reroute as other planes did.

I think in the article it says that they had the radar set incorrectly so had misjudged the size of it

I thought they said some of the bodies that drifted seemed to have drowned, rather than died on impact.

Which makes the whole thing all the more excruciating. And I think what TSC points to is true as well- horrifying.

The same thing happened with the challenger disaster iirc....

Some of the astronaughts survived the crash but drowned (although they were almost certainly unconscious)

[El Campeador]

Some of the astronaughts survived the crash but drowned (although they were almost certainly unconscious)

Nah, no chance mate. The cabin hit the ocean at 200 G, something like 350kph. No chance a human can survive that sort of impact.

[The Gulleysucker]

Some of the astronaughts survived the crash but drowned (although they were almost certainly unconscious)

It's possible that some survived the Challenger explosion and the subsequent descent, but not the impact, it would be just too great

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/kerwin.html

Same with Lockerbie.

[Tony Drago]

The popular mechanics article ignores a lot of key facts as already known and is somewhat sensationalist in it's delivery. It is also based, at points, on somewhat loose translations which may well not be entirely accurate. That said, it does loosely fit the sequence of events as described in a limited fashion in the interim BEA report though I would urge people not to take it all at face value and await the final BEA report.

That was the stand out fact for me. There is a big question about why they didn't reroute as other planes did.

I think in the article it says that they had the radar set incorrectly so had misjudged the size of it.

There is a working theory around this that their radar was obstructed by a smaller storm - one that could be flown through safely. This is a possibility even with the most advanced aircraft radar systems.

Fucking chilling reading the transcript. If only the captain hadn't left the cockpit for a nap everything would probably of been OK. The only positive to come out of that crash is that at least there will(surely) be improved CRM training for all pilots now.

RIP to all.

Again I would suggest treating the transcript with caution at this point. Agree entirely with the Captain taking his rest and the training aspects of this, certainly at certain carriers. I believe I have discussed the Airbus mandatory training required for certification earlier in this thread.

[Tepid water]

It's possible that some survived the Challenger explosion and the subsequent descent, but not the impact, it would be just too great

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/kerwin.html

Same with Lockerbie.

You are right....of course

[armchair-fan]

Here's a piece in Popular Mechanics on it. One of the co-pilot's actions are almost unbelievable.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-6611877

As I'm not a great flyer anyway, and I'm going on a long distance flight in a couple of weeks time, I should probably have swerved this thread.

Nonetheless, fascinating article  - thanks for posting

[Tepid water]

As I'm not a great flyer anyway, and I'm going on a long distance flight in a couple of weeks time, I should probably have swerved this thread.

Nonetheless, fascinating article  - thanks for posting

Flying is unbelievably safe ......

Ridiculously safe compared to any other form of transport, more so if you go on recognised national carriers and not dodgy ones.

Most people worry because they don't understand what the noises are/mean and what is normal.


People also worry because they think they are dropping out of the sky when they experience turbulence.

[mbroon]

Flying is unbelievably safe ......

Ridiculously safe compared to any other form of transport, more so if you go on recognised national carriers and not dodgy ones.

Most people worry because they don't understand what the noises are/mean and what is normal.


People also worry because they think they are dropping out of the sky when they experience turbulence.

Flying is relatively safe indeed. And I read somewhere that this year has been the safest year in flying since the second World War.

[Tony Drago]

Flying is unbelievably safe ......

Ridiculously safe compared to any other form of transport, more so if you go on recognised national carriers and not dodgy ones.

Most people worry because they don't understand what the noises are/mean and what is normal.


People also worry because they think they are dropping out of the sky when they experience turbulence.

Whilst some of your posts are relatively sensible on this subject I must take issue with the above. "Recognised National Carriers" are not, per se, any safer than any other, indeed the current investigation into AF447 is heavily focussed on potential causal factors such as pilot training, an area which Air France ( a recognised national carrier) appears on the current available evidence to be inferior to other operators, and certainly inferior to my own employer. This will all be validated in the final BEA report. Such a sweeping statement is not fair on many carriers, Ryanair are, to a lot of the flying community and the self loading freight (that's passengers to the average joe) a boil on the bum of the airline industry due to some of their practices yet have a very impressive safety record, the same cannot be said for Air France and Turkish airlines, both national flag carriers.

[Tepid water]

Whilst some of your posts are relatively sensible on this subject I must take issue with the above. "Recognised National Carriers" are not, per se, any safer than any other, indeed the current investigation into AF447 is heavily focussed on potential causal factors such as pilot training, an area which Air France ( a recognised national carrier) appears on the current available evidence to be inferior to other operators, and certainly inferior to my own employer. This will all be validated in the final BEA report. Such a sweeping statement is not fair on many carriers, Ryanair are, to a lot of the flying community and the self loading freight (that's passengers to the average joe) a boil on the bum of the airline industry due to some of their practices yet have a very impressive safety record, the same cannot be said for Air France and Turkish airlines, both national flag carriers.

Fair point.....

I really meant that if he stayed clear of some of the carriers in places ending "stan" he would be fine.....


I know a guy who used to be a BA engineer and he was horrified by the safety of some carriers......

[Tony Drago]

Interesting article in todays telegraph about this. Final report due in a month.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9231855/Air-France-Flight-447-Damn-it-were-going-to-crash.html

[rusty-la]

Interesting article in todays telegraph about this. Final report due in a month.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9231855/Air-France-Flight-447-Damn-it-were-going-to-crash.html

Thanks for that Tony.

Ive been following this thread for a year or so.

When I first saw the pilots transcripts prior to the crash it was terrible to read. Their words, on the way to their impending doom were very difficult to read. May they rest in peace.

For me, as a layman, what I don't understand is this:

How can one of the finest and most expensive aeroplanes in the World  have controls that that are not 'duel', as they were in the old days..?  Or at least a warning on the readout of what the other pilot was doing with his controls?.

I know its simplistic.  But in this World of technology where these things are taken for granted, how could this happen?.

[flemingcool]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18721046

Report out today

[pewithree3]

Documentary on UK channel 4 last night, they had the transcripts
read out by actors.

General opinion from experts was not to blame the pilots as they were
getting conflicting messages from computers which came about from the
frozen pitot tube.

1; Why did the captain fly into a serious storm when others changed course?
2; The most junior pilot was in control in the bad conditions.
3; The captain had gone for a rest break but when the second pilot called for
    the captain to return to the cockpit he couldn`t be found for a few minutes.
4; The second pilot who was vastly more experienced than the junior pilot
    did not take command of the plane when the serious problems started. 
5; Eventually the second pilot started to take over the controls but did not say
    "I have control" so the junior was still pulling hard back on his side stick.
6; By this time the plane was falling out of the sky at a very fast rate with the
    nose still pointing up, due to a lack of speed.

   74 bodies were found in the sea after the crash with over a 100 found inside
   the remains of the fuselage in a later search, some still strapped into their seats.
   Other bodies have never been recovered.

[Graeme]

I watch Air Crash Investigation quite a lot and the format here was very similar - they even used some of the same industry experts that ACI does. One thing they always say on ACI which was relevant here is that it is very, very rarely a single event or decision that brings an aircraft down, there is nearly always one bad decision that leads to another and then another.

As the guy said last night, when the AP disengaged he didn't need to do a thing, just take the controls and keep the aircraft in level flight.

['Mondzz']

Watched the program on this last ngiht aswell, suprising the way not one of the pilots mentioned the word 'stall' throughout the ordeal.

[rusty-la]

if, like me you missed this, here's the link:-

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/fatal-flight-447-chaos-in-the-cockpit/4od#3412784

[Graeme]

Watched the program on this last ngiht aswell, suprising the way not one of the pilots mentioned the word 'stall' throughout the ordeal.

Its a good point when you consider that the stall alarm sounded 58 times!

[redgriffin73]

if, like me you missed this, here's the link:-

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/fatal-flight-447-chaos-in-the-cockpit/4od#3412784

Missed this so thanks for the link.