TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Air France jet missing over Atlantic
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by tanta It was human error

Exactly. Therefore it's avoidable.

Re: Air France jet missing over Atlantic

quote:

Originally posted by Leon i don't mean to be the bearer of bad news with that other seemingly random air travel topic lurking around... but http://www.reuters.com/article/topN...eedName=topNews 'People look at the arrivals screen showing Air France flight AF447 as "delayed" at Charles de Gaulle airport near Paris June 1, 2009.' bad stuff..

i have a Degree in Aerospace Engineering.

in 2nd year, 1st semester, in a class called Fluid Mechanics the Professor (he has worked for NASA) tried to shed some light on how an airplane actually flies.

(AKA, the aerodynamic theory of what makes an airplane actually fly)

and to the silence of the whole room, he proceeded to tell us, that to this day, no one has yet figured out how a plane actually flies.

Airplanes fly, but no one has yet to provide the actual theory behind how airplanes, or why airplanes actually fly.

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker From the analysis they've been able to conduct already, they believe that nozzles, used to direct air-flow to a device that measures air-speed, froze solid when the plane entered a massive storm bank. Unable to determine how fast they were going, pilot confusion led to a series of errors that resulted in the plane stalling. There are actually procedures for avoiding the stall in such conditions but the pilots may not have ascertained the severity of the problem in time to fix it. It should be interesting to find out if that is the case or what it actually was.

first rule of flying:

if ice forms anywhere on the plane, that plane needs to land...or passengers = death.

" they believe that nozzles, used to direct air-flow to a device that measures air-speed, froze solid when the plane entered a massive storm bank"

those nozzles that take in air-flow input are either on the engines or on the wing.

ice anywhere on the wing = certain death.

the wing snaps off in minutes after it starts to freeze.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 I'm assuming a plane nose diving into the ocean is a result of the engines failing.

storms over the ocean are really nasty when they are big, because they draw extra power from the ocean and currents of wind that are extensive over the oceans.

two things could have happened:

1. heavy ice caused all engines to fail, one by one.

2. the wings froze instantly when entering the storm system, and one of the wings snapped off in 1 or 2 minutes.

both would lead to major nose dive.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 Can a roughly 500,000lb plane really glide down safely with no power?

no one knows the severity of the storm. storms cause major turbulence EVEN when you fly on top of them. so that fact that your in the middle of the turbulence + ice + engine failure + any type of system failure

you literally need to start praying for several miracles to happen.

my guess is, you dont fly through the middle of a thunderstorm that is over the ocean and live to tell the tale.

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker It's thought that all of them failed when super-cooled water vapor condensed on them. There was a series of electronic transmissions of systems shutting down, including the auto-pilot, just prior to the plane's crash. The systems that shut down were related, in some measure, to those tubes.

when you enter a storm system, first thing you do, is disengage autopilot, and you try to get out of the storm as soon as possible especially a nasty storm over the ocean.

the fact that its over the ocean and at night, means they were probably not paying attention, there wasnt a lot of good warning signs to be made aware that they are about to encounter a huge storm system,

and once you enter a storm over the ocean, start praying to god, something doesnt fail, or turbulence doesnt cause flutter.

flutter can snap the wing in two based on a specific frequency of oscillation of the wing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroelastic_flutter#Flutter

flutter could have happened due to unique turbulence.

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose "Ladies and gentlemen this is your captain speaking, we have just lost our second engine, the plane is about to stall and plow into the nearest mountain range in the next 120 or so seconds. Please proceed calmly and one by one your nearest emergency exit where a stewardess will provide you each with a parachute and properly instruct you on how to use it, while i remote detonate the shaped charges so that the emergency door will actually open and you can all jump to safety."

cant open the main door, or emergency door on an airplane during mid flight. they can only be opened on the ground, from the outside.

once you are on a runway inside a plane, you are in it for the ride.

quote:

Originally posted by VDub According to an Airbus telex sent to all airlines using their A330, the flight recorders on Air France flight 447 confirm that their airplane didn't suffer any failure and they shouldn't take any precautionary measure: ...at this stage of preliminary analysis of the Flight Data Recorder, Airbus has no immediate recommendation to to its operators. Updates will be provided as soon as significant items that Airbus will be available or will be authorized to issue more information in accordance with the investigation. According to Le Figaro, the flight data recorder points to an error by the crew as the origin of the accident that killed 228 people aboard the Airbus A330. The data will be disclosed soon by the agency investigating the accident. Le Figaro's sources say that they still don't have data from the Cockpit Voice Recorder, which will probably reveal more about the actual source of the accident.

the only error of the crew, is if they saw the storm beforehand, had enough time to divert, and chose not to.

other than that, an airplane is not built to fly through mother-of-all-earth thunderstorms that are HUGE AND NASTY, over the middle of the ocean. if they built planes to withstand that, 75% of people that use planes could not afford a ticked to get on that plane.

quote:

Originally posted by VDub So many questions as to why they behaved the way that they did... I thought of so many possibilities for the crash but never did pilot error cross my mind. I just gave the crew the benefit of the doubt... I don't think I'll ever fly Air France... Second pilot error crash in 3 years...

if the admit to any structure failure, or system failure leading to the crash, they get sued for millions by all the families of the diceased.

the world is a game about money.

it is cheaper to pay off whoever you need to, so they dont report the actual failures of the crash,

then to pay tens of millions to a lawsuit because admitting to any sort of structural/engine/system failure of the airplane.

blaming already dead pilots is about as cheap as it gets to "getting off scotch free"

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzQi Hard core edit: I've read about a number of near misses that were due to the pilot, a junior, pulling up instead of down when they should have gone down. You'd think that would be common sense, even non-pilots know that.

if they pulled up, that means they knew they were going to die for sure if they stayed in the storm,

because pulling down, would leave you still inside the storm, with the possibilities that either something freezes, and failures/airplanes structure breaks, or turbulence causes heavy malfunction or for a wing to snap off.

if they pulled up, it means they got hit blind by the storm, and if you pull up while you still have running engines, and everything functioning, then you might be able to elevate above the storm system and avoid the storm, which would be a less riskier option that to risk structure/engine failure due to freezing/turbulence or both if they pulled down.

what im guessing is though, they pulled up praying they could go above the storm, but it was a thunderstorm probably of twice the height above the ocean from what their altitude was when the storm hit.

because it was a HUGE STORM, and it grew BIG instantly, it means it was a 0/0 chance of survival either way.

sometimes, Death is unavoidable.

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ Someone's had access to the full transcript ahead of the report next year. I doubt the audio will ever be released, though. THE FINAL MOMENTSMarc Dubois (captain): 'Get your wings horizontal.' David Robert (pilot): 'Level your wings.' Pierre-Cedric Bonin (pilot): 'That's what I'm trying to do... What the... how is it we are going down like this?' Robert: 'See what you can do with the commands up there, the primaries and so on�Climb climb, climb, climb.' Bonin: 'But I have been pulling back on the stick all the way for a while.' Dubois: 'No, no, no, don't climb.' Robert: 'Ok give me control, give me control.' Dubois: 'Watch out you are pulling up.' Robert: 'Am I?' Bonin: 'Well you should, we are at 4,000.' As they approach the water, the on-board computer is heard to announce: 'Sink rate. Pull up, pull up, pull up.' To which Captain Dubois reacts with the words: 'Go on: pull.' Bonin: 'We're pulling, pulling, pulling, pulling.' The crew never discuss the possibility that they are about to crash, instead concentrating on trying to right the plane throughout the final four minutes. Dubois: 'Ten degrees pitch.' Robert: 'Go back up!�Go back up!�Go back up!� Go back up!' Bonin: 'But I�ve been going down at maximum level for a while.' Dubois: 'No, No, No!� Don�t go up !� No, No!' Bonin: 'Go down, then!' Robert: 'Damn it! We�re going to crash. It can�t be true!' Bonin: 'But what�s happening?!' The recording stops.

sounds like its supposed to be a movie script. can i say FAKE???

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ Best article I've read yet. By Popular Mechanics. Very detailed and utterly terrifying. http://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...6611877?src=rss Although the full report is due next year, some french dude has published a book about the disaster with the entire transcript in it. The BEA are quite hacked off.

if you ask someone to provide the black box, they wont be able to. its somewhere in the bottom of the ocean.

i read the article in your post. that thunderstorm snapped a wing off, or snapped the plane in two while it was still in mid-air.

the conversation between the pilots sounds made up and a cover-up to the fact that they dont want to admit

the planes they build are not safe to fly through huge thunderstorms that occur over the ocean...

safety factor of the wings 1.5 - 2 and structure 1.5 of an airplane
will not withstand the loading caused by extreme turbulence or structural failure via rapid freezing that a nasty thunderstorm would produce.

quote:

Originally posted by Flec i disagree, now that they figured out what happend they are going to be taking steps to fix this which reduces the chances of it occuring again.

not if it costs money.

they blamed the pilots, they are not obliged to fix anything.

money rules the world, not intelligence.

decisions that are made with money, or for money, do not necessarily need to be either intelligent, or of high moral standard.

Lol, one man thread.

Did you actually bother reading the reports or the rest of this thread?

No? oh, just trolling. Ok, carry on then.

Not sure if this was posted earlier... but this is an interesting theory:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread469662

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Lol, one man thread. Did you actually bother reading the reports or the rest of this thread? No? oh, just trolling. Ok, carry on then.

i analyzed everything posted in this thread,

from an Aerospace Engineering stand point.

the fact that not a lot of planes are involved in a plane crash comes from the limit of behavior, not the evolution of intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by TheTrinity i analyzed everything posted in this thread, from an Aerospace Engineering stand point. the fact that not a lot of planes are involved in a plane crash comes from the limit of behavior, not the evolution of intelligence.

Got a degree in aerospace engineering?

Degrees? Who needs one of those?! School is just for brainwashing the sheeple!

quote:

Originally posted by TheTrinity i analyzed everything posted in this thread, from an Aerospace Engineering stand point. the fact that not a lot of planes are involved in a plane crash comes from the limit of behavior, not the evolution of intelligence.

Some of the shit you are spweing is downright offensive.

"A cover-up" are you fucking serious?

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ Some of the shit you are spweing is downright offensive. "A cover-up" are you fucking serious?

rule one of business: protect the investment.

wake up.

they simply assumed that the aircraft is built perfectly and can withstand all occasions, and they admit to only one small malfunction

which they state that "that malfunction would never cause the plane to crash, therefore it must have been human error"

its called assumptions towards the benefits of the company

vs the hard work and sacrafice that reporting an objective analysis would mean.

they dont want to admit that airplanes ARE susceptible to huge storms,

cause then people would fly less. less consumption = less revenue.

WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON WHEN YOU DONT REALIZE MONEY, NOT INTELLIGENCE OR STRIVE FOR EVOLUTION RUNS THIS WORLD.

You are such a twat, and ever worse at trolling than I first assumed.

You have a "degree in aerospace engineering" but your professor can't explain how planes actually fly. Did you get your degree from a website?

My grandfather was chief engineer of British Airways for 30 years (i.e. the buck stopped with him for the entire global fleet), and his take was that 90% of air disasters happen due a to catalog of errors, usually started by a physical malfunction which alone is usually not enough by itself to result in complete catastrophe, but is then compounded and in some cases catalyzed by human error, and in many cases repetitive and avoidable error.

If you bothered to read the thread, in it's entirety, plus the links posted you'd find it's really not difficult to figure out what went wrong here, and it's not some frankly dumb and insulting conspiracy theory and cover up.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN You are such a twat, and ever worse at trolling than I first assumed. You have a "degree in aerospace engineering" but your professor can't explain how planes actually fly. Did you get your degree from a website? My grandfather was chief engineer of British Airways for 30 years (i.e. the buck stopped with him for the entire global fleet), and his take was that 90% of air disasters happen due a to catalog of errors, usually started by a physical malfunction which alone is usually not enough by itself to result in complete catastrophe, but is then compounded and in some cases catalyzed by human error, and in many cases repetitive and avoidable error. If you bothered to read the thread, in it's entirety, plus the links posted you'd find it's really not difficult to figure out what went wrong here, and it's not some frankly dumb and insulting conspiracy theory and cover up.

Clearly, he was just perpetuating the public relations narrative to keep people consuming.








WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO?

ITT: Nobody cares about DJ Rann's "grandfather"

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 ITT: Nobody cares about DJ Rann's "grandfather"

Your great grand mother did? Get it, Luke?

Lol, I made it up you numbnuts, but that was a the quote from the Chief Engineer at BA. Gee, caught two flies with one trap. Oh, wait, Trinity didn't bite. Just you. Guess that makes you special.

Oh, while were on the subject of making you look dumb again:

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 Can a roughly 500,000lb plane really glide down safely with no power?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Transat_Flight_236

Too bad RANN, Trinity, and Russell weren't on this flight!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.