Transport Tycoon Forums

No topic for such a disaster? In a transport discussion section?
So much for a less selfish world...
Anyway, dont wont to go way off-topic.
It should take 20 years to discover the reason of the accident, just like with the TWA crash.

Starting a topic with insulting the members of a forum is the wrong way to go. Despite that, I do agree it's a bit surprising this topic has not yet been made. I believe I have seen topics regarding other aeroplane disasters here.

In addition, they are locating more of this missing airplane (Air France Flight 447) by the day. It will either take a month or two to discover the cause of this accident, or it will never be discovered. They need those black boxes and they are narrowing down the search area, I believe. Problem is, the signal from the box is not strong enough to reach boats searching on the surface. The French (I believe it's the French) have sent a sub-marine to scan the ocean floor

I also fail to see how not having a topic on one disaster (as if we enjoy discussing disasters... ) makes us selfish.

Enough on that now, use this topic to only discuss the Air France disaster.

buckethead wrote: It should take 20 years to discover the reason of the accident, just like with the TWA crash.

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think that? As they have said in the news, they have about 30 days to find the black box, so I assume this investigation will not take 20 years. Plus, they seem to already have a good handle on what happened- it looks like they have narrowed it to a handful of causes- pitot tube being the seemingly most likely issue.

I'm sorry, I've already lost patience. I am evil. Keep that in mind.
The cause is not terrorist, no spark in the fuel tank. The airplane was new. But there was a problem with the speed sensor. Which indicates that maybe the plane was going to slow and the pilots didnt notice, so the plane stalled badly?
Awkward!

Last I read, they think the plane broke up in flight. The latest is, the speed indicator may have been reading low, so the plane was flying into turbulence too fast. Or it may simply be a case of a serious blast of turbulence in the thunderstorms simply swatting the plane out of the sky like you or I swat a bug.

According to another report, two of the passengers were "connected to terrorism" and there had been a bomb threat against an Air France plane earlier in the week. However, since none of the Jihadist organizations are claiming responsibility, one tends to think it wasn't terrorism. I mean, if Al Qaeda or the Taliban or Ansar al Islam had claimed responsibility, the free press in France, the UK and US would have told us. Right?

Two passengers shared the name with known terrorists, but were not, in fact, terrorists themselves

Takes 30 days tops to find the blackbox, 20 years to reunite most pieces of the aircraft to be able to do a full investigation, to get the most precise and possible cause of the accident.
It can't be terrorism, its terrible, but lamer to make crash on sea then on a building. They want to get noticed, how does this fully demonstrate quickly to whos watching the news that it was them?
It can't be a bad turbulence, all planes at the same time had absolutely no trouble. An A330 can't reach very high speeds, a speed so high that combined with torbulence causes the crash.
Weird. Loss of the whats-it-called-liquid that powers the flaps?

buckethead wrote:It can't be a bad turbulence, all planes at the same time had absolutely no trouble. An A330 can't reach very high speeds, a speed so high that combined with torbulence causes the crash.

I'm pretty sure that if the fly-by-wire controls were deactivated, and the speed indicators were faulty, that the plane is basically a metal dart travelling at whatever speed it wants.

I'd rather wait for the report than needlessly speculate like this.

buckethead wrote:Takes 30 days tops to find the blackbox, 20 years to reunite most pieces of the aircraft to be able to do a full investigation, to get the most precise and possible cause of the accident.

Not true, they may never find it if stops giving out a signal, also that presumes that the Black Box survived the incident. Also, how do you know it will take 20 years to do a full investigation. You talk, basically, twaddle.

About the blackbox my mistake, confused phrase.

You think that in 5 years you can obtain enough debris to investigate precisely? I remember you that the debris is shattered on a huge area for away from the coast. Its hard to find it, especially if it's sunk down deep.

buckethead wrote:About the blackbox my mistake, confused phrase.

You think that in 5 years you can obtain enough debris to investigate precisely? I remember you that the debris is shattered on a huge area for away from the coast. Its hard to find it, especially if it's sunk down deep.

Not having been there I have no clue but you can't just say that it'll take 20 years. You just can't.

Ameecher wrote:

buckethead wrote:About the blackbox my mistake, confused phrase.

You think that in 5 years you can obtain enough debris to investigate precisely? I remember you that the debris is shattered on a huge area for away from the coast. Its hard to find it, especially if it's sunk down deep.

Not having been there I have no clue but you can't just say that it'll take 20 years. You just can't.

Apparently he can...being an ''mature'' 14 year old he must know a lot about aircraft accident investigations...

If they fail to find the black box (a case which may very well become true), this accident is most likely never going to be "solved" to 100%. We know it crashed in the waters, and that there was a major cabin pressure drop. There is not that much more to it

My god! I like the civilian airplanes! I don't have fun by making stupid guesses! I've seen loads of air crash investigation documentaries, searched and searched the web for information! You think its easy to reunite most of the debris in a situation like this?
Stop complaining! Do you lose something if I'm right? Do you get humiliated? Suppose for once that what I say is correct. Does it make you angrier? This is a forum, we are free to say what we got to say, I've let you criticize me, I asked you too to criticize me! But do you need to make situations even more awkward, when you are complaining that I behave awkwardly?

buckethead wrote:I've seen loads of air crash investigation documentaries

It's just that they don't make a 'crash investigation' documentary about crashes that are unresolved, because then it wouldn't be a documentary (non-fiction) but fiction. This will then give everyone the idea that all crashes are resolved.

Ofcourse I hope they get some real clues soon and maybe they should think about streaming the black box/voice recorder data. This could give the experts access to the information sooner, although it won't work in case the power went out or the tranceiver went down, but in this case it could have been valuable information. After all they received a series of error messages from the plane.

Hope no-one minds replying to this after about a week.
Just some things I wanted to quote and discuss.

buckethead wrote:Takes 30 days tops to find the blackbox, 20 years to reunite most pieces of the aircraft to be able to do a full investigation, to get the most precise and possible cause of the accident.

Incorrect. The Flight-Data-Recorder and Cockpit-Voice-Recorder (aka, the 'Black Boxes') have something called a 'pinger' which fires a signal marking it's location. However, the batteries only last 30 days. After that they become harder to find, but not impossible. In some cases it has taken many months to find both BlackBox's.
Not sure where you get the 'takes 20 years' thing from. it takes however long it takes. There's no estimate and no guesses when investigating plane crashes. You could find the answer in just a couple of pieces, on one of the Black-Boxes or have to take up vast pieces of the aircraft.

buckethead wrote:It can't be terrorism, its terrible, but lamer to make crash on sea then on a building. They want to get noticed, how does this fully demonstrate quickly to whos watching the news that it was them?

Actually there was a plot that was foiled some time ago where there was a plan to blow up several transatlantic flights over the ocean. They will target what ever they can. It's more than likely ruled out since (from what I've heard) there was a problem with the rudder and/or auto pilot.

buckethead wrote:It can't be a bad turbulence, all planes at the same time had absolutely no trouble. An A330 can't reach very high speeds, a speed so high that combined with torbulence causes the crash.
Weird. Loss of the whats-it-called-liquid that powers the flaps?

How do you know it's not also bad turbulence? It may have contributed. Just because other aircraft didn't have a problem doesn't mean the AF might have. There was a severe thunderstorm and turbulence around the area which the aircraft was flying through according to recent information. Also stated, the storm may have contributed to the crash.
537mph (467Knots) is a pretty nippy cruising speed if you ask me. That's not the maximum either. The higher the altitude for an aircraft, the faster it can go without risking damage as far as I'm aware.
I guess by liquids you mean hydraulics? They power pretty much everything needed to fly. From Flaps, Ailerons, rudder, spoilers and in some cases the gear. There's 3 main hydraulics systems for large airliners.

buckethead wrote:You think that in 5 years you can obtain enough debris to investigate precisely? I remember you that the debris is shattered on a huge area for away from the coast. Its hard to find it, especially if it's sunk down deep.

You never know, in 5 months the investigation might find a possible answer. Area and depth is a problem but they know where it is. Many aircraft have gone-down over seas and such leaving debris scattered for miles and miles.

buckethead wrote:I've seen loads of air crash investigation documentaries, searched and searched the web for information! You think its easy to reunite most of the debris in a situation like this?

So have I - and that doesn't mean I know 'everything about planes'.
I don't know everything about aviation and aircraft, but i have learnt many things from various places on the net, in books, in real-life, documentaries and even on FSX.

buckethead wrote:Stop complaining!?

Pardon me for saying this but anyway see the irony there?


Right, that's the quotes done.

I've not looked the Air-France flight up a lot yet so I'm going on information I've heard really.
One thing I'm reading up on now is the weather around there. Where the aircraft flew through a thunderstorm with heavy turbulence. At that altitude, icing/rain is not out of the question.
I'm reading about pilots have to use on-board radar to navigate around them at night. However, to memory the radar signals have to bounce-back to the aircraft and tell the pilots what is there.
If they are deflected elsewhere, it may read as clear or not as bad. Such things have happened before and there was a new system being worked on to solve that. Whether it was installed/finished or not I haven't the foggiest. Just thinking out loud really.

Also I've read somewhere about faulty speed-readings. Anyone think that could be possibly pitot-tube related? I'm just theorising here but a pitot-tube blocked or 'bunged up' with ice could give faulty readings. Then again I'm pretty sure that's what 'pitot heat' is for to avoid such things.
I'm no investegator and i'm no genious - I am the first to admit and say that. I'm just theorising out loud to everyone. Feel free to quote, correct or comment me at will.

It is a shame to see such things happen. Hopefully what ever caused the problem can be identified and avoided in the future.
I sympathise for the relatives though. Can't even begin to imagine what it must be like for either end. On second thought, I'd rather not try to imagine it.

Anyone else noticed there's been quite a few incidents this year regarding aircraft?

And I'm jumping in a few weeks later.

Have to say what I've read in this topic has amused me somewhat...

Geo Ghost wrote:

buckethead wrote:Takes 30 days tops to find the blackbox, 20 years to reunite most pieces of the aircraft to be able to do a full investigation, to get the most precise and possible cause of the accident.

Incorrect. The Flight-Data-Recorder and Cockpit-Voice-Recorder (aka, the 'Black Boxes') have something called a 'pinger' which fires a signal marking it's location. However, the batteries only last 30 days. After that they become harder to find, but not impossible. In some cases it has taken many months to find both BlackBox's.
Not sure where you get the 'takes 20 years' thing from. it takes however long it takes. There's no estimate and no guesses when investigating plane crashes. You could find the answer in just a couple of pieces, on one of the Black-Boxes or have to take up vast pieces of the aircraft.

Air adam flight 574, crashed off Indonesia in 2007. Took nearly 9 months to recover the black box off the ocean floor.
The sea the AF flight crashed into is almost twice as deep. They may find the boxes, but then again, they may not.

Geo Ghost wrote: I guess by liquids you mean hydraulics? They power pretty much everything needed to fly. From Flaps, Ailerons, rudder, spoilers and in some cases the gear. There's 3 main hydraulics systems for large airliners.

And the 3 systems are all completely independent, and have protection values incase of leaks and etc. etc. etc.

Also, the A330 is a fly-by-wire aircraft, so most hydraulic lines have been replaced. Newer aircraft are doing away with hydraulics altogether and using electric actuators. I can't remember if the A330 is all hydraulic, or the main system is electric and the back-ups hydraulic....

Geo Ghost wrote:You never know, in 5 months the investigation might find a possible answer. Area and depth is a problem but they know where it is. Many aircraft have gone-down over seas and such leaving debris scattered for miles and miles.

I suspect they will have most "possible answers" figured out - they will need the evidence however to either confirm a theory, or to rule them out.

Also I've read somewhere about faulty speed-readings. Anyone think that could be possibly pitot-tube related? I'm just theorising here but a pitot-tube blocked or 'bunged up' with ice could give faulty readings. Then again I'm pretty sure that's what 'pitot heat' is for to avoid such things.

Yes, but I can't remember where the fault lay with the readings. I think it was in comparing the different pressure in the pitot tube rather then the pitot tube itself. I highly doubt however the speed readings were the cause.

Anyone else noticed there's been quite a few incidents this year regarding aircraft?

Probably down to more reporting rather then an actual increase in incidents.


Re comments about transmitting blackbox data - currently the capability does not exist and probably won't be added. Yes, it would be useful - however given the huge number of daily flights, the systems bandwidth would have to be HUGE, and therefore either too expensive or technically impossible.

I have heard other comments along similar lines that the aircraft should broadcast its GPS position along with the maintenance messages that get broadcast, but again the additional bandwidth requirements may prevent that from happening (but more more likely to happen then the above).

Sorry for the bump but I've just come across this:

BBC News Video Report

BBC News Article

I don't remember hearing about the Black Boxes being recovered so must have missed that at some point.
Also, this certainly blows the whole "it'll probably take 20 years" rubbish out the window.


There's some parallels being drawn here to another crash involving pitot tubes. I cannot remember the name of it, but I remember reading about it very clearly.
To memory, the pitot tubes on a flight became blocked and there-fore gave inaccurate readings where the change in speed was actually a response the air pressure. At one point the aircraft was warning of 'over speed' so the pilots slowed down and increased altitude to compensate, not knowing the readings were incorrect. In reality, they were travelling far slower then they should have done so as soon as they increase their altitude, they were met with a shaking-stick warning (insert the actually technical term here?) which is, as far as I remember, a warning of imminent stall.
The result eventually was that the auto-pilot cut out, they were still getting false readings and the aircraft stalled, plummeted, and crashed.

My knowledge with this area has slipped over the years so I'm trying to recall things as I go along. Feel free to kindly correct me on any details that are not right.

Reading through the news article though, there seems to be some similarities to the previously mentioned incident. Strange though, I thought measures in place in-case of such of event including training for pitot tube failure and alternate ways of reading airspeed.


Thoughts on the matter? The current information is certainly suggesting pitot tube failure but I suppose we won't know all the details for certain till the report is released.
I am very curious to know how and why it all happened and I'm sure families are too. The interesting thing will be where the blame lies - if it can be places at all.