Chris Kennedy
EF1
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2008
- Messages
- 76
My prayers go out to everyone on that plane and their family members
cdcollura
EF5
Good day all,
This is why you do not fly through any thunderstorms / convective showers.
I remember speaking with a pilot, and he avoided anything above Level 3 VIP, Level 6 being the highest (above 55 dbz).
This is why you do not fly through any thunderstorms / convective showers.
I remember speaking with a pilot, and he avoided anything above Level 3 VIP, Level 6 being the highest (above 55 dbz).
Andrew Stoller
EF5
Some news reports I've heard indicated these weren't garden variety thunderstorms either. They had tops over 50,000 feet and were quite strong.
I dunno; maybe lighting knocked out the electronics. This happened last night so if they lost their artificial horizon, then....
I dunno; maybe lighting knocked out the electronics. This happened last night so if they lost their artificial horizon, then....
At the same time I've seen numerous interviews with pilots saying that Lightning shouldn't do that to planes as many actually get struck every year... Maybe it just has more to do with the strength of the storm they went in to.
cdcollura
EF5
Good day all,
I am not sure what they flew into / through, but I doubt it was anything really severe.
In that part of the world, over the tropics, and with little or no upper-air dynamics, strong storms do nothing more that just "wet the palm trees".
Flying through this stuff, however, is a different story. Tropical thunderstorms can be a very dangerous thing to fly through.
I remember flying back from Panama in 1997 and the pilit decided to punch one of those "small" tropical cells along the ITCZ. Nailed everyone in their seat at twice the pull of gravity for a few seconds (from the updraft), then nearly lifted me out, straining in the lap-belt.
Throw in something like this with a wire-chafing problem, or weakened structure, and then you really have problems.
I am not sure what they flew into / through, but I doubt it was anything really severe.
In that part of the world, over the tropics, and with little or no upper-air dynamics, strong storms do nothing more that just "wet the palm trees".
Flying through this stuff, however, is a different story. Tropical thunderstorms can be a very dangerous thing to fly through.
I remember flying back from Panama in 1997 and the pilit decided to punch one of those "small" tropical cells along the ITCZ. Nailed everyone in their seat at twice the pull of gravity for a few seconds (from the updraft), then nearly lifted me out, straining in the lap-belt.
Throw in something like this with a wire-chafing problem, or weakened structure, and then you really have problems.
John Hudson
EF4
I have doubts about the lightning theory, since so many safeguards are included in the assembly of aircraft these days. All movable parts like control surfaces and landing gear have bonding straps attached to complete the Faraday cage, and avionics are painstakingly isolated from the rest of the aircraft structure.
The only caveat to this would be if they had an unfortunate encounter with a positive strike, which would likely have changed things somewhat. Or, the lightning could have hit a surface made with glass or carbon composites, which don't handle lightning attachment very well and have a tendency to explode.
The last time an aircraft was lost to lightning (with proof) was way back in 1963.
I think I'd be more inclined to suspect that extreme turbulence loads or hail brought this plane down.
In any case, it's a horrible tragedy.
John
VE4 JTH
The only caveat to this would be if they had an unfortunate encounter with a positive strike, which would likely have changed things somewhat. Or, the lightning could have hit a surface made with glass or carbon composites, which don't handle lightning attachment very well and have a tendency to explode.
The last time an aircraft was lost to lightning (with proof) was way back in 1963.
I think I'd be more inclined to suspect that extreme turbulence loads or hail brought this plane down.
In any case, it's a horrible tragedy.
John
VE4 JTH
Chris Carter
EF3
well, from what i read in the stories, it wasnt lightning that may have caused the problem, many believe that because of the thunderstorm, but there was also severe turbulence and there was an electronics failure notice that was sent out before losing contact with the plane...in anycase, my heart and prayers go out to those families hurt by this tragedy.
GOES and Meteosat images of 00-03Z indicated that the likely thunderstorm cluster it reportedly entered was located 600-700 km farther away from the island of Brazil where they first started searching, near 30-33°W and 1-3°N (900 km from Brazilian shore).
Dennis Dennison
1st--R.I.P. All on board.
2nd--I seriously question composites for large airliners.
3rd---I seriously question Airbus design as far as computerization of controls-too much automation IS NOT a good thing.
4th---My bet will be an electrical/electronic problem.
2nd--I seriously question composites for large airliners.
3rd---I seriously question Airbus design as far as computerization of controls-too much automation IS NOT a good thing.
4th---My bet will be an electrical/electronic problem.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/02/brazil.france.plane.missing/index.html
"Two debris fields were found about 650 km (400 miles) northeast of the Fernando de Noronha Islands, an archipelago 355 kilometers (220 miles) off the northeast coast of Brazil, the Ministry of Defense said on its Web site. The debris lies about 80 kilometers (50 miles) east of the flight path between Rio de Janeiro and Paris. " (right where the storm was located)
"Two debris fields were found about 650 km (400 miles) northeast of the Fernando de Noronha Islands, an archipelago 355 kilometers (220 miles) off the northeast coast of Brazil, the Ministry of Defense said on its Web site. The debris lies about 80 kilometers (50 miles) east of the flight path between Rio de Janeiro and Paris. " (right where the storm was located)
Last edited by a moderator:
Scott Olson
EF5
Clearly from the lack of a mayday call it is clear that whatever happend was catastrophic. It was reported that the aircraft continued to send out 13 automated ACARS messages, in which it was reporting several electrical malfunction in many systems.
Turbulence- Turbulence is certainly possible as there have been numerous instances of severe damage to an aircraft from Turbulence, including engine seperation and seperation of a tail fin. These things however should not lead to widespread electrical failure or malfunctions.
Lightning- Aircraft are designed to withstand and distrubute the force of a lightning strike. You don't hear about cars being disabled by lightning even though there are millions of cars moving about in charged lightning fields every single day. Aircraft are designed with this in mind and despite all the problems it's nearly unheard of in the history of modern aviation for an airplane to crash due to a lightning strike. One possibility in my mind is that the we are talking about some type of jet, or other form of lightning that occurs towards the top of a thunderstorm and has properities and intensities that exceed the design limits. In that aspect It is certainly possible that a lightning strike could have severely damaged the electrical systems in the aircraft, or even perhaps lead to an explosion of some sort. To me that still leaves two questions. First, if there had been a completel catastrophic failure then why is the airplane still managing to broadcast the ACARS messages? Certainly some systems must still be online for the diagnostics to work and for the message to be sent out. Second, even with a complete electrical failure the A330 is flyable. The airplane is highly automated but it should still be flyable without the electronics. There are backup instruments that don't need electricity, also the engines should continue to run and the hydraulics should continue to have pressure. Even with the loss of both engines the aircraft has an APU that can generate functional power.
I think the most likely solution is some catastrophic break up of the aircraft. There is usually not a mayday call in the event of such an event (see TWA800).
Given the very long debris path, it unfortunately appears that the aircraft was torn apart over the course of course of 4-5 minutes.
Turbulence- Turbulence is certainly possible as there have been numerous instances of severe damage to an aircraft from Turbulence, including engine seperation and seperation of a tail fin. These things however should not lead to widespread electrical failure or malfunctions.
Lightning- Aircraft are designed to withstand and distrubute the force of a lightning strike. You don't hear about cars being disabled by lightning even though there are millions of cars moving about in charged lightning fields every single day. Aircraft are designed with this in mind and despite all the problems it's nearly unheard of in the history of modern aviation for an airplane to crash due to a lightning strike. One possibility in my mind is that the we are talking about some type of jet, or other form of lightning that occurs towards the top of a thunderstorm and has properities and intensities that exceed the design limits. In that aspect It is certainly possible that a lightning strike could have severely damaged the electrical systems in the aircraft, or even perhaps lead to an explosion of some sort. To me that still leaves two questions. First, if there had been a completel catastrophic failure then why is the airplane still managing to broadcast the ACARS messages? Certainly some systems must still be online for the diagnostics to work and for the message to be sent out. Second, even with a complete electrical failure the A330 is flyable. The airplane is highly automated but it should still be flyable without the electronics. There are backup instruments that don't need electricity, also the engines should continue to run and the hydraulics should continue to have pressure. Even with the loss of both engines the aircraft has an APU that can generate functional power.
I think the most likely solution is some catastrophic break up of the aircraft. There is usually not a mayday call in the event of such an event (see TWA800).
Given the very long debris path, it unfortunately appears that the aircraft was torn apart over the course of course of 4-5 minutes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Scott Lincoln
EF4
Or more than a full day of ocean currents and stormy swells have made their impact.
Joshua Nall
EF4
Tim Vasquez has written a piece on this and can be found at this address:
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af477/
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today while commuting between job sites and he mentioned to his audience that Tim's write up about it was excellent, and then he gave out Tim's website and the address to the document. I'm sure his website has seen a lot of traffic today
Sorry if the address above doesn't convert to a link, as I'm fairly new to this.
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af477/
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today while commuting between job sites and he mentioned to his audience that Tim's write up about it was excellent, and then he gave out Tim's website and the address to the document. I'm sure his website has seen a lot of traffic today
Sorry if the address above doesn't convert to a link, as I'm fairly new to this.
Rob Sermon
Lightning has nothing to do with this aircraft accident. I've been struck in a Cirrus SR-20. The immediate failures were the Primary, and Multifunction displays, which after reboot worked fine, with the exception of the glide slope indicator. (insulator got fried)
I figure the flight got into a "hot tower" (a Cumulonimubus, busting 50,000 feet) and got her feathers torn off.
I figure the flight got into a "hot tower" (a Cumulonimubus, busting 50,000 feet) and got her feathers torn off.
