Air Asia Flight missing..

Tenger

man98 wrote: »

I'm thinking that maybe (happened tonnes of times before) that pilots get a computer malfunction and don't know how to handle it. ....That's the type of incompetency I'm talking about.

Lets left the blame game to the professionals, will we. Those flight crew have family.

Mountainsandh

Calina wrote: »

I am not a pilot, but iirc the issue the last time was that pilots might willingly give their expertise on a particular item of interest and have it ignored because someone who has a lack of knowledge in that area doesn't want to accept their pet theory is unrealistic.

In many respects discussions like this can do harm because rather than spreading information, they can spread misinformation.

Take your comment above: you don't know what the water conditions are but are sure you could see the bottom at that depth.

Why are you so sure when you don't know what the water conditions are? There are several questions I have: how far can the plane have travelled in the time it was lost to the time it eventually sank. It's fine to be able to see the bottom, which you might not depending on chop, pollution and weather conditions - but if you don't know exactly where to look, then it takes a while to find something.

So threads like this, in my view, can be fantastic tools for learning if people are willing to recognise where their expertise stops and the expertise of another begins. IME, a lot of people over estimate their skillset and understanding, so threads come to spread misunderstanding and misinformation, and experts get frustrated.

In my view, it's fine to speculate, but if someone comes in with a theory and someone who is clearly more expert has an opposing view, the response should be to learn from it rather than go on about the attitude of experts. MH370 made it clear that a lot of people didn't want to learn and direct their speculation to a realistic direction.

I enjoy learning bits and pieces on boards, and it's great when it happens, but with all due respect, this is not a closed door training seminar where lay people may be trained. This is a discussion forum, where experts and non-experts are entitled to participate, or am I wrong ?

I see discussions on boards on my area of expertise, if the ignorance of some posters drives me mad, I might try and get them to understand. If they don't, I just let it go.

Realistically, what impact exactly do you think misinformation on boards.ie will have on aircraft crashes investigations in Malaysia ?

At the end of the day, the question is, do you want to find the plane, in which case you have to pay attention to experts, or do you just want to speculate about it for years to come?

Can the experts, or anyone on boards.ie really help ?
If the experts on boards.ie can indeed help (that would be wonderful), how would their expert opinions and decisions be influenced by lay people's comments on boards ?

To go back on topic, the search area has now been extended, and the USS Sampson is due to join the search.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/live-blog-missing-airasia/1557034.html#cxrecs_s

Wicklowleaid

http://news.sky.com/story/1399546/airasia-search-plane-door-and-debris-seen. Sounds like a positive development in the search hopefully will lead to the finding of the crash site in the near future!

smurfjed

Teams searching for the missing AirAsia flight 8501 have found up to six dead bodies, luggage, a plane door and an emergency slide floating in the water off the coast of Borneo Island.
Indonesian officials coming off a helicopter said they spotted a numerous bodies floating in the water, adding that as many as 10 items may have been located - including what might be a life raft, life jackets and long orange tubes.
Three of the bodies, none of which were wearing life jackets - have already been removed from the water, were taken to an Indonesian navy ship.

It appears that search teams have found the site.

HighLine

smurfjed wrote: »

It appears that search teams have found the site.

Local news thought it was prudent to show and zoom in on a body in the water and then cut to the families reaction of seeing the said images. Idiots.

Mountainsandh

French news are reporting 40 + bodies and various debris so far.
In the misery of this situation it will be a way for the families to grieve, at least.

billie1b

How insensitive showing floating bodies on the tv live, bloody terrible

martinsvi

billie1b wrote: »

How insensitive showing floating bodies on the tv live, bloody terrible

I can imagine only one thing worse - if after a few hours they would come out and say those where not related to the flight

Mountainsandh

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I enjoy learning bits and pieces on boards, and it's great when it happens, but with all due respect, this is not a closed door training seminar where lay people may be trained. This is a discussion forum, where experts and non-experts are entitled to participate, or am I wrong ?

I see discussions on boards on my area of expertise, if the ignorance of some posters drives me mad, I might try and get them to understand. If they don't, I just let it go.

Realistically, what impact exactly do you think misinformation on boards.ie will have on aircraft crashes investigations in Malaysia ?



Can the experts, or anyone on boards.ie really help ?
If the experts on boards.ie can indeed help (that would be wonderful), how would their expert opinions and decisions be influenced by lay people's comments on boards ?

To go back on topic, the search area has now been extended, and the USS Sampson is due to join the search.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/live-blog-missing-airasia/1557034.html#cxrecs_s

The post you quoted explains it well. It's very common on the Internet to be honest, situation happens, people react someone, in this case a pilot, ATCO etc tries to explain but someone else who thinks they know better argues a different point of view one based on let's say a Hollywood film or Sci Fi which they think is reality and can/does happen. The topic gets derailed with the people jumping in and two pages later the original "experts" opinion is lost. Mod issues a slap nothing is said for a few hours and by then the "expert" has lost patience and moved on. The Malaysian airlines incident topic was a good example with many thinking/saying aliens had them or the CIA had taken the aircraft to Russia or Diego Garcia.

In this case severe thunderstorms were reported for the area and a bit like the MD in the Sahara appears to have encountered said TS and I'm sorry to say succumbed to the forces of nature and crashed.

billie1b

billie1b wrote: »

How insensitive showing floating bodies on the tv live, bloody terrible

What about showing the Virgin incident Live yesterday in airports ? They broadcast and showed the live shots of dead bodies being recovered in the airport in Indonesia where families were watching.

Have we really got to the stage now where people think this was ok, where Skynews will most likely rant on about how distasteful this was but still do the same themselves a few minutes later.

Grandeeod

At least the site appears to have been found and the process of grieving and investigation can begin. As I said in an earlier post, I wanted to wake up this morning and find out that the site was identified. While saddened, I'm also somewhat relieved as its been a pretty negative year all round for aviation. My wish for 2015 is that we get answers to this years disasters.

billie1b

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What about showing the Virgin incident Live yesterday in airports ? They broadcast and showed the live shots of dead bodies being recovered in the airport in Indonesia where families were watching.

Have we really got to the stage now where people think this was ok, where Skynews will most likely rant on about how distasteful this was but still do the same themselves a few minutes later.

Yeah thats what I meant, they had a split screen and were showing the bodies and the reaction of the victims families, it was very distasteful, they knew what they were doing and didn't even apologise. Another news agency in the area who were piggy backing the live feed cut the feed straight away and put up an apology.

boreder

HighLine wrote: »

Local news thought it was prudent to show and zoom in on a body in the water and then cut to the families reaction of seeing the said images. Idiots.

billie1b wrote: »

How insensitive showing floating bodies on the tv live, bloody terrible

Deleted User wrote: »

What about showing the Virgin incident Live yesterday in airports ? They broadcast and showed the live shots of dead bodies being recovered in the airport in Indonesia where families were watching.

Have we really got to the stage now where people think this was ok, where Skynews will most likely rant on about how distasteful this was but still do the same themselves a few minutes later.

billie1b wrote: »

Yeah thats what I meant, they had a split screen and were showing the bodies and the reaction of the victims families, it was very distasteful, they knew what they were doing and didn't even apologise. Another news agency in the area who were piggy backing the live feed cut the feed straight away and put up an apology.

Am I the only one who thinks you should expect to see that if you're watching a search operation live on TV? We all know what they're looking for in the search, so you can hardly be surprised and / or shocked when you see it, given you're voluntarily watching it.

owenc

billie1b wrote: »

Yeah thats what I meant, they had a split screen and were showing the bodies and the reaction of the victims families, it was very distasteful, they knew what they were doing and didn't even apologise. Another news agency in the area who were piggy backing the live feed cut the feed straight away and put up an apology.

That is absolutely disgusting.

kstand

I'm curious to know how the plane entered the water - it spears to have lost airspeed and rose in altitude at the same time, would it then have stalled and fallen straight out of the sky or what? None of the bodies pulled out had lifejackets on - so it would appear to me that they didn't have much warning and then just plummeted into the ocean below which probably would have caused the plane to break up on impact..
I'm no expert - anyone have any thoughts on what could have happened?
I would have thought that if there was any way to bring the plane down "gracefully" on the water and get people into life-jackets then the pilot would surely have done that.

billie1b

boreder wrote: »

Am I the only one who thinks you should expect to see that if you're watching a search operation live on TV? We all know what they're looking for in the search, so you can hardly be surprised and / or shocked when you see it, given you're voluntarily watching it.

I'll be honest, i'm thick skinned, it doesn't/didn't bother me one bit, i've seen a few dead bodies in my lifetime, my first one when I was 10/11 years old, I just believe it was very distasteful for the families involved, they didn't need to see it at that time.

Growler!!!

Unfortunately, in those kind of weather conditions the stress on the airframe would have caused it to break up in the air.

Bbc World have aired a press conference where the authorities have confirmed the location of the crash site. Sky news were showing sport!!!

owenc

kstand wrote: »

I'm curious to know how the plane entered the water - it spears to have lost airspeed and rose in altitude at the same time, would it then have stalled and fallen straight out of the sky or what? None of the bodies pulled out had lifejackets on - so it would appear to me that they didn't have much warning and then just plummeted into the ocean below which probably would have caused the plane to break up on impact..
I'm no expert - anyone have any thoughts on what could have happened?
I would have thought that if there was any way to bring the plane down "gracefully" on the water and get people into life-jackets then the pilot would surely have done that.

Well they found a emergency slide and also a shadow of the plane so I think it didn't break up.

billie1b

owenc wrote: »

Well they found a emergency slide and also a shadow of the plane so I think it didn't break up.

The wreckage is located and divers are at the scene, they have said the aircraft is broken up but in sizeable pieces that you are still able to identify it as an aircraft

kstand

billie1b wrote: »

The wreckage is located and divers are at the scene, they have said the aircraft is broken up but in sizeable pieces that you are still able to identify it as an aircraft

Which would suggest it broke up at a lower altitude or indeed on impact with the water.

owenc

billie1b wrote: »

The wreckage is located and divers are at the scene, they have said the aircraft is broken up but in sizeable pieces that you are still able to identify it as an aircraft

I thought they seen a shadow

dlouth15

kstand wrote: »

I'm curious to know how the plane entered the water - it spears to have lost airspeed and rose in altitude at the same time, would it then have stalled and fallen straight out of the sky or what? None of the bodies pulled out had lifejackets on - so it would appear to me that they didn't have much warning and then just plummeted into the ocean below which probably would have caused the plane to break up on impact..
I'm no expert - anyone have any thoughts on what could have happened?
I would have thought that if there was any way to bring the plane down "gracefully" on the water and get people into life-jackets then the pilot would surely have done that.

Not an expert but I believe a sudden downdraft as can occur in thunderstorms can cause the aircraft to stall. In the unstable air it may have been difficult to regain control. Have to wait for analysis of the flight recorder for the full picture.

kstand

dlouth15 wrote: »

Not an expert but I believe a sudden downdraft as can occur in thunderstorms can cause the aircraft to stall. In the unstable air it may have been difficult to regain control. Have to wait for analysis of the flight recorder for the full picture.

The fact no one was found with a life-jacket suggests to me that the plane may have gone into something of a nosedive and literally fell out of the sky - or perhaps broke up in the air.
All speculation though of course.

billie1b

owenc wrote: »

I thought they seen a shadow

That was a few hours ago, divers were already sent in and its been located

Taken from AVH

'On Dec 30th 2014 Indonesia's Search and Rescue Services reported, that they have located the wreckage of the fuselage at the floor of the Java Sea, about 97-100nm southwest of Pangkalan Bun. The aircraft is broken up into several large parts but well recognizable'

Discodog

In an age of computers should we not be at a stage where an airliner can't stall. Is there not some form of hsnds off recovery?

2 stroke

Discodog wrote: »

In an age of computers should we not be at a stage where an airliner can't stall. Is there not some form of hsnds off recovery?

Perhaps someday they will solve the problems of computers crashing, then they can start working on your idea.
My guess is that increasing automation increases the chance of a stall.

owenc

billie1b wrote: »

That was a few hours ago, divers were already sent in and its been located

Taken from AVH

'On Dec 30th 2014 Indonesia's Search and Rescue Services reported, that they have located the wreckage of the fuselage at the floor of the Java Sea, about 97-100nm southwest of Pangkalan Bun. The aircraft is broken up into several large parts but well recognizable'

Ok so it is broken up so no ditching probably..

martinsvi

Discodog wrote: »

In an age of computers should we not be at a stage where an airliner can't stall. Is there not some form of hsnds off recovery?

we are. Airbus has a feature of flight envelope protection. The unfortunate thing is sometimes sensors lie, sometimes an unexpected situation develops (software will only work with situations that programmers predicted will happen, once unexpected inputs develop, computers back off and allow pilots to handle it).. and then there's a pilot error

Wicklowleaid

Dont think that was possible due to other aircraft in the area!

martinsvi

Sclosages wrote: »

The pilot wanted to climb and divert to the left. Did they think he was taking the piss?

a very uninformed remark from your side.. pilot always makes the last call, ATC's job is to control, not to dictate or force. If the pilot wanted, they could have advised that they're climbing anyway due to immediate danger and then it would be ATC's job to get the conflicting traffic out of the way. With the performance they had, they wouldn't have made it up to FL380 anyway.

what really puzzles me is the location of the wreck.. basically it looks like they did a 180° turn.. would love to know how that happened and was it a decision made by the crew or were they completely out of control (damaged/lost tail would explain transponder going off-line at fl363, I wonder will it be found at the same spot with the rest of the plane)