Plane crash in Alps ### MOD NOTE 1st POST

JupiterKid

Terrible tragedy. Thoughts are with the families of the victims.

Hans Bricks

bb1234567 wrote: »

Would you like if people joked about your family's death.

It's an international news story. No ones specifically laughing at the fate or suffering of anyone individual on the plane, it's just offensive puns etc.. This is another country however, so it's not as local as say an air crash tragedy in the Wicklow mountains. Making a joke doesn't suggest NO empathy, more that it doesn't affect everyone as directly where if it were an Irish tragedy.

The_Kew_Tour

RIP to all those lost.

Jesus it was been a horrible, frightening experience. I hope their lives were ended quick and pain free.

I remember flying over the Alps 2 or 3 times. Stunning views, but I always remember thinking to myself I hate be stuck in middle of it.

Mallagio

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I remember flying over the Alps 2 or 3 times. Stunning views, but I always remember thinking to myself I hate be stuck in middle of it.

I've had the same thoughts too, like you I also hope it was painless.

My opinion is that they were already unconscious prior to impact.

dfx-

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

Would it be the frozen pitot issue again like Flight 477 or were they all upgraded?

Could be something as 'simple' as the autopilot disengaging without them knowing. Pretty sure a crash was caused years ago by the autopilot being disengaged silently and unknowingly by the pilot's knee knocking the steering column.

Same with the famous Aeroflot flight where the child in the pilot seat turned the plane and knocked the autopilot off.

YFlyer

[quote="dfx-;94821943"

Same with the famous Aeroflot flight where the child in the pilot seat turned the plane and knocked the autopilot off.[/quote]

What happened? Did the pilot turn the autopilot back on?

force eleven

No, the plane started to bank, imperceptibly at first and by the time the pilots realised what was wrong the plane started to dive.

dfx-

YFlyer wrote: »

What happened? Did the pilot turn the autopilot back on?

no, it was really a new plane for them so they were not aware the autopilot switched off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593

Macavity.

The Mod note implied there would be dark humour in this thread, but I don't see any.

Tombi!

Macavity. wrote: »

The Mod note implied there would be dark humour in this thread, but I don't see any.

Either post civilly or don't post at all

MarkY91

I remember flying over the alps before. I never have fears of flying and this won't affect me but my auntie will probably cancel her transatlantic flight now lol

seamus

dfx- wrote: »

Could be something as 'simple' as the autopilot disengaging without them knowing. Pretty sure a crash was caused years ago by the autopilot being disengaged silently and unknowingly by the pilot's knee knocking the steering column.

Possibly, but I'd be surprised. I don't know enough about the ins and outs, but I would have thought there'd be a "dead man's switch" built-in to modern autopilots where it automatically kicks in if the aircraft hasn't received any manual input in 30 seconds or so.

the_monkey

MarkY91 wrote: »

I remember flying over the alps before. I never have fears of flying and this won't affect me but my auntie will probably cancel her transatlantic flight now lol

Tell her now just after a crash is probably even safer to fly.

I don't understand this, I'm flying next week and I'll be a little more nervous then usual but I just get on with it.

But to ACTUALLY CANCEL a trip to me seems bizarre.

Especially a Transatlantic flight - presumably it's not with a low fare crowd ..

MarkY91

the_monkey wrote: »

Tell her now just after a crash is probably even safer to fly.

I don't understand this, I'm flying next week and I'll be a little more nervous then usual but I just get on with it.

But to ACTUALLY CANCEL a trip to me seems bizarre.

Especially a Transatlantic flight - presumably it's not with a low fare crowd ..

She won't cancel. She will be extra nervous. She had horrific turbulence going home from Glasgow recebtly.. She prepared for death. I find it silly though. I read that you have an 11 million to 1 chance of dying in a plane crash.

the_monkey

MarkY91 wrote: »

She won't cancel. She will be extra nervous. She had horrific turbulence going home from Glasgow recebtly.. She prepared for death. I find it silly though. I read that you have an 11 million to 1 chance of dying in a plane crash.

Yeah, Ive been through bad turbulence , it's horrible but really the plane was never in danger, its a mental thing - and the f*cking media, they are the ones causing all these fears...

MarkY91

MarkY91 wrote: »

She won't cancel. She will be extra nervous. She had horrific turbulence going home from Glasgow recebtly.. She prepared for death. I find it silly though. I read that you have an 11 million to 1 chance of dying in a plane crash.

It depends on the aircraft & other key variables. if statistics are of any reassurance , get her to download this app on her iphone
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/am-i-going-down-fear-flying/id950258805?mt=8

Plazaman

From looking at some of the air crash investigation documentaries, a rapid descent such as this one usually creates a scenario where people would pass out within seconds (I unfortunately can't see people being able to get oxygen masks on in such a rapid descent) so whilst it is a terrible tragedy, from a humane point of view hopefully they were unconscious for the impact. I hope the black box will give a definitive answer as to what happened.

clever user name

I haven't watched much of the news coverage, just read what was said on the various news sites. Maybe it's just me, but descending from 38,000 feet to 6000 feet in 10 minutes doesn't seem all that rapid Yeah it's probably quicker than normal, but I don't imagine people could have passed out from that. Unless there was some decompression of course. I'm no expert, so maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject could enlighten me.

paulbok

seamus wrote: »

Possibly, but I'd be surprised. I don't know enough about the ins and outs, but I would have thought there'd be a "dead man's switch" built-in to modern autopilots where it automatically kicks in if the aircraft hasn't received any manual input in 30 seconds or so.

You'd also imagine there would be an alarm or indicator light that would go off when the auto-pilot disengages for whatever reason, and has to be manually turned off by the pilot, thus confirming it's supposed to be off.
With all the tech redundancy you hear of on planes, it's baffling such a thing can happen.

IvyTheTerrible

clever user name wrote: »

I haven't watched much of the news coverage, just read what was said on the various news sites. Maybe it's just me, but descending from 38,000 feet to 6000 feet in 10 minutes doesn't seem all that rapid Yeah it's probably quicker than normal, but I don't imagine people could have passed out from that. Unless there was some decompression of course. I'm no expert, so maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject could enlighten me.

Oh French news, an aviation expert was saying it wasn't fast at all, it would just have felt like a steep landing to the passengers. He thought it was strange how the plane kept to it's course, and also that they didn't manage to get a mayday message out in 10 minutes.

kneemos

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Oh French news, an aviation expert was saying it wasn't fast at all, it would just have felt like a steep landing to the passengers. He thought it was strange how the plane kept to it's course, and also that they didn't manage to get a mayday message out in 10 minutes.

Is there any purpose to a mayday message?
They're location is recorded anyway.

IvyTheTerrible

kneemos wrote: »

Is there any purpose to a mayday message?
They're location is recorded anyway.

AFAIK, if a plane issues a mayday message, other planes are supposed to keep radio silence.

paulbok

kneemos wrote: »

Is there any purpose to a mayday message?
They're location is recorded anyway.

It gives the emergency services the heads up so they can be ready for whatever happens (as much as they can be), rather than waiting until it happens.

Tokyo

kneemos wrote: »

Is there any purpose to a mayday message?
They're location is recorded anyway.

Plenty of purpose - it puts the nearest control tower into red alert so they can divert other aircraft away from the area if needs be, lets them prioritise this plane as being an emergency, gives them time to put the emergency services on alert should the plane attempt a landing, so on and so forth.

Rosie Rant

Such a horrible tragedy. I keep thinking about the classmates of those 16 school kids. How they must be feeling. And the families of all those that were lost. It is just so awful. RIP.

LordSutch

Re black box voice recorder; Hearing rumours of a cracked windscreen/structural failure . . .

No confirmation yet (3:05pm).

Tokyo

^^ If that's the actual CVR recovered, then it's in pretty good condition considering what it's just been through. The drum in the middle is where the voice data is stored.

topper75

Second recorder found but unusable. Chip missing. Conspiracy nuts are in a lather predictably. Concept of hitting mountain at over 400mph lost on them.

kippy

Plazaman wrote: »

From looking at some of the air crash investigation documentaries, a rapid descent such as this one usually creates a scenario where people would pass out within seconds (I unfortunately can't see people being able to get oxygen masks on in such a rapid descent) so whilst it is a terrible tragedy, from a humane point of view hopefully they were unconscious for the impact. I hope the black box will give a definitive answer as to what happened.

This wasn't a rapid decent.

Tokyo

topper75 wrote: »

Second recorder found but unusable. Chip missing. Conspiracy nuts are in a lather predictably. Concept of hitting mountain at over 400mph lost on them.

Latest news reports would seem to indicate that crash investigators were able to extract usable audio data form the flight recorder:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32056861

Going by that same report, the flight data recorder has not been found at all yet.

Duggy747

topper75 wrote: »

Second recorder found but unusable. Chip missing. Conspiracy nuts are in a lather predictably. Concept of hitting mountain at over 400mph lost on them.

If one of their socks went missing in the wash they'd find it a conspiracy.

wretcheddomain

Duggy747 wrote: »

If one of their socks went missing in the wash they'd find it a conspiracy.

We shouldn't even glorify conspiracy theories with the name. We should instead call them what they really are - paranoeac theories.

Jimminy Mc Fukhead

wretcheddomain wrote: »

We shouldn't even glorify conspiracy theories with the name. We should instead call them what they really are - paranoeac theories.

Oh Yeah? well explain the missing sock then!!

Junkyard Tom

How long before real time avionic information, and cockpit voice recording, are transmitted to a server on the ground? The data recovery technology seems a bit 20th Century.

Nodin

wretcheddomain wrote: »

We shouldn't even glorify conspiracy theories with the name. We should instead call them what they really are - paranoeac theories.

I prefer the term "shite talk" myself.

seamus

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

How long before real time avionic information, and cockpit voice recording, are transmitted to a server on the ground? The data recovery technology seems a bit 20th Century.

The on board recovery will basically always be required to provide data right to the very millisecond of the end of the flight. Even at the moment of impact it will be able to provide technical data from accelerometers and such which can be used to detect non-fatal issues with aircraft design and accurately reconstruct the the impact.

There is of course the issue of latency, technical issues, etc, which will always require the data to be recorded locally before being transmitted.

Mountainsandh

Voices and sounds (beeps etc...) have been heard on the CVR, but analysis is ongoing (well, to be resumed tomorrow presumably at this time).
Whose voices these were has not been determined yet.

I got the feeling from one report that they were still hoping they might come across the actual flight recording container (with chip) somewhere in the debris, I wonder how strong this is without the carcass of the box.

They have been working on piecing bodies together, and an on the spot laboratory (down in the valley) has been set up for forensic analysis. They are able to check DNA there, and families arriving tomorrow will have the grim task of submitting DNA for comparison.

JupiterKid

An aviation expert interviewed on TV last night speculated that it was some sort of structural/mechanical failure that caused the crash - as opposed to pilot error.

Perhaps it was rapid decompression at 38,000 feet cruising altitude caused by metal fatigue that overwhelmed the pilots in the cockpit and led to the descent.

IvyTheTerrible

JupiterKid wrote: »

An aviation expert interviewed on TV last night speculated that it was some sort of structural/mechanical failure that caused the crash - as opposed to pilot error.

Perhaps it was rapid decompression at 38,000 feet cruising altitude caused by metal fatigue that overwhelmed the pilots in the cockpit and led to the descent.

Experts on tv tonight said that sort of descent in that plane couldn't have happened without the voluntary action on the part of a pilot.

JupiterKid

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Experts on tv tonight said that sort of descent in that plane couldn't have happened without the voluntary action on the part of a pilot.

Perhaps the pilots put the plane into a descent because of the decompression - in order to reach a breathable altitude - but during the descent became unconscious due to a lack of oxygen. If so, at least the passengers would have been unconscious before the crash which would be a small mercy for them.

It is a real tragedy and I'm confident that the French will get to the bottom of this.

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

How long before real time avionic information, and cockpit voice recording, are transmitted to a server on the ground? The data recovery technology seems a bit 20th Century.

It's not really feasible for a whole heap of reasons at the moment, one being cost.
You'd be surprised how much we rely on 20th century tech for a whole host of things and why its still so good!

Junkyard Tom

seamus wrote: »

accelerometers and .. latency, technical issues

There have been quite a few incidents when black boxes weren't recovered [wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unrecovered_flight_recorders] so why not compliment them with real time data so that crashes that leave no useful recoverable data become a thing of the past.

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

There have been quite a few incidents when black boxes weren't recovered [wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unrecovered_flight_recorders] so why not compliment them with real time data so that crashes that leave no useful recoverable data become a thing of the past.

Why not, cost benefit analysis.

The_Kew_Tour

According to New York Times

Germanwings Pilot Was Locked Out of Cockpit Before Crash in France

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/world/europe/germanwings-airbus-crash.html

madcabbage

Interesting that they're coming out with that so soon. Makes the situation sound a bit shady from that viewing.

Junkyard Tom

kippy wrote: »

Why not, cost benefit analysis.

It's already happening for RR engines.

All engines of Rolls Royce ... are equipped with sensors that collect data from different components, systems or sub-systems within the engines. The monitoring happens in real-time, be it at 37.000 feet or in the middle of the ocean, and the data is sent to the control room in Derby.

datafloq.com/read/rolls-royce-shifts-higher-gear-big-data/514

Would it really be prohibitively expensive to retrofit airliners with real time avionic data gathering at their next big service?

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

It's already happening for RR engines.



Would it really be prohibitively expensive to retrofit airliners with real time avionic data gathering at their next big service?

Totally different For numerous reasons and yes I would suggest it would be prohibitively expensive to develop and implement such a system.

SpaceSasqwatch

kippy wrote: »

and yes I would suggest it would be prohibitively expensive to develop and implement such a system.

the software written for use on planes and other critical hardware such as heart beat monitors are tested to hell and back.Thats not done cheaply.

kneemos

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

It's already happening for RR engines.



Would it really be prohibitively expensive to retrofit airliners with real time avionic data gathering at their next big service?

How often does any given airline lose a plane,if ever.

Junkyard Tom

kippy wrote: »

Totally different For numerous reasons and yes I would suggest it would be prohibitively expensive to develop and implement such a system.

The system is already developed for all intents and purposes.. Rolls Royce are using it.