Air France Airbus missing over the Atlantic

[Lionel Ritchie]

Looking bad at this stage. Flight from Brazil to Paris with 228 onboard disappeared off radar, no radio contact and now over three hours overdue.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0601/airfrance.html

[Pauro 76]

The sad thing is, it's probably run out of fuel at this stage. Hope answers come out soon, dread to think what might have happened. It's stories like this that make you nervous about long haul flights.

[John83]

From what I've read, they reported heavy turbulence ten minutes before contact was lost. There was also an automatic signal indicating an electrical fault.

The BBC are suggesting that it may have been struck by lightning, though I've not seen their reasoning yet (and planes are routinely hit by lighting, I thought).


EDIT: For those with a morbid sense of humour, http://www.theonion.com/content/node/42594 (Sorry, but you click at your own peril).

[Lionel Ritchie]

From what I've read, they reported heavy turbulence ten minutes before contact was lost. There was also an automatic signal indicating an electrical fault.

The BBC are suggesting that it may have been struck by lightning, though I've not seen their reasoning yet (and planes are routinely hit by lighting, I thought).

Certainly shouldn't be enough to bring an Airbus down.

Looking likely now it went down an hour or so north east of Fernando de Noronha. It was never picked up by Cape Verde radar which probably means it didn't make it that far.

[John83]

Certainly shouldn't be enough to bring an Airbus down.
I've read speculation that positive lightning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning#Positive_lightning) might do the trick.

[John83]

A couple of informative images.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45851000/gif/_45851533_plane_crash466.gif

http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/GOES/IFG12-02452009152.jpg

[SligoBrewer]

I've read speculation that positive lightning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning#Positive_lightning) might do the trick.

That's scary.

[hula4]

it appears there are 3 irish on board also

[John83]

it appears there are 3 irish on board also
Two according to Folha.
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/cotidiano/ult95u574807.shtml

[SkStu]

irish times article says 3 irish confirmed...

horrible way to go it has to be said. I can barely watch a plane crash scene on tv without getting a sick feeling in my stomach. My thoughts go out to the passengers and their families.

[Sheridan]

I read that one of them was an Irish citizen from Belfast, which might be the source of the confusion.

[Lionel Ritchie]

Yep, one from Belfast, one Tipp and one Dub.

[pete]

I think it is always a concern when plane from major airliner goes down as these would be perceived as having the best maintenance & newest planes. When a plane goes in the third world I feel there is a perception the plane was old or not maintained properly.

[Mr Maroon]

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45852000/gif/_45852693_plane_crash2_466.gif

[Den Perry]

A couple of informative images.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45851000/gif/_45851533_plane_crash466.gif

http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/GOES/IFG12-02452009152.jpg


thanks John

[Lionel Ritchie]

...horrible way to go it has to be said. I can barely watch a plane crash scene on tv without getting a sick feeling in my stomach. My thoughts go out to the passengers and their families.

I'll not get too caught up in morbid details and it's little or no consolation to all who've lost loved ones anyway that the end may have been very, very quick.

We may never know what actually happened but the Brazilian Air Force as opposed to Brazilian Air Traffic Control are saying they picked up the automatically generated signals from the plane that indicated multiple electrical short circuits and loss of cabin pressure.

When you add to that info that there was no mayday (that we know of as yet and likely won't now until the black box is retrieved) it may point to a catastrophic cabin failure. In that scenario the end for all those misfortunes will have been about as close to instantaneous as it gets.

[pineapple stu]

Not quick enough that they couldn't send a few text messages home, according to wiki (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Passengers_on_Air_France_Flight_447_sent_text_mess ages_to_family_members_before_plane_disappeared) (quoting a couple of sources).

Cabin pressure sounds the most likely reason alright. Would explain why the pilots didn't radio in. Although if passengers could turn their phones on and send texts, you'd have thought the pilots would have had time to send some manner of radio signal.

[John83]

Odd. I'd have thought they were too far from a base station to do that. Unless this is one of the planes where they allow phones and have equipment to connect them to a network (at least, I think some of them do that now; never been on one that did).

Anyway, it only takes some people a few seconds to send a message as short as the examples given in that link, "I love you" and "I'm afraid", and the pilots may have been busy with the whole plane crashing thing.

[eamo1]

A sick in the head friend of mine said "its like in Lost where the plane goes missing".
Not loooking good,there is some archipelico's(spellings) off the Brazilian coast but they would have hit the water too hard to survive anyway.A sad day.

[pineapple stu]

Anyway, it only takes some people a few seconds to send a message as short as the examples given in that link, "I love you" and "I'm afraid", and the pilots may have been busy with the whole plane crashing thing.
True, but I'd have thought that the first thing you'd do when the plane was crashing was to radio in saying that the plane was crashing. There were three pilots/co-pilots, so (and I don't profess to be a pilot expert or anything) I would have thought two could try stop the plane crashing and one could radio in. Even if, hypothetically, they'd brought the plane to a safe landing in the middle of the Atlantic, that's still worthless without backup help.

[Dodge]

A sick in the head friend of mine said "its like in Lost where the plane goes missing".


In fairness saying it reminds them of "Lost" isn't really sick at all. I'm sure it popped into the head of a huge amount of people.

[pete]

In fairness saying it reminds them of "Lost" isn't really sick at all. I'm sure it popped into the head of a huge amount of people.

Especially when they mentioned islands off the continent...

[passinginterest]

In fairness saying it reminds them of "Lost" isn't really sick at all. I'm sure it popped into the head of a huge amount of people.

First thing I though of and have said it to numerous people, well maybe second thing after "that's awful". I do tend to have a particularly morbid sense of humour though.

[pineapple stu]

Sky News reporting that debris has been found, although it's undetermined what it's from.

[anto1208]

True, but I'd have thought that the first thing you'd do when the plane was crashing was to radio in saying that the plane was crashing. There were three pilots/co-pilots, so (and I don't profess to be a pilot expert or anything) I would have thought two could try stop the plane crashing and one could radio in. Even if, hypothetically, they'd brought the plane to a safe landing in the middle of the Atlantic, that's still worthless without backup help.

Could the short circuit they are blaming have knocked out the radios ?
Or what i think may have happened was the cabin pressure in the **** pit is different to the rest of the plane new security feature after 9/11 so maybe that went the pilots would nod off no one could get in because of the new security doors and the plane crashed.

Either way its pretty horrible

[pineapple stu]

Hee hee - **** pit.

I wouldn't have added a safety feature designed to knock the pilots out first, to be honest. Radio being shorted out is a possibility.

Do black boxed float? Good luck finding it otherwise.

[Schumi]

Do black boxed float? Good luck finding it otherwise.They have radio beacons I think.

[John83]

True, but I'd have thought that the first thing you'd do when the plane was crashing was to radio in saying that the plane was crashing. There were three pilots/co-pilots, so (and I don't profess to be a pilot expert or anything) I would have thought two could try stop the plane crashing and one could radio in. Even if, hypothetically, they'd brought the plane to a safe landing in the middle of the Atlantic, that's still worthless without backup help.
Probably the first thing they're supposed to do in theory, but if you have only seconds and the plane is suddenly pointed in a worryingly vertical direction... I suspect the practice is that you're not going to get anything off.


Could the short circuit they are blaming have knocked out the radios ?
I haven't seen any specifics on the short circuit, so perhaps. Not the transmitter itself - the automated signal got through - but perhaps somewhere nearer the cockpit. Still, a modern aeroplane has a lot of redundancy built in.


Or what i think may have happened was the cabin pressure in the **** pit is different to the rest of the plane new security feature after 9/11 so maybe that went the pilots would nod off no one could get in because of the new security doors and the plane crashed.
Eh? That's some pretty wild speculation. It assumes that cabin pressure dropped in the cockpit but not the main cabin. I don't know if that's even possible.

That aside, if the cockpit door opened into the cabin (I think they do), a large pressure differential would have made it very tough to open the door, regardless of other security measures. Perhaps that's what you meant though - the security measures you're referring to being something like the cockpit being hermetically sealed?

And that aside, I suspect that a plane like that, in a storm, perhaps with no radio, was not going to be saved by a plucky air hostess and a theoretical passenger struggling to get over Macho Grande.

[anto1208]

Hee hee - **** pit.

I wouldn't have added a safety feature designed to knock the pilots out first, to be honest. Radio being shorted out is a possibility.

Do black boxed float? Good luck finding it otherwise.

Dont think they intended it to work like that but with fears of gas attacks in the passenger section the c0ckpit would need to be on a seperate system. That system may have shorted out first.

Im just guessing of course i dont know what happened but they have started to find the wreckage and reports of another plane seeing the sea on fire along the same route.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0602/airfrance.html

[John83]

Do black boxed float? Good luck finding it otherwise.
No. Rated for a month of transmission at the bottom of an ocean though.

[pineapple stu]

Probably the first thing they're supposed to do in theory, but if you have only seconds and the plane is suddenly pointed in a worryingly vertical direction... I suspect the practice is that you're not going to get anything off.
Possibly, but pilots are very well trained in things going very badly wrong (and I know being in the position itself is a different matter). Here's (http://www.planecrashinfo.com/lastwords.htm) a link to radio correspondences of crashing planes (not all fatal); I don't know how representative that is, but it does note that pilots do make radio calls when in trouble. It's been suggested as strange that no radio contact came through, which leads me to believe it must be common enough that radio contact is made.


Dont think they intended it to work like that but with fears of gas attacks in the passenger section the c0ckpit would need to be on a seperate system.
Just thinking actually - that has to be nonsense. Air hostesses go into the cockpit every now and again, and I've been on one flight where the door was left open. I've never noticed any rubber sealing around the door which would surely be necessary to keep two separate pressures. And the logic still doesn't make sense.

[anto1208]

Probably the first thing they're supposed to do in theory, but if you have only seconds and the plane is suddenly pointed in a worryingly vertical direction... I suspect the practice is that you're not going to get anything off.


I haven't seen any specifics on the short circuit, so perhaps. Not the transmitter itself - the automated signal got through - but perhaps somewhere nearer the cockpit. Still, a modern aeroplane has a lot of redundancy built in.


Eh? That's some pretty wild speculation. It assumes that cabin pressure dropped in the cockpit but not the main cabin. I don't know if that's even possible.

That aside, if the cockpit door opened into the cabin (I think they do), a large pressure differential would have made it very tough to open the door, regardless of other security measures. Perhaps that's what you meant though - the security measures you're referring to being something like the cockpit being hermetically sealed?

And that aside, I suspect that a plane like that, in a storm, perhaps with no radio, was not going to be saved by a plucky air hostess and a theoretical passenger struggling to get over Macho Grande.

I would think it would definetly be a different pressure in the cockpit due to terrorist attacks if someone in the cabin released a gas smashed a window let off some small explosion that caused cabin pressure to drop the pilot has to be able to land , the door into the cockpit is not able to be opened from the cabin side again due to terrorist attacks.

But yea all wild speculation on what actually happened.

[John83]

Possibly, but pilots are very well trained in things going very badly wrong (and I know being in the position itself is a different matter).
I know. I guess my point is that it may have been a particularly sudden failure.

[anto1208]

Possibly, but pilots are very well trained in things going very badly wrong (and I know being in the position itself is a different matter). Here's (http://www.planecrashinfo.com/lastwords.htm) a link to radio correspondences of crashing planes (not all fatal); I don't know how representative that is, but it does note that pilots do make radio calls when in trouble. It's been suggested as strange that no radio contact came through, which leads me to believe it must be common enough that radio contact is made.


Just thinking actually - that has to be nonsense. Air hostesses go into the cockpit every now and again, and I've been on one flight where the door was left open. I've never noticed any rubber sealing around the door which would surely be necessary to keep two separate pressures. And the logic still doesn't make sense.


Well the pilot can let her in ;) Im 100% sure that the door can only be opened from the pilots side otherwise a terroist only has to open the door !!

From Wiki ( i know not the best source but )

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

cockpits on large airliners are also physically separated from the cabin.

[pineapple stu]

anto - we need a certain pressure to be able to breathe and function normally. It makes no sense to say that the cockpit normally has a lower pressure than the rest of the aeroplane (as you imply noting that the pilots could nod off first and no-one else - obviously not having nodded off - could get into them); that would mean the pilots - the most important people - are normally on a lower oxygen than the rest of us. I've seen the cabin door opened from the main body of the plane in the last year, and I distinctly recall (admittedly almost 20 years ago) being led into the cockpit of a plane and noticing the same amount of oxygen there.

In accordance with the rules of the forum, can you please provide a link backing up your theory rather than propogating wild speculation?

Edit - link posted in the meantime, thanks. Mentions nothing about potential pressure differences, so I think we can put that theory to bed.

[John83]

anto - we need a certain pressure to be able to breathe and function normally. It makes no sense to say that the cockpit normally has a lower pressure than the rest of the aeroplane (as you imply noting that the pilots could nod off first and no-one else - obviously not having nodded off - could get into them); ...
I think he means that, say, if a cockpit window blew out, the cockpit might be the only part of the plane to lose pressure because the cockpit is substantially separate from the rest of the plane for security reasons.

Anyway, this line of speculation is fairly pointless, and I'd suggest we return to commenting on news as the facts come in.

[pineapple stu]

I know. I guess my point is that it may have been a particularly sudden failure.
Which brings me back to the original point that it wasn't sudden enough that people didn't have time to realise that something was happening, take their phones out of their pockets, turn them on and send texts home.


I think he means that, say, if a cockpit window blew out, the cockpit might be the only part of the plane to lose pressure because the cockpit is substantially separate from the rest of the plane for security reasons.
Hmm. It's possible, although it's not exactly in line with what he was suggesting. I agree with this, though -


Anyway, this line of speculation is fairly pointless, and I'd suggest we return to commenting on news as the facts come in.
- although speculation and gossip is what we as a nation do best.

[anto1208]

anto - we need a certain pressure to be able to breathe and function normally. It makes no sense to say that the cockpit normally has a lower pressure than the rest of the aeroplane (as you imply noting that the pilots could nod off first and no-one else - obviously not having nodded off - could get into them); that would mean the pilots - the most important people - are normally on a lower oxygen than the rest of us. I've seen the cabin door opened from the main body of the plane in the last year, and I distinctly recall (admittedly almost 20 years ago) being led into the cockpit of a plane and noticing the same amount of oxygen there.

In accordance with the rules of the forum, can you please provide a link backing up your theory rather than propogating wild speculation?

Edit - link posted in the meantime, thanks. Mentions nothing about potential pressure differences, so I think we can put that theory to bed.

Stu will you please read what i post. ( ps i like the way you tell me to back up what im saying with links then make your own statements with out any links !!! genius )

1. The security features on the cockpit changed after 9/11 what happened 20 years ago has no bearing at all . The door is now locked from the inside.

http://www.allbusiness.com/transportation-communications/transportation-services/4133778-1.html

Requires cockpit doors to remain locked. The door will be designed to prevent passengers from opening it without the pilot's permission. An internal locking device will be designed so it can be unlocked only from inside the cockpit


2. i didnt say the pilots have lower pressure in the cockpit, i said it may be seperate and if the short circut or what ever happened had caused the pressure in the cockpit to drop the pilots would nod off this could explain the lack of any radio communication but people in the cabin could still send texts. This was only a reply to someone else's suggestion that text messages where sent.

And i did say that it was only my theory on what may have happened same as everyone else is just giving their thoughts on what may have happened as not one single person here knows what happened does that mean that no one can post in this thread ????????.


Now i think i have done enough googling for airplane/cockpit door security features to get me a visit from the FBI.

[pineapple stu]

( ps i like the way you tell me to back up what im saying with links then make your own statements with out any links !!! genius )
I think "I saw" counts as a link. As does "Sky News reports", and the links that I've posted. Your posts were technical assumptions, which is different.

(Also, using punctuation would aid your point not getting lost en route).

Anyways, back on topic.

[anto1208]

I think "I saw" counts as a link. As does "Sky News reports", and the links that I've posted. Your posts were technical assumptions, which is different.

(Also, using punctuation would aid your point not getting lost en route).

Anyways, back on topic.

It actually doesnt. Not when you say things like i saw a door open 20 years ago :rolleyes:

[pineapple stu]

For something as straightforward as a door opening in my presence, it clearly does. And I clearly stated the potential problem with my own comment. (And I saw the door open last year; I was led through the door 20 years ago).

Anyways, back on topic.

[pineapple stu]

Random stat from The (London) Times yesterday - 1966 was the last time a commercial flight was brought down by a storm. Not because storms can't bring planes down, but because pilots tend to fly around them. Mentioned complaints some pilots have had about excessive use of autopilot on modern planes.

[Fr Damo]

Random stat from The (London) Times yesterday - 1966 was the last time a commercial flight was brought down by a storm. Not because storms can't bring planes down, but because pilots tend to fly around them. Mentioned complaints some pilots have had about excessive use of autopilot on modern planes.


Bullsh!t article. Planes (albeit regional ones) are downed all over the Southern area of the united states as a result of wind shear & down bursts at the rate of one every two years. A plane crashed in Leeds with 12 dead as recently as 1995 after taking off from Leeds Bradford Int as it flew through a storm!

If you are taking about storms at 30000ft, then that's a different storey. Consider a 737 at 500kts taking on a cross wind of 150kts while in flight. The only impact would be on a the trolly dolly and her bar service most likley and so unimportant an event. Nothing in that story, sorry.

[pineapple stu]

If you are taking about storms at 30000ft, then that's a different story.
That's possibly the differentiation that was made. It mentioned that small craft come down often enough, but not large ones, which makes this crash so surprising.

[Reality Bites]

The frightening part of the flight remains the exact cause of the crash and the suspicion that it may have been caused by natural events such as turbulence or a lightening strike which in himself seems too innocuous to bring a plane of this size, I am a relatively good flyer but I must admit turbulence does give me the shivers, if anyone has seen the crash scene in Tom Hanks Cast-Away it brings home the horrors of such a catasphore all too realistically, I cannot imagine the horror going through ones mind as a plane plunges from 37000 feet to the Atlantic, I hope most of the passengers had lost counciousness early with cabin pressure failure..

[pete]

I am a relatively good flyer but I must admit turbulence does give me the shivers...

Don't mind the shaking too much within reason but don't like the dropping.

I have always had the impression that larger jets are less likely to have an accident whereas smaller jets (sub 737) are more likely to survive a crash. I have changed my opinion in recent years & I think small (say 70 seats) are the most comfortable & probably bets choice as fly above storms.

[pineapple stu]

If you have an accident at cruising altitude, you're screwed regardless of size (which is probably why a bit of turbulence can be so scary; that and the general feeling that sitting seven miles above rather hard ground is just physically wrong).

Here's a graph (http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm) of when you're most likely to crash and/or die. Very interesting (and re-assuring) site overall actually.

[Ringo]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0605/airfrance.html


The mystery surrounding the crash of an Air France plane off the coast of Brazil has deepened after Brazilian officials revealed that debris pulled from the sea was not from the missing jet.

The search by ships for wreckage from Air France flight AF 477, which came down early Monday as it was flying from Rio to Janeiro to Paris with 228 people on board, is continuing.

'Up to now, no material from the plane has been recovered,' Brigadier Ramon Cardoso, director of Brazilian air traffic control, told reporters in the northeastern city of Recife late last night.

[Den Perry]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0605/airfrance.html


Very strange...

[John83]

Interesting article here:
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/crash-plane-was-flying-too-slowly-to-remain-airborne-1762625.html