Jump to content

Airasia Plane Missing?


CanadaEH

Recommended Posts

Hi Don,

Places such as the Java Sea will have junk at the odd place on the bottom.

Trawling through wartime wrecks in the area reveals the closest was a 630 ton minesweeper at 3-42S 128E, though as usual one will never know what you've found until you can get the Mk1 eye-ball on to it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Surface winds and currents can be found at http://earth.nullschool.net/#2014/12/29/1200Z/ocean/surface/currents/orthographic=-251.39,-2.90,3000 The url to the left is for the currents at 2014/12/29/1200Z, and that portion of the url can be adjusted for the time you want. At present the wind at the surface is most likely having a predominate effect. Check for the correct url once you have opened the page in your browser.

Unfortunately sea currents on nullschool are not updated hourly, as the winds are. If you open the menu by clicking the word earth you will see the date of the most current currents current on the 29th was Dec16th.

So information is not always what it seems ... A problem that is not lost on investigators, I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you suppose it's just a "good defence is a strong offence" attempt?

I would hardly think so.....why would the Indonesia Met Officials attempt to put any "blame" on the weather and thus "defend" the airline?

I think it is all pure speculation by just about everybody who knows about the accident but the only proof that will be reliable will be gleaned from the recorders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hardly think so.....why would the Indonesia Met Officials attempt to put any "blame" on the weather and thus "defend" the airline?

.

I am merely proposing that someone (Indonesian Met, an goverment run office) is trying to deflect blame and possibly avoid early lawsuits by injecting this line of thought about the weather. Air Asia is an interesting structure with separate OC's issued by each state. Air Asia/Indonesia is one of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Landing on water? This accident is getting more interesting. Not sure if I can agree with these experts but as already mentioned in this thread, the CVR/DFR should tell us the complete story.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/experts-say-airasia-flight-8501-landed-safely-in-sea-then-sank/article/422401

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know from recent experience, (LionAir, MH370), that any pronouncements from Indonesia must be read carefully, cautiously and with suspended credibility because they are, without important exception, just posturing and "preparation" as described by some here, rather than actual news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately sea currents on nullschool are not updated hourly, as the winds are. If you open the menu by clicking the word earth you will see the date of the most current currents current on the 29th was Dec16th.

So information is not always what it seems ... A problem that is not lost on investigators, I'm sure.

Thanks for that. I hadn't checked, but I note that the currents are now valid for 06-01-2015, and are being reported at 3-55S 110-00E as "from" 235T @ 0.3m/s. I quoted the "from"; as different from the wind, sea currents are normally recorded as moving in the direction that they flow to. In this case it should be 055T @ 0.3m/s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Don mentioned earlier in this thread, the MAK/IAC produced a report for the BEA during their search for AF447 in which they provided details on a number of incidents they investigated where aircraft suffered Loss of Control at high altitude. In general, the aircraft all impacted the surface within 12 NM of the initial upset, and the furthest distance was where some modicum of control was achieved then lost again.

The current search for the wreckage of QZ8501 has located part of the tail section very close to the LKP(s) i.e. those which I depicted earlier in the thread.

I have gathered the coordinates for the Search and Recovery operations of Day 12 (8 January 2015), and placed them on a SkyVector chart, complete with those LKP(s) I mentioned.

16gxuon.jpg

The net outcome is that whatever happened, the upset was not recovered from, and the PSR data showing a vertical rate of -11,518 ft/min probably says it all. A further reminder, that a search for wreckage always starts at the LKP, bearing in mind that floating objects will have been subject to the effects of currents and winds.

Underwater images taken within the tail section (behind the pressure bulkhead) show the jack-screw for the THS, and the DFDR should be located very close to it. However, there have been no published images of the pressure bulkhead, and the aircraft could well have split just aft of it taking the DFDR with it. The ULB attached is not designed to withstand the forces that the DFDR can, and may well have been damaged and now unservicable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kip Powick,

Simon has been going on about this ADS-B data for a number of days. Tell me how a Primary Surveillance Radar needs barometric data to determine any characteristic of the target it is tracking. ADS-B is the playground of a Secondary Surveillance Radar, and it is reproducing barometric data as provided by the aircraft's transponder.

Both those positions were leaked on day 2 of the search, and it would seem now that they were genuine. Otherwise the person responsible would be better off spending their time winning Lotto!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent graphic Woody, thanks.

The Guardian is reporting tat the pings were "sourced" a long way from the location of the tail but that that location was examined with no trace of metal; we learned quite a bit about ULB's in the MH370 discussion here and elsewhere. We learned that the sonic signals are subject to "bounce", attenuation, and appearances of "nodes" of strength due to reflection by layers of different water temperature all make ULB technology not 100% reliable.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/airasia-planes-tail-lifted-from-seabed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was surprised at how they roughly hauled it over the stern of the recovery tug. It must have caused a lot of additional damage that might mask, or at least make less obvious, any damage incurred in flight or on impact. I would think a crane of some kind would be better than pulling it over the stern like a net full of cod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main fuselage along with the Flight Data Recorders has apparently been located 321.84T x 1.6534 NM (3.062 km) from where the Tail Section was located.

An updated graphic will hopefully show how small the distance was, from what looks like a LOC incident, to the aircraft impacting the surface.

2cqfu6b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...