8 min after takeoff. hope all ends well.
Crash: Indonesia Asia A320 over Java Sea on Dec 28th 2014, aircraft went missing believed to have impacted waters Looks like they were trying to fly around weather by climbing from FL320 to FL380 A radar screen shot shows the A/C at FL363 with a ground speed of 353 Kts Shades of AF447??????
Yeah. Maybe like AF. There typically aren't strong high altitude winds in that part of the world, so GS is close to TAS. At those altitudes IAS is quite low compared to TAS. While I have no experience in the A320 or am I familiar with its cruising speeds, I'll try and equate what I know about 747 speeds to this. At 32000, Mach .84 would be around 307 indicated At 36000, Mach .84 would be around 279 indicated. So assuming the wind didn't change much between those altitudes (it probably didn't), then the GS loss shown on the radar display (470 - 353) of 117 kts would probably put them right close to stall speed. This 117 kts GS would probably equate to around 80 or 90 kts IAS. So for the 747, 279 - 90 = 189. That's slow. And for those who don't fly in weather much or think that radar makes it easy, it does't. Sure, when there are isolated cells, weather radar does a good job showing what's out there. But when there is a lot of outflow and significant clouds besides the thunderstorms, it can be a real challenge. I'd have to say some of my most challenging flying is without a doubt thunderstorm avoidance. I'd take heavy crosswinds or foggy days over days (especially nights!) flying in convective activity. Some countries don't have radar. It's not always easy getting your clearance to deviate. At 480 kts (typical cruise GS), you cover 8 miles a minute. 5 mins getting a clearance covers 40 miles. Anyways, I'm not sure what happened here and am not trying to defend the pilots. It's just a lot of times after a crash you here someone saying that he shouldn't have flown into that. It's not always that easy. Radar screens can become quite "red". And once you're in heavy precip, it's hard for the radar to show you anything. Don't mean to rant, but I'm in Kansas City visiting relatives and don't have much to do. So may be posting a lot in the next week!
What Lou said about TRWs. As advanced as we are in aviation, a thunderstorm is nothing to be trifled with. They can destroy an airplane with turbulence. The precip can be so heavy it can drown a turbine engine out. Updrafts and downdrafts can exceed 10,000 feet per minute. No fun in an Airbus on a dark and stormy night.
In the intertropical convergence zone ala AF 447.... No wreckage yet but some reported oil slicks. I hope they find it tomorrow.....
Hope it was not a hold full back stick until impact kind of accident. Flying near the coffin corner requires really knowing what you are doing and delicate handling.
To lose 80 - 90 kts IAS, not sure how that happens. Of course if probe icing gave unreliable high speed indications, the autothrottle may have pulled power back, thus the airspeed loss. Like AF. And in the Airbus the throttles stay in one place even though the power is being reduced. Another thought on the airspeed loss....I'm assuming the radar shows forward track groundspeed. An object descending at a very high angle and high rate of speed would probably show a relatively slow GS return. In other words, an object falling straight down would show a ground speed of 0.
Wow. I dont know about Lou, but when I go back for recurrent, Im hand flying as much as possible and ask for the crazy scenarios. Im kinda getting bored with the standard checkride prep. Give me raw data approaches with heavy cross winds. I also try to recreate the latest crash scenarios. Last time I went, we tried to take off with full forward trim to possibly simulate the Boston GIV crash (you can). I truly ope something is leaned form this one to pass along to the flying community.
What is the coincidence? That he was french AND well qualified? (sorry for the pun) Back to the topic: Wreckage spotted in the Indonesian sea has just been confirmed at the minute by Indonesian officials as "being indeed the Air Asia Airbus". http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/12/30/govt-confirms-debris-airasia.html Rgds
Indonesian TV just aired (graphic) video of a headless woman's body floating in the sea. They've obviously found the crash site. Very sad.
At least forty bodies have been now found on location, which is now without doubt the site of the crash. Rgds
"On Dec 30th 2014 Indonesia's Navy reported that Navy ships have recovered more than 40 bodies. A Navy Admiral later corrected the earlier statement of a Navy spokesman stating that three bodies have been recovery by Navy ships, not 40 as reported earlier." Crash: Indonesia Asia A320 over Java Sea on Dec 28th 2014, aircraft lost height and impacted waters
BBC news is reporting the flight went through a thunderstorm that was over 600 miles across, and that the aircraft should NOT have flown through that. Looking more like weather brought it down, so the next question, is it the pilots fault ?? I know its his responsibility, but if he is not allowed to alter course around the storm what are his choices ?
Let's not jump to conclusions quite yet because airplane accidents always focus on the "root cause" analysis. The weather may have been a factor but it could have been a never before seen fault in the design the came through via the weather combination. Example: BAA 38 incident in Heathrow. I've traveled a lot last year and looks like I have some coming up soon so I am hoping to see what the verdict is (granted it will take quite some time).
So ridiculous. That would be a thunderstorm almost twice the size of Arizona! An area of thunderstorms that covers 600 miles sounds better.
Actually maybe 4 times the size of Arizona. I'll bet there were other airplanes in the same area when it went down. I haven't followed this very closely, but didn't they have to await a clearance to either deviate or climb? Assuming that was due to traffic. The thunderstorms in that area (tropical) are typically not as bad as frontal or steady state thunderstorms. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't try and go through one. But that said, they typically have heavy precip with less wind speed and turbulence than frontal storms. I'd like to think there's more to this other than the fact he flew into a thunderstorm.
Looks like there might have been some typical journalistic hyperbole going on as the BBC have removed the interview I saw. Now they are reporting "thunder clouds" over the area with a satellite image. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-30631968
CVR has now been recovered as well. Edit: They've found the fuselage: On Jan 14th 2015 Indonesia's SAR announced that a large portion of the aircraft, sized 30 by 10 by 3 meters with a wing still attached, has been discovered by Singaporean ship RSS Swift. The large part is located about 3000 meters from the tail section of the aircraft and about 800 meters from the CVR. Due to current and visibility divers have not been dispatched to the wreckage yet. Fishermen discovered and recovered two more bodies bringing the total to 50 bodies recovered so far.
That's a pretty good distance from one another, but I guess that if the tail didn't sink right away it could drift a good distance from the fuselage, which would probably sink pretty quickly. With two big parts in the same general area you would think that would indicate that the aircraft didn't break up in flight.
