Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jan 21, 2015 5:34:09 GMT 1
Just typing "Airasia" in google brings up some rather bizarre suggestions now...
|
|
|
Post by FabienA380 on Jan 21, 2015 5:47:11 GMT 1
That's what I've seen on TV here actually, they were saying that the plane was climbing 3 times faster than usual speeds, just at about fighter jet speeds...........
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Jan 29, 2015 14:29:17 GMT 1
ADS-B data seems to indicate something like a short extreme climb with more than 12000 feet per minute climb rate at altitude. That is not sustainable so after like a minute they must have stalled and fell down without recovery. I hope the recorded data will be shared in some open and not censored way and soon please.
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jan 30, 2015 4:17:31 GMT 1
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Jan 30, 2015 14:41:22 GMT 1
Whatever is discovered by the investigators, lots of people will nevertheless say that this accident was caused by some "flaws in the Airbus fly-by-wire system" as evidenced by the "fact" that the accident is "a repeat of AF 447".
I wonder what caused that aircraft to climb as it seems to have ... I don't think the pilots wanted to do that.
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jan 31, 2015 5:57:28 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Feb 2, 2015 10:47:48 GMT 1
The interim report seems to be out. However it is not published until now.
As sensors can fail, ice up for example, and confuse many important systems and procedures down the line wouldn't it be possible to have some sort of a "panic button" (like some fighters have) initiating some "basic flight"-modus that just puts the wings on the horizon with a slight climb and sets a "safe" speed while the pilots get time to sort things out? That's certainly better than to just switch off computers at will and create make shift procedures under stress.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 2, 2015 15:15:56 GMT 1
Hmm ... - I don't trust leaks ; the lack of official information on what actually happened makes any suggestion premature ; - I am sure any easy fix would have already been implemented ...
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Feb 3, 2015 14:07:47 GMT 1
I think it is not acceptable, to keep available facts a secret. This is the internet age and a major accident in the public interest. It seems to be clear that the aircraft involved has had a history of FAC-computer glitches. I perfectly understand that there is no final verdict only weeks after a crash. But the FDR data (not the CVR) at least must be shared with the public. Otherwise this will fire back and the entire industry will lose public trust. Do it like the Americans do it please and be more open with that investigation. No wonder that Indonesia doesn't invite the NTSB to work with them on it. It should not be up to a local government to restrict data at will.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 3, 2015 15:53:46 GMT 1
I disagree here. Crash investigations are ruled by the Chicago convention, and interim reports are for interested parties only, unless the country leading the investigation wishes to publish them.
This investigation is not intended to fuel the media, its sole purpose is to improve flight safety. There is no need for early statements that might be countradicted later - anyhow we'll know the whole story within a few months. If no immediate step is advised (such as checks for instance), then probably there is no urgency to do anything.
|
|