Air France Flight 447 Disappears?

[Vulcan59]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Hi rs,

At the top of the document is the page number - page 28 of 256 (further down is page 29 of 256). Under the heading "Typ" is the type of messsage - messages of type WRN are warnings, and type FLR are fault reports. Under the heading "Sel", the first 2 digits again indicate the type of message (WN or FR) and then the date (e.g. WN0906010214 indicates warning message received at 0214GMT on the 1st June 2009). The messages are sent in batches, and the sequence within a batch is not meaningful. ATA stands for Air Transport Association and the full list of ATA chapters can be viewed here.

The oldest messages received at 0210GMT is at the bottom of page 29. Under the left-hand column ATA/PH looking at for 34 11/06:

34 11/06 FLR FR0906010210 34111506EFCS2

So the above decodes to:-

34 = Navigation

11 = Sensors Power supply and switching

15 = Pitot Probes

06 = Cruise phase of flight

So your suggestion that it was a serial number is not correct. It is like a more detail fault code.

The link that you gave at angelfire.com is very basic and not very helpful in decoding the above ACARS messages.

 

[mada85]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Q: (L) Questions? (J) What caused the destruction of the Air France flight?

A: Cometary explosion of the Tunguska variety though higher and a bit smaller.

The plane was lost on June 2. Today is June 15. A tunguska type event as stated would result in a large amount of dust in the upper atmosphere. Today in southern England, the weather has been quite strange, with a high level haze which caused weak, watery sunlight. I was reminded of those descriptions from the dark ages of weak sunlight that was not strong enough to cast a shadow. The shadows this morning were not very strong. As the morning progressed, the haze was replaced by massive, towering white clouds that seemed to form very quickly. And now, at 3pm, we have a thunderstorm with heavy rain. The whole sequence of events suggests to me similarities with cloud seeding, i.e., dust particles in the upper atmosphere, moisture condensing around them, followed by heavy rain. Obviously one cannot prove that today's weather and a possible Tungiska type explosion are related, however the sequence of events is suggestive.

 

[RedFox]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

fwiw (and this is a bit of a shot in the dark), should anyone be able to get hold of the raw transmition data (sound), it can be decoded with this software _http://www.acarsd.org/ ....should we not trust the data provided. Like I say though, bit of a long shot (and probably not needed in the long run).

From what I can tell you need actual manuals for decoding the ACARS messages meaning, as all the info I can find online is rather limited. Anyone with easy access to a technical library?

 

[Vulcan59]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Hi Redfox,

I do have access to a technical library but not specifically for the A330 but as far as I know, all commercial aircraft have to follow the FAA/JASC codes.

As far as the ACARS message from AF 447 is concerned, that was what Air France chose to release to the public, so yeah, could have been an altered or "modified" version.

 

[RedFox]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Thanks for that Vulcan, that's exactly what I was trying to find. Was wanting to have a go at deciphering the messages.
Having read the document however, I'm still at a loss as to how you got all of the following?

34 11/06 FLR FR0906010210 34111506EFCS2

So the above decodes to:-

34 = Navigation

11 = Sensors Power supply and switching

15 = Pitot Probes

06 = Cruise phase of flight

From the pdf...
34 = Navigation....that I can see
3411 = Pitot/Static system.....

The rest I can't work out. Its probably not of any great significance, but I am curiouse what I'm missing to work out what the messages mean.
The drive to make the incomprehensible, comprehensible :)

 

[ArdVan]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Just wanted to add this link where news about this accident will be continuously updated:

_http://www.avherald.com

 

[Vulcan59]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Hi Redfox,

I had copied that decode from Airliners forum and assumed that it was correct. Since you brought up the discrepancy, I had to look up the manual here in the office and yes you are right. 11 should decode as Pitot/Static System and 15 as the power supply to that system.

Edit: Added Later

Well, I now have the Aircraft Maintenance Manual for the Airbus in front of me and surprisingly 11 does show as Sensor Power Supply and switching and 15 shows as Pitot/Probes. Why the discrepancy, I have no idea.

My first statement above, I was looking at the Boeing maintenance manual.

 

[Breton]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic


Yemen jet crashes in Indian Ocean
A Yemeni airliner with 153 people on board has crashed in the Indian Ocean near the Comoros archipelago.
_http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8125664.stm

This article mentions the recent air france mishap:

"On 1 June an Air France Airbus 330 travelling from Rio de Janeiro to Paris plunged into the Atlantic, killing all 228 people on board."

Think about the choice of words:

"..plunged into the Atlantic..."

Doesn't this kind of give the impression that the earlier Air France jet fell intact into the ocean? Is there not enough data for the mainstream press to say more accurately instead: "broke apart above the Atlantic"?

However, this could be explained if the powers-that-be prefer that people do not contemplate an upper atmosphere Tunguska-like comet explosion.

I posted this because nowadays I find myself more aware of how the mainstream media's choice of words tries to "redirect" the minds of the masses.

_Breton_

 

[Joe]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Here's a wild theory

The yemen airlines crash was, in some way or other, deliberately provoked and evidence will be available to show that it was caused by mechanical issues in order to better make the claim that the Air France Airbus probably crashed for the same reason.

 

[Vulcan59]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Just to add here. The two aircraft involved, the A330 and the A310 are two very different airplanes. The A330 is a fly by wire airplane versus the A310 which is a conventional mechanical or cable control system.

There is a lengthy article here which argues that perhaps the Airbus should be grounded because of the use of composite tail fin. Boeing airplane do use composites too but not in the tail fins.

The quote below is from the article above:-

In 2001, NASA assessed the state-of-the-art in the design and manufacturing of large composite structures in a paper by Charles E. Harris and Mark J. Shuart, which concluded that:

“Composite structural design and manufacturing technology is not yet fully mature for all applications. There are 3 key factors that contribute to the lack of maturity of the design and manufacturing technology. These factors are the lack of a full understanding of damage mechanisms and structural failure modes, the inability to reliably predict the cost of developing composite structures, and the high costs of fabricating composite structure relative to convention aluminum structure. While the technology required to overcome these uncertainties is under development, these factors are barriers to expanding the application of composites to heavy loaded, primary structure.” (emphasis added) [70]

Shuart states that “all of us (at NASA) are proponents of the effective use of composites in aerospace,” and that the Boeing research and testing experience “makes us feel good.” He believes “in the right material for the right application,” and the main “question is how do you design and meet loads?” [71]

According to Shuart, there are places where it may be inappropriate to use composite materials instead of metal such as where there is a “banging around” or “excessive wear,” as in joints, hinges, or bearings. [72]

Shuart believes it may be useful and prudent to do a “hard scrub,” or thorough review, of the design loads used by Airbus in the design of critical structures in its aircraft. He is of the opinion that “failures are more likely a design, rather than a composite problem.” [73]

Regarding Airbus’s use of composites in rudders, couplers and vertical stabilizers, Shuart said, “What you’re asking is a good question.” [74]

So it seems that the blame will eventually be the failure of composite tail fin excluding everything else.

 

[rs]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Just to add here. The two aircraft involved, the A330 and the A310 are two very different airplanes. The A330 is a fly by wire airplane versus the A310 which is a conventional mechanical or cable control system.

There is a lengthy article here which argues that perhaps the Airbus should be grounded because of the use of composite tail fin. Boeing airplane do use composites too but not in the tail fins.

Interestingly, the rudder failed on the JFK airbus that crashed shortly after 9/11. The eventual result of that investigation was that the problem was "pilot error" because the pilot over corrected the rudder input due to a response to a micro burst.

I didn't buy it at the time and still don't buy it. IMHO, a correctly designed aircraft for commercial use should not "break" due to *any* input by the pilot. The worst case scenario should only be that pilot inputs place the aircraft into an unstable region of flight (i.e. a stall). The idea that a pilot could perform an emergency input to the rudder control and snap off the rudder under "normal" flight conditions is just a cover-up.

Airbus is using composites in its new planes, so they have something to cover up if there is bad news. Also, the FAA certified the airframe that Airbus is building, so in any accident investigation, particularly where there is a huge number of aircraft in the world wide fleet, there is also something to cover up.

Perhaps Boeing has or will discover a new "competitive advantage" in this dire economy?!?!

EDIT:
The only problem I see (in retrospect) is that if you look at the pictures of the AF447 rudder assembly that was recovered, there is no damage to the actual rudder mechanism itself. Instead, it is as if the whole tail just snapped off.

Perhaps TPTB will go in this direction, perhaps not, but now I am thinking that the rudder and/or a focus on composites is the proverbial "red herring".

 

[Joe]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Here's a wild theory

The yemen airlines crash was, in some way or other, deliberately provoked and evidence will be available to show that it was caused by mechanical issues in order to better make the claim that the Air France Airbus probably crashed for the same reason.

Of course, there is also the Boeing Airbus rivalry that has been increasing for the past few years that maybe should be considered here. Perhaps several agendas are being serviced at once.

 

[mamadrama]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Here's the latest press release from AP

Findings on Air France Crash Released AP

LE BOURGET, France (July 2) -- An intact Air France Flight 447 slammed belly first into the Atlantic Ocean at a very high speed, a top French investigator said Thursday, adding that problems with the plane's speed sensors were not the direct cause of the crash.
Alain Bouillard, who is leading the investigation into the June 1 crash for the French accident agency BEA, says the speed sensors, called Pitot tubes, were "a factor but not the only one."
"It is an element but not the cause," Bouillard told a news conference in Le Bourget outside Paris. "Today we are very far from establishing the causes of the accident."
The Airbus A330-200 plane was flying from Rio de Janeiro to Paris when it went down with 228 people on board in a remote area of the Atlantic, 930 miles off Brazil's mainland and far from radar coverage.
Skip over this content
Tragedy Over the AtlanticEraldo Peres, AP11 photos An Air France flight that went down June 1 plunged vertically into the Atlantic and did not break into pieces mid-air as previously thought, an airline investigator said Thursday. Meanwhile, the search for the plane's black box voice and data recorders was extended to July 10. Here, workers unload debris from Air France Flight 447 June 14 in Recife, Brazil.(Note: Please disable your pop-up blocker)

The BEA released its first preliminary findings on the crash Thursday, calling it one of history's most challenging plane crash investigations. Yet the probe, which has operated without access to the plane's flight data and voice recorders, appears to have unveiled little about what really caused the accident.
"Between the surface of the water and 35,000 feet, we don't know what happened," Bouillard admitted. "In the absence of the flight recorders, it is extremely difficult to draw conclusions."
One of the automatic messages emitted by the Air France plane indicates it was receiving incorrect speed information from the external monitoring instruments, which could destabilize the plane's control systems. Experts have suggested those external instruments might have iced over.
The Pitots have not been "excluded form the chain that led to the accident," he said.
Bouillard said the plane "was not destroyed in flight" and appeared to have hit "belly first," gathering speed as it dropped thousands of feet through the air.
He said investigators have found "neither traces of fire nor traces of explosives."
Bouillard said life vests found among the wreckage were not inflated, suggesting that passengers were not prepared for a crash landing in the water. The pilots apparently also did not send any mayday calls.
He said there was "no information" suggesting a need to ground the world's fleet of more than 600 A330 planes as a result of the crash.
"As far as I'm concerned there's no problem flying these aircraft," he said.
A burst of automated messages emitted by the plane before it fell gave rescuers only a vague location to begin their search, which has failed to locate the plane's black boxes in the vast ocean expanse. The chances of finding the flight recorders are falling daily as the signals they emit fade. Without them, the full causes of the tragic accident may never be known.
The black boxes — which are in reality bright orange — are resting somewhere on an underwater mountain range filled with crevasses and rough, uneven terrain. Bouillard said the search for the plane's black boxes has been extended by 10 days and will continue through July 10.
The remote location, combined with the mystery of what happened to the plane — the pilots had either no time or no radio frequency to make a mayday call — makes the inquiry exceptionally challenging.
Bouillard said French investigators have yet to receive any information from Brazilian authorities about the results of the autopsies on the 51 bodies recovered from the site.
Families of the victims met with officials from BEA, Air France and the French transport ministry before the report was released Thursday. An association of families addressed a letter to the CEO of Air France, Pierre-Henri Gourgeon, demanding answers to several questions about the plane.
Investigators should have an easier time recovering debris and black boxes in the crash of a Yemeni Airbus 310 with 153 people on board that went down Tuesday just nine miles (14.5 kilometers) north of the Indian Ocean island-nation of Comoros.
Vandore reported from Paris. Associated Press writers Cecile Brisson at Le Bourget and Angela Charlton in Paris contributed to this report.

 

[kenney]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

i would prolly never have noticed this had I not found the Cass site due to a session that answered questions about the air france flight that went down last month. but the other day another air bus went down in the indian ocean ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31638822/ns/world_news-africa ) .

this story made drudge report, msn news, and other new sites that collect top stories... for about three hours. which I found, well, telling for lack of a better word. News sites like that usually, so I have found, delight in retaining stories of carnage on their page for as long as they can. Why take this one down so suddenly?

a google search shows most all of the run of the mill news agencies had some coverage of it. but not a priority, i could list the seemingly mindless stories that took presidence, but I am sure you all understand my meaning.

things that struck me were that this flight had a lot of french on it and that it is almost directly in line with the last crash (they both appear to have happened almost directly on the equator) and they appear to have happened for no tenable reason.

welp that is the thought, more of an itch.

 

[Breton]

Re: Air France Plane Goes Down Over Atlantic

Is there not enough data for the mainstream press to say more accurately instead: "broke apart above the Atlantic"?

Now I see from the recent news articles that somebody at least does not think the data points more to a break up in the air, (or wishes the public to think so) and now the lead French Investigator, Alain Bouillard, is giving an explanation that I can imagine the PTB (powers that be) would prefer, instead of cometary causes.

As posted above by Black Swan:

LE BOURGET, France (July 2) -- An intact Air France Flight 447 slammed belly first into the Atlantic Ocean at a very high speed
…

Also:

Bouillard said the plane "was not destroyed in flight" and appeared to have hit "belly first," gathering speed as it dropped thousands of feet through the air.

Pretty strongly said above: "not destroyed in flight"!

Associated Press
Published: July 2, 2009
A French investigator says Air France Flight 447 did not break up in flight but plunged vertically into the Atlantic Ocean. Alain Bouillard, leading the investigation into the June 1 crash for the French accident investigation agency BEA, also says life vests found among the wreckage of the plane were not inflated.
[…]

AP says "belly first", then later “vertically”: is that the same thing? I suppose it is, but it is hard sometimes to think what “vertical” means when talking about a vehicle that travels in 3D space (I only drive a car).

While on the subject, though, I am not a pilot nor do I know much about the science of flying, but why does my mind seem to rebel at the physics of a plane slamming belly first into the Atlantic? Is something at a subconscious level trying to tell me something? Do planes crash belly first or nose first? What has past history of plane crashes tell us? Does this contradict the other data we have before us? Well, it may be nothing.

Air France jet plunged at high speed into Atlantic
Last Updated: Thursday, July 2, 2009
CBC News
The pilot of a doomed Air France flight was flying with neither the help of the autopilot nor information about the plane's speed and direction when it slammed into the Atlantic Ocean a month ago, French officials said Thursday.
[…]
Lead investigator Alain Bouillard said the plane is not thought to have broken up in the air but plunged steeply into the ocean at an extremely high speed, because no large pieces of the aircraft have yet been found.

The aircraft "was not destroyed in flight," he said. "The plane seems to have hit the surface of the water on its flight trajectory with a strong vertical acceleration."

Premise alert: is it really so that a break up in the air necessarily means that there would be LARGE pieces? What would happen in a Tunguska-like event in the upper atmosphere? If this was real news, and if this was real investigation, they should just be reporting that they did not find LARGE pieces, and leave it at that, and not jump to the conclusion that it hit the water at high speed intact. Right?

Among the small pieces of debris that have been retrieved, there is no indication fire or explosion, he said.

This is the “no fire” therefore “no break up in the air” premise.

26/06/2009
Air France crash probe to release initial report on July 2
The French agency probing the mid-Atlantic crash of an Air France jet said Thursday it would release an initial report on its findings on 2 July.
[…]
The cause of the disaster is not known. Speculation has swirled about whether the plane broke up in the air, perhaps from strong turbulence, or on hitting the water.

At least this news item (before Bouillard's report) seems to allow for the possibility it broke up in the air, unlike the others.

Jet explosion 'unlikely'
Recife, Brazil
June 15, 2009
DEBRIS recovered from Air France flight 447 seems to indicate the jet plunged suddenly into the Atlantic Ocean and did not explode in the sky, Brazilian experts say.

Security consultant Captain Ronaldo Jenkins told O Globo he had identified a safety vest and an internal covering which showed no trace of fire or smoke, suggesting no explosion.

"On the photographs published in recent days, where we can see debris from the plane floating in the water and a restroom door, there were also no signs of fire," he added.
[...]
Former pilot Ari Germano told O Globo that photographs released on Friday showed crew seats were folded with the seatbelts hanging down, which, he said, "suggests that the crew was moving about the passenger cabin. If there had been an alert or a warning about a pending risk, the crew would have been seated. They did not have the time to do anything." AFP

It is bit of a simplistic premise that “only an explosion”, such as from an explosive device (bomb, missle) that causes fire, would cause a plane to break up. It is a faulty premise when Tunguska-like events are possible too. And an open minded investigator might consider even other possibilities.


The part about "crew seats were folded with the seatbelts hanging down" seems to me to be at odds with the belly slamming into the ocean theory put forward by the investigator, Bouillard. That is, if that belly slamming into the ocean meant that crew had time to get back to their seats and strap themselves in: it is certainly possible they did not have that time even if they did not break up in the air. Maybe. But my mind keeps thinking "belly slamming into water" = plane was mostly level = crew would have gotten into their seats. Maybe.

Crash bodies show fractures: Brazil official
Stan Lehman
June 18, 2009
Bodies recovered in the Air France disaster show multiple fractures in the legs, hips and arms, a Brazilian official said on Wednesday. Experts said such injuries suggest the plane broke up in the air.

[…]

Hmmm… is it just me, or have I seen very little of this kind of article published widely. It would suggest AP has been doing a disservice to say “plunged into the Atlantic” so knowingly!

Autopsies suggest jet broke up in sky
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
June 18, 2009
SAO PAULO (AP) — Autopsies have revealed fractures in the legs, hips and arms of Air France Flight 447 victims, injuries that — along with the large pieces of wreckage pulled from the Atlantic — strongly suggest the plane broke up in the air, experts say.
[…]
The paper also reported that some victims were found with little or no clothing, and had no signs of burns.
“In an in-air break up like we are supposing here, the clothes are just torn away,” said Jack Casey, an aviation safety consultant in Washington, D.C. and a former accident investigator
[…]

Lack of burn evidence would not necessarily rule out an explosion, said John Goglia, a former member of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

I think the news article above could be spread around a bit more by AP, don't ya think?

In that last article, I finally I found someone quoted as saying "Lack of burn evidence would not necessarily rule out an explosion". It is a statement that you don’t see very often in the news reports, and a statement that the French investigation probably does not like. However we still await someone to be brave to publish something more – like the possibility of cometary Tunguska-like events.

_Breton_