Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Air France Flight Missing

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
UK papers now saying French suspect that the pilots stalled the airplane. I'm not a commercial / ATP (only PPL) so don't understand the aerodynamics of high altitude / high speed stalls. Do know you slow down to aircraft specific speed to penetrate turbulence.

Would appreciate your insights...

Thanks,
LAFF
 
In a jet like this that reverted to a few different flight law programs, I think it is very hard to say the pilots did it. (Yet)
But in the end it is always easier for the living to blame the deceased.
 
UK papers now saying French suspect that the pilots stalled the airplane. I'm not a commercial / ATP (only PPL) so don't understand the aerodynamics of high altitude / high speed stalls. Do know you slow down to aircraft specific speed to penetrate turbulence.

Would appreciate your insights...

Thanks,
LAFF
Without the FDR there is no possible way they can know that for certain. The ACARS doesn't transmit continuous instrumentation feed.

The warning system might have sent a stall warning message through ECAM, and that might have been in one of the final few ACARS bursts, but whether it was before or after the aircraft started coming apart, there's no way to tell.

Incidentally, in a thunderstorm penetration scenario, it's very possible to encounter a severe updraft shear, stabilize the plane's pitch and relative airspeed for that vertical shaft, then have it suddenly become a down-draft / tailwind shear and all your relative airspeed drops off. If you were slowed back to turbulence pentration speed or Va, especially at high altitude, theoretically you would then stall the plane from the sudden loss of relative airspeed, but that wouldn't be considered a pilot-induced stall, that would be pure weather/windshear related (windshear can exist at any altitude and can exist both vertically and horizontally).
 
Found this kind of interesting.

"Investigators also likely will explore a possible structural weakness in the A330's wing because it hit an AF A321 while taxing at Paris Charles de Gaulle in August 2006. Damage to the A330 was considered minor at the time but the A321's tail sustained substantial damage."

from the Air Transport World

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Airbus that crashed over long island have some issue during it's manufacture? I remember reading somewhere that the tail had been damaged at the factory and that was a major contributing factor. Anyone?

If that's the case, not good for Airbus.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Airbus that crashed over long island have some issue during it's manufacture? I remember reading somewhere that the tail had been damaged at the factory and that was a major contributing factor. Anyone?

If that's the case, not good for Airbus.

Here's some NTSB copypasta for ya:

No deviations from the original design and materials specifications were found in the vertical stabilizer (including the repair to the left center lug area that was made during manufacturing) that would have contributed to the vertical stabilizer separation. Also, a detailed inspection of flight 587’s wreckage, including an extensive examination of the vertical stabilizer main attachment fitting fractures, revealed that each main attachment fitting had features that were consistent with overstress fracture and exhibited no evidence of fatigue features or other preexisting degradation.

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404.pdf
 
UK papers now saying French suspect that the pilots stalled the airplane. I'm not a commercial / ATP (only PPL) so don't understand the aerodynamics of high altitude / high speed stalls. Do know you slow down to aircraft specific speed to penetrate turbulence.

Would appreciate your insights...

Thanks,
LAFF


Vb is the turbulence penetration speed and is usually right about the same as LRC (long range cruise) at those altitudes and weights so no adjustment is usually required. Just hang on.
 
Last edited:
Most airlines don't teach very much when it comes to radar, unfortunately. It's becoming a lost artform.

I went through one green echo on my first night flight in the ITCZ last summer. That was also the last time I'll do that.



Rant time, here: Why the heck can't we have a real time satellite uplink of radar and sat imagery?? The technology is easily there, it's not very expensive and freaking Cessnas have it and 99% of airliners don't. Heck on our PTV equipped planes the passengers have better "big picture" weather than we have.

-Good point.

The answer is: Airlines are run by the cheapest bastards in the history of cheap bastards-thes guys will not spend any money (except for each other's bonuses) if they are not forced to do so.
-I evny the avionics capabilities most Cirrus and Cessna guys have every time they talk about it!
 
UK papers now saying French suspect that the pilots stalled the airplane. I'm not a commercial / ATP (only PPL) so don't understand the aerodynamics of high altitude / high speed stalls. Do know you slow down to aircraft specific speed to penetrate turbulence.

Would appreciate your insights...

Thanks,
LAFF


Yea, just like you want to keep your 172 in the green arc on the airspeed indicator in turbulence.
 
I hope they can figure this one out, but I would bet that most of it will remain a mystery.

probably will be the most intensely investigated aircraft accident in history. The recovered parts of the Titanic from that depth so they should be able to get the recorders.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top