Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Monday March 10 2014, @07:10PM   Printer-friendly
from the The-Presses-Keep-Rolling dept.

Papas Fritas writes:

"Bill Palmer, an Airbus A330 captain for a major airline, and author of the book 'Understanding Air France 447.' has an interesting read at CNN on why there have been so few clues about the fate of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, beginning with the lack of a distress call. According to Palmer the lack of a distress call is not particularly perplexing. 'An aviator's priorities are to maintain control of the airplane above all else. An emergency could easily consume 100% of a crew's efforts. To an airline pilot, the absence of radio calls to personnel on the ground that could do little to help the immediate situation is no surprise.'

Reports of a possible course reversal observed on radar could be the result of intentional crew actions but not necessarily says Palmer. During Air France 447's 3-1/2 minute descent to the Atlantic Ocean, it too changed its heading by more than 180 degrees, but it was an unintentional side effect as the crew struggled to gain control of the airplane. The Malaysian flight's last telemetry data, as reported by, shows the airplane at 35,000 feet. Even with a dual engine failure, a Boeing 777 is capable of gliding about 120 miles from that altitude yielding a search area roughly the size of Pennsylvania, with few clues within that area where remains of the aircraft might be. "This investigation may face many parallels to Air France 447, an Airbus A330 that crashed in an area beyond radar coverage in the ocean north of Brazil in June 2009. Like the Air France plane, the Malaysia Airlines aircraft was a state-of-the-art, fly-by-wire airplane (a Boeing 777) with an excellent safety record," says Palmer. 'We will know the truth of what happened when the aircraft is found and the recorders and wreckage are analyzed. In the meantime, speculation is often inaccurate and unproductive.'"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11 2014, @11:56AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11 2014, @11:56AM (#14587)

    The right wing came off in flight. This aircraft had a collision with a Airbus from China eastern airlines a few years ago while taxiing and it took off the last 3 feet of the right wing. This damage was repaired however the maintenance people.may not have checked the wing root for cracks. Over the course of the last two years the small crack developed into a large crack that structurally compromised the aircraft. The proof of this is that the flightradar 24 telemetry shows the aircraft track veered to the right just before losing contact. This would be expected since the left wing is still generating lift and makes the aircraft tumble to the right slightly as it goes down. The high g acceleration may explain the loss of the altitude information in the ADS_B telemetery on the flightradar 24 website (high g and loss of wing damaged avionics).

  • (Score: 2) by gottabeme on Wednesday March 12 2014, @11:51AM

    by gottabeme (1531) on Wednesday March 12 2014, @11:51AM (#15197)

    Maybe, but complete loss of the right wing would cause the aircraft to roll continuously to the right, not simply turn right. It also wouldn't cause loss of electrical power, nor "wing-damaged avionics"). If the wing fell off it would immediately fall behind the aircraft. It might strike the tail or the fuselage on its way back, but it wouldn't take out anything forward of the wing.