Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
Malaysian 777 missing >

Malaysian 777 missing

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

Malaysian 777 missing

Old 03-25-2014, 04:36 PM
  #841  
Gets Weekends Off
 
KC10 FATboy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 3,483
Default

Originally Posted by SyGunson View Post
Please can you be more specific which facts this does not match in your opinion, rather than offering a blanket dismissal?

The final manouvere sent by transponder just after passing waypoint IGARI was a turn west to 040 degrees:

The last location tracked by Flightradar24 was
Time UTC: 17:21:03
Lat: 6.97
Lon: 103.63
Alt: 35000
Speed: 471 knots
Heading: 40

If an electrical problem developed then that would explain a turnback southwards

If the electrical problem led to a fire in cockpit O2 lines then that would explain sudden incapacitation.

Please be more specific which facts this theory does not match?

INMARSAT Doppler tracking confirms now that the aircraft flew a steady course at a steady altitude over 30,000ft
I think your theory is plausible. I just read the Egypt Air 667's accident report. That fire quickly developed and spread throughout the cockpit. Those pictures are shocking.

Additionally, Boeing knows of 29 known cockpit fires caused by electrical arcing in the cockpit windows. In many of those cases, flames were present. One American Airlines jet used two fire bottles on a window fire during an Atlantic Ocean crossing.

I heard on the news that ATC queried the crew several times about what altitude they were at prior to the handoff. Either they were lying (knowingly switched transponder off), or there was a system failure already in progress.
KC10 FATboy is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 04:47 PM
  #842  
Gets Weekends Off
 
galaxy flyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 4,849
Default

Anyone is still thinking of a successful ditching should look at this Telegraph video from a ship in the IO.

GF


mod note: this was later proven to be taken from a tanker in a hurricane back in Jan 2013. Journalistic integrity!

Last edited by 80ktsClamp; 03-25-2014 at 07:42 PM.
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 04:48 PM
  #843  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 29
Default

Originally Posted by MEMA300 View Post
If the aircraft had a fire like the EgyptAir 777 and killed the crew it would not fly on for hours or hours. At least I do not think the aircraft would stay together for that long. At some point when you get a whole in the nose of the aircraft with all the drag it either becomes aerodynamically unstable or begins to slowly break apart.


You mean it would break apart after explosive decompression like those of United Airlines B771, flight 811 in 1989, or like Aloha Airlines B732, Flight 243 in 1988?



I recall American Airlines flight 96 (Windsor incident) when a DC-10 lost its rear cargo door and structural falure in the rear fuselage and continued to fly to a safe landing

Also the British Airways BAC-111, Flt 5390 in 1990, in which the the cockpit windscreen blew out and the captain was sucked out?

How about the TAM Airlines Fokker 100 in 2001, when cabin was punctured by shrapnel from an uncontained engine failure?

Please can you provide conclusive proof that an airliner will not continue to fly after structural failure?
SyGunson is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 04:55 PM
  #844  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 29
Default

Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy View Post
I think your theory is plausible. I just read the Egypt Air 667's accident report. That fire quickly developed and spread throughout the cockpit. Those pictures are shocking.

Additionally, Boeing knows of 29 known cockpit fires caused by electrical arcing in the cockpit windows. In many of those cases, flames were present. One American Airlines jet used two fire bottles on a window fire during an Atlantic Ocean crossing.

I heard on the news that ATC queried the crew several times about what altitude they were at prior to the handoff. Either they were lying (knowingly switched transponder off), or there was a system failure already in progress.
Thank you, my belief regards the transponder is either they were in a SSR radar black spot, or they were taking advantage of a radar black spot to make an illegal shortcut from IGARI to BIBAN bypassing BITOD, or that a creeping electrical failure disabled their transponder altogether.

That after an emergency turn back to southerly heading the aircraft kept flying on autopilot with crew expired.
SyGunson is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 05:03 PM
  #845  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 29
Default

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer View Post
If a fire like Egyptair's , the fuselage, under pressurization and flight loads would have failed quite quickly. I don't see it flying for hours.

If you look at the stats for air carrier accidents durn cruise flight, suicide or terrorism is foremost. Three suicides in the last 15 years--Egypt Air, SilkAir and LAM last year in Mozambique.

GF
I read a comment recently that pilot suicide in Silk Air has since been disproven, sorry i failed to note the source.

That being so I can only think of one airline pilot suicide being the JAL DC-8-62 which a co-pilot slammed into the sea short of a runway (Narita?) back in the late sixties (1968?)

The Egyptair flight 990 crash of 1999 was hotly disputed by Egyptian crash investigators and I have personally never accepted the NTSB findings from that crash. The Captain entered the cockpit and asked the co-pilot if he had closed the throttles... that and an uttered prayer are the only real proof. I believe electrical failure is another possibility.
SyGunson is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 05:08 PM
  #846  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 29
Default

Originally Posted by F4E Mx View Post
In thinking further one of the first things the crew would do in case of a fire in the cockpit would be to depressurize, so it wouldn't matter if the cockpit fire burned through the skin or not as far as pressurization is concerned.
The scenario which I suggested was that they were dealing with one problem (electrical) when another developed (decompressio/cockpit fire).

You are talking about a cool calm situation under control when dealing with only one problem at a time and not about a cascading multiple series of issues.

Useful consciousness at 35,000ft would be 30-60 seconds so you're telling us in a confusing cascading series of event it wouldn't matter cos the guys would just pull out the QRH and methodically work through solutions?
SyGunson is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 05:25 PM
  #847  
Gets Weekends Off
 
afterburn81's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: CR7
Posts: 1,258
Default

Originally Posted by SyGunson View Post
The scenario which I suggested was that they were dealing with one problem (electrical) when another developed (decompressio/cockpit fire).

You are talking about a cool calm situation under control when dealing with only one problem at a time and not about a cascading multiple series of issues.

Useful consciousness at 35,000ft would be 30-60 seconds so you're telling us in a confusing cascading series of event it wouldn't matter cos the guys would just pull out the QRH and methodically work through solutions?
Please don't take this the wrong way but do you fly commercially for a living? Perhaps retired from flying airliners? Just wondering. There's book smart. Then there's street smart. I see a lot of book smart in you. But………. well never mind.
afterburn81 is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 05:48 PM
  #848  
Gets Weekends Off
 
KC10 FATboy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 3,483
Default

Originally Posted by afterburn81 View Post
Please don't take this the wrong way but do you fly commercially for a living? Perhaps retired from flying airliners? Just wondering. There's book smart. Then there's street smart. I see a lot of book smart in you. But………. well never mind.
I don't think that's fair. I think his comments are very interesting and plausible. I knew of the Egypt Air B772 fire, but I've never read about it. After reading the accident report, that fire erupted and was out of control in seconds as is was fed by the FO's oxygen line.

Since you brought it up, what is he missing that doesn't make him street smart?
KC10 FATboy is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 05:57 PM
  #849  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 240
Default

If there was an electrical problem it may be related to a possible oxygen-fed fire. In the Egyptair accident the fire was caused by a wire chafing inside the oxygen hose. The AD note replaces the hose with one that does not have a metallic wire. If the wire was shorting out you would expect a period of heating of the surrounding area (including wire bundles?) before the fire actually broke out.
F4E Mx is offline  
Old 03-25-2014, 06:32 PM
  #850  
Gets Weekends Off
 
galaxy flyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 4,849
Default

Sy,

None of those structurally damaged planes would have flown for about 7 hours, as has been pretty much proved by INMARSAT engineering analysis. None failed to send out radio distress calls, none has their transponders disabled.

You seem to have a preconceived bias against human intervention, esp suicide by pilot (s). The NTSB opinions on both Egypt Air and Silk Air were pretty convincing on suicide with more data than you presented.

GF
galaxy flyer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Roll Inverted and Pull
Major
8
03-04-2008 06:36 PM
boost
Cargo
1
02-01-2008 03:38 PM
Dog Breath
Hangar Talk
8
09-13-2007 08:48 AM
madfoxjay
Part 135
8
09-06-2007 08:25 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread