Maybe that is just the authorities managing expectations at this stage. It will certainly not be easy to locate the orange "black" boxes, but with all the technology available today it should nevertheless be possible. I am certain that Airbus has an extremely great interest in getting to the root of the problem and that will only be possible if the FDR (Flight Data Recorder) and CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) are recovered.

Possible yes. Probable? I don't know.

Remember we're talking of an estimated debris line of 60 miles and a water depth (average) around 2'500 meters. Tridimensionally speaking that is a huge amount of water to tow a TPL through. And the underwater locator beacon only works for 30 days.

I agree entirely. However, it is also very early days which is why I felt the statement was more in the realm of expectation management (i.e. the chances of finding and recovering the boxes is really slim, so don't hold your breath) rather than a flat "this will remain a mystery".

I believe they have a month to recover the boxes. Less than a week ago, Air France apparently received a bomb threat ( ABC and here ).

First of all I said that it wasn't proven that they were RR engines- in fact they aren't they are GE engines. Secondly the guy (Tim Vasquez)who wrote the analysis that I Posted has been heralded by many as having the most insightful opinion. Anyway I know someone who is working on the problem, but I suppose I'd better keep it to myself- would you have preferred that I said - it was kind of near the Bermuda Triangle? I guess we will never know, but still this ice accretion worries me and others Like David L Hagen: Further to ice causing flameouts see: High Altitude Engine Flame-Outs By Patrick R. Veillette, Ph.D. , Business & Commercial Aviation, July 23, 2007 In the past, it was thought that high-altitude ice particles — particles, not hail — would harmlessly bounce off wings and engine component surfaces and would not result in any ice buildup, either on the wing or in the engine. Recently it has been discovered that this past assumption may be wrong. Whether this discovery will provide an answer for the Beechjet engine flameouts hasn’t been definitively stated right now. However, the findings by several highly qualified research teams are quite eye-opening and have caused many of the engine manufacturers and FAA certification engineers to reconsider engine certification criteria.One of the significant findings of this research is quite surprising. Several researcher teams have learned that those high-altitude ice particles can accrete on static components inside the engine’s core even where the air temperature is significantly warmer than freezing. This interior form of engine icing can grow to such size that it blocks enough of the airflow through the engine’s core flow and adversely affects the operability. This ice accretion could eventually detach from those internal components and go directly into the high-pressure compressor or combustor, causing potential surge or flameout. Unfortunately, detecting this condition prior to such an event is almost impossible because the particles can enter the engine core without leaving ice accretion on the wing, engine inlet and fan components. So the first indication to the pilot is a significant rollback in engine rpm and sometimes complete flameout. . . .According to “The Ice Particle Threat to Engines in Flight,” a paper presented at the 44th American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics “Aerospace Sciences Meeting,” the majority of the uncommanded thrust reductions that occurred to engines of RJs happened near major thunderstorms at altitudes between 28,000 and 31,000 feet. Authored by Jeanne Mason, a senior engineer from the Boeing Commercial Airplane division; J. Walter Strapp, a physical scientist from Environment Canada; and Philip Chow, a senior principal engineer from Honeywell International, the report noted that all of these incidents occurred while in IMC, at thrust levels between 90 and 100 percent and in light to moderate turbulence. . . .In some cases the flight crew was diverting around areas of high reflectivity associated with a large convective storm and in most cases the engine problem began within 30 miles of the area of maximum radar reflectivity, often in the anvil outflow region of a thunderstorm. . . .Under the conditions of less dense air (higher altitudes) and decreased power, ice particles can constitute a greater proportion of the total mass flowing into the engine. Third, at low power the metal temperature in the compression section is lower than at high power, making it more susceptible to ice accretion. . . . The incident database includes complex cases of multiple convective cells with perhaps merged anvil regions and cases where there was no high-reflectivity core at flight altitude. All three reports recommend minimizing the time spent in these thunderstorm anvil regions. The authors of the AIAA conference presentation advise following the standard practice of avoiding the regions of high radar reflectivity by at least 20 nm since ice water content typically drops off sharply as a function of distance from the storm center. The AIAA report also recommends flying upwind of a cell to avoid the spreading anvil downstream and to limit exposure to high ice particle content conditions, advice that was just as valid before this “ice particle threat” came to our recent attention.

Strangely, a bombing/explosion would tick a lot of the boxes... reliable aircraft, multiple system loss, no mayday signal.... lets wait and see.

I have to admit I'm kinda thinking the same way.

Paragraphs: learn how to use them.

Sorry about the paragraphs, I forget to knock off my script virus protection.

I heard about the bomb threat, but who was it? Usually whoever successfully carries out a bomb threat, wants recognition, unless they are blackmailers.

They are a bit slow to come forward.

I am in the process of picking myself up off the floor...I actually agree with hoppy on this one. Truly frightening, but I can assure you that it is exceptional.....

OOOh! Maybe someone will agree with this too. A common-sense friend tells me that it was some kind of catastrophic failure (da!) but says that it is not engines, not even flame out. If it was an engine problem the plane could still glide. They think it was some kind of explosion or sudden break up like fatigue- a wing falling off or something. I argued that the plane was last checked in April -no red flags, they said that that didn't mean a lot. They continued that the pilot did not send any kind of message out, so it was a sudden disintegration. With the turbulence it is unlikely that he would have left the co-pilot alone. I read that the pilot was the son of a pilot, so I would have assumed experienced. I also saw a report on the possibility of a massive downdraft, but even then wouldn't the pilot have hasd some time to send a message? But, yes, I beg the patience of all - I am freaked out by the ice theory. I just hope that they find the Black Box so that they can work on improving safety, because I am doing everything to avoid flying.

Flying is still the safest way to fly...
[/old jokes]
You're still far more likely to cark it on the way to the airport.

It was not sudden. There were signs that something terribly wrong was going on. I am reading on the Spanish news, quoting Brazilian official spokespersons, that a there were a series of signals sent out during 4 min by the automatic systems, after passing an high turbulence zone. These refer to electrical- , main system-, and ADIRU-failures (ADIRU is the system who controls altitude and vertical speed). This would explain why the plane was flying at 35000 and not 37000 feet as it was supposed to. Also, the automatic pilot was switched off after these signals (whether voluntarily or not, it is not known).

The 20 km long layer of oil and fuel that was found discards the hypothesis of fire or explosion.

Lets be a bit sensible here - right now there are little things that are known for a fact, and lot of speculation. It is not likely that we will never exactly know what has happened. But, people don't need to be reminded constantly about bombs. Actually, for far more less than this, the authorities have made travelers pass through security with all their belongings in plastic bags and reinforced whatever policies they had in place. I want to believe it was an accident. A bomb just doesn't make sense...

Yes, this happens so often and sure you made this assumption based on statistics (your own of course).

My boss visited me today from Paris. By accident he had forgotten to take a pen knife out of his bag. It was not picked up by security.

As humans, we're only fallable as it is us that reads the results of the scans. However, the luggage containers on planes are designed to minimise damage from an explosion.

My bet is on a catostrophic failure. For automatic alerts to be sent out for 4 minutes as they were, it rules out the possibilty that the plane broke up in mid air. This is however, only speculation based upon what I've read.

Regardless of our speculation, comments etc, these people are most probably dead and we need to respect the feelings of the relatives and friends. I myself was in a plane crash back in 1996 and survived. I know how scary that experience was and can only hope that the poor souls on board didn't know what happened.

RIP

Explosion doesn't necessarily mean bomb, like the overheated fuel tanks that exploded off the coast of Long Island (TWA?), but that problem should have been solved. I've heard that not all fuel will combust in the air and some may form a slick. I suppose everyone has their own fear. Last week I was riding on a stretch of road where a few days earlier my best friend had come off the back of a motorcycle. Double pelvic hip fracture and L2. But I love Motorcycles-love travelling, hate flying!

Can't somebody PLEASE vote hoppy off this island?



If engines fail, due to ice buildup or fuel exhaustion or volcanic ash, airplanes don't crash, stall, self-destruct or disintegrate.

They simply turn into gliders.

For examples, see:

Boeing 767 Gimli Glider

Boeing 747 Volcanic Ash

Airbus 330 (gulp) over the Atlantic

There are other examples, you can use Google to locate them.

I think what happened here was a catastrophic event on board that airplane that didn't leave the crew much, if any, time to react. And it's aviate, navigate, communicate, so talking comes last. My guess is that they attempted to dodge some major thunderstorm cells and two cells converged on them, chewed up the plane and spit it out in pieces. The highly detailed analysis of Tim Vasquez (I think somebody referenced it earlier) outlines this and other scenarios:

http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/



May their souls rest in peace.

Ah yes, as opposed to the documented cases where disintegration takes hours.

I live in fear of the day I'll be flying with a pilot whose dad is not a pilot (which must be an awful lot of the time).

You're the expert... whaddya reckon?

Huh? You really are clueless ... everybody knows TWA 800 was brought down by a surface-to-air missile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800

Zoom-climb after inflight breakup ... yeah, right. 258 witnesses saw a streak of light.

My dad is not a pilot. I shall surrender my license immediately.