Jump to content




Replying to Mysterious disappearance of AF 447


Post Options

  • Anti-spam: complete the task
  or Cancel


Topic Summary

CHamilton

Posted 27 May 2014 - 03:08 PM

How Statisticians Found Air France Flight 447 Two Years After It Crashed Into Atlantic

 

After more than a year of unsuccessful searching, authorities called in an elite group of statisticians. Working on their recommendations, the next search found the wreckage just a week later.

Lawrence Stone and colleagues from Metron Scientific Solutions in Reston, Virginia,... are statisticians who were brought in to re-examine the evidence after four intensive searches had failed to find the aircraft. What’s interesting about this story is that their analysis pointed to a location not far from the last known position, in an area that had almost certainly been searched soon after the disaster. The wreckage was found almost exactly where they predicted at a depth of 14,000 feet after only one week’s additional search.

Today, Stone and co explain how they did it. Their approach was to use a technique known as Bayesian inference which takes into account all the prior information known about the crash location as well as the evidence from the unsuccessful search efforts. The result is a probability distribution for the location of the wreckage.

 

 


PRR 60

Posted 19 May 2012 - 10:43 AM

Air France almost pulls off another stall!

http://www.flightglo...tactics-372060/

Yikes!

What is the first thing taught in flight school? View and trust your instruments.

jis

Posted 19 May 2012 - 09:06 AM

Air France almost pulls off another stall!

http://www.flightglo...tactics-372060/

jis

Posted 10 December 2011 - 10:39 AM

What was finally determined to have happened to Air France 447 can be seen in this Popular Mechanics article. Extremely serious pilot error causing loss of control and stall. The aircraft itself would have recovered if the pilots had not lost situational awareness as completely as they apparently did.

And Here is the discussion thread on airliners.net.

jis

Posted 31 July 2011 - 10:38 AM

Early indications seem to be that the pitot tubes failed, possibly with ice. Pitot probes are always heated, so I'm sure we'll see something about that. Now the question is if the pilot flying responded correctly. The first thing a pilot learns is stall recovery, and the one thing they have to do is lower the nose, and add full power. The engines were operating normal. Several times the pilot flying raised the nose which upset the situation. It remains to be seen if he knew if they were in a stall. Obviously his airspeed information was not accurate.

Hopefully it's not the same as the Colgan crash in Buffalo. That was totally the pilots' fault.

The Thales Pitot Tubes were known to have this problem, and at least 10 other flights had experienced similar problem (and even in bad weather) (both Airbus and Boeing aircrafts) and recovered. That particular type of Pitot Tube is not used by any responsible airline any more. Air France was in the process of replacing them when this event occurred and even the very aircraft involved was supposed to get the replacement Pitot Tubes before its next flight! Some sections of the press have alleged that they and the French in general dragged their feet for a while since after all Thales is an upstanding French company. Just allegedly mind you. No matter which way you look at it, two and a half French companies are in a bit of a soup it would seem.

amtrakwolverine

Posted 31 July 2011 - 02:09 AM

Another flight Birgenair Flight 301 crashed due to blocked pitot tubes. They can be blocked by other things then just ice.

Birgenair Flight 301 http://en.wikipedia....nair_Flight_301

saxman

Posted 30 July 2011 - 10:04 PM

Early indications seem to be that the pitot tubes failed, possibly with ice. Pitot probes are always heated, so I'm sure we'll see something about that. Now the question is if the pilot flying responded correctly. The first thing a pilot learns is stall recovery, and the one thing they have to do is lower the nose, and add full power. The engines were operating normal. Several times the pilot flying raised the nose which upset the situation. It remains to be seen if he knew if they were in a stall. Obviously his airspeed information was not accurate.

Hopefully it's not the same as the Colgan crash in Buffalo. That was totally the pilots' fault.

jis

Posted 29 July 2011 - 04:52 PM

There weren't any announcements, but I would guess that falling at 10,000 feet per minute that they knew that something wasn't right.

Absolutely terrifying - of course it's easy to think rationally about it while sitting at a comfortable desk.

I wonder how much the passengers felt, other than a feeling of falling into an air pocket. Afterall even the pilots did not quite understand it, even with the altimeter whizzing away in front of them.

RyanS

Posted 29 July 2011 - 04:15 PM

There weren't any announcements, but I would guess that falling at 10,000 feet per minute that they knew that something wasn't right.

Absolutely terrifying - of course it's easy to think rationally about it while sitting at a comfortable desk.

jis

Posted 29 July 2011 - 03:53 PM

The third interim report is now out from BEA, and it give an event by event description of what happened with a complete time-line, and frankly it is scary reading. Seems like there were a series of individually recoverable events that cascaded together to lead to disaster with possibly inadequate pilot training and cockpit management playing a significant part.

The report can be found at: http://www.bea.aero/...llet2011.en.pdf

Safety Recommendations at: http://www.bea.aero/...llet2011.en.pdf

The passengers never knew anything was amiss since no announcements were made.

Review the complete topic (launches new window)