It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Air France Plane down

page: 28
56
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   


Fernando de Noronha - Brazilian military planes found a 5km path of wreckage in the Atlantic Ocean, confirming that an Air France jet carrying 228 people crashed in the sea, Defence Minister Nelson Jobim said on Tuesday.




www.news24.com...




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


Hey Green Bic Man,

That's cool. These aircraft are built strong, but no plane should ever be flown into towering cumulus cloud... ever golden rule.

Yes and no. There's nothing wrong with the plane. You could wreck any plane flying into a thunderstorm cell. A Boeing, Lockheed, British Aerospace, McDonnell Douglas plane.

The captain did the big no-no. He flew headlong into a towering cummulo-nimbus or CB cloud reaching up above 45,000ft.

These clouds have columns of air inside them some rising at 2000 feet per minute and others descending at similar rates. Fly an aircraft in at 453 knots (the last recorded speed) and it will rip the plane to pieces.

The last ACARS report indicated depressurisation at 35,000ft. Undoubtedly there was sudden structural break up because the captain flew into a thunderstom. It was visible on his weather radar and there was clear airspace 30 miles to the west.

Air France wont admit this because it is quite unprofessional conduct and reflects badly on the airline.




[edit on 3-6-2009 by sy.gunson]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Wow..

At least do you think you could assume that these people died almost instantaneously and not spiraling towards death?

I think I remember one taking off from NY and going into the ocean.. I think the plane broke in half or something? It was like 10+ years ago though.. ughhhh

Makes my knees quiver even thinking about it



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by sy.gunson
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 

Air France wont admit this because it is quite unprofessional conduct and reflects badly on the airline.


It doesn't just reflect badly on their airline, it doesnt do any favours to the airline industry since you never actually get to choose your pilot you can never be sure if you get a stubborn, gung-ho person or a person who pulls out all the stops and takes all the precautions.

Air France clearly know that it is ultimately their fault as they have tried to blame this on every minutely possible occurence, soon they'll say that it might have been a meteorite sming in from space and hitting the aircraft. Then that the aircraft went through a Quantum phenomenon whereby the front half of the aircraft was quantum tunneled to 5 yards infront of the rear half, splitting the plane in two and causing it to crash.

The other reason Air France really don't want to admit this is because they receive their first A380 this year, and there will be no way they can fill that aircraft if people have no confidence in their long haul pilots.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


When a plane explosively decompresses those not strapped down get hurled around inside the cabin, usually with broken limbs. The cabin appears to have disintegrated as it fell anyway. Usually unconsciousness is mercifully quick.

One glider pilot in South Africa flew into a towering CB at 2000 feet and his aircraft got sucked up to thirty something thousand feet, breaking up as it ascended. He popped out at the top and then as the cockpit disintegrated around him he fell out back through the thunderstorm with his parachute on. He took so long to drop back down that he suffered unconsciousness and frostbite but survived.

The occupants of 447 would have all been unconscious within seconds.



[edit on 3-6-2009 by sy.gunson]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   
I might be wrong but at 30k ft I think that the air is too thin to breath on so you'll have about 30 seconds before you lose consciousness and start to freeze to death.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 



Mr gunson do you think theres storms like this over countries like Europe or North America?? Or mainly just over the ocean?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


geez

well i mean, i guess if it is your time, it is your time

terrible way to go, but could have been much worse if that was your destiny

at least you can take solace in the fact that it was quick..

to think about the science involved in all of that is pretty crazy



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by CloudySkye
 


what kind of estimate is the temp up there, lets just say in the summertime?

like below 0 F?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by topsecretombomb
 


Hey topsecret, call me Simon.

These CB clouds are everywhere but at the tropic convergence zone they're bigger and more violent.

Take a look at my avatar to the left of my post. Behind that little aeroplane to the right is a towering CB. We've all seen them. Pilots are all trained to fly around them.

What is astonishing with this Air France flight is that the guy just flew straight into it.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


I think at 30000 ft the temperatures can be as low as -30 Fahrenheit (-35 degrees C) so freezing would come quickly if it wasn't because without the plane you are now falling, fast.

though the average global temperature at 10000ft is still only 23F (-5C) but it would take you about a minute to freefall the intervening 20k ft

take a look at this high altitude parachuting article...



[edit on 3/6/09 by CloudySkye]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
The normal adiabatic lapse rate is 2 degrees celsius per thousand feet, so if the surface temperature was 30 degrees celsius then the temperature at 35,000 feet was around -40 degrees Celsius



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


Their was electrical failures before the decompression so I presume something happened before the plane completely failed.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
The central processing unit for the autopilot was tripping out, the autopilot tripped out and the aircraft's fly by wire changed it's software logic settings.

The ACARS system gave a series of automated warnings before the last signal at 0214GMT warning of decompression.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by CloudySkye
 


yikes..

yeah,.. reminds me of south dakota in the mornings waiting for the schoolbus lol... never forget those days..

another question

is there enough oxygen up there for the plane to even blow up.. or did that plane just totally rip apart, no fireball etc..

i was wondering this because i heard reports that people saw fire or something coming from the wreckage in the ocean



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


Stochiometrically speaking, I'd have to look it up, but I don't see why not. That said however I don't think it "blew up" in a fuel ignition explosion, I think the structure tore apart.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Engines may have kept running and stayed attached to the wings. Any fire was secondary to the break up as ACARS gave no indication of in flight fire.

The aircraft wreckage may have exploded on impact or during descent.

I very much doubt what hit the sea was a recognisible aircraft.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by CloudySkye
 


Yeah, I just wanted to totally debunk the missile theory with that I guess in relation to their not being enough oxygen to cause a fire up there or whatever.. like I said im not sure about any specifics or details or anything of how that all works...



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


Oh okay now I understand the question better.

With the aircraft disintegrating fuel cells would have ruptured in the wings and been ignited by the engines.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Well in terms of specifics its all about the temperature, pressure, air/fuel ratio and minimum energy to ignite a fuel vapour, there are rich limits and lean limits (which mean that there is too much or too little oxygen to fuel) and likewise by altering the pressure and temperature you can take the energy for ignition prohibitively large. You can't debunk a missle causing an explosion since they invariably carry an explosive warhead.

The problem with a missile theory is that it is a bit ridiculous for this to be the case after the aircraft has already warned of electrical, pressurisation and general systems errors and the crew has complained about severe turbulence. Who needs a missile when you already knwo the plane is breaking up.




top topics



 
56
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join