It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Emiiiiiil
Could this possible be the first case of a plane being struck by a meteor?
i found a article on a woman in Gran Canaria who claims to have
photographed the plane in flames?
Im not capable to read spanish myself, I found the link to it on a danish newspaper site.
im hoping somone here can make sense of it.
the time of the taking of the photo and the crash should about the same,
but the location is way off the crash site?
so i wonder could there have been a meteor shower at that time?
the weather on the route should have been very bad with a front across equator, shown by sat images from the day.
But question is? what is that picture if not a plane or a meteor?
if you are told that it is a plane it looks like a plane.
but it could aswell be a meteor. or something third?
[edit on 4-6-2009 by Emiiiiiil]
AF447 Data Suggests Faulty Speed Data
Data from Air France flight 447's automatic ACARS message indicates the pilots may not have had access to the correct speed information during the final minutes of the flight.
The list of fault messages sent to Air France's operations headquarters in Paris includes a sequence of notes that hints at the three Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU) computers to show diverging information. ADIRU compiles data delivered by the pitot tubes and process it to the aircraft's other computers.
The list, obtained by AviationWeek among others, gives an insight into the sequence of computer and system failures on the Airbus A330-200. During the last four minutes the situation worsened. At 2:10 a.m. zulu, the autopilot was either switched off by the pilots or automatically. The function is switched off automatically if speed drops by some margin below a previously defined minimum.
Separately, a Spanish newspaper quotes the crew of an Iberia Airbus A340 that flew seven minutes behind AF447 on the same track. According to the crew, air traffic control failed to contact the Air France jet after 1:33 a.m. zulu in spite of trying several times. The Iberia pilots - who deviated 30 miles east from the track to circumnavigate thick clowds - then tried to get in touch with their French colleagues, too, but did not succeed either. The pilot of a Lufthansa Boeing 747-400 that had passed the region 30 minutes earlier said that he had to fly several detours to avoid heavy weather, but otherwise described the flight as routine.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Anyway, in the debate about Boeing vs. Airbus, from a passenger standpoint, I'll take Boeing over Airbus any day in terms of comfort, seating arrangements, ect. I find Airbus jets to be uncomfortable, cramped, and not much fun to fly in. That's just my own experience, my own person view.
Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
I know planes are shielded for lightning strikes and such. But I'm pretty sure they're not shielded for high level solar radiation.
[edit on 5-6-2009 by DEEZNUTZ]
Originally posted by maxweljames
Originally posted by reugen
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by relu84
here is the wiki link:
It differs from normal lightning by many magnitudes. It's lightning on serious steroids.
Yes, magnitude 5-10 since it has to cover the distance from the CB cloud to the ground, and here is my question, what is ground here, is it the sea ?
Could be sea, could be another cloud, could be the plane itself. Anything that may be polarized opposite of the origin of the lightning.
The Air France jet which went missing over the Atlantic sent 24 error messages minutes before it crashed, French investigators say
...and for some reason the autopilot was switched off,...
...would like to know that pilots are so top professionel, that nothing would
cause them all to leave the cabin during flight?
my guess is no.
But the Airbus is such a automated plane, from what i understand, that you cant really fly it outside the envelope?
Could some crews gain so much reliability in to the automatisation that
they would sleep/eat/play online poker. maybe in another room?
Im just asking?
But knowing that they flew into a storm, that's unlikely to have happened im sure.
Looking at the incident described in post 316, we can imagine what would have happened to AF447, upon entering such a "warm pool", if the autopilot had remained engaged - and the incident allowed to develop. Quite simply, wing and nose drop plus yaw (aka autorotation) at a high power setting as the autopilot and autothrust tried to maintain the flight level - despite, due to the warm pool, suddenly being overweight for the environmentals.
It's called coffin corner. Aerodynamic stall and Mach buffet boundaries come together to define the upper edge of the aircraft's flight envelope. Autorotation (aka spinning) at a high power setting is going to have some further complicating ramifications: