EgyptAir flight from Paris to Cairo has vanished from Radar

a reply to: glowdog

Not built for safety? Seriously? From January to December of 2015, in the US alone, there were almost a million departures every month of passenger flights. In that same period, there were a grand total of zero commercial fatalities. The global accident rate (which doesn't include Germanwings or MetroJet) was 0.32. That works out to one fatality every 3.1 million flights. There were four accidents involving 136 fatalities last year. The global hull loss rate was 0.22 or one hull loss per 4.5 million flights.

originally posted by: glowdog
a reply to: imsoconfused

i recently saw a design for an airplane where the whole passenger cabin is "ejectable" in segments, equipped with huge parachutes.
but i guess modern airplanes are only built for profit and not for comfort and safety of passengers.

Modern airplanes are very much built for safety. Have you seen the safety statistics for air travel?

Do you know what isn't safe? Bombs. Bombs are not safe.

a reply to: Zaphod58

yeah you are right - safety is ofc a concern when building an airplane.i was exaggerating/being silly and stand corrected.

the security design i was talking about seemed to be pretty clever though- wish i could find it again

originally posted by: imsoconfused

How about we work harder on keeping the people on board alive during a crash. Like I would like my own ejectable seat.

Screw the data save me please.

The ignorance is strong in this one.

Let's see what would be involved in putting ejection seats in airliners.
1. Explosive charges placed to blow holes in the fuselage to allow the seats to get out.
2. Placing an rocket engine under each person to blow their seat clear of the aircraft.
3. A sequencing system to fire the seats in a certain order so they don't run into each other.
4. A lanyard system to pull your arms and legs into the proper attitude for ejection.

I can go on and on. Any one of these fails you are dead.
Now imagine this. You are sitting in your seat while the aircraft is on the ground. You are not strapped in because the plane hasn't finished loading yet. The guy behind you is trying to get comfortable and kicks the back of your seat. Your seat fires, but, the explosive charges haven't blown the hole in the fuselage for your seat to exit and you are not strapped in.

Google "four man ejection S-3B Viking" The S-3 Viking was a Navy four man anti-submarine aircraft. The ejection seats worked like the ones I described above. There was never a successful four man ejection from these aircraft.

In 1983 a Navy mechanic is working in the cockpit of an A-7 Corsair while it is in the hangar bay of the USS Ranger. The ejection seat misfired, driving it and him into the overhead of the hangar bay and then bouncing down the length of the bay. I saw what was left, you wouldn't want to.

Do you think that you would actually be safer with an ejection seat in an airliner?

Last question. Suppose that you safely ejected from the airliner, at night, over water. Now what do you do?

a reply to: glowdog

You mean this one?

ACARS messages received.

00:26Z 3044 ANTI ICE R WINDOW
00:26Z 561200 R SLIDING WINDOW SENSOR
00:26Z 2600 SMOKE LAVATORY SMOKE
00:27Z 2600 AVIONICS SMOKE
00:28Z 561100 R FIXED WINDOW SENSOR
00:29Z 2200 AUTO FLT FCU 2 FAULT
00:29Z 2700 F/CTL SEC 3 FAULT

This indicates a fire on board.

a reply to: earthling42

Fire burning through the floor would cut the flight control cables and leave the aircraft out of control. The pilots would be trying to save the aircraft and probably not worried about radioing a distress call.

I'm betting the deicing unit in the window caught fire. There was an issue a few years ago where they warned that it could short and start a cockpit fire.

originally posted by: carewemust
The news media wants it to be a bomb soooo badly! If it was, it will take many months (or years?) to pin responsibility on a terror group. By then, there will have been 2 or 3 other terror events.

I think France wants it badly to be a bomb, well the government in place, let me explain, François Hollande want's to make sure he get reelected, at this the government is doing all it's possible to increase the police force, military, all the workers paid by the state, because he has more chance of that new employee voting for him, and his family too (at the moment it's quite a big deal to have a job in France)

originally posted by: Byaniyev
hope the plane will be found soon and all the people aboard are alright...

is the plane missing caused by illuminati or not ? pls read these following info:

The Illuminati and EgyptAir Flight 990
Robert Sterling ()

A copy of this will appear in the next The Excluded Middle.
The most sacred of numbers to the Illuminati is 33, corresponding to the highest degree of Masonry.
When events have the Illuminati's fingerprints on them, they often leave numeric clues involving the number 33 to let those in the know what is going on.
On Halloween, EgyptAir Flight 990 crashed going from New York to Egypt.
At the time of its sudden fall, the plane was at an altitude of 33,000 feet.
The plane disappeared from radars 33 minutes after takeoff.
The EgyptAir plane, named Thutmosis II, had a little over 33,000 flight hours.
It has been confirmed that 33 Egyptian military officers were aboard EgyptAir.
33 people boarded the plane on its previous stop, Los Angeles.
990 is 10 times a trinity of 33's.
The number of passengers is reported as one hundred and a trinity of 33's (199.)
Fnord.

The most sacred Illuminati number is 13 - and the 33 'public degrees of masonry doesn't include the 6 secret degrees.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Based on the messages, it must have originated from the lower compartment.
The lavatory is situated outside and behind the cockpit, beneath it is the forward cargo bay and the avionics bay.
The fault in deicing might easily be a shortcircuit due to fire.

a reply to: earthling42

Could be. Especially with the avionics bay involved.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Could this be considered a security design flaw? I mean, having a common and publicly accessible area, immediately behind the cockpit, and above the avionics area. Destroy that common area and you get a compromised cockpit AND avionics in one fell swoop. Or am I misunderstanding the configuration from your discussions?

a reply to: Krakatoa

The fire might have started below decks in the below floor wiring and spread to the lav from there, and was detected first there.

a reply to: Zaphod58

True, but is it not plausible it started in the lav?

a reply to: Zaphod58

Isn't the Airbus fly by wire? If so wouldn't that make it more susceptible to losing control because of fire?

originally posted by: glowdog
a reply to: imsoconfused

i recently saw a design for an airplane where the whole passenger cabin is "ejectable" in segments, equipped with huge parachutes.
but i guess modern airplanes are only built for profit and not for comfort and safety of passengers.

You don't say, profit above anything else? I'm even surprised you posted that comment as its so obvious.

To be fair, the industry is based on profit, as are all industries. The chances of being killed in an Aviation accident these days are MINIMAL, why re-design and spend money on such a low risk when it would put fares up and require a complete redesign of the structure putting fares up even more.

Perhaps in the future, with new design it may be feasible, i honestly think we will invent teleportation devices before that happens.

I drive every day, sometimes for hours on end, more people are killed in RTC's than aviation accidents ...... forget airbags and side curtains etc, why not fit ejector seats to cars, you would save a hell of a lot more people if the car was intelligent enough.

Risk Analysis v Spend, not worth it, which brings us back to ticket prices and profit

Just saying

a reply to: Krakatoa

It could have started in either honestly. The Lav is probably the more likely place, but until they find the debris and can take a better look at it, then both are still in the running.

a reply to: JIMC5499

I would think so anyway.

a reply to: corblimeyguvnor

And profit on some flights are so low, even when the plane is full, that it's not funny. There are some routes that profit is almost single digit on a full flight.

a reply to: earthling42

Going back and looking at them, the window is the first warning. So it's possible that the window shorted and started a fire in the blow deck wiring, and it spread to the lav, and then the avionics bay and then the flight controls. That's my opinion based on the ACARS at least.

Almost all the incidents (98%) involved a significantly shattered or cracked layer of the windscreen. One-quarter (25%) of them exhibited electrical arcing after the windscreen shattered, while nearly one in 10 (9%) involved arcing prior to the shattering. Bird strikes were the initiating event in 12 of the fixed-wing incidents, while hail damage caused three.

Once the cracks occurred, about one-third (36%) of the crews began descending immediately and 14% donned their oxygen masks in anticipation of loss of pressurization. Most of the incidents (86%) involved significant immediate action, and those that did not (14%) occurred while on approach with the pilots continuing the approach to a landing.

Nearly one-fifth (17%) of the incidents were preceded by a precautionary warning of a windshield heat failure, followed shortly thereafter by the abrupt shatter of one of the panes within the windshield. A windshield must withstand extreme temperature differences in a short time frame, which subjects it to formidable thermal stresses as it attempts to expand or contract. There is a conductive layer between the plies that heats the window unit. In some windows you will notice an electrical grid in the corner of the windshield, which is the electrical connection from the power source.

Within the windshield system there are thermostats to keep the transparencies from overheating, but these can fail. Should that happen in flight, there’s an airspeed restriction for many aircraft, which is published in their respective AFMs. If the heating is inadvertently left on during ground operations with no cooling air flow over the windshield, it can be prone to overheating, which can result in a peculiar wavy distortion when looking through the windshield.

aviationweek.com...