GroupDIY

General Discussions => Brewery => Topic started by: StephenGiles on June 03, 2009, 02:13:04 PM

Title: The lost Air France jet
Post by: StephenGiles on June 03, 2009, 02:13:04 PM
Having made 6 flights to Agentina from England and others to Peru and Ecuador, the thought often occurred to me, when standing in the galley eating fun sized mars bars at various times through the night, not being able to sleep,  - do the flight controllers know where we are? We have been reminded that there is no radar over a big chunk of the Atlantic in the last few days!
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: MartyMart on June 03, 2009, 02:58:30 PM
That's a very sad loss .... and yes it makes you think about that "out of range" area.

I fly almost every week in and out of Europe so I "try" very hard not to think too much about it
 ..... after 20 years and many thousands of flights I am beginning to NOT enjoy them !!

Hope it doesn't become a big problem for me in the near future.

MM
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: JohnRoberts on June 03, 2009, 08:13:04 PM
The good news is we generally learn from such catastrophic failures to better avoid them in the future, the bad news is a 3 mile long debris field in deep water will not make it easy to find the black box.

RIP

JR
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 03, 2009, 10:03:33 PM
They've been mulling over putting bidirectional GPS equipment in planes for years.  This would allow you to track the plane via GPS.  For some reason the cost of this is too much for airlines to consider doing it yet cellphone companies can put these devices in every new phone.

WTF

Yet again the airline industry fails us and it's sad that it's always a terrible loss that will give them a kick in the pants to get this moving along.

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: deuce42 on June 03, 2009, 10:08:46 PM
Whilst it's no consolation to the passengers or their now grief stricken loved ones, the amount of plane related deaths is actually very low compared to any other form of transport.  It's the enormity of the loss when it happens that makes plane crashes seem so scary for us, i.e hundreds of people going down in a huge piece of metal. If a car crashes and 2 people die (which happens daily in every country on the globe) we seem to accept it as fact of life, yet if we add up the number of car related deaths it would far exceed any air disaster.

Marty, I don't fly as frequently as you do, but maybe you might feel a little better if you consider that before a plane takes off, at least theoretically, there are people performing safety checks  etc. If you had driven or taken a long term bus or train on as many trips over 20 years would you be any better off? 

I wish you and everybody else on this board a safe passage for the rest of your trips:)
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: PRR on June 04, 2009, 01:54:51 AM
> yet cellphone companies can put these devices in every new phone.

Many of these cellfone finders are not "global".

They do not reference satellites, Polaris, sun, moon, etc.

They work only where cellfone coverage exists.

In most of the cellfone area, multiple cells can "hear" you. They negotiate and the one which hears you best takes your call; but hands-off to another as you move around.

So if towers 47, 48, and 49 hear you, you are somewhere between them; if 47 hears you best, you are likely closer to 47 (of course this may be skewed by trees, buildings, etc).

I don't know, but "logically" another level of location can be found by comparing path delay. If tower 47 hears you and then tower 48 hears you 1 microsecond later, you are on a line 1,000 feet closer to tower 47. Three towers can, ideally, reduce that line to a point (at least a cocked hat). Strong multipath can skew this, but if the delay times exceed the known distance between towers, the anomaly is clear. Additional evidence if your cellfone has been on while moving: errors can average-out giving a firmer path to your current position.

Oddly, there is better cellfone coverage hundreds of miles in the sea off the coast of Texas than there is in Maine north of the Volvo Line. Must be all those oil wells. The airplane went down far off a poor coast; I doubt cellfone reaches. (However they have been saying the pilot "texted" a message, a verb coined for cellfones.)

I'm not sure how position data would have helped here. For one, so -many- systems failed in the last minutes, we must not assume any GPS would have functioned toward the end. For another, the general path and speed of the craft was known, simple dead-reckoning gives a probable area. Headwinds affect this, and the pilot will steer to avoid trouble; but trouble seems to have come on quickly so the error-area should be small. And indeed they found slicks fairly quickly, considering how remote the area is.

What bothers me is two slicks 60 miles apart. No explosion will do that. All I can think is that some major piece fell off, yet the rest of the plane continued at decent glide angle. If you assume a cabin-chunk falls near vertical, and the rest of the plane at 10:1 (a healthy airliner does better), then from ~~30,000 feet the plane would glide 60 miles past the chunk. Somewhat like the Hawaii Air airplane, except that one "only" lost roof-skin and landed in full control. This one may have been far more frightening.

> Yet again the airline industry fails us

"Failed"? There is a clear alternative: don't fly. Take the Queen Mary, only 5 or 6 days when she ran. Of course, while Mary ran well, some other ships went down, many with more souls lost than any airplane. Or do what most folks did before the Vikings and Columbus: avoid the sea, and if compelled to go by boat, hug the shore. Oh yeah: lot of shore-hugging boats were lost.

Yet Stephen and Marty take advantage of very affordable rapid travel for business or pleasure, repeatedly, and surely aware that nothing is certain except a tin can 8 miles high at 0.9 speed of sound is certainly risky. Marty is doing business, trade which might be less busy and profitable without rapid travel. And he could, instead, stay in London and dodge highway traffic, or go hermit on a distant farm and be killed by a bull or his tractor...

Yes, the current event can probably be "blamed" on the low cost of airline travel. There is a little too much pressure to fly in bad weather, to cover the airplane loan. And there is a little too much pressure to increase the payload/cost ratio of airplanes, leading to changes which bench-test well then crack a few years in service. And as more and more flying gets done, there is more chance of "unlikely" combinations of circumstances actually happening.

It is interesting that the Graf Zeppelin flew that route for many years, with zero excitement, not even a twisted ankle. And dirigibles are far more at the mercy of storms than 707s: their top speed is only comparable to a good storm, not 10+ times faster, their top commercial altitude is below the top of storms, while a 707 flies over most storms. And while weather radar may be thin in that area, there was none when the Graf was flying. -Most- peacetime dirigibles went down in unexpected storms (and the exceptions are instructive: the India was redesigned for such high payload that it creamed the first hill it found).
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: strangeandbouncy on June 04, 2009, 03:46:46 AM
Hi


  Latest news on BBC is suggesting that there may have been a bomb on board. 4 days before there was a direct threat to the same flight.



   Kindest regards,


    ANdyP
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: SSLtech on June 04, 2009, 09:46:19 AM
...or go hermit on a distant farm and be killed by a bull or his tractor...

Why on earth does the Bull have a tractor?

-Sounds dangerous to me!

 ;D

Keith
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 04, 2009, 10:33:25 AM
Quote
> yet cellphone companies can put these devices in every new phone.

Many of these cellfone finders are not "global".

They do not reference satellites, Polaris, sun, moon, etc.

They work only where cellfone coverage exists.

In most of the cellfone area, multiple cells can "hear" you. They negotiate and the one which hears you best takes your call; but hands-off to another as you move around.

So if towers 47, 48, and 49 hear you, you are somewhere between them; if 47 hears you best, you are likely closer to 47 (of course this may be skewed by trees, buildings, etc).

Uh no.  GPS was mandated to be installed in ALL US cellphones after 9/11.  This was under the guise of E911 for the purpose of finding someone if they call 911 from their phone.  Most phones only have an uplink, they can only report themselves on the GPS network but cannot downlink anything.

Here is an article where the police used it for good: http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/0,1406,KNS_347_5507506,00.html

and I'm sure that given the right circumstances, they will use it for evil as well.

Chances are good that if you've bought a cell phone anytime after about a year from 9/11 then your cell phone has the ability to be tracked by GPS satellites if you have any GPS functionality, like navigation, or not.

This is only a small part of the government's invasion into our privacy but they can't seem to help make transportation safer by mandating that an airplane have a GPS location device so that they can find it when it goes down.  Who knows how many people *might* have survived that crash only to have drowned before anyone could find them?
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: SSLtech on June 04, 2009, 11:00:45 AM
Chances are good that if you've bought a cell phone anytime after about a year from 9/11 then your cell phone has the ability to be tracked by GPS satellites if you have any GPS functionality, like navigation, or not.

No, Your phone is NOT "tracked by GPS satellites". Only the CELLPHONE knows where it is. The satellites are much too busy doing more useful work to know where every cellphone on the planet's surface is... and where it's been.

Satellites used for GPS transmit a synchronised time-code, along with other things which they were BUILT to do. GPS is a clever way of detecting subtle differences between the arrival times of these timecode streams, which the GPS RECEIVER is then able to use to calculate position, on the surface of a notional sphere. -If you want navigation capability, what you have to do is superimpose a known terrain upon that same notional sphere surface.

But the sattelites are basically just doing the 'speaking clock' job and "talking" to your phone... they're NOT 'listening'.

-CELL TOWERS listen to cell phones. When GPS tracking is remotely enabled to find a phone, the PHONE determines its position by listening to the satellites, then relays its calculated position via subcoding within its "I'm here" response to the cell tower's "Who's here" messages. -If there's no cell towers to send the message to, there's no way to track the phone. (unless it's a satellite phone of course... but none of us own those, I have little doubt!)

Cell-tower-signal-dominance location (pretty much exactly as described by PRR) has been available since early on, and since cell towers also broadcast timing synchronisation codes, I understand that since later on -even before GPS- it may have been possible to more closely approximate location by arrival-timing comparison of TOWER signals, which helps with signal 'shadowing' and multipath issues.

I'm not a specialist, but I do know a guy who works at a major phone company, and who was pretty deeply involved with some of the developments in this field. -He tells some fascinating (to a geek-nerd at least!) stories. -If there are any detail-specific questions, I can put them to him, and see if he can explain things better than I have.

Keith
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 04, 2009, 01:12:21 PM
GPS satellites do have uplink channels..  They just don't tell you about them.  SHSSSSSHH.  It's a secret..

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: SSLtech on June 04, 2009, 01:41:24 PM
They do indeed; -they have to, in fact.

But cellphones don't talk to them.

Keith
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Marik on June 04, 2009, 02:00:30 PM
Why the black boxes are not designed to float? It'll make much more sense, wouldn't it?  ???
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: JohnRoberts on June 04, 2009, 02:11:16 PM
One thing that makes sense considering modern communications bandwidth is for the black box to be virtual and have the data stream to somewhere physically distant from the aircraft.  I suspect communication satellites don't have very dense coverage over the middle of the ocean, but give them time. People will want their youtube while flying.

JR


Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: AnalogPackrat on June 04, 2009, 02:39:49 PM
GPS satellites do have uplink channels..  They just don't tell you about them.  SHSSSSSHH.  It's a secret..



Please...all satellites have comm uplinks for control and configuration purposes.  These old GPS satellites don't have some secret monitoring capability.  Some other military satellites may well be doing this, however!

You're 5w or less omni-directional fone antenna ain't gonna provide squat for signal at the almost 13000 mile distant GPS satellite.  Said satellites were not built to monitor hundreds of millions (billions?) of fones.  The obvious and practical way to implement fone location via GPS is exactly as outlined by SSLTech.

If you don't want to be tracked either leave the fone at home or pop out the battery.

A P
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: AnalogPackrat on June 04, 2009, 02:43:54 PM
One thing that makes sense considering modern communications bandwidth is for the black box to be virtual and have the data stream to somewhere physically distant from the aircraft.  I suspect communication satellites don't have very dense coverage over the middle of the ocean, but give them time. People will want their youtube while flying.

Good idea.  Current BB tech is still pretty primitive--tapes and all that.  Seems like flash memory is getting pretty robust these days.  Why not dump to local memory and offload to external data sink?  As for the floating thing--also a good idea, but difficult to implement with the current designs which are large, imbedded in the plane for increased survivability (and connectivity for recording).  A small digital,  ejectable unit with beacon and flotation might be possible.

A P
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 04, 2009, 03:12:31 PM
I have intelligence from a retired Navy person who worked on the GPS uplinks.  They do indeed have uplink channels that aren't the data channels you speak of.  They are true DSSS uplink channels for transmitting through the satellites, not datalink channels used to communicate WITH the satellites.

Since I work with RF I can say with confidence that the GPS signals are some of the most robust transmission types on the planet.  The receivers and transmitters on the satellites are highly efficient.


Quote
You're 5w or less omni-directional fone antenna ain't gonna provide squat for signal at the almost 13000 mile distant GPS satellite.

GPS data can be acquired up to 10 feet underground and further underwater.  That's pretty darn good for something for such a tiny amount of power.  In RF sometimes it's not the POWER of the signal, it's the robustness and the ability of the receiver to reject noise and interferers. 

 
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: AnalogPackrat on June 04, 2009, 04:15:18 PM
I have intelligence from a retired Navy person who worked on the GPS uplinks.  They do indeed have uplink channels that aren't the data channels you speak of.  They are true DSSS uplink channels for transmitting through the satellites, not datalink channels used to communicate WITH the satellites.

And you think these uplinks are used to monitor cell phone transmissions?  I don't think so.

Quote
Since I work with RF I can say with confidence that the GPS signals are some of the most robust transmission types on the planet.  The receivers and transmitters on the satellites are highly efficient.

And I don't deny that at all.  I think you misunderstood me.  I never said GPS transmissions were a problem.  What I said was that GPS satellites are not monitoring hundreds of millions of cell fones.


Quote
Quote
You're 5w or less omni-directional fone antenna ain't gonna provide squat for signal at the almost 13000 mile distant GPS satellite.

GPS data can be acquired up to 10 feet underground and further underwater.  That's pretty darn good for something for such a tiny amount of power.  In RF sometimes it's not the POWER of the signal, it's the robustness and the ability of the receiver to reject noise and interferers.  

Again, I'm not arguing about reception of GPS signals by cell fones or other devices.  You posited that cell phones were being directly monitored by GPS which is simply not true.  5w omni transmission from a cell phone + 13000 miles + noise from hundreds of millions of other devices on the same wavelengths is a bit different from what you are talking about.  The inverse square law is not your friend here...

A P


 
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: lofi on June 04, 2009, 04:53:39 PM
Why the black boxes are not designed to float? It'll make much more sense, wouldn't it?  ???

then the plane would have to disintegrate in order to ensure there release.

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: pucho812 on June 04, 2009, 06:04:44 PM
why don't they make the entire plane out of the stuff they make the black boxes. would survive the impact.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: lofi on June 04, 2009, 06:10:58 PM
should wrap them in bubble wrap, never had a prob getting stuff undamaged when thats used.

sorry for making light :-[
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: stereokillah on June 04, 2009, 06:13:14 PM
For me this story is very strange,

-fisrt thing with google satellite i can see all my twoon in 3D, the usa satlletite could recongnize a face  anywhere on the earth  and find a mobile phone and they can't find the last work of this plane?
-second thing Airbus should do a party for a mondiale promotion the next days of this crash for inogurate the A380
after this crash all this promotion is dead.

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: simonsez on June 05, 2009, 05:36:50 AM
Why they're not make the seat like in the jet fighter? if something happen then i just press the eject button..  8)
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: recnsci on June 05, 2009, 10:41:27 AM

-fisrt thing with google satellite i can see all my twoon in 3D, the usa satlletite could recongnize a face  anywhere on the earth  and find a mobile phone and they can't find the last work of this plane?


USA satellite has to be POINTED to specific spot, if you want face-recognition-resolution. DoD doesn't usually target empty places in ocean. And if airplane was in storm cloud, you would only get image of ,well , storm cloud, even if some high resolution orbital camera was taking pictures. Further more, real time capacity of US military orbital hardware is still somewhat limited (regarding real-time optical targeting-reconnaissance data link). To put it simply, evil-big-brother-in-Pentagon is not watching every square foot of earth surface 24/7 (just for mental gymnastic, if pixel resolution is 0.1 inch (for face recognition) , and you take 10 images per second, and use good compression algo (lets imagine 100:1), calculate total data throughput if you cover completely Earth surface).

Finding cell-phone is trivial. Finding plane in middle of ocean is not. (back at school, I've done some work at cell-phone triangulaton by utilising power level from each base station (phone usually "see" at least three base stations, and report back signal power from each; that info + some histeresis is used for handover) and average field distribution in cell. Time domain is tricky cus' usually there is good amount of multipath ).

Constant data link from plane is actually feasible, but I'm not sure how reliable it would be. I'm doing some work on automotive black-box-thingie, and we use inertial navigation backed with GPS correction here and there. I've seen quite a few GPS dropouts.

cheerz
urosh
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: recnsci on June 05, 2009, 10:59:05 AM
Why they're not make the seat like in the jet fighter? if something happen then i just press the eject button..  8)

Those nice 0-0 ejection seats only take you from plane, you still have to have parachute strapped. Further more, on mil-planes explosive bolts blow small and light canopy away. In commercial liner, you would either have super powerful seat with penetrator on top to rip trough fuselage, or compicated system with explosive bolts to rip whole fuselage apart prior to seat ignition.

I, personally, enjoy flying so much that I usually don't contemplate on such sad events like this one. You still have more chances to get killed on street by another driver (especially here in Belgrade).

BTW airplane black-box-thingies are rigidly connected to some internal part of airframe. Some type of floating device around it would be tricky to do, and I doubt it would work reliably (if that particular part of airframe around BB has not decomposed on impact).


cheerz
urosh
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: simonsez on June 05, 2009, 11:29:04 AM
Why they're not make the seat like in the jet fighter? if something happen then i just press the eject button..  8)
I'm still very sure that it's not impossible if they want to, may be it's very expensive but i think it's worth comparing to human life victim. now, i don't really want to flying.. :-X lately the plane crash is very often

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: sodderboy on June 05, 2009, 02:43:24 PM
And you have to work-out the 600 mph/ -50 degree celsius/ no oxygen thang once you clear the plunging plane.

It will take thousands of planes dropping from the sky to even-out the probability that you still have a better chance of an early (is it really premature, though) death in an automobile within 10 miles of your home, or for many of us just doing home "repairs".  Almost did not make it past 13 in a plunging scaffolding incident.

Strange lack of coverage on it, even in the States where they don't give much of a hoot about reporting non-US related news.  I really hope that this is not a case of a soft target having been found.  God help the families.
Mike
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: recnsci on June 05, 2009, 05:31:21 PM

I'm still very sure that it's not impossible if they want to, may be it's very expensive but i think it's worth comparing to human life victim. now, i don't really want to flying.. :-X lately the plane crash is very often


IMHO, planes don't crash more often, you just have much more coverage in media. I would sack that idiot who figured out that Air Crash Investigation would be nice family show (OTOH, I'm under impression that they only sell fear in mainstream media these days).

cheerz
urosh
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: PRR on June 05, 2009, 07:04:41 PM
Let's not confuse GPS and photo satellites.

The GPS birds are transmit-mostly. They are like the North Star: you can see it, you can work out where you are. A little trickier because the GPS birds don't stand still. But cheap computing makes it a $5 job to work out your location from several observations. They do not listen much, although they must hear a time-code from somewhere, and there was a "smear" option turned off a few years ago. They certainly don't know where you are.

The spy-birds are up there looking down all the time. There are several levels. There are photos from mile-high civilian airplanes doing surveys and map-checks. In crisis, a spy-plane can buzz a part of the world from above AA-missile range. There are eyes at geo-sync orbit (23,000 miles) keeping 24/7 watch over huge corners of the world, essentially looking for rocket-launches and bomb tests. Weather photos come from these and some lower birds.

But the see-your-house photos come from low-orbit satellites. Roughly 100 miles up, 20 mile swath of ground. In polar orbit, it takes over a thousand orbits to see the whole world, each orbit over 90 minutes. Half the time the ground is dark, and some of the daytime is cloudy. A single satellite won't see you more than once or twice a year. There are multiple satellites, but not a gigantic number. If "they" are watching me, they probably don't get more than one look per week. And if they are not looking for me, the data-stream may get stored for months before anybody uses it.

I do not believe they can do face-recognition from orbit. Air turbulence defies such acuity. For stationary objects like bunkers and silos, averaging will improve the image; maybe they can read manhole cover numbers. But unless you lay dead face-up for a long time, they can't read your face.

The out-there Truth: Bermuda Triangle. People vanish. This is because earthlings are tasty, and if you catch them at sea or in flight they are pre-crated/canned and ready for transport to food-shops on Jupiter. Because of over-hunting, earthlings are now rare in the historical Bermuda Triangle, so the hunters have moved further down the coast where surveillance is thin.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 05, 2009, 11:14:08 PM
Nobody listened to me about the GPS satellites but I'll add that those spy birds, namely the ones launched in the last 5 years CAN recognize your face from space and read your license plate too.  It's not just optical zoom anymore, they can digitally take 100 photos of you in just a second, use those photos in some crazy algorithm and "remove" the distortion based on multiple pics.  It's pretty insane what they can do but nobody listens to me, they are too busy defending their cozy "reality" and not researching reality.  ;)
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: simonsez on June 06, 2009, 01:17:08 AM

IMHO, planes don't crash more often, you just have much more coverage in media. I would sack that idiot who figured out that Air Crash Investigation would be nice family show (OTOH, I'm under impression that they only sell fear in mainstream media these days).

[/quote]

Yes...plane crash is not as often as car crash, but when it crash it will take hundredS of life with it, and it will continue to crash....for sure. When i'm in a car, i have safety belt and other safety protection tech. but when i'm fly i don't have anything if something bad happened except taht emergency door. :-\. OK... may be i just too paranoid.. :-\
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: trancedental on June 06, 2009, 11:19:44 AM
3 weeks after 9/11, I was on a flight from Dublin to London where some male & female passengers were allowed on board with full Islamic dress, suffice to say, many in fact most passengers were not happy & started complaining,  some actually made plans to thwart anyone interfering with flight crew or other passengers. Luckily nothing happened, but as I don't like flying anyway it made my mind up I'd rather travel by Trains, Ferries, Eurostar ect  ;D

That was the last flight I made until last summer, since then I have made over a dozen flights & almost conquered my flight phobia. Almost but not quite ::)

Incidents like this make me now think that I'm better off going back to my old ways & saving myself all the related stresses of flying, checking in, security, waitng for bagage, getting to the airport in time, which nowadays means hours & hours beforehand.

God bless the victims RIP

Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: JohnRoberts on June 06, 2009, 12:23:23 PM
I'll believe face recognition from space sometime after they get it working reliably from a few feet away..  They are still wrestling with the differences between the same person smiling or frowning.

Yes, news panders to sensationalism... hundreds dying violently at once is more sensational than thousands dying every day from eating too much and not exercising, or children of malaria in Africa because DDT is politically incorrect, etc...

Yes indeed condolences to all who lost loved ones, whether they died violently or not...  There seems to be some extra anger about deaths that seem avoidable, but numerically there are far more of them all around us. 

JR
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Jonte Knif on June 06, 2009, 12:28:58 PM
Quote
the ones launched in the last 5 years CAN recognize your face from space and read your license plate too.

I guess you have a reason to hide ;) Well, you know, just wear an Osama mask, and they'll never find you. And start riding a donkey or camel instead of a car. You'll be fine.

Sorry, I couldn't resist, I it so cozy and real up here at the polar circle. Seriously, do you have a source? That technology has certainly developed quite a lot since I last read anything about it. (before 2001) I wonder how much the paparazzi would be willing to pay for such service :)
The algorithms for removing air disturbances at least in astronomy are quite clever. Nothing beats Hubble, but they are getting closer with signal processing.

But to the topic: It is not far fetched to wonder if the aviation companies are starting to save from the wrong things. Like not avoiding serious storms to save fuel, skipping on maintenance etc. And the composite materials are a risk IMHO.

I once flew from Delhi to Moscow, and the plane took a stop at Dubai to avoid storms. Not exactly in the route if you look at a map. This kind of things cost money and the companies face serious competition these days.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Kingston on June 06, 2009, 12:46:33 PM
There seems to be some extra anger about deaths that seem avoidable, but numerically there are far more of them all around us.

speaking of avoidable deaths, I always cringe when flight safety is discussed in the media. Those numbers are rarely put next to traffic death, with about 40 000 killed every year in US alone, 3000 a year in the UK, some 500 in finland etc. I don't even dare to google how bad it gets in the third world.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Svart on June 06, 2009, 01:44:01 PM
So did anyone read that the wreckage they found was NOT from the Air France flight?

2 things come to mind..

What WAS the wreckage from and where the hell did the Air France plane go?

 ???

They found a couple bodies though..  We'll see where they are from soon enough.



And I didn't mean automated facial recognition, someone still has to look at the photo, they just have the software ability to remove the optical distortion from the photos.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: Kingston on June 06, 2009, 01:58:33 PM
What WAS the wreckage from

The sea is to most countries the equivalent of a garbage dump. There is a gigantic amount of crap along to shores of every major ocean. The tip of the ice berg does not even begin to describe that in comparison to how much is still floating, and sunken out there.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: 1954U1 on June 06, 2009, 02:15:08 PM
What WAS the wreckage from

The sea is to most countries the equivalent of a garbage dump. There is a gigantic amount of crap along to shores of every major ocean. The tip of the ice berg does not even begin to describe that in comparison to how much is still floating, and sunken out there.

Yes, indeed.
But anyway, IMO there is a smell of lame, tragicomic, nervous lies.
The sad, simple, not-spoken truth being costs cut.
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: SSLtech on June 06, 2009, 08:50:06 PM
The thing which struck me is how many "slicks" they found.

I'm certain that a lot of merchant traffic just dumps oily waste overboard and nobody's any the wiser, -right?

Keith
Title: Re: The lost Air France jet
Post by: 1954U1 on June 06, 2009, 10:35:07 PM
Quote
At a news conference earlier Saturday, officials of France's accident investigation bureau, or BEA, said that the plane encountered an "incoherence" in its measured air speeds, but that they could not conclude whether incorrect speed readings caused the crash.
Airbus had advised airlines to replace the device used to communicate flight speed, but Air France had not done so on Flight 447, according to BEA President Paul-Louis Arslanian.

If I remember well, its not the 1st time, and not even the 2nd, that  these airplanes has suffered from electronic system misreading.