News EgyptAir flight MS804 disappears from radar between Paris and Cairo

C3PO said:
How would the aircraft react to a sudden change in thrust in one engine @FL370? I'd imagine that there wasn't a huge margin between cruise and stall speed, however this late in the flight the lighter fuel load would have improved on that. Maybe an uncommanded deployment of one reverser could catch out a crew that was troubleshooting a list of perplexing faults.
Click to expand...

Boeing previously said that a thrust reverser deployed in flight could NOT cause a crash. They then tested it and were proven right - at slow speed. When they tested it at altitude and cruise speed the result was one hell of an in flight upset. The tests were carried out after this crash http://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_main.cfm?TabID=2&LLID=34&LLTypeID=2

So yes, a thrust reverser deployment in cruise would be fatal. It could also explain the course change and the other primary radar returns.
 
garyw said:
So yes, a thrust reverser deployment in cruise would be fatal. It could also explain the course change and the other primary radar returns.
Click to expand...

But it would not cut the transponder and other electronics. Or the communications of the crew.
 
And it wouldn't explain the ACARS messages.

So we are back to waiting for more information and black boxes.
 
Someone I know wondered if the co-pilot suddenly converted to radical islam and used the cutlery for the inflight meal to try and take over the plane
 
Linguofreak said:
My dad's wild speculation:

Window ices over, crew turns on anti-ice.

Anti-ice power circuit short circuits in avionics bay. Circuit breaker pops, resulting in first warning.

Crew resets breaker, resulting in fire in avionics bay due to short circuit.

Fire burns through wiring for right sliding window sensor.

Fire results in smoke alarms, and progresses through the avionics bay, causing other alarms and eventuality leading to loss of radio power. The lavatory smoke alarm comes first leading the crew to check for a passenger smoking in the lavatory first. By the time they know what's going on, they've lost radio and can't make a distress call.
Click to expand...

So far this is the best non-terrorism explanation. Everyone jumps into the ISIS conclusion, but the circumstances still make no sense, and nobody even claimed the attack yet. Maybe it was a lone wolf?

Furthermore, there's still no evidence of a bomb explosion anywhere (from what they analyzed, so that isn't totally excluded).
 
APDAF said:
Someone I know wondered if the co-pilot suddenly converted to radical islam and used the cutlery for the inflight meal to try and take over the plane
Click to expand...

Does not explain the descent rate and the sudden loss of signal.

Also you need no radical Islam for that: A copilot committing suicide that way is much easier and does also not require a violent fight.
 
Urwumpe said:
Exactly. 3 minutes run out quickly if you are especially distracted by strange warnings that make no sense.

But 3 minutes is also a rapid propagation of a fire in an aircraft after the modifications that followed Swissair 111. The previously inflammable insulation materials had been replaced by flame-resistant materials.
...
I would also not exclude something in the cargo hold. But previous terror attacks had also been assisted already by workers in the airport, so it is not a new possibility. Just a lot more sophisticated than before. The forward avionics compartment can be accessed from the nose landing gear bay - even a blind passenger would be a possibly cause like that.
Click to expand...

Can't recall if the fire suppression system in the cargo hold is manually activated, or automatic. I DO recall that, if baggage is placed too close to the ceiling of the hold, it will compromise the fire suppression system's ability to extinguish a fire. Furthermore, the cargo bay walls are composite, and there are access panels on the forward bulkhead of the #1 bin (foremost compartment).

So, throw even a small incendiary device in the #1 bin against the bulkhead and amidst the HIGHLY flammable luggage, pile it up to the ceiling of the hold, and you stand a VERY good chance of burning through that bulkhead and into the compartment beyond. Not sure what's there exactly, but it would probably link into the avionics bay somehow.
 
What if the cockpit began to completely fill with smoke? So full that the FO (right-side) in a panic thought the only option of clearing it would be to slide open a window? Would that cause enough stress on the structure of the pressurized flight deck to break the adjacent window?
 
n122vu said:
What if the cockpit began to completely fill with smoke? So full that the FO (right-side) in a panic thought the only option of clearing it would be to slide open a window? Would that cause enough stress on the structure of the pressurized flight deck to break the adjacent window?
Click to expand...

Not really. I am not even sure if you even can open a window against the pressure difference.
 
You wouldn't be able to brake it... the window is disigned so that the air pressure pushes it into it's frame and there isn't anything inside the cockpit to break it]
 
Urwumpe said:
Not really. I am not even sure if you even can open a window against the pressure difference.
Click to expand...

Probably not. They are most likely designed to be like the doors of the plane, plug doors that cannot be opened in flight unless the plane is depressurised.

Now it seems that an emergency signal WAS detected from MS804 on the day of the accident.

http://www.airlive.net/breaking-egyptair-flight-ms804-from-paris-to-cairo-disappears-from-radar/

I think that there has to be some criticism of the way this is being handled, the military denied that there was a emergency signal, now it seems that there was one.
 
That report a bit ambiguous. Initially the miitary said there had been an emergency call from the aircraft i.e. pilot - this was then denied by the airline. Not so? This latest report says there was a satellite detected emergency locator signal - i.e. ELT, an emergency beacon - not a "call". Possibly triggered when hit the water - hence the sudden precise location to within 3 miles. it doesn't say what time

Agreed there is a lot of mixed and misinformation :(

To add to that - there are various ELT types including those on rafts activated by salt water (doesn't mean raft necessarily used) Also wasn't for long, indicating what ever was, it went down.
Better info - as usual - on PPruNe
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that the primary radar trace from the Greek authorities loses track of the plane at 10,000 ft. That piece of the Mediterranean, *must* be covered down to sea-level by dozens of radars. Hopefully we will get the full story soon.

I would love to see planes retrofitted with an emergency sat data package, triggered from any significant departure from the flight plan. Emergency data transmission of as much of the black box data as it can handle (and if it can transmit more than real time, then start dumping back in time as well to build up the story back to the upset). Then why cannot we have a set of pingers, all with different timers and rates, to make it much more likely to zoom in on the crash site. Put this on the top of the plane (e.g. where the DirtecTV retrofits are being done, so we know this is possible). I know this is just a $$$ issue, but it should be mandated at least for all new vessels.
 
mojoey said:
PPruNe us just as bad, if not worse than APC for rumor-mongering, so I would take anything you read there with quite a bit of salt.
Click to expand...

:thumbup: Haha - that's what I meant - at least it says it's a rumour network - just has more . . .
 
garyw said:
Probably not. They are most likely designed to be like the doors of the plane, plug doors that cannot be opened in flight unless the plane is depressurised.

Now it seems that an emergency signal WAS detected from MS804 on the day of the accident.

http://www.airlive.net/breaking-egyptair-flight-ms804-from-paris-to-cairo-disappears-from-radar/

I think that there has to be some criticism of the way this is being handled, the military denied that there was a emergency signal, now it seems that there was one.
Click to expand...
Airbus doesn't use plug-type doors on the cabin or cargo hold...
 
The Egyptians report that a ship has discovered the wreck of the aircraft. The accident investigation board has already received pictures from the bottom of the sea, which seem to be convincing that the wreck is found.

---------- Post added 06-16-16 at 03:23 PM ---------- Previous post was 06-15-16 at 10:58 PM ----------

The CVR has been located and recovered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Soheil_Esy
Science Atmospheric Science
Replies
0
Views
6K
Soheil_Esy
Soheil_Esy
polaris149Tiberius
"From the Earth to The Moon" an AMSO 1.17 Apollo 11 Full Mission Tutorial Using IMFD
5 6 7
Replies
137
Views
159K
polaris149Tiberius
polaris149Tiberius
Back
Top