Air Asia Flight missing..

mr.anonymous · 29-12-2014 03:10AM

Strumms wrote: »

i agree with your point about the media and how they report on aviation especially tragic events like this within the industry. Almost always uninformed, sensationalist and looking for clickbait.

i disagree about your point re: the Cork crash.. the report indicated that there were more holes aligned in that block of cheese then one. And because people come on to speculate in a definite manner re: say this crash or any other at this time with 99% of the facts unknown does not make them any better then the hack who is coming up with sensationalist BS under the banner on the daily fail or some other publication.. just my two cents

For the Cork crash, I remember watching the initial RTE news reports and then the reports regarding the final report from the AAIU, which came nearly three years later. The initial reports weren't shy about implying things. The media always run through a sensationalist list of possibilities then finish off by saying we don't know yet.

I would gladly listen to what the likes of David Learmont from Flight International magazine has to say on this accident, but he would only be using the same finite information we are and commenting from experience.

It's particularly frustrating to hear talk of whether the airline is a safe airline. They don't seem to understand that an airline with a low cost business model needs the same approvals from the aviation authority to operate. Safety is about risk and not crashes.

eatmyshorts · 29-12-2014 03:52AM

NewSigGuy wrote: »

.

I see CNN have brought out Richard Quest in this case as a de facto expert on all things aviation, what is his qualification??

He's got a degree in "Hiding things in your sock while out for a stroll".

tharmor · 29-12-2014 09:35AM

mayotom wrote:

Sensationalist Rubbish

mayotom wrote:

Ownership "Indonisian AirAisa" is as follows "AirAsia Berhad" has a 49% share in the airline with "Fersindo Nusaperkasa" owning 51%. Indonesia's laws disallow majority foreign ownership on domestic civil aviation operations.

Well i just posted based on some article on twitter...and yes that deal was scrapped in 2012.....apologies for the wrong info !

Peppa Pig · 29-12-2014 09:58AM

RTE reporting objects seen near where plane went missing

Objects have been spotted in the sea in the area where a missing AirAsia passenger plane went down.

mayotom · 29-12-2014 01:02PM

tharmor wrote: »

Well i just posted based on some article on twitter...and yes that deal was scrapped in 2012.....apologies for the wrong info !

No that Deal never existed

owenc · 29-12-2014 01:07PM

NewSigGuy wrote: »

So a Guy makes a blatant statement of Knowledge, which they clearly could not have at this stage, and it is wrong to question the posters expertise!!

Aviation has become an area in which every arm chair expert has an opinion and an answer. Watching black box etc does not give you the full facts nor does it give one a real insight into the dynamics in play on the flight deck of an aircraft.

Aviation has become synonymous with the phrase "Pilot Error" and this is I believe unique in the professional world as is the fact that in most cases the one who makes the error will also pay the price.

I think most Pilots find it hard to take it when the media and the public at large are so quick to jump to judgement and everyone has the expert opinion from some talking head on some 24/7 news channel. I think its important to consider that the news channel just needs to fill the minutes till the next headlines and they will broadcast almost anything that fills the void.

I see CNN have brought out Richard Quest in this case as a de facto expert on all things aviation, what is his qualification??

At the moment everything is pure speculation and while many pilots may have opinions most will keep them to themselves until there is more concrete info.

Well people are here to learn.

owenc · 29-12-2014 01:08PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Perhaps you'd care to rephrase? I'm sure that kind of language could be considered misogynistic.

I'm saying nothing.

owenc · 29-12-2014 01:10PM

Strumms wrote: »

I really do not understand the lust for speculation in such tragic incidents. There could be many reasons why the aircraft crashed. As highlighted most investigations take a long time to come to a finding and often there is a Swiss cheese scenario where multiple factors play a part. It's completly ludicrous for anyone to sit in their armchair tonight to come out with baloney such as.. " well I think this happened or that happened". It's nosensical and serves no purpose nobody knows Jack **** apart from there was bad weather in the area which may or may not have been a contributory factor. Boggles the mind.

Well what is the point in creating this thread then? I mean what else are people going to talk about?

I really do not know why these 'pilots' have a fit when people discuss possible causes of an accident, I mean we are doing no harm and its not like people are saying its exactly what happened.

Its just odd how they can't find this plane with the depth of the water there, I don't know what the water conditions are but i'm sure you could almost see the bottom at that depth.

Peregrine · 29-12-2014 01:21PM

tharmor wrote: »

Well i just posted based on some article on twitter...and yes that deal was scrapped in 2012.....apologies for the wrong info !

The plan was that Tune Air would sell 10% of AirAsia to a Malaysian government hoding company who, in turn, would give Tune Air 20% of Malaysian Airlines. And yes, it was scrapped.

Calina · 29-12-2014 01:25PM

owenc wrote: »

I really do not know why these 'pilots' have a fit when people discuss possible causes of an accident, I mean we are doing no harm and its not like people are saying its exactly what happened.

Its just odd how they can't find this plane with the depth of the water there, I don't know what the water conditions are but i'm sure you could almost see the bottom at that depth.

I am not a pilot, but iirc the issue the last time was that pilots might willingly give their expertise on a particular item of interest and have it ignored because someone who has a lack of knowledge in that area doesn't want to accept their pet theory is unrealistic.

In many respects discussions like this can do harm because rather than spreading information, they can spread misinformation.

Take your comment above: you don't know what the water conditions are but are sure you could see the bottom at that depth.

Why are you so sure when you don't know what the water conditions are? There are several questions I have: how far can the plane have travelled in the time it was lost to the time it eventually sank. It's fine to be able to see the bottom, which you might not depending on chop, pollution and weather conditions - but if you don't know exactly where to look, then it takes a while to find something.

So threads like this, in my view, can be fantastic tools for learning if people are willing to recognise where their expertise stops and the expertise of another begins. IME, a lot of people over estimate their skillset and understanding, so threads come to spread misunderstanding and misinformation, and experts get frustrated.

In my view, it's fine to speculate, but if someone comes in with a theory and someone who is clearly more expert has an opposing view, the response should be to learn from it rather than go on about the attitude of experts. MH370 made it clear that a lot of people didn't want to learn and direct their speculation to a realistic direction. At the end of the day, the question is, do you want to find the plane, in which case you have to pay attention to experts, or do you just want to speculate about it for years to come?

Tenger · 29-12-2014 01:44PM

owenc wrote: »

......
Its just odd how they can't find this plane with the depth of the water there, I don't know what the water conditions are but i'm sure you could almost see the bottom at that depth.

How deep is it?
What is the light levels at this time?
Is it murky or crystal clear?
What are the surface conditions?
What is the sea floor composed of?

Yet you are "sure"

owenc · 29-12-2014 01:46PM

The water is 50 feet around the last known location or speculated crash location.

NewSigGuy · 29-12-2014 02:07PM

owenc wrote: »

The water is 50 feet around the last known location or speculated crash location.

Where did you get that FACT?? I read that the average depth of the Java sea is 46Mts.. Makes a significant difference IMHO

Have you considered any of the other factors that could reduce visibility in water??

martinsvi · 29-12-2014 02:13PM

from my limited diving/snorkelling experience in Red Sea/Great Barrier Reef/Donegal I would say 50ft is enough to not be able to see the bottom of the sea. Reports suggest very low visibility in the area, it's wet season in that part of the world, meaning regular thunderstorms, low clouds, fog etc, that reduce visibility not just in the air, but in water as well. No direct sunlight means, visibility even in crystal clear water can go down to just few meters and large objects cannot be seen even if they're in a shallow water as there's very little reflected light

on that note, I would imagine, mentioned conditions could also slow SAR efforts. But I'm sure they'll find it soon, reports of oil spills and debris found are coming in

Spanish Eyes · 29-12-2014 02:28PM

martinsvi wrote: »

on that note, I would imagine, mentioned conditions could also slow SAR efforts. But I'm sure they'll find it soon, reports of oil spills and debris found are coming in

Reports also saying the sighted oil spills are not connected with the lost flight.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/dec/29/airasia-qz8501-search-for-missing-flight-resumes-at-first-light

owenc · 29-12-2014 02:33PM

NewSigGuy wrote: »

Where did you get that FACT?? I read that the average depth of the Java sea is 46Mts.. Makes a significant difference IMHO

Have you considered any of the other factors that could reduce visibility in water??

If you go on Google Earth and look east of the island you will see the figures around 50 to 100 feet.

martinsvi · 29-12-2014 02:44PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Reports also saying the sighted oil spills are not connected with the lost flight.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/dec/29/airasia-qz8501-search-for-missing-flight-resumes-at-first-light

ah yes, I forgot those waters are polluted as hell, same thing happened with MH370, loads of spills, debris but non of them linked to the missing aircraft..

Spanish Eyes · 29-12-2014 02:59PM

I don't know, but is it unusual that passing marine traffic has not picked up the Black Box signals yet?

Would they have to be specifically listening in for them, or would the signals be automatically broadcast to whatever traffic is in the vicinity?

Maybe they need to know what the "vicinity" is first I suppose.

I hope this is not another MH370.

smurfjed · 29-12-2014 03:08PM

Would they have to be specifically listening in for them, or would the signals be automatically broadcast to whatever traffic is in the vicinity?

They are broadcast on 121.5, 243 and/or 406 mhz. The first one can be easily picked by passing aircraft, the other two would need to be tuned by the searching aircraft. But as martinsvi has pointed out, these devices have a very poor range in water.

Spanish Eyes · 29-12-2014 03:14PM

smurfjed wrote: »

They are broadcast on 121.5, 243 and/or 406 mhz. The first one can be easily picked by passing aircraft, the other two would need to be tuned by the searching aircraft. But as martinsvi has pointed out, these devices have a very poor range in water.

Thanks for the information on that.

Would passing marine traffic pick up any signals even if they were not specifically looking for them?

I seem to recall that implements were lowered into the water when looking for signals in 370, while the bb was still active.

I suppose then you would need to know where to look.

Aplogies if I am asking silly questions, am not in aviation at all, but am curious, and open to information from those who might know.

smurfjed · 29-12-2014 03:24PM

We have a company policy to maintain a listening watch on 121.5, this is generally for ATC to call you if they can't get you on their own frequency, but you will also hear ELT transmissions, unfortunately we don't have any indicating devices to show where the signal is coming from.
The other two frequencies would have to be tuned on the ADF radio and this would indicate the general direction of where the signal is coming from.

Growler!!! · 29-12-2014 04:04PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I don't know, but is it unusual that passing marine traffic has not picked up the Black Box signals yet?

Would they have to be specifically listening in for them, or would the signals be automatically broadcast to whatever traffic is in the vicinity?

Maybe they need to know what the "vicinity" is first I suppose.

I hope this is not another MH370.

There are no facilities aboard modern merchant marine vessels to pick up this signal. The modern ships comms suite is predominantly satellite based. The radios onboard have preset channels which cannot be tuned in a way similar to your old style FM radio.

FWVT · 29-12-2014 07:00PM

For what it's worth I did this analysis on the meteorological conditions in the area at the time. Just an analysis of data, not a statement of cause.

http://irishweatheronline.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/indonesia-air-asia-8501-a-meteorological-analysis/

martinsvi · 29-12-2014 11:27PM

some guy on pprune wrote the following:

Was in 747-100 cargo from syd-hkg same time frame nothing was painting on radar I went back to galley to get coffee as I came back up the captain said to strap in we hit a cell rising fast went from fl33 to fl39 in seconds and wild airspeed swings then back down to fl33 all three of us looked at each other and said what the hell was that? As a side note this aircraft was number 3 off the production line !

most of the thread there is rubbish, but this seems mindblowing if true

owenc · 29-12-2014 11:31PM

So surely they should've seen bits of floatinf fusealage by now??

martinsvi · 29-12-2014 11:36PM

owenc wrote: »

So surely they should've seen bits of floatinf fusealage by now??

local time in Indonesia is 5:35 AM... Sun will be rising in a few minutes, if there was nothing found this morning Irish Time then one can safely asume nothing will be found during the day ( which is their night). Be patient!

Grandeeod · 29-12-2014 11:54PM

One can't blame people unassociated with the airline industry, to be a little apprehensive about all this. Nearly 48 hours have elapsed and still not definitive sign of this aircraft. I want to wake up tomorrow and read that the wreckage has been found so we can put the March 8th disappearance down to a one off.

owenc · 29-12-2014 11:57PM

Its just a bit weird that it was lost in a highly populated area with shallow waters yet they see no evidence.

Jack1985 · 30-12-2014 12:01AM

owenc wrote: »

Its just a bit weird that it was lost in a highly populated area with shallo waters yet they see no evidence.

Yet.

Grandeeod · 30-12-2014 12:19AM

Jack1985 wrote: »

Yet.

Hopefully and I mean that.

Air Asia Flight missing..

Comments