AF447 didn't break apart in flight. I hit the ocean whole and pretty much flat on its belly with a little nose up and a little banking.

 

Cheers,

 

Yes but the point was it came down hard without getting too literal. I don't have the visual of how it hit the water in my head for good reasons.

 

I've read reports that passengers from QZ8501 had been found with life jackets deployed and a raft was deployed so it seams like this one didn't hit that hard

I've read reports that passengers from QZ8501 had been found with life jackets deployed

This all turned out to be lies (or miss-statements).

We heard quite a few of lies so far - they already recovered 40 bodies - lie.

With the help of sonar they pinpointed location of the fuselage - lie.

A recovered body had a life jacket on - lie.

 

I don't have the visual of how it hit the water i

Too bad, they were in a relatively stable and well defined attitude when they hit water, nothing terribly hard to visualize.

 

so it seams like this one didn't hit that hard

Faulty deduction based on faulty data.

At this point there is absolutely no verified info to support theory they hit water "softer" than AF447.

This all turned out to be lies (or miss-statements).

 

Not surprised. New reports are way too unreliable and the investigation far too soon.

 

Too bad, they were in a relatively stable attitude when they hit water, nothing very hard to visualize.

 

For me their are three accidents that hit home, one being SwissAir flight 111, I was living in Nova Scotia at the time and when they brought that up off the ocean floor I could see the wreckage from my house. Other being MK Airlines Flight 1602 (my partners cousin was onboard that one and lost their life). Third one was a Cessna crashed when I was in flight school and lost a fellow instructor and student.....So therefore I don't read too much into details of a crash anymore but more interested in the cause. Seeing the wreckage from 111 was heartbreaking so I would never like to see or visualize something like that again.

My guess is that the a/c suffered structural failure. Look back to BAW 911 in 1966 that crashed over Mt Fuji. Aircraft "are" designed to withstand heavy turbulence but only to a gust factor of 66feet per second. Beyond that things start to fail or break. There are many instances of a/c landing with bits missing due to turbulence. Fortunately in those cases they weren't critical bits.

 

 

There are many instances of a/c landing with bits missing due to turbulence. Fortunately in those cases they weren't critical bits.

 

Pretty much my biggest fear when flying.  People are quick to stress that the wings are supposed to bend and are tested vigorously.  I always reply, it's not the wings i worry about, it's separation of the vertical stabilizer.

New and entirely different twist, the plot thickens yet again...

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/airasia-plane-may-have-made-emergency-landing-high-waves-sunk-it-experts/article1-1302454.aspx

New and entirely different twist, the plot thickens yet again...

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/airasia-plane-may-have-made-emergency-landing-high-waves-sunk-it-experts/article1-1302454.aspx

 

Very doubtful IMHO, if it did make a soft landing, there should have been survivors in the water, or at least bodies in life vests. As stated above the earlier reports of bodies found in life vests has been thus far proven false.

 

New and entirely different twist, the plot thickens yet again...

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/airasia-plane-may-have-made-emergency-landing-high-waves-sunk-it-experts/article1-1302454.aspx

I doubt this theory because it is extremely rare for an aircraft of this size to survive intact when ditching at sea. The sea was rough at the time of the accident and it was at night so it would have been nigh impossible to execute the correct ditching drill. All the passengers would have been wearing their life jackets. Until the black boxes are recovered everything is conjecture. I hope though it's not yet another case of pilots not knowing what to do when the computer gives up!

 5:17 AM
Sunrise in Surabaya, Indonesia

120nm eastsoutheast of Pulau Belitung Island at about 06:16

 5:43 AM
Sunrise in Belitung

Daybrake, sun was probably up already.

Cheers,

Black box recovery and analysis is about the only reports I will believe. With aviation accidents the early news reports are terrible speculations based on what people are saying about it, I have no idea where some of these people come up with this stuff. This one is still far too soon to know what really happened as it could still take a year for real data to be released. 

Early reports says it stalled

 

Apparently the data points toward that the plane pitched up beyond the flight envelope.

 

God rest their souls

Looks like this is going to be another AF447 situation, with the Pitot tubes malfunctioning. That would explain why the flight computers protections didn't prevent the plane from entering that situation, as it should have.

Haven't seen anything about "pitot tubes", but stall seems to have been an early speculation and what data dribbles out does not preclude that speculation.

 

scott s.

.

Haven't seen anything about "pitot tubes", but stall seems to have been an early speculation and what data dribbles out does not preclude that speculation.

 

scott s.

.

The Airbus flight protection systems should prevent the aircraft from entering a stall situation, so something went wrong, that could be caused by a computer malfunction (Possible), the pilot intentionally disables the protections (also possible), or inaccurate sensor data picked up from the Pitot tubes which will result in inaccurate data to the computers and gauges. The Airbus A3XX  has a history of this problem (most notably AF447), so I tend to lean towards the latter

My thoughts are with the pitot tubes as well, their is a known history of this problem so it is possible their 'Fix' just wasn't enough, and these ones froze too