Air France Flight Sent 24 Error Messages Minutes Before It Crashed

BBC News:

The Air France jet which went missing over the Atlantic sent 24 error messages minutes before it crashed, French investigators say.

Read the whole story: BBC News

Comments

[SharpDressedMan]

02:09 PM on 06/06/2009

Airbus should have made the black boxes buoyant so they remain on the surface of the water and can be retrieved more easily.

Otherwise, they should send the signals to Air France via satellite. Wireless and satellite technology have broadband capability. Someone in a control center could have monitored the situation in real time, discussed this with the crew and possibly averted this terrible disaster.

[CheshireCat2]

02:20 PM on 06/06/2009

Airbus does not make the FDR's or CVR's. I know that Honeywell is one manufacturer.

[Mogamboguru]

03:37 PM on 06/06/2009

But SharpDressedMan has a point.

I was thinking the same after the crash.

[wadenelson1]

01:27 PM on 06/06/2009

PLEASE TELL MICROSOFT ABOUT THIS PROBLEM.

[poster1122]

01:44 PM on 06/06/2009

You really shouldn't jump to conclusions about these things. The memo that the AP got a hold off talks about the flight speed sensors on these craft. As the CS saying goes, garbage in, garbage out.

[CheshireCat2]

01:02 PM on 06/06/2009

Mr Arslanian confirmed that the missing jet had had a problem calculating its speed, adding that it was a recurring problem on the A330s and that Airbus was undertaking a replacement programme.

Yet, that article notes later, "But he insisted the planes were safe in the meantime."

Oh, OK!

[groucho]

02:04 PM on 06/06/2009

That was a sentence that should have been in bold. Really, how could you know they were safe in the meantime if they were recurring problems.
Sort of like when there is a big explosion at one of the oil refineries in California. Black smoke pours out all over the city and within 5 minutes someone comes on the radio and says there is no danger to the community. Then when hundreds go to the ER with common complaints they are labeled as opportunists.

[CheshireCat2]

02:16 PM on 06/06/2009

Wait till the new 747 replacement from Airbus hits the skies. It will be ugly. This thing has had a greater history of failure than the Bush administration.

[CheshireCat2]

02:16 PM on 06/06/2009

Wait till the new 747 replacement from Airbus h-its the skies. It will be ug-ly. This thing has had a greater history of failure than the Bu-sh administration.

[CheshireCat2]

12:59 PM on 06/06/2009

I can't stand Airbuses, upon landing they sound like they are coming apart at the seams.

[Yve72]

12:46 PM on 06/06/2009

Something doesn't sound right.

Why were they reporting debris from the plane and then retracting the statements?
Didn't they say the debris could be assigned to a specific by by the serial numbers on it?

If the debris doesn't belong to Air France, what does it belong to? ...AND why won't they clarify that?

Why were the automated messages about electrical malfunctions, depressurization, and descent the only ones reported at first? Now there are 24. Why weren't they mentioned the first time? Its like someone just handed the public a bunch of gar.bage about wind speeds, etc.

Why is there no more information about the BAM pilot who spotted "orange spots"/fire on the ocean as he flew the same route in the opposite direction? We heard about it for a quick second and now nothing. Why didn't they ask his exact location when he witnessed this?

Something ain't right.

[poster1122]

01:50 PM on 06/06/2009

Actually, they have issued a number of clarifications on that. The problem was that the Brazilian search teams initially reported debris from what they *thought* was the plane. This report was made from visual sighting of debris *done from high up in the air*. This was made in conjunction with a sighting of an oil slick.

However, when sea-borne search teams arrived, they found that the oil slick was likely was from a ship (totally different grade of fuel than what a plane uses) and the debris was miscellaneous flotsam and jetsam (you'd be amazed to realize how much garbage we dump into the seas).

[AngieMom57]

04:09 PM on 06/06/2009

"you'd be amazed to realize how much garbage we dump into the seas"

Oprah Shines Light On Great Pacific Garbage Patch (Video)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/23/oprah-shines-light-on-gre_n_190552.html

[mergina]

12:22 PM on 06/06/2009

Whatever caused it to send 24 error messages before IT DISAPPEARED was very large and solid and NOT OF THIS WORLD.

[AngieMom57]

12:31 PM on 06/06/2009

I'm thinking satellite parts falling from space into our oceans, makes me worry about Air Force One.

[poster1122]

02:08 PM on 06/06/2009

From what basis do you say that?

Take an average control system. If you short out a piece of hardware that doesn't have a sensor directly attached to it, you'll likely get dozens of error messages from pieces related to it. It's not that you have dozens of faults per se, but dozens of faults resulting from one underlying one.

In this case, an electrical malfunction, for instance, could cause lots of sensors to start misreporting data. Not at all an uncommon scenario in electrical engineering.

Let's wait until we get more data.

[tydicea]

12:18 PM on 06/06/2009

They'll probably never find a trace of this plane if is was transmitting erroneous information in its final moments.

[tydicea]

01:00 PM on 06/06/2009

I stand corrected, breaking news on CNN says they've found bodies.

[dems08]

12:13 PM on 06/06/2009

"Air France had not acted on a recommendation to change airspeed-detecting instruments on Flight 447 before the plane crashed in turbulent weather, the French agency investigating the disaster said Saturday.

The French accident investigation agency, BEA, found the doomed plane received inconsistent airspeed readings by different instruments as it struggled in a massive thunderstorm... "

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090606/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_plane

[kwinyan]

12:35 PM on 06/06/2009

When the pitot tubes, which I think are on the fuselage, go out , it's worse than getting incorrect velocity readings. The plane accelerates and de-accelerates uncontrollably.

[thepathforward]

02:15 PM on 06/06/2009

Respectively- the pitot tubes ARE the source for the velocity readings. If in auto flight with malfunctioning air speed indications that are realized (soon enough), autothrottles can be disconnected and thrust (airpseed) manually controlled. IMO the key is "soon enough". In autoflight with erroneous air speed data what you noted as "plane accelerates and de-accelerates (sic) uncontrollably " can certainly occur. However, autothrottle and autopilot disconnects are designed to return control to the pilot. It just is very difficult to know where one is actually at in the flight envelope and proper airspeed region to stay out of critcal stall and buffet regions, etc. without accurate air speed indications even under manual thrust. Without proper air speed data and indications it's hard to understand/figure out where on is at between the critical high/low airspeed limits, which is especially critical at normal cruise altitudes and cruise speeds (mach).

But there were many other aircraft systems issues and anomalies going on at the time of the incident relative to the ACARS data stream, as reported, so airspeed/pitots may be only one of many pieces of the overall technical puzzle, or may possibly be a critical initial technical event that may have subsequently triggered many other successor critical technical events. Finding the CVR and FDR should definitely put the final technical puzzle together accurately. And that IMO is what is most crucial at this point.

[marymansour]

12:08 PM on 06/06/2009

I never trusted that Airbus from the gitgo.

[CheshireCat2]

01:23 PM on 06/06/2009

You got that right.

Wait till the new one hits the skies.

[SharpDressedMan]

01:59 PM on 06/06/2009

American Boeing never failed me.

[CheshireCat2]

02:05 PM on 06/06/2009

Zing!

That and a pair of Cheap Sunglasses

[dems08]

12:05 PM on 06/06/2009

Air France received a bomb threat four days before Flight 447 went down....

An anonymous caller made the threat to a plane heading from South America to Paris...

Following the phone threat, Flight 415 was grounded in Buenos Aires as sniffer dogs made a full search - but no explosives were found ....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/06/04/bomb-threat-4-days-before-jet-crashed-115875-21413591/

Was this just a coincidence? I wonder how often the flight from BA to France received bomb threats....

[TXfemmom]

11:59 AM on 06/06/2009

All the Airbus330's and other versions with this speed thing should be grounded until the thing is replaced, period. Didn't you just love the thing where they ADMITTED that the planes have had problems with determining speed with these things, Airbus IS AND HAS BEEN AWARE OF IT, and then this plane may have crashed because of it.

Then, they go on to say that they are replacing them slowly, but in the meantime, the planes THAT HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED, are SAFE. Bulls***. These planes ARE NOT SAFE.

[dems08]

11:54 AM on 06/06/2009

"...the missing jet had had a problem calculating its speed, adding that

IT WAS A RECURRING PROBLEM

on the A330s and that Airbus was undertaking a replacement programme."

[TXfemmom]

12:00 PM on 06/06/2009

You forgot to add that they then claimed that the PLANES WHICH HAVE NOT HAD IT REPLACED ARE STILL SAFE. BULL.

[dems08]

12:07 PM on 06/06/2009

I didn't forget. I wrote what I wrote.

[SharpDressedMan]

02:01 PM on 06/06/2009

The fact that they are replacing the instrumentation indicates pre-existing problems they should have acted on from the get go.

[SeeJaneRunning]

11:52 AM on 06/06/2009

24 error messages? Time for a War on Error.

[AngieMom57]

12:29 PM on 06/06/2009

lol

[1logicalthinker]

12:33 PM on 06/06/2009

War on Error? Didn't we already have eight years of that :)

[Hnorc]

01:36 PM on 06/06/2009

No, that was a War of Error. :)

[sarabono]

11:49 AM on 06/06/2009

Send in one of our deep water Navy subs. If the box is not transmitting, finding it would take a little time. If it is transmitting, we could find it almost immediately.

[Dredd]

11:40 AM on 06/06/2009

Weather Channel experts determined from satellite data that there was no lightning within 150 miles of the airliner.

There were storms with destructive winds that should not have been flown into.

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/06/aircraft-lost-hurricane-season-begins.html

[marymansour]

12:13 PM on 06/06/2009

One wonders if the pilots had spent a night partying in Rio - just a theory and not meant to cast aspersions on the crew.