What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Egypt Air Flight Missing (1 Viewer)

Maybe if the pilots were too busy.  Having a hard time coming up with an alternative.  Md80 is mostly mechanical as I don't think it's fly-by-wire but my information is dated 
It's standard training that a distress call is a priority during an event.  You want to call it in ASAP so ground crews can scramble to your aid.  I can't imagine a crew being too busy to talk to ATC, even if they had to fly the plane w/o assistance.

 
I think given the lack of radio response, and the erratic flight patterns, the three best theories are:

1)  A bomb went off in the rear of the plane, which damaged either the elevator and/or the horizontal stabilizer(s), as well as communications.  This would mean the pilots had little control of the pitch of the plane.  The ailerons were potentially unaffected, so the banking, descending turns were them trying something, anything, to get control of the plane.  Without horizontal control, the plane either pitched up, which resulted in a stall and a rapid descent, or nosed down and just sped up until impact.

2) A pilot forced the crash, in which case the erratic flight patterns could have been either just that pilot's choice, or the result of some kind of struggle.

3) Explosive decompression due to something(a bomb, structural failure, etc.  This was also a MH370 theory) which rapidly depressurized the plane.  You've got only seconds at that altitude before you black out.  Emergency descent procedures for most planes are steep, circular dives, similar to the plane's rapid descending 360.  The pilots might have been trying to get down to a lower altitude ASAP and just blacked out.

I lean towards option 1 personally.

 
'Let me introduce your pilot, Mohamed....and your co-pilot, Mohamed'.

Yeah, ok, let me off, I'll drive.

 
It's standard training that a distress call is a priority during an event.  You want to call it in ASAP so ground crews can scramble to your aid.  I can't imagine a crew being too busy to talk to ATC, even if they had to fly the plane w/o assistance.
Sure in theory but I can see someone thinking I need to focus on fixing the problem  I will talk to ground control later.

But this is also why I am not a pilot.

 
bagger said:
Sure in theory but I can see someone thinking I need to focus on fixing the problem  I will talk to ground control later.

But this is also why I am not a pilot.
Rule 1, fly the plane. You aren't wrong.

 
Can someone explain the tech behind a black box? Seems a little outdated to me. Good for 30 days, can only be detected within a few miles - there has to be a better way, no? 

Can't they make something A) that is easier to detect/locate B) that can ping data in real time to an external source?

 
Can someone explain the tech behind a black box? Seems a little outdated to me. Good for 30 days, can only be detected within a few miles - there has to be a better way, no? 

Can't they make something A) that is easier to detect/locate B) that can ping data in real time to an external source?
It's a battery operated comm device, both options to make this better involve a larger battery or stronger radio or both.  These cost money and weight.  There's no certainty you could get something to deatch and float like you would find on a sinking ship (Think deadliest catch) and still survive the impact.  

One would think that you could get the black box to try and dump it's contents while the plane is falling from the sky, at least LKGC and stuff like that.

 
Can't they make something A) that is easier to detect/locate B) that can ping data in real time to an external source?
B is the key. I imagine the limit is bandwidth. I imagine am amazing amount of data is stored in the back box. To capture and record all the data from all the aircraft currently flying would likely take an astounding amount of bandwidth and storage.  But there's likely a way. Only maintain it an hour. Hit the SAVE button when a plane goes missing to preserve it. Something like that.

 
B is the key. I imagine the limit is bandwidth. I imagine am amazing amount of data is stored in the back box. To capture and record all the data from all the aircraft currently flying would likely take an astounding amount of bandwidth and storage.  But there's likely a way. Only maintain it an hour. Hit the SAVE button when a plane goes missing to preserve it. Something like that.
You'd think that at least any plane with a wifi connection for passengers could make this work.

 
You'd think that at least any plane with a wifi connection for passengers could make this work.
I would think range is an issue with wifi. I think it would have to be transmitted via a system like GPS via satellite, or something like an HF radio signal. Because these things can fly over large bodies of water where they aren't anywhere near conventional radio range.

 
I would think range is an issue with wifi. I think it would have to be transmitted via a system like GPS via satellite, or something like an HF radio signal. Because these things can fly over large bodies of water where they aren't anywhere near conventional radio range.
The plane uses satellites for the wifi for passengers.  No reason they can't use them for this data, that's all I mean.

 
The plane uses satellites for the wifi for passengers.  No reason they can't use them for this data, that's all I mean.
Ah, did not know that. Agreed then, should work. My guess is cost? Can't afford to lose $2 per flight paying for a system like that. Bag fees probably go to $120 per to pay for it.

 
Seems like Greek and Egyptian aviation officials don't agree on the facts. Greeks say the plane definitely turned 90 degrees left while dropping altitude, then did a 360 and dropped again to 15k ft. The Egyptians say "There was no turning to the right or left, and it was fine when it entered Egypt's FIR [flight information region], which took nearly a minute or two before it disappeared." They also add "the plane had been flying at its normal height of 37,000ft before dropping off the radar."

How can these two sides disagree on what I would think are facts provided by satellites? Regardless of anything else shouldn't the altitude and flight pattern be indisputable?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36365256

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top