Author Topic: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?  (Read 25851 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline aargee

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 726
  • Country: au
Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« on: July 29, 2015, 11:05:48 pm »
Looks like it might be. The wing section is from a Boeing 777. More evidence and tests will follow I guess.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-30/plane-wreckage-sparks-malaysia-airlines-mh370-speculation/6658600
Not easy, not hard, just need to be incentivised.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2015, 12:28:22 am »
If it is the flap, it doesn't look deformed in any way as you'd expect if the plane hit vertically at speed as most suspect due to the lack of debris.
So points toward a softer landing.
But perhaps they were just looking in the completely wrong area all this time?
To take all this time for wreckage to wash up seems a bit far fetched, but it is one big arse ocean.
I wonder if they can trace currents back to an approximate lattitude?
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 12:31:39 am by EEVblog »
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2015, 12:32:53 am »
Good.
"No part of the wreckage has ever been found" - This is not true. A halon fire extinguisher spherical tank washed up on a Maldives beach, Mar 26, 2014. Closely matches photos of the same tank in a Boeing 777.
See http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54178
And several other reports around that time, see http://everist.org/archives/links/__Flight_MH370_disappearance_links.txt  time sequence.

But it doesn't fit the official story. The tank disappeared, and was never mentioned in the MSM.
I wonder what the French will say about this wing part?

Ocean currents, indian ocean:
http://www.wikipedy.com/ocean_currents_northern_hemisphere_world_map_ocean_currents.htm
http://www.wikipedy.com/images_o/ocean_current.jpg

Another article:
 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3178978/Debris-floating-Indian-Ocean-missing-Malaysia-Airlines-flight-370.html
Quote
Air crash investigators have 'a high degree of confidence' that a piece of wreckage found on the Indian Ocean island of La Reunion is from a Boeing 777 - the same model as the doomed MH370 which disappeared in March 2014.

Since the Boeing 777 was introduced in 1994, there have been five incidents - including MH370 -  which have led to the destruction of the aircraft. MH370 is the only aircraft of its type which has vanished over the sea. ....

A Boeing source told NBC that they believe the piece of wreckage is from a Boeing 777 and the only missing aircraft of its type is MH370.

He also noted a reference on the wreckage: BB670.  He added: 'This code is not a plane's registration number, nor serial number. However... it's clear that this reference would allow a quick identification.

Edit: pic from that article:

« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 03:34:30 am by TerraHertz »
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline ElectroIrradiator

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 614
  • Country: dk
  • More analog than digital.
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2015, 12:36:37 am »
Chunks of that size cannot be dropping off 777 wings too frequently. Even then Boeing ought to have the incident in their records if it has happened to another airplane.
 

Offline ez24

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3092
  • Country: us
  • L.D.A.
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #4 on: July 30, 2015, 12:46:41 am »
Quote
A Boeing source told NBC that they believe the piece of wreckage is from a Boeing 777 and the only missing aircraft of its type is MH370.

NBC just broadcast this and showed that the currents could carry it across the Indian ocean (counterclockwise currents).  They also said this is consistent with a "soft" crash landing.  See

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/missing-jet/french-investigators-check-plane-debris-remote-french-island-clues-mh370-n400586?cid=eml_nnn_20150729
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 12:52:58 am by ez24 »
YouTube and Website Electronic Resources ------>  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/other-blog-specific/a/msg1341166/#msg1341166
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #5 on: July 30, 2015, 12:57:54 am »
Wow.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2015, 01:01:32 am »
But it doesn't fit the official story.

Just a warning - don't go off on your conspiracy rants again, we don't want that here. Ok?
 

Offline Mechanical Menace

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1293
  • Country: gb
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2015, 01:02:11 am »
I wonder how long there will be until the obvious conclusion is reached, that the 777 is just not a flight worthy plane yet, no matter how long they failed at getting it built to begin with?
Second sexiest ugly bloke on the forum.
"Don't believe every quote you read on the internet, because I totally didn't say that."
~Albert Einstein
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2015, 01:05:26 am »
Quote
A Boeing source told NBC that they believe the piece of wreckage is from a Boeing 777 and the only missing aircraft of its type is MH370.

Sounds like we have a winner then. If so, they should start diverting what boats are left and back searching the currents to look for other wreckage.
Gotta be a soft-ish landing.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2015, 01:07:37 am »
I wonder how long there will be until the obvious conclusion is reached, that the 777 is just not a flight worthy plane yet

How so?
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/b777.htm
Not many major incidents since 1993
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2015, 01:08:18 am »
Here is a bit of ocean current information. Seems to be roughly on track with the estimated crash location. Of course everything waaay to preliminary.

http://5newsonline.com/2015/07/29/garretts-blog-gyres-mh370-debris/
 

Offline Mechanical Menace

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1293
  • Country: gb
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2015, 01:11:40 am »
I wonder how long there will be until the obvious conclusion is reached, that the 777 is just not a flight worthy plane yet

How so?
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/b777.htm
Not many major incidents since 1993

Brain fade, was thinking of the wrong plane. Self  :palm: :palm:
Second sexiest ugly bloke on the forum.
"Don't believe every quote you read on the internet, because I totally didn't say that."
~Albert Einstein
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2015, 01:12:54 am »
Here is a bit of ocean current information. Seems to be roughly on track with the estimated crash location. Of course everything waaay to preliminary.
http://5newsonline.com/2015/07/29/garretts-blog-gyres-mh370-debris/

Wow, that's almost bang-on:
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2015, 04:03:58 am »
I'm not sure why so many people are looking at this and saying "Proves it must have been a soft ditching".
It's been ripped off the wing, it has lots of damage around the rear edge, the actuator mount that should be present in that pic I posted above isn't there (ie ripped out.)

At the rear edge of the wing, close to the wing root, I can imaging it surviving a high speed water impact and ending up like that. Quite a few large pieces of Air France 447 survived as intact as this one. Including at least one flap I can recall.  So it's condition doesn't really say much about the impact.

I wonder what the flotation volume is? Just hollow sealed cavities, or some kind of closed-cell foam?
Because the question is, did it break off on impact (and then why wasn't it seen?)
Or did it go to the bottom with most of the wreckage and then work loose and pop up later?

Hollow sealed cavities would have been pressure-crushed at depth. So would flexible closed cell foam, removing buoyancy. But a hard foam might have held up. It's just that this is big and light-colored, so WHY WASN'T IT SPOTTED?

I wonder if it might have been floating end-up, rather than flat? Someone should put it back in the water, and see.
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2015, 04:47:03 am »
I'm not sure why so many people are looking at this and saying "Proves it must have been a soft ditching".

If you have experience in testing stuff hitting water vertically you'll know why.
I've done a lot of such testing, and hitting water can be like hitting concrete.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2015, 04:50:28 am »
Hollow sealed cavities would have been pressure-crushed at depth. So would flexible closed cell foam, removing buoyancy. But a hard foam might have held up. It's just that this is big and light-colored, so WHY WASN'T IT SPOTTED?

Likely because it's a big arse ocean. And ask anyone who does search and rescue and they will tell you how hard it is to spot stuff.
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2015, 05:05:31 am »
Hollow sealed cavities would have been pressure-crushed at depth. So would flexible closed cell foam, removing buoyancy. But a hard foam might have held up. It's just that this is big and light-colored, so WHY WASN'T IT SPOTTED?

Likely because it's a big arse ocean. And ask anyone who does search and rescue and they will tell you how hard it is to spot stuff.
Been there and done that. Concur.
Every time even a little wave breaks you think you spotted something - and then it vanishes.
In this case a white (or light grey) object lying just below the surface would be very hard to actually detect visually - because that is the colour of a breaking wave.
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2015, 05:18:25 am »
AF 447 hit the water in a full vertical stall (belly down), definitely not a 'soft ditching', yet bits like these survived. Last one is a wing flap.

Anyway, doesn't tell us anything useful, probably.
Why have no other pieces turned up? Let's hope they find some more now.

Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2015, 06:03:33 am »
This is pretty interesting. The flight as reported in a simulator. Military radar altitudes don't fit but otherwise fits.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/latest/a/22235213/flight-recreated-in-777-simulator/
 

Offline amyk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6541
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2015, 06:24:00 am »
It won't take long to know what it is, parts of planes - especially ones this big - have serial numbers on them.
 

Offline Halcyon

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3729
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2015, 08:17:44 am »
They confirmed today that it was part of MH370.
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3500
  • Country: gb
  • Electronic Engineer & Hobbyist
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2015, 09:12:33 am »
AF447 was easily found. Perhaps sheer luck but it probably helped that tracking radar was available until the crash and it crashed (~relatively) close to the coast of Brazil.  Plus, the impact was relatively gentle, all considered.

MH370 hasn't been found yet and is suspected to have crashed in a large area due to the lack of data available.

I suspect more debris may appear as it was predicted that ocean currents would take approximately 1 year to 18 months to reach the coast of Africa going on the estimation of crashing somewhere in the Indian Ocean.
 

Offline B.B.Bubby

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 58
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2015, 11:06:50 am »
Here is a bit of ocean current information. Seems to be roughly on track with the estimated crash location. Of course everything waaay to preliminary.
http://5newsonline.com/2015/07/29/garretts-blog-gyres-mh370-debris/

Wow, that's almost bang-on:



Would there be a dirty big eddy in the middle of that zone, may be there's a whole heap more wreckage floating around in the centre?
 

Offline MikeW

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Country: gb
  • Self confessed noob
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2015, 12:46:13 pm »
it could be difficult to locate.

Quite the understatement. It's still a couple million square miles or so of ocean to search.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2015, 01:50:06 pm »
it could be difficult to locate.
Quite the understatement. It's still a couple million square miles or so of ocean to search.

The only way they'll find the black boxes is if they find huge parts of the fuselage on the ocean floor. If the whole thing was scattered to kingdom come then they have buckleys chance.
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2015, 06:07:45 pm »
How deep is it there, and what is the terrain like on the bottom? Since the black box will have long since stopped pinging it could be difficult to locate.

Since the sea floor there ranges from 2-6km deep, and is pretty rough and rugged ( think the Himalayas writ large, and covered with a snow cover of sediment as well), you would really have to be lucky.

Seeing as they found a wreck that was unknown, right in a well surveyed nature preserve off the USA, and they had been doing research only 200m away from it for a few years totally unknowing of it till happenchance with a missing anchor point led them right over it.
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2015, 01:43:32 am »
No matter what, no aliens, not hidden in the desert and so on, I hated that crap.

I would think that even finding one bit is a great relief to the families, better to know than not.

I wonder if there are search crews out looking for stuff on the surface?
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4775
  • Country: gb
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2015, 04:24:19 am »
it could be difficult to locate.
Quite the understatement. It's still a couple million square miles or so of ocean to search.

The only way they'll find the black boxes is if they find huge parts of the fuselage on the ocean floor. If the whole thing was scattered to kingdom come then they have buckleys chance.
Even an intact 777 fuselag on the ocean floor looks really really really tiny. Its a damned big floor.
 

Offline ccs46

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2015, 05:49:15 am »
There are barnacles on that piece, they can look how much cement those things have put down and see how long its been,where it's been, and many other things. The way that things looks, it was sheared off. That plane is the only 777 to have gone down over that ocean. It's a damn fine plane.
Normal people... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet. - Scott Adams
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4775
  • Country: gb
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2015, 06:21:28 am »
That plane is the only 777 to have gone down over that ocean. It's a damn fine plane.
A fine plane might not have picked up the nickname cripple seven.
 

Offline ccs46

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #30 on: July 31, 2015, 07:54:53 am »
That plane is the only 777 to have gone down over that ocean. It's a damn fine plane.
A fine plane might not have picked up the nickname cripple seven.
That kind of plane has only crashed 4 times in it's history. Considering there is hundreds of that type of plane and that small of a number of them crashed it is 'a damn fine plane." It is probably one of the safest planes Boeing has ever, built. In Asiana Airline Flight 214 crash 3 people died, but not from the crash itself. The British Airways Flight 38 no one died and there was one serious injury. Malaysian airlines flight 17 only crashed because it was shot down by Russian Separatists, and then MH 370, which is the only 777 that has crashed over the ocean and the transponder was turned off, no pilot in his right mind would turn that off, it was done maliciously. Even the 747, and 767 have more fatal crashes than this plane does.  If you think about it flying today is the safest means of travel, your more likely to get in a car accident than be in a plane crash. 
Normal people... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet. - Scott Adams
 

Offline McBryce

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: de
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2015, 10:45:34 am »
No matter what, no aliens, not hidden in the desert and so on, I hated that crap.

I would think that even finding one bit is a great relief to the families, better to know than not.

I wonder if there are search crews out looking for stuff on the surface?

No, but a whole new set of conspiracy theories are being dreamt up as we speak.

I very much doubt that they'll ever find the actual crash spot. I can't find that tiny spring that just shot out of the phone I dismantled and that's in a 4sqm room and I went over the floor with a magnet!

McBryce.
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2015, 09:22:18 pm »
No matter what, no aliens, not hidden in the desert and so on, I hated that crap.

I would think that even finding one bit is a great relief to the families, better to know than not.

I wonder if there are search crews out looking for stuff on the surface?

No, but a whole new set of conspiracy theories are being dreamt up as we speak.

I very much doubt that they'll ever find the actual crash spot. I can't find that tiny spring that just shot out of the phone I dismantled and that's in a 4sqm room and I went over the floor with a magnet!

McBryce.

You will find that tiny spring when it sticks in your foot!

As for the mh370. They have the first bit  of evidence. If it came off at depth it will shows signs. If it was snapped off on the surface should also show. If on the surface then a debris field is probable and may be spotted on satellite (from the time of the crash).
 

Offline codeboy2k

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1838
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2015, 09:47:59 pm »
oh noes.... cue the conspiracy theorists... someone (or some state with the technology to do so) clearly just set off a volcanic eruption on Reunion Island in order to cover up any remaining debris that might be found on the island.

Just two days after finding the debris and now there's an eruption?  Some mighty powerful state doesn't want this plane to be found !

/end sarcasm
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #34 on: July 31, 2015, 10:52:28 pm »
and then MH 370, which is the only 777 that has crashed over the ocean and the transponder was turned off, no pilot in his right mind would turn that off, it was done maliciously.

Well that's the million dollar question.
The current top theory is the lithium batteries on board started a fire, once that happens, all bets are off as to what technical issues happened with the plane.
 

Offline AG6QR

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: us
    • AG6QR Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #35 on: July 31, 2015, 11:24:21 pm »
and then MH 370, which is the only 777 that has crashed over the ocean and the transponder was turned off, no pilot in his right mind would turn that off, it was done maliciously.

Well that's the million dollar question.
The current top theory is the lithium batteries on board started a fire, once that happens, all bets are off as to what technical issues happened with the plane.

Yes, there was a cockpit fire near the pilot's oxygen system in a different 777 (on the ground).  It seems plausible that a cockpit fire could have disabled much of the electronics, could have motivated the pilots to turn toward the nearest airfield, and could have incapacitated the pilots.  When the fire penetrated the hull, it would have caused decompression that could have starved the fire for oxygen, leaving the people incapacitated and letting the plane continue on autopilot until it ran out of fuel.

It also seems plausible that the pilot could have deliberately disabled systems, depressurized the plane, pointed the plane out toward the middle of the ocean, and committed suicide, taking the passengers with him.  He may have killed himself by depressurization, leaving the plane to continue on its course until running out of fuel. 

Either way, after the fuel ran out, the plane would have glided down to the ocean surface, in cruise configuration.  So far, it seems like the flaperon piece is consistent with that, though I'll wait for the authorities to fully investigate.

Both main scenarios have legitimate criticisms, and I haven't seen a convincing argument to rule out either idea completely.  People try to invoke Occam's razor, but in this case, the "simplest" explanation depends on whether you find it easier to accept the human or the machine failing in a particular way.  Whether it was man or machine that failed, it wasn't a common everyday failure.

If the wreckage of the main portion of the fuselage and/or the black boxes are found, it will almost certainly rule out one or the other of those scenarios.  There will be a burned hole in the cockpit or there won't.
 

Offline Bud

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3627
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #36 on: August 01, 2015, 01:29:19 am »
Malaysian airlines flight 17 only crashed because it was shot down by Russian Separatists
Please refrain from bold accusations and leave making conclusions to the investigators, which they have not done yet.
Facebook-free life and Rigol-free shack.
 

Online wasyoungonce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 410
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #37 on: August 01, 2015, 01:47:27 am »
Aircraft fire.....Nah....Aircraft would have crashed/disintegrated way long before it got too far.  The Aircraft did a wing over Penang...the Pilots home.  Typical Pilots trick, last gawk at home.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2974685/Is-emotional-farewell-fly-past-Penang-island-key-clue-mystery-missing-Malaysia-flight-MH370-British-pilot-s-theory.html
I'd forget my Head if it wasn't screwed on!
 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7368
  • Country: nz
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #38 on: August 01, 2015, 02:13:22 am »
Does anyone know how long the black boxes can survive in salt water while still having some hope of recovering data?
Is it already too late, or could they recover some data after many years in the ocean?

Assuming they are intact and not ripped apart of course.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2015, 02:15:13 am by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline ccs46

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2015, 02:37:45 am »
Malaysian airlines flight 17 only crashed because it was shot down by Russian Separatists
Please refrain from bold accusations and leave making conclusions to the investigators, which they have not done yet.
If you actually look Flight 17 WAS shot down by Pro Russian Insurgents. It happened 4 months after MH370. They had the audio from the Insurgents talking about "How beautiful" it was. Don't believe me? Google it.  Please refrain from telling someone they're incorrect without having the evidence to back it up.
Normal people... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet. - Scott Adams
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #40 on: August 01, 2015, 02:54:01 am »
Does anyone know how long the black boxes can survive in salt water while still having some hope of recovering data?
Is it already too late, or could they recover some data after many years in the ocean?

Assuming they are intact and not ripped apart of course.

Air France May 2009 - May 2011 recovery of last black box, both survived. So 2 years is possible, I remember hearing that 3 years or earlier is desirable but not sure where I heard that or what it relates to.

One thing that has bugged me for a while is that reports say the transponder was turned off. They do not say lost contact. I expect that's a direct reading from the acars but would a loss of power generate the same message? It would also be interesting to know if shutting off the transponder is recommended or detailed on any of the onboard emergency checklists. This is the first event so you'd think it would be covered in more detail.
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #41 on: August 01, 2015, 03:18:16 am »
It would also be interesting to know if shutting off the transponder is recommended or detailed on any of the onboard emergency checklists.
Shutting it OFF (or standby)? No, not in flight. That switch is only deliberately used on the ground.
But the selection of an emergency code IS mandated in all checklists for serious events.
It is possible that during this code selection, the on-off switch was inadvertently operated, but personally I find that highly unlikely.
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #42 on: August 01, 2015, 03:30:25 am »
It would also be interesting to know if shutting off the transponder is recommended or detailed on any of the onboard emergency checklists.
Shutting it OFF (or standby)? No, not in flight. That switch is only deliberately used on the ground.
But the selection of an emergency code IS mandated in all checklists for serious events.
It is possible that during this code selection, the on-off switch was inadvertently operated, but personally I find that highly unlikely.

The term used is "shutting off the transponder" but that is in flight so does that mean putting it into standby? Would that generate a message? What I'm curious about is if there is one or more acars messages that say the standby switch was hit, power shut off, or simply a signal lost issue and the same message is used for all so the crew can be notified (or whatever action taken).

So I guess the followup would be that if the power was shut off, would that be shutting down other items as well and do they report over the acars?

I find news reports so watered down it's hard to know if the reporters have asked any relevant questions.
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #43 on: August 01, 2015, 05:21:18 am »
The term used is "shutting off the transponder" but that is in flight so does that mean putting it into standby?
From the perspective of the ATC secondary radars, either standby, off or some actual failure* would disable the active return of the radar signal (amplification and encoding) and the aircraft would basically disappear from the radar display (although if modern enough, the display probably indicates last known position with an error flag on it).

The particular radars in use by the ATC facilities in this incident only had a low power primary radar (a primary radar works by simple skin reflection) that had a range of about 40-60 miles. The location of the aircraft when the transponder return was lost was outside of that range. The high power primary military radars were able to track the aircraft (but without accurate altitude information), but this track information wasn't available to anyone with flight following responsibilites for that flight at the time.

*Failure is mitigated against by having at least two transponders on the aircraft.
And an actual "off" switch position is useful in flight as being a digital device, transponders sometimes stop working correctly. And like any similar device, the solution is to turn it off and on. In aviation speak - "Please recycle your transponder".

Would that generate a message? What I'm curious about is if there is one or more acars messages that say the standby switch was hit, power shut off, or simply a signal lost issue and the same message is used for all so the crew can be notified (or whatever action taken).

So I guess the followup would be that if the power was shut off, would that be shutting down other items as well and do they report over the acars?

I find news reports so watered down it's hard to know if the reporters have asked any relevant questions.
I cannot speak with any authority on the subject of ACARS system interaction with the transponder - I don't have that specific information. Perhaps there is a tie from the built in test equipment of a transponder to the ACARS system that would report a discrete failure of that unit, but there would be no need for the physical "off/standby" switch to be so coupled.

But the ACARS system was not working properly that day either - the last normal ACARS uplink happened prior to the loss of transponder returns, whether this was due to a deliberate act or some part of the wider system failure, that is not really known.
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #44 on: August 01, 2015, 07:39:20 pm »
Assuming the one possibility of the ghost plane scenario (humans and some electronics knocked out for some reason just after the last comms), surely they should be able to model what happens to the aircraft when flying on autopilot and the fuel runs out, in terms of the type of impact with the water. So the flaperon survived the wing break up, surely there must be clues in there.

As has been shown with other accidents, you really have to have a lot of luck and skill to ditch successfully, more often that not its going to end with a break up of the aircraft. Its going to be smashes to tiny bits if it hits the water with terminal velocity.

At least something has been found! The rest must be out there, luckily we have the Aussies with deep pockets and lots of toys on the case.
 

Offline ez24

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3092
  • Country: us
  • L.D.A.
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #45 on: August 01, 2015, 09:22:24 pm »
An expert on a news story said that the found piece did not have leading edge damage indicating it did not suffer a head on collision.  Watch the wing in this video from an out of gas plane trying to land on the water.  It was ripped off by centripetal force when the other wing hit the water.

YouTube and Website Electronic Resources ------>  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/other-blog-specific/a/msg1341166/#msg1341166
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #46 on: August 01, 2015, 09:34:23 pm »
Assuming the one possibility of the ghost plane scenario (humans and some electronics knocked out for some reason just after the last comms), surely they should be able to model what happens to the aircraft when flying on autopilot and the fuel runs out, in terms of the type of impact with the water. So the flaperon survived the wing break up, surely there must be clues in there.

As has been shown with other accidents, you really have to have a lot of luck and skill to ditch successfully, more often that not its going to end with a break up of the aircraft. Its going to be smashes to tiny bits if it hits the water with terminal velocity.

At least something has been found! The rest must be out there, luckily we have the Aussies with deep pockets and lots of toys on the case.

I think that unless the apu was running (not sure if that has it's own tank or not) that the autopilot would not be able to move any of the control surfaces. Even if it did have fuel it may not have been powered up (a pilots duty). In that case the plane could glide but outside forces could cause it to dive, spin or stall.
 

Offline mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12046
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #47 on: August 01, 2015, 10:02:09 pm »
As regards flight recorder data lifetime, if it is a recent enough model to use solid-state storage, it ought to be possible to recover data from the flash chips for decades - seawater might corrode away the pins of the chips but it still ought to be possible to access the dice.
Tape may be less robust and more dependent on how well sealed it is against water getting to it.
 
Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #48 on: August 02, 2015, 12:00:59 am »
I think that unless the apu was running (not sure if that has it's own tank or not) that the autopilot would not be able to move any of the control surfaces. Even if it did have fuel it may not have been powered up (a pilots duty). In that case the plane could glide but outside forces could cause it to dive, spin or stall.
There is a "Ram Air Turbine" (a small wind driven generator/pump) that automatically deploys into the airflow to provide last ditch electrical and hydraulic power.
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #49 on: August 02, 2015, 12:09:37 am »
I think that unless the apu was running (not sure if that has it's own tank or not) that the autopilot would not be able to move any of the control surfaces. Even if it did have fuel it may not have been powered up (a pilots duty). In that case the plane could glide but outside forces could cause it to dive, spin or stall.
There is a "Ram Air Turbine" (a small wind driven generator/pump) that automatically deploys into the airflow to provide last ditch electrical and hydraulic power.

You are so right, sorry. One of the last pings was interrupted and they figure that was when the fuel was actually running out and the turbine was deployed.
 

Offline AG6QR

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: us
    • AG6QR Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #50 on: August 02, 2015, 04:31:23 am »
An expert on a news story said that the found piece did not have leading edge damage indicating it did not suffer a head on collision.  Watch the wing in this video from an out of gas plane trying to land on the water.  It was ripped off by centripetal force when the other wing hit the water.

The piece that was found was a flaperon, not a wing.  The flaperon's leading edge is normally protected by the wing during cruise flight, because it's nested in back of the wing.  The fact that there was no leading edge damage to the flaperon seems to indicate that the flaps were not lowered at the time the plane hit the water, but that's not a surprising thing.  In fact, if the flaps HAD been lowered at the time the plane hit the water, that would have been quite puzzling.
 

Offline ez24

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3092
  • Country: us
  • L.D.A.
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #51 on: August 02, 2015, 05:09:07 am »
I meant the flaperon's leading edge lack of damage that would have occurred if it had smashed against the wing, like in a frontal collision.  It had extensive damage to the inboard end like it was ripped off sideways like the wing in the video.

I just wonder why Australia is paying for the search?

YouTube and Website Electronic Resources ------>  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/other-blog-specific/a/msg1341166/#msg1341166
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #52 on: August 02, 2015, 05:20:49 am »
I meant the flaperon's leading edge lack of damage that would have occurred if it had smashed against the wing, like in a frontal collision.  It had extensive damage to the inboard end like it was ripped off sideways like the wing in the video.

I just wonder why Australia is paying for the search?

It went down next to Australia, they pay. That's a general rule but not always correct. Most countries are also willing to have help. This aspect of plane travel is pretty amazing when you think about the cost. There are side benefits as well and it need not be a losing proposition. Having a surface scan of an ocean could be very handy in many cases, brownie points with other govts, having the countries name in the news and so on.
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #53 on: August 02, 2015, 06:00:22 am »
The piece that was found was a flaperon, not a wing.  The flaperon's leading edge is normally protected by the wing during cruise flight, because it's nested in back of the wing.  The fact that there was no leading edge damage to the flaperon seems to indicate that the flaps were not lowered at the time the plane hit the water, but that's not a surprising thing.  In fact, if the flaps HAD been lowered at the time the plane hit the water, that would have been quite puzzling.

But the Flaperon does not get lowered entirely like a flap, although it tilts down to act like a flap when needed, still the leading edge would not get exposed even when its 'lowered', unlike the the flaps proper. Even when down it will still act like an aileron, that is move up and down to maintain roll angle required, or straight & level flight.
 

Offline johansen

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 730
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #54 on: August 02, 2015, 06:12:26 am »
Malaysian airlines flight 17 only crashed because it was shot down by Russian Separatists
Please refrain from bold accusations and leave making conclusions to the investigators, which they have not done yet.

please refrain from believing the official story when there is no evidence to suggest its plausibility.

knowing that particular plane was loaded with dead bodies... would Dave believe it if there was a few undamaged passports hidden inside this piece of wreakage?

regardless if its from the plane or not, it doesn't change a damn thing.. how the hell is it still floating in the ocean after x years?
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #55 on: August 02, 2015, 06:31:32 am »
So here is a comparison of the flaperon to a page from the 777 service manual. I think there is one floating around showing the other end as well.

I guess the troubleshooting nature of air crashes is what I am drawn to, very interesting.

Sounds like some other debris may have been found in May, it was destroyed (burnt as trash)
 

Offline ccs46

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #56 on: August 02, 2015, 10:59:08 am »
Malaysian airlines flight 17 only crashed because it was shot down by Russian Separatists
Please refrain from bold accusations and leave making conclusions to the investigators, which they have not done yet.

please refrain from believing the official story when there is no evidence to suggest its plausibility.

knowing that particular plane was loaded with dead bodies... would Dave believe it if there was a few undamaged passports hidden inside this piece of wreakage?

regardless if its from the plane or not, it doesn't change a damn thing.. how the hell is it still floating in the ocean after x years?
I think we are talking about two different plane crashes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17 was the one shot down, MH370,  is the one that went into the ocean, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370 .
Normal people... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet. - Scott Adams
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #58 on: August 02, 2015, 11:08:22 am »
I just wonder why Australia is paying for the search?

Every country is responsible for   search and rescue in it's allotted surrounding ocean, and we have more area than most.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30122
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #59 on: August 02, 2015, 11:12:04 am »
regardless if its from the plane or not, it doesn't change a damn thing.. how the hell is it still floating in the ocean after x years?

a) It is from the plane. There is no other missing 777.
b) The flaperon obviously has welded sealed compartments (or some other such bouyancy and/or low density materials) inside that allows it to float.  Not rocket science.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2015, 11:28:01 am by EEVblog »
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18010
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #60 on: August 02, 2015, 11:18:22 am »
I smell a pilot's suicide club. They found more small pieces of wreckage so maybe they didn't find the plane yet because it is in millions of small pieces scattered on the ocean floor. Just like the German wings pilot the pilot of MH370 could have driven the plane into the ocean at full speed tearing the plane into small bits and pieces. That would also explain why they never found any escape slides/life rafts; a controlled emergency landing on water would at least have the escape slides/life rafts deployed.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2015, 11:25:56 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #61 on: August 02, 2015, 11:43:43 am »
I smell a pilot's suicide club. They found more small pieces of wreckage so maybe they didn't find the plane yet because it is in millions of small pieces scattered on the ocean floor. Just like the German wings pilot the pilot of MH370 could have driven the plane into the ocean at full speed tearing the plane into small bits and pieces. That would also explain why they never found any escape slides/life rafts; a controlled emergency landing on water would at least have the escape slides/life rafts deployed.

Escape slides do not deploy unless you first MANUALLY break a wire locked handle, then only will operate one the door is opened again MANUALLY. If the passengers and crew are all either anoxic, dead or overcome with fumes from a fire in the lithium batteries carried in pressurised cargo, there would be nobody competent enough to open the door, break the wire lock and then trigger the deployment charges. Even if there were people awake, the doors would have resisted opening until impact, and after that you would not need them in any case as the plane would be in pieces from impact ( that South Atlantic is never going to be a still millpond ever), so they went down either unfired or shredded into smaller pieces, which would float for a while or just sink anyway as they are denser than water when not inflated.
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #62 on: August 02, 2015, 01:24:15 pm »
Certainly one of the biggest mysteries in the  history of aviation, but how could the aircraft fly due south to the middle of nowhere for so long without anyone compos mentis is something that I cant get over, with other pilot suicides it over quite quickly, either plunging into the ground / sea or mountain, and the aircraft is smashed to smithereens. Although the pilot (or someone else ) releasing some  toxic gas can not be eliminated, although this would not explain some of the nav/comms equipment failure. And no one on board who had any background that would suggest this action.

Surely the waypoints keyed into the Autopilot that caused it to track that erratic track then route that great circle south is some clue? Perhaps done in a panic or on the brink of conciousness.

Until they find more pieces and figure it all, its all just speculation.
 

Offline MadTux

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 527
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #63 on: August 02, 2015, 09:24:33 pm »
I smell a pilot's suicide club. They found more small pieces of wreckage so maybe they didn't find the plane yet because it is in millions of small pieces scattered on the ocean floor. Just like the German wings pilot the pilot of MH370 could have driven the plane into the ocean at full speed tearing the plane into small bits and pieces. That would also explain why they never found any escape slides/life rafts; a controlled emergency landing on water would at least have the escape slides/life rafts deployed.

Wouldn't it be smarter to do a controlled ditch, like Hudson bay bird strike ditch, and wait for the plane to sink in one piece, if you want to make a plane disappear? That way, there wouldn't be any suspicious parts floating on the surface. I'd expect to be lots of floating parts after a high speed high decent rate crash into the ocean, since the plane is ripped in many floating and non floating pieces. (load bearing structure will most likely sink but seats,bits from honeycomb panels etc will float and generate a big debris field)

I don't know how long a plane stays afloat with air in fuel tanks. But since all dead spaces and fuel tanks (probably also the inside flap that was just found, but the honeycomb structure still generated enough lift) must be vented because of the differential pressure between sea level and flight altitude (e.g. pressure differential of 750 mbar/75000Pa or 7.5 tons per m², enough to cause dents/rips in non-vented parts), I  think it's only a matter of time until these spaces are flooded and the plane sinks completely intact and without any traces on the surface. So if I were a suicidal pilot and wanted to make a plane disappear completely, I'd go that way. But of course it would be a much more agonizing death for the pilot, if you survive the ditch. Floating without food or water in the ocean 1000s of miles from any land/shipping routes is probably one of the shittiest deaths I can imagine.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18010
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #64 on: August 02, 2015, 10:36:58 pm »
Besides that the people inside the plane would open the doors and inflate the escape slides/life rafts before the airplane sinks (if the pilot manages to land the plane in one piece on water). The wreckage only suggests the plane isn't in one piece at this moment. There is a lot of mystery to solve. I hope they can use wind and current patterns to guestimate the location the flap could come from.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2015, 10:38:33 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline MadTux

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 527
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #65 on: August 02, 2015, 10:54:08 pm »
AFAIK the pilot probably killed the passengers by cabin depressurization. Since the pilot has oxygen for a far longer time (4h I read somewhere) than the passengers (a few minutes), he just have open pressure valves for an hour or so at high altitude, before he is alone up there.

It's the trailing edge damage which makes me somewhat suspicious that the pilot deployed flaps for maximum lift to make a slow ditch with minimal damage. Compare the damaged flap with the damage on the hudson bay A320
http://charlottemagazine-images.dashdigital.com/images/cache/cache_b/cache_9/cache_9/15721-0114_FEA_5Years05-dd6e199b.jpeg?ver=1434645054&aspectratio=1.5
« Last Edit: August 02, 2015, 11:02:14 pm by MadTux »
 

Offline Alexei.Polkhanov

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 683
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #66 on: August 02, 2015, 11:03:14 pm »
b) The flaperon obviously has welded sealed compartments (or some other such bouyancy and/or low density materials) inside that allows it to float.  Not rocket science.

I think these compartments used as a fuel tank. That is another reason why they are very well sealed. They probably were already empty at the time of a crash.



 

Online wasyoungonce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 410
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #67 on: August 03, 2015, 12:51:25 am »
No the Flaperon is not used as a fuel tank, its a moving control surface.   The new parts on reunion island do not really look like aircraft parts (looks like an alloy case handle) but it does have a Chinese looking stamp on it  :-//
I'd forget my Head if it wasn't screwed on!
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #68 on: August 03, 2015, 07:05:25 am »
Reminds me of the Monty Python & the Holy Grail

So why do witches burn?
- 'Cause they're made of wood? - Good!
- How do we tell if she is made of wood? - Build a bridge out of her.
- But can you not also make bridges out of stone?
- Oh, yeah.
- Does wood sink in water?
- No, it floats. - Throw her into the pond!
- What also floats in water?
- Bread. - Apples.
- Very small rocks. - Cider! Great gravy.
- Cherries. Mud. - Churches.
- Lead. - A duck!
- Exactly.
- So, logically--
- If she weighs the same as a duck...
- she's made of wood.
- And therefore?
- A witch!



However this here flaperon has a honey comb structure inside (for strength I guess) that is why it has floated to Reunion.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-31/mh370-what-is-washed-up-plane-debris-flaperon/6663434

"The flaperons on the 777 are made from a combination of lightweight materials, including aluminium, a glass fibre-reinforced plastic laminate skin, and a honeycomb internal structure. A lightweight part of this type could potentially stay afloat for a long time. "

« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 07:12:06 am by kosmonooit »
 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7368
  • Country: nz
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #69 on: August 03, 2015, 07:12:28 am »
Certainly one of the biggest mysteries in the  history of aviation, but how could the aircraft fly due south to the middle of nowhere for so long without anyone compos mentis is something that I cant get over, with other pilot suicides it over quite quickly, either plunging into the ground / sea or mountain, and the aircraft is smashed to smithereens. Although the pilot (or someone else ) releasing some  toxic gas can not be eliminated, although this would not explain some of the nav/comms equipment failure. And no one on board who had any background that would suggest this action.

Surely the waypoints keyed into the Autopilot that caused it to track that erratic track then route that great circle south is some clue? Perhaps done in a panic or on the brink of conciousness.

Until they find more pieces and figure it all, its all just speculation.

There are many different autopilot modes. Some will maintain level flight indefinitely.
It's entirely possible that everyone was dead for many many hours and it flew on in complete silence until the final few minutes when the computer would have said  "Too low, terrain" a few hundred times before impact.

</eerie>

Usually a water landing rips a wing off, the wing that contacts first gets extreme forces from the engine digging in.
So finding a flaperon makes sense, it's right where the wing joins the plane
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 07:19:17 am by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline aargee

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 726
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #70 on: August 03, 2015, 07:16:31 am »
I think more wreckage is required (yeah, really?) and if there is evidence of fire, especially if there are fuselage remnants, that will start to mount up a case for a hot burning fire that killed off the avionics.

I reckon there would have been lots and lots of simulator runs with scenarios for this disappearance and it's all still conjecture.
Not easy, not hard, just need to be incentivised.
 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7368
  • Country: nz
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #71 on: August 03, 2015, 07:20:22 am »
Yes, finding some parts that show signs of fire damage would make the lithium battery fire theory pretty much proven.
But its also possible that the lithium batteries just smoldered producing lots of fumes but no actual fire. In that case there would be no fire damage to find.
Finding the batteries themselves would be the only way, and they would have reacted to the salt water anyway so proving what happened when would be very difficult.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 07:23:41 am by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #72 on: August 03, 2015, 07:32:19 am »
Was that other fire that burnt on ground figured out? That was a 777 as well.
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #73 on: August 03, 2015, 07:38:36 am »
I think a fire on board can be ruled out, there is no way it would have continued to fly for such a long time with a Fire on Board, although perhaps there was a localised fire that produced toxic fumes and then petered out or was extinguished. Also control and power circuits would go in a big fire, and Al melts real easy as anyone who has tried to weld it knows, so the fuselage would be compromised.

The range is consistent with the fuel load, what I want to know is are/were the relevant tanks auto-selected as required?  Back in my piloting days, I had to manually select wing and center tanks to keep the aircraft balanced (single engine)

But in aircraft fires, its the fumes that kill long before the heat.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 07:42:53 am by kosmonooit »
 

Online wasyoungonce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 410
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #74 on: August 03, 2015, 08:19:43 am »
Exactly...the Helderberg, a SA 747 airliner & cargo plane, crashed ~ 1987 from an onboard fire (from cargo area).  Once fire detected....it didn't stay flying for long.  There have been a few Aircraft fires, suffice to say, they burn pretty rapidly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Airways_Flight_295
I'd forget my Head if it wasn't screwed on!
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #75 on: August 03, 2015, 08:30:41 am »
Define fire, and ruling it out without seeing it?

Cockpit fire same aircraft. Same masks? Possible fire on mh370, of course. Need not be the same cause.

http://avherald.com/h?article=44078aa7
 

Online wasyoungonce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 410
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #76 on: August 03, 2015, 09:03:23 am »
True...I've seen Aircraft fires (or the aftermath)...the Aircraft do not fly for long, short minutes at best if not seconds, to be true they were not civil aircraft.  Suffice to say, there is no way if they had a fire MH370 battery or other, that the Aircraft would return to Penang do a wing over then fly off do a couple of more course changes and then fly to southern ocean.  These are known's not circumstantial.

A fire is a possibility, circumstantial, but there is no way an airliner could have stayed aloft do these course changes and fly on for hrs and hrs from a fire that incapacitated all on board.  It would engulf the rest of the airframe, rapidly causing catastrophic break-up.  Just like the Helderberg.

Oh I should have also said...MH370 flew pretty much over the old RAAF Butterworth Penang Radar station (Primary) which was real odd then did course changes that appeared to be avoiding radar, this is known but the intent is speculation.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 09:13:16 am by wasyoungonce »
I'd forget my Head if it wasn't screwed on!
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #77 on: August 03, 2015, 01:48:07 pm »
Butterworth has an air navigation waypoint (VBT) that would explain why they routed overhead, and I am suggesting that keypoints were being keyed into the Autopilot (just a case of selecting or entering the  letter codes and then GOTO) by a pilots who were perhaps loosing conciousness (that's how these aircraft are flown nowadays) the final one was perhaps on the other side of the earth that why it flew the track it did.

http://ourairports.com/navaids/VBT/Butterworth_VORTAC_MY/#lat=5.476309776306152,lon=100.39399719238281,zoom=10,type=Satellite


In terms of defining 'fire' that would suggest an open flame, which is ignited from combustible (and toxic) fumes, once that starts it spreads rapidly but it this case it could have started in some way, maybe it was contained or extinguished, but continued to out gas toxic fumes, maybe the skin on the fuselage was compromised  causing decompression, whether that  Li Ion cargo had anything to do with that, who knows. As far as I know they only really start misbehaving when over loaded and not cooled (let's get Elon Musk's opinion on this)  not just spontaneous combusting with no load. There could have been an electrical fault that caused wiring to start burning. Lots of maybes here.

About the Helderburg, there was a lot of speculation about its cargo, at that time there was a lot of covert shipping of arms and ammo (and rockets fuel) to SA which was under sanctions, some of the manifest was dodgy and unaccounted for if I remember correctly. It was a Cargo Combo 747, the pax all rushed forward to escape the fumes, some were found three up on the seats.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 02:11:19 pm by kosmonooit »
 

Offline AG6QR

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: us
    • AG6QR Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #78 on: August 03, 2015, 05:08:21 pm »
Exactly...the Helderberg, a SA 747 airliner & cargo plane, crashed ~ 1987 from an onboard fire (from cargo area).  Once fire detected....it didn't stay flying for long.  There have been a few Aircraft fires, suffice to say, they burn pretty rapidly.

Yes, but there are also numerous documented instances of pilot suicides.  Once the pilot took action to commit suicide, the plane didn't stay flying for long.

Whatever happened to MH370, it was significantly different from any previous event.

It's not impossible to imagine a pilot pointing the plane out into the middle of the ocean.  But it's also not impossible to imagine a fire that extinguished itself once it breached the pressure vessel and caused decompression, which would cool things, "blow out" a small fire, and/or starve it for oxygen.
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #79 on: August 03, 2015, 06:05:58 pm »
Helios Airways Flight 522 is similar enough (loss of cabin pressure) that could account for the course change and extended flight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

Excessive smoke in the cockpit could easily cause the same issue and flight path. It's not like you can open the windows and the system can only handle so much volume. Not to mention the toxicity.

An electrical fire need not have spread through the plane and could have self extinguished after the crew and passenger where incapacitated.

Could it have been some sort of a hijacking or suicide. An Egyptair flight was certainly suspect when you consider suicide and hijacking happens. Can't rule it out, a weapon fired on board is also a possibility and that would also cause a similar issue with loss of pressurization.

Basically I like to let the evidence lead the way and there is little there at this point.
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #80 on: August 03, 2015, 06:12:26 pm »
Cargo of used lithium cells, and one in the middle is almost at failure. At take off it is fine, but as the hold depressurises to cabin cruise pressure it expends slightly, then this triggers the cell to short internally.  It heats up from the stored energy, and heats up the other used cells in the same pack. The cell protection will not prevent this, as the cell is failing internally. The failing cell eventually bursts and the vapour released catches fire, fuelled by the heat and the ambient air and the hot cells around it. This then triggers the other cells, and they also start to vent and burn the plastic housings. The smoke released, along with the CO and other toxic chemicals in the smoke are circulated by the plane's AC system, and as the first vents are the cockpit the CO starts to build up. The pilots might then notice smoke in the cockpit, and  start to initiate a RTO immediately, programming in the waypoints in reverse order to get there. By now the smoke probably has triggered a loud cargo hold smoke alarm, a fire warning alarm and a few caution warnings as the smouldering fire starts to burn cargo hold wiring. The pilots, thoroughly confused, wearing possibly masks, are trying to contain and triage this sudden unexpected pattern of events, not covered fully in the simulator, where an engine fire is the most common simulation. Thus one or the other mistypes a waypoint, and confirms without checking, setting the autopilot on a track to some far off waypoint via a great circle. Fire by now has burnt through control wiring for the cabin entertainment, and trips breakers, taking out at the same time one AC bus and one DC bus. Aircraft systems reconfigure to a failed state but keep running in degraded mode, and there are suddenly a whole load of new warnings on an already overloaded crew.  fire burns through control wiring and half the cabin instrumentation goes dead, and kills the comms systems and radios. Fire burns through bottom of cargo hold, and vents cabin pressure at a rapid rate, dumping the smoke, but the crew have already lost consciousness from the sudden pressure loss popping the masks off them, and they fall down unconscious.

Plane flies to waypoint on autopilot, then turns and attempts to follow to the other waypoints programmed in by the pilots by error. In all this fuel management and trim keeps the aircraft in balance, transferring fuel as needed from tanks to keep the aircraft balanced at the optimum flight attitude for the altitude and speed. Plane flies till autopilot detects low fuel, and it gives strident warnings to the cabin, then eventually degrades to attitude hold as the engines run dry. Last engine runs out, and suddenly the AC busses disappear, and the DC battery is called on to supply all power. RAT is deployed automatically by the failed AC bus and DC bus monitor, and provides emergency power and hydraulics, and autopilot stops attitude hold and does minimum airspeed management in a long glide. No ground warning, no power for the radio altimeter, though the air data system would be triggering warnings about level.

Impact.

 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #81 on: August 03, 2015, 06:22:57 pm »
I would love to hear what was in the successfully transmitted data packets. They say normal, but what items where recorded and what are capable of being recorded.
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #82 on: August 03, 2015, 06:24:27 pm »
Cargo of used lithium cells, and one in the middle is almost at failure. At take off it is fine, but as the hold depressurises to cabin cruise pressure it expends slightly, then this triggers the cell to short internally.  It heats up from the stored energy, and heats up the other used cells in the same pack. The cell protection will not prevent this, as the cell is failing internally. The failing cell eventually bursts and the vapour released catches fire, fuelled by the heat and the ambient air and the hot cells around it. This then triggers the other cells, and they also start to vent and burn the plastic housings. The smoke released, along with the CO and other toxic chemicals in the smoke are circulated by the plane's AC system, and as the first vents are the cockpit the CO starts to build up. The pilots might then notice smoke in the cockpit, and  start to initiate a RTO immediately, programming in the waypoints in reverse order to get there. By now the smoke probably has triggered a loud cargo hold smoke alarm, a fire warning alarm and a few caution warnings as the smouldering fire starts to burn cargo hold wiring. The pilots, thoroughly confused, wearing possibly masks, are trying to contain and triage this sudden unexpected pattern of events, not covered fully in the simulator, where an engine fire is the most common simulation. Thus one or the other mistypes a waypoint, and confirms without checking, setting the autopilot on a track to some far off waypoint via a great circle. Fire by now has burnt through control wiring for the cabin entertainment, and trips breakers, taking out at the same time one AC bus and one DC bus. Aircraft systems reconfigure to a failed state but keep running in degraded mode, and there are suddenly a whole load of new warnings on an already overloaded crew.  fire burns through control wiring and half the cabin instrumentation goes dead, and kills the comms systems and radios. Fire burns through bottom of cargo hold, and vents cabin pressure at a rapid rate, dumping the smoke, but the crew have already lost consciousness from the sudden pressure loss popping the masks off them, and they fall down unconscious.

Plane flies to waypoint on autopilot, then turns and attempts to follow to the other waypoints programmed in by the pilots by error. In all this fuel management and trim keeps the aircraft in balance, transferring fuel as needed from tanks to keep the aircraft balanced at the optimum flight attitude for the altitude and speed. Plane flies till autopilot detects low fuel, and it gives strident warnings to the cabin, then eventually degrades to attitude hold as the engines run dry. Last engine runs out, and suddenly the AC busses disappear, and the DC battery is called on to supply all power. RAT is deployed automatically by the failed AC bus and DC bus monitor, and provides emergency power and hydraulics, and autopilot stops attitude hold and does minimum airspeed management in a long glide. No ground warning, no power for the radio altimeter, though the air data system would be triggering warnings about level.

Impact.

Fits perfectly.
 

Offline donotdespisethesnake

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 889
  • Country: gb
  • Embedded stuff
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #83 on: August 03, 2015, 07:49:53 pm »
Cargo of used lithium cells, and one in the middle is almost at failure. ...

This is something like my best guess scenario too. There have certainly been lithium fires, and also depressurization events where the plane continues to fly (e.g. Helios). Although it is unlikely the two combine in such a way, MH370 is also a rare event.

However, professional pilots suggest a cargo fire or depress should cause the pilots to descend immediately, either to land ASAP or increase cabin pressure. But pilots do not always follow the book, and in the case where they were already hypoxic, may not have been able to think normally.

The potential search area is huge though, I am not sure they will ever find it to resolve the mystery.
Bob
"All you said is just a bunch of opinions."
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3500
  • Country: gb
  • Electronic Engineer & Hobbyist
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #84 on: August 03, 2015, 07:55:29 pm »
SeanB's scenario seems quite plausible. An example of cockpit confusion due to fire is the case of Swissair 111. The pilots are confounded by systems failing one by one as the fire destroys wiring and system avionics. The autopilot fails and they have to take control, but the fire begins destroying the mechanical control cables and control of the aircraft is lost. If the fire began near the aft electronics bay, it's quite possible that the only initially noticeable symptom would be gradual loss of key systems. I'm not sure where the transponder system is, but perhaps if this is located in the aft electronics bay this could be one of the first systems to fail.

One question - is there any fire suppression system for the cargo hold or aft electronics bay, and if so is this sufficient to extinguish a lithium battery fuelled fire?
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #85 on: August 03, 2015, 08:01:42 pm »
But aren't  the hold and the cabin pressures linked always? I think generally set to 6000' equiv at altitude, so how could there be a big differential  in cargo - cabin pressures & temps?

Aren't most Li Ion cells protected with a small circuit board ? I've seen 'em smoking / exploding on YouTube but only once the protection is removed, and after a serious 'battering'.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 08:14:08 pm by kosmonooit »
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #86 on: August 03, 2015, 08:18:14 pm »
Electrical /chemical fires need to have the sources removed. Turn off the power or remove the fuel. Breakers and fusible links are there for a reason.
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #87 on: August 03, 2015, 08:21:42 pm »
SeanB's scenario seems quite plausible. An example of cockpit confusion due to fire is the case of Swissair 111. The pilots are confounded by systems failing one by one as the fire destroys wiring and system avionics. The autopilot fails and they have to take control, but the fire begins destroying the mechanical control cables and control of the aircraft is lost. If the fire began near the aft electronics bay, it's quite possible that the only initially noticeable symptom would be gradual loss of key systems. I'm not sure where the transponder system is, but perhaps if this is located in the aft electronics bay this could be one of the first systems to fail.

One question - is there any fire suppression system for the cargo hold or aft electronics bay, and if so is this sufficient to extinguish a lithium battery fuelled fire?

There are also many other instances with pilot confusion in the midst of a panic and wrong waypoints entered (like in Columbia where the aircraft flew into a mountain)  - there must be clues in what worked and what didn't in terms of circuits failure, I think there is triple redundancy on the 777?

In terms of fire suppression I think there is lots in the cargo hold, but not much you can do about the toxic smoke. Also that was the problem the Helderburg 747 Combi, inadequate fire   suppression in the cargo section of the main cabin.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 08:23:43 pm by kosmonooit »
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #88 on: August 03, 2015, 08:43:55 pm »
You have pressurised and unpressurised cargo areas, the pressurised cargo shares the cabin air and ventilation, as it is often used for transporting livestock, fish and pets.. Thus a fire there will lead to smoke in the cabin, followed by equipment failures as it typically is just behind the avionics bays, or even between them for certain things like gyro's, which have to be mounted at the mass centre of the aircraft. The cargo holds also have the main wiring and hydraulic lines running through them, in bundles either under the floor in a cable tray or in loops of wiring bundled up and laced hanging from the support structure of the floor above.

Fire protection used to be a remote discharge halon unit, but they have had to change them out, so now it is only possible to have a dry powder or a CO2 canister, and the main fire suppression method is to depressurise the cabin and close of the air input, to starve it of O2 while aiming for the nearest runway at speed. seeing as the Lithium cells are capable of burning even in low oxygen conditions and they will continue to generate toxic gas so long as they have charge, and thus will fill the interior with toxic or irritating gas for a long time, even if you stop the fresh air inlet, which will prevent the gas from being removed by the cabin purge valves.

Triple redundancy does not protect against physical damage, only that the software, firmware is not all going to fail at the same time. Note as well the tiny matter of the firmware counter being found to have a time dependant bug which caused it to fail had after being powered for a few months when an internal counter would overflow and crash. Reboot fixes it till next time, but you really do not want to reboot on approach or take off.

The protection circuit may protect against overcharge, but it doers nothing about internal cell failure. Sony and others had massive recalls of battery packs that had a ferrous contaminant in them from the sealing process, which led to some rather spectacular battery fires in laptops. A cell in the pack may short to another if the casing is damaged, and this would be enough to trigger a fire in the pack, just from the connector tabs getting red hot within seconds.
 

Offline AG6QR

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: us
    • AG6QR Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #89 on: August 03, 2015, 08:47:51 pm »
But aren't  the hold and the cabin pressures linked always? I think generally set to 6000' equiv at altitude, so how could there be a big differential  in cargo - cabin pressures & temps?

Yes, the fuselage of the aircraft is one big pressure vessel, and that's why it's roughly cylindrical in shape with rounded ends.   Pressure vessels require significant reinforcement (meaning significant weight) to make sharp corners, or even flat surfaces.

The floor of the cabin is not capable of sustaining a significant pressure differential between the cabin above and the hold below.  There is enough ventilation to insure that no big pressure differences build up.  Temperature differences aren't always so well controlled.

You have pressurised and unpressurised cargo areas, the pressurised cargo shares the cabin air and ventilation, as it is often used for transporting livestock, fish and pets..

There is NO unpressurized cargo area in a modern airliner.  There are areas that lack forced-air ventilation, with no temperature control, and these areas are unsuitable for pets and other live animals.  But they are at the same pressure as the cabin.
 

Online wasyoungonce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 410
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #90 on: August 03, 2015, 09:24:55 pm »
Cargo of used lithium cells, and one in the middle is almost at failure. At take off it is fine, but as the hold depressurises to cabin cruise pressure it expends slightly, then this triggers the cell to short internally.  It heats up from the stored energy, and heats up the other used cells in the same pack. The cell protection will not prevent this, as the cell is failing internally. The failing cell eventually bursts and the vapour released catches fire, fuelled by the heat and the ambient air and the hot cells around it. This then triggers the other cells, and they also start to vent and burn the plastic housings. The smoke released, along with the CO and other toxic chemicals in the smoke are circulated by the plane's AC system, and as the first vents are the cockpit the CO starts to build up. The pilots might then notice smoke in the cockpit, and  start to initiate a RTO immediately, programming in the waypoints in reverse order to get there. By now the smoke probably has triggered a loud cargo hold smoke alarm, a fire warning alarm and a few caution warnings as the smouldering fire starts to burn cargo hold wiring. The pilots, thoroughly confused, wearing possibly masks, are trying to contain and triage this sudden unexpected pattern of events, not covered fully in the simulator, where an engine fire is the most common simulation. Thus one or the other mistypes a waypoint, and confirms without checking, setting the autopilot on a track to some far off waypoint via a great circle. Fire by now has burnt through control wiring for the cabin entertainment, and trips breakers, taking out at the same time one AC bus and one DC bus. Aircraft systems reconfigure to a failed state but keep running in degraded mode, and there are suddenly a whole load of new warnings on an already overloaded crew.  fire burns through control wiring and half the cabin instrumentation goes dead, and kills the comms systems and radios. Fire burns through bottom of cargo hold, and vents cabin pressure at a rapid rate, dumping the smoke, but the crew have already lost consciousness from the sudden pressure loss popping the masks off them, and they fall down unconscious.Impact.

Good points...but any fire that takes out comms and NAV would have disable all Inmarsat systems (no handshake pings), avionics and flight controls.   Swiss AIR 111 is a typical example, though fire was near cockpit.
I'd forget my Head if it wasn't screwed on!
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #91 on: August 03, 2015, 09:57:06 pm »
Like I suggested earlier it could be partial avionics and power circuits failure due to thermal stresses  - cutting out the comms, leaving some instruments on line, source could be a dodgy connection, chaffed live, whatever, has happened before, electrical fires are hectic. Details can only be pure speculation, but have 'they' been looking at possible scenarios? But its this vs the suicide plane, that I have difficulty with. As any student of aviation safety will know, expect the unexpected, in terms of things going wrong, how humans react, most of the accidents are not due to one single cause, but a number of smaller things, that in themselves would not be significant or fatal.

Li Ion cargo sounds more like a conspiracy theory, yes there have been issues in the past, but surely aviations authorities would not be complacent about that if there were indeed tangible dangers for them as cargo? Beside the overheating due to over charging, which is well know, and also temp problems with high/ long current drain like Solar Impulse recently experienced (Tesla has a liquid cooling system in their battery pack) Remember the Dreamliner Li Ion problems? they just did workarounds "The causes of the battery failures are still unknown"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787_Dreamliner_battery_problems

But batteries in the hold, out of any circuit ...? hmmmm (as Dave would say)

 

Offline Wytnucls

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2836
  • Country: be
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #92 on: August 03, 2015, 11:32:07 pm »
Lithium ion batteries are not allowed in the cargo holds of airliners anymore.
The 777 has class C cargo holds with smoke detection and halon fire suppression.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 11:47:13 pm by Wytnucls »
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #93 on: August 04, 2015, 02:39:15 am »
There is NO unpressurized cargo area in a modern airliner.  There are areas that lack forced-air ventilation, with no temperature control, and these areas are unsuitable for pets and other live animals.  But they are at the same pressure as the cabin.

Exactly. In point of fact, there were a few accidents involving cargo door failures (DC10s mostly) that depressurised the cargo area so quickly that the cabin floor failed due to the differential pressure. In one case the failing floor cut (or jammed) flight surface control cables and the aircraft was lost (Turkish DC10).

That is why in newer designs (and retrofitted to older aircraft) there are now weakened blow out panels or vents in the floor that allow the pressure differential to quickly equalise to avoid further structural damage.

BTW, typical pressure differentials are around 8-9PSI (~0.6Bar) - I'll leave it as an exercise to calculate the total forces involved for a large airliner fuselage.
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 

Offline wxm145

  • Contributor
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 10
  • Country: cn
  • pcbgogo pcb sample
    • Pcb Sample Quick Turn
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #94 on: August 04, 2015, 02:44:30 am »
feel very sad for mh 370 :'(
we are factory which fabricates the pcb sample quick turn fabrication.
www.pcbgogo.com
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3500
  • Country: gb
  • Electronic Engineer & Hobbyist
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #95 on: August 04, 2015, 08:17:36 am »
Good points...but any fire that takes out comms and NAV would have disable all Inmarsat systems (no handshake pings), avionics and flight controls.   Swiss AIR 111 is a typical example, though fire was near cockpit.

Depends where the fire begins. Could a slow burning fire take out the radio/comms systems without the crew noticing?  Perhaps inmarsat stuff is located nearer the cockpit? Or could the aircraft remain flying with all flight controls at neutral, say if key avionics systems were lost?  I have a feeling the fire would compromise the airframe before this would happen.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2015, 08:19:46 am by tom66 »
 

Offline John_ITIC

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 423
  • Country: us
  • ITIC Protocol Analyzers
    • International Test Instruments Corporation
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #96 on: August 09, 2015, 09:51:45 pm »
That plane is the only 777 to have gone down over that ocean. It's a damn fine plane.
A fine plane might not have picked up the nickname cripple seven.

I just came back from vacation in Europe on a 777-200. Flew from London on Friday morning but had to turn back due to short circuits in (two separate) entertainment centers that caused smoke in the cabin. We dumped fuel and made an uneventful emergency landing. The airline paid for hotel, dinner, breakfast etc so not too bad. But the next morning, we boarded another 777-200 for another attempt just to find out that the co-pilot's instruments didn't match the pilot's. This wasn't detected until pre-flight check. The mechanics were called in and a bunch of things were replaced including the co-pilot's seat (apparently electronics built-in) before we could get on our way. Then we were told that the pilots' maximum wake/work time would be exceeded if we went all the way back to Los Angeles. This was "solved" by making an extra stop in Washington DC for crew change. I think the total trip took some 18 hours...

Not sure if we were double-unlucky but I'll remember Boing 777-200 and United Airlines for a while...
1480A USB 2.0 LS/FS/HS/OTG 1.3 Protocol Analyzer - $695 USD
2500A PCI Express 1.1 2.5 Gbps Protocol Analyzer - $6,995 USD
Enter "EEVBLOG" for a 20% discount at https://www.internationaltestinstruments.com
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #97 on: August 09, 2015, 10:24:10 pm »
That plane is the only 777 to have gone down over that ocean. It's a damn fine plane.
A fine plane might not have picked up the nickname cripple seven.

I just came back from vacation in Europe on a 777-200. Flew from London on Friday morning but had to turn back due to short circuits in (two separate) entertainment centers that caused smoke in the cabin. We dumped fuel and made an uneventful emergency landing. The airline paid for hotel, dinner, breakfast etc so not too bad. But the next morning, we boarded another 777-200 for another attempt just to find out that the co-pilot's instruments didn't match the pilot's. This wasn't detected until pre-flight check. The mechanics were called in and a bunch of things were replaced including the co-pilot's seat (apparently electronics built-in) before we could get on our way. Then we were told that the pilots' maximum wake/work time would be exceeded if we went all the way back to Los Angeles. This was "solved" by making an extra stop in Washington DC for crew change. I think the total trip took some 18 hours...

Not sure if we were double-unlucky but I'll remember Boing 777-200 and United Airlines for a while...

Double unlucky would be not finding the problem. Funny how stuff like that doesn't even rate a mention on the news. You'd think the reporters would be looking for every little incident and making a big deal out of it.



 
 

Offline amyk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6541
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #98 on: August 10, 2015, 01:13:34 am »
Funny how stuff like that doesn't even rate a mention on the news. You'd think the reporters would be looking for every little incident and making a big deal out of it.
It does get mentioned on the aviation news; he was probably talking about this one: http://avherald.com/h?article=48a78266&opt=0

(MH370 is there too.)
 

Offline ccs46

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #99 on: August 10, 2015, 02:12:46 am »
BTW, typical pressure differentials are around 8-9PSI (~0.6Bar) - I'll leave it as an exercise to calculate the total forces involved for a large airliner fuselage.
Its a marvel of engineering that the 777 can stay together at those forces!
Normal people... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet. - Scott Adams
 

Offline kosmonooit

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #100 on: August 10, 2015, 06:53:30 am »
I've flown many long distance miles on SIA with the venerable 777 - no problems, but think of all the  systems there, electronics, contacts etc just a matter of time before some problem arises, its really how the problem is dealt with: redundancy, preventative maintenance and, most importantly, skills of the crew. That is where we are loosing our way imho, increased automation is decreasing pilot skills, one only has to look at some of the last few air disasters for signs of that. But sh!t does happen. In the most unpredicted and unanticipated ways.

 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7368
  • Country: nz
« Last Edit: August 10, 2015, 07:42:57 am by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • Country: ca
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #104 on: August 13, 2015, 03:08:28 am »
Here is one image. I'd like to see the group. I wonder if the shadow indicates a curved surface?
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #105 on: August 13, 2015, 07:28:25 am »
Here is one image. I'd like to see the group. I wonder if the shadow indicates a curved surface?

OK, so it's a computer generated image from sonar echo data, thus not safe to interpret as if it was a light-illuminated scene. But that sure looks like a small cliff with some big rectangular blocks of stone fallen off and sitting near the cliff base. Anyone else see it differently?

Can anyone explain how those blocks could possibly be man-made? But then maybe the apparent level of detail is an artifact, and they could be any shape of around that size. And how come there seem to be 'shadows' to the right of each? From a towed sonar imager, surely there wouldn't be any such effect? Or is it a computer-generated effect to convey height information, which the sonar data would include?

Parts have washing up at the Maldives apparently.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3191134/Has-MH370-debris-washed-Maldives-Investigators-examine-items-isles-locals-saw-low-flying-jet-day-plane-vanished.html

Very interesting, thanks for the link. That'd be *more* aircraft parts washed ashore in the Maldives in March 2014 soon after MH370 went missing, since there was also the halon fire extinguisher sphere.
  See http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/54178 and pics below.

Then there's the many eyewitness accounts of a large white plane with red stripe flying low and slow over the Maldives to the southwest early the morning after MH370 went missing. Within the possible flight time. Also I take their description "white plane with red stripe" as a reinforcement of veracity, since that's what one would notice from a brief surprised glimpse. While someone making shit up for publicity attention, would have said "white with red and blue stripes", having looked at photos and seeing both color stripes. I've listened to phone interviews with some of those witnesses, and they sound genuine.
Or the Maldives fisherman who was way out to sea to the south that morning, and reported seeing smoke and flames on the ocean far to his south. Too far for him to go investigate, but he reported it.
None of this ever got into the MSM at the time. Fascinating to see some mention now.

Anyway, good luck trying to discuss such details here. Contradicts the official narrative, and so must be crazy conspiracy stuff, disrespectful to the relatives, and will get deleted and you threatened with banning. Never mind the relatives are the loudest voices insisting there's some kind of coverup.

There's a lot of other 'doesn't fit the narrative' solid details I could mention. Stuff about the passenger list, the cargo manifest, a particular item of cargo on the manifest and what it probably was, the semi-technical data Inmarsat _finally_ released (which cries out for a solid technical analysis), and so on. But in a truth-chilled forum it isn't worth the effort (and getting banned.)  Even though the Inmarsat data and evaluation of what the stated Doppler shifts really mean, could hardly be more on-topic here.
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #106 on: August 30, 2015, 04:51:08 am »
Update on that wing part:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/08/strange-saga-of-the-mh370-plane-part.html
Quote
About That Airplane Part That Was Supposed to Solve the MH370 Mystery ...
By Jeff Wise August 28, 2015 9:13 a.m.
Summary: It isn't from MH370. Serial # plate is removed, but crucially modifications don't exactly match those made by Malaysian Airlines. (An interesting thing in itself.)
Also:
Quote
According to a Toulouse aeronautics expert who requested anonymity,” the article stated, “the element of the wing would not have floated for several months at the water’s surface but would have drifted underwater a few meters deep.”
It’s not yet known why investigators reached this conclusion, but one clue might be that the flaperon found on La Réunion was encrusted on every edge with goose barnacles. These animals are a type of crustacean that attaches while young to a floating object and spends its entire adult life affixed to the same spot. Since they obviously can only survive underwater, their distribution around the object suggests that the entirety of it must have spent at least several months submerged.
  http://jeffwise.net/2015/08/26/how-did-the-reunion-flaperon-float/
And goes on to say it could not have 'floated underwater a few meters deep' for any length of time by itself:
Quote
So, how could a six-foot-long chunk of airplane remain suspended beneath the ocean surface for a long period of time? At this point, there aren’t any simple, common-sense answers; the range of possible explanations at this point runs from as-yet-unidentified natural processes to purposeful intervention by conspirators. The implausibility of it all is quite maddening — but, then again, when it comes to MH370, maddening and implausible are par for the course.

People paying attention and with inquiring minds capable of inference were wondering from soon after seeing the pics how the part managed to have barnacles on every surface, but no algae at all. Since barnacles only grow underwater, and anything in the ocean near the surface for months definitely will get covered in algae. Also how it managed to 'wash ashore' (on a pebbly beach) without getting the barnacles all or mostly ground off. Not to mention staying afloat for so long despite all compartments in such aircraft metal structures having drain holes for pressure equalization during ascent/descent, and to ensure condensation drains out rather than building up and causing corrosion. All these points were raised in forums where free debate of important issues is allowed.

Anyway, now at least some of those questions are in the mainstream media. The part is apparently not from MH370, and that's quite curious. Thought you should know.

Incidentally, it also returns the status of washed-up parts to 'only known candidates were in the Maldives, shortly after the plane was lost.' Except those parts seem to have been vanished, so far as official investigation goes.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2015, 10:15:09 am by TerraHertz »
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline NiHaoMike

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5642
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #107 on: August 30, 2015, 05:42:17 am »
If it's not from MH370, where could it have come from?
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #108 on: August 30, 2015, 10:12:45 am »
If it's not from MH370, where could it have come from?

That's the key question, isn't it?

I'm eagerly awaiting some more formal announcement about this, and seeing how it's spun.
Maybe there'll be some explanation for how it remained deep enough for barnacles to grow on all surfaces, but somehow too deep (or in shade) for algae to colonize the surfaces too. Algae needs light. And I doubt airplane paint includes marine algae inhibitors like TBT.

Or how such a part got in the ocean at all, if it's officially confirmed it doesn't match the Malaysian Airlines maintenance records. Yet no other airframe of that type has ever crashed in any ocean.

Would be nice to get a photo of where the identification plate was supposed to be. I suppose it's possible the rivets just electrolyzed away in seawater, and it fell off.
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #109 on: August 30, 2015, 10:27:13 am »
They rarely rivet those plates on, to save mass on the thousands of parts they generally use a laser etched self adhesive label, which has a 3M adhesive that bonds very well and which is almost totally chemical and solvent proof once cured. your car also has a few of these now, as it is both faster in assembly, the sheet of labels is made in a single process and follows the body shell through the assembly line where they peel off as needed) and you save time in not drilling 4 holes, placing 4 rivets and sealing the assembly to prevent corrosion.  They place one on each body panel after the paint shop ( or before with a peel off cover strip on some interior panels for hidden identifying marks) so there is no issue with having a different spec version down the line.
 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5738
  • Country: nl
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #110 on: August 30, 2015, 10:57:05 am »
1) It is proven to be from a 777
2) No other 777 is missing
3) The oceanstreams match with date and locations

The rest is all a bit of sensation journalism if you ask me.
Algae dissapear in a few sunny days here in one of my statues that sit in the shadow 3/4 of the year, the statue is all green, put it a couple of days in hot sunlight and they are gone, statue is bright white.

99% of conspiracy theories are BS. If it was a conspiracy you know some govt. should have pulled this off since no small organisation can aquire this part unnoticed and grow shells on it for some months and the fly it to south africa unnoticed to lay on the beach.
So if so what would there be to gain you can ask?
The only thing a piece of evidence from this plain would bring is assurance that it lies on the bottom of the ocean. So the only thing that would make sense for this to be a conspiracy fake evidence would be that the plane never crashed and it has landed somewhere. Now if you believe that then there should have been some very wanted people aboard of that plane think of nobel price winner people, which there were not. There were no highly important people on board. So skip the BS that plane has just crashed, lies on the bottom of the ocean somewhere and this is very likely a piece of it.
 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7368
  • Country: nz
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #111 on: August 30, 2015, 12:07:53 pm »
there has to be more than one part with a S/N in that flaperon
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Online Kjelt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5738
  • Country: nl
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #112 on: September 01, 2015, 01:17:58 pm »
If the piece is from the MH370 then the plane is probably lying somewhere south of Java according to German oceanologists (no idea if this is a valid english word but scientists that study the ocean). However they feel not sure enough to advise the australian government to change the search zone.
Dutch only:
http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/4117300/wrak-vlucht-mh370-ligt-volgens-duitse-oceanologen-bij-java.html
 

Offline Rick Law

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2712
  • Country: us
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #113 on: September 03, 2015, 03:38:10 pm »
(Sep 3, 2015)

"French prosecutor says serial numbers found on wing part confirm it is from Flight 370"

"...PARIS — A French prosecutor says the piece of wing discovered in July on a remote Indian Ocean island has been formally identified as having come from the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370...."

http://www.startribune.com/french-investigators-confirm-wing-part-is-from-flight-370/324102121/
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #114 on: January 01, 2016, 09:22:14 pm »
Necroposting somewhat, but this popped up as info.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/mh370-pages/updates/reports.aspx

Might be worth a read,
 

Offline TerraHertz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3593
  • Country: au
  • Why shouldn't we question everything?
    • It's not really a Blog
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #115 on: January 02, 2016, 12:45:02 am »
Dammit, how long is it going to take me to learn to type 2016 instead of 2015 in filenames when saving?
Collecting old scopes, logic analyzers, and unfinished projects. http://everist.org
 

Offline SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15166
  • Country: za
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #116 on: January 02, 2016, 09:22:48 am »
Dammit, how long is it going to take me to learn to type 2016 instead of 2015 in filenames when saving?

About a year............
 

Online Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9403
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #117 on: January 02, 2016, 10:33:05 am »
... I was going to say 11 1/2 months.
 

Offline cimmo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: au
Re: Wreckage of MH370 washing up on Reunion Island?
« Reply #118 on: March 15, 2016, 12:05:27 pm »
Noise filter is set to ignore: Zapta, dunkemhigh, dannyf
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf