Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Rods2 on 20 January 2015, 18:49:05
-
The findings are that it climbed too fast at 6000ft / min to avoid a storm and then stalled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237)
Spokesman saying a fighter jet can't climb at that rate is bull, where many modern fighters can climb at over 50,000ft / min!
-
Surely there would be some form of anti-stall device, along with an audible warning.
-
Surely there would be some form of anti-stall device, along with an audible warning.
There are both of these, so let us wait for the proper report. :y
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/553569-air-asia-indonesia-lost-contact-surabaya-singapore-113.html
-
Ive always been told its quite difficult to stall modern Commercial Airliners, ie the Pilots got to be trying really hard to drop a wing in a stall. :-\
-
Ive always been told its quite difficult to stall modern Commercial Airliners, ie the Pilots got to be trying really hard to drop a wing in a stall. :-\
Not that difficult if you are trying. ::)
-
Given the weather at the time of the incident it is quite conceivable that a very strong updraft "might" have caused the rate of ascent seen on the radar. This would not cause a "stall" in the normal use of the word as the rapid rate of climb would be counteracted by a "nose down" condition, either manually by the pilots or automatically by the flight management system (autopilot) which, given the relative air flow would decrease the chances of a stall. There is a danger that this action leads to a very rapid rate of descent once the aircraft leaves the updraft, however from the height they were at that should have been easily recoverable.
As said .. lets wait until the accident data recorders are analysed properly and we know some facts, rather than suppositions.
-
I have taken to watching the Air Investigation programmes Nat Geo (Channel 423) and this has happened before. The pivots ice up, the pilots lose their instrumentation / become confused and disorientated. losing track of their true air speed,and one pilot continues to pull the stick back instead of pushing forward and getting out of the stall.
They ignore all normal reasoning, now apparently being so used to relying on instruments to fly instead of actully "flying" the plane and lose it. At least two cases (one the Air France Airbus for one that ended in the southern Atlantic) I have seen involved all this and the plane just ended up free falling many thousands of feet in minutes and going in flat! :o :o :o
Rather than climbing at a extraordinary rate, this one I suggest MAY have fallen at an extraordinary rate and ripped off it's tail plane plus braking up in the air.
Obviously though the fall investigation should reveal the real truth.
-
Pitot tubes... And in the case of AF443? Pilot error caused that ultimately... It took them nearly 38k feet to not save the aircraft as they panicked and ended up with the pilot and copilot trying to fly the aircraft in opposite directions, and by the time the captain had figured it out they were about five seconds from dead :'(
-
The findings are that it climbed too fast at 6000ft / min to avoid a storm and then stalled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237)
Spokesman saying a fighter jet can't climb at that rate is bull, where many modern fighters can climb at over 50,000ft / min!
The EL Lightening could manage 20,000 / min in the late 50's
-
The findings are that it climbed too fast at 6000ft / min to avoid a storm and then stalled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237)
Spokesman saying a fighter jet can't climb at that rate is bull, where many modern fighters can climb at over 50,000ft / min!
The EL Lightening could manage 20,000 / min in the late 50's
When properly prepared it could go vertical and then supersonic.....although the prep for such a stunt would degrade the exoskeleton airframe which thus limited it's service life and was it's eventual demise. A shame really it was a superb rocket with a seat strapped to it aircraft.
-
The findings are that it climbed too fast at 6000ft / min to avoid a storm and then stalled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237)
Spokesman saying a fighter jet can't climb at that rate is bull, where many modern fighters can climb at over 50,000ft / min!
50000 ft/min is the initial climb rate of a typical modern fighter, at sea level. They can't maintain anything like that rate as the altitude increases and the air gets thinner. "Streak Eagle" reached 98000 feet in 3 minutes 28 seconds - the last 30K odd feet being ballistic as the engines had flamed out approaching 70K. Initial climb rate was 70K ft/min after about 30 seconds at sea level accelerating to Mach 1.4.
http://www.whiteeagleaerospace.com/aquila-maxima/
The Air Asia jet started out at 36000 feet and appears to have climbed to in excess of 38000 ft in around 20 seconds. Those figures are comparible with a sub sonic jet fighter's capabilities at those flight levels. Service ceiling on an A320 is FL390 so something extraordinary must have happened. 2000 feet in 20 seconds is nose up, and hang on till the air thins and the airspeed decays, at which point it stalls (which it will). Subsequent data apparently shows the plane falling at 15K ft/min, though it hasn't been revealed if it was in one piece whilst this was happening.
-
Possibly not for long depending on attitude during the descent :-\
-
The findings are that it climbed too fast at 6000ft / min to avoid a storm and then stalled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30902237)
Spokesman saying a fighter jet can't climb at that rate is bull, where many modern fighters can climb at over 50,000ft / min!
The EL Lightening could manage 20,000 / min in the late 50's
When properly prepared it could go vertical and then supersonic.....although the prep for such a stunt would degrade the exoskeleton airframe which thus limited it's service life and was it's eventual demise. A shame really it was a superb rocket with a seat strapped to it aircraft.
All I know is that back in the 1980s I was at a Fairford Air Show and (I think it was) an USAF F14 came flying along the runway at very low level, then tipped up vertically like a rocket and raced up into a very blue sky until he disappeared at about 30,000 ft; very, very impressive! :y :y
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
-
Nah, that's not a take off...
That's a take off... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA&feature=youtube_gdata_player) 8)
-
That's RW26 at Bournemouth, Al. Does get a bit 'Brown Pants' there sometimes. Iv'e even been in Haskins Garden centre at Ferndown when something big goes out, and thought 'Sh1t...that's coming in here' ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I met a flight there earlier this month, a Tui 737/800, which used pretty much all of the runway length to slow down, although I don't think he was trying very hard ::)
I'm not sure that I am brave/daft enough to stand where that camera was with an EAC jumbo heading towards me though... :o
-
Looking at the weather conditions in the area at the time and what is known (in the public arena), my money is going on a simple cloud burst followed by structural failure :(
These are very common at this time of year in that part of the world and can quite easily drag any aircraft up at a good 5 or 6G. This followed by a nasty microburst downdraft could rip the aircraft to pieces if it wasn't in tip top condition and lets be honest here, the A320-200 has been around for donkeys years and aircraft maintenance in some parts of the world is scheduled by accountants not engineers :(
Lizzie, unless the USAF has started sailing aircraft carriers, you will probably find that that F14 was in fact a F15C from Bitburg in sausage land ;D
Guffer, "quote .... When properly prepared it could go vertical and then supersonic.....although the prep for such a stunt would degrade the exoskeleton airframe which thus limited it's service life and was it's eventual demise"
What makes you think that ??
I'm asking because I spent 3 1/2 years of my life taking them off the squadron, stripping them down to the shell, fixing anything that needed doing / upgrading then rebuilding / testing the aircraft and sending it back out to the flight line so the piggin jockeys can break / bend them again ;)
LC0112G The Streak Eagle was a stripped down, tuned up one off airframe and had very little in common with the USAF's F15's. Also, no way on earth could it do mach 1.4 @ sea level ;) In fact the F15 is shite at anything above mach at low level due to the wing loading. That's why it was common practice during exercises for the lightning pilots to lead them down low if they wanted to have a fight ;)
That time to height record was set up in response to the soviets Mig 25 (go faster version) in the good old cold war tradition of my dick aeroplane is better then yours ;D
The time to height record also used a stepped climb profile to get there which is very similar to how the lightning got up there so fast.
Standing on your tail over the threshold is for air shows / the public only unless the boss isn't looking :D
-
Nah, that's not a take off...
That's a take off... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA&feature=youtube_gdata_player) 8)
Bet he'd chewed through his pants by the time he was airborne.
Anyway, this is a takeoff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Qh95I_YM0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Qh95I_YM0)
or.. if you like the wind in your hair..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPfIpDcvqhg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPfIpDcvqhg)
-
Nah, that's not a take off...
That's a take off... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA&feature=youtube_gdata_player) 8)
Bet he'd chewed through his pants by the time he was airborne.
I love Youtube comments.. "OMG how can you not see this is FAKE!" ::) ;D
-
Guffer, "quote .... When properly prepared it could go vertical and then supersonic.....although the prep for such a stunt would degrade the exoskeleton airframe which thus limited it's service life and was it's eventual demise"
What makes you think that ??
I'm asking because I spent 3 1/2 years of my life taking them off the squadron, stripping them down to the shell, fixing anything that needed doing / upgrading then rebuilding / testing the aircraft and sending it back out to the flight line so the piggin jockeys can break / bend them again ;)
Precisely what you said :y
The requirement to constantly fix/replace parts of the exoframe was not cost effective and if I recall correctly there was only a limited number of times it could be polished (and thus reach maximum speed) before the entire airframe was written off.
It was a fantastic aircraft though, and I am tempted to hop over to SA where they still have one flying ::)
-
TG, you say that about the age of the A320... this one was only 8 years old :-\
The aircraft was an Airbus A320-216, with serial number 3648, registered as PK-AXC. It first flew on 25 September 2008, and was delivered to AirAsia on 15 October 2008. The plane had accumulated approximately 23,000 flight hours over 13,600 flights. It had undergone its most recent scheduled maintenance on 16 November 2014. [21] The aircraft was powered by two CFM International CFM56-5B6 engines and was configured to carry 180 passengers.
Ok, not the newest, but nearly twenty years newer than some A320s I could name :y
-
Looking forward to my trip on an Airbus A321 on Saturday, now!
-
LC0112G The Streak Eagle was a stripped down, tuned up one off airframe and had very little in common with the USAF's F15's. Also, no way on earth could it do mach 1.4 @ sea level ;) In fact the F15 is shite at anything above mach at low level due to the wing loading. That's why it was common practice during exercises for the lightning pilots to lead them down low if they wanted to have a fight ;)
That time to height record was set up in response to the soviets Mig 25 (go faster version) in the good old cold war tradition of my dick aeroplane is better then yours ;D
The time to height record also used a stepped climb profile to get there which is very similar to how the lightning got up there so fast.
Standing on your tail over the threshold is for air shows / the public only unless the boss isn't looking :D
The F-15 is my Mastermind specialised subject :) Agree with most of that, except....
The structural design limits on an F-15 are Mach 1.4 at sea level. This was achieved during the flight test program.
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-15C_Eagle_SAC_-_February_1992.pdf
However, this is in a clean configuration, and it was extremely rare for any Bitburg, Spang or Soesterburg Eagle to fly in clean configuration. Even at airshows they usually had centreline and wing pylons fitted. The release to service limit is 800KIAS. However, the wing loading does make for a bumpy ride at low level, and few crews I've spoken to have exceeded M1.4 even at altitude.
The lower level time to climb records (up to 15K meters) were done in a single climb . Those involved accelerating to M1.4 as "sea level" then pulling 4g and climbing at 50 degrees nose high. The records above 15K meters were done in 2 steps - M1.1 at "sea level", Immelman up to around 35K feet, accelerate to M2.2 then 50 degrees up till the engines flame out.
The records were set at Grand Forks AFB in North Dakota, which is 913ft AMSL, so not "sea level" I'll concede that. The temperature was also very sub zero, so nice dense air for the engines to breath.
Anyway - looking more likely now that this plane somehow got into a flat or spiral spin that the crew couldn't recover before structural failure.
-
Nah, that's not a take off...
That's a take off... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA&feature=youtube_gdata_player) 8)
Bet he'd chewed through his pants by the time he was airborne.
Anyway, this is a takeoff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Qh95I_YM0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Qh95I_YM0)
or.. if you like the wind in your hair..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPfIpDcvqhg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPfIpDcvqhg)
Watching the glider clip, that is impressive for an aircraft with no engine 8)
But it lead me to a couple of very impressive videos, one a take off and one not...
Last first...
What an achievement (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSBC9RJA0CE&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
Sounds like Mr Wood is providing some of the commentary on that :y
And the first last, saw a vid titled "B737 takes off from Lasham... just" which wasn't that impressive, but did lead me to this one...
A nice short field take off (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSBC9RJA0CE&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
-
Thread drift .... but if you really want short field landings and takeoffs ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM5AI3YSV3M
:D :D
and then there is JATO assist ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEh5ChbJKAQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHOvoO-6nWQ
-
I remember my first winch launch in a glider. Nobody warned me what it would be like :o :o :o ;D
-
Watching the glider clip, that is impressive for an aircraft with no engine 8)
Well, technically, it's got an LPG'd Chevy 502, it just leaves it on the ground. ;D
I remember my first winch launch in a glider. Nobody warned me what it would be like :o :o :o ;D
It does take a couple of them before you're able to stay sufficiently together to fly the plane. ;D
On my first one was in a Schleicher Ka-2 and the cable broke at 800 feet. In "lowering the nose" the instructor managed to deposit all the dirt that was hanging around on the floor of that old hunk of wood and fabric straight onto my bonce!
-
Now these are take offs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqBozAEpDE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTr2UvLqfkQ
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
Thanks Emd, but no. The one I saw went straight up from flying at just a few feet above the runway, completely vertical, like a rocker and without any rolls into a clear blue yonder! 8) 8) :y
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
Thanks Emd, but no. The one I saw went straight up from flying at just a few feet above the runway, completely vertical, like a rocker and without any rolls into a clear blue yonder! 8) 8) :y
Yes Lizzie, I remember that's how the Lightning used to finish its display at Farnboro' in the old days. Low level pass, then re-heat and straight up till almost lost from sight. Beautiful !! :y
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
Thanks Emd, but no. The one I saw went straight up from flying at just a few feet above the runway, completely vertical, like a rocker and without any rolls into a clear blue yonder! 8) 8) :y
:o :o :o
air show (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=totzfPN4hWQ)
I bet mr entwood could have a lot of fun in that ;D
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
Thanks Emd, but no. The one I saw went straight up from flying at just a few feet above the runway, completely vertical, like a rocker and without any rolls into a clear blue yonder! 8) 8) :y
:o :o :o
air show (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=totzfPN4hWQ)
I bet mr entwood could have a lot of fun in that ;D
After several decades flying in airborn barges he would mostly likely kack 'is pants ;D ;D
-
Like this Lizzie :y
Take Off (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DK3ANJvHjdqw&ei=lgvAVP2aOZDhasrRgqgO&usg=AFQjCNHwTFy2hE4aUvamX_91aGrwgvbjhA)
Thanks Emd, but no. The one I saw went straight up from flying at just a few feet above the runway, completely vertical, like a rocker and without any rolls into a clear blue yonder! 8) 8) :y
:o :o :o
air show (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=totzfPN4hWQ)
I bet mr entwood could have a lot of fun in that ;D
After several decades flying in airborn barges he would mostly likely kack 'is pants ;D ;D
Yeah i bet the G-Forces are a little more than when he drove one :-\
-
The bigger stuff is more impressive when being thrown around...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO6vFpH7gIE&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO6vFpH7gIE&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
-
Those of us that were there won't forget the departure of 3 Bitburg F-15's during the 1986 Tiger meet at Cambrai.
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/7/0/6/0331607.jpg)
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/0/5/5/0232550.jpg)
I'm sure there were 3, the other one went straight up!