cassiewoofer

I was told after one post 'no it isn't', but the story of Helios, suggests that a plan to do it, with the technical knowledge of how to set the pressurisation to manual, might be possible. Something I have mused over. But seriously..... how long does a pilot have in his daily schedule to plan anything like this? It just can't be narrowed down..... hijacking/pilot suicide/equipment failure with some weird electronic events that led to controlled turns. Incredible... just hope they find it. One thing is certain.... a lot of things will change after this. Things that should have been implemented after AF447

EsherFlyer

But would they have been in place by now? I'd have thought a decade would be a quick change for in-service aircraft. Are there any precedents for rapid changes to something that doesn't cause accidents (but may help with their aftermath / management)?

bimmerdriver

Everyone hopes that when / if wreckage from MH370 is located, things will be learned from it. One could argue that even if wreckage is never recovered, the disappearance makes a good case for changes to how aircraft are tracked. However, whether or not anything changes remains to be seen. There is a lot of inertia in the industry, so I won't hold my breath unless conclusive evidence of a root cause is found. I don't see on what basis you are suggesting that what should change as a result of MH370 is similar to what "should have been implemented after AF447". AF447 happened due to a combination of pilot error, improper cockpit management, pitot freezing and the airbus style of digital flight control system. There is no indication MH370 has any similarity whatsoever to AF447.

sbrower

Presurization is for the entire plane. The pressure in the cabin, and in the flight deck, and in the cargo hold, is the same.

polarbreeze

So the question becomes whether it is possible to depressurize the plane from the flight deck.

trailboss99

The APU fires up because without power a 777 falls out of the sky, it's fly by wire remember.

The batteries only provide power to one bus (can't remember which in a 777) and that only contains systems critical to keeping the plane in the air plus maybe the cabin intercom and IIRC one VHF radio. This will kick in upon engine flameout and stay on until either exhausted, the APU starts or the RAT deploys.




I am not sure that anything on a 777 sends an automated "we are screwed" message, actually I'm reasonably sure that they do not. AFIK #s 3 and 4 don't exist. #1 is unlikely to send anything but it is possible I suppose that #2 may send a message over ACARS but I have no idea if it actually does. Wouldn't be a bad idea to incorporate if it doesn't already.


Sorry I missed this. The answer is yes. Bleed air can be shut off via the bleed air panel and switching the outflow valves (pressurisation panel) to manual-open. The appropriate section of the (simplified) 777 manual can be found here: http://www.smartcockpit.com/download...ir_Systems.pdf

drath

Would like refer to this article:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...find-the-plane

A diagram in the article above:
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-conten...t-coverage.gif
appears to show that Inmarsat may have had coverage of MH370 through another satellite: 178E POR apart from the one above the Indian ocean. Wikiing Inmarsat shows they do have that particular satellite listed.

I understand that such diagrams may be quite inaccurate. I'm just wondering if anyone can provide further information on the actual coverage range of the INMARSAT 178E POR satellite. If the coverage range does extend that far, would it not have recorded some data for MH370 and therefore make it possible to eliminate some possibilities and refine the search
area? I'm not in any way someone well versed in satellite transmissions, so if I've erred, please correct me.

Also, the pings recorded by Inmarsat, mention 6 handshakes and many articles state that these were recorded hourly.
But in the graph provided by Inmarsat for burst frequency offset analysis, it appears there are more data points observed than 6. The last point does coincide with 0811 MYT but they are not hourly. Would appreciate it if someone could clarify.

polarbreeze

iirc it was the absence of pings from that other satellite that helped to narrow down the possible flightpaths.

Gynob001

Assuming the flight ended up in the sea, shouldn't debris be washing up shore soon?

karenkay

so, they're now saying the last words from MH 370 were “Good night Malaysian three seven zero”

rather than what they had reported before, as “All right, good night”.

is there a reason this is significant? i can't come up with one (other than that they just aren't being accurate).

EsherFlyer

To me the only significance is that it is very odd that the Malaysian team would get it wrong initially and not correct it in a timely fashion.

Sounds entirely normal, although can read a little oddly if you don't insert a pause before the flight ID bit.

cassiewoofer

I was thinking along the same lines and I did have a look at a few sites on south equatorial surface currents in the region and the speeds and directions involved seemed to suggest that the first floating debris would make landfall on the north coast of Madagascar in 2016!
I don't know what undisclosed technology HMS Tireless has but lets hope it can home in on that black box signal, though they might need to get every ship in the area to stop all engines for a few days!
Having read more about how unlikely an intact ditching at sea is, I hope the first debris to be found before the black box signal dies in the next 10 days.
The arrival of Tireless is the best news I've heard in weeks!

bimmerdriver

It depends on where the aircraft went down and the direction of the ocean currents. If you recall the fukushima tsunami, debris is just showing up on the west coast of north america now.

Flaflyer

Not necessarily. If a plane comes apart in the air or comes apart on impact, there are tons of floating stuff inside the fuselage and cargo holds. In a normal water landing, the pax open the doors, inflate the rafts, and the plane sinks with the doors open allowing tons of stuff to float out on its way to the bottom, to join the rafts and pax life vests floating on the sea.

But IF and a big IF a crewmember/hijacker took over the cockpit, and if it is possible to knock out the pax/FAs by depressurizing the plane (while the pilot had his oxygen mask on, fed from a tank that lasts longer than the 15 mins. the passenger drop down masks last), the lone pilot could fly south till almost out of fuel and carefully ditch the plane. The engines and possibly wings tear off (and sink) but the SFO crash shows how darn strong the round 777 fuselage is.

(Look up pictures of the SFO plane. There are closeups of the fuselage on the ground and on the trucks after the plane was cut apart for removal. After smashing the tail, flipping around and slamming the ground, the lower fuselage skin forward of the wing (except of course for the very bottom) does not have a visible wrinkle or blemish. It looks pristine. THAT is a strong Boeing built fuselage. ^)

With no live pax, no doors are opened and the fuselage slowly fills with water. I think it could possibly sink to the bottom intact with all the floatable debris sealed into the aluminum tube. In this case the plane is GONE and there is nothing floating, not even an oil slick, as the plane was out of fuel. Finding the plane would be darn near impossible.

JDiver

Sorry, but I call . This was not Sullenberger putting the A320 down on the smooth Hudson River, this was a 777 landing in the Roaring Forties in the southern Indian Ocean, with significant waves. See this video of Ethiopian 961.