SeanD
Well-Known Member
Was a CVR ever recovered? I couldnt find any other info that it ever was. I also believe there is still some debate about the Egypt air flight out of JFK being a suicide by pilot scenario.
Malaysia Airlines 777 missing
- Thread starter ComplexHiAv8r
- Start date
Was a CVR ever recovered? I couldnt find any other info that it ever was. I also believe there is still some debate about the Egypt air flight out of JFK being a suicide by pilot scenario.
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
The tallest building in Beijing is also a World Trade Center.
(until they find evidence of a crash, I would imagine the folks in charge of securing air travel in countries around the world will be pooping diamonds for a while)
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
Because of the speed and angle at the time of the crash, the aircraft shed many of it's components/parts even before she hit the water. It basically disintegrated upon impact and not even one entire/complete human remain(s) were found intact, just bits and pieces. I think they recovered about 65% or so of the actual debris/wreckage, pieced them together as best they could and both recorders were recovered as well, along with their data. There were two investigations (the NTSC and the NTSB). The NTSC came up with really no sound conclusion.
NTSB report stated: "The examination of all of the factual evidence is consistent with the conclusions that: 1) no airplane-related mechanical malfunctions or failures caused or contributed to the accident, and 2) the accident can be explained by intentional pilot action. Specifically, a) the accident airplane’s flight profile is consistent with sustained manual nose-down flight control inputs; b) the evidence suggests that the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was intentionally disconnected; c) recovery of the airplane was possible but not attempted; and d) it is more likely that the nose-down flight control inputs were made by the captain than by the first officer. A technical analysis of the sound signature of a CVR circuit breaker trip, as recorded by the CVR, was carried out by investigators and the evidence showed that the CVR stoppage was consistent with being manually initiated. The radio continued to work after the failure of the recorders, which indicates that power failure was not the cause."
You also have to look into the background of the Captain and events going on in his life which sadly, make the suicide potential rather high. He had several issues going on in his life at the time, both professionally and personally, depression and anxiety over them and seemed to be on a spiral out of control path.
Last edited:
SeanD
Well-Known Member
I dont know, I just have a hard time buying into the pilot suicide thing and involving hundreds of innocent lives just to take yours. It really doesn't make much sense to me. This accident doesn't seem to have enough evidence to conclude a suicide was in fact the cause. Just because the pilot was demoted and had financial problems is a weak argument for investigators to build on IMHO. It took 4 years for them to find the faulty servo problem with the USAir flight. The Silk Air crash happened during that time.
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
As for Egypt Air again you have two investigative entities involved (ECAA) but I have to side with the NTSB for their non-political, non biased, non concern over financial impacts, etc.in their assessment of the crash:
The CVR recorded the Captain excusing himself to go to the lavatory, followed thirty seconds later by the First Officer saying in Egyptian Arabic "Tawkalt ala Allah", which translates to "I rely on God." A minute later, the autopilot was disengaged, immediately followed by the First Officer again saying, "I rely on God." Three seconds later, the throttles for both engines were reduced to idle, and both elevators were moved three degrees nose down. The First Officer repeated "I rely on God" seven more times before the Captain suddenly asked repeatedly, "What's happening, what's happening?" The flight data recorder reflected that the elevators then moved into a split condition, with the left elevator up and the right elevator down, a condition which is expected to result when the two control columns are subjected to at least 50 pounds (23 kg) of opposing force. At this point, both engines were shut down by moving the start levers from run to cutoff. The Captain asked, "What is this? What is this? Did you shut the engines?" The First Officer did not respond. The Captain repeatedly stated, "Pull with me" but the FDR data indicated that the elevator surfaces remained in a split condition (with the left surface commanding nose up and the right surface commanding nose down) until the FDR and CVR stopped recording. There were no other aircraft in the area. There was no indication that an explosion occurred on board. The engines operated normally for the entire flight until they were shut down. From the presence of a western debris field about 1,200 feet (370 m) from the eastern debris field, the NTSB concluded that the left engine and some small pieces of wreckage separated from the airplane at some point before water impact.
The NTSB's final report was issued on 21 March 2002, after a two-year investigation, and concluded:
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the EgyptAir flight 990 accident is the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean as a result of the relief first officer's flight control inputs. The reason for the relief first officer's actions was not determined."
Further: "Bernard Loeb, former NTSB director of aviation safety, said What was unprofessional was the insistence by the Egyptians, in the face of irrefutable evidence, to anyone who knows anything about investigating airplane accidents and who knows anything about aerodynamics and airplanes, was the fact that this airplane was intentionally flown into the ocean. No scenario that the Egyptians came up with, or that we came up with, in which there were some sort of mechanical failure in the elevator control system, would either match the flight profile or was a situation in which the airplane was not recoverable."
The CVR recorded the Captain excusing himself to go to the lavatory, followed thirty seconds later by the First Officer saying in Egyptian Arabic "Tawkalt ala Allah", which translates to "I rely on God." A minute later, the autopilot was disengaged, immediately followed by the First Officer again saying, "I rely on God." Three seconds later, the throttles for both engines were reduced to idle, and both elevators were moved three degrees nose down. The First Officer repeated "I rely on God" seven more times before the Captain suddenly asked repeatedly, "What's happening, what's happening?" The flight data recorder reflected that the elevators then moved into a split condition, with the left elevator up and the right elevator down, a condition which is expected to result when the two control columns are subjected to at least 50 pounds (23 kg) of opposing force. At this point, both engines were shut down by moving the start levers from run to cutoff. The Captain asked, "What is this? What is this? Did you shut the engines?" The First Officer did not respond. The Captain repeatedly stated, "Pull with me" but the FDR data indicated that the elevator surfaces remained in a split condition (with the left surface commanding nose up and the right surface commanding nose down) until the FDR and CVR stopped recording. There were no other aircraft in the area. There was no indication that an explosion occurred on board. The engines operated normally for the entire flight until they were shut down. From the presence of a western debris field about 1,200 feet (370 m) from the eastern debris field, the NTSB concluded that the left engine and some small pieces of wreckage separated from the airplane at some point before water impact.
The NTSB's final report was issued on 21 March 2002, after a two-year investigation, and concluded:
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the EgyptAir flight 990 accident is the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean as a result of the relief first officer's flight control inputs. The reason for the relief first officer's actions was not determined."
Further: "Bernard Loeb, former NTSB director of aviation safety, said What was unprofessional was the insistence by the Egyptians, in the face of irrefutable evidence, to anyone who knows anything about investigating airplane accidents and who knows anything about aerodynamics and airplanes, was the fact that this airplane was intentionally flown into the ocean. No scenario that the Egyptians came up with, or that we came up with, in which there were some sort of mechanical failure in the elevator control system, would either match the flight profile or was a situation in which the airplane was not recoverable."
Last edited:
RDoug
Well-Known Member
The tallest building in Beijing is also a World Trade Center.
Use to be. Not anymore. Just got back from China last month, where I photographed both the China World Trade Center (right across from our hotel in Beijing) and the Shanghai Tower (now the world's second tallest building).
Ooops. Reading really is fundamental.
I just reread and noticed where you specifically cited the tallest in Beijing, and you're 100% correct.My bad.
Last edited:
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
There was more going on in his life. His financial losses (share trading showed losses of more than $1 million dollars plus he had other large debts as well) his securities trading privileges had been suspended 10 days before the accident due to non-payment, his obtaining an insurance policy on his life the previous week (the policy was to have gone into effect on the day of the accident), his receipt of several recent disciplinary actions on the part of the airline (including one that related to improper manipulation of the CVR circuit breaker), and his depression over the loss of three squadron friends during his military flight training, which occurred 18 years earlier on the exact date of the crash. He also had experienced several conflicts with his co-pliot on the flight previously and other co-pilots who had questioned his command suitability. Investigations later revealed that his total assets were greater than his liabilities, although his liquid assets could not cover his immediate debts; his monthly income was far less than his family's monthly expenditure and he had some outstanding credit card debts. He was also having at this time issues with his wife, marriage and his family who had bailed him out financially on several occasions.
I don't think it is out of the realm of believing that he snapped. You have to put yourself in the shoes of a person who believes they are losing their career, their finances and other things/people close to them. It wouldn't be the first time that someone committing suicide takes a large number of individuals with them in the process. As painful and abhorrent to "normal" people to do, for someone in such a metal/emotional state, their thinking is just way off base and therefore-their actions. Everyone's breaking point and stability is different. His actions aboard the flight can point to nothing else, IMO.
MarkE
Greetings, Professor Falken
I don't think they're capable of this feeling.
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
The wreckage was found the day after because the aircraft did not intentionally deviate from its intended track. Someone already touched on it but the exponential equation that some SAR person is doing involves the hours of fuel remaining and I'm guessing max endurance. Now the search area is gigantic. For a 777 in the flight levels? How many hours can you go at Mach .74 or some efficient speed one that is likely published? A long way.
There is just so much earth to look at. Unless there was some kind of covert surveillance of this area that we don't know about from either the Chinese or the US I can imagine they will never find the plane. If they find a life vest that was floating, it has been floating in the ocean at 1 to 3 knots depending on winds for what a week now. Even if you could plot that it would still be a huge area hundreds of miles from the crash area.
I was a sailor before a pilot and during a man overboard drill in the calm bay of a tropical island there was no way to see the float that was our "man overboard". When I fly to Kona I always look for ships and look outside. I have never seen a thing. Sometimes waves look like a yacht, for only a moment. I really hope that no one is floating around on a slide in the middle of the Indian Ocean....
That would be a horrible way to go.
RDoug
Well-Known Member
Oh, I fully concur, Beef Supreme. My opinion (as if that's worth anything at this point in time)? If MAS370 went into the ocean, then it's already far too late to locate the debris field even if flotsam is eventually located — which it will be at some point. The amount of current drift and wind after a full week will place any flotsam way too far from the impact area to be of any real use in a search.
🦈💜
Well-Known Member
I meant ... is it possible for a perfectly-ditched pressurized airplane to sink?
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
It may narrow things down so they are looking in the correct body of water but yeah. I just shudder to think if that one hearty guy or gal made it out and was floating around on the open ocean on a slide. Does the 777 have rafts with provisions or do you just hang off the door slides?
I sailed with someone that spent 8 days in a life raft before EBIRB or even GPS in the late 70s between the coast of northern New Zealand and Fiji. They were picked up by chance, by a Russian fishing vessel.
Pro tip. Always have a life raft with a bigger capacity than your occupants. At least that works for sailing. 4 men in a 4 man raft is comfy.
Vector4Food
This job would be easier without all the airplanes
To that I don't know
I would surmise it possible to float but I have no technical experience to support that at all.
My logic dictates it would, eventually sink
A Life Aloft
Well-Known Member
Most of the slides are configured to be used as life rafts when they are detached from the frame. You sit inside of the slide/now raft.
Some carriers also have additional rafts:
Some carriers also have additional rafts:
Last edited:
Vector4Food
This job would be easier without all the airplanes
My theory, at this point, is that the plane was hijacked by someone, crew or otherwise.
At some point during that maybe hours later they were over powered by passengers or crew, and crashed, like UAL on 9/11.
It's a plausible event, if a pilot/hijacker was suicidal, why not just crash the plane, why fly on for hours.
Also, there's zero notice that India has checked all PSR tapes, or any other sources on it's potential flight path , if they have, you would think it would be public so people would stop thinking it's been "stolen"
Editors note: my theory is worth about as much as the pixels on your screen.
At some point during that maybe hours later they were over powered by passengers or crew, and crashed, like UAL on 9/11.
It's a plausible event, if a pilot/hijacker was suicidal, why not just crash the plane, why fly on for hours.
Also, there's zero notice that India has checked all PSR tapes, or any other sources on it's potential flight path , if they have, you would think it would be public so people would stop thinking it's been "stolen"
Editors note: my theory is worth about as much as the pixels on your screen.
RDoug
Well-Known Member
The real question from an engineering standpoint is: How well will a structure designed to keep pressurized air inside work at keeping water outside? My guess? Not too well. The seals are made to press outward from air pressure, and should be easily defeated by water pressing inward from the opposite direction.
In other words: The fuselage would initially keep the aircraft afloat, but eventually would fill with water and sink.
SeanD
Well-Known Member
I completely see what youre saying and dont completely disagree. What bothers me is that both the USAir 737 and this 737 had the same characteristics when they crashed. Not to mention the 737 en route to RIC that experienced the rudder failure but fortunately regained control and landed safely. Its possible, the pilots personal and financial situation was pure coincidence. Not all pilots are immune to a debt free life. I guess I see it like this. If your going to "off" yourself, why wait until you well in to cruise? You dont know if the other pilot is going to leave the cockpit for a pee break. Why not just plow the thing into the ground as your taking off?
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
This picture has already been covered @Acrofox but I'll do it again....
As far as I know, systems-wise in my airplane for example... it doesn't have a system that would prevent it from filling with water "enough" to keep it afloat. There are just too many areas. Once the aircraft runs out of AC generated power / bleed source, it will no longer be able to hold any pressurization.
ArcherII
Well-Known Member
No engines, no pressurization.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Yes. Remember, a pressurized airplane isn't so much sealed as it is leaking a carefully controlled amount.