Autopsies suggest Air France jet broke up in sky

[AdamLanes 1]

Do you agree with this statement: "Typically, if you see intact bodies and multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a midflight break up," said Frank Ciacco, a former forensic expert at the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

To me it seems the other way around, that you would more likely find intact bodies if people remained with a relatively intact aircraft until impact, as opposed to bodies and pieces of aircraft hitting the water in free fall.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/brazil_plane

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

You bring a valid counter argument to the table... should I believe the forensic expert hired as a consultant in an international case of interest... or the person on the internet.

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

To me it seems the other way around, that you would more likely find intact bodies if people remained with a relatively intact aircraft until impact, as opposed to bodies and pieces of aircraft hitting the water in free fall.

How many air crashes of either type have you investigated?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Brains 2]

I would think that if you remained in the aircraft, upon impact everything in that aircraft would start to come apart and shred everything in its path. In freefall, they probably froze to death before they ever hit the water, impact with the water is what broke all the bones. I am not a forensic expert but this just makes sense to me.

Never look down on someone, unless they are going down on you.

[SpeedRacer 1]

froze to death in freefall?

In June along the Brazilian coast?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Butters 0]

Quote

Do you agree with this statement: "Typically, if you see intact bodies and multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a midflight break up," said Frank Ciacco, a former forensic expert at the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

Yes. I'm thinking of impact speeds ...

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

To me it seems the other way around, that you would more likely find intact bodies if people remained with a relatively intact aircraft until impact, as opposed to bodies and pieces of aircraft hitting the water in free fall.

Ever been on a crash scene? I find it amazing that any body would be in one piece.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[wmw999 2,589]

Well, June is winter time in Brazil Of course, I think it broke up just north of the equator, so maybe it was summer time there

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

In freefall, they probably froze to death before they ever hit the water

I don't think they froze to death. Rapid decompression, trauma from the plane if it indeed came apart I would think caused most of the deaths. Oh yeah, that impact with the ocean would be a bitch also.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[DJL 235]

Quote

Do you agree with this statement: "Typically, if you see intact bodies and multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a midflight break up," said Frank Ciacco, a former forensic expert at the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

To me it seems the other way around, that you would more likely find intact bodies if people remained with a relatively intact aircraft until impact, as opposed to bodies and pieces of aircraft hitting the water in free fall.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/brazil_plane

He's quoting historical evidence. What's your counter? It makes sense; the plane breaks apart and the bodies remain intact vs. the plane hits the water at several hundred mph and the people shred.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[lawrocket 3]

Picture the WTC collapse. Those who jumped would be intact with massive orthopedic injuries. Those who were in the buikding when it collapsed were ripped to shreds.

In an impact the impacting side (if the tail was missing I'd reckon the top of the plane near the cockpit hit) comes to a sudden stop and the rest of the craft keeps moving.
It appears the aircraft disintegrated at some point as evidenced by the bodies with broken bones not in the fuselage. Had it disintegrated on impact, the aircraft pieces above them would have disintegrated into them.

Tons of metal hitting bodies at 300-500 knots WILL grind them up.

Midair disintegration usually means "human bodies."

Disintegration on ground impact usually means "human remains.". The plane disintegrates the people, too.


Note: ejection seats are, in effect, a controlled disintegration, the ejection seat is designed to get the aviator away from the bird. Too many pilots were breaking themselves hitting the tail section. Bob Hoover broke his legs hitting the tail in a bailout. Dick Bong - the leading ace of WWII, wrapped around the tail and was dragged down with the plane.

I think every skydiver can appreciate orthopedic injuries when exiting a craft at altitude.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[AdamLanes 1]

I have a hard time imagining bodies that have hit the earth in free fall being described as "intact". What about the scenario where the plane makes a semi-controlled decent into the ocean and is subsequently broken up by a hard landing, waves, and water. Broken arms, legs, and hips, seem relatively minor compared to the catastrophic damage I would expect from a free fall impact.

[billvon 3,120]

>Do you agree with this statement: "Typically, if you see intact bodies and
>multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a
>midflight break up," said Frank Ciacco, a former forensic expert at the U.S.
>National Transportation Safety Board.

Yes. The forces that can rip a plane apart will do serious damage to the humans still inside.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I have a hard time imagining bodies that have hit the earth in free fall being described as "intact". What about the scenario where the plane makes a semi-controlled decent into the ocean and is subsequently broken up by a hard landing, waves, and water. Broken arms, legs, and hips, seem relatively minor compared to the catastrophic damage I would expect from a free fall impact.

and your counter theory is what exactly? Was this another act of the 9/11 conspirators (BushCo and the Jews) to attack the fish dwellers off Brazil?

What do you actually bring to the table in this, other than a presumption that freefall should be messier?

It takes a long time for a jetliner to go from cruising altitude to impact if it is a "semi-controller" descent. Enough time that you'd expect to hear from the plane.

[lawrocket 3]

Yes. It may seem counter-intuitive. But the terminal velocity is gonna be the same. There will e damage and the insides will be mush, but especially in water (which will kill you but still disperse a bunch of the energy) you'd expect to find the outside keeping the inner pieces of a person together.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Channman 2]

Quote

Yes. It may seem counter-intuitive. But the terminal velocity is gonna be the same. There will e damage and the insides will be mush, but especially in water (which will kill you but still disperse a bunch of the energy) you'd expect to find the outside keeping the inner pieces of a person together.

The following information was forwarded to me from my former Flight Instructor who now flies for Charles Swabb. "This is just another posible cause"

"FV "Cort" de Peyster Carpe Cappuccino San Juan Islands, WA, USA

Subject: Air France Accident: Smoking Gun Found
A Brazilian Naval unit reportedly found the complete vertical fin/rudder assembly of the doomed aircraft floating some 30 miles from the main debris field. The search for the flight recorders goes on, but given the failure history of the vertical fins on A300-series aircraft, an analysis of its structure at the point of failure will likely yield the primary cause factor in the breakup of the aircraft, with the flight recorder data (if found) providing only secondary contributing phenomena. The fin-failure-leading-to-breakup sequence is strongly suggested in the attached (below) narrative report by George Larson, Editor emeritus of Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine. It's regrettable that these aircraft are permitted to continue in routine flight operations with this known structural defect. It appears that safety finishes last within Airbus Industries, behind national pride and economics. Hopefully, this accident will force the issue to be addressed, requiring at a minimum restricted operations of selected platforms, and grounding of some high-time aircraft until a re-engineered (strengthened) vertical fin/rudder attachment structure can be incorporated. Les --------------------------(George Larson's Report)--------------------- This is an account of a discussion I had recently with a maintenance professional who salvages airliner airframes for a living. He has been at it for a while, dba BMISalvage at Opa Locka Airport in Florida. In the process of stripping parts, he seesthings few others are able to see. His observations confirm prior assessments ofAirbus structural deficiencies within our flight test and aero structures communitiesby those who have seen the closely held reports of A3XX-series vertical fin failures. His observations:

"I have scrapped just about every type of transport aircraft from A-310, A-320, B-747, 727, 737, 707, DC-3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, MD-80, L-188, L1011 and various Martin, Convair and KC-97 aircraft.

Over a hundred of them.

Airbus products are the flimsiest and most poorly designed as far as airframe structure is concerned by an almost obsession to utilize composite materials.

I have one A310 vertical fin on the premises from a demonstration I just performed.. It was pathetic to see the composite structure shatter as it did,something a Boeing product will not do.

The vertical fin along with the composite hinges on rudder and elevators is the worst example of structural use of composites I have ever seen and I am not surprised by the current pictures of rescue crews recovering thecomplete Vertical fin and rudder assembly at some distance from the crashsite.

The Airbus line has a history of both multiple rudder losses and a vertical fin and rudder separation from the airframe as was the case in NY with AA. As an old non-radar equipped DC4 pilot who flew through many a thunderstorm in Africa along the equator, I am quite familiar with their ferocity. It is notdifficult to understand how such a storm might have stressed an aircraftstructure to failure at its weakest point, and especially so in the presence ofinstrumentation problems.

I replied with this:

"I'm watching very carefully the orchestration of the inquiry by French officials and Airbus. I think I can smell a concerted effort to steer discussion away from structural issues and onto sensors, etc. Now Air France, at the behest of their pilots' union, is replacing all the air data sensors on the Airbus fleet, which creates a distraction and shifts themedia's focus away from the real problem. It's difficult to delve into the structural issue without wading into the Boeing vs. Airbus swamp, where any observation is instantly tainted by its origin. Americans noting any Airbus structural issues (A380 early failure of wing in static test; loss of vertical surfaces in Canadian fleet prior to AA A300, e.g.) will be attacked by the other side as partisan, biased, etc. " His follow-up:

One gets a really unique insight into structural issues when one has first-hand experience in the dismantling process.

I am an A&P, FEJ and an ATP with 7000 flight hours and I was absolutely stunned, flabbergasted when I realized that the majority of internal airframe structural supports on the A 310 which appear to be aluminum are actually rolled composite material with aluminum rod ends. They shattered.

Three years ago we had a storm come through, with gusts up to 60-70 kts.,catching several A320s tied down on the line, out in the open. The A320 elevators and rudder hinges whose actuators had beenremoved shattered and the rudder and elevators came off..

Upon closer inspection I realized that not only were the rear spars composite but so were the hinges. While Boeing also uses compositematerial in its airfoil structures, the actual attach fittings for the elevators,rudder, vertical and horizontal stabilizers are all of machined aluminum." -----------------(end of narrative)---------------

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

You bring a valid counter argument to the table... should I believe the forensic expert hired as a consultant in an international case of interest... or the person on the internet.

Absolutely. Air crash investigation is the province of technical experts and is not amenable to polling on the internet.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[billvon 3,120]

>The fin-failure-leading-to-breakup sequence . . .

The recovered ACARS data would tend to support that. The ADIRU failures caused several fly-by-wire systems to drop off line, including the rudder travel limiter. At that point, overcontrolling the rudder could cause a structural failure, since rudder travel is no longer limited.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

You bring a valid counter argument to the table... should I believe the forensic expert hired as a consultant in an international case of interest... or the person on the internet.

Absolutely. Air crash investigation is the province of technical experts and is not amenable to polling on the internet.

Oh, bullshit. That only applies to law and medicine.

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

That only applies to law and medicine

Based on a (very) random sampling of dz.com postings, I'd have to say that both law and medicine are verylikely to be polled on the internet . Along with proper canopy size.

And I'll just bet that plenty of decisions are made based on those polls, too

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[StreetScooby 5]

Just spent some time at my local pub talking to an Airbus Captain. Here's his take on the Air France flight:

* The crew had just spent several days in Rio.
* Multiple daily flights have stopped.
* Crews are staying over.
* The captain took his break to sleep prior to the TCZ.
* That left two young first officers on the deck.
* Those two young first officers had a good time in Rio.
* They were bullshitting with each other
* They were not staying on top of things.
* Going 8 miles a minute.
* They suddenly found themselves in a massive thunder storm.
* The icing zone in the TCZ can extend over 30K.
* Due to the warm air coming off the ocean.
* They hit that, because they didn't turn around in time.
* The engines started dying due to massive icing.
* The electrical systems starting going out.
* Because the engines weren't turning.
* They lost cabin pressure.
* Because the engines weren't turning.
* The rudder protection system kicked out.
* Violent, violent airflows going on.
* They over stressed the tail fin, and it came off.
* The plane came apart.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 3,120]

>The engines started dying due to massive icing.
>The electrical systems starting going out.
>Because the engines weren't turning.

These don't follow. The A330 has both an APU (that comes on automatically when an engine loses power) and a RAT (which deploys automatically when the APU won't start.)

In addition, had they really lost electrical power in both AC buses - or if they had shed loads to run the essentials bus due to a power problem - it is unlikely that there would have been 3 minutes of ACARS messages sent out.

>They lost cabin pressure.
>Because the engines weren't turning.

Bleed air from the APU can keep cabin pressurization going. Even if it doesn't start, the outflow valve would snap shut, keeping a reasonable level of pressure in the aircraft. The aircraft would slowly depressurize from there, but not fast enough to trip a vertical-speed warning.

>The rudder protection system kicked out.

The rudder protection system is part of the FBW system, and would not disengage just because an engine lost power. The ACARS message indicated it dropped off-line because the ADIRU's were giving faulty data, and the rudder limiter could no longer use airspeed as a "gate" to limit deflection.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Do you agree with this statement: "Typically, if you see intact bodies and multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a midflight break up," said Frank Ciacco, a former forensic expert at the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

To me it seems the other way around, that you would more likely find intact bodies if people remained with a relatively intact aircraft until impact, as opposed to bodies and pieces of aircraft hitting the water in free fall.

Look at other crashes.

TWA 800 and Pan Am 103. Both exploded in midair (not going into causes/conspiracies here)
Numerous intact bodies (badly broken, but intact) were recovered.

At the other end of the spectrum, ValuJet 592 went into the Everglades in a full dive.
There were very few body parts bigger than your hand.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[StreetScooby 5]

Nice feedback.
I'm learning something here.

Quote

These don't follow. The A330 has both an APU (that comes on automatically when an engine loses power) and a RAT (which deploys automatically when the APU won't start.)

I'm not certain what the acronyms mean, but here goes:
How long does APU power last?
What if the RAT was iced, and didn't do anything?

Quote

The ACARS message indicated it dropped off-line because the ADIRU's were giving faulty data, and the rudder limiter could no longer use airspeed as a "gate" to limit deflection.

Was this because of severe icing conditions?

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 3,120]

>How long does APU power last?

For as long as there's fuel to run it. Given the likely fuel state of the plane (i.e. it had enough to make it to its destination) the APU would have had plenty of fuel whether or not the engines were still maintaining their usual burn rate.

>What if the RAT was iced, and didn't do anything?

Then you'd lose everything except for the batteries on the DC buses, which would power some instrumentation for a few minutes. Without hydraulic power you'd have no flight control though.

However, the RAT is normally stowed, and is not extended until you have a massive electrical or hydraulic power failure, or the pilot extends it manually - so the odds of it failing due to icing soon after it's needed are fairly low.

The RAT does not supply power to anything but the essentials bus, and as far as I know the ACARS system is not on the essentials bus - so the fact that they were getting messages up until the rapid cabin pressure change is indicative that they were not running the RAT.

>Was this because of severe icing conditions?

You mean the ADIRU message? The ACARS message was "NAV ADR DISAGREE" which indicates that the air data units were not providing the same information, and thus the primary flight control computers started ignoring the data they were sending.

The current theory is that icing on the pitot tubes or static pressure ports rendered one or more ADIRU's inoperable, and this lead to control law reversion and the disabling of several features (like flight envelope protection, rudder limiter etc.)