AirAsia flight QZ8501 from Indonesia to Singapore missing

[krisb]

Aus news update...

No debris has been found. This is a rumour.

They do know the plane was climbing 180km/hr too slowly before radar contact was lost.

This would be pilot error.

Just a thought, but if he was climbing intentionally even though the request had just been denied, it would be expected that he would slow down. You simply have to trade some of your speed for altitude in the climb.

Again, I have no idea what he was doing but the above is true.

He wouldn't slow down in a climb. No pilot slows down in a climb till they level out.

Was he denied? I can't remember reading that.

[Maestro]

The last I read the ascent was denied. He was reported to be flying slower than normal maintaining altitude. His transponder reports speed and altitude to Center...

You’re right. Initial news reports only reported Indonesian officials saying what the pilot had requested. A later report, by CNN, mentioned that "Air traffic control approved the pilot's request to turn left but denied permission for the plane to climb to 38,000 feet from 32,000 feet".

I was on the phone app earlier but am now at the PC where doing a search is easier. The plane’s position was not reported at 36,000 feet in this topic, but on MailOnline and some other news sources, and was not based on an official announcement.

"I have a radar plot which shows him at 36,000 feet and climbing at a speed of 353 knots, which is approximately 100 knots too slow ... if the radar return is correct, he appears to be going too slow for the altitude he is flying at."

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aap/article-2889383/Experts-say-QZ8501-flying-slow.html

Another source, David Cenciotti's weblog The Aviationist, has this radar screen image showing the plane at 36,300 feet:

The original web source for this image seems to be this tweet by Gerry Soejatman: https://twitter.com/GerryS/status/549163093368913920

[krisb]

Aus news update...

No debris has been found. This is a rumour.

They do know the plane was climbing 180km/hr too slowly before radar contact was lost.

This would be pilot error.

Just a thought, but if he was climbing intentionally even though the request had just been denied, it would be expected that he would slow down. You simply have to trade some of your speed for altitude in the climb.

Again, I have no idea what he was doing but the above is true.

You'd be better to ask these questions in pprune where some current pilots chat. All I can tell you is that yes - there is a different speed for climbing, but it depends on the circumstances and requirement. 150knots less than cruise does sound excessive, but I bow to any current airbus jocks who'd care to comment

It's not 150knts less than cruise, it's 150knts less than the climbing speed.

Exactly like driving a car up a hill, you put the foot down to get it up the hill.

If the plane wasn't responding to the pilots putting the power down, then the climb should have been aborted and the plane turned around or taken to land asap I'd think, but then they would have sent a pan pan.

They continued to climb, underpowered. A captain with over 20 thousand hours should have known better. His co pilot should have known better also, so perhaps false readings were showing on the airspeed indicator? Icing occurs more over tropical areas also. Was the plane too heavy?

All speculation, anythings possible.

What are they saying on the pilots forum?

[jpinx]

Aus news update...

No debris has been found. This is a rumour.

They do know the plane was climbing 180km/hr too slowly before radar contact was lost.

This would be pilot error.

Just a thought, but if he was climbing intentionally even though the request had just been denied, it would be expected that he would slow down. You simply have to trade some of your speed for altitude in the climb.

Again, I have no idea what he was doing but the above is true.

You'd be better to ask these questions in pprune where some current pilots chat. All I can tell you is that yes - there is a different speed for climbing, but it depends on the circumstances and requirement. 150knots less than cruise does sound excessive, but I bow to any current airbus jocks who'd care to comment

It's not 150knts less than cruise, it's 150knts less than the climbing speed.

Exactly like driving a car up a hill, you put the foot down to get it up the hill.

If the plane wasn't responding to the pilots putting the power down, then the climb should have been aborted and the plane turned around or taken to land asap I'd think, but then they would have sent a pan pan.

They continued to climb, underpowered. A captain with over 20 thousand hours should have known better. His co pilot should have known better also, so perhaps false readings were showing on the airspeed indicator? Icing occurs more over tropical areas also. Was the plane too heavy?

All speculation, anythings possible.

What are they saying on the pilots forum?

Typically an aircraft climbs at approximately 85% of cruise speed

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/553569-air-asia-indonesia-lost-contact-surabaya-singapore-18.html

[krisb]

Just a thought, but if he was climbing intentionally even though the request had just been denied, it would be expected that he would slow down. You simply have to trade some of your speed for altitude in the climb.

Again, I have no idea what he was doing but the above is true.

You'd be better to ask these questions in pprune where some current pilots chat. All I can tell you is that yes - there is a different speed for climbing, but it depends on the circumstances and requirement. 150knots less than cruise does sound excessive, but I bow to any current airbus jocks who'd care to comment

It's not 150knts less than cruise, it's 150knts less than the climbing speed.

Exactly like driving a car up a hill, you put the foot down to get it up the hill.

If the plane wasn't responding to the pilots putting the power down, then the climb should have been aborted and the plane turned around or taken to land asap I'd think, but then they would have sent a pan pan.

They continued to climb, underpowered. A captain with over 20 thousand hours should have known better. His co pilot should have known better also, so perhaps false readings were showing on the airspeed indicator? Icing occurs more over tropical areas also. Was the plane too heavy?

All speculation, anythings possible.

What are they saying on the pilots forum?

Typically an aircraft climbs at approximately 85% of cruise speed

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/553569-air-asia-indonesia-lost-contact-surabaya-singapore-18.html

I would have thought the other way round?Cruise at 85% of it's climb power.

On take off obviously it's near full power, and any object requires more power to climb right? More than at level flight.

Anyway, how's this quote from that pilots forum...

There is more than one kind of "Dark" in aviation in this part of the world. One is when the sun is down. The other is when all cockpit windows are covered by newspapers and blankets while the pilots watch movies or play games on their IPADs.

I have been waiting for this accident to happen. I am only surprised it took so long.

[canuckamuck]

Krisb: The throttle is set high for a climb true, but the airspeed is not necessarily faster because it is using energy to lift. and the ground speed is reduced because the AC is now going vertical. A steep climb would have a low ground speed. The indicated speed of the plane from radar is the ground speed.

Head wind also reduces ground speed. but not air speed. So either a climb or head wind or a combination could explain low ground speed.

[krisb]

Krisb: The throttle is set high for a climb true, but the airspeed is not necessarily faster because it is using energy to lift. and the ground speed is reduced because the AC is now going vertical. A steep climb would have a low ground speed. The indicated speed of the plane from radar is the ground speed.

Head wind also reduces ground speed. but not air speed. So either a climb or head wind or a combination could explain low ground speed.

So your effectively saying all radars are giving wrong information regarding indicated air speed?

[lostinisaan]

Aus news update...

No debris has been found. This is a rumour.

They do know the plane was climbing 180km/hr too slowly before radar contact was lost.

This would be pilot error.

Just a thought, but if he was climbing intentionally even though the request had just been denied, it would be expected that he would slow down. You simply have to trade some of your speed for altitude in the climb.

Again, I have no idea what he was doing but the above is true.

He wouldn't slow down in a climb. No pilot slows down in a climb till they level out.

Was he denied? I can't remember reading that.

It seems that quite a few people here read stuff that was never mentioned.

Must be quite interesting for those who've lost relatives, or friends and read this forum.

Edited December 29, 2014 by lostinisaan

[canuckamuck]

Krisb: The throttle is set high for a climb true, but the airspeed is not necessarily faster because it is using energy to lift. and the ground speed is reduced because the AC is now going vertical. A steep climb would have a low ground speed. The indicated speed of the plane from radar is the ground speed.

Head wind also reduces ground speed. but not air speed. So either a climb or head wind or a combination could explain low ground speed.

So your effectively saying all radars are giving wrong information regarding indicated air speed?

Potentially I have my terminology wrong, but I don't think normal radar can show air speed. Which is how fast the air is moving past the fuselage.

But ground speed is how fast they are moving relative to the earth.

Ever seen a bird flying in the wind and not getting anywhere? Its airspeed is good but the ground speed is zero.

[jpinx]

I would have thought the other way round?Cruise at 85% of it's climb power.

On take off obviously it's near full power, and any object requires more power to climb right? More than at level flight.

Anyway, how's this quote from that pilots forum...

There is more than one kind of "Dark" in aviation in this part of the world. One is when the sun is down. The other is when all cockpit windows are covered by newspapers and blankets while the pilots watch movies or play games on their IPADs.

I have been waiting for this accident to happen. I am only surprised it took so long.

You confuse "power" with "speed"

[krisb]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

[krisb]

I would have thought the other way round?Cruise at 85% of it's climb power.

On take off obviously it's near full power, and any object requires more power to climb right? More than at level flight.

Anyway, how's this quote from that pilots forum...

There is more than one kind of "Dark" in aviation in this part of the world. One is when the sun is down. The other is when all cockpit windows are covered by newspapers and blankets while the pilots watch movies or play games on their IPADs.

I have been waiting for this accident to happen. I am only surprised it took so long.

You confuse "power" with "speed"

I'll continue this in 4 years after I complete my airline license.

I've always wanted a job where I just watch my ipad.

[Maestro]

It seems that quite a few people here read stuff that was never mentioned.

Must be quite interesting for those who've lost relatives, or friends and read this forum.

After over 500 posts it is getting difficult to remember what one has read in this topic and what one has picked up from other sources. The ideal thing would of course be always to link to the source of the information but when one posts from the phone, it is difficult to backtrack to the source, as I have experienced myself with the flight level of 36'000 feet.

[MaxYakov]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

Roundup the usual suspicious objects - CBC News:

"Jakarta's air force base commander Rear Marshal Dwi Putranto says he was informed Monday that an Australian Orion aircraft had detected suspicious objects near Nangka island, about 160 kilometres southwest of Pangkalan Bun, near central Kalimantan, or 1,120 kilometres from the location where the plane lost contact."

Edited December 29, 2014 by MaxYakov

[ExPratt]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

http://www.nst.com.my/node/67186?

[krisb]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

http://www.nst.com.my/node/67186?

“However, we cannot be sure whether it is part of the missing AirAsia plane,” Putranto says, “We are now moving in that direction, which is in cloudy conditions.”

Sounds like after not wanting Australias help, they are now embaressed Australia found it.

[Maestro]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

http://www.nst.com.my/node/67186?

Thank you for the link, ExPratt.

From the linked article:

Jakarta’s Air Force base commander Rear Marshal Dwi Putranto says he was informed Monday that an Australian Orion aircraft had detected suspicious objects near Nangka island, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) southwest of Pangkalan Bun, near central Kalimantan, or 700 miles (1,120 kilometers) from the location where the plane lost contact.

“However, we cannot be sure whether it is part of the missing AirAsia plane,” Putranto says, “We are now moving in that direction, which is in cloudy conditions.”

[Maestro]

I understand that the distance between Surabaya and Singapore is 870 miles, as the crow flies. What sense does it make to search in an area 700 miles from the last known position of the plane?

[MaxYakov]

Reports are Australian Air Force has found debris 1000km from the search area.

http://www.nst.com.my/node/67186?

“However, we cannot be sure whether it is part of the missing AirAsia plane,” Putranto says, “We are now moving in that direction, which is in cloudy conditions.”

Sounds like after not wanting Australias help, they are now embaressed Australia found it.

Found what?

[draftvader]

There is a lot of confusion but if you replace the distance being from the last known point of contact and make it from Surabaya then I think it is quite accurate and places it back where it should be.

[ExPratt]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I understand that the distance between Surabaya and Singapore is 870 miles, as the crow flies. What sense does it make to search in an area 700 miles from the last known position of the plane?

Yes does seem a bit far out. Mind you the Malaysians had everyone searching for 370 in the wrong Hemisphere , Due to losing contact I don't think they really know where it went

[jpinx]

I understand that the distance between Surabaya and Singapore is 870 miles, as the crow flies. What sense does it make to search in an area 700 miles from the last known position of the plane?

Maybe you missed the search areas maps I posted earlier.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/787579-search-resumes-for-missing-airasia-passenger-jet/?view=findpost&p=8866190

[draftvader]

I have to say that, as a Brit, I am getting VERY hacked off with hearing the Indonesians talking about it being "difficult" to go out in the rough weather. Until we prove otherwise is there not a chance we have people bobbing about out there? In the UK the brave UNPAID VOLUNTEERS of the RNLI would be out there 24/7 until they got a result. In the ffffing North Sea at that. Grow a pair Indonesian men and get out there.

[george]

UPDATE

Air Force found oil spill in Tanjung Pandan. Still unknown whether it is avtur and belongs to the missing plane or not

Source: http://news.detik.com/read/2014/12/29/161837/2789287/10/ini-penampakan-tumpahan-minyak-di-perairan-tanjung-pandan

[Maestro]

From Indonesia National SAR official briefing:

(all times local)

05:36 QZ8501 departed Juanda airport, Surabaya

06:12 Contacts Jakarta center 125.70 at FL320, requests weather deviation left of M635 airway and climb to FL380

06:16 QZ8501 still observed on radar

06:17 Radar contact lost. Radio contact lost. Only ADS-B signal remained.

06:18 All contact lost. Only flight plan view on radar screen.

07:08 ATC declares INCERFA (aircraft position uncertain)

07:28 ATC declares ALERTFA (emergency alert)

07:55 ATC declares DETRESFA (emergency distress)

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/553569-air-asia-indonesia-lost-contact-surabaya-singapore-4.html#post8799172

---

They waited 50 minutes with no contact before declaring any kind of emergency ?????????

"06:12 Contacts Jakarta center 125.70 at FL320, requests weather deviation left of M635 airway and climb to FL380"

I find it strange that the SAR briefing does not mention the center's response, ie approval or denial, to the two request made by the pilot.

Air traffic control approved the pilot's request to turn left but denied permission for the plane to climb to 38,000 feet from 32,000 feet, Djoko Murjatmodjo, an aviation official at the Indonesian Transport Ministry told the national newspaper Kompas.

The increased altitude request was denied because there was another plane flying at that height, he said.

Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/29/world/asia/airasia-missing-plane/index.html

[Commerce]

I understand that the distance between Surabaya and Singapore is 870 miles, as the crow flies. What sense does it make to search in an area 700 miles from the last known position of the plane?

It doesn't. You start from last known position of contact, or radar last location and track back to lost position at contact. I am totally lost as to why there is no radar position, when the whole area has tremendous radar tracking.

[balo]

So they found oil spill, I remember they found oil and debris last time looking for MH370 , lets hope its really coming from the plane this time.

[draftvader]

I wonder where this, and the other planes, had their last mechanical maintenance done?

The date has been given on the 1st couple of pages of this thread. Some time in mid November if I remember correctly.

[Kan Win]

So the same thing once again.

No signals from MH370 nor from QZ8501 have/has been detected.

Looks very bad.

Win

[draftvader]

From pprune and very interesting.

http://www.aeroinside.com/item/4946/lufthansa-a321-near-bilbao-on-nov-5th-2014-loss-of-4000-feet-of-altitude

The Aviation Herald learned that the loss of altitude had been caused by two angle of attack sensors having frozen in their positions during climb at an angle, that caused the fly by wire protection to assume, the aircraft entered a stall while it climbed through FL310. The Alpha Protection activated forcing the aircraft to pitch down, which could not be corrected even by full back stick input. The crew eventually disconnected the related Air Data Units and was able to recover the aircraft.

Apparently this has triggered an Airworthiness Directive.

Edited December 29, 2014 by draftvader