All that shows is that a CNN guy got a copy of the list, not that it was provided to them by official means.
I think a small bomb could produce much the same effects as severe turbulence: some sort of structural failure that at first leads to depressurization and electrical system problems (which are apparently what were reported in the automatic message). Such problems might quickly lead to further failures and possibly to in-flight breakup, which obviously would rule out any further communication.
But at this point all we really have is speculation based on tiny amounts of information. I’m guessing that wreckage will be found and we’ll eventually know more.
They’re fish food already mate. Let me know if your fish fingers are strangely garlicky next month 
Just curious, is there a depth beyond which recovery of wreckage would not be feasible? If so, is the suspected crash location anywhere near that depth? How closely can they determine where the plane went down? For the sake of argument let’s say it’s a rectangle 100 miles x 400 miles. How long would it take to scan such an area by radar?
The course, speed and altitude are known. They can figure an approximate position by determining the (probable) LKP from those data.
Had a stab at the NTSB and FAA incident databases, but my search-fu is weak tonight and I did not get useful answers. Interesting question, though.
Would that Hawaiian Air flight that had part of the fuselage peel off in flight be what you’re thinking about? Except, of course, that airplane landed safely despite considerable structural damage. Which is one of the points I’m trying to make - an airliner can lose surprisingly large bits and still be capable of flight and a controlled landing.
Well, that would depend on the severity, wouldn’t it? But I heard on the news tonight that the area of the Atlantic they were flying through last night had some storm cells with cloud heights up to 50,000 feet, indicative of incredibly severe weather. Obviously, the plan would be to detour around the worst of that, but if they blundered into the center of such a cell… well, run into a F4 or F5 tornado (not impossilbe in such a storm) and I doubt the airplane would fare well.
Another interesting question.
I’ll attempt some more on-line research.
Could take weeks.
It is quite possible if the plane disintegrated on impact that it could be lost forever - think about it, how do you scan for little fragments of plane? What they might find is some floating piece of insulation leading them to search in that general vicinity. And then if it isn’t too deep they may try for the black box. But bottom silt can be measured in meters and even kilometers in some places in the ocean. I think their window to find anything of use is going by quickly.
Just in case someone is interested, here’s the wiki on BOAC Flight 781, an over-ocean in-flight breakup from 1954. In this case, fishermen witnessed the crash and were able to retrieve some of the bodies for examination. This accident predated the “black box” for airplanes, but it’s an interesting discussion of how the accident was investigated.
Our techniques for investing such things have improved considerably, of course, but again much depends on finding something from the crash to inspect.
This is a wiki list of airline structural failures but it’s arranged alphabetically and not by year or cause. I don’t have the time to wade through all of it tonight, but someone else might.
Planes don’t fly through thunderstorms. They go around them. Lightning strikes with aircraft occur on the periphery.
An airliner would not survive flying directly through a storm cell due to the extreme wind sheer and hail. When people describe turbulence during a flight as severe they are actually experiencing light to moderate turbulence. Without weather radar service over the ocean it would be possible to lose internal radar while flying in an area thick with storm cells and not be able to pick a safe route through.
If the plane goes done in the ocean then the crash site would dissipate quickly and the chance of finding it slim. Water landings are difficult in the ocean because of wave action. If one engine catches first then the plane is torn apart and it’s difficult to get out and deploy the life rafts.
True enough, but look at all the unknowns: without knowing the cause we could be wildly off on the angle of descent, we don’t know if it significantly changed direction as a result of the incident, and we don’t know precisely what time it occured. Combining all these unknowns I’d be quite impressed if they get it within 100 miles.
There are a few others. It’s rare, but not unheard of.
I did say ‘approximate’.
In this case we know the speed, altitude and direction. We also know the maximum range. I don’t know if position data was included in the automated signal, but let’s assume it didn’t. But we do know when the signal was sent. We can assume that the Airbus was maintaining a normal course until the emergency. (It’s not certain, but I think it’s a safe assumption.) Knowing the course and speed, by inserting the time of the broadcast into the equation we can determine fairly closely where the emergency happened. So that would be the probably Last Known Position.
You are correct that the aircraft could have changed direction. Draw a circle representing the maximum possible range around the (probable) LKP, and that’s a lot of area. So where do we go from there?
A pilot may elect to attempt to make it to the nearest suitable airport. Or he may elect to continue on course if he deems the problem not that severe. Or he may attempt to return to the airport of origin. Or he may get lost.
But I’m guessing the problem was catastrophic. The data transmission lasted about four minutes. The aircraft was at 35,000 feet. Assuming the transmission started at the moment of failure and ended at or near impact, that’s a descent rate of nearly 9,000 feet per minute. That doesn’t sound unreasonable. I think that the LKP can be determined fairly closely. I think that the aircraft probably headed down shortly after the multiple failure. So the aircraft is 6-1/2 miles up, going 520 mph, at such an angle that it hits the ocean after four minutes. My algebra is 30 years old, but let me think… Four minutes is .067 hours. At 520 mph, that’s about 34 miles. Square that and multiply by pi… About 3,800 square miles? (Someone check my math.)
Still a large area, but that’s where I’d start my search.
I just watched a show not long ago discussing the somewhat similar over the Atlantic crash of Air India Flight 182. This flight crashed, or more appropriately exploded, due to a bomb. The show I watched discussed some of the difficulties in searching for the black box, etc. that would be similar to the problem facing the search team this time.
Do the life rafts in transport aircraft contain EPIRBs? How many EPIRBs would be aboard an transport aircraft?
The local news reported that another pilot spotted orange dots on the surface so that would be a good sign.
A report I read said the other pilot said after landing in Brazil that he thought the orange points were fire.
Your first and second questions are not the same. For example the crash of TWA 800 (the subject of a current thread in Great Debates) was not due to malice, but it was due to an explosion. I would say it fits the intent of your question though.
I meant to exclude explosions whether they were caused by malice or accidents. I couldn’t write ‘That is, they just break up’, because they don’t ‘just’ break up. There’s always a cause. I couldn’t list every possible reason an aircraft suffer a catastrophic structural failure in flight, as I’d undoubtedly miss some. But I did mean to exclude explosions. And by ‘explosions’ I mean an ignition and rapid expansion of burning gasses, rather than a non-combustive explosion caused by a breach of the pressure vessel (e.g., a window blows out).
The plane is a fly by wire passenger jet, lighting may have caused a local version of EMP or electro magnetic pulse. Had that happened , it may have screwed that computer enough to cause catostrophic results before the crew was able to get redundant systems online.
Declan
The “current event” article lists the flights captain as Robert Piché. Not sure if this is correct, or if it’s the same guy, but there is a Captain Robert Piché who is famous for saving another flight.