AirAsia Crash

[WestCoastRunner]

What's up with the conflict over crash evidence.

One day we hear they found the wreckage, the next day, it's denied. It is so tragic for families to hear this. Sounds so similar to MH370.

Have we not learned any lessons from MH370? Why would the media release information that the wreckage was found when in fact it wasn't?

There was a report that 40 bodies were found and then it was retracted.

Where is the intregrity of these reports?

[Smallc]

The media reports what they hear, and they usually say where they heard it from. Take things as they come.

[WestCoastRunner]

The media reports what they hear, and they usually say where they heard it from. Take things as they come.

Yes, I get that. But, seriously, there should be more integrity applied to media reports. Let's confirm before we report.

[WestCoastRunner]

Yes, I get that. But, seriously, there should be more integrity applied to media reports. Let's confirm and double confirm before we report.

[Smallc]

Yes, I get that. But, seriously, there should be more integrity applied to media reports. Let's confirm before we report.

Reporting is fine, as long as you state that the reports are unconfirmed.

[WestCoastRunner]

Reporting is fine, as long as you state that the reports are unconfirmed.

No, it's not. They should be held more accountable.

[Smallc]

No, it's not. They should be held more accountable.

How is reporting what your sources tell you wrong? As long as you qualify what you're saying, I don't see the problem.

[WestCoastRunner]

How is reporting what your sources tell you wrong? As long as you qualify what you're saying, I don't see the problem.

For one thing, we had CNN not confirming that the plane was found, except to say that the Wall Street Journal or some other such media platform stated that.it was found. And the families were told that the plane was found on the bottom of the ocean, and yet we hear the next day that these were unconfirmed reports.

It doesn't matter if you qualify what you are saying. If it's not confirmed, don't report it. Let's think about the families. Have we learned nothing from the MH370 disaster.

[Smallc]

The media has a duty to report. Confirmed reports should be stated as such, and unconfirmed reports should be stated as such.

[Shady]

Wreckage has been found. So have bodies. That isn't inaccurate.

[Bonam]

Media is media. Any ideas of "integrity", if they ever existed, died long ago. Stories that sell get reported. This should be obvious to people on a political forum... whatever your stripe, it should be obvious that a significant portion of the media blatantly misrepresents stories constantly, shamelessly.

Edited January 1, 2015 by Bonam

[bush_cheney2004]

There is no more news...it is now "promotable content".

CNN rode MH370 to better ratings and is trying to do the same thing with the Air Asia crash, obsessing on every report, confirmed or not.

That's show biz folks !

[-TSS-]

According to the latest news it is a possibility that people may have been alive when the plane hit the ocean and have died of drowning as the plane sank. The evidence to suggest this was that the bodies were intact when found. In a powerful crash into an ocean they would have all turned into minced meat.

[GostHacked]

The media has a duty to report. Confirmed reports should be stated as such, and unconfirmed reports should be stated as such.

I can get behind that notion. Clarification is needed more than ever these days because information can come from anywhere and even dis-info can be easily spread if not vetted in some fashion. It's getting hard to navigate what is the truth and what is bullshit.

Even trusted sources have known to be 100% false. Take the recent Sony hack where North Korea was blamed. Now we know it came from the inside for whatever reasons.

And I believe we are still being fed crap regarding MH370.

[Big Guy]

An "unconfirmed" report is hearsay or rumour. Why any reputable media outlet would report it makes no sense to me.

I heard that if all the passengers would have jumped at the same time that the plane hit the water that a few might have survived.

[Wilber]

According to the latest news it is a possibility that people may have been alive when the plane hit the ocean and have died of drowning as the plane sank. The evidence to suggest this was that the bodies were intact when found. In a powerful crash into an ocean they would have all turned into minced meat.

We don't know if the aircraft broke up in the air or when it hit the water. Depending on where and how it broke up will determine how many were thrown clear and how many went down with the largest piece of wreckage. Although it is extremely unlikely, it's not even clear whether this was a controlled ditching. Given that the weather was bad at the time, even an aircraft under control could break up trying to ditch in high seas.

[-TSS-]

If you remember the emergency landing on the Hudson-river a few years back that was considered as master-class piloting and that happened in a broad daylight on a placid river. Imagine trying the same in darkness on a stormy sea.

[WestCoastRunner]

A few analysts have said that it is interesting, that the emergency door was found, the inflatable chute was found, the cylinder was found and the flight attendant's body, all in close proximity. It could be a sign that they tried to prepare for the crash.

[Rue]

Yes correct me if I wrong West TSS but the fact they found bodies intact would suggest it did not explode when it hit right or like you said the bodies would only be bits and pieces of flesh. So it does sound like an attempted crash landing.

Now I ask those who know better, i.e., Derek or others who know planes, is it possible the engine would have malfunctioned but worked enough to try an controlled emergency landing? Would lightening have done that? I am told lightening would just be conducted around the shell of the plane and it was probably engine failure.

In a storm will lightening compromise an engine on strike and/or is the failure of any engine coincidental or does actual wind and rain compromise it.

I mean I have been caught in some bad storms where it felt the plane would be ripped apart and the pilot laughed it was just wind turbulence.

I remember flying an Eastern Provincial Airways flight to Fredericton that had to divert to Halifax as he could not land in this huge ice storm in January.

I had a drink with the pilot a Newfoundlander who flew out of Gander and Goose Bay in WW2 when we got into Halifax. He was a nice man. Looked like Stompin Tom Connors. Maybe it was him, Anywayshe said ice scared him more than lightening and laughed and said he had been in worse storms. Man there was lightening and I saw ice on the wings He said the storms always felt worse then they were.

So how bad is a bad thunderstorm when one flies. Is it a reason to piss your pants or not? Could this accident happen more often than it has and if not why not?

I appreciate the pilot was being nice to me and calming me down. He was also not drinking booze but I was I can assure you. Whoever that pilot was he was a cool dude. I am glad he looked like Stompin Tom and not Rita McNeil. If I die I want stompin Tom there singing the hockey song with my dogs singing along. If Rita McNeil or Celine are there I know I am in hell

Edited January 3, 2015 by Rue

[Derek 2.0]

Now I ask those who know better, i.e., Derek or others who know planes, is it possible the engine would have malfunctioned but worked enough to try an controlled emergency landing? Would lightening have done that? I am told lightening would just be conducted around the shell of the plane and it was probably engine failure.

Wilber I'm sure could answer the question better, my direct experience with multi-engine, seized wing aircraft, is little more than a passenger.......but with that said, a large airliner will have multiple redundancy on-top-of multiple redundancy.......first to lose both engines, at altitude (reducing the chances of multiple bird strikes) would be caused by numerous of the said redundancies failing all at once and/or pilot error......With multi-engine military aircraft, the most common cause is contaminated fuel, followed my pilot error.......

I don't know enough about this crash to speculate with any credibility, but from what I've heard in various media, is the air traffic controllers lost contact shortly after the airline requested a change in altitude......which could indicate the aircraft stalled and couldn't recover, be it pilot error induced by faulty instruments/equipment, loss of hydraulics and/or electrical power........ But that is all speculation until further facts are known.

[On Guard for Thee]

One report indicated that the airplane showed a speed of somewhere around 105 knots on the climb above it's assigned cruise of 32k. That's way too slow for that plane and the fact it was climbing w/o clearance would seem to indicate the pilots may have got in too deep and took things into their own hands when they got in trouble.

[Derek 2.0]

One report indicated that the airplane showed a speed of somewhere around 105 knots on the climb above it's assigned cruise of 32k. That's way too slow for that plane and the fact it was climbing w/o clearance would seem to indicate the pilots may have got in too deep and took things into their own hands when they got in trouble.

I understood they did receive clearance.........none the less, if that was their airspeed, they very likely stalled.......IIRC, with the Air France flight that was lost in the Atlantic about 10 years ago, it was determined the aircraft had either a faulty or damaged pitot tube, causing incorrect airspeed being relayed to the crew/ FMGEC.......increase in altitude and blamo.

[On Guard for Thee]

I understood they did receive clearance.........none the less, if that was their airspeed, they very likely stalled.......IIRC, with the Air France flight that was lost in the Atlantic about 10 years ago, it was determined the aircraft had either a faulty or damaged pitot tube, causing incorrect airspeed being relayed to the crew/ FMGEC.......increase in altitude and blamo.

It was actually icing that buggered up the pitot tubes in air france. They penetrated the top of a t-storm and the pitiot heat was either not on or was overwhelmed and the autopilots kicked off line and the pilots werent ready or able it seems to handle it. Could be the same thing in this air asia thing.

[Rue]

Thanks for the responses. Derek the latest media reports now speculate not an attempt at an emergency landing but a stalled engine as you are now explaining. Guess so. I guess if they get the black box it will confirm that and explain why the engine stalled?

I bet we also get some conspiracy theories soon particularly since it was not in the flight route it was supposed to be in/

[guyser]

Why no mayday call? Amybe the pilots knew they screwed up and tried to save face?