AF447 broke up mid-air

[Zippy]

If it was flying too slow through a storm, then it could easily break up. The airframe can't cope with the load put on it by the changes in airpressure caused by the storm.

Call me old-fashioned but didn't engineering for such eventualities used to be popular? Surely if too slow it would stall before breaking up.

Disclaimer - I know bugger all about aircraft

[Menelaus]

Actually - thinking about it - when the shuttle Columbia broke up didn't it send out a series of failure notices for the various systems one after another a la AF447?

[Le Rosbif]

Call me old-fashioned but didn't engineering for such eventualities used to be popular? Surely if too slow it would stall before breaking up.

Disclaimer - I know bugger all about aircraft

Well I think you can worry...

http://airportwatch.org.uk/news/deta...AIRPORTWATCH=Y

[FSM with Cheddar]

Call me old-fashioned but didn't engineering for such eventualities used to be popular? Surely if too slow it would stall before breaking up.

Disclaimer - I know bugger all about aircraft

Aircraft are designed to cope with turbulence and have a very big safety margin put in as well.

However there is a trade-off between strength and weight. If the plane was flying slowly, then it could have a large downward pressure on the front and simultaneously a large upward pressure on the back. The airframe couldn't cope with such a large difference and would breakup.

[Shimano105]

Been on an Airbus when it was landing in bad weather - it shook really violently and you could see the plane body flexing all ways (I was sat at the rear).

Scary - maybe they are just a bit fragile?

[Menelaus]

Been on an Airbus when it was landing in bad weather - it shook really violently and you could see the plane body flexing all ways (I was sat at the rear).

Scary - maybe they are just a bit fragile?

True dat, but isn't there a picture on youtube somewhere of a Lufthansa airbus landing in a crosswind and side slipping the landing?

[Zippy]

Actually - thinking about it - when the shuttle Columbia broke up didn't it send out a series of failure notices for the various systems one after another a la AF447?

I believe you are correct although from the pilot point of view it doesn't really help if you can't do anything about it.
I know its morbid in this instance but I find why things went wrong really interesting.

IGMC if you don't agree

[VectraMan]

Aircraft are designed to cope with turbulence and have a very big safety margin put in as well.

However there is a trade-off between strength and weight. If the plane was flying slowly, then it could have a large downward pressure on the front and simultaneously a large upward pressure on the back. The airframe couldn't cope with such a large difference and would breakup.

So why doesn't this happen all the time? Or do they normally just avoid such storms, and if so why didn't they avoid this one?

[Menelaus]

I believe you are correct although from the pilot point of view it doesn't really help if you can't do anything about it.
I know its morbid in this instance but I find why things went wrong really interesting.

IGMC if you don't agree

No don't get your coat - I think it's a male, testosterone thing to be interested in disasters. I think the only reason I watch motorsport is for the crashes, which is why F1s got so boring of late!

[Zippy]

Well I think you can worry...

http://airportwatch.org.uk/news/deta...AIRPORTWATCH=Y

A bit sketchy but