AirAsia flight missing.

[CourierDriver]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: MalfunctionProne
They found it.

All dead.


Sadly, this is what I would have guessed.

Airplanes that disappear from radar are seldom found intact.

The analysis will be interesting. I suspect weather (more precisely, the failure to avoid it) will be a primary cause.

The A-320 is a good airplane. I've got 5 years of flying experience in it. I've been through some crummy weather in it and it's a well designed, well built machine that performs well in bad weather.

But some weather is simply best avoided. Thunderstorms principal among that group. Going over a thunderstorm is rarely a good idea, the convection extends several thousand feet above the visible moisture, and often the storm itself extends up to 50,000 feet. That's well above the 39,100 foot maximum altitude on an A-320.

Many, many years ago, in an F-14, I tried going over a line of thunderstorms that was between me and NAS Oceana. The tops of the squall line were around 45,000. So, we climbed to 50,000 in afterburner - and it all looked clear.

We were well above the clouds.

Then, as we got directly over one cell, we got the $&@@ kicked out of us. Severe turbulence. Several hundred feet drops followed by upward slams that registered many Gs. It was incredibly rough, just keeping the plane wings level was a challenge. No way I could maintain altitude as the plane slammed up and down and rolled left and right.

They say that good judgement comes from experience.

And experience comes from bad judgement.

I am proof of that.

I will always avoid convective activity. Whether air traffic control gives me permission or not....
glad your here, now that was quite a ride, mercy.

 

[Astro14]

LT4 - read back a few posts. I mentioned an anecdote from my youth.

Simply: bad weather, in the form of thunderstorms/convective activity, often extends far above the altitude capability of the airplane. The turbulence, and even rain or hail, can extend far above the visible clouds of a thunderstorm.

Further, a change in altitude is a deviation from flight plan. It's not just a track over the ground. So, to climb, or descend, as well as a turn left or right, require ATC coordination to avoid a traffic conflict, or worse, a collision.

As I mentioned then, in the absence of ATC approval, I would exercise the authority to avoid the severe weather as the safest course of action. But there are many pilots who rigidly follow ATC instruction, including many fatal crashes where ATC instruction was followed even though the pilots knew that to do so would result in a crash.

This rigid compliance with instruction is exacerbated in some cultures, where you blindly follow authority (like ATC) or you do not admit you have a problem for fear of looking foolish or for fear of retribution. Several classic (studied) accidents have this cultural predisposition as part of the cause.

I learned to fly in the Navy. We were entrusted with a jet airplane when we had fewer than 100 total hours and we were well aware that the pilot was the ultimate authority for the safe operation of that airplane. The ATC controller, if he makes a mistake, can get up from his chair, a chair that was at one G and zero knots, and get another cup of coffee. We never had that luxury. The consequences of mistakes by others, and by those of us in the jet, would be suffered by those of us in the jet.

So, I will take those actions necessary, including ignoring instructions, or thoughtfully breaking rules, if I need to do so to keep the airplane safe. Sadly, that awareness, and willingness to act, does not exist across commercial aviation.