Come on, folks, we likely have victims family members/relatives currently googling anything that they can find,
CAUTION with your headlines:
Form the article under that headline:
the plane disintegrated either in the air or when it slammed into the ocean
Either air /or impact is not necessarily "likely" in-flight.
Actually, the current hypothesis is the latter (impact in one or two major pieces, kerosine all in one spot), so keep your balls low if you do not know about such stuff (and I am not attacking th messnger here, but those BBC/CNN/FOX journalistic "aviation experts" that usually just quote pprune and do not know nothing themselves.
One more example, and I could go on:
The last automatic message, at 11:14 p.m., signaled loss of cabin pressure and complete electrical failure — catastrophic events in a plane that was likely already plunging toward the ocean.
WRONG. While it is *one* possible explanation, it is just interpretation of the original - one sentence - message, and - even in the bascic scenario described - there are more posibilities.
Stating one of them
as factual is simply plain bad, bad,
bad journalism. This from both an ex aviator as well as an ex journalist.
Anyone read the msgs in detail?
From 02:11 to 02:13, multiple faults regarding ADIRU (Air Data and Inertial Reference Unit) and ISIS (Integrated Standby Intsruments System) were reported. Then on 02:13 the system reported failures of PRIM 1, the primary flight control computers that receive inputs from the ADIRU and SEC 1 (secondary flight control computers). The last message at 02:14 was a 'Cabin vertical speed' advisory.
All times UTC.
Last message says nothing else than that. *One* posibility for triggering this message is depressurization, but there are several others.
Those journalists inventing stuff from a simple teletext msg are deplorable and are cluttering the investigation, nothing else.
(Just FdR: They might even be right, but they would not know, as everybody else wouldn´t know).
I would sincerely ask the messengers here to
double check on such sensitive themes news, same as OPSEC/PERSEC for mil ops, there is a high percentage probability they simply are (at best) "educated" guesses and nothing else...
Factual take atm as I am writing: We know that we do knot know *anything* (yet).
A place to start is pprune indeed (but you will have to wade through tons of info and desinfo, also a lot of media are there "baiting" responses, and those don´t care whether it is John Smith the barkeeper answering, afer he responded he will be cited as "aviation expert"...):
http://www.pprune.org/
I urge you to:
Stop speculating with victms relatives watching,
Tx in advance,
Rattler