Germanwings A320 Crashes in French Alps

[muppet]

Just breaking now.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32030270

[DennistheMenace]

An Airbus A320 with 148 people on board. I hope there are survivors but fear the worst.

[muppet]

I don't know how I feel about this sort of stuff, but you can track the flight here by pressing <play>: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/d-aipx/#5d42675

10 minutes from 38,000' to 6,800' is just over 3,000' fpm on average. That is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Hopefully there are survivors, but even if there are, it could be difficult to find and help them quickly.

[Rois]

Oh no, this is terrible news.  A lot of the terrain is still covered in snow around there, and pretty inaccessible I'd imagine. 

[DennistheMenace]

I don't know how I feel about this sort of stuff, but you can track the flight here by pressing <play>: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/d-aipx/#5d42675

10 minutes from 38,000' to 6,800' is just over 3,000' fpm on average. That is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Hopefully there are survivors, but even if there are, it could be difficult to find and help them quickly.

Debris spotted according to reports and SAR teams deployed, wouldn't take a rocket scientist to imagine it being a mountainous terrain, even with a steady decent I can only fear the worst.

[DennistheMenace]

Doesn't mean sense really that there was no significant deviations from the flight path with the slow and steady decent. Will be interesting to hear if and what communication was made to the control tower.

[AZOffaly]

Would a slow and steady descent indicate a pilot trying to crash land, as opposed to some catastrophic event?

[muppet]

Would a slow and steady descent indicate a pilot trying to crash land, as opposed to some catastrophic event?

It could, but even without engines you could safely glide at a slower descent rate than that. And you would most likely turn away from the Alps if you had any control at all.

I don't know if that site is accurate enough to determine that the rate was steady either. It could have varied wildly and not shown up on that radar.

[orangeman]

It's been a bad few years for aviation.

[AZOffaly]

I'm starting to think the boat is a better bet!

[DennistheMenace]

It's very strange, weather doesn't appear to be a factor in this crash, apparently there was contact with the control tower before the plane disappeared off radar but that's to be confirmed. All the data point towards a gradual descent at 3,000 ft a min, whilst it isn't normal it certainly isn't a rapid dangerous descent.

[take_yer_points]

I don't know how I feel about this sort of stuff, but you can track the flight here by pressing <play>: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/d-aipx/#5d42675

10 minutes from 38,000' to 6,800' is just over 3,000' fpm on average. That is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Hopefully there are survivors, but even if there are, it could be difficult to find and help them quickly.

On that link the time starts at 8.55am and finishes at 9.41am.

BBC now have on their website:

"According to sources quoted by AFP news agency. plane had issued a distress call at 10:47 (09:47 GMT)."

Is 9.41am the time it disappeared off radar or the time of the crash?

[muppet]

I don't know how I feel about this sort of stuff, but you can track the flight here by pressing <play>: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/d-aipx/#5d42675

10 minutes from 38,000' to 6,800' is just over 3,000' fpm on average. That is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Hopefully there are survivors, but even if there are, it could be difficult to find and help them quickly.

On that link the time starts at 8.55am and finishes at 9.41am.

BBC now have on their website:

"According to sources quoted by AFP news agency. plane had issued a distress call at 10:47 (09:47 GMT)."

Is 9.41am the time it disappeared off radar or the time of the crash?

All commercial aviation is recorded in GMT. It could have still been flying below the radar, but early information is notoriously unreliable so I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

[lfdown2]

Sky reporting;

sarahcollerton 7 minutes ago
In 10 minutes the plane plummeted from 40,000ft to 6,200ft - a catastrophic loss of altitude, says Sky's Enda Brady

[DennistheMenace]

Sky reporting;

sarahcollerton 7 minutes ago
In 10 minutes the plane plummeted from 40,000ft to 6,200ft - a catastrophic loss of altitude, says Sky's Enda Brady

It really isn't catastrophic at all.