Breaking: Possible wreckage of MH370 found

[Batman]

Sorry, not buying it. Oh I'm buying that 10 kilos of too much paint near the tail would be a problem. I'm NOT buying there 'would' what with that representing 5% of the weight of the paint job concentrated in somewhere below 1% of the painted area.

[Broomstick]

The other reason to be precise is because it's not just paint, it's a lot of little things that all add up. You want to keep as much under control as possible because aviation can be extremely unforgiving. Fudge a little here, estimate there, don't worry about that, and suddenly all those little rounding things you just did might add up to a problem.

[Venator]

Would 200kilos of paint really make that much difference in an airplane weighing upwards of 80 tons 'empty' and up to 200 fully loaded? Especially as that weight would be pretty evenly spread across the airframe so no balance issues?

An anecdotal point, but a friend was on a small jet at only ~25% occupancy, and they asked five or six people to move to the other side of the airplane because the plane was "unbalanced". I have no idea if the air crew were just bored and fucking around as they didn't move anything in the overhead storage, but it's interesting to note.

[Simon_Jester]

Moving people would probably be easier and more effective than moving overhead baggage. The average passenger probably weighs about sixty kilograms, their carry-on luggage is only a fraction of that.

[Broomstick]

Would 200kilos of paint really make that much difference in an airplane weighing upwards of 80 tons 'empty' and up to 200 fully loaded? Especially as that weight would be pretty evenly spread across the airframe so no balance issues?

An anecdotal point, but a friend was on a small jet at only ~25% occupancy, and they asked five or six people to move to the other side of the airplane because the plane was "unbalanced". I have no idea if the air crew were just bored and fucking around as they didn't move anything in the overhead storage, but it's interesting to note.

Some of the modern small passenger jets have sensors to determine if something like that is out of tolerance, and if it doesn't have sensors then at some point before take-off the pilots are sitting up front doing the calculations by hand. No, they weren't bored, they were doing their job.

[Thanas]

And if the calculations are incorrect, you get this.

[SpottedKitty]

You want to keep as much under control as possible because aviation can be extremely unforgiving. Fudge a little here, estimate there, don't worry about that, and suddenly all those little rounding things you just did might add up to a problem.

Very much this. A couple of quotes I've often found relevant in this sort of situation:

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."

Richard Feynman, appendix to the Space Shuttle Challenger accident report.

"But remember, please, the Law by which we live,
We are not built to comprehend a lie,
We can neither love nor pity nor forgive.
If you make a slip in handling us you die!"

Rudyard Kipling, The Secret of the Machines.

[Imperial528]

The other reason to be precise is because it's not just paint, it's a lot of little things that all add up. You want to keep as much under control as possible because aviation can be extremely unforgiving. Fudge a little here, estimate there, don't worry about that, and suddenly all those little rounding things you just did might add up to a problem.

To add on to this, aviation enthusiasts (mostly old military aircraft buffs) I know talk at length about how aircraft get heavier as they age. Best put as "Lt. Joe lost his sandwich in there one day and they never found it."

There's also dust/dirt build up, inevitable corrosion, etc. that can change how the mass of the plane is distributed. The paint itself probably isn't enough to affect that on its own, however I imagine repainting is a pretty regular occurrence so it's probably the best opportunity to rebalance the plane on a scheduled timescale, since it'll be in maintenance anyway.

[Simon_Jester]

And if the calculations are incorrect, you get this.

Yes.

And I note that in this case, the plane took off and seemed to be fine, but then crashed... because there were two separate problems. One was the plane being slightly overloaded and badly unbalanced. The other was that the plane's controls weren't working properly due to poor maintenance procedures. With the FAA looking in on this and finding 'neither problem would have caused the crash alone.'

So this is a great illustration of Broomstick's point that you want to control everything that can be controlled on your aircraft, including minor petty details, because those petty details add up.

[Broomstick]

At the FAA safety seminars I used to attend (not only free, but donuts and coffee being further enticements) there was much talk about the "chain of events leading to an accident". Particularly with the large passenger aircraft, planes going down because of just one thing is pretty rare these days. More typically, it's a series of small events and failures, none of which would be fatal or even more than mildly annoying on its own, adding up to catastrophe. The notion is that if you can interrupt that event chain you can avoid accidents, or at least reduce the damage. That's why aviation types can get so damn picky about teeny tiny details - the better you control the details the more likely you are to interrupt that chain of events.

[Mange]

Breaking news: The debris is from MH370: BBC News

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually keeping with Malaysia being nothing but a source of lies and disinformation throughout this, its prime minister has proclaimed the debris are from MH370, while the French say in fact that only that the part is from the same type of aircraft has been confirmed. And that they in fact do not have confirmation it is from MH370.

As quoted from above

French prosecutor Serge Mackowiak later confirmed the wing fragment, known as a flaperon, was from a Boeing 777 - the same make and model as the missing Malaysian airliner.

He said initial tests showed there were "very strong indications" that it was from flight MH370. But he said confirmation would only come after further tests on the fragment, which would begin on Thursday.

"[Investigators] will try to do it as soon as possible in order to provide total and reliable information to the family of victims, who are on our minds at the moment," Mr Mackowiak added.

So likely, but not proven. Since 777s have been scrapped before, and certainly had a lot of parts replaced in the twenty odd year history of the 1,300+ planes built, confirmation matters.

[Starglider]

I assume they are trying to trace serial numbers stamped onto mechanical parts?

[Sea Skimmer]

This part because of its nature (no integral moving parts) may not have a useful serial number. Its been suggested though that chemical tests on the type of paint used might match it to Malaysian Airways though. RUMINT of the piece having non serial stock numbers painted on it sometimes used internally by maintenance facilities have not been confirmed, though even if it did finding anyone who could remember applying them could be well impossible anyway.

Also still no further word on that plastic piece which was found and could be part of a aircraft window frame.

[Zaune]

A partial list of alternate sources of this particular component.

[Terralthra]

A...flaperon? Is it a combination of a flap and an aileron?

[Zaune]

Well, I doubt it's a supervillain's robot minion from a comic set in the Roaring Twenties...

[Sea Skimmer]

A...flaperon? Is it a combination of a flap and an aileron?

Yup; works out to be a aileron you can lower in form and not uncommon on modern aircraft design. One advantage is you can now have a control surface on the inner wings which are normally all flaps, more evenly spreading flight control loads across the wing structure.

[Broomstick]

This part because of its nature (no integral moving parts) may not have a useful serial number.

[Nitpick] Actually, the entire thing is a moving part, because a flaperon that doesn't move is sort of pointless. [/nitpick]

I say let the French make the determination, they're quite competent when it comes to aviation investigations.

[SpottedKitty]

This part because of its nature (no integral moving parts) may not have a useful serial number.

[Nitpick] Actually, the entire thing is a moving part, because a flaperon that doesn't move is sort of pointless. [/nitpick]

Come to think of it, is it all there? I remember seeing patches of barnacles, and bits of ragged metal at the ends. It would be a setback to a definite ID if the bit with the serial number got ripped off when the wing broke up. Might need to wait until (and if) more wreckage is found.

[Sea Skimmer]

[Nitpick] Actually, the entire thing is a moving part, because a flaperon that doesn't move is sort of pointless. [/nitpick]

Actually your nitpick is wrong. I said integral moving parts. It moves relative to other parts which are externally mounted, and all torn off. The piece in question has nothing within it that moves independently becoming a wear item, which typically have serial numbers because they are commonly replaced and have lifespans which must be tracked. The structural piece itself should last as long as the aircraft does unless damaged by external factors.

[Batman]

Aren't the points where it's attached to the rest of the wing a wear item?

[Sea Skimmer]

The bearings appear to be ripped out, the shafts certainly are. Which would make sense if it was violently torn off, but also if it was a piece of salvaged material.

[Broomstick]

Aren't the points where it's attached to the rest of the wing a wear item?

^ This.

Of course, those are also the bits most likely to be torn off in a crash and if not, would be roughly under where the barnacles attached themselves. More or less. From what I can see from new pictures, which are likely not the best view.

Although Sea Skimmer is correct about his "integral" moving parts comment. Which is also a nitpick.

[Batman]

I actually meant the sockets those items slot into on the flaperon, which would presumably show wear over time?