France is making this absurd allegation because if it wasn't a bomb then the Airbus A320 may have a fire problem in the avionics bay.
The French allegations are based entirely on surveillance camera footage at the terminal of the co-pilot putting perfume bottles, an iPhone and an iPad on the dashboard during loading and the fire indicators in the cockpit was in that area.
If you leave crap on the dashboard, if you're lucky, it ends up in your lap. If not lucky it ends up in your face because turbulence happens.
Its not likely they were still there during the flight or even takeoff.
It's fortunate that none of us are part of the investigation given the expertise demonstrated so far. It's not possible to come to any causation given what we know compared to what we don't know.
Yet that doesn't seem to matter. Here's hoping that people doing actual investigation are far more objective and relying evidence and not a 'news' article.
France is making this absurd allegation because if it wasn't a bomb then the Airbus A320 may have a fire problem in the avionics bay.
The French allegations are based entirely on surveillance camera footage at the terminal of the co-pilot putting perfume bottles, an iPhone and an iPad on the dashboard during loading and the fire indicators in the cockpit was in that area.
If you leave crap on the dashboard, if you're lucky, it ends up in your lap. If not lucky it ends up in your face because turbulence happens.
Its not likely they were still there during the flight or even takeoff.
What allegations do you mean? I don't think France has alleged anything yet. I thought they were investigating different possibilities to rule out some and try to determine the cause of the disaster. What is absurd about it?
There has been a lot of contradictory reporting in this case but but I believe the 'existence of a fire' was confirmed in radio communication (although initially denied).
It actually is very possible a fire started in the cockpit by the pilot charging an iOS device on the USB port. Cockpits do have USB ports. The reason being is they are used to update flight management data systems and navigational databases. They technically aren't there for charging devices, but obviously you can by the way USB ports are designed. In my opinion, I think the most plausible explanation is there could have been a short circuit from the USB port being overloaded and it caused a fire in the avionics bay. That is probably why the black box recorded smoke in both the cockpit and bathroom. It makes you wonder if the co pilot was using a cheap aftermarket lightning cable.
If this is the case then Airbus is in a whole heap of hurt. USB ports are supposed to be power-limiting and not overdeliver to devices not capable of accepting more than the minimum. Even if an iDevice failed and caught fire that should not cause a problem in the aircraft's avionics bay. You should be able to put a dead short on the USB port and have it do nothing more than either shut down of blow a fuse. If testing shows that a USB failure can cause such a problem then Airbus is taking the whole brunt of this.
They have halon fire extinguishers on flight decks. I can't see a mobile device starting a fire so quickly that trained aviation professionals couldn't extinguish it before it ruined the navigation controls.
I'm not sure they use halon, because it is deadly to anything that breath air. Halon works by staving a fire from oxygen. It is also heavier than air and if you get it in your lungs it will suffocate you.
They have halon fire extinguishers on flight decks. I can't see a mobile device starting a fire so quickly that trained aviation professionals couldn't extinguish it before it ruined the navigation controls.
I'm not sure they use halon, because it is deadly to anything that breath air. Halon works by staving a fire from oxygen. It is also heavier than air and if you get it in your lungs it will suffocate you.
That was my doubt too. Years ago they had halon gas installations on the London Underground and the warnings on them were very clear. You had to get out of the area quickly in case if activation.
it's a hypothesis, probably 1 of many, not even news worthy but since it links Apple then it makes headlines. Investigators have to explore every avenue and it's highly unlikely but still a possibility that had to be given a thought.
Comments
The French allegations are based entirely on surveillance camera footage at the terminal of the co-pilot putting perfume bottles, an iPhone and an iPad on the dashboard during loading and the fire indicators in the cockpit was in that area.
If you leave crap on the dashboard, if you're lucky, it ends up in your lap. If not lucky it ends up in your face because turbulence happens.
Its not likely they were still there during the flight or even takeoff.
Yet that doesn't seem to matter. Here's hoping that people doing actual investigation are far more objective and relying evidence and not a 'news' article.
There has been a lot of contradictory reporting in this case but but I believe the 'existence of a fire' was confirmed in radio communication (although initially denied).