[ventus45]

For those who still believe in "the ghost flight" scenario, (and I still don't mind you), this new flap debris, and Victor's paper, has given me "a new thought", to "possibly" support the "ghost flight" idea.

I don't really believe it, but consider this, "what if".

If the "objective" was to minimize debris, then the obvious "end game" requirement for the "impact with the sea" would be:
(a) Minimum forward speed.
(b) Minimum vertical speed.
© Slight pitch up, say between 5 and 8 degree nose up.

Now, the only way to achieve all three un-piloted, would be to set the following conditions, some time after the final turn south:
(1) Descend to the highest altitude where you could actually set flap 20 and speed 120 knots IAS.
(2) Set Flap 20 (NOTE: NOT FULL LANDING FLAP)
(3) Set Speed 120 knots IAS (which is probably around 200 kn TAS / GS (ignore winds for the moment) at "the altitude", but reduces in TAS / GS terms during further descent, and becomes 120 kn IAS / TAS / GS at sea level).
(4) Set Minimum VS = -100 ft/min ROD.

Reasons:
(1) For the "softest possible" landing, the aircraft has to be configured for "best L/D "in ground effect" (you guys might remember some remarks I made about "hanger landings" some time ago).
(2) As far as I can determine from performance data on the net, for a 777 at light weight (fuel not yet exhausted), that would be flap 20, at about 120 KIAS, with about 5 or 6 degrees nose up.
(3) This would give an effective "fly it on" L/D of around 120 to one, just slightly nose up, which is perfect for a "belly landing" or "alighting" i.e. in this case, a "ditching".

So, let's suppose, that at some time after the final turn, say when well away from Sumatra, say around 19:41z, he terminates the high altitude cruise, and descends to say FL260, and "configures" as above.

He has that done by 20:00z, and "checks out" as it were.

So now the aircraft is "on its own".
All we have to do now, is determine the most plausible "start point" for the "ghost flight" from 20:00z.

For the sake of argument, let's say, that at 20:00z, he is on the Equator at 95 East, at FL260, with Flap 20, IAS 120 kn, heading 180 M.
Why select 180M ?  See below.

Now, we have to work out Where he will he be at 00:19z.

Doing the "vertical first".
20:00z to 00:19z = 4hrs 19 minutes = 259 minutes.
VS = -100 fpm = loss of altitude of 25.900 feet (so that is why we start at FL 260).
Descent is "to the surface" precisely "on time".
Check, good so far.

Now it gets complicated.  

The number crunchers are invited step up to the plate, at this time.

Jumping "ahead" to the "ditch", to answer the "Why select 180 M".

Besides the fact that 180 takes him to "nowhere in particular", other than "out into the middle of nowhere", in the "end game", the advantage of using 180 M is as follows.

Depending on "just where" the aircraft ends up, it would still be on a heading of 180 M, which would most likely be around 150-160 True.

Since the "wave axis" in the IO is most likely to be around  340-160, and since it is it is most important that the aircraft "alight" as it were, "as parallel to the swell as possible", selecting 180 M would give a close approximation those "alignment" conditions, for a successful "ditching".

Now, the aircraft could come down on the crest, or in the trough, or "on a slope" either on the "front side" of a wave, or the "rear side" of the wave.

If on a crest, or in a trough, (given the long wavelengths of the swell) would be perfect, almost "Sully like".

But, the available "evidence", of the right flaperon, and the inboard section of the right outboard flap, and all the other "starboard side pieces" suggests, (to me) a ditch on the "front side of a swell", with the right wing "digging in" first. Thus the aircraft would "yaw right", and the forward fuselage would slam into the wave, fracturing it at the door R1 frame, thus releasing that "hosties table piece".

It all fits.

Tin hat on, and furiously digging foxhole !!


Edit:
(I put this up on JeffWise.net)



Got a reply:-


INCOMING: