I will help by offering translations for the ATC recordings starting at 7:47 Hainan Airlines 7152 attempting to relay a message from ATC to China Eastern 5735: "Guangzhou Center is calling you" No response 7:50 Zhuhai Approach on frequency 120.35 asking "China Eastern 5735, respond if you can hear" No response 7:54 Zhuhai Approach asking China Southern 3764 to relay to China Eastern 5735 again, No response 8:04 Shanghai Airlines 9256 attempts to relay message on Guard, again No response 8:13 really emotional to translate, essentially saying " Everyone hopes we can hear once more China Eastern 5735 respond by saying, Go ahead"
Thank you very much. I assume these communication attempts were after the crash. I don't remember Juan saying that, but maybe this was explained, and I missed it.
@@daic7274 But there is no response from China Eastern 5735 in this recording, so why wouldn't it be after the crash when ATC is trying to contact China Eastern 5735?
1. For the ATC audio, I am chinese so I understand what they said. Bascially that's the ATC controller and other aircrafts in the air trying to contact MU5735. There's no actural reponce from MU5735. I think this happened after the crash, or more accurately, after the controller spots the loss of radar signal from MU5735. 2. On FR24 I noticed a period of ADS-B data missing from this flight. There is no data from 5:27 UTC to 6:06 UTC. I am not sure if that is a normal behaviour on ADS-B data. Anyone knows why?
It's usually because there is not enough coverage in the region it was flying over to receive the aircrafts signals. Thank you for the translation too, friend
The data is only missing on third party websites such as FR24 as they are reliant on receivers being available to them in the area. The big gap of missing data on FR24 for MU5735 is simply because there is no receiver on the ground that they have access to, so they can't get the live data. Not that surprising considering how sparsely populated the land is between Kunming and Guangzhou
The Chinese Is fairly audible on the ATC recording. They also put transcripts down below. Basically the Guangzhou ATC asked two other commercial flights nearby(cz3764 & FM9256) to hail MU5735. They tried and informed ATC that they got no response.
Its not a Chinese problem its a damn problem with all these idiotic millennials who put everything to music and most of it is crap music. Thanks for the interpretation.
@BipolarGamer57 The theory is plausible but Who, What, When, Why and How must be answered first. The CVR and/or LHR should provide a lot of answers. I've been in commercial aviation for over 40 years half of it in QA and more hours in large aircraft than half a dozen retired pilots. I've personally done hundreds of investigations of all types, some of which I was sure what happened only to find out that it was something other. It is odd because of it's rarity and unusual flight profile. I believe the true cause will be determined. The Chinese are very good investigators and quite transparent. The true cause must be determined to prevent another accident or suicide, or structural failure, or hijacking, or tripping and falling between the yoke and seat, etc. I don't know Juan, but understandably he must be cautious in what he presents. That's a prerequisite of a Pilot and respectful of the company who ultimately signs his check. Companies aren't all excited about their employees being on social media. He has a fine line to follow. Imo, he seems to believe that as I do, there is nothing more important than getting up and down without anyone dying. We all will know the cause at some point.
@BipolarGamer57 It is very unusual to be at that attitude, almost impossible for an airliner. I've been on many test and acceptance flights. Hijacking and/or struggle maybe plausible as well. There were 3 in the flight station and 1 hand axe amongst other hard items. BTW Love UPS folks! What a success story. Fly safe!
from the ATC recording: 7:47 Hainan(HU) 7152: Eastern(MU) 5735, Guangzhou calling you. 7:50 Zhuhai Approach: Zhuhai Approach calling on 120.35. (Eastern 5735) respond if you receive. 7:53 Zhuhai Approach: Southern 3764. This is 120.35, can you help call Eastern 5735 again and see if they respond? 7:57 Southern(CZ) 3764: Roger. 120.35 calling Eastern 5735 from Southern 3764. 8:03 Shanghai(FM) 9256: Eastern 5735, Eastern 5735, Shanghai 9256 calling on 121.5. 8:08 Shanghai 9256: Eastern 5735, Shanghai 9256 calling on 121.5. (second time) no response from 5735 the entire time. p.s. even if you don't understand the language, you can probably hear the sad tone in their voice.
@@theGENIUSofART-understood like honestly, the music is pretty distasteful, as if the tragedy alone wasn't bad enough, the editors had to put emotional music on? Really disgusted with it, tbh.
While I too find the music inappropriate, this clip nonetheless has a chilling aspect: The repeating lowest line (in smaller characters underneath the words translated above shown only briefly each time) essentially reads "No response from Eastern 5735."
Re the 1st officer Zhang Zhengping, according to a Chinese News report, Zhang was a pilot legend with 40 years of flying experience (31k hrs referred to his total flying hours on all types of planes, not on 737 alone) and was supposed to retire in 2022. He started to fly 737 in 1996.
@Exuma Guy when doing what we call IOE (Initial Operating Experience); a Line Check Airman (Captain) when working with a new upgrade (FO to Cpt.) or a cpt. transitioning into equipment; will occupy the right seat. We perform all duties of the FO but remain the Pilot in Command. IOE is conducted on ALL pilots after they have completed their simulator training. This occurs “on the line”, during revenue service. So it is entirely possible that the left seater was receiving IOE instruction from the right seater (Line Check Airman Cpt.). Not saying this was occurring…but a possibility. As for 31k hours experience; as Juan said…that’s a ? & I say that as a 64 yr old LCA Cpt with 33 years airline experience and 27,770 total hours. Let’s NOT jump to any conclusions..
It sounds like the First First Officer was a Check Ride Captain. Which would make sense. And also explain why there were 2 FO’s on such a short flight. And oh man, 40 year career months from retirement. Thoughts and prayers go out to the families of all involved.
@@Larkeshet even with a rudder hard over or elevator malfunction single or dual. 31000 hours is incredible. He was a trainer and I believe he trained the pilot. This is a devastating accident. Single or dual elevators or rudder hardover would be extremely unlikely, because neither one of those accident scenarios would cause the aircraft to behave during this flight.
Its surprises me with all the technology we have we still need to find the black boxes. The status of the Aircraft should automatically be complicated to there a central system in the ground. Thank you for sharing. I enjoyed the video presentation and info up to date✈️💯
Bandwidth from aircraft to satellites, or ground stations, is not reliable enough to replace on-board recorders. For SATCOM, the antenna has to physically track the satellite, and often drops the link in a normal turn... so an aircraft upset or unusual attitude would almost certainly drop the link. Just when you need it most.
Sir, as a Chinese I REALLY appriciate your possitive , professional and objective analysis towards the crash, especially saying someone put the music on the top of ATC CM tapes "unprofessional", that's in deed really good comment.
@@michelebouvet8074 most of them because thee copyright for uploader who doesn't has the original copyright, yet some just feel itis not good if the dont put a music in that.
I'm able to understand the chinese atc coms... The Guangdong ATC asked other airlines most likely nearby same area on same frequency to call MU 5735, other pilots who have attempted to contact the MU flight include, china southern flight, shanghai airlines flight, and zhuhai airlines. None of them received any answer.
I’m a Chinese speaker here, to translate the ATC voice recording, first ATC asks Donguan ATC to try and call, and then proceeds to ask CHina southern and eastern, and Shanghai airlines planes nearby to try and contact the lost plane.. Calling on frequency 121.5 and 124.45… ATC also denied clearance for any aircraft west of GZ to descend and cleared the aircraft to land on any runway
Thanks Juan. I truly appreciate your unbiased fact based approach - no speculation. Grateful for you. Thoughts and prayers to the passengers, crew, and those who loved them.
Juan, thanks for your objective and informative updates, as always. You are the first place I go to for honest, no BS, no spin reporting on aircraft crashes. There is always a lesson to be learned from any crash, and you are the best place to get that honest analysis. Thanks again.
The recording is basically the ATC and other pilots from China Southern and Shanghai Airline trying to communicate with China Eastern plane but got no reply so there's not much information we can get from the recording. I actually did the math using flightradar24 data and the reported maximum 30,976 vertical descend speed is actually not really accurate. There was a 5 second period (21:09-21:14) when the plane descended like 5,000 feet. Then the average vertical descend rate could be 60,000 feet per minute. After this steep descent, it tried to get the nose up but the average G force from 21:45-21:55 is almost 2G. Instantaneous G force could be even higher than that.
2G is within the 737 structural limits. This doesn't explain why the airplane started the dive. The FDR will show this. I've worked with the CAAC. They are very interested in safety. I'm sure we will see the data set.
@@jimpalmer1969 Chinese media said they found the CVR and still working on finding the FDR. They may have an idea after listening to the cockpit recording.
Based on the tone/urgency, the recording starts after contact was lost for some time; translation by other members below is pretty much correct, and basically attempts by various controllers using various aircraft in the area to relay messages on 120.35 and 121.5. On this audio, pilots from Hainan air, China Eastern, Shanghai air, and China Southern are calling the lost aircraft, as well as Guangzhou and Zhuhai ATC. Hopefully more ATC audio is released afterwards.
Its not a Chinese problem its a damn problem with all these idiotic millennials who put everything to music and most of it is crap music. Thanks for the interpretation.
@HisRoyalSkinniness I just googled "China Eastern 7535" and there is NOTHING. If your claim were true the internet would be lit up. YOU'RE TALKING SH*T.
30,000 hours is unusual but not unheard of. I spent 26 years in the regionals maxing out every year just to make a paycheck because I was raising a family. So now at 61 my numbers are almost identical. Stopped adding it up when I got to 29k.
I'm not a pilot, but I found it somewhat entertaining that on the airline forums there were so many pilots claiming it was basically physically impossible for him to have accrued that many hours. There was even speculation he wrote his flight hours in as minutes, or that he fudged the number of hours he did early on in his career. Thank you for commenting on this
@@seanpellegrino2989 This pilot was a well-known person in Chinese Aviation: Zhang Zhengping, 59 years old, one of the first Chinese pilots flying "western" aircrafts back in the 1980ies, 737-pilot since 1996, working since a couple of years as instructor and examiner for China Eastern, a few month away from his retirement. The more important question seems to be why he was with his tremendous experience unable to prevent this crash from happening.
@@Hans_R._Wahl yes, thank you for mentioning that. I knew of this from an article in the press, but I could not find it again. He was apparently a doing a line check, but in China Eastern (or China in general maybe) the check airmen are listed under First Officer on crew manifests. It might have something to do with a translation thing I think.
@@seanpellegrino2989 Yes, indeed. The "First Officer" is in Chinese Aviation the Pilot sitting in the right front seat, even if he is the Pilot in Command. The Captain was only 32 yeats old. Probably it was a training/ Check flight.
My hope is that these passengers passed out before the end. I really love your no frills, no nonsense, professional, straight to the point approach to all your reports to us all. THANKYOU!. I've learned so much from you.
re: the co-pilots hours "According to a lengthy 2018 profile published by China Aviation News, the industry’s official newspaper, Mr. Zhang was among the first batch of pilots to be trained to fly commercial aircraft in China in the early years of the country’s post-Mao reform era." He was apparently 58-59 years old, and had been flying for 40 years(presumably including when learning). Perhaps the hours are from all flying though?, not just on commercial jets.
@@scoobydo446 Lots of non-aviation people, like me, watch Juan because they are interested in aviation, and they may not understand how hours are calculated. This was a good observation from someone who isn't familiar with pilot hours. There is no need to be dismissive.
A pilot by the name of Ed Long logged 65,000 flight hours during his life time, he had the most flight hours in the world. Ed Long started flying when he was 17, he was born in 1915 and passed away in 1999. The crazy thing is most of that flight time was in a piper cub flying under 200 feet because his job was to check power lines.
I’m just saying.. I’ve worked on 737-800 that were very near the 89P model number that this plane was, many of which were delivered from Chinese carriers. The CVR and FDR in those planes looked like the exact same unit. I haven’t seen anything that looked like what is in that video.
The atc recording is basically Zhuhai approach trying to call the downed aircraft with other planes trying to do the same for approach (with no response).
Amazing that it could survive that impact, hopefully the data is in good shape, that the other recorder survived as well and that no breakers were pulled prior to the incident. Thank you for the update on this tragic crash.
If the FDS made it down that intact, they probably will be able to get good data from it. Just a question of how much finicky work it will take to get it. The canister didn’t look fire damaged, which is the biggest concern. And the canister didn’t look crushed or directly dented. So the board inside is probably intact, and if not the chips are probably still recoverable and readable.
One of the easiest ways to transition from horizontal flight to vertical flight is the 'Split-S' maneuver, it does not even require a trim change. What could cause one wing to create a large amount of asymmetrical lift and/or drag that would overpower any corrective aileron input by the pilots? Once the aircraft reaches 180 degrees of roll & is inverted, the wing's natural angle of incidence and the current elevator trim setting will ensure that the nose will start dropping into the Split-S. Since aileron input is ineffective to stop the rolling moment in this scenario the aircraft will continue rolling as the down-line gets steeper with a resultant increase in airspeed & dramatic loss of altitude. What could have caused the momentary recovery & increase in altitude? Pulling back on the stick/yoke at the most effective time within one roll cycle, may have resulted in a return to upright flight and a short duration of climb. However the rolling moment would continue since ailerons were ineffective and the aircraft would enter a second Split-S, this time at a much lower altitude.
The ATC communication in Chinese can be heard clearly despite the background music. It essentially contains ATC calling the EA 737 with no response; ATC calling other airplanes in the vicinity to relay the call; other airplanes calling EA737 with no response.
Barring deliberate action, possibly some kind of failure of the vertical stab / rudder could make the plane roll over and enter an unrecoverable dive even with elevator authority. Will be interesting to see when more data is available.
A transport category aircraft is a 2.5G airframe. Given that, it would only take 3.75Gs before factor of safety would be exceeded on the most vulnerable part of the airframe. An aggressive recovery from a steep dive could very easily overstress the airplane and result in a structural failure.
Thanks for sharing. Good update. The music was a little unique. The ATC talk was in Chinese. No wonder hard to make it out. It pretty much fell out of the sky. Hope they figure out what happened. Condolences. RIP.
Could the recovery from a stall knock off the tail (elevator) system and cause this? The video of the vertical dive looks like it was from about 7000 ft elevation to ground. I'm wondering if something went wrong at 29k ft that caused a stall and then there was an attempt at recovery at 7-8k ft but then....whatever caused the first problem reappeared or the stall recovery bent or knocked off the elevator (at the back of the plane)? יוי
@@patrickcobb4483 you know....my mind wanders to who was on the plane that might be on a hit list. Sorry....the head pilot was named similar to XiChenping...it's probably nothing. יוי
Thank you for giving us all the info and explaining it in the concise way you always do Juan. I look forward to hearing the cause of this tragedy and the families being able to get some closure.
Thank you, will wait for future updates. Respectfully however, the Silk Air was not an Indian airline but from Singapore, it crashed in 1997. Thank you.
Doing some calculations based on the graph of vertical airspeed here. It looks to me like the maximum vertical acceleration was about 1g ( =10 m/s/s) , together with gravity this would be 2g's of load. This happens at around 06:21:45 on the graph, the steepest portion of the graph seems to be here. It's a 10 second period where the vertical speed goes from -15000 fpm ( = -76 m/s ) to +5000 fpm ( = +25 m/s ) which gives an acceleration of about 10 m/s/s. (I'm not totally convinced this calculation is correct though, it is only looking at the vertical motion, not the horizontal motion... i'll keep thinking about it..)
That is incredible. I used to know stuff like that by heart when I was in crash reconstruction (land based vehicles). Going from -15,000 to +5,000 fpm was something not encountered with wheeled vehicles. Hard to wrap the brain around what the G force is.
Your calculation is slightly off. The force to arrest the descent and climb was 20000fpm or was 333.33 fps which is 100m/s, so the load is 10g - well exceeding structural limitations for this aircraft.
@@paulgerard5413 the speed change over 10 sec is around 20000fpm. So the rate of change is 10m/s/s. But that g is nothing for an experienced pilot. Especially considering a lot of Chinese commercial pilots are ex-military. Though I do suspect there maybe a misreading on the time scale. Maybe it wasn’t just 10 seconds.
@@paulgerard5413 You are listing only one speed and no time interval. How are you calculating an acceleration without two at least two speeds (beginning and ending) and a time interval? I didn't study the graph, but a Simon's calculation -76 m/s to +25 m/s in 10 s does correctly give a 10 m/s/s acceleration.
Juan Brown is amazing. Excellent reporting.👍 I would have liked to hear his take on Alaska Airlines Flight 261, if RUclips had existed in the year 2000.
Is the 737 a tough enough bird that a pilot could recover that dive aggressively enough for the pilots to suffer G-LOC? Even a grey out could explain the pull out and return to dive. It seems the 737 is tough enough to at least hold together through it, whether it can change attitude fast enough to overcome the pilots is an interesting thought.
It's basically a bus; not a fighter plane ..... maybe someone with structural knowledge of this air frame will chime in; I would surmise the airframe cannot survive the kinds of forces that induce grey outs or loss of consciousness without severe structural damage.
Nope. Not unless there was something wrong with them. Limit is 2.5g with 50% overload test, so 3.75g. If there's more margin in a 737 then you could get into the 4-6g band where normal people start passing out. Trained people can hit 14g, probably with the special trousers though.
@@sparky6086 That’s probably an unlikely scenario. It would take a considerable amount of force to push the plane into a dive like that. I don’t think someone slumped over the yoke would do it. It would take some serious concentrated effort to initiate and sustain that kind of dive. However, I’m not a 737 pilot so that’s just a [semi] educated guess.
A 2.5G pull (max norm operating G limit at gross) at 600mph, results in a roughly 10,000' turn radius, taking roughly 17 seconds to pull out of a 70 degree dive assuming speed remains constant. This seems survivable to me from a structurally sound 737-800. None of this answers the question of what caused the initial rapid descent though.
That first pull-up looks to be about an additional 2.5 G vertically, then rate of descent increased again, then the second pull-up was easily twice as steep as the first one. I'm really wondering if they found all four corners now...
I assume you added in the 1g gravity in addition to the change in vertical speed. The other thing is that the data points are 10 seconds apart so it could have been 10x what you see there for part of that time difference. The graph looks like its probably a gentle pull up and overshoot before going back down so I'd like to believe the wings stayed on. Hopefully the data recorder will know.
At the impact site, the right wing tip, a large fragment of the right wing lower side, fragments of the rudder has been confirmed found based on the photos I've seen. Based on reports, the engines and the horizontal stab has also been found, no word on the left wing yet. Reports also claim that pieces have been found 10km away from the primary site, but not confirmed.
Nice job. It was very strange that music was played over the ATC tapes. Could this have been a hard-over rudder. The 800 has a different design than the previous one that proved fatal for many. From the previous models like 200 series, a hard-over rudder caused the 737 to bank inverted. If that happened here, then the jet may have corkscrewed down to 7,400. Followed by a very high G recovery that caused more structural damage or high speed stall, then spin.
I went to his twitter account and he adds loud annoying music to all his videos. Maybe he's a wannabe musician ? He did have some good crash vids I haven't seen.
@@ACPilot I don't think the 800 has problems with jack screws like what happened to the Alaskan Air 727. Isn't that the only other explanation outside of pilot suicide?
@@mcdowelltw What? The possible causes are probably in the hundreds at least. The causes of previous famous incidences have little to no bearing on it. With a name like that I myself am skeptical that you are making such a statement in good faith.
That data could suggest one of the flight crew putting the aircraft into a steep dive, then maybe the slight recovery could suggest the other member of the crew wrestling control back briefly? Just a thought!
Excellent explanation, thank you for making this video. Such a tragic crash, prayers to all family and friends of the passengers. And may God hold the passengers in His arms.
6:10 Re: Calculating the g forces the data is too coarse from my experience. Calculating acceleration from velocity data requires taking a derivative of some form, and with data that's fairly crude the results tend to be very inaccurate. Can say that from doing analysis on sensor data and when you want to do a derivative the results can get very inaccurate with noisy or coarse data. This is especially true here as you need to use both the rate of climb _AND_ the ground speed to calculate the resulting acceleration since its a vector quantity. Each one of those is only one component of the aircrafts speed. If you had the actual numerical data you might be able to clean it up a bit, but even then it would be a very rough estimate of the true g-loads.
@@jgunther3398 No, it’s likely not as the speed is part of the data that’s provided by the flight radar tracking, meaning that it is calculated from the radar data. It’s likely that there are some forms of error correction. These, however, are only good enough to make it visually acceptable. Do you remember from physics that acceleration = dV/dt? That means to get acceleration you have to take not one derivative, but TWO since both the vertical and ground speed are needed since each is only one component of the aircraft speed. This then gives the lateral and vertical acceleration components. By definition, derivatives are the rate of change, so any variations in the data are amplified, too. You can get huge errors from data that looks visually smooth since the rate of change is often on the same order as the error tolerance. There is also the additional factor that the calculated acceleration is relative to the ground (it’s from a stationary radar, after all) and not the plane itself. Ideally if one had to do this, you would use the data to reconstruct the flight path, and then use that to get your estimates as you can make some rational assumptions to fill in any gaps and make the data more reliable.
@@jgunther3398 And to be clear, by reconstruct I mean use the data to try and get good estimates for the yaw, pitch, and roll of the aircraft so you can do some reasonable interpolation to clean things up. Just using the raw data alone an a spread sheet would be iffy at best.
It's actually very difficult to point an aircraft straight down and keep it there. As the airspeed increases so does the lift, the effectiveness of the controls, and also the stiffness of the controls. So the pilot would unlikely be able to hold it pointing vertically downward as the aircraft would eventually wrench the cotrols from the pilot and enter some vicious and random manoever, probably a 'stick back' - likely leading to the low level bump in the graphs. It looks like a suicide to me.
@StayInAlive Yeah makes good sense. Also it seems the aircraft broke up well above the ground, probably during said vicious and random manoever due to vastly excessive wing loading.
Many sources are reporting a rapid climb mid drop. Do you think this is correct, or just an anomaly in the ADBS data? I've seen around me the local HEMS bird jump across the city and back on tracking app because of a data glitch.
7:47 rough translation of the atc recording: Hainan 7152: MU5735 Guangzhou is calling you (no response) Zhuhai approach: Zhuhai approach calling on 120.35 please answer if you (MU5735) hear us (no response) Zhuhai approach: southern airline 3764, please help us tell MU5735 that 120.35 is calling them and see if they respond Southern airline 3764: roger, call MU5735 at 120.35 3764: (This is) 3764 (no response) Shanghai airline 9256: MU5735 MU5735 Shanghai airline 9256 121.5 is calling you (no response) The last time a nearby flight called MU5735: 9256: Shanghai airline 9256 121.5 is calling you (no response) Last sentence on screen: wish you (MU5735) could have replied “go ahead”
Just feel horrible for the people that unfortunately ended up on this doomed flight and the terror they experienced those final seconds because they were most likely conscious the whole time. I knew it's early but I pray the families get some answers quickly and can eventually find peace.
With the extreme G's, it is possible that at least some of the passengers would have lost consciousness. I hope that they all did and escaped the terror in those last minutes.
@@cremebrulee4759 😪 It would have been chaotic to say the least. Some (everyone not belted in) may have been knocked out or hit with debris. QF72 gives a bit of insight into the impacts inside the cabin during a sudden altitude change. Terrifying, and I hope they find the cause of this accident MU5735 very soon.
@@cremebrulee4759 only during the attempted recovery from the initial upset would there be positive G loads during the vertical nose down dive basically no Gs or slight negative load if anything. Either way it's beyond fathomable the terror those people experienced.
I heard that the impact speed was estimated at between 400-500kts, which is surprising to me. Even if he was only flying at 500kts when the nose pushed over at 29000ft, and that he somehow temporarily pulled into a brief if aerodynamically unlikely climb at 7500ft before diving again out of 8600ft, that's still more than 20000ft at close to 90 degrees, while still under the power of two engines operating normally, which certainly wouldn't cause you to slow down. Do we know yet where the throttles were during that descent? Because at that attitude, I seem to remember others in similar predicaments going briefly supersonic, not to mention shedding flight surfaces.
Juan, look at the actual data. 30,000 fpm is the limit of FlightRadar24. I calculated the max rate of decent of >50,000 fpm between two of the data points! 😲
Yeah, apparently something to do with the maximum size of a data packet from the ADS-B where the maximum value of descent or climb rate it can broadcast is around 31-32k.
Any thoughts that either the captain or first officer may have had a medical issue as in a heart attack etc, then that pilot leaning forward pushing the yoke forward? I can see the other pilot trying to get the incapacitated pilot off the yoke making it impossible to communicate with anyone or possibly even being able to do anything flight control wise because of the short amount of time and the incapacitated pilot being dead weight on the yoke. Or is this even plausible? Hopefully someone can understand what I’m trying to say. English is not my first language. Sorry
Seems like I remember there was a KingAir flight where that very thing happened--one of the passengers happened to be a single-engine pilot that hadn't flown in ages, but he was able to land from the co-pilot seat, as the pilot was deceased--and they had a terrible time getting his weight off the controls so that the passenger could fly and land the plane.
@@psalm2forliberty577 Thanks for the confirmation--getting old sucks, LOL, and I'm never sure I get the details right on something when it's been awhile since I saw it.
The plane was on autopilot, according to Juan's excellent analysis. Any input from the pilots would not have made much difference unless they switched off the autopilot first. Your idea is vaguely plausible but highly unlikely.
3400 g. I had no idea the FDRs were that durable. I doubt that a sledgehammer could withstand a load like that. Simply amazing! Please keep us informed. I am very curious to hear about the g load during the attempt to recover. The may have lost conscience during the pullout. Thank you Juan. You are always the best source for such tragic crashes. May God receive these souls and bless the families of those lost.
everything is relative. If you drop a memory stick onto the floor it can experience 10,000G and it works fine. Its so high because its a very short distance to stop. The FDR has the length of the plane to slow down a bit and then hits soil etc so has longer to stop. So it will hopefully be within that limit of 3400. Even so the impact energy in this crash is incredible it really is amazing.
Terrible loss of life. I wish there was a way we could protect human beings in some fashion similar to but more human-friendly to the way black boxes protect data. Thank you for your excellent reporting, JB.
One of the easiest ways to transition from horizontal flight to vertical flight is the 'Split-S', it does not even require a trim change. What could cause one wing to create a large amount of asymmetrical lift and/or drag?
I will help by offering translations for the ATC recordings starting at 7:47
Hainan Airlines 7152 attempting to relay a message from ATC to China Eastern 5735: "Guangzhou Center is calling you" No response
7:50 Zhuhai Approach on frequency 120.35 asking "China Eastern 5735, respond if you can hear" No response
7:54 Zhuhai Approach asking China Southern 3764 to relay to China Eastern 5735 again, No response
8:04 Shanghai Airlines 9256 attempts to relay message on Guard, again No response
8:13 really emotional to translate, essentially saying " Everyone hopes we can hear once more China Eastern 5735 respond by saying, Go ahead"
Thanks........puts a little asterisk on it.
I dont understand who spoke the last comment in that thread?
Thank you very much. I assume these communication attempts were after the crash. I don't remember Juan saying that, but maybe this was explained, and I missed it.
@@cremebrulee4759 they would be leading up to the crash, China eastern 5735 would not be able to respond "go ahead" after the crash.
@@daic7274 But there is no response from China Eastern 5735 in this recording, so why wouldn't it be after the crash when ATC is trying to contact China Eastern 5735?
1. For the ATC audio, I am chinese so I understand what they said. Bascially that's the ATC controller and other aircrafts in the air trying to contact MU5735. There's no actural reponce from MU5735. I think this happened after the crash, or more accurately, after the controller spots the loss of radar signal from MU5735.
2. On FR24 I noticed a period of ADS-B data missing from this flight. There is no data from 5:27 UTC to 6:06 UTC. I am not sure if that is a normal behaviour on ADS-B data. Anyone knows why?
Not sure why it happens but it's common
Could be low to the ground below the radar
Oh ok, btw are you using a vpn😂
Edit: i misread the comment, apologies
It's usually because there is not enough coverage in the region it was flying over to receive the aircrafts signals. Thank you for the translation too, friend
The data is only missing on third party websites such as FR24 as they are reliant on receivers being available to them in the area. The big gap of missing data on FR24 for MU5735 is simply because there is no receiver on the ground that they have access to, so they can't get the live data. Not that surprising considering how sparsely populated the land is between Kunming and Guangzhou
This is THE site for informed commentary on flight disaster updates. Great work Juan.
Dan Gryder will remind you he is a taco thief! 😂😂
@@TheBeingReal LOL!
As soon as heard this plane went down, first place I went for information is Juan Brown.
@@TheBeingReal Dan can't hold Juan's beer.
@@TheBeingReal Dang Ryder thinks it was pilot suicide ... already.
Thanks!
Thanks Vincent!
I love how YT demonetizes your videos but slaps a bunch of ads on the front end. Either way, great job keeping us updated as always!!!
Doesn’t that mean that it’s not yet been demonetised?
@@_chipchip that’s what I believe. Plus, an ad played in the middle of the video, that’s a strong sign this video has not been demonized.
I got 2 ads.
It will take a while for the video to get demonetized
@@_chipchip My understanding is that RUclips will often quite happily put ads on your "demonitized" video, it just won't give the money to you.
The Chinese Is fairly audible on the ATC recording. They also put transcripts down below.
Basically the Guangzhou ATC asked two other commercial flights nearby(cz3764 & FM9256) to hail MU5735. They tried and informed ATC that they got no response.
Its not a Chinese problem its a damn problem with all these idiotic millennials who put everything to music and most of it is crap music.
Thanks for the interpretation.
Absolutely thanks for the translation and I am haunted by no response from MU 5735
As usual, great presentation! Professional, unbiased, non-speculative. Keep up your good work.
That other channel thinks it was pilot suicide.
@@vk2ig I think that “other channel” has a high probability of being correct.
Why isn't the ATC communicating in English IAW FAA.
@BipolarGamer57 The theory is plausible but Who, What, When, Why and How must be answered first. The CVR and/or LHR should provide a lot of answers. I've been in commercial aviation for over 40 years half of it in QA and more hours in large aircraft than half a dozen retired pilots. I've personally done hundreds of investigations of all types, some of which I was sure what happened only to find out that it was something other. It is odd because of it's rarity and unusual flight profile. I believe the true cause will be determined. The Chinese are very good investigators and quite transparent. The true cause must be determined to prevent another accident or suicide, or structural failure, or hijacking, or tripping and falling between the yoke and seat, etc. I don't know Juan, but understandably he must be cautious in what he presents. That's a prerequisite of a Pilot and respectful of the company who ultimately signs his check. Companies aren't all excited about their employees being on social media. He has a fine line to follow. Imo, he seems to believe that as I do, there is nothing more important than getting up and down without anyone dying. We all will know the cause at some point.
@BipolarGamer57 It is very unusual to be at that attitude, almost impossible for an airliner. I've been on many test and acceptance flights. Hijacking and/or struggle maybe plausible as well. There were 3 in the flight station and 1 hand axe amongst other hard items. BTW Love UPS folks! What a success story. Fly safe!
Thanks, Juan. And congrats on 300K subs...and counting. :)
from the ATC recording:
7:47 Hainan(HU) 7152: Eastern(MU) 5735, Guangzhou calling you.
7:50 Zhuhai Approach: Zhuhai Approach calling on 120.35. (Eastern 5735) respond if you receive.
7:53 Zhuhai Approach: Southern 3764. This is 120.35, can you help call Eastern 5735 again and see if they respond?
7:57 Southern(CZ) 3764: Roger. 120.35 calling Eastern 5735 from Southern 3764.
8:03 Shanghai(FM) 9256: Eastern 5735, Eastern 5735, Shanghai 9256 calling on 121.5.
8:08 Shanghai 9256: Eastern 5735, Shanghai 9256 calling on 121.5. (second time)
no response from 5735 the entire time.
p.s. even if you don't understand the language, you can probably hear the sad tone in their voice.
I could barely hear anything over the bloody music
@@royaltoadclub8322 lol
@@theGENIUSofART-understood like honestly, the music is pretty distasteful, as if the tragedy alone wasn't bad enough, the editors had to put emotional music on? Really disgusted with it, tbh.
@@LuvBorderCollies nope. if the ccp had any say, there would be no release of anything.
While I too find the music inappropriate, this clip nonetheless has a chilling aspect: The repeating lowest line (in smaller characters underneath the words translated above shown only briefly each time) essentially reads "No response from Eastern 5735."
Re the 1st officer Zhang Zhengping, according to a Chinese News report, Zhang was a pilot legend with 40 years of flying experience (31k hrs referred to his total flying hours on all types of planes, not on 737 alone) and was supposed to retire in 2022. He started to fly 737 in 1996.
I read he had trained the much younger Captain Yang Hongda who they are saying had a great future ahead of him, very respected and good record.
@Exuma Guy It reads to me that he was indeed an instructor/ examiner and that this was a test flight for the Captain.
Thank you for interpreting for us, Mr. Wong.
@Exuma Guy when doing what we call IOE (Initial Operating Experience); a Line Check Airman (Captain) when working with a new upgrade (FO to Cpt.) or a cpt. transitioning into equipment; will occupy the right seat. We perform all duties of the FO but remain the Pilot in Command. IOE is conducted on ALL pilots after they have completed their simulator training. This occurs “on the line”, during revenue service. So it is entirely possible that the left seater was receiving IOE instruction from the right seater (Line Check Airman Cpt.). Not saying this was occurring…but a possibility. As for 31k hours experience; as Juan said…that’s a ? & I say that as a 64 yr old LCA Cpt with 33 years airline experience and 27,770 total hours. Let’s NOT jump to any conclusions..
It sounds like the First First Officer was a Check Ride Captain. Which would make sense. And also explain why there were 2 FO’s on such a short flight. And oh man, 40 year career months from retirement. Thoughts and prayers go out to the families of all involved.
6:17: The y-axis is in increments of 10000 ft. So it's rate of climb at that moment was actually
almost 10000 ft/m.
It’s hard to believe after this the aircraft didn’t fall apart.
@@hnt510 maybe it did….wouldnt be surprised if an elevator came off during that maneuver. In the video u can see a small piece coming down…
@@Larkeshet even with a rudder hard over or elevator malfunction single or dual. 31000 hours is incredible. He was a trainer and I believe he trained the pilot. This is a devastating accident. Single or dual elevators or rudder hardover would be extremely unlikely, because neither one of those accident scenarios would cause the aircraft to behave during this flight.
I always enjoy your professional and direct type of reporting on these accidents! Thank you so much!
Its surprises me with all the technology we have we still need to find the black boxes. The status of the Aircraft should automatically be complicated to there a central system in the ground. Thank you for sharing. I enjoyed the video presentation and info up to date✈️💯
Bandwidth from aircraft to satellites, or ground stations, is not reliable enough to replace on-board recorders. For SATCOM, the antenna has to physically track the satellite, and often drops the link in a normal turn... so an aircraft upset or unusual attitude would almost certainly drop the link. Just when you need it most.
Sir, as a Chinese I REALLY appriciate your possitive , professional and objective analysis towards the crash, especially saying someone put the music on the top of ATC CM tapes "unprofessional", that's in deed really good comment.
that's not" unprofessional", you prob forgot what's the copyright for uploader who doesn't has the original copyright
your comment is just ridiculous.
@@henhappy7428 That's exactly what I thought
I REALLY hate it when people feel a need to put music over talking. Why do they do it?
@@michelebouvet8074 most of them because thee copyright for uploader who doesn't has the original copyright, yet some just feel itis not good if the dont put a music in that.
I'm able to understand the chinese atc coms... The Guangdong ATC asked other airlines most likely nearby same area on same frequency to call MU 5735, other pilots who have attempted to contact the MU flight include, china southern flight, shanghai airlines flight, and zhuhai airlines. None of them received any answer.
Was this before or after the crash?
@@KyIieMinogue they didn't say but most likely after radar contact lost
I’m a Chinese speaker here, to translate the ATC voice recording, first ATC asks Donguan ATC to try and call, and then proceeds to ask CHina southern and eastern, and Shanghai airlines planes nearby to try and contact the lost plane..
Calling on frequency 121.5 and 124.45… ATC also denied clearance for any aircraft west of GZ to descend and cleared the aircraft to land on any runway
Thank you for the translation.
Congratulations on 300k subscribers Juan. Your channel is fantastic.
Thanks Juan. I truly appreciate your unbiased fact based approach - no speculation. Grateful for you.
Thoughts and prayers to the passengers, crew, and those who loved them.
Juan, thanks for your objective and informative updates, as always. You are the first place I go to for honest, no BS, no spin reporting on aircraft crashes. There is always a lesson to be learned from any crash, and you are the best place to get that honest analysis. Thanks again.
The recording is basically the ATC and other pilots from China Southern and Shanghai Airline trying to communicate with China Eastern plane but got no reply so there's not much information we can get from the recording. I actually did the math using flightradar24 data and the reported maximum 30,976 vertical descend speed is actually not really accurate. There was a 5 second period (21:09-21:14) when the plane descended like 5,000 feet. Then the average vertical descend rate could be 60,000 feet per minute. After this steep descent, it tried to get the nose up but the average G force from 21:45-21:55 is almost 2G. Instantaneous G force could be even higher than that.
2G is within the 737 structural limits. This doesn't explain why the airplane started the dive. The FDR will show this. I've worked with the CAAC. They are very interested in safety. I'm sure we will see the data set.
@@jimpalmer1969 Chinese media said they found the CVR and still working on finding the FDR. They may have an idea after listening to the cockpit recording.
it sounds like the plane went supersonic or very close to that.
@@zhugeMTB-Tech They found the FDR today.
It's incredible that these data recorders can survive a crash like this.
g's
I remember the other day when Juan was rather pessimistic about recovery of either one.
@@johnslaughter5475 it was probably more about them either getting destroyed in the fire or simply buried.
Up to 3500 G's 😳
Why is it incredible? Thats what they are designed to do. Duh!
Based on the tone/urgency, the recording starts after contact was lost for some time; translation by other members below is pretty much correct, and basically attempts by various controllers using various aircraft in the area to relay messages on 120.35 and 121.5. On this audio, pilots from Hainan air, China Eastern, Shanghai air, and China Southern are calling the lost aircraft, as well as Guangzhou and Zhuhai ATC. Hopefully more ATC audio is released afterwards.
Thank you. Some knobs in the comments are suggesting this recording came from before the crash.
Its not a Chinese problem its a damn problem with all these idiotic millennials who put everything to music and most of it is crap music.
Thanks for the interpretation.
@@tonywilson4713 yeah and unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised if the audio is edited for engagement.
@HisRoyalSkinniness I just googled "China Eastern 7535" and there is NOTHING.
If your claim were true the internet would be lit up. YOU'RE TALKING SH*T.
30,000 hours is unusual but not unheard of. I spent 26 years in the regionals maxing out every year just to make a paycheck because I was raising a family. So now at 61 my numbers are almost identical. Stopped adding it up when I got to 29k.
I'm not a pilot, but I found it somewhat entertaining that on the airline forums there were so many pilots claiming it was basically physically impossible for him to have accrued that many hours. There was even speculation he wrote his flight hours in as minutes, or that he fudged the number of hours he did early on in his career. Thank you for commenting on this
@@seanpellegrino2989 This pilot was a well-known person in Chinese Aviation: Zhang Zhengping, 59 years old, one of the first Chinese pilots flying "western" aircrafts back in the 1980ies, 737-pilot since 1996, working since a couple of years as instructor and examiner for China Eastern, a few month away from his retirement.
The more important question seems to be why he was with his tremendous experience unable to prevent this crash from happening.
@@Hans_R._Wahl yes, thank you for mentioning that. I knew of this from an article in the press, but I could not find it again. He was apparently a doing a line check, but in China Eastern (or China in general maybe) the check airmen are listed under First Officer on crew manifests. It might have something to do with a translation thing I think.
@@seanpellegrino2989 Yes, indeed. The "First Officer" is in Chinese Aviation the Pilot sitting in the right front seat, even if he is the Pilot in Command.
The Captain was only 32 yeats old. Probably it was a training/ Check flight.
Thank you very much for the update! Please, keep us informed!
Indeed. I had the same thought - and the same wish.
My hope is that these passengers passed out before the end. I really love your no frills, no nonsense, professional, straight to the point approach to all your reports to us all. THANKYOU!. I've learned so much from you.
Thanks Juan for keeping us posted, always look forward to your updates!
You’re the one I turn to for the facts. Thank you.
re: the co-pilots hours "According to a lengthy 2018 profile published by China Aviation News, the industry’s official newspaper, Mr. Zhang was among the first batch of pilots to be trained to fly commercial aircraft in China in the early years of the country’s post-Mao reform era."
He was apparently 58-59 years old, and had been flying for 40 years(presumably including when learning). Perhaps the hours are from all flying though?, not just on commercial jets.
Of course it’s all the hours together , Juan knows that,
Yes, it would be all hours. Based on that information, he was also an older pilot.
@@scoobydo446 Lots of non-aviation people, like me, watch Juan because they are interested in aviation, and they may not understand how hours are calculated. This was a good observation from someone who isn't familiar with pilot hours. There is no need to be dismissive.
@@cremebrulee4759 are you drunk ?
A pilot by the name of Ed Long logged 65,000 flight hours during his life time, he had the most flight hours in the world. Ed Long started flying when he was 17, he was born in 1915 and passed away in 1999. The crazy thing is most of that flight time was in a piper cub flying under 200 feet because his job was to check power lines.
I’m just saying.. I’ve worked on 737-800 that were very near the 89P model number that this plane was, many of which were delivered from Chinese carriers. The CVR and FDR in those planes looked like the exact same unit. I haven’t seen anything that looked like what is in that video.
fishy?
@@emperordunord5594 slightly
Congratulations on 300K subscribers!! Excellent report as always JB
Amazing a recorder survived. Hope the data is readable.
the ATC record is just the ATC asking other planes in the area to call 5735. I believe it was after ATC lost radar contact of 5735.
Great work Juan ; I really enjoy your info filled videos , Have a GREAT DAY / EVE. Davey
Always appreciate your take on everything aviation. Congratulations on 300k+, on to a million!
The real expert, great job juan
You have been reporting on such very important topics in a way that deserves much respect and appreciation.
Thanks Juan. Not the first time an aircraft has been lost in such circumstances.
6:01 Possibly the horizontal stab departs the aircraft?
The atc recording is basically Zhuhai approach trying to call the downed aircraft with other planes trying to do the same for approach (with no response).
Thank you for the update, keep us informed as you get more information. This is a very interesting collision.
A weird one.
Amazing that it could survive that impact, hopefully the data is in good shape, that the other recorder survived as well and that no breakers were pulled prior to the incident.
Thank you for the update on this tragic crash.
But will China tell us the truth
If the FDS made it down that intact, they probably will be able to get good data from it. Just a question of how much finicky work it will take to get it. The canister didn’t look fire damaged, which is the biggest concern. And the canister didn’t look crushed or directly dented. So the board inside is probably intact, and if not the chips are probably still recoverable and readable.
Makes you wonder how come there were no debris in shanksville
Good point
@@SusanKay- they can, it would weigh 10 lbs though. and cell reception would suck.
Always appreciate your expertise on these matters. Just the facts, mam.
One of the easiest ways to transition from horizontal flight to vertical flight is the 'Split-S' maneuver, it does not even require a trim change.
What could cause one wing to create a large amount of asymmetrical lift and/or drag that would overpower any corrective aileron input by the pilots?
Once the aircraft reaches 180 degrees of roll & is inverted, the wing's natural angle of incidence and the current elevator trim setting will ensure that the nose will start dropping into the Split-S. Since aileron input is ineffective to stop the rolling moment in this scenario the aircraft will continue rolling as the down-line gets steeper with a resultant increase in airspeed & dramatic loss of altitude.
What could have caused the momentary recovery & increase in altitude?
Pulling back on the stick/yoke at the most effective time within one roll cycle, may have resulted in a return to upright flight and a short duration of climb. However the rolling moment would continue since ailerons were ineffective and the aircraft would enter a second Split-S, this time at a much lower altitude.
Update 3/28/22 - A channel called Airspace reports a winglet was found 12km West of the crash site : ruclips.net/user/AirspaceVideosvideos
Congrats on achieving 300k subscribers, Juan!
The ATC communication in Chinese can be heard clearly despite the background music. It essentially contains ATC calling the EA 737 with no response; ATC calling other airplanes in the vicinity to relay the call; other airplanes calling EA737 with no response.
Thank You Juan for another EXCELLENT, Unbiased presentation in easy to understand language💖
Barring deliberate action, possibly some kind of failure of the vertical stab / rudder could make the plane roll over and enter an unrecoverable dive even with elevator authority.
Will be interesting to see when more data is available.
I thought the same. And des, indeed. With the FDR now found the chances increased that the investigation will bring valide results.
It’s always great watching your content, Mr. Blancolirio. Thank you.
A transport category aircraft is a 2.5G airframe. Given that, it would only take 3.75Gs before factor of safety would be exceeded on the most vulnerable part of the airframe. An aggressive recovery from a steep dive could very easily overstress the airplane and result in a structural failure.
The rate of change was over 15 seconds and generated about 0.9g at the steepest part of the curve. (Yes, I was surprised too).
Thank you for your reporting
Thanks for sharing. Good update. The music was a little unique. The ATC talk was in Chinese. No wonder hard to make it out. It pretty much fell out of the sky. Hope they figure out what happened. Condolences. RIP.
Congratulations on the 300K Juan. Best aviation VLOG going!
Could the recovery from a stall knock off the tail (elevator) system and cause this? The video of the vertical dive looks like it was from about 7000 ft elevation to ground. I'm wondering if something went wrong at 29k ft that caused a stall and then there was an attempt at recovery at 7-8k ft but then....whatever caused the first problem reappeared or the stall recovery bent or knocked off the elevator (at the back of the plane)?
יוי
Yes - maybe.
But no mayday call. That has me stumped
@@patrickcobb4483 you know....my mind wanders to who was on the plane that might be on a hit list. Sorry....the head pilot was named similar to XiChenping...it's probably nothing.
יוי
Thanks for all Your efforts Juan.
Quite a professional overview, great job!
Thank you for giving us all the info and explaining it in the concise way you always do Juan. I look forward to hearing the cause of this tragedy and the families being able to get some closure.
Thank you, will wait for future updates. Respectfully however, the Silk Air was not an Indian airline but from Singapore, it crashed in 1997. Thank you.
Thought that photo of the plane in a vertical descent was fake. Thank you for pointing that out.
Doing some calculations based on the graph of vertical airspeed here. It looks to me like the maximum vertical acceleration was about 1g ( =10 m/s/s) , together with gravity this would be 2g's of load. This happens at around 06:21:45 on the graph, the steepest portion of the graph seems to be here. It's a 10 second period where the vertical speed goes from -15000 fpm ( = -76 m/s ) to +5000 fpm ( = +25 m/s ) which gives an acceleration of about 10 m/s/s. (I'm not totally convinced this calculation is correct though, it is only looking at the vertical motion, not the horizontal motion... i'll keep thinking about it..)
That is incredible. I used to know stuff like that by heart when I was in crash reconstruction (land based vehicles). Going from -15,000 to +5,000 fpm was something not encountered with wheeled vehicles. Hard to wrap the brain around what the G force is.
Your calculation is slightly off. The force to arrest the descent and climb was 20000fpm or was 333.33 fps which is 100m/s, so the load is 10g - well exceeding structural limitations for this aircraft.
@@paulgerard5413 the speed change over 10 sec is around 20000fpm. So the rate of change is 10m/s/s. But that g is nothing for an experienced pilot. Especially considering a lot of Chinese commercial pilots are ex-military. Though I do suspect there maybe a misreading on the time scale. Maybe it wasn’t just 10 seconds.
@@paulgerard5413 10G, holy shit, wouldn't a body compress at that rate? Like that would be 450kg of force on a 50 kg person
@@paulgerard5413 You are listing only one speed and no time interval. How are you calculating an acceleration without two at least two speeds (beginning and ending) and a time interval? I didn't study the graph, but a Simon's calculation -76 m/s to +25 m/s in 10 s does correctly give a 10 m/s/s acceleration.
Good report Juan! Lots more info. I see the stall you see.
Juan Brown is amazing. Excellent reporting.👍 I would have liked to hear his take on Alaska Airlines Flight 261, if RUclips had existed in the year 2000.
Thank you Juan. Awesome report as usual. J
This one is a real mystery right now - perfect flight and then a sudden nosedive?! My heart goes out to all the families of those that were lost.
I love the way Juan explains the facts in a way non pilots can make sense of what happened
Is the 737 a tough enough bird that a pilot could recover that dive aggressively enough for the pilots to suffer G-LOC? Even a grey out could explain the pull out and return to dive.
It seems the 737 is tough enough to at least hold together through it, whether it can change attitude fast enough to overcome the pilots is an interesting thought.
It's basically a bus; not a fighter plane ..... maybe someone with structural knowledge of this air frame will chime in; I would surmise the airframe cannot survive the kinds of forces that induce grey outs or loss of consciousness without severe structural damage.
Nope. Not unless there was something wrong with them. Limit is 2.5g with 50% overload test, so 3.75g. If there's more margin in a 737 then you could get into the 4-6g band where normal people start passing out. Trained people can hit 14g, probably with the special trousers though.
@@sparky6086 That’s probably an unlikely scenario. It would take a considerable amount of force to push the plane into a dive like that. I don’t think someone slumped over the yoke would do it. It would take some serious concentrated effort to initiate and sustain that kind of dive. However, I’m not a 737 pilot so that’s just a [semi] educated guess.
@@jeremyguiles, Agree, there was a fight going on.
Pieces fall off wings break. Beyond max speed would take 20,000 feet minimum to recover if you didn’t pull the wings off
Thank you Capt. Brown
A 2.5G pull (max norm operating G limit at gross) at 600mph, results in a roughly 10,000' turn radius, taking roughly 17 seconds to pull out of a 70 degree dive assuming speed remains constant. This seems survivable to me from a structurally sound 737-800. None of this answers the question of what caused the initial rapid descent though.
That's because we can only speculate why the dive started in the first place
It headed straight down, head first. That was messed.
That first pull-up looks to be about an additional 2.5 G vertically, then rate of descent increased again, then the second pull-up was easily twice as steep as the first one. I'm really wondering if they found all four corners now...
@Dr_b_ True, but that doesn't have to mean they functioned the way they were supposed to
I assume you added in the 1g gravity in addition to the change in vertical speed. The other thing is that the data points are 10 seconds apart so it could have been 10x what you see there for part of that time difference. The graph looks like its probably a gentle pull up and overshoot before going back down so I'd like to believe the wings stayed on. Hopefully the data recorder will know.
thanks for all your work! Appreciate you. your my go to guy for aviation stuff!.
I would assume the 1st copilot's time has an extra digit. It might be .9 on the end and it just didn't translate right.
At the impact site, the right wing tip, a large fragment of the right wing lower side, fragments of the rudder has been confirmed found based on the photos I've seen.
Based on reports, the engines and the horizontal stab has also been found, no word on the left wing yet.
Reports also claim that pieces have been found 10km away from the primary site, but not confirmed.
Nice job. It was very strange that music was played over the ATC tapes.
Could this have been a hard-over rudder. The 800 has a different design than the previous one that proved fatal for many. From the previous models like 200 series, a hard-over rudder caused the 737 to bank inverted. If that happened here, then the jet may have corkscrewed down to 7,400. Followed by a very high G recovery that caused more structural damage or high speed stall, then spin.
As far as I know all newer 737’s have a system to prevent the earlier rudder hard over problem. The older 737’s have been modified.
I went to his twitter account and he adds loud annoying music to all his videos. Maybe he's a wannabe musician ? He did have some good crash vids I haven't seen.
@@ACPilot I don't think the 800 has problems with jack screws like what happened to the Alaskan Air 727. Isn't that the only other explanation outside of pilot suicide?
@@mcdowelltw What? The possible causes are probably in the hundreds at least. The causes of previous famous incidences have little to no bearing on it. With a name like that I myself am skeptical that you are making such a statement in good faith.
@@mcdowelltw What? That's quite a logical leap you've made there.
Thank you very much for reporting facts-based as usual about this horrible and also weird crash!
Please keep us update!
Excellent information as always. Every accident sad .
thx for all the information, juan!
it's always annoying when people put music over voice recordings...
That data could suggest one of the flight crew putting the aircraft into a steep dive, then maybe the slight recovery could suggest the other member of the crew wrestling control back briefly? Just a thought!
My thoughts exactly. Possibly a stroke or heart attack. Or a struggle in the cockpit as in a hijacking attempt . Too soon to speculate tho. So sad.
That’s what it looks like: todays news, intentional crash.
Excellent explanation, thank you for making this video. Such a tragic crash, prayers to all family and friends of the passengers. And may God hold the passengers in His arms.
6:10 Re: Calculating the g forces the data is too coarse from my experience. Calculating acceleration from velocity data requires taking a derivative of some form, and with data that's fairly crude the results tend to be very inaccurate. Can say that from doing analysis on sensor data and when you want to do a derivative the results can get very inaccurate with noisy or coarse data. This is especially true here as you need to use both the rate of climb _AND_ the ground speed to calculate the resulting acceleration since its a vector quantity. Each one of those is only one component of the aircrafts speed. If you had the actual numerical data you might be able to clean it up a bit, but even then it would be a very rough estimate of the true g-loads.
it the data is good enough to make a graph of speed it's good enough to make a graph of acceleration
@@jgunther3398 No, it’s likely not as the speed is part of the data that’s provided by the flight radar tracking, meaning that it is calculated from the radar data. It’s likely that there are some forms of error correction. These, however, are only good enough to make it visually acceptable. Do you remember from physics that acceleration = dV/dt? That means to get acceleration you have to take not one derivative, but TWO since both the vertical and ground speed are needed since each is only one component of the aircraft speed. This then gives the lateral and vertical acceleration components. By definition, derivatives are the rate of change, so any variations in the data are amplified, too. You can get huge errors from data that looks visually smooth since the rate of change is often on the same order as the error tolerance. There is also the additional factor that the calculated acceleration is relative to the ground (it’s from a stationary radar, after all) and not the plane itself. Ideally if one had to do this, you would use the data to reconstruct the flight path, and then use that to get your estimates as you can make some rational assumptions to fill in any gaps and make the data more reliable.
@@jgunther3398 And to be clear, by reconstruct I mean use the data to try and get good estimates for the yaw, pitch, and roll of the aircraft so you can do some reasonable interpolation to clean things up. Just using the raw data alone an a spread sheet would be iffy at best.
It's actually very difficult to point an aircraft straight down and keep it there. As the airspeed increases so does the lift, the effectiveness of the controls, and also the stiffness of the controls. So the pilot would unlikely be able to hold it pointing vertically downward as the aircraft would eventually wrench the cotrols from the pilot and enter some vicious and random manoever, probably a 'stick back' - likely leading to the low level bump in the graphs. It looks like a suicide to me.
@StayInAlive Yeah makes good sense. Also it seems the aircraft broke up well above the ground, probably during said vicious and random manoever due to vastly excessive wing loading.
Many sources are reporting a rapid climb mid drop. Do you think this is correct, or just an anomaly in the ADBS data? I've seen around me the local HEMS bird jump across the city and back on tracking app because of a data glitch.
7:47 rough translation of the atc recording:
Hainan 7152: MU5735 Guangzhou is calling you (no response)
Zhuhai approach: Zhuhai approach calling on 120.35 please answer if you (MU5735) hear us (no response)
Zhuhai approach: southern airline 3764, please help us tell MU5735 that 120.35 is calling them and see if they respond
Southern airline 3764: roger, call MU5735 at 120.35
3764: (This is) 3764 (no response)
Shanghai airline 9256: MU5735 MU5735 Shanghai airline 9256 121.5 is calling you (no response)
The last time a nearby flight called MU5735:
9256: Shanghai airline 9256 121.5 is calling you (no response)
Last sentence on screen: wish you (MU5735) could have replied “go ahead”
Oh my heart. I wish they could have replied, too. Rest In Peace MU5735.
Thank you sir
Just feel horrible for the people that unfortunately ended up on this doomed flight and the terror they experienced those final seconds because they were most likely conscious the whole time. I knew it's early but I pray the families get some answers quickly and can eventually find peace.
Thank you from China
With the extreme G's, it is possible that at least some of the passengers would have lost consciousness. I hope that they all did and escaped the terror in those last minutes.
@@cremebrulee4759 😪 It would have been chaotic to say the least. Some (everyone not belted in) may have been knocked out or hit with debris. QF72 gives a bit of insight into the impacts inside the cabin during a sudden altitude change. Terrifying, and I hope they find the cause of this accident MU5735 very soon.
@@cremebrulee4759 only during the attempted recovery from the initial upset would there be positive G loads during the vertical nose down dive basically no Gs or slight negative load if anything. Either way it's beyond fathomable the terror those people experienced.
Very grateful for your commentary and analysis!
I heard that the impact speed was estimated at between 400-500kts, which is surprising to me. Even if he was only flying at 500kts when the nose pushed over at 29000ft, and that he somehow temporarily pulled into a brief if aerodynamically unlikely climb at 7500ft before diving again out of 8600ft, that's still more than 20000ft at close to 90 degrees, while still under the power of two engines operating normally, which certainly wouldn't cause you to slow down.
Do we know yet where the throttles were during that descent? Because at that attitude, I seem to remember others in similar predicaments going briefly supersonic, not to mention shedding flight surfaces.
Thanks Juan
Another great video on this Juan. 🙏🏻
Thank you for this very informative channel!
I been waiting my friend! Cheers!
Juan, I agree, 31000 hour copilot? I retired with 38 years of airline flying plus 10 years of civilian flying before that and I have 32000 hours.
Juan, look at the actual data. 30,000 fpm is the limit of FlightRadar24. I calculated the max rate of decent of >50,000 fpm between two of the data points! 😲
Yeah, apparently something to do with the maximum size of a data packet from the ADS-B where the maximum value of descent or climb rate it can broadcast is around 31-32k.
Great job as usual Juan. This new information just leaves more questions. We shall see!
This is such a tragedy. Thank you for bringing us this news in such a timely and highly informative way.
Good analyst Juan...looking forward to your next update..
Any thoughts that either the captain or first officer may have had a medical issue as in a heart attack etc, then that pilot leaning forward pushing the yoke forward? I can see the other pilot trying to get the incapacitated pilot off the yoke making it impossible to communicate with anyone or possibly even being able to do anything flight control wise because of the short amount of time and the incapacitated pilot being dead weight on the yoke. Or is this even plausible?
Hopefully someone can understand what I’m trying to say. English is not my first language. Sorry
Seems like I remember there was a KingAir flight where that very thing happened--one of the passengers happened to be a single-engine pilot that hadn't flown in ages, but he was able to land from the co-pilot seat, as the pilot was deceased--and they had a terrible time getting his weight off the controls so that the passenger could fly and land the plane.
@@Doxymeister
You remember correctly !
@@psalm2forliberty577 Thanks for the confirmation--getting old sucks, LOL, and I'm never sure I get the details right on something when it's been awhile since I saw it.
@@Doxymeister That sounds a lot like a movie I saw that starred Eric Roberts as the hero.
The plane was on autopilot, according to Juan's excellent analysis. Any input from the pilots would not have made much difference unless they switched off the autopilot first. Your idea is vaguely plausible but highly unlikely.
Another great video thanks for sharing!
Thanks for the update
Congratulations on 300,000 followers...
Amen-
3400 g. I had no idea the FDRs were that durable. I doubt that a sledgehammer could withstand a load like that. Simply amazing!
Please keep us informed. I am very curious to hear about the g load during the attempt to recover. The may have lost conscience during the pullout.
Thank you Juan. You are always the best source for such tragic crashes. May God receive these souls and bless the families of those lost.
everything is relative. If you drop a memory stick onto the floor it can experience 10,000G and it works fine. Its so high because its a very short distance to stop. The FDR has the length of the plane to slow down a bit and then hits soil etc so has longer to stop. So it will hopefully be within that limit of 3400. Even so the impact energy in this crash is incredible it really is amazing.
Terrible loss of life. I wish there was a way we could protect human beings in some fashion similar to but more human-friendly to the way black boxes protect data. Thank you for your excellent reporting, JB.
I am glad that Juan verified that video as being fake too.
One of the easiest ways to transition from horizontal flight to vertical flight is the 'Split-S', it does not even require a trim change. What could cause one wing to create a large amount of asymmetrical lift and/or drag?