Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,490 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,655,070
Pageviews Today: 2,156,825Threads Today: 471Posts Today: 8,562
02:40 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?

 
Daniel

User ID: 163427
United States
11/28/2006 06:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
This IS a Fringe Conspiracy Lunatic site -

that INVESTIGATES unusual events.

The Rockaway crash and it's timing was NOT NORMAL.

This was discussed at jfk research and pics analyzed.

Again that event was NOT as depicted by the media and NTSB.

Seems some don't mwant this discussed.

I don't like to be TOLD what to Think.

NTSB has "EARNED" my Distrust.

Daniel

bushtard
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 06:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I don't like to be TOLD what to Think.

NTSB has "EARNED" my Distrust.

Daniel

bushtard

 Quoting: Daniel



Well, as a AA pilot, and at that time a A-300 pilot i and all of the A-300 pilots in the airline was directly involved in the investigation of the crash.

Just wanted to add some facts about the aircraft and what
we learned from this accident.

Sorry, it will not happen again.
bohica

User ID: 139480
United States
11/29/2006 07:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I was working on the Random House HQ, on 56th & B'way, that day.
What impressed me most was the tour-bus look-alikes that had swing-out flashing lights like a police vehicle. They came out of nowhere and were headed for the East side, the city was crazy with all kinds of security types coming out of the woodwork.
Another coincidence with that flight was that one of the passengers had left his job at the WTC on Monday, 10 Sept., to become a sports agent. He was on his way to the D.R. to sign up a prospect. I guess it was his time.
Leave me alone and I'll return the favor.
Guns and gardening, peaceful prosperity
I aint that anon.
User ID: 157217
United States
11/29/2006 07:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
It was shoe bomber number one.
Trust me.
property is theft
User ID: 163869
United States
11/29/2006 07:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Totally agree.........But 5 years has passed and no one has yet figured out 911 so how are we suppose to figure out 912(the rockaway, airbus shake and bake)? I mean really figured out......sure, there are gut feelings but too many lose ends remain....Gee.....even JFK killing remains an unknown known.

I think reality is trying to tell us something!

This IS a Fringe Conspiracy Lunatic site -

that INVESTIGATES unusual events.

The Rockaway crash and it's timing was NOT NORMAL.

This was discussed at jfk research and pics analyzed.

Again that event was NOT as depicted by the media and NTSB.

Seems some don't mwant this discussed.

I don't like to be TOLD what to Think.

NTSB has "EARNED" my Distrust.

Daniel

bushtard

 Quoting: Daniel
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 07:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
The real mystery with 587 is NOT the tail section shearing off. That CAN happen, it WAS built from composites and thus it is, in theory, a likely place to start looking for a cause.

Same for the jet wash vortex theory. Yes, it is a known problem for jet airlines, something pilots are fully aware of. The issue is, however, exactly how close this 747 was out ahead of the Airbus, and whether the vorticies induced behind it were enough to cause the Airbus pilot to panic bigtime. You don't slam the rudder back and forth unless you are in a full-fledged panic mode.

Having said all that... the REAL mystery to 587 is twofold - did BOTH engines shear off from the wings, as has been reported? How is that possible? The possibility that the tail sheared off is one thing... but to think that both engines also sheared off is almost statistically beyond belief. Yes, they are designed to shear off in a case of a major incident to an engine, but it takes an absolutely enormous amount of vibration before they do so.

The second mystery is that eyewitnesses reported that the body of the plane was on fire BEFORE it hit the ground. Sure, fuel lines could have ruptured and the fuel ignited if the engines did indeed drop away in mid-air. But then we're back to this statistical impossibility of the tail shearing AND both engines falling off.

This all depends upon eyewitness reports, and as we should have learned in the TWA800 incident, eyewitness reports are extremely unreliable (huge dose of sarcasm intended). I personally have spoken with multiple eyewitnesses on Long Island and it is reasonably clear to me that the government covered something up with TWA800 - what, is the question.

It is also reasonably clear to me, again based upon "unreliable" eyewitness reports of 587, that the government again covered something up.

I'm not shocked. I do not trust our government to tell us the truth. Why should I? Were they truthful about the JFK assassination? Dog and pony show. Were they truthful about the Gulf of Tonkin? USS Maine? No, when the government has an ulterior motive or a clear and present need to lie, they do so. Period. It's disturbing, it's utterly disgusting in a supposedly "free and open" society... but it is a fact.

We should never forget 587, and add it to the litany of government lies to its own people. Some have said to me that they do this for a good reason, and ours is not to question. I say "bullshit". We teach our children not to lie, correct? And yet we then hypocritically tell ourselves "oh but it's ok if our government lies to us if they have good reason". Bullshit, I say.
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 08:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
You don't slam the rudder back and forth unless you are in a full-fledged panic mode.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


And that's where the A-300 rudder design comes in to play.
No travel limiter, forces needed to move the rudder at high speed is basicly the same as at the ground as you got
full hydraulic pressure to the PCU at any time.

Having said all that... the REAL mystery to 587 is twofold - did BOTH engines shear off from the wings, as has been reported? How is that possible?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


When the tail is gone lateral control is lost.
Aircraft will start to yaw uncontrolled and violently.
Forces involved will be big enough to crack the
fuse pins that hold the engine to the pylon.
It's designed to waste the engine instead of damaging
the wing having a sudden engine failure.
Yes both engines came off before hitting the ground,
and after the tail was gone.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 08:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Do you buy the jet wash vortex theory, freak, as being the initial causal factor in this supposed accident?

If that is the case... why have the families never sued the air traffic controllers for allowing the Airbus to take off within the one-mile separation required by the FAA to prevent such a thing?

Perhaps they have... but I have not heard and am curious. This would be a logical extension to any such determination as to a cause.
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 08:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Do you buy the jet wash vortex theory, freak, as being the initial causal factor in this supposed accident?

If that is the case... why have the families never sued the air traffic controllers for allowing the Airbus to take off within the one-mile separation required by the FAA to prevent such a thing?

Perhaps they have... but I have not heard and am curious. This would be a logical extension to any such determination as to a cause.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


As a start yes i do.
But the reason why the aircraft and everyone onboard was
lost was agressive handling of the rudder, and a poor
rudder design.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 151551
United States
11/29/2006 08:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
ALL eyewitnesses saw the bomb flash.

All of them.
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 08:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
If that is the case... why have the families never sued the air traffic controllers for allowing the Airbus to take off within the one-mile separation required by the FAA to prevent such a thing?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


They did sue ATC, but investigation ruled out seperation as
a contributing factor for the accident.

The fix from Airbus for the rudder issue was: only use the rudder for takeoff and landings in speeds below 180 kts and this was still in effect when i last flew
the A-300 3 yrs ago.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 08:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I believe you said you were, or are, a pilot Freak... again I am curious - how often do passenger jet pilots flying into and out of these busiest airports in the world like JFK experience a "seat of your pants" (soiled, even LOL) moment where you realize you are in the grips of jet wash?

I have been told it is very rare... could this have been some sort of rare case where there WAS a one-mile separation with the JAL 747 and yet there still was a jet wash worthy of pilot panic? Could this simply have been ATC error, and there wasn't one-mile separation? Is jet wash really this big of a problem, and if it is... why are there very few accidents because of it? I understand you feel composite design of the tailfin connection was suspect, but goodness, aircraft design is so rigorous and disciplined... the last thing an airline manufacturer can ever put up with is in-flight failure. Have Airbus 300's been retrofitted with new tailfin connections subsequent to this incident?

I am constantly reminded that the conclusion to the government's TWA800 investigation (i.e. sham) was that inert gas systems were to be installed in the center fuel tanks of all passenger jet aircraft to prevent such a reoccurance.

To date, the recommendation and directive issued by the FAA as a result has not been followed by any airline manufacturer. Tells you a lot, doesn't it?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 08:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I just checked, and apparently I am wrong on the inerting systems directive (gee it only took them over TEN YEARS LOL):

[link to www.faa.gov]

"FAA Proposes Rule to Reduce Fuel Tank Flammability
On November 23, 2005, the FAA proposed a rule that would require more than 3,200 existing and certain new large passenger jets to reduce flammability levels of fuel tank vapors. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) would require aircraft operators to reduce the flammability levels of fuel tank vapors to remove the likelihood of a potential explosion from an ignition source. Fuel tank inerting is the best solution to meeting the news standards outlined in the agency’s proposal.

The FAA’s proposal applies to new large airplane designs. Boeing 737, Boeing 747, and Airbus A320 models would be retrofitted first. The preliminary estimate for the total cost for the U.S. fleet is approximately $808 million over 49 years, including $313 million for retrofitting the existing fleet. The following is the projected U.S. aircraft fleet that would be retrofitted:

Airbus Models Number of Aircraft
Airbus A320 906
Airbus A330 44
Boeing Models Number of Aircraft
Boeing 737 1,149
Boeing 747 93
Boeing 757 581
Boeing 767 347
Boeing 777 157



The comment period closed on May 8, 2006. The FAA’s proposed rule and public comments may be viewed online at http...dms.dot.gov, docket FAA 2005-22997."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 159923
United States
11/29/2006 08:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Glad I read this after I just flew on a A319. The older I get, the less I like flying.
 Quoting: SHR


Finally required to pay full adult fare, eh?
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 08:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I believe you said you were, or are, a pilot Freak... again I am curious - how often do passenger jet pilots flying into and out of these busiest airports in the world like JFK experience a "seat of your pants" (soiled, even LOL) moment where you realize you are in the grips of jet wash?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


Well, i'm flying B-737 as well as the triple seven in and out of Chicago O´ Hare, in the B-737 about 14 times at a 5 day sector.
And yes landing or taking off behind a heavy you notice it even with a legal seperation, but nothing that i can't handle flying a fine aircraft like the B-737.
(The airline haven't had to replace any seatcovers yet)

I have been told it is very rare
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


Feeling the effect of wing vortexes is wery common, wing wortexes becoming a reason for trouble is rare.

could this have been some sort of rare case where there WAS a one-mile separation with the JAL 747 and yet there still was a jet wash worthy of pilot panic?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


Not panic, but the flying pilot might have felt there was reason for a recovery action, and then the aircraft didn't
respond as expected, he got full rudder deflection.

Could this simply have been ATC error, and there wasn't one-mile separation? Is jet wash really this big of a problem, and if it is... why are there very few accidents because of it? I understand you feel composite design of the tailfin connection was suspect, but goodness, aircraft design is so rigorous and disciplined... the last thing an airline manufacturer can ever put up with is in-flight failure. Have Airbus 300's been retrofitted with new tailfin connections subsequent to this incident?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


No ATC error here. Jet wash as you say is not a big problem
as long as the crew is properly trained on type, and the aircraft behaves as expected.
As i wrote in a earlier post the fix from Airbus was: do not overload the rudder !
I didn't expect Airbus to use lots of money fixing the rudder as those A-300's life as a passenger carrier is over
anyway, most of them converted to freight planes.
-Freak-

User ID: 163244
Norway
11/29/2006 08:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
I just checked, and apparently I am wrong on the inerting systems directive (gee it only took them over TEN YEARS LOL):

[link to www.faa.gov]

"FAA Proposes Rule to Reduce Fuel Tank Flammability
On November 23, 2005, the FAA proposed a rule that would require more than 3,200 existing and certain new large passenger jets to reduce flammability levels of fuel tank vapors. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) would require aircraft operators to reduce the flammability levels of fuel tank vapors to remove the likelihood of a potential explosion from an ignition source. Fuel tank inerting is the best solution to meeting the news standards outlined in the agency’s proposal.

The FAA’s proposal applies to new large airplane designs. Boeing 737, Boeing 747, and Airbus A320 models would be retrofitted first. The preliminary estimate for the total cost for the U.S. fleet is approximately $808 million over 49 years, including $313 million for retrofitting the existing fleet. The following is the projected U.S. aircraft fleet that would be retrofitted:

Airbus Models Number of Aircraft
Airbus A320 906
Airbus A330 44
Boeing Models Number of Aircraft
Boeing 737 1,149
Boeing 747 93
Boeing 757 581
Boeing 767 347
Boeing 777 157



The comment period closed on May 8, 2006. The FAA’s proposed rule and public comments may be viewed online at http...dms.dot.gov, docket FAA 2005-22997."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 163551


Well, on the 737 and 777 we now can keep center tank pumps running until low pressure light on! Problem fixed.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9237
United States
11/29/2006 09:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
was it a Hatian airline going to santo Domingo? some black people died so no one reaLLY CARED



Yea i think that was the one. I forgot all about that engine falling off. Dont you think that was real odd so soon after 9/11 and it was a big airliner to. Very weird.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 159941
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 09:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
On an entirely different note, Freak... I am in the midst of a mid-career crisis of sorts. Debating giving up my engineering position which is nothing but an absolute headache every day, and changing mid-stream. I have always loved flying, and have spent hundreds of hours in the PC simulator. Granted, I know it is not "real world" by any means... but I certainly have the basics down. I am seriously thinking of going to flight school (I live near Embry-Riddle in Prescott, altho I'm not sure that's my best option at 43 years old!), and working my way up the ladder from single-engine PPL to IFR to multi-engine to commercial. I have no intention of flying with the big boys like yourself (probably could never get there) but I would love to fly Lears or Citations for private corporations or similar.

Do you have any recommendations for me? Estimated length of time to achieve all licensing? Total cost? Is it do-able, for someone in his 40's to become a high flying taxi cab driver? Is it a pipe dream?

I plan on visiting flight schools in my area right after the first of the year after the holiday rush is over (too much to do this month) to investigate the possibilities. But flight schools will gush all over me, seeing nothing but my wallet. hehe I need perspective from "real world" folk like yourself.

Thanks for anything you may be able to offer in the way of advice or suggestion.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 135784
United States
11/29/2006 09:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Do you buy the jet wash vortex theory, freak, as being the initial causal factor in this supposed accident?

If that is the case... why have the families never sued the air traffic controllers for allowing the Airbus to take off within the one-mile separation required by the FAA to prevent such a thing?

Perhaps they have... but I have not heard and am curious. This would be a logical extension to any such determination as to a cause.


As a start yes i do.
But the reason why the aircraft and everyone onboard was
lost was agressive handling of the rudder, and a poor
rudder design.
 Quoting: -Freak-


Freak is right!

Investigation of the Crash of American Airlines Flight 587


American Airlines Flight 587 was an Airbus A300 that crashed shortly after takeoff from JFK airport in New York. The crash is currently under investigation by the NTSB The following is a brief description of the crash, an overview of the investigation, and related links.

Synopsis
On 12 November 2001, at approximately 9:17 a.m. local time, American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus A300-600, crashed into the Belle Harbor area of Queens, New York, several minutes after taking off from JFK International Airport. The plane was on a scheduled flight to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. All nine crew members and 251 passengers on the aircraft were killed, including five infants. Five people on the ground were also killed.

Accident Sequence
The NTSB calculated that the time between flight 587’s liftoff from Runway 31L until impact with the ground was 103 seconds. The flight data recorder (FDR) recorded data for about 93 seconds after liftoff and the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) continued to record information until at or about the time of the plane’s impact with the ground.

Based on radar data, flight 587 took off approximately 105 seconds behind a Japan Airlines 747. The FDR indicates that flight 587 encountered two wake vortices generated by JAL flight 47. The second wake encounter occurs about 8 seconds before the end of the FDR data. For the first few seconds after the second wake encounter, the aircraft responded to flight control inputs. Both wake encounters averaged about 0.1 G lateral (side to side) movement. During the last 8 seconds of FDR data, the plane experienced three stronger lateral movements, two to the right of 0.3 and 0.4 Gs, and then one to the left of 0.3 Gs. These lateral forces corresponded in time with rudder movements. The NTSB continues to investigate the cause of the rudder movements.

The FDR’s rudder data becomes unreliable about 2.5 seconds before the end of the recording, and sound spectrum analysis shows that engine sounds can be heard on the cockpit voice recorder beyond that point.

The rudder and tail fin were found first in the wreckage path, followed by the engines and then by the main wreckage impact point at the intersection of Newport and 131st Street, Belle Haven, New York.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 159906
United States
11/29/2006 09:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Feeling the effect of wing vortexes is wery common, wing wortexes becoming a reason for trouble is rare.


Are you Russian, Freak?


I"m sorry, I can't believe that a plane certified to fly hundreds of passengers at a time would have a tail that could fall off, no matter how rough the turbulence. I don't believe the fuel tank blew up on flt 800, either. I'm sure that was the "official" explanation, though.
Daniel

User ID: 163911
United States
11/29/2006 10:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Feeling the effect of wing vortexes is wery common, wing wortexes becoming a reason for trouble is rare.


Are you Russian, Freak?


I"m sorry, I can't believe that a plane certified to fly hundreds of passengers at a time would have a tail that could fall off, no matter how rough the turbulence. I don't believe the fuel tank blew up on flt 800, either. I'm sure that was the "official" explanation, though.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 159906

FREAK "SAYS" he is a Pilot.
Who knows - this IS GLP after all.

Strange all the Backing up of the Official Stories.

FLT 800 - NTSB AND NTSB ignored over 400 eyewitnesses that saw 2 missles blow the FRONT off.

Ret. Commander Donaldson strongly disagreed with NTSB - Nose shot off and ROSE 1,700 feet in altitude.

This affirms my DISTRUST of NTSB.

Daniel

bushtard


Anonymous Coward
User ID: 163551
United States
11/29/2006 11:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Early on in the investigation, James Kallstron ALMOST blew the whistle on the NTSB and TPTB... AND the US Navy, but it appears he chickened out and bit his tongue. The pussy.

My personal belief is that it is entirely possible that the US Navy was somehow involved, inadvertantly, and that a live-fire exercise being conducted in warning zone Z-105 off the coast of Long Island somehow went horribly wrong. Can you say COVERUP? It might have been terrorism, as I believed for a long time... but it may not have been.

[link to www.aim.org]

It is probably no coincidence that Kallstrom retired from the FBI soon after TWA 800, to join MBNA bank (there's a nice cushy job for ya Jim!). Today, where is he? Why, the Lower Manhattan Development District Board of Directors! Anti-Terror!!!

"As Senior Advisor, Mr. Kallstrom is responsible for coordinating and bolstering anti-terrorist efforts throughout the State of New York. He reports directly to the Governor and serves as a member of the Governor’s executive staff.

Mr. Kallstrom has recently been appointed by the Governor to a new management team responsible for overseeing the development of the World Trade Center Site and the Lower Manhattan area. He has been charged with directing security matters related to the building of the Freedom Tower as well as the rebuilding and development of Lower Manhattan."

[link to www.renewnyc.com]

Gee. Whaddya know. A connection to NYC and to the World Trade Center!

Curiouser and curiouser. How deep down the rabbit hole do you want to go? Red... or blue?

propoganda
JeeTee
User ID: 7063625
United States
09/10/2012 02:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Anyone remember that plane crash in NYC about a week after 9/11 ?
Stinger Missile IMO. There were witnesses that said they saw a missile hit the plane causing an explosion. It was covered up.

I also believe that the last 9/11 jet ws shot down by US fighter jets and we were fed a "let's roll" story to spark patriotism!

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!