Posted on 02/21/2014 2:39:18 PM PST by butterdezillion
Remember that video of the plane crash in Hawaii after which Hawaii Health Director Loretta Fuddy "died"?
You need to take a closer look.
...And Murphy invented “¿hit happens!”???
“The photos of the crash that Josh Lang provided to the media? They weren’t of the same plane. The plane that crashed with Fuddy in it had a window between the door and the tail; Lang’s photos don’t.”
That is a false statement. The window aft of the passenger door is right there in plain sight in Lang’s photo. You’re looking right at it.
“The only other Cessna 208B engine failure in the past 30-some years that the NTSB has investigated was within 50 days and 25 miles of this one, and it - like this one - was “investigated” so poorly by the NTSB that the plane was left unattended for the evidence to be contaminated. When Makani Kai pulled this plane out of the water 6 days after the crash it was in pieces, even though it had gone into the water nearly intact.”
That is a false statement, because there have been “other Cessna 208B engine failure in the past 30-some years that the NTSB has investigated.” For example:
NTSB Identification: ANC13LA012
Scheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Monday, December 03, 2012 in Mekoryuk, AK
Probable Cause Approval Date: 01/30/2014
Aircraft: CESSNA 208B, registration: N169LJ
Injuries: 1 Minor,8 Uninjured.
NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.
Shortly after the scheduled commuter flight departed with the second-in-command (SIC) at the controls, the engine “coughed,” started vibrating, and lost power. The SIC attempted to restart the engine, but was unsuccessful. Subsequently, the pilot-in-command assumed control of the airplane and landed on a frozen bay, which resulted in substantial damage to the airplane’s right wing and fuselage. A postaccident examination of the airplane’s engine revealed that one of the first-stage compressor blades had fractured due to fatigue cracking. The source of the fatigue crack could not be determined due to secondary damage sustained to the fracture surface.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The total loss of engine power as a result of a fractured first-stage compressor blade due to fatigue cracking. The source of the fatigue crack could not be determined due to secondary damage sustained to the fracture surface.
ANC13LA012
On December 3, 2012, about 1050 Alaska standard time, a Cessna 208B airplane, N169LJ, sustained substantial damage during a forced landing shortly after takeoff from the Mekoryuk Airport, Mekoryuk, Alaska. Of the nine people aboard, the two pilots and six passengers were not injured, and one passenger sustained minor injuries. The airplane was being operated as Flight 140, by Hageland Aviation Services, Inc., dba ERA Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, as a visual flight rules (VFR) scheduled commuter flight under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and company flight following procedures were in effect. The flight originated at the Mekoryuk Airport about 1045, and was destined for Bethel, Alaska.
In a telephone conversation with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge (IIC), the pilot-in-command (PIC) stated that the second-in-command (SIC) was the flying pilot for the flight to Bethel. He said that the takeoff and initial climb were normal, but shortly after passing 1,000 feet, the engine “coughed,” started vibrating, and lost power. An attempt to restart the engine was not successful. The PIC assumed control of the airplane, and landed on a frozen bay approximately 5 miles northeast of the Mekoryuk Airport. Witnesses at the airport observed the airplane descending, and responded with snow machines, and all-terrain vehicles to transport the airplane’s occupants back to Mekoryuk.
During the forced landing the airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage and right wing.
The airplane was equipped with a Pratt & Whitney PT6A-114A turbine engine. A postaccident engine examination, performed at the facilities of Pratt & Whitney Canada, St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada, and under the direction of a senior NTSB powerplants investigator, revealed that a blade on the first stage compressor rotor failed as a result of a fatigue fracture. The fatigue crack initiated from the leading edge area and then propagated towards the trailing edge, and at mid-chord, the blade released by tensile overload. The initiation of the fracture could not be determined because of secondary damage to the fracture surface. A copy of the Safety Board powerplants investigator’s report is included in the public docket for this incident.
During the last engine overhaul, 5 first stage compressor blades were replaced with new blades. The blade that failed during the accident flight was one of the five replaced blades based on the batch numbers recorded on the blades.
“As to how somebody could get there, the Cessna 208b is supposed to hold 14 passengers.”
Wrong. The Cessna 208B is capable of transporting a maximum of 14 passengers, but it is only supposed to hold 9 passengers in compliance with regulations governing the maximum number of passengers and maximum payload allowed in commercial operations.
“But the slowest part of the plane’s sinking would have been when the mostly-empty fuel tanks were keeping the plane afloat because of the air in them. Only as the air was displaced by water would they become heavy and make the plane sink, tipping the nose down first. According to the video the water was already up to the level of the cabin floor by the time the door was opened. “
False statement, because the Cessna 208B fuel tanks cannot keep the aircraft afloat no matter how much fuel is or is not in the fuel tanks. The fuel tanks were not “mostly-empty,” and water did not displace the fuel in the fuel tanks to sink the aircraft.
I see a frogman.
Ok, that was it! Gorton, not Morton! And that guy killed Fuddy with a special needle!
Those look exactly like the same plane, Butter. They do.
We know this death is as hinky as they come. But there is no evidence of a diver and these photos are of the same plane. Be careful and when no one, especially your friends here, can logically point to clues supporting the frogman, etc, please reconsider. I for one am so glad you do the detailed research you do. You are very valuable. But be careful of being a hammer, where everything looks like nails.
Yaelle, have you looked at the images/questions I pinged you to earlier today? At http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3125646/posts?page=391#391 ?
Not one person has responded to me on any of those questions. Not one.
Ah, so I need to update my list to include results they figured out 24 days ago. You were pretty quick to catch that very recent addition. They found that some compressor blades that had been replaced in the last overhaul malfunctioned. That cause is irrelevant to Makani Kai’s situation, but it did just manage to slip in there so you can claim I made a false statement. Congratulations.
Makani Kai was only licensed to carry 9 on this Cessna, but that doesn’t change the size of the plane or how many it can physically hold, which is what I was talking about.
How do you know what the fuel tanks did or didn’t have in them? Do you work for Makani Kai, WhiskeyX? YOu’ve made a lot of claims about insider information. Why do you claim to have insider information?
I don’t believe she was murdered; these people considered her family. I don’t believe for a minute that they would have been in on something to truly harm her. But I do believe any and all of them would have done what they thought was necessary to save her from the big bad lawsuits coming down the pike, as well as what Sheriff Joe’s got coming up soon.
There could easily have been people aboard that plane who exited before the other passengers.
What I know is that there were people and things in the water that show up in the video that don’t fit the “official story”. And there’s stuff like a death being reported before anybody could have known there was a death, as well as the spokesman for the acting coroner claiming the day after the crash that Fuddy’s body had been retrieved from the wreckage... and a lot of other discrepancies.
I also know that the USCG is evading my requests for records (juggling the request between DC and HI and not answering my emails, not giving me phone numbers or names of people to call, etc) and the FAA says I can’t have any records because there is a law enforcement investigation underway (although the only investigation they referenced was an NTSB investigation which is not law enforcement.) Oh, and I was told by a worker at HDOT that he had to check with superiors as to whether he could email me an acknowledgement of my request because my email address is flagged for monitoring...
Also, there’s strange stuff with the plane records as well as the discrepancy of Kawasaki never having been listed as a Makani Kai pilot. We have no way of knowing whether they practiced ditching.
But certainly the easiest way to have everybody close enough would be to carry them on the plane. Puentes covering up his camera lens made a nice opportunity for the video to be edited during the cabin portion. Perfect for this scenario.
Yes, that appears to be the case.
The two sets of images don’t make sense with each other though. I’ve addressed that on the other thread. The Lang photo (showing the top frames of the 2 windows between the wing and the door not submerged yet and the bottom of the back window to not have entered the water yet) would have to come BEFORE the Puentes image showing the same 2 windows fully submerged in the water and the bottom of the back window already in the water.
If these were the same plane/event, the Lang photos could only come after the Puentes image if something happened to cause the 2 windows between the wing and the door to come UP out of the water after Puentes’ image showed them fully submerged. But those windows are very close to the center of gravity, and for the tipping of the front of the plane to get those windows up out of the water, the plane would have had to stop sinking and simply rotated on its center-of-gravity fulcrum, putting the tail high into the air - which we don’t see in Lang’s image, so that can’t be the way that the windows weren’t fully submerged on the Lang photo.
The sequence of how the submersion would have had to happen just doesn’t allow the Lang photo to be the same event as the Puentes photos are from.
If somebody wants me to believe otherwise - and believe that these are from the same event and the Lang photos came after the people had floated far, far away, then they need to explain what mechanism caused those 2 windows to come up out of the water after being fully submerged - without bringing the tail up high in the process. Good luck with that.
I’m thinking butyl or amyl nitrate (AKA “poppers”) as a possible arrhythmia inducing agent (inhaled vapors) if such was used. Easily carried, easily disposed of, common enough in club scenes and other circles. Who’d find a little bottle in the ocean?
Those are very blurry pictures. What are you trying to find? There isn’t anything in them that looks like it doesn’t belong with them in the ocean after surviving a plane crash.
The foot is Fuddy’s and makes sense with the way she is lying. She is lying with her head on the right of most photos and her legs go toward the left and closer to the camera.
I saw your photos but why would anyone ever have to pick out anything in those blurs? To what purpose? I don’t think but I could be wrong that desperately searching for cause of death in those grainy images will bring you satisfaction. I don’t see how.
Your reading comprehension has failed you again. Were any of those others that stayed afloat carrying an extremely heavy air tank on their back? No of course they weren’t. It’s the tank that means you can’t stay afloat without a vest BZ - of course a swimmer can, but not a swimmer carrying the weight of a tank without flippers.
We have two basic divers.
Snorkelers and scuba.
Snorkelers normally stay on the surface and are usually equipped with dive masks, snorkels(for breathing only on the surface) and masks.
Scuba or underwater breathing apparatus' usually have masks,fins snorkels and tanks. The tanks, filled with compressed air, have devices,regulators, that extend from the compressed air tank to the mouthpiece and generally you have from 30-60 minutes of air with which you can safely dive under the water at various depths.
Accessories are endless. Knives, dive watches, depth meters,wet suits,go pros, its endless what you can tack on to either a scuba diver or snorkeler.
If you see someone under the water most likely he/she is equipped with at least the basics of a tank, regulator, mask, snorkel and fins. It's likely he has a bunch of accessories as well.
I agree. If she was murdered, the killer was on the plane. If not the pilot (who had to be part of the plan to ditch the plane) then the passenger list needs to be checked very, very carefully.
Now, I don't disagree with you in essence, that is, I'm not seeing a diver in the pictures. But you are wrong that a diver would necessarily have a heavy bottle on his back. A diver with a closed-circuit rebreather can easily maintain any depth from 30' down, to on the surface with his head exposed, simply by breathing more or less oxygen from the bottle into the breathing bag.
This is the chest-side of a Draeger, showing the breathing bag.
“I don’t believe she was murdered; these people considered her family. I don’t believe for a minute that they would have been in on something to truly harm her. But I do believe any and all of them would have done what they thought was necessary to save her from the big bad lawsuits coming down the pike, as well as what Sheriff Joe’s got coming up soon.”
Crashing a plane into the sea could have EASILY killed everyone on board.
If the idea was to fake her death and spirit her away to a safe location, SURELY there are easier ways to achieve that than crashing a plane into the ocean with 9 other people on board, having scores of EMT people involved in the rescue, carrying out a funeral with an open casket and hundreds of well wishers (was she in the casket holding her breath?) and ‘photoshopping’ two news reports of the event?
Have you done any math on how many people would be involved in that scenario?
Note: When I use the term frogman, I mean UDT/SEALs etc, not Navy Divers or hardhat divers.
I personally know former SEALs who are also airplane pilots. In that case, you would only need ONE conspirator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.