Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Josh Lang's Photos of the Fuddy Crash Are Not the Same Plane
Butterdezillion's Blog ^ | 2-23-14 | Butterdezillion

Posted on 02/23/2014 3:09:07 PM PST by butterdezillion

The photos of the Loretta Fuddy Cessna 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. (I've got photos at my blog and in the first post I'll post them so you can compare the 2 planes)

Lang apparently had photos of a DIFFERENT plane ditching in the water and gave them to the media, claiming they were of this crash, and apparently the media didn't check out the genuineness of the photos...

Now why would Lang do that? Why would he post images of the area with no passengers or anything else in the water ANYWHERE, rather than taking photos of what was actually there and giving those to the media?


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Society; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; butterdezillion; cessna; eligibility; fuddy; hi; naturalborncitizen; obamarecords
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 581-600601-620621-640 ... 821-822 next last
To: Ray76

I think that’s the question we all would like answered. I have always found flightaware to be accurate and the FAA database to be accurate on planes and airmen.


601 posted on 02/27/2014 3:51:47 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Can’t just transfer a tail number on your own call. If the FAA is allowing that now, there is a problem. There are temp regs you can get.


602 posted on 02/27/2014 3:53:09 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

If you are talking about 2006 and 2009, the FAA database for current/pending/new registrations shows a month online. If I read their data base correctly. That would have nothing to do with Leis in 2009 buying the plane from Arctic.

I think there is no argument about the Rules and registration. You can’t decide on your own to change the license plate, and the FAA can’t take your current and valid license plate away from you without reason. I can’t imagine why we would even bother with a license/registration of pilots and planes if it’s okay to just switch out without authorization and there isn’t any update.


603 posted on 02/27/2014 3:57:25 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: machogirl
The website TELLS YOU IT MAY NOT BE UP TO DATE, therefore: lack of evidence of transfer on the website does not indicate lack of evidence of transfer in reality. Leis flew that tail# on a different plane which is evidence that the tail# was transferred.

Suppositions that there has been some nefarious misuse of the tail# are just that: suppositions. Suppositions without any supporting evidence.

604 posted on 02/27/2014 3:57:55 PM PST by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 601 | View Replies]

To: Ray76
Leis Air flew an Aviocar with tail number N687MA on Jan 5, 2014 from Sleetmute, AK to Anchorage, AK

That's known as a bug.

The airplane making the flight in question is probably N440RA.

605 posted on 02/27/2014 3:59:01 PM PST by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I can throw that right back at ya. Supposing they just transferred their tail number/registration is a supposition. There may be NO mystery except why the heck the FAA is slow> or why not submitting proper paperwork is allowed? or why owners would think they could just go off and switch registrations? for our own safety we need to know who owns the planes and correct regs/identifying numbers. It could all be one great big pile of no one caring to submit paperwork or an agency that is slow as molasses, but even those two excuses shouldn’t be allowed.


606 posted on 02/27/2014 4:02:11 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 604 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

It doesn’t even have to be a bug. Data entry problem? But still, it should be as accurate as possible. I guess that’s where the old saying goes, “that’s close enough for govt. work”.


607 posted on 02/27/2014 4:05:08 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 605 | View Replies]

To: machogirl

Of course! Leis is involved in a conspiracy. There’s no question about it. There’s tail# monkey business going on. Why must there be tail# monkey business? To support a theory that the plane photographed by Lang is not the crashed plane that Fuddy was on. Even if it’s not (which it is), it.makes.no.difference.


608 posted on 02/27/2014 4:09:06 PM PST by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 606 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Now, instead of acknowledging there is a discrepancy and lazy/slow/non filing of paperwork regarding planes and the FAA, you try to deflect using the “conspiracy” charge. it’s like the “race card”, all charged up and nothing left.

I railed on the inaccuracy of information, for whatever reason. You brought in the “conspiracy” (wink wink, kook)to shut down the debate. You lost the debate.


609 posted on 02/27/2014 4:13:11 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 608 | View Replies]

To: machogirl

The website has a currency disclaimer. We’ve both acknowledge this disclaimer. So stow your nonsense about “deflecting”.

I have not brought any conspiracy to the thread, I am pointing out a conspiracy others have brought to the thread. Specifically that the Lang photo is of another plane. That’s not my theory, that theory belongs to someone else.

To support this theory allegations have been made about the tail number. These allegations rest on info “missing” from the FAA website, but this “missing” data is easily explained by the website disclaimer.


610 posted on 02/27/2014 4:20:45 PM PST by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 609 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I have always found the site FAA and flightaware to be accurate. If the argument for the inaccurate information is backlog, owner disregard of rules, or FAA inaccuracy, that is a problem as I see it. As a taxpayer for sure. I would not want to be on a plane with a mis-identified tail number/reg if the Govt. was in reality looking for another plane.

Example: the crash at Aspen on January 4, 2014. Faa registry and flightaware both agree that the registration still belongs to the owner of the totaled plane.

A crash that for personal reasons that I had to use the resources online from flightaware and the FAA concerning a plane crash that had been literally less than 1 hour after occurrence, the resources were accurate as to the tail number/regs. That tail number has not been given out either to another plane owner or to another plane in a fleet. I don’t think it’s too much to ask the Govt. to be accurate? It’s not a conspiracy it’s a question of accuracy and safety.


611 posted on 02/27/2014 4:31:16 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I ain’t “stowing” nothing. For my tax money, I expect accuracy.


612 posted on 02/27/2014 4:32:34 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

We all know the LEGAL reasons for the disclaimer on everything. That doesn’t excuse sloppiness does it? I should put a disclaimer on my tax form. That would do I am sure for the IRS. lol


613 posted on 02/27/2014 4:35:15 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: machogirl

A website is not an official record.


614 posted on 02/27/2014 4:42:02 PM PST by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 611 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion
I think you are wrong...

So we disagree.

No worries...!!

615 posted on 02/27/2014 5:00:46 PM PST by Osage Orange (I have strong feelings about gun control. If there's a gun around, I want to be controlling it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 524 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Yep, I know. Why I expect better things from my Government, I’ll never know?

Another aircrash that I personal knowledge of that happened over a year ago. The tail number has not been reassigned even though the owner died in the crash. The registration is current until july of this year.

In reading their own website, the FAA is woefully lacking in registration, although the majority of the unregistered craft are NOT business craft (tourism flights, cargo flights, etc), it is woeful indeed. From their own site as to registration:
“Prompt reporting of a change in aircraft ownership, mailing address, or destruction has long been required by registration regulations. Without these reports from the owners the aircraft records could not be updated. “

“Upon expiration of registration the owner of an unregistered aircraft will be sent notice of the scheduled cancellation of the N-number and their option to reserve the N-number. Once canceled, the N-number will not be available for assignment or reservation for the next five years.” -
this pretty much bites the dust on the ole lottery of the tail numbers after expiration. and the FAA is pretty clear on the OWNERS being required to promptly REPORT change in ownership, address, destruction... it’s clear. no conspiracy the FAA regulations require this. it’s also clear that by their own admission, the FAA is inadequate.

http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certification/aircraft_registry/reregistration/


616 posted on 02/27/2014 5:10:32 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 614 | View Replies]

To: machogirl

Tough crowd today defending the defenseless. CEO’s have been dumped for less.


617 posted on 02/27/2014 5:24:48 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 616 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

How do you reconcile Lang’s 2 different images for where the plane was? I posted on this on my blog (and thanked you for providing the aerial view of the area; very helpful and I had meant to get to that. So thank you for posting that!)

That’s in the update at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/a-closer-look-at-langs-photos/


618 posted on 02/27/2014 5:47:21 PM PST by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

I very strongly doubt that it was boring. I would love to see the parts they cut out.

If the NTSB saw the unedited video and still made the report they made then everything I suspected about their role in this is confirmed.


619 posted on 02/27/2014 5:50:35 PM PST by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

You’re concerned about the angle between the wings and the shore?


620 posted on 02/27/2014 5:51:48 PM PST by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 618 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 581-600601-620621-640 ... 821-822 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson