Posted on 01/28/2020 5:45:57 AM PST by Zhang Fei
Yes, loss of cabin air is alarmed.
...........
Pilots would immediately look to descend and land, and turn on the autopilot hoping to be alert enough to regain control.
...........
Normal flight altitude for that aircraft is 42,000 feet. Decompression would cause a blackout within a minute or less.
...........
Fighter jets have had this event, many did not recover.
Correct.
The O2 system is not a contributing cause. . .in my best guess as a certified and experienced aircraft mishap investigator.
Below 10K feet, ambient O2 is good, over 18K feet, O2 is required (regs). Something affected the aircrew and all on board as the other occupants would have raised alarms before impact. Now, they could have been distracted by working an issue in the jet and splatted. What time of day was the mishap? If at night and distracted by some system issue, they could have flown a gentle decent, never knowing they were headed to impact. AN L10-11 had this happen a few years ago.
Who know what happened? Until the mishap board issues its findings, it is just as likely the jet crashed because they were chasing a false horizon and not cross-checking their instruments, or George Jetson rammed them with his personal rocket car.
Time to sit-back and wait for the official report.
[Yes, loss of cabin air is alarmed.
...........
Pilots would immediately look to descend and land, and turn on the autopilot hoping to be alert enough to regain control.
...........
Normal flight altitude for that aircraft is 42,000 feet. Decompression would cause a blackout within a minute or less.
...........
Fighter jets have had this event, many did not recover.]
They ALWAYS have a special reason for ALTERING the TRUTH in order to "protect" Americans from hearing the bare painful TRUTH.
Certainly for the pilot to remain conscious until the plane gets below 15,000 feet. Most people should not have a problem remaining conscious below that level. -Tom
His real admonishment was directed at academia.
************
Why then does he refer to ‘military’ nine times in his address and ‘research’ only four times?
He also cites the “immense military establishment and a large arms industry” noting that we must comprehend the total influence and “grave implications” of same.
His notes may indicate a concern with academia but the actual address does not seem to reflect much of that since it was only mentioned half as much as the defense industry was.
Moreover (and to one of your points) hostility toward the defense industry was not the issue. Rather it was about a well founded concern about its “unwarranted influence”.
[Certainly for the pilot to remain conscious until the plane gets below 15,000 feet. Most people should not have a problem remaining conscious below that level. -Tom ]
We stood up a brand new government. It takes a while for everyone to settle into their roles...the government will slowly get its act together...
**************
I don’t share your optimism. Its a tribal culture and has been for thousands of years. We’re never going to change that “society” in any meaningful or lasting way.
How many American lives will be lost over the next few decades to supposedly protect our national interests (what are they really and who is profiting handsomely from them?). And how many loved ones, realtives and friends are we willing to sacrifice for these tribal and duplicitous ingrates?
Open ended engagements have, and continue to take, a horrific toll on this country. The nation is tired of the devastating and long term effects of those losses.
I was in the military. It saddens me deeply to see this tragic waste.
There is NOTHING in Afghanistan worth protecting.
If the Pentagon denies that the plane was shot down, that means that it was shot down.
From my initial PhD thesis proposal:
The defense industry/international arms trade via government-run foreign military sales (FMS) is not well understood. FMS is oft-times misrepresented in popular media and through agenda-driven reporting/monitoring organizations. Consequently, many people are unaware of the driving forces behind FMS and usually associate FMS with unrealistic but entertaining fantasy or simply object to such activities altogether. The subject is further confused by a myriad of Executive Branch FMS bureaucratic processes, laws, vague regulations, as well Congress.
President Eisenhower’s 1961 (often taken out of context) “military industrial complex” speech contributes to an enduring negative view of the defense industry. Indeed, President Eisenhower’s speech is cited as a warning about the defense industry and its growing influence among the “councils of government.” However, in context, President Eisenhower did not “warn” about the defense industry, he acknowledged the need for a robust defense industry and called on informed citizenry and politicos to “recognize the imperative need for this development.” (The “development” referred to a healthy defense industry). Consequently, far from condemning the defense industry, he was recognizing its vital role in advancing US political, economic and military goals.
I go on to write:
Oft times elected officials, NGOs, academics, Hollywood and media, as well as the general public have a skewed impression as to the defense industry and FMS international arms trade; who controls what and, more importantly in my view, why. They generally think it is all about greed. This is not supported by evidence.
When contrasted with nations such as France, Russia, Ukraine, China, North Korea, etc., the US places (relatively) onerous restrictions on the use and transfers of US arms.
More of my comments/research:
The US defense industry and the US government work to ensure they operate within the law, as oversight and reporting requirements are many and in plain view (except for classified programs, they come under different laws and reporting requirements and are beyond the scope of this proposed research effort). Indeed, US international arms sales are severely restricted by the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA), section 505, and the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), section 3 (22 U.S.C. 2753) and section 4 (22 U.S.C. 2754). Additional controls are defined in countless other policy manuals and service-specific instructions, as well as mandated in the sales contract—LOA.
More. . .
“Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery and respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the EQUAL and opposite danger the public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. . .”
Comment:
I’ve worked in DoD where we worked with the defense industry. Also upon retirement, I worked for the defense industry. I found much ignorance about FMS and the defense industry. It seems “everyone” feels like they know what goes on in the defense industry, but what “they” know, they don’t really know, and with hollywood and TV making movies advancing nonsense, it is filling minds with conspiracy and sneaky wrong-doings when in fact, the defense industry is a very transparent process and most who work in the defense industry have friends and family still serving so they don’t push for wars because they have a personal stake at risk. Thus my motivation to pursue my PhD in International Relations, focused to the Defense Industry and Foreign Military Sales.
There is enormous untapped mineral wealth there.
That’s not nothing, whether we should be involved is another question.
Not really.
Mishap and accident boards will be convened and great effort will be employed to discover the how and why the jet was lost. This is important because if it was pilot error, we need to look at training and certifications, if it was a material failure we need to know so other jets will not experience such a failure, and if shot down, we need to know HOW and WHY it was shot down so we can figure out how to protect our people and jets to avoid other shoot-downs.
The mishap board will interview all direct witnesses, and if the aircrew survived, they will be interviewed as well. Thing is, mishap board findings and interviews are not used to go after pilots or maintainers, such interviews are close-hold to ensure the aircrew or maintainers that possibly made an error are free to speak uninfluenced by a threat of punishment. Ensures truth is found.
The accident board is different and can make UCMJ recommendations.
Post 54.
Post 54, please.
[There is enormous untapped mineral wealth there.]
Actually I read it in a USGS report. They had people in Afghanistan down range.
Of course they could be lying.
My point: whatever the outcome of that "thorough" investigation produces it is still subject to the Government's DECISION as to WHAT the public needs to know and DOESN'T need to know. An example that comes to mind is "Flight 800."
The Government, like the MSM, often times WITHHOLDS what they believe you do not need to know because they have an already in play predisposed agenda.
When it does occur it's referred to as "Government Coverup."
I did. Thanks for the information.
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.