Passenger Plane Crash in Queens NYC!

Fox News ^

[Attila_the_Hun]

AA Passenger plane has crashed in Queens, live video on Fox News... Developing!

[Nitro]

It took off on a heading of 230 degrees and would likely remain on that heading for the climb out then turn south and head out over the Atlantic for the trip down!

[hellinahandcart]

Thank you. (blushing) :-)

[concerned about politics]

Anyway the entire idea is nonsense.

ABC showed the flight path. The plane should have flown E, and then SE from Kennedy airport and arched down to the Deminican Republic.
Why was the plane going SW? The UN is west!
The plane was off it's flight path.

[hellinahandcart]

I have no doubt that it went seriously out of control (if there were any degree of control whatsoever, they wouldn't have let it crash on land); I would just like to stomp on the notion that the plane was seeking the U.N. to crash into.

The terrorists would never attack the U.N., IMO. It's the most anti-American slice of real estate in the hemisphere. All their damned buddies are in there.

[concerned about politics]

The plane reported a mech, maybe they were trying to get back to JFK, also, ATC can route a plane any way they want due to traffic.

Communications were lost at take off. There was no warning of Mechanical error. That's why they need the black box.

[Avi8tor]

You cannot determine that the aircraft was off it's flight path. After take-off, all aircraft follow a standard departure procedure, regardless of where they're headed. In addition, air traffic controllers often issue vectors for climb according to traffic conditions in the terminal area. Flights sometimes do not get cleared on course for 15-20 minutes after departure.

[hellinahandcart]

Why was the plane going SW? The UN is west!

West and NORTH, according to your own map; go buy a clue.

The plane was off it's flight path.

Well, DUH, yeah. The ground certainly wasn't on the flight plan two minutes after takeoff. If you lose control of a plane, do you expect it to stay on course?

[stlnative]

---

Airbus A.300 - Accident History

Airbus A.300 1st flight: 1972 Series: B4-200, -600, -600R 2 jet engines max. 375 passengers 507 built prod. ended: still in production

Relevant Airbus A.300 safety related information on the internet:
Airbus A.300 emergency exit information

Relevant Airbus A.300 safety related news:

20 OCT 2001 A Tunisair cabin crew member fell to her death when she opened the door of Airbus Airbus A300-605R TS-IPB at Djerba. A steward who also fell from the plane was seriously injured. Possible incomplete depressurization is being investigated. (ASN) A.300 incident November 20, 2000

17 OCT 2001 A PIA Airbus A.300 ran off the runway at Dubai when the right hand maingear collapsed on landing. Some injuries among 205 occupants. (Gulf News) ASN Incident Description

26 JUN 2001 The UK AAIB released a Special Bulletin regarding a May 18, 2001 incident in which Monarch Airways Airbus A.300 G-MONS suffered an uncontained failure of the No. 2 engine Low Pressure Turbine, causing minor impact damage to wing skin panels and inboard aileron. A safe precautionary landing was carried out at Faro. (AAIB Special Bulletin)

18 JUN 2001 Japan Air System (JAS) was ordered to complete within two weeks checks of its 17 Airbus A.300 planes for possible corrosion of rear pressure bulkheads; JAS has already inspected four of the planes without finding any failures. (Kyodo News)

[eno_]

I am descended from Eastern European refugees. I say deport all Arabs. Here's why that's not hypocrisy: Of the many millions of Easter European immigrants, only a tiny handful were Anarchist trouble-makers. MOST of the mosques in the U.S. are radical. At least 15% of Arabs in the U.S. support bin Laden. ZERO Arab organizations are actively campaigning against radicalism. MANY middle-class educated Arabs, such university professors, have become radicalized. This is a cultural and widespread phenomenon, not a handful of nuts. Cancel the visas and green cards of every Arab that does not look squeaky-clean, and monitor the ones that do.

[Nitro]

I doubt this was a takeover attempt like 9/11 usually they would wait for the plane to gain altitude before trying to gain control. However if they were aware of the constant presence of US fighter planes on patrol they might try to take over quickly to avoid a shootdown.

As far as the UN being the target, that can't really be stated with any certainty. There are still about 70 of the worlds tallest 150 buildings in Manhattan and anyone could be a target.

[concerned about politics]

Ok, what ever makes you folks "feel good."

look at the stupid map. Kennedy, and the crash is SW of Kennedy..
I have a low tolerance for stupid people.
I'm not even going to argue the facts.

[Howlin]

The plane was taking off to the NW, then turned toward the SE, that's when it crashed.

[callisto]

From the HoustonChronicle.com Per New York Times News Service:
Plane shed engine, offering a clue

The Airbus A-300 that crashed shortly after takeoff from Kennedy International Airport today shed part of one of its two engines, raising the possibility that the jetliner had suffered a catastrophic breakup of the engine or that the engine itself had detached from the plane -- an event so severe that pilots do not even train for it.

The plane carried two General Electric CF-6 engines, one under each wing, and these normally would have been at or near maximum thrust on departure. Fast-rotating internal parts have been known to come lose on such engines, sometimes penetrating the outer shell of the engine and sending parts that act as missiles into the plane.

A CF-6 engine on a Continental Airlines DC-10 broke up on takeoff from Newark International Airport in April 2000, and in June 2000 a CF-6 on a Varig Airlines Boeing 767 broke up.

This morning, the front portion of one engine was clearly visible in the driveway of a Shell gasoline station in the New York neighborhood where the plane crashed. That was the fan portion; the turbine portion was not in the same location.

In several cases, engines of various types have come completely loose from the plane. An engine on an American Airlines DC-10 came loose when the aircraft was taking off from Chicago in May 1979. The plane crashed near the airport, killing about 270 people.

A plane can fly on one engine, but if an engine fell off or broke up, it could destroy the three hydraulic systems, which are required to fly. The plane's flight control surfaces, the moveable panels that the pilots use to make it bank, climb, dive and change direction, are run by the hydraulic systems; the loss of an engine means the automatic loss of two hydraulic systems. Collateral damage could destroy the third system, experts said, but they cautioned that the wreckage of the plane and its flight data recorder must be examined in order to know what had happened.

The Airbus has a heavily computerized cockpit and a flight data recorder that takes extensive measurements throughout the plane.

An A-300 is a midsize jet, slightly longer than the Boeing 767 but with a shorter wingspan. A plane bound for Santo Domingo would be carrying about 50,000 pounds of fuel, or more than 9,000 gallons.

Apparently, nearly all seats on the plane that crashed were full. The A-300 can carry 240 passengers in economy class and 26 more in first class.

[Howlin]

You are correct; the plane took off toward the NW, banked left, and was heading SE when the trouble started.

[culpeper]

Just heard on Fox that witnesses saw pieces of metal fall off wing first, then the engine fell off.

[Nitro]

News reports agree the plane took off on a heading of 230 degrees which is essentially a straight line to the crash site from the runway.

[undergroundwarrior]

Yeah. What does it all mean. NTSB looking towards accident.

[undergroundwarrior]

Yeah. What does it all mean? NTSB looking towards accident.

[Howlin]

I don't think these maps are accurate; this one is different: