Flight 587 Video Shows 'Puff of Smoke' in Sky

Newsmax ^ | November 17, 2001 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[MeekOneGOP]

Saturday, Nov. 17, 2001 11:39 a.m. EST

Flight 587 Video Shows 'Puff of Smoke' in Sky

A second-by-second videotape of the final moments of doomed American Airlines Flight 587 shows a puff of smoke in the sky seconds after it crashed outside New York's JFK Airport Monday, lending credence to eyewitnesses who say the jetliner exploded before slamming into a Rockaway, N.Y., neighborhood.

Though Flight 587 probers have not released the key videotape, shot from a Metropolitan Transportation Authority highway surveillance camera, reporters from New York's Daily News were allowed to view it Friday.

"The tape ... shows a white outline of the jetliner against a clear sky in fairly steep decline," the News reported in Saturday editions. "Seconds later, the outline disappears and the video shows a blurry, white, undefined patch as the plane apparently breaks apart."

Visible in one of the final frames of the sequential videotape is "a puff of white smoke in the sky."

The images of Flight 587's final moments are said to be "very unclear." FBI and NTSB investigators hope to learn more through video enhancement techniques.

On Friday, MTA spokesman Tom Kelly told NewsMax.com that the FBI had turned the videotape over to the NTSB, but apparently both agencies now have copies and continue to analyze them.

Enhancement of the Flight 587 video could confirm the accounts of eyewitnesses like Jackie Powers, who, minutes after the crash, told both ABC News and WABC Radio in New York that she saw "an enormous flash" near the wing on the A-300 Airbus before it dropped from the sky.

"I don't know if it was fire or an explosion," she said. "It appeared that debris fell from the left side [of the plane]. It just plummeted. It had no momentum whatsoever. It just plummeted."

Dozens of other witnesses told various media outlets they saw the jet either explode or catch fire before it crashed.

An explosion would be a problem for NTSB officials, who spent the better part of the last few days trying to sell the idea that the plane's vertical stabilizer snapped off, causing the in-flight breakup, because of "wake turbulence" from a Japan Airlines 747 that had taken off from JFK two minutes earlier.

Independent aviation experts have generally scoffed at the NTSB theory.

"[747 wake turbulence] is not strong enough to be able to break off a tail or to compromise any sort of a normal airplane," said ABC News aviation analyst John Nance on Friday.

"They could turn a little airplane upside down. But especially an A-300, which is a jumbo jet - no way in the world should that ever have any potentially disastrous impact on the aircraft or the tail," he explained.

On Wednesday, an unnamed aviation expert quoted in New York's Newsday said one likely explanation for Flight 587's breakup was a bomb exploding on board. (See: Aviation Expert: Bomb One Likely Cause of Flight 587 Crash.)

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
TWA 800
War on Terrorism

[Robert357]

Thank you for the photo's. This looks like kind of a classic failure at an attachment point. There is a local company in Seattle that made its name by having a hole enlargement-metal compression system. so that small stress fractures would not propagate between rivet holes, causing massive failures of panels.

While the attachment points are a totally different kind of thing, and should have been designed to avoid any kind of propagation of stress fractures, weakening the tail and stabalizer, a fatique/materials failure could happen. It would be interesting to know the history on this particular airframe, i.e. whether it had suffered any extreme conditions or was one of the older models in the air. If there isn't such adverse history this could raise some real concerns regarding airbus design techniques toward stress fatique failure.

Thanks again for the factual information.

[Blueflag]

You were doing great until you're third paragraph. The A300s (of two models) had already been hit with an AD from the FAA. They ARE ALL already 'grounded' for US and French carriers. Obviously structural (not mechanical) failure is suspectsd.

[Born to Conserve]

"Jimhotep.................member since November 17th, 2001"

What they he!! does that matter? For all you know the guy has been lurking for three years. Only a fool would make such a stupid ad hominum argument. I hope you don't put your head in a microwave with all that aluminum foil on.

[anniegetyourgun]

Welcome to FR today, Jim. One thing you need to know right now is that whatever the government's final report says, folks around here have already rejected it.

[mad_as_he$$]

Yup really looks like somebody took those bolts out! lol

Of course next will be that it wasn't the real Vert Stab in the pictures. Sarcasm off.

Overall though this is still a very weird thing....Thanks for the link I'm sending to everyone on my list

[nicmarlo]

Thanks for posting the eyewitness account; you posted it on another thread and I've taken the liberty of reposting that when the "gov. speak" gets too strong.

[EggsAckley]

"Jimhotep.................member since November 17th, 2001"
What they he!! does that matter? For all you know the guy has been lurking for three years. Only a fool would make such a stupid ad hominum argument. I hope you don't put your head in a microwave with all that aluminum foil on.

Take a pill, pal.

[Blueflag]

Zordas--- a good look at the rudder's surface, trailing edgeds and hinges might point to flutter as well. Flutter may have been mechanical or structural. We'll all seen photos of a pretty nice looking VS. NO photos of rudder. To be continued ...

[Silvertip]

but of course, NTSB provided the evidence there too!

Not to mention that well-known civilian aircraft accident investigation agency the CIA!

[Blueflag]

Actually the spin would not stay flat for long as the upwind wing will generate more lift than the downwind wing, and the aircraft will roll (swept wings). The aircraft by all accounts, gov't, conspiracy theorists, and eyewitnesses did roll over (not saying inverted) and not just pancake.

[Born to Conserve]

Thanks for that transcript.

If a piece of the wing hit the tail, I would expect to see some damage to the tail. . .

[Born to Conserve]

So? I predicted it a little after it happened. That's how I loose all my money in the stock market.

[Robert357]

Very interesting explaination and interview. If correct, then there should be some damage marks on the tail/stabalizer or real of the plane where the wing pannel impact occured. In looking at the photo's I would also expect to see more of a "torgue" or asymetric ripping at the attachment points if this were the cause. But an interesting potential explaination.

[mad_as_he$$]

While I don't doubt that these "hundreds" of people saw something. I find it interesting how many everyday Americans know exactly what a missile looks like in flight.

I think you "missile" guys hurt your credibilty when you insist it was a missile. Can't you just say that they saw what looked like an object streaking to or near the plane? I also find it interesting that apparently the government is good enough to keep hundreds of people in tow for so many years. This is not 1944 and people will talk for the right price.

Just trying to help but I'm sure somebody will call me names so flame on.......

[MeekOneGOP]

(((PING))))))

If you want off my ping list, please let me know. . .

[Chad Fairbanks]

Maybe that's not a real tail. Maybe the REAL Vertical Stabalizer is with JFK, Elvis, and Bill Clinton's Aline Love Child at an 'undisclosed location'???? ;0)

Actually, I'm hoping that this was just one of those freak accidents that happens every so often, but I'm keeping an open mind...

[Born to Conserve]

Another ad hominum argument?

[nicmarlo]

Maybe that's not a real tail. Maybe the REAL Vertical Stabalizer is with JFK, Elvis, and Bill Clinton's Aline Love Child at an 'undisclosed location'????

Now that's an interesting thought (just kidding).

[Chad Fairbanks]

hominum

That's a FUN word to say... just like Kumquat and Jalalabad... ;0)