Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flight 587 Video Shows 'Puff of Smoke' in Sky
Newsmax ^ | November 17, 2001 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 11/17/2001 10:58:21 AM PST by 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


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: flight587
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-330 next last
To: Born to Conserve
Another ad hominum argument?

No, just a response to a person on the edge of hysteria.

61 posted on 11/17/2001 11:59:59 AM PST by EggsAckley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
"the spin would not stay flat for long as the upwind wing will generate more lift than the downwind wing"

It only has to flat spin for a bit to bust off the engines, and if it was flat spinning perpendicularly to it direction of travel, the wings (if they were still there) would have equal effects.

I hope they can clean up the video enough to resolve all this. Has there been a prognosis on the light data recorder? It would clear up everything if it has attitude records.

62 posted on 11/17/2001 12:01:51 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Great! I know people discount much of the eyewitness reports...but this guy was right under it and saw the flames..that has to mean something.
63 posted on 11/17/2001 12:02:26 PM PST by Native American Female Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Native American Female Vet
Ken: There was flames on the belly of the plane..I don't know weather it was the engine or ya know, but the plane bellied up towards us as it was going down and flames in the a..in that vicinity of the engines or whatever like underneath the plane

LIAR! We all know a bird knocked that tail off!

64 posted on 11/17/2001 12:02:41 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jimhotep
If, IF, that A300 had a multi-channel FDR, I eagerly await the analysis of rudder position, engine parameters and yaw/roll/pitch.
But, as someone here said, whatever the reports: some have already decided not to believe it.
65 posted on 11/17/2001 12:05:04 PM PST by KirklandJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
I think you "missile" guys hurt your credibilty when you insist it was a missile.

Actually, when they were first asked, they said it was like a shooting star going up, like it was a missile or something. It was a bright dot that ran right into the plane.

66 posted on 11/17/2001 12:05:14 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve
Your welcome.

I thought about that too

67 posted on 11/17/2001 12:05:19 PM PST by Native American Female Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
"That's a FUN word to say... just like Kumquat and Jalalabad... ;0)"

You're going to have to work on your attitude if you want to hang around here. May I suggest bitter aggresion?

68 posted on 11/17/2001 12:05:32 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Jimhotep
bump
69 posted on 11/17/2001 12:05:43 PM PST by Fred25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: copycat
>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.

Thanks for the ping. An interesting development.

But it's also depressing, too. Just about all the witnesses I heard on the day of the crash reported seeing fire or a flash on the side of the plane, right where the wing attached. I'm sure something interesting happened there.

But investigators seem to think nothing of ignoring any eye witness report which conflicts with a finding they're comfortable with. Look how many witnesses are ignored in the TWA-800 case!

I haven't followed threads as carefully as I should -- has anyone gotten any information on the helicopter that a couple of people saw in the area of the plane?

Mark W.

70 posted on 11/17/2001 12:06:08 PM PST by MarkWar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: EggsAckley
Yet another ad hominum argument?
71 posted on 11/17/2001 12:06:15 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Native American Female Vet
this guy was right under it and saw the flames..that has to mean something.

Well, that's what I'd say.

72 posted on 11/17/2001 12:06:32 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: concerned about politics
"LIAR! We all know a bird knocked that tail off!"

LOL ooopps..I forgot

74 posted on 11/17/2001 12:08:39 PM PST by Native American Female Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Jimhotep
What those pictures say to me is that the fin attachements broke above the bolts holding them on one side, but on the other they broke at the holes through which the bolts securing them pass.

Now that doesn't say a thing about what caused them to break off in the first place nor, with the resolution of pictures, which side broke first. It probably means the stab bent over towards the side where the attachments broke above the bolts, which according to the captions is the left side. A big push to the left on the tail would however turn the nose to the right, opposite of what is reported, so that conclusion is somewhat shakey, if one assumes that it was an external force, IOW wake turbulence, wind shear, etc, that caused the leftward force on the tail. If however something else caused the aircraft to yaw to the left, the force on the tail would be to the left, because the relative wind would be striking the right side of the vertical stab. Something like the left wing failing, but not necessarily separating from the aircraft. Or the left engine failing, which would also cause a yaw and roll to the left.

Yesterday I was speaking with a retired Marine C-130 pilot and a retired USAF KC-10 crew chief. Neither believed the wake turbulence should/could have caused the vertical stab failure, in the absence of some other problem that is. The KC-10 crew chief hadn't been too keen on the engine explosive failure theory either, and the KC-10 uses essentially the same engine.

75 posted on 11/17/2001 12:08:45 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
This is not 1944 and people will talk for the right price.

They have - for free! A whole group! The news said around 100 or so of them wanted the investigation done over, because they know what they saw. They wanted to sue to have the real story told.

After the outrage, the press stopped running the story. I don't know what happened to them. ( I'm from Upstate NY)

76 posted on 11/17/2001 12:09:37 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
I doubt you will ever get an answer to that. I would bet that there is or was an arab somewhere involved in the maintenance. We will never know.
77 posted on 11/17/2001 12:10:28 PM PST by auggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Birds (that can fly in 747 wake turbulance) ingested breaking off R engine which flew into tail breaking it off without any visible damage. Pilot then dumps fuel starting fire and breaking off other engine which causes plane to crash.

ANYTHING but explosion dozens of eyewitnesses saw.

CIA cartoon(s) coming to theatres in time for the holidays!

78 posted on 11/17/2001 12:10:34 PM PST by Silvertip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
"3. Flame away oh conspiracy and government-is-lying buffs..."

Personally, I'd vote for separate threads -- headed "for conspiracy buffs only" and "all others".

79 posted on 11/17/2001 12:11:10 PM PST by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
"LIAR! We all know a bird knocked that tail off!"

amused...

80 posted on 11/17/2001 12:11:26 PM PST by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-330 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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