FLIGHT 587---Shame, Shame

USRead ^ | 10/17/02 | Victor Trombettas

[JohnFiorentino]

NTSB continues to demonstrate it's unreliability.

[Alice in Wonderland]

I just received this via email from Vic...are you on his list too?

A BUMP for usread.com and the truth!

[Howie]

When I read that the ship had been checked by a mechanic just before takeoff for "uncommanded rudder movments" I chalked this one up to some sort of mechanical or computer problems.

The mechanic supposedly "reset the computer" and fixed the problem. I'm not an engineer but this sounded fishy to me.

[I'm_With_Orwell]

I smell another TWA800-quality investigation by the NTSB all over again.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[copycat]

Flight 587...it wasn't the pilot's fault, it was the first known successful shoebombing. The shoebomber sat just above the right wing.

All released flight data and witness testimony is consistent with a right wing shoe bomber, followed by a loss of integrity of the right wing.

[copycat]

All released flight data and witness testimony is consistent with a right wing shoe bomber, followed by a loss of integrity of the right wing.

Uh, that's right wing OF THE PLANE.

[First_Salute]

Thank you for the accurate reminder.

The aircraft's vertical stabilizer was in process of failure by the time of its arrival.

Chalk it up to fatigue ("fat ig u").

Its flutter aggravated the critical airflow over the rudder which then developed its own flutter; the two harmonically "in" and "out" causing the flight deck crew to try and compensate.

Any of their first moves merely helped the vertical stabilizer to further ruin.

The aircraft (587) was not in the preceding, departing flight's wake.

The composite materials around the root fasteners holding the vertical stabilizer to the airframe, were at various frequencies ... vibrating to failure.

The aircraft's only chance would have been to abandon all hope of making a turn and then use the throttles to gently lower the aircraft to a ditching --- and all that being the course the crew were to take at the first hint of any trouble AND by chance the vertical stabilizer and rudder had completely separated at that first hint ... maybe they would have had a chance.

But the did not, because the departure maneuvers required turns which simple caused the vertical stabilizer to take up variations from its normal relation to the airframe.

The tail wagged the dog, so to speak.

The ship was uncontrolable.

The crew was good but not God.

[Howie]

I think you are right on with your assessment. I experienced aileron flutter once in a sailplane and it was frightening. It was a lot like front-end shimmy on a worn out motorcycle or jalopy.

In my case it was caused by slack in the control cables. When I hit a certain speed the ailerons started to buzz and eventually the wing and then the whole airframe was shaking like a limp rag!

As I slowed the flutter stopped.

[Talldocs1]

Are you sure it wasn't just an air leak?

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

Then why didn't the terrorists take credit for the results?

[Mr. Mojo]

I, like you, am fairly certain that it was a bomb that took down that plane. But do you think a bomb that could fit into the sole of a shoe could generate enough explosive power to take down a jumbo jet? Do you think it was possible that the bomb was in with the check-in baggage?

[Mr. Mojo]

Al Qaeda, unlike the more familiar Palestinia terrorist groups, isn't in the habit of taking credit for their deeds.

[goody2shooz]

The Feds are seeking a cover, any cover story will do, other than the truth.

Of course, I'm biased, John. I think a shoe bomber brought down Flt. 587.

The unreleased video tapes of the aircraft in flight, tapes that the Feds refuse to release to the public, may provide tantalizing pictures that show evidence which can be constued as just such an incident.

Destroying someone financially as well as their professional reputation is part of the job requirement when you are a Federal employee performing an investigation.

[goody2shooz]

Reid, when he was stopped from getting his shoe-bomb into position, was located in the plane so that his directed explosion would have taken out the plane's hydraulics. When the plane lost hydraulics the pilots tried to stear using the planes engines which caused it to careen sideways with the resulting seperation of the tail. Buh-bye Flt. 587!

Al Qaeda rarely, if ever, takes credit for the terror attacks it sponsors.

[eno_]

That's a load of worm infested baloney.

Both engines and the tail came off. Nobody has ever questioned the strenght of the engine pylons.

The ONLY explanation for al these large surfaces coming off is air load, which supports the position the plane was out of control BEFORE it came apart.

Mid-air breakup AFTER loss of control is commonplace in air crashes. Anything requires "flutter" or maybe bridstrikecheesewaketurbulencethrustreversers?

[eno_]

An Al Quaida op experimented with mixing an explosive (probably acetone + peroxide) on board a flight, and built a bomb that killed one passenger (it was under his seat). If the bomb had been placed is a less fortunate place, it might have taken out critical components for controlling the plane. AQ is known to have researched the SMALLEST bombs that could take down a plane.

[spycatcher]

Right, left-wing shoe bomber blowing up the right wing

[Fudd]

I experienced aileron flutter once in a sailplane and it was frightening.

Sounds scarier than anything I ever did flying. Including a few close calls.

[Howie]

Saw a video of a V tailed high performance sailplane doing a high-speed low pass, when he reached a certain speed the rudders just exploded in a cloud of fiberglass!

He pulled up, did a 180 and landed safely. There was just enough elevator/rudder surface left to allow some control, he was too low to bail out. I would bet his pants were wet.