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

Skip to comments.

JetBlue Pilot Saw American Airlines Crash
Reuters ^ | Patrick Markey

Posted on 11/16/2001 1:21:47 PM PST by The Magical Mischief Tour

By Patrick Markey

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A JetBlue Airways pilot waiting for take-off at John F. Kennedy International Airport saw the American Airlines flight that crashed on Monday as it fell from the sky accompanied by smoke and a smaller piece of the aircraft, according to an internal report.

The pilot told the JetBlue officials that in its final moments American Airlines Flight 587 appeared to be in a very steep descent, falling nose down at about 80 degrees in a spiral dive.

Before it exploded on impact, the aircraft was accompanied by the smaller piece above and to the right or southwest of the smoke trailing behind the main body, according to the internal JetBlue report provided to Reuters.

The investigation into Monday's crash has become centered on the Airbus A300's tail fin and rudder that separated from the plane before it crashed killing up to 265 people, including casualties on the ground.

Investigators recovered the tail fin of the aircraft from Jamaica Bay.

Preliminary flight data released on Thursday showed the aircraft, operated by AMR Corp.'s American Airlines, was buffeted twice by turbulence in its final moments before beginning a sharp downward turn to the left.

Safety investigators said the turn occurred even as the pilots' controls were set to the right, suggesting the plane was no longer responding to pilot commands.

Investigators are still examining and comparing information from the aircraft's black box and its flight data recorder to piece together a clearer picture of what happened.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aaflight587; flight587; jetblue
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 next last
To: El Gato
Yes, thanks for the info. The carbon based substance may be the cause of the "charred" look at the attachment site of the tail fin. Surely the investigators took chemical samples of the material there - and analyzed why one little rounded smooth area of the detachment was as it was - rounded and smooth rather than jagged.
101 posted on 11/16/2001 7:23:13 PM PST by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
I was briefly tempted to give a longer reply to your post...

We clearly disagree about the cause and significance of any number of recent events. (such as flight 800)

But it's equally apparent to me that you are as firmly entrenched in your beliefs as I am in mine.

To be blunt about it, since no one is paying me to make an effort to modify your way of looking at things, it really isn't an activity that's worth doing, so I'll simply agree to disagree with you...

And wish you a good day.

102 posted on 11/16/2001 11:47:23 PM PST by DWSUWF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Chad
Maybe it was the groucho duck.
103 posted on 11/16/2001 11:59:45 PM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Texas Mom
How bout non-sinister conjecturing?
104 posted on 11/17/2001 12:04:16 AM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
LOL!
105 posted on 11/17/2001 12:08:01 AM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: AntiKev
According to a Friday MSNBC article quoting Blakely, wake turbulence alone did not bring down that jet.
106 posted on 11/17/2001 12:15:27 AM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
What caused the number 2 engine to burn?
107 posted on 11/17/2001 12:24:08 AM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Lion's Cub
Thanks for indexing these threads.
108 posted on 11/17/2001 12:30:24 AM PST by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Thanks for the clarification--as I stated up front, I am totally ignorant of things mechanical. Now with YOUR explanation, that makes the appearance more than a little suspicious. Thank God for FReepers who know things.
109 posted on 11/17/2001 1:30:30 AM PST by jammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
This appears to be carbon fiber and it would be blackish appearing in its natural state prior to fire I believe

That's what I was thinking also.

It appears to me that it's delaminating along the vertical plane as if it had been buffeted from side to side. After seeing this up close I'm now wondering how Boeing does theirs.

These pieces weren't exposed to fire.

110 posted on 11/17/2001 2:05:36 AM PST by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: tuesday afternoon
You're welcome :)
111 posted on 11/17/2001 2:56:56 AM PST by Lion's Cub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: mystomachisturning
Do you actually have evidence of that kind of wind sheer ripping the wing off a large aircraft
I believe that hungry seagull swooped down and just bit that tail clean off. That is more believable than the wake turbulence malarky.
112 posted on 11/17/2001 3:07:35 AM PST by Gotterdammerung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LLAN-DDEUSANT
It was a bad repair job on a previously damaged tail. Maintenance records. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Exactly right. They found in the maintenance records for this plane that 7 years ago it got caught in a rather severe wind shear/turbulence which may have caused structural damage, that went undetected.

* We've seen incidents in the past where wind shears have caused planes to slam into the ground (crash during takeoff or landing)) or land hard

* We've seen incidents in the past where counterfeit plane parts have caused engine failure

* We've seen incidents in the past where bad maintenance (such as lack of lubrication on the tail corkscrew on the MD80) or lack of maintenance due to improper manufacturer specification, caused structural failure. Alaska Airlines had this problem a few years back, which caused the FAA to ground EVERY MD80 in service. Ironically, this problem happened over the course of 10 years and it took the FAA and the manufacturer that long to find it. Even though there were MANY complaints of loss of control over that airplane due to the corkscrew.

So before everyone puts on their tinfoil hats (probably too late for that) and blames this one on terrorism, we've seen in the pat where bad maintenance, wind shear, wake turbulence and more have caused airline accidents.

As soon as I heard it was an Airbus 300, I *knew* this was either engine or structural failure. These planes along with the Airbus A320 have *lousy* safety records. Frankly, Airbus can't build a plane. Anytime I've been booked on an Airbus (EU Built CRAP!) I've gotten my flight switched to another plane.

113 posted on 11/17/2001 3:08:14 AM PST by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
And don't forget the UAL Flight 137 (Des Moines Iowa crash) where a Boeing 737 suffered a major hydraulics failure mid-flight.

It wasn't a bomb/terrorist attack ...

It was just bad maintenance on that plane.

114 posted on 11/17/2001 3:12:34 AM PST by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
But, but, they discounted the fire before crash story, you know, unreliability of eyewitness versus the reliability of federal non-eyewitnesses?
115 posted on 11/17/2001 3:20:59 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rheo
I'm on one of those with my family in January. Actually, we have that type of aircraft on two of four flight segments, Milwaukee/Memphis, Memphis/Fort Lauderdale. I'd also be interested in hearing what is known about that model. And if you kind, knowledgeable Freepers will indulge me with one more question.

What kind of aircraft would an MDC C94-40 be? Never heard of it before, but are scheduled to fly on one. Northworst is the airline.

116 posted on 11/17/2001 3:26:07 AM PST by Trust but Verify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lion's Cub
Nothing to see here, folks.

Move along!

117 posted on 11/17/2001 3:27:04 AM PST by advocate10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

Comment #118 Removed by Moderator

To: mystomachisturning
Do you actually have evidence of that kind of wind sheer ripping the wing off a large aircraft?

Only if it's a Frog-built Airbus!

119 posted on 11/17/2001 5:38:34 AM PST by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
While I don't have a timeline for what happened, that doesn't prove your timeline is correct. By the same logic, since you haven't addressed my issues - Major Meyer saying it was military ordnance and Mike Wire describing a missile - that doesn't prove my theory is correct.

As my post indicates, my reference to Mike Wire is merely my transcript of a radio interview done on 8/23/2001. There were at least two threads here on that subject, for anyone who wants to research this further.

Finally, if our government lies, it is our responsibility to stop it. I will not follow a government that can't tell me what "is" is.

120 posted on 11/17/2001 6:12:02 AM PST by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 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