Posted on 06/06/2009 9:56:25 AM PDT by traumer
Bodies from the Air France passenger plane that crashed in the Atlantic Ocean off Brazil have been found by search teams.
The news comes it was revealed the airliner sent out 24 automatic error messages in its final moments as its systems broke down one by one.
The head of the French agency probing the tragedy said signals from the jet before it disappeared showed its autopilot was not on.
Paul-Louis Arslanian said it was not clear if the autopilot had been switched off by the pilots or had stopped working because it received conflicting airspeed readings.
He said investigators were searching a zone of several hundred square miles in the Atlantic Ocean for the debris.
Plane manufacturer Airbus said an investigation found Air France Flight 447 had inconsistent readings from different instruments as it struggled in a massive thunderstorm.
The plane, with 228 people on board, disappeared early on Monday as it made its way from Rio de Janiero, heading to Paris.
The wreckage of the jet has not been found, despite days of intensive searching by air and sea.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.sky.com ...
Of course you do. That's why you're ruling out possible causes before any evidence has been found.
It's telling that you think terrorism is just as likely as alien abduction, though.
Not anymore obviously, but when he was in his prime, I wouldn't have bet against it.
Do you think the truth will ever be made public?
Nope! However, my firm belief is that it exploded in air and it is terrorism related.
Nobody made a public statement and took responsibility after 9/11 either. Not for years afterwards when the truth had already been revealed by investigation. Even then, most people in the Middle East still believe that blaming the islamists is just a smear.
The Challenger vids are pretty convincing. Look tough to fake.
“Do you think the truth will ever be made public?”
The same way the truth has been made public regarding TWA 800...
What, no conspiracy theory???!!!
Parts 1 to 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25wl7rxAegE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaqhFFtxk8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt4pU3dFhCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0yEc-iVSH0
There are two other parts, but I can’t find them. The analysis start in part 2.
The only ones that bother me, landings or take-offs, is into/out of San Diego, in an MD-80 Even Dallas Love, where the usual approach takes you kinda near downtown Dallas, is nothing compared to San Diego. Landing pattern goes below level of buildings, and not that far from them and the runway is short, and angled such that you get closer to the terminal area as you land, there is only about 150 yards of overrun and the fence is pretty much "right there", maybe another 50 yards. At least on take off, it's only the short runway, heavy aircraft, and noise-abatement. If you prang at that (NW) end of the runway, at least they'll always be plenty of Marines to help with the aftermath, since Marine Corps Recruit Depot- San Diego borders that end of the runway.
*ahem* The NASA and Morton-Thiokol engineers refused to sign off on the launch.
They were overridden by NASA and M-T management.
I can't help but think the final decision was driven by the desire to have the Shuttle in orbit for that evening's State of the Union address.
LOL! You are a bad man.
The O-rings were just fine. The launch occurred well below their minimum rated temperature. That's why the engineers refused to buckle under the full weight of NASA management and didn't sign off on the launch.
(OTOH the joint design wasn't all that great, propellent pressure tended to force the joint slightly open, rather than crushing it closed)...
Yes, I believe that's absolutely correct. I also remember something about Rockwell engineers also expressing some serious concern about the weather conditions with respect to ice and it's effect on the seals.
You are correct to point out and to clarify that it was both NASA and Morton-Thiokol management that insisted that the launch go forward. As to the pressure that felt because of the State of the Union, I'll leave to others to decide. But, I think it's fair to say that the Roger's Commission was equally tough on both NASA and MT's management.
I looked into that at the time. It depends on the MANPAD, some are "advertised" to make it that high, and the published values are more likely to be low rather than high.
As far as hitting an engine goes, yes they would be tracking on the engine. But that doesn't mean they won't miss and/or the proximity fuse set them off such that the blast pattern doesn't shred a fuel or control line in the fuselage, or just cause a rapid depressurization and structural failure. Airliners are not designed to take that sort of thing, like A-10s are.
A-10, flown by Captain Kim "Killer Chick" Campbell. This appears to have been from a SAM warhead, but could have been heavy AAA as well. If was a MANPAD SAM, it did not hit either engine, directly that is, the cowlings and exhaust nozzle took a beating though.
I take this as proof the plane did not dive into the water at high speed but more likely broke up in air. In the case of TWA 800 many victims were found floating in the ocean still strapped into their seats.
I’m hoping that one of the black boxes could be found inside a larger section of the aircraft on the sea floor.
Terrorism should not be ruled out at this point even though there is little indication of this being terrorism.
We know the aircraft depressurized. Assuming it was at cruising altitude they most likely would have been conscious only a few seconds.
It is my understanding that TWA 800 was not high enough for this to occur and that after the nose detached the remainder of the aircraft then climbed for the next 30 seconds or so.
I read about that too, not sure where though.
I remember waking up with the TV on and seeing video of TWA 800 burning in the ocean. "It had to be terrorists." was my thought. It happened while they were climbing out of New York which is where I'd expect terrorists to do something like this.
The problem with a shoulder fired missile is that it would have headed into one of the engines and not necessarily downed the aircraft. The flight was almost (though not completely) out of range for a shoulder fired missile to be successful. These missiles also only burn for a second, maybe two, and just coast through the rest of their flight.
Today I'm inclined more towards the official version of events but there's always that element of doubt.
It would have been a SAM, just not necessarily a MANPAD. Something like the British Javelin or it's follow on the Starstreak
Modern IR Guided SAMS, like the Stinger, or later Russian models, are not restricted to going after the hot exhaust of the engines, they are "all aspect". The Javelin has a ceiling of 5,500 meters or 18,000 feet. It is not even IR guided, but rather uses an RF link back to the launcher and uses Semiautomatic Command Line of Sight guidance.
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.