Posted on 07/06/2013 12:02:24 PM PDT by FreedomPoster
Currently just Tweets and locals talking about this, nothing on news sites yet. Lots of stuff in the Twitter feed, including links to uploaded videos of the smoking mess.
It’s their tweet and you can’t just add all the numbers together. The 49+132 are the 181 total hospitalized, for example.
I just typed what an aviation expert reported about the design.
I guess I’m the only one that thinks a seagull or two, or perhaps a pelican took out an engine, causing loss of power on final approach.
KCRA just reported (again) of teetering before approach
The people “unaccounted for” likely includes many people who got out OK and didn’t get checked in with whoever was there counting noses. They might even have wandered back to the terminal before they got counted.
updated count is only one remains missing, 2 dead. Everyone else is accounted for.
Probably is the case. KTVU twittered that ONE person is unaccounted for, two deceased, 181 hospitalized and 123 not injured.
Wonder if Reuters was confusing the missing with the number missing in the Quebec train explosion?
Yep, like I said earlier, this person is definitely the recipient of “affirmative action.”
Did you see the in the SF article link you posted that the SF Chronicle’s spell-checker must be broken?
What the hell is “garnisheed?”
Stupid LIBS!
thank you, oops I posted BEFORE I read your post. (note to self, don’t jump to bottom of page first)
Good news except for the two dead.
Looking at photos. ..flaps on outboard left wing look to be up with no damage..so up on impact...outboard flaps on right are down and crushed from impact so down on impact....if that the case...could explain alot
LOL, Kevin - I noticed that and cleaned it up in the quote I just put into another post — I guess I should have put [sic]!
San Franciscans were just voted the most smug/superior/snobby in an article I saw on FR the other day. How typical that the libs are such snobs yet they can’t even spell (or use a spell-checker)....
Seems unlikely, even unthinkable -- I'm sure it was also on the ATIS. But that's what happened at Agana though it was night IMC).
Another possibility -- the zero fuel weight in the FMS was wrong (too light) and the FCC-generated approach speeds were off, biased toward the low side. When they were close to the flare the airplane developed a sink with no stick shaker (also based on FCC-generated speeds). But the long flight with step-climbs seems to negate that possibility.
I think these engines were Pratts, not RR's, so the previous 777 crash-landing is probably not related.
The water's edge is 600 feet short of the threshold. If they were supposed to be at 50 feet over the threshold, then fifty plus at least 31 feet (sine of 3 degrees times 600) equals at least 81 feet low. In day VMC that would be very obvious.
Well then, call me a creepy ass cracker, 'cuz I ain't agonna respect thoughts/ideas that have been shown to be...well.....wrong, incorrect, stupid, erroneous, mistaken, unreliable, untrue, inaccurate, false, counterfactual, (did I say wrong?) untrustworthy, specious, faulty, unsound, and...and....wrong.
However, I can still respect someone if they do not have the mental capacity to function normally, yet still try. Conversely I cannot respect one whom has the capacity, yet refuses to use it.
You seem like a nice guy, Foxy, so yeah, I respect ya bro.
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.