NO SIGNS OF ENGINE FAILURE!

FOX News

[X-Servative]

At the NTSB press conference, they just stated that both engines appear to be intact and that there are no signs of engine failure, according to George Black, NTSB Boardmember.

[SerpentDove]

Also, the incessant references to those who reasonably leave open the possibility that this is a terrorist act as "tin-foil hatters" is childish and also fools no one. (And I'm NOT saying you have doine this, but I've seen it plenty today. Quite juvenile IMHO).

[RummyChick]

Just look at her code by looking at "view source" on one of her messages. It is very easy to do.

[webster]

;-) There are old pilots and bold pilots but no old bold pilots....is that true?

[ramdalesh]

grrrr

[DittoJed2]

That phrase is rather "Clintonesque."

[E-2K]

Good, then I didn't just imagine it. She was very specific about the right side. Shortly after that it was reported that other eyewitnesses described left side explosions and parts. I began to wonder if a missle might have gone right through it??? The of course there was no reason to suspect anything other than a mechanical.

[anniegetyourgun]

The NTSB has lied to us? Silly me, I thought the final report wasn't even in yet.

[captain11]

The real question now is, what would cause the vertical stabilizer to break off as cleanly as it did with no damage whatsoever to the stabilizer itself.

Bolts by Baghdad?

[nicmarlo]

. . .Now, they may well be doing this to "avoid a national panic." But when they say "There is no evidence..."while the plane parts are too hot to be touched with oven mitts and they have not recovered a black box or flight data recorder, it insults my intelligence.

It's almost like they think we're three years old.

Bingo!!!!

[justlurking]

I took it to mean that all of the ticketed passengers couldn't be boarded in time for the scheduled take off time.

In so many words, that's correct. But, it leaves unanswered why they didn't board in time.

I believe the passengers don't even know the reason for this particular delay. I was delayed in boarding a few weeks ago, after a cryptic announcement from the gate agent. Under questioning by multiple passengers who knew better, she still wouldn't be specific about the reason.

Since this was in conflict with the airline's earlier promises to keep passengers informed about the duration and reason for delays (under threat of federal regulation), I was surprised and considered filing a complaint, as I'm a regular passenger. But, shortly thereafter I read about the random checks and realized that was the cause.

I decided to not hassle them about it, as I can understand why they wouldn't want to announce it. Some flyers would get worried, because they might think it wasn't truly random.

[history_matters]

Sabotage is sabotage.
even when it is denied.

[eno_]

It's almost like they think we're three years old.

I bet a lot of bureaucrats think it is the duty to keep nasty facts from people who might be upset by them, and think it is unfair that they are called liars and worse, but I say give 'em Hell. Otherwise they will never change their ways.

[DaughterofEve]

Witty line!

[anniegetyourgun]

Hey, you're guess is good as the next guys! As for me, I think I'll wait for the final report.

[bootless]

That's the "A" inspection, which I think is pretty close to a walk-around inspection. nardo, anyone?

[history_matters]

Here's an in-house CHEESE LINK.

[rwfromkansas]

Well, what the heck......