Skip to comments.
NTSB Briefing, NTSB claiming .3 to .8 g wake encounter caused crash?!?!?!
CNN
| 11/15/2001
| me
Posted on 11/16/2001 1:19:06 PM PST by The Magical Mischief Tour
This is Bull $h!t!!!
The NTSB is LYING like rugs!!!
NTSB dude just claimed that .3 to .8 g's encountered during the wake encounter caused the Airbus to break up in flight...
Even a male reported asked "is this even possible".
"Isn't this normal bumping encountered when flying?"
Even the media don't believe them!!!!!
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aaflight587; flight587
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 461-473 next last
To: samuel_adams_us
Cover Up again It doesn't matter who is in charge ( rats or the gop), the GOVT always lies.
41
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:09 PM PST
by
KQQL
To: KQQL
To: ChemistCat
That is not something that would have happened if it had been properly bolted down.Almost certain I heard someone say the bolts connecting the body of the aircraft to the tail are fine. The break occurred above them.
To: samuel_adams_us
As your sitting in your chair reading this, place your hands on your desk and push yourself to a standing position. This my friends is equivlent to 1.42 G's (centralized) of force transfereing from your palms to your desk. Lord help us if our planes can't handle a little push like that
44
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
westnews
To: Born to Conserve
Hey folks....
Your government at work...!!!
Accept it or DO something about it..!!!!
45
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
freddy
To: The Magical Mischief Tour
what is a .3g wake?
To: westnews
That is pretty scary! I am sure someone either unbolted that baby or broke some welds. Either that or a little explosive action did the deed. Screw the airline industry, public safety is more important!
To: Born to Conserve
Sorry, but every standard building code requires a safety factor of at least 1.7x required loading.
48
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
lugsoul
To: samuel_adams_us
60 Minutes? Yeah, I'll bet they'll get right on it.
I'm totally confused, not being an engineer. I'd like to hear what independent AEs (Right term?) have to say about this.
49
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
Loopy
To: The Magical Mischief Tour
What the hell is going on?Now, what do you think with Thanksgiving travel just beginning?
50
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
Osinski
To: Darth Reagan
Any idiot can substitute judgement for the corrupt Clinton-appointed NTSB !!! No science there at all...just used car salesmen from little Rock ArrrKansas
To: samuel_adams_us
Wouldn't you think turning the plane at 450mph would be about the same amount of force on the tail section if not more? Do we have an engineer out here who knows this answer? Turning a plane at 450mph can cause 0 to infinite G's depending on the rate of change in direction.
To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Anybody here a pilot? I would like to know about this one.... Sounds suspicious.
To: BillM
He'll come running back onto the stage in just a moment to announce it was "three to eight G's, not .3 to .8!!! The French use commas for decimals. We screwed up!! The plane really WAS over-stressed!!!"
Sure ...
54
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
Blueflag
Comment #55 Removed by Moderator
To: classygreeneyedblonde
Uh oh... sirens outside my window! Help me!
(false alarm... just the Boogeyman)
To: freddy; Phantom Lord
Accept it or DO something about it..!!!!Maybe we could all enroll in an Aeronautical Engineering program, so that we might have some reasonable, educated basis for our conjecture
(though, I suspect that the government controls what we can and cannot learn in order to keep their NTSB cover-ups going).
To: Loopy
Being a software engineer I don't know the formulas but I sure wish I did now. Time to bug my father and older brothers who are retired USAF.
To: samuel_adams_us
I am sure someone either unbolted that baby or broke some welds. Now, this is something I have considered. Could some al-Qaeda operative work at the Airport? Maybe.
To: BillM
If the NTSB is right, then why would anyone fly in a commercial jet again? And why haven't tails been falling off planes for all these years?
60
posted on
11/16/2001 1:19:10 PM PST
by
CdMGuy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 461-473 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson