dojetdriver

Right, got it, I read the report also. Just curious if it was true that a human would not be able to move the rudder that much, and that many times in 6.5 seconds.

FliFast

With adrenaline pumping...I'd say yes...but hard to believe in any event.

Good observation, dojet.

FF

MaxFiano

Dear


You have been flooded with a wide assortment of conspiratorial scenarios over the years. There is an entire industry brimming with conspiracy factoids and whole-cloth fiction. However too often some people will quickly marginalize a theory as "conspiracy wackoism' despite overwhelming evidence to suggest that something just doesn't pass the smell test.
I am not an aviation expert. The bulk of my aviation experience beyond semi-regular commercial flights has been jumping out of perfectly good airplanes. However, notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, I am considered reasonable.
American Airlines Flight 587, which came apart in the air over Long Island and crashed into homes in Rockaway, N.Y., was not an accident.
The tail section and two engines do not fall off by accident.
Like most Americans, I was relieved to hear the tragedy of Flight 587 was not an act of terrorism. Now, failing any contrary evidence, it seems most likely to have been an act of sabotage. My confidence in the same government players since the downing of TWA Flight 800 has dropped below the perception of nanotechnology.
I recently had a United Airlines pilot with over 27-years experience. I asked him three questions:

1. Have you ever heard of a plane losing the tail section like Flight 587? He said, "No."
2. Have you ever heard of a plane losing two engines like Flight 587? He said, "No." Although he had heard of one engine dropping off as a result of traumatic weight shifting.
3. Have you ever heard (in all aviation history) of a situation in which a modern aircraft has lost the tail and two engines spontaneously? He said, "Absolutely not! And if that were possible I'd stop flying."

Statistically, the probability of any commercial airplane losing the tail section the way Flight 587 did is incomprehensible. Statistically, the probability of any commercial airplane losing two engines the way Flight 587 did is equally incomprehensible. To combine two monumentally incomprehensible statistical anomalies doesn't just double the improbability – there would be a compounded geometric explosion of zeros following the decimal point.
Flight 587 was not an accident. We are being told what we want to believe. We are being stroked, conned and b.s.-ed by a government and aviation industry already suffering because – as Jack Nicholson's colonel said in "A Few Good Men" – "You can't handle the truth!"

The Federal Aviation Administration, focusing on form over substance, has not posted any of their newfound cadres of guards at jet ways and jet bridges or next to planes at night at JFK or any airports. The American Airlines plane that became Flight 587 reportedly left Monday morning after having been parked all night following a flight from Miami. Compare that to airline sources that say, when Saudi jets land at Logan International, two armed guards are posted outside the plane all night.
You can't take a nail clipper on a commercial flight but the aircraft itself – the equipment – apparently is left unguarded?
The FBI has in its custody videotape that could show exactly what happened to American Airlines Flight 587. New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority spokesman Tom Kelly confirmed to the Daily News Friday that the agency has given surveillance videotapes from Cross Bay Blvd. and Marine Parkway bridges to the FBI.
According to the News, "One tape captures the plane taking off from JFK."
Cross Bay Blvd. and Marine Parkway traverse Jamaica Bay, where the plane's vertical stabilizer was discovered intact after the crash.
Dozens of eyewitnesses have reported they saw an explosion and/or a fire at the juncture of Flight 587's wing and fuselage moments before it began to break up, losing its tail first, then both its engines. Multiple sources tell us the air conditioning unit of an airplane is located there and emits a bunch of heat. Reportedly anything "heat seeking" would home in on the air conditioning unit's heat.
National Transportation Safety Board investigators have examined the engines and found no evidence of mechanical failure. Although we were told catastrophic engine failure was the probable cause – that dog won't hunt.
Now we are supposed to believe that wind turbulence from another plane is the most likely cause of the crash. I don't think so! In addition to the United Airlines captain who called me, a former jumbo-jet veteran pilot who was quoted in the New York Post was also highly skeptical of the turbulence theory.
"If wind turbulence caused that accident, I'll never fly again,someone who flew 747s for TWA.
Why hasn't the FBI released (or at least commented on) the video they have? Their silence, coupled with again ignoring eyewitness testimony only fuels the building fire of conspiracy.
The FBI is allegedly playing a secondary role in the investigation behind the NTSB. Why was the video grabbed by the FBI and not the NTSB?
I now in my opinion believe Flight 587 was the victim of sabotage. I do not believe this is some extraordinary statistical probability anomaly. I believe the government knows it was not an accident and in a misguided attempt to "protect" us from the truth (and slow down the financial hemorrhaging of the airline industry) they are blowing smoke. If or when (God forbid) another airplane falls from the skies, a portion of the blame for the lost lives will need to be assumed by the misguided and duplicitous government bureaucrat who incorrectly assumed "You can't handle the truth!"

MaxJet

captscott26

I must borrow a line from Billy Madison....

"Mr. Maxjet, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and my God have mercy on your soul."

Sorry to be harsh, but are you trying to tell me that someone fired a missile from the middle of Brooklyn and the only one who knows about it is the FBI....come on man, seriously!!!!

MaxFiano

Check this out

http://usread.com/flight587/Prelim_Report/Part6.html

Thanks

MaxJet

NGINEWHOISWHAT

Question ... when TWA 800 went down witnesses stated they "saw" something that resemebled a missle or SAM being fired. It turned out to be the plane "leaking" fuel, or something that resembled leaking fuel (stream of fire).

Anything is possible, and I discount no abstract theory. Sabotage or not, I believe improper rudder inputs caused the failure. Improper inputs with a faulty repair lead to the crash. I am a conspiracy theory type of person, but not in the case of 587.

There is a strong similarity between AA 587 and JAL 123.

**** The jet was en route from Tokyo to Osaka when it lost its vertical tail section and crashed into a steep, forested mountainside in central Gunma prefecture (state), about 70 miles northwest of the capital. All but four people on board were killed. ***

http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safet...rs/jal123.html

Tom

TWA 800
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWkWXBTsgsA

JAL 123
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDczOztDQVE,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYvcNe4NJrg

GravellyPointer

It came out in public NTSB hearing in Wash DC that the Airbus 300 is different in rudder than other large airliners, especially Boeings. The A300, with both engines operating, and at speeds higher than used for takeoff and landing, has higher sensitivity and correspondingly greater rudder deflection for the same pedal travel. It also has a higher breakout force, the minimum force on the rudder pedal required for it to move and thus actuate the rudder. It's in the neighborhood of greater than 50 lbs and perhaps greater than 75 lbs (don't know the actual check old Av Week issues). With as little as 2-3 inches rudder pedal travel the rudder will reach full deflection at the speed the AA 300 had the wake turbulence encounter. Airbus designed it this way.

Unfortunately AA flight training dept didn't know or teach this extensively enough to their pilots. Airbus engineers only intended the rudder to be used during an engine failure, like all other transport jets.

I did see the AA video while training at a now defunct MCI based airline, and was surprised. The instructor was clearly recommending aggressive use of rudder in one direction to help recover from a nose low or nose high upset.

TWA800 had blackhawk pilots, airline pilots, and military pilots who gave eyewitness testimony that they observed a missile launched from the sea hit the aircraft. Where are the witnesses for this occurring to AA587? Where is the evidence for explosions occurring to both of the engines? You're a Kook!

I can't crunch the numbers to confirm, but if an A300 lost it's vertical stabilizer under massive side loads the immediate stress on the engine attachments points could definitely produce a failure which could and did rip the engines away from the aircraft.

Deez340

Sweet! excellent reference!

shackone

Why not?

Do you think there is a rate device that limits the rate at which the rudder moves? Depending on airspeed, there may be a limiter for how far the rudder can be moved...but one for how rapid?

I'm not sure.

6 seconds can be a long, long time.

Lifizgud

This is not new stuff..... many years ago a B-52 lost its vertical stab on a low level in turbulence (they landed the acft with no fin). They shortened the hight of the stab which reduced the bending moment at the attach point. In spite of the mod my B-52 instructor pounded into me how not to handle the controls in turb, MITO, wakes, stalls, lazy 8s, etc. We did this training in the jet not in the sim. I have not received this type of training while at the airlines "in the jet". The closest thing we do is "upset training" "in the sim". Just isn't the same.

Training film: ( note the date )

"Flight Without A Fin"
(1964, Color, 9:56)
This film includes some absolutely amazing footage of an actual B-52 which has lost its vertical stabilizer! The film serves as a briefing on what to do in this unusual situation. This a really interesting short film!