Plane crashed into queens in manhattan. Looks like an accident but this is too much coincidence!!!

Plane Crashes In New York





A plane has crashed in New York.

It is understood the plane was an Airbus A300 and suffered engine failure shortly after taking off from JFK airport.


Reports say the aircraft may have been carrying up to 246 passengers when it plunged into a residential area of Queens.

The jet, thought to be flight 587, was heading to Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic.

There are reports the plane hit a number of homes near Rockaway beach. One eyewitness said pieces of the plane were falling off mid-air.

"I saw a large piece hit a hood of a car," one women told Fox News.

"It seem to fold and fall onto a residential area," adding that she initially thought the plane was a Concorde.

F16 fighter jets are now in the skies of New York - the incident comes two months after the US terrorist attacks on the US.

Security chiefs said there was no evidence of terrorist activity but all airports in New York have now been closed as a precautionary measure. Bridges and tunnels have been closed The city has also been put on the highest state of alert.

A huge plume of smoke is rising above the New York skyline as the wreckage burns.

The Dow Jones dropped 200 points as news of the crash reached the markets.

Early reports said the plane was a Boeing 767 - the same type which crashed into the World Trade Centre.

Yeah just saw this on fox and cnn :( indeed very depressing news. Does anyone know how many passengers were aboard?

- Asher.

Originally posted by ^Kyo
Yeah just saw this on fox and cnn :( indeed very depressing news. Does anyone know how many passengers were aboard?

- Asher.

They said 246 on TV but it's not confirmed yet (or is it?)

try reading my previous post :D

sad thing .........................

Im watching cnn, and its looks like an acident, but who knows. 11/12/01....

Jim

.

246 passengers and 9 crews ... 255 in total ... Not sure about the number of casulaties on ground. Pretty sad indeed ... One of the engine is separated, about 4 block far, from the aircraft itself. No terrorist action being assumed, yet all airports in NYC metro area are being closed down ... Let's not make an early assumption, but just keep watching the news/updates ... pray for the family left behind from this casualties.

cheers,
:beer:

I best guess is an engine fire, which traveled up the fuel lines and severed the engine to wing joints. The airplane could have likely had problems shortly after takeoff and never gained enough altitude before a complete loss of thrust in the seperated engine before the plane finally impacted the ground.

A single engine failure on a twin-engine jet can be a disaster at low-altitudes, as much of the thrust has to be countered by rudder, which drops the climb capability to nearly zero, especially on that type of airliner. The asymetric thrust is not nearly as great a problem on T-tailed jets, such as the DC-9 variants and the 727.

I hope this makes sense to some of you. I may be wrong about everything, but I hope this sheds some light on this subject.

-Came from Boston (before JFK)
-American Airlines
-11/12/01
-9:17 a.m. EST
-crashed in queens New York

Compare with September 11th.
What do you think?

Well the media is saying its an engine faliure till now. still you cant decide until the details are out. also there was apparentely an explosion on board.

Lets not all jump to conclusions

You're mostly correct but :)

All aircrafts need to comply with certain performance requirements, for instance all calculations of maximum take off weights are calculated with an engine failure at worst point. This is called V1 where you as pilot should at the latest abort the take off. A twin engine aircraft must have more power than a four engine aircraft since the performance calculations are different, it has to fly with only one engine. No aircraft takes off with more payload then it still can get airborne in the case of an engine failure. So to make a long story short, if it was only an engine failure with or without an engine fire the remaining engine would have no problems providing sufficient power to keep the aircraft in the air. This is practised by pilots in simulators two times a year and trust me, an Amercican Airlines pilot would handle this with no problems. Regardless of the assymetry.

But if there was an explosion with a severe fire, then we are talking different stuff. An explosion can rip things apart and make the aircraft uncontrolable.

Most likely there was an explosion onboard, from a failed/separated engine or from something planted. Regardless of the cause behind this, it's a tragedy.

Nordic

Originally posted by support=profit
-9:17 a.m. EST

The plane crashed almost immediately after takeoff -- there was no way the plane could have been hijacked that soon.

-crashed in queens New York

The plane crashed into a complete non-target: A residential neigbourhood. A terrorist would have aimed at something.

It is pretty clear that this was an explosion -- the plane came down in pieces, and nothing short of an explosion could have split the plane into so many parts so quickly -- but it is not clear what caused the explosion. It is worth noting that the FAA issued a directive on September 10, 2001 requiring that Airbus A300 series planes be modified within 18 months to correct a fault which could cause a fuel tank explosion.

Originally posted by cperciva


The plane crashed almost immediately after takeoff -- there was no way the plane could have been hijacked that soon.


Who is talking about hijacking? Hijacking is not the only way
to bring down a plane! Bombs are used too.
And one more thing: The UN building was not far away. You
all know what Bin Laden said about the UN? And there was a lot
of leaders present at UN today.

And terrorist aim to target totaly innocent people. What are
better targets then the place the plane went down today?

I sure hope I`m the one thats wrong here.

Originally posted by support=profit
Who is talking about hijacking? Hijacking is not the only way
to bring down a plane! Bombs are used to...


I was just making the point that this was not a replay of 9/11.

I did not say that this crash was a replay.
Let`s hope it was a accident.

Odd that I get the latest news from a web hosting forum. Glad microsol posted it. I'm sure more people lose their lives in car accidents every day or week, but for some reason airline crashes are tramatic. 6 in 2 months makes it a bit more extreme I suppose. My condolences to the neighborhood, the passengers, and crew.

Originally posted by Chicken
My condolences to the neighborhood, the passengers, and crew.

From me too.

too bad you guys dont have these sort of posts for the hundreds of innocent afghans that die everyday because Bush wants to push his weight around! :(

Originally posted by Magic
too bad you guys dont have these sort of posts for the hundreds of innocent afghans that die everyday because Bush wants to push his weight around! :(

Why should we post about people not able to live in peace in decades even within their own frontiers? :o

Originally posted by Magic
too bad you guys dont have these sort of posts for the hundreds of innocent afghans that die everyday because Bush wants to push his weight around! :(

show me the report/news about hundreds of afghans die everyday ... Of course, the news have to be verifiable, independently ... I don't like people to exagerate thigns ....

cheers,
:beer:

Originally posted by Chicken
My condolences to the neighborhood, the passengers, and crew. [/B]

here here.


dektong:

hundreds of Afghans do die every day. Its not a rumor its true just read about it.

250 ppl die in NY and the world is over for america. Hundreds of afghans die everyday and all you americans think is that your killing the terrorists.

When is America going to wake up? The more you kill... they more they come and kill you! Its stupid bombing a country because of one man!

It would be like someone bombing LA cuz there are so many criminals there! Its just such a retarded concept!

Magic,

Why are you blaming us for death of afgans?
Do you see us blaming WTC Attack of innocent afgan people, or the terrorist group itself?


This have been discussed many times already, just plain stupid to get into this subject again.

If you have nothing to say regarding the plain crash, start a new thread.

Magic, you should know better ;)

Trying to get americans to accept blame, even say sorry with out strings etc...In an already patriotic thread!!!

Get with it!

Bogdan, just blaming one specific person, or group of people, does not mean that you *just* hurt them when you act on that blame.

You do have a good point: this is not the thread for this: you cannot, *cannot* look at things objectivly when you are looking for revenga, and you get hit again....

We shall see what happens....all idiotic deaths are a waste, whether the person aggries with you or not.

Aloha
well hundreds of people die everyday from every country is a part of life
maybe not a good part we still have starving people in the US homeless that die in the US and the same goes for other countries
again a very sad thing
the more they kill you the more they will come and kill you thing ??
well they shouldnt have crashed a plane in us to begine with then we wouldn't be there ??
did they say they were sorry ???
this is how wars start one country does one thing another pushes back ????
again sad but the fact the latest tapes that got out of binladen he said in quick
his plan is to also get rid of the Jews ????
dang we got another hitler on our hands
so also our country has given more aid to Afghan then any other country ??

the fact is they hit first !!!

and binladen is no goody twoshoes he is a hitler all over trying to eliminate a race and/or religinons he does not like
that makes him a close minded idiot

Originally posted by Magic
250 ppl die in NY and the world is over for america. Hundreds of afghans die everyday and all you americans think is that your killing the terrorists.

When is America going to wake up? The more you kill... they more they come and kill you! Its stupid bombing a country because of one man!

It would be like someone bombing LA cuz there are so many criminals there! Its just such a retarded concept!

Originally posted by support=profit

And one more thing: The UN building was not far away. Well, technically it's in the same city. So are a lot of other things... but the plane crashed in Rockaway, in Queens -- southeast of JFK airport; the UN is in midtown Manhattan, northwest of JFK. There's no reason to make a connection between the two.

This is just traumatic, its been hardly 2 months since the WTC incident and another plane crash, especially when the holiday season is nearing in.. very sad indeed.

When is America going to wake up? The more you kill... they more they come and kill you! Its stupid bombing a country because of one man!
I don't want to get into an argument, but that is truly an ignorant statement. The United States is not bombing Afghanistan only because of one man. The United States warned Afghanistan (and other terrorist harboring countries) long ago that any attacks on the United States involving Osama Bin Laden would not be tolerated and actions would be taken. Afghanistan had the choice of whether or not they would harbor this man, and they chose wrong. The United States is now at war with this country, and unfortunately, that means some civilians may lose their lives. However, the United States would never specifically target civilians, unlike a terrorist. So, who needs to wake up...seriously?

Here we go again :)

I'm not getting involved this time :D

Just one thing, bombing Afghanistan and crippling the Taliban will SAVE more Afghan lives in the future.

Anyone know how many people the Taliban kill daily?

So U.S is saving more Afghan lives in one way :)

Originally posted by ^Kyo
dektong:

hundreds of Afghans do die every day. Its not a rumor its true just read about it.

Well, thousands of African day everyday ... I just need to read any source/news (which can be verified independently) where the cause of these death is due to US bombing the Afgans ...

Cheers,
:beer:

thousands of ppl die everywhere everyday... so is it ok for me to come and kill your brother? cuz who cares ... thousands of ppl die, so its ok for bush to kill more, and its ok for everyone to kill?

i was about to write an essay explaining all this stuff... but i really cant be bothered... but i will say this for those of you who dont know...

This war is about Bush. Bush is pissed at Bin Laden's brother (who is in business with Bush) and so he just wants to show whos the boss. Hence he attacks Bin Laden cuz thats the easiest target hes got.

There is NO evidence against Bin Laden... and the Taliban said that they would try bin laden in a court if the US were to show some sort of evidence indicating bin laden is guilty... but there is none... so the US refused.

BTW, do you really think one man represents and entire nation? If so, i live in the UK, if i come and crash an airplane ... will the US attack the UK? no.

wake up and smell the coffee (Nescafe Gold Blend :D)

Originally posted by Magic
This war is about Bush. Bush is pissed at Bin Laden's brother (who is in business with Bush) and so he just wants to show whos the boss. Hence he attacks Bin Laden cuz thats the easiest target hes got.The guy who can't be found is the "easiest target?"

I've heard a lot of silly theories, but this is one of the silliest. What then, is the explanation for Clinton's cruise missile attacks aimed at bin Laden after the embassy bombings in Africa? Clinton was mad at bin Laden's sister?

lol, no i think Bin Ladens son :)

Magic, stop the BS ... Just give me the news/report (which can be independently verified) where you say:


hundreds of innocent afghans that die everyday because Bush wants to push his weight around


Enough said ...

cheers,
:beer:

"Hundreds every day" may be an exaggeration, but there have been and continue to be without doubt many innocent Afghan civilations killed as a direct result of the current US military activity.

It's a value judgement that warring nations, convinced they are on the side of right, have been making since the beginning of time. To pretend it isn't happening is no more justifiable than is the exaggeration of the scale at which it's happening.

To say that this is happening because "Bush wants to push his weight around" is simply silly, if not ignorant. A terrorist attack within the US, especially one of the scale of that of September 11, would result in a military response regardless of who was in the Oval Office at the time.

The guiding rule of US military response over the past 15 years has been "proportionate and measured." Clinton's response against bin Ladin was relatively minor because it was in response to attacks of much smaller magnitude and significance (to the world and the country as a whole; certainly not to the families affected). It was clear at the time that there wouldn't have been public support within the US for movement of troops or risking lives of American soldiers, so the response was a largely ineffective cruise missile attack.

It's a different situation today, and a situation that no president would have failed to respond to with harsh military measures.

Originally posted by Magic
Bush is pissed at Bin Laden's brother (who is in business with Bush) and so he just wants to show whos the boss. Hence he attacks Bin Laden cuz thats the easiest target hes got.

Yep, this is all about a bad business deal. Makes sense. please write that essay as I'm sure it would be quite entertaining. I don't claim to know much about the whole thing but I always enjoy reading the posts of people who do think they know everything about things thay know nothing about. I just know that somehow this involves JFK, or Watergate, (I'm hoping both).

God bless those unfortunate souls in New York.

God bless vBs Ignore User option...

-t

Chicken... maybe you should read up a bit more on politics huh? ;)

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=bush+business+bin+laden+brother


detong... what cave have you been hiding in, in the last 2 months????

Originally posted by Magic
detong... what cave have you been hiding in, in the last 2 months????

I don't know ... what news have you been reading in the last 2 months? See ... Air strike against Taliban have gone for at least 30 days ... Show me where at least thousands of afgans have died. Just show the news (third request), and I will appreciate it much.

cheers,
:beer:

Originally posted by Eric_Echter

I don't want to get into an argument, but that is truly an ignorant statement. The United States is not bombing Afghanistan only because of one man. The United States warned Afghanistan (and other terrorist harboring countries) long ago that any attacks on the United States involving Osama Bin Laden would not be tolerated and actions would be taken. Afghanistan had the choice of whether or not they would harbor this man, and they chose wrong. The United States is now at war with this country, and unfortunately, that means some civilians may lose their lives. However, the United States would never specifically target civilians, unlike a terrorist. So, who needs to wake up...seriously?

The correct answer is: C) You! I agree with Magic on several points (not all of them) First, the US has shown little to no proof implicating bin Laden.. Does this mean they have none? or just don't want to show it? that isn't for us to speculate, but if they presented the evidence, then this would be a lot easier.

Now, the really ignorant statement is by you
Originally posted by Eric_Echter
However, the United States would never specifically target civilians, unlike a terrorist. So, who needs to wake up...seriously?
Oh but they have! We have sanctions in place against Iraq right now to "target Saddam (sp?)" They aren't hurting him. They are hurting the civilians there buy not allowing them to have water treatment equipment. This was part of the plan of the sanctions...to promote illness amongst the civilians. It is killing many everyday. BTW, this is from a government website and The Progressive I can get you the exact article if you would like.

Wake up and get out of your dillusional US=always good bed! (some coffee would be nice too)

I'm really sick of this blind patriot crap

I agree with you Dogma :)

Most of the U.S people (civilians) have good intentions, but how do we know what the Government's intentions are?



Originally posted by Dogma


The correct answer is: C) You! I agree with Magic on several points (not all of them) First, the US has shown little to no proof implicating bin Laden.. Does this mean they have none? or just don't want to show it? that isn't for us to speculate, but if they presented the evidence, then this would be a lot easier.

Now, the really ignorant statement is by you

Oh but they have! We have sanctions in place against Iraq right now to "target Saddam (sp?)" They aren't hurting him. They are hurting the civilians there buy not allowing them to have water treatment equipment. This was part of the plan of the sanctions...to promote illness amongst the civilians. It is killing many everyday. BTW, this is from a government website and The Progressive I can get you the exact article if you would like.

Wake up and get out of your dillusional US=always good bed! (some coffee would be nice too)

I'm really sick of this blind patriot crap

How right you are. These terrorist attacks are just an excuse to get back at Bin Laden's brother, correct? All th earlier attacks were also a part of this too? May I also ask how the Us attacks are targeting civilians if we are air droping suplies to them and when we are the biggest aid to them? Please explain. I am getting very confused here....

anyway...

place crash in New York remember?

I've been watching quite a few reports on this one and current thinking seems to be that the engine had a staggering malfunction, and literally fell right off the plane. It possibly damaged the tail section on the way off, which shortly after caused the tail section to separate.

The pilot and co-pilot tried in vain to steer the plane to the bay, but a plane missing an entire engine affects the flight dynamics far more than just if it had an engine out. As the tail was torn off, this dynamic was ruined even more, and caused it to head straight down. The pilots didn't even have time to call it in before it plowed into the ground. Reports of vast amounts of unburnt jet fuel indicates the pilot did release the tanks to lessen the impending explosion.

I tend to agree with this theory so far all things considered.

It's very sad to see more people dying due to things outside their control as it always is, especially also for the neighbourhood as it's reported to be the area a lot of the police and firefighters killed in the WTC collapse lived.

Greg Moore

The correct answer is: C) You! I agree with Magic on several points (not all of them) First, the US has shown little to no proof implicating bin Laden.. Does this mean they have none? or just don't want to show it? that isn't for us to speculate, but if they presented the evidence, then this would be a lot easier.
I truly believe our government has plenty of evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to the crimes of September 11. From what I've heard, he all but admitted to it in his last statement (every station has different stories, so I can't say for sure).

Originally posted by Magic
too bad you guys dont have these sort of posts for the hundreds of innocent afghans that die everyday because Bush wants to push his weight around! :(


We send red cross and help at americas Expense :even before the war or 9/11 - America has been helping afghans for years.

The people in afghans can`t even feed themselves, so don`t act like caused the situtation in afghan. The taliban controled afghans misery, and made thier own versions of the karon or how ever you spell it. There is nothing in the scripts that say "kill others that are not islamic.

my 2 cents

Originally posted by Magic
thousands of ppl die everywhere everyday... so is it ok for me to come and kill your brother? cuz who cares ... thousands of ppl die, so its ok for bush to kill more, and its ok for everyone to kill?

i was about to write an essay explaining all this stuff... but i really cant be bothered... but i will say this for those of you who dont know...

This war is about Bush. Bush is pissed at Bin Laden's brother (who is in business with Bush) and so he just wants to show whos the boss. Hence he attacks Bin Laden cuz thats the easiest target hes got.

There is NO evidence against Bin Laden... and the Taliban said that they would try bin laden in a court if the US were to show some sort of evidence indicating bin laden is guilty... but there is none... so the US refused.

BTW, do you really think one man represents and entire nation? If so, i live in the UK, if i come and crash an airplane ... will the US attack the UK? no.

wake up and smell the coffee (Nescafe Gold Blend :D)


Have you been reading the info and facts ???

USA is not at war with afghan, they are in war with talibans, afghans are to weak to deal with thier own internal affairs.

Originally posted by thewitt
God bless vBs Ignore User option...

-t

Be thankful that you are safe and that you can use that feature. I can't :bawling: :D

Originally posted by Woody
How right you are. These terrorist attacks are just an excuse to get back at Bin Laden's brother, correct? All th earlier attacks were also a part of this too? May I also ask how the Us attacks are targeting civilians if we are air droping suplies to them and when we are the biggest aid to them? Please explain. I am getting very confused here....
Oh come on! The air drop was for show. They dropped less then 100,000 meals (closer to 50,000 I think, but don't quote me, the exact #s don't matter really) which wouldn't feed a huge majority of the population! ANd the success rate of air drops from the height that they dropped the food is low.

Also, the US is targeting civilians, albiet unintentially. Everytime a US missile hits a civilian target, it is because it was targeted to hit there. Not on purpose, but the bombs go where they are told to go. And what about those what, 5+ Red Cross buildings we blew up!

Well, i`m sure the people who drove the airplanes into the towers were concerned.


Look at it this way, America is the only country that Drops bombs and snacks during a war, We "try to not kill those not involved"

My personal opinion, just Nuke the taliban and save the bucks and put everyone out of thier misery.

All extremist should be killed, no reason they even should excist.
any population that kills because of religion should be eliminated.

The taliban creates laws based on what / how they interperat the Karan, Does our bible say, Kill islams or jews? Heck no,

The american people in genreal are good people, we didn`t ask for this war, the taliban did confess, bin laden did say it was a ligimate target.

Nuke the taliban?

Nuking the Taliban would kill other innocent people.

Also do you know the fallout after a nuclear strike..

I don't really think you mean't that comment.

Originally posted by Chicken
Be thankful that you are safe and that you can use that feature. I can't :bawling: :D

Bet your finger gets pretty itchy over that ban button though :D

Greg Moore

Originally posted by William
The taliban creates laws based on what / how they interperat the Karan, Does our bible say, Kill islams or jews? Heck no,
Neither does theirs
Originally posted by William
My personal opinion, just Nuke the taliban and save the bucks and put everyone out of thier misery. Oh yeah, that'll solve all our problems! Lets go kill and disfigure a bunch of people, fun! Military action is only going to cause more terrorism...

Originally posted by William
All extremist should be killed, no reason they even should excist.this is a really funny comment, i couldn't resist saying this (sorry, i know this isn't a time for humor.. but).. William, you say all extremist should be killed... Originally posted by William
any population that kills because of religion should be eliminated.your statement as i read it sounds alot like something an extremist would say... does that mean someone should now kill you? :eek:

aside from my humor-attempt, i felt very sad today when i heard the news... it's really unfortunate that the people of New York have to experience this type of accident so soon after the great tragedy of 9/11. :(

Originally posted by William
any population that kills because of religion should be eliminated.
So all Christians should be killed? Great plan! (you do remember the Crusades, don't you?)

Lets just ****ing kill everyone!!

Guys and Gals,

This conversation is *really* going out of topic. Lets not talk about killing people ok? Live and let live. Peace and all that stuff =)

The topic was simple, plane crash in NYC/Queens. So lets just stick to that.

Regards,

Asher.

Hmm.. This is great, airport security sucks and to top it off they can't even keep their planes bolted together. I'm really going to enjoy watching the airline industry go down the drain.

Think of how long people have been pressuring airlines for increased security and to address repair issues more closely.

We should have launched a few sidewinders at the homes of the owners of these Airlines rather than throwing our tax dollars into some foreign country in a crusade that's purely illogical in any chance of success, it's like declaring we're going to have world peace, it's pure BS! Yeah, down with the Evildoers!

Just drag that SOB Laden out of their, have him drawn and quartered, dipped in acid and then dragged through downtown Manhatten. It cracks me up that we completely mess with a foreign countries civil war, dropping food and bombs when we've got more problems than we can handle right here at home. A few years from now we'll be having the same war with this Northern Alliance group that we've just put into power.

And lastly, my completely unrational but all solving solution..
If Bush wasn't such a Bible Buddy he'd have skipped the unrealistic idea of Global extinction of Terrorism and went right for Religion.. Yes, Religion, anyone that supports, harbors or practices Religion will be Nuked.. Have a nice ... day! :D

Originally posted by Seer
We should have launched a few sidewinders at the homes of the owners of these Airlines[...]That's not really a practical idea, since few of them actually have homes that fly.


(joke explained below)

.


.


(The sidewinder is an air-to-air missile.)

(Also, most airlines are publicly held corporations, so they are owned by thousands of stockholders, none of which is really part of the decision-making process. So a better approach would be to attack airline executives' homes with GBU-15 guided bombs. Or, to save money, just use MK-84s.)

LOL!! destructive arent we ;)

Originally posted by JayC
(The sidewinder is an air-to-air missile.)

(Also, most airlines are publicly held corporations, so they are owned by thousands of stockholders, none of which is really part of the decision-making process. So a better approach would be to attack airline executives' homes with GBU-15 guided bombs. Or, to save money, just use MK-84s.)

Well, if you've gotta be technical about it... I was just giving an outline of the idea. ;)

Perhaps stick the whole executive department on an airbus and autopilot them right into one of Bin Ladens Caves.

Aloha
seer should we hope that hte tobaco companies go under to as more people are killed using tobaco
how about Ford or GM more people die in these cars than airtravel should we hope they go under ???
we let car companies knowingly put on bad tires faulty gas tanks
faulty wiring were you bitching then ???

anyone that supports or practices religion would be nuked ??
well there goes the whole world

oh and shoot a missile into houses ;)

Not to undermine the possibility of terrorism, but it seems birds may be the cause of the plane crash ...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/656892.asp?cp1=1

cheers,
:beer:

Originally posted by dektong
Not to undermine the possibility of terrorism, but it seems birds may be the cause of the plane crash ...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/656892.asp?cp1=1

cheers,
:beer:

I was wondering if they'd have a cause to be something like that. I was guessing lightning, but birds is even more interesting. Basically, with the impact this would have on the industry, a cause that wasn't related to terrorism or the fault of AA might smooth things over. I wouldn't doubt there's some media manipulation going on with this. That'd be my conspiracy theory, but hey it makes sense.

I'd be pretty amazed if they could find the remain of a bird in this wreck as it would most likely have been completely incinerated. At least have found it this soon anyway!

Originally posted by Honu
Aloha
seer should we hope that hte tobaco companies go under to as more people are killed using tobaco
how about Ford or GM more people die in these cars than airtravel should we hope they go under ???
we let car companies knowingly put on bad tires faulty gas tanks
faulty wiring were you bitching then ???

anyone that supports or practices religion would be nuked ??
well there goes the whole world

oh and shoot a missile into houses ;)

Alright, that tobacco bit is the choice of the one smoking it.

Cars have accidents, and we're talking airlines not isolated car faults. This AA bit is pure ignorance. They knew about problems with this particular engine a month ago. Tighter airport security could have made one big difference on the 11th, a really big difference.
The rest of my statement as I had noted, was not rational, simply a reality check. :)

Originally posted by Seer


I was wondering if they'd have a cause to be something like that. I was guessing lightning, but birds is even more interesting.
[clip]
I'd be pretty amazed if they could find the remain of a bird in this wreck as it would most likely have been completely incinerated. At least have found it this soon anyway!
Not lightening. The day was crisp and clear.

Bird strike - as it's called - leaves behind evidence in even the worst crashes, so if that was the cause, it will be determined.

-t

Originally posted by Seer
I'd be pretty amazed if they could find the remain of a bird in this wreck as it would most likely have been completely incinerated. No, that's not likely at all. The affected engine could clearly be seen in news coverage away from any fires. Nothing in it would have been incinerated. Finding that evidence, in this case, was probably made easier because the engines on modern airliners are engineered to break away in the event of catastropic failure -- so the engine fell some distance from the heart of the debris field.

It's not uncommon for birds to cause failure in jet engines, and it's usually easily discovered when it happens because the remains of the birds... uh, remain. At JFK, by the way, it's a recognized problem because there's a bird sanctuary adjacent to the airport.

Just one more reason to fly out of LaGuardia -- if not Islip MacArthur!

All good informative answers, thanks for the fill in. ;)

It just struck me as odd, even if these engines were intact on the ground now i'm trying to figure how an engine that didn't explode or catch on fire was broken lose from the aircraft by the impact of a bird. I haven't seen this given as a possible cause anywhere else. Lots of mixed stories at this time, a lot of speculation happening I suppose.

Okay, here's one for you all.

If the airlines were a webhost, what would be their uptime? :eek:

If the airlines were a webhost, what would be their uptime?

LOL :laugh:

Originally posted by Seer

If the airlines were a webhost, what would be their uptime? :eek:

Surely not 99.99% :D

Originally posted by Seer

If the airlines were a webhost, what would be their uptime? :eek: :D :laugh: :dgrin:

Aloha
well since airlines
are a form of transporation and seeing how they are still the safest they would have the most uptime.


Originally posted by ZYE
If the airlines were a webhost, what would be their uptime?

LOL :laugh: