Post #17,854
11/12/01 9:59:30 AM
11/12/01 10:06:20 AM
|
Another attack? AA plane crashes in NY
The folloiwng info is from CNN:
"An American Airlines plane has crashed in the Queens borough of New York City. The FAA identifies the flight as American flight 587, an Airbus A300 from JFK airport to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Thick smoke was billowing over the area, and local media reported several houses on fire. According to the Airbus Web site, the A300 has a seating capacity of 220-360 seats."
Edited by bluke
Nov. 12, 2001, 10:06:20 AM EST
|
Post #17,855
11/12/01 10:04:30 AM
|
No inidications of attack
Plane reported to "spiral" down. This points to engine failure. Crashed in a residential neighborhood, not a political/economic target. The conclusion you jump to is incorrect at this time. Wait for details before spouting alarmist crap.
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #17,858
11/12/01 10:08:08 AM
|
Didn't jump to any conclusions
That is why I wrote Another Attack? did you miss the question mark?
|
Post #17,863
11/12/01 10:21:51 AM
|
goto dictionary .com, look up infer.
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #17,869
11/12/01 10:56:32 AM
|
Speaking of inference...
I infer that you implicitly implicate me as well. I also use question marks in the same manner.
Also, never mind what the dictionary approves, what on earth is the point of using "infer" to mean "imply" when you can just as easily, and with greater clarity, use the latter word?
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
|
Post #17,871
11/12/01 11:05:18 AM
|
infer vs. imply
A speaker implies somthing. A listener infers something.
Probably was the point your point that you were implying. At least that's what I inferred from you statement. :-)
|
Post #17,879
11/12/01 11:32:02 AM
|
Nah
Gave up on you a long time ago. No sense trying to open a mind with such obvious welds keeping it shut.
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #17,905
11/12/01 1:17:47 PM
11/12/01 1:20:58 PM
|
That one cuts both ways.
What you project onto the Other reflects back on you.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
Edited by marlowe
Nov. 12, 2001, 01:20:58 PM EST
|
Post #17,910
11/12/01 1:55:00 PM
|
I see nothing wrong with title
The question mark is sufficient IMO
________________
oop.ismad.com
|
Post #17,916
11/12/01 2:35:52 PM
|
You're entitled to your opinion.
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #18,028
11/13/01 9:33:52 AM
|
He's not the only one who read it as a QUESTION
and not a statement.
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #18,033
11/13/01 10:07:50 AM
|
Perhaps I'm too sensitive.
Nope. A question can be just as alarmist as a statement.
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #18,040
11/13/01 10:57:30 AM
11/13/01 10:58:50 AM
|
While a question can be alarmist,
it's not the same as "jumping to a conclusion".
In this case, it was a request to see if anybody had more information to determine if it was an attack or not. The initial post(later edited) was "I can't get any more details as all the news sites are unavailable.", which supports the "request for info" aspect of the title. No need to get upset with everybody else because you inferred more than what was implied.
I'm sure the question "was it another attack?" was on initially on most everybody's mind when the plane first went down. I know it was were I work. It's not all that surprising, given the circumstance.
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
Edited by SpiceWare
Nov. 13, 2001, 10:58:50 AM EST
|
Post #18,043
11/13/01 11:08:36 AM
|
Yeah
I'm just so damned pissed at the media lately that when I saw what I thought was another "would you care to comment on the suppositions regarding the possiblities of the chances of more attacks?" type of question I jumped to my own conclusion. Sorry bluke and others. I shouldn't take it out on my friends when strangers get me riled up. (And you can't get much stranger than some of our news "personalities").
How to mangle the truth;
Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
|
Post #18,161
11/13/01 9:00:05 PM
|
Know how it goes
I'm fighting a sinus infection and I feel like I'll to scream if just one more person comes up with "oh, you poor thing", "what are you taking", "have you seen a doctor" and so on. Everybody has their limits :-)
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #17,859
11/12/01 10:10:29 AM
|
Meanwhile they declared a level 1 alert in NYC ...
and shut down all the airports
|
Post #17,903
11/12/01 1:12:02 PM
|
Reports of an explosion before the crash
In other words, it could have been a bomb, it would not be the first time.
|
Post #17,911
11/12/01 2:02:40 PM
|
On the ground or in the air?
If the alleged "first" explosion was on the ground, then it could have the plane engine dropping. Reportedly a plane engine detached and smacked into to the ground.
When engines croak and catch fire, do they "explode"?
However, being in NY, it is a little bit on the suspicious side.
There goes the "Airline recovery", regardless. Anybody who was nervious about flying is not gonna step on one of those without dragging and kicking. That probably reduces family flights, since one skittish person will probably result in none going.
________________
oop.ismad.com
|
Post #17,924
11/12/01 3:08:49 PM
|
Engines can explode...
turbine fans within the engine turn at a very nice rate of speed. Metal fatigue of the blade can cause it to break free, resulting in what would appear to be an explosion.
That can cause the engine to "croak and catch fire".
Don't know if that's what happened though.
|
Post #17,913
11/12/01 2:17:05 PM
|
Re: Reports of an explosion before the crash
Could have been a bomb. Also could have been sabotage, stupidity, part failure, a bad reaction to a goose dinner, or any number of things. At the moment, there just isn't enough information to jump to conclusions.
Mind you, the odds of flying into or out of the NYC area are getting worse, for whatever reason... Don't think I'd want to do it, but then I've always disliked NYC anyway.
-Hugh
|
Post #17,915
11/12/01 2:34:05 PM
|
They serve goose on AA? I only get peanuts
________________
oop.ismad.com
|
Post #17,921
11/12/01 2:52:33 PM
|
This figures with your reputation...
Peanuts are appropriate... :)
|
Post #18,047
11/13/01 11:13:05 AM
|
Investigators find signs birds may have caused crash
[link|http://www.msnbc.com/news/656892.asp|Investigators find signs birds may have caused crash of Flight 587]
"Investigators examining one of the separated engines from American Airlines Flight 587 found foreign debris inside, indicating that the engine may have ingested a flock of birds and then caught on fire."
|
Post #18,056
11/13/01 11:44:20 AM
|
I had this really weird image...
Pres. Shrub announces a press conference, and comes on TV...
"Our nation has suffered another great tragedy in New York. Elements of another group opposed to our way of life took advantage of our focus on the war on Terrorism to attack us yesterday. Today I declare a war on the second greatest threat to the American way - birds! We will not rest until every single bird has been hunted down and eliminated as a threat..."
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #18,137
11/13/01 5:46:52 PM
|
Er.. that's \ufffd Alfred Hitchcock and we don't want to go there
- they outnumber us and..
They won. (Actually a short drive from here - nice restaurant, once: The Tides)
(Fortunately.. something outnumbers us) til we nuke 'em all..
Then: We win :-)
|
Post #18,045
11/13/01 11:10:56 AM
|
Ari Fleischer would be proud.
After all, "we're under attack!" is the battle cry for stripping the remnants of our remaining Constitutional rights from us. It's useful to keep crying "Wolf!", how else are we going to rationalize the suspension of The Constitution?
|
Post #18,124
11/13/01 4:41:37 PM
|
Here's How
By declaring "it's for the children" or "it will protect you from the evil corporations".
Worked most of the time for the Clintonistas for 8 years. And they didn't even have the threat of terrorism to make it real.
|
Post #18,140
11/13/01 6:09:12 PM
|
Nah - reverse doggerel == doggerel
One o' those mysteries like 'conserving' the Constitution by ignoring it. Or tossing Red Herrings into any issue to deflect it into agit-prop.
Kinda like M$, y'know? Studied them a lot?
|
Post #17,857
11/12/01 10:07:42 AM
|
Houston Chronicle has info
[link|http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/topstory/1128869|article]
An American Airlines Airbus A300 crashed this morning in a heavily residential section of New York's Queens borough, and buildings reportedly were on fire in the neighborhood.
...
The cause of the crash was not immediately known.
...
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #17,884
11/12/01 11:35:45 AM
|
From first witness reports
Something close to the passenger side on the right wing (possibly the right engine?) appears to have exploded; at any case, the engine fell off and the plane spiralled almost straight down.
The talking heads are, of course, getting their face time again, and getting many parts of the story wrong again. Jennings and at least one of the others were esaying "This is not a terrorist attack" when in fact the government is saying "There is no evidence of a terrorist attack".
In fact, they don't know what actually caused it, whether it was a duck flying into the engine, maintenance failure, or (gasp) dare we even panic those poor impressionable American people by thinking of a bomb?
Hell, they may not know for sure for months or years.
Whatever the findings, the conspiracy nuts will love it (remember TWA 800?).
|
Post #18,105
11/13/01 3:52:56 PM
11/13/01 4:00:57 PM
|
And NOW what is going on?
They've got the cockpit voice recorder. "There was nothing unusual."
Huh? If I'm a pilot and something catastrophic happens, one click: "Mayday mayday!" Or, if I don't have time for that, there are a great many expletives that can be voiced quickly.
The fact that (supposedly) there was nothing unusual IS pretty doggone unusual. Like the Sherlock Holmes short story, a major clue is that the dog did not bark.
The latest reports are that the tail fell off into the bay and then BOTH engines fell off. (Both engines landed blocks away from the body of the plane.) One of the engines apparently had not caught fire.
Huh?????
This is an accident? I'm going to be real interested to see how this comes out as an accident.
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it."
-- Donald Knuth
Edited by wharris2
Nov. 13, 2001, 04:00:57 PM EST
|
Post #18,118
11/13/01 4:21:13 PM
|
I would imagine they meant that in a relative way
By "nothing unusual", the accident investigators may have meant only that they heard nothing that they wouldn't expect in any other crash of this sort. That may sound callous, that they call the flight crew's crys for help nothing unusual, but some of that is expected. They are looking for something far more unexpected to be considered unusual.
~~~)-Steven----
"I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country..."
General George S. Patton
|
Post #18,120
11/13/01 4:25:20 PM
|
Engines
IIRC, the engines on planes are designed to break away if the stress gets anywhere near close to damage the wings - so that the planes can still glide, even if they lose both engines.
"nothing unusual" could very well mean "mayday! mayday!" considering the recent problems we've had - unusual would be "Allah is great!" or something of the sort.
I saw a report this morning on MSNBC that they found FOD (Foreign Object Debris read: bird parts) in at least one of the engines.
So, if this is a conspiracy, they're going to some lengths to cover it up...
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #18,130
11/13/01 4:54:22 PM
|
Comments; flight data recorder found.
Here's what the AP is reporting now. [link|http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-plane-crash1113nov13.story?coll=sns%2Dap%2Dnationworld%2Dheadlines|Here]. The URL will change. November 13, 2001, 2:14 PM EST
NEW YORK -- Investigators found the flight data recorder Tuesday that could yield clues about the final seconds of the American Airlines crash that killed more than 260 people.
The data recorder was one of the two "black boxes" aboard Flight 587. The other, the cockpit voice recorder, was found shortly after Monday's crash.
The flight data recorder tracks the speed and actions of the engine and instruments. Authorities said the voice recorder didn't indicate any problems aboard the flight that crashed less than three minutes after leaving nearby Kennedy Airport.
"The communications from the cockpit were normal up until the last few seconds before the crash," said Marion Blakey, the head of the National Transportation Safety Board. She did not elaborate on the last few moments.
But authorities did not rule out sabotage or other potential causes.
"We're not going to exclude that possibility until the investigation goes much further than this," George Black, a member of the NTSB, said Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show.
A source close to the investigation said the board also was looking at whether the engines failed after sucking in birds. Kennedy Airport, running along Jamaica Bay, has had problems with birds on the runway. Emphasis added. From this story, they still don't know much of anything yet. And I wouldn't expect that they would so early in the investigation. Not throwing stones at anyone here. But, it seems with every major event in the news lately there's been a frenzy in the press to have answers and solutions unreasonably quickly, IMO. Chandra Levy, 9/11, the Afghan war, and this crash. Can you imagine what the race to the Moon would be have been like if it were run under such intense scrutiny? "Are we there yet?" "Why aren't we there yet?" "We'll be there soon, right?" "Are we there yet?" "Someone said we should be there by now. Why aren't we there yet?" ... :-( Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #18,139
11/13/01 6:04:01 PM
|
Most unusual putative-factoid I heard:
Someone decribing on Tee Vee, the recovered tail:
"It looked (~pristine) as if 'unbolted' as a unit."
Now break-away engine mounts make sense, as mentioned above. But parts of (a whole?) wing allegedly detached in mid-air here, as well...
Heard of two previous 'engine uninstalls' in flight:
1) Lost engine physically. Believe it crashed.
2) Engine apparently detached and sped ahead of plane quite briefly (!) Belief was: that the plane crashed into it = crashed too. (How they learned this factoid - have no idea, if it indeed crashed subsequently)
So 'breakaway' may have its own problems. Too early to guess if in this case BOTH engines ingested birds, oscillated from the unbalanced hi-speed mass of breaking internals AND, while striking the plane subsequently (?)
fractured neatly -- all the tail bolts -- without marring the tail! I call this - an impending mystery, guesstimating that - a saboteur might have removed a lot of bolts / replaced some with: Woods Metal fakes !!)
(Mayhap in one o' those foreign repair places, run to less than FAA standards - talk about inventing stuff from too little data! Mea culpa)
Ashton Scriptwriter of Disaster Movies
|
Post #18,146
11/13/01 6:32:44 PM
|
It doesn't take much.
Planes are usually designed to specific tolerances and requirements. Every bolt and rivet has a specific purpose. If it wasn't needed, it wouldn't be there (to save cost and weight).
[link|http://www.69megs.com/pages/whenmagazine/Stealth97/stealth.htm|Here] is a story about a crash of an F-117 stealth fighter/bomber in 1997. It crashed because some bolts were left out during maintenance, or were misinstalled.
The AA crash yesterday seems strange to me. I can understand an engine falling off and the pilot losing control. One would expect that if a engine was going to be lost that it would happen at takeoff when the stress is greatest. But there are reports that both engines came off. It seems unlikely that both would be lost (from opposite sides of the plane). And why did the tail fin come off?
Jet engines are tested to make sure they survive eating birds. (There have been threads here about it.) Even if both engines injested birds, why would the tail have been lost? They'd only been airborne a few minutes and were presumably still accelerating to cruising speed. The stress on the tail fin shouldn't have been that great even if the plane was out of control - I would think....
There was a case in 1996 when an [link|http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/06/delta.plane.2/|engine failed] and a piece of the turbine penetrated the cabin and killed a passenger and her child. It was early enough in the takeoff that the pilot was able to abort. So it's not unique to have an engine come apart even though they're very reliable and very strong (the blades are made of titanium and there's a whole technology built up around them - e.g. [link|http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:1cRXzqSjOiI:www.ml.afrl.af.mil/successes/2000/ss00413.html+titanium+fan+blades&hl=en&start=4|this] article from Google's cache.).
The AA case strikes me as a very strange accident based on what's reported now.
But I'm no expert on this stuff.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #18,153
11/13/01 7:38:50 PM
|
I'd forgotten the F-117 and The Bolts + ___*Just In*
If merely installed 'upside down' (must have asymmetric heads?) .. and that was enough?
Then what we have here.. with all this stuff allegedly flying off a slow-moving (<220 kts. was mentioned) airplane on initial climb-out:
Tail
Two engines
Wing! or part thereof
Again.. not at 450 kts, but - slow; much less environmental forces to contend with.
..what we have here is One Mystery, which I hope we get more than dumbed-down censored info about. Surely an analysis of the ground locations + other data will confirm (or deny) most of these allegations. Though some parts went into water / some of those? most of those? were recovered. Unusually then - an over-land crash with scorched parts available.
HOW does an airplane disintegrate in such a way? Even sabotage -- would / could any sociopath loosen bolts or ___ *in so many places* when any one would accomplish the aim?
Just In: (NPR news blurb)
Engines relatively intact.
No sign of birds as proximate cause.
Rattling sound (heard on recorder?) just before crash.
Report reiterates in-air separation of BOTH engines!
(Wing not specif. mentioned)
???
|
Post #18,155
11/13/01 8:14:21 PM
|
a cargo jet dropped an engine a few blocks from my house in
Alaska a few years ago, it was 4 minutes into the flight and power had been just cut back. Perhaps a similar thing while 120 seconds into the flight and under full power would cartwheel the plane.
thanx,
bill
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
|
Post #18,199
11/14/01 12:25:57 AM
|
747 Nose Bolts
Having been in the bolt business at the time, I heard this about the 747 nose. After each of the early test flights, bold heads were found in the nose section - from the bolts that hold the nose on.
The manufacturer was accused of making bolts not up to spec, but proved randomly selected bolts from the spares stock met spec.
Further investigation found the cause. The nose was mounted on a trolly and rolled up to the fuselage. The bolts were put in place and torqued up to spec (a high percentage of the bolts tensile strength). Then the trolly was removed, adding the weight of the nose to the stress on the bolts, taking them beyond design tensile stress. Add to this the stress and vibration of flight, and the bolts started to break, starting with the uppermost ones.
On another subject, the company I worked for was a major manufacturer of the "fuse pins" that hold the engines on jet aircraft. They are made to very strict specifications, and we had to break between 5% and 10% of production to prove consistency. The ones for the 747 are about 3" in diameter, hollow, with a contoured inside. All are hard chrome plated on the outside so eliminate wear from vibration that would change their break point.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #18,210
11/14/01 5:06:39 AM
|
Bolts.
Hmmm, if most aircraft bolts are 'relieved', torqued to near elastic limit in ordinary service - implication is that they cannot handle much external force at all. Impulse I mean, (F x T) as an object hitting. Not even a very big object. The 747 was failing with only the relatively gradual stress of the added mass loading - scary chosen bolt dia. then :[
Only automotive equiv. that comes to mind is cyl. head bolts. Cheaper and to less rigid specs of course - but IIRC - many nowadays are meant to be torqued equally near elastic limits, and except for one retorquing (from initial creep and from thus - 'slacked-off') = reset just up to original value. If ever removed next - buy new. Ditto for my Kawa KZ-550 cyl. head bolts, when I changed head gasket.
Trains are nice.
Ashton
|
