Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Air Algerie plane shot down to curb Ebola outbreak?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The media are trying to tell us that modern planes can fly through hurricanes but will fall to pieces in a mere thunderstorm... does anyone else find a problem with this? This isn't 1966 anymore, modern planes, such as the MD-82 have to comply to strict FAA rules to be able to withstand 1.5 times the worst turbulence ever recorded, but according to the media reports, a multi-million piece of engineering marvel cannot endure a simple thunderstorm, yet a 1970's P3-orion or Gulfstream IV can endure the turbulence, gusts, and extreme conditions found in hurricanes (Hurricane Hunters - NOAA) but a commercial jet that has to comply to stricter safety rules CANNOT?!

Why am I getting the thought this is another shootdown incident. The official theory is simply silly. The plane was at cruise altitude. So they are implying the plane was broken up in the storm which simply isn't possible. Very little info going around despite the size of the disaster!

The plane came down in Mali.. half the passengers so far were black, looked to be native to Africa..
edit on 30-7-2014 by miles1993 because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-7-2014 by miles1993 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
It's my understanding that the NOAA aircraft fly well above the windshears of Hurricanes & drop instruments down into them - perhaps I'm wrong?
You have to go through a pretty serious customs check on international flights. I doubt someone with known symptoms of ebola is going to get through.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Planes crash in storms. It depends on the storm, the age of the plane, and a lot of factors. Just a few storms that have brought down planes:

Taiwan
Southern AIrways 242
Air France 447

Those are just three. There have been dozens over the years. The planes that fly into hurricanes are sturdier military planes mostly. Regular aircraft avoid them, because they aren't designed to handle the stress of the winds and turbulence.

The aircraft did not break apart in flight, as shown by the debris field. It went out of control and impacted the ground.
edit on 7/30/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: PleiaDsClusterDck

The NOAA birds tend to fly in the outer bands, and above the storms. AIr Force WC-130 aircraft actually fly through them, but they are designed to take a beating and come out of it. Even they have come back from hurricanes beaten to hell, with the entire crew sick as could be from the beating they took.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   
actually the NOAA website says the planes arent reenforced in any way..

The Gulfstream IV is a buisness jet. And yes they often do fly right into the worst, in hurricane Hugo a P3-orion flew at 1,500 feet, and battled 200 mph gusts..

if commerical airlines are breaking up in turbulence they should not be allowed to fly. Ever.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
If there was reason to suspect there were infected passengers onboard the plane don't you think they could have landed then quarantined the passengers?

Doesn't that make more sense than shooting down a commercial airliner?!?
edit on 30-7-2014 by minusinfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   
It sure as hell makes more sense than the plane apparently being made out of paper mache and breaking up in a little ol turbulence.. hahaha



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: miles1993

No, you are wrong again. From the NOAA website:


NOAA's newest aircraft acquisition is a Gulfstream IV SP (Special Performance) jet, which began hurricane surveillance missions in 1997 in support of forecasters at NOAA's National Hurricane Center. The jet, which can fly high, fast and far with a range of 4,000 nautical miles and a cruising altitude of 45,000 ft., paints a detailed picture of weather systems in the upper atmosphere surrounding developing hurricanes. This operational data is used in computer models that help forecasters make current predictions.

www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov...

P-3s and C-130s are built stronger than commercial aircraft, because they're military and designed to be shot at. That means that they have plating protecting their critical systems, which makes them more resistant to damage. Commercial planes are designed to be as light and efficient as possible, not to take battle damage from small or large caliber ammunition.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you for bringing the voice of reason, and fact, to this thread Zaphod.

Des



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: miles1993
The media are trying to tell us that modern planes can fly through hurricanes but will fall to pieces in a mere thunderstorm... does anyone else find a problem with this?

Flying through the tops of a thunderstorm can destroy an aircraft, literally tearing it to shreds. I have personally worked on aircraft that had their frames bent from having gotten into a thunderhead. They are much more violent then a hurricane, and the winds do not follow the same pattern, but rather have serious vertical shears.

The guys who fly into hurricanes are military with specific training, flying specialized aircraft. There have been 5 hurricane hunter crews that have been lost since they started doing this. Hurricanes have a strong horizontal wind (which they fly directly into), but not severe vertical shears.


originally posted by: miles1993
So they are implying the plane was broken up in the storm which simply isn't possible.

It's most assuredly possible.
Pan AM used to have a 727 called the “bent Bertha” that flew through a thunderstorm and was permanently bent if you looked from nose to tail down the body. If you looked from the nose you could see that the fuselage had a bend to aircraft right, making it shaped like: (



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: miles1993

And you've spent how many years working on and around aircraft to have such detailed knowledge of them?

The plane in question was approaching the end of its life cycle, and had 33,000 cycles on it. Planes with fewer cycles than that have failed due to metal fatigue. The area it flew through is where hurricanes are generated, which means there are very strong storms in that region. Strong storm, and older plane is a bad combination.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   


If you looked from the nose you could see that the fuselage had a bend to aircraft right, making it shaped like: (


Glad I didn't know that until now. I'm pretty sure I flew PanAm when I was in college.

I just can't see Mali shooting it down. Mali can't even control a part of it's own country larger than Texas. I might have different thoughts about Flight 93, however.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: PleiaDsClusterDck
It wasn't damaged enough to take it permanently out of service. They just re-trimmed it to compensate for the bowing, and kept flying it.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: defcon5

B-52 tail number 007 out of Castle was twisted due to low level turbulence and storms. They used it for pilot training and made the candidates fly it without trim, so they had to use the rudder to keep it straight.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: PleiaDsClusterDck

You have to go through a pretty serious customs check on international flights. I doubt someone with known symptoms of ebola is going to get through.



Wrong, I went from Shenzhen to Hong Kong, and boarded a flight from Hong Kong to London, without anyone stoping me. And I had the flu with 40C fever, with lots of other symptoms as well.

The Shenzhen to Hong Kong border, is a potential danger zone ... they literally cool you down, so you wont make a recording on their instruments. Knowingly admitting people through, that have severe symptoms. That's the new chinese government rule for ya, and why the Hong Kong chinese are taking to the streets to demonstrate.

If it's anything similar in Africa ... we're already dead meat.
edit on 30/7/2014 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: miles1993

Honestly, I find nothing sinister about this plane crash. It was flying in horrible weather, and it crashed. It was a terrible accident that cost the lives of over 100 people.

While the Ebola virus and the though of pandemic is scary, why would "they" shoot a plane down rather than just grounding the flight or diverting it back to the point of origin?



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I think you are being a bit too paranoid here.The Ebola connection is a bit of a stretch given that neither Burkina Faso nor Mali have casesmof Ebola....oh and by the way not all planes have to comply to FAA regulations



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: bjarneorn

Ebola kills too fast for it to be a real threat of an epidemic, like Spanish Flu was. It will burn itself out fairly quickly.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's what everybody keep saying,meanwhile the death toll is rising in Liberia sierra Leone and guinea...All I'm saying is that this time,the disease seems persistant



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: miles1993

Not everything is a conspiracy. Unless that is part of the conspiracy. Uh oh I have throne myself into an infinity loop.

What others have said. Sometimes planes just crash due to weather. Yes its not 1966 but its also not 2066. Indestructible planes do not exist yet.






top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join