It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible MH-370 debris found on Reunion Island?

page: 15
44
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf




And given Zaphod's info,


Part of which was clearly wrong. Let's just ignore it though.




posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: YouPeople

Is there some reason you've turned the thread into a vendetta ride against one particular member?

I mean if you have some sort of point to make, I'm interested in hearing it.

So....what's the point? Is there an angle to how much a flaperon costs that needs to be looked at? Is there an angle to where an actuator is located that we should be looking at?

Or is this all just an effort to say "nanny nanny boo boo?"



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
The Boeing fire extinguisher in the Maldives seemed to come and go quite quickly and with minimal fuss, was this item ruled out as 100% not being from MH370?.

I would imagine that the force needed to take this part off the plane would mean quite a hard splash and it does make me ask why nothing else has been found least of all a oil slick or something from say a merchant ship as I imagine that area is traversed a fair bit. Though it is a massive ocean and a plane is tiny in perspective. I still shake my head that it sounds like a number of items may have been found and burned by the beach cleaner.

Is it still the general consensus that this plane went down off the coast of Australia or are we now thinking it was further into the Indian ocean due to the time needed for this part to contact Reunion in May?.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: YouPeople


The parts that are powered and make the flaperon move are not situated in the wing and extended to the flaperon?

Instead they are situated in the flaperon and extended to the wing?


In the video they performed a powered test of the inboard flaperon where the aileron function was tested.

The flap track mechanism and hydraulics are located in the wing while flap slot one extension actuators are inside the flaperon.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I think am justified in contesting the claim that there are actuators inside the flaperon.

Especially when claims are being made that they will be able to indentify MH370 by the actuators, that are not actually in the flaperon.

Am I wrong for doing so and expecting a clarification?



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Ivar_Karlsen




The flap track mechanism and hydraulics are located in the wing while flap slot one extension actuators are inside the flaperon.


And what do they do?



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: YouPeople


And what do they do?


They cover the gap between the flaperon and the wing when flaps are down.
If you go back and have a look on the last picture you posted you can clearly see them.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: YouPeople

Well actually the claim was that there are actuators that can be identified and "other internal parts."

So, great. Maybe there aren't actuators in the flaperons. But unless you're going to prove that that means there's no possible way to identify the flap then....so what?

Bragging rights?



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Any way there are parts with a time limited service life inside the flaperon.
That means it is in the airlines maintenance log.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Shamrock6

The plate with the serial number debonded while it was in the water, so they'll have to go deeper and get the serial numbers off the actuators and internal pieces, then go back to the manufacturer and see which flaperon they installed those parts on, and trace it that way.



I attempted to alert the thread posters that the identification of this particular part (a 'flaperon') cannot be proof positive that the physical Flaperon was originally & forever installed on Boeing 777 MH370

the Flaperon could very well be part of MH17 wreckage shot down in July 2014 in Ukraine...

the parts numbers of both MH370 & MH17 Left side Flaperon can or could be switched very easily, by a hacker into the Boeing Plant Historical log of that particular aircraft, so as to falsely 'confirm' the physical object washed ashore is indeed from the missing passenger given the identity known as MH-370 over the Indian Ocean


believe 1/2 of what-you-see and None of what-you-hear..... (a line from the old classic song: I heard it through the Grapevine


the scattered 777 parts, seats, other small items ...all seem to be stuff that would be removed from a passenger Jet that is converted into a bomb carrying missile on a one way trip to martyrdom or a false-flag attack
~ I sure don't see any super-structure components being discovered --- so, to my reasoning the debris follows the model of being a staged discovery which point to the debris being wrongly identified as all being wreckage from MH-370 and not at all being a 'flaperon' from Jet MH-17 to cover up the hijacking of the Bejing ? bound flight MH-370 which is being concealed for future use !



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio

And they switched all the internal part numbers too? Everywhere the numbers are recorded? The data plate is not the only way this part can be identified.

Just because parts haven't been found yet doesn't make this staged.
edit on 8/3/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: St Udio

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Shamrock6

The plate with the serial number debonded while it was in the water, so they'll have to go deeper and get the serial numbers off the actuators and internal pieces, then go back to the manufacturer and see which flaperon they installed those parts on, and trace it that way.



I attempted to alert the thread posters that the identification of this particular part (a 'flaperon') cannot be proof positive that the physical Flaperon was originally & forever installed on Boeing 777 MH370

the Flaperon could very well be part of MH17 wreckage shot down in July 2014 in Ukraine...

the parts numbers of both MH370 & MH17 Left side Flaperon can or could be switched very easily, by a hacker into the Boeing Plant Historical log of that particular aircraft, so as to falsely 'confirm' the physical object washed ashore is indeed from the missing passenger given the identity known as MH-370 over the Indian Ocean


believe 1/2 of what-you-see and None of what-you-hear..... (a line from the old classic song: I heard it through the Grapevine


the scattered 777 parts, seats, other small items ...all seem to be stuff that would be removed from a passenger Jet that is converted into a bomb carrying missile on a one way trip to martyrdom or a false-flag attack
~ I sure don't see any super-structure components being discovered --- so, to my reasoning the debris follows the model of being a staged discovery which point to the debris being wrongly identified as all being wreckage from MH-370 and not at all being a 'flaperon' from Jet MH-17 to cover up the hijacking of the Bejing ? bound flight MH-370 which is being concealed for future use !


This is ludicrous. Come on, man. Stop moving the goal posts. They found wreckage that is in fact from the missing plane. Be happy for the families instead of trying to move this into another conspiracy. No one went into hostile territory and stole parts of another plane just to put them on this island. I mean. . . really?



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: jaffo


to each their own

I want solid proofs not cobbled assumptions


911 is another thing that needed deeper investigation, so is this action...



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: St Udio
a reply to: jaffo


to each their own

I want solid proofs not cobbled assumptions


911 is another thing that needed deeper investigation, so is this action...



You are ignoring reality. It's very clear that other than sneaking into the Ukraine there simply is no way that this part came from anything but the missing plane. You can't just ignore evidence because you do not want it to be true, you know?



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio

And what will constitute solid proof? Because it won't take long to trace this flaperon to MH370.
edit on 8/3/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Ivar_Karlsen




Is this not the one flaperon on the wing that doesn't have the flap slot extentions?

I also found this,


Abdul Aziz said the most definitive confirmation of its origin would have to come from Boeing, saying the aircraft manufacturer performed modifications to the flaperon that would make it easy to identify. "There have been some modifications to internal beams in the flaperon. Only Boeing can verify (that the flaperon came from MH370). The modifications were done by Boeing," he said. "Only after they verify the internal parts of the flaperon can they be sure that it is from MH370."


www.theedgesingapore.com...

Nothing about actuators or hydraulics.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: YouPeople

Something about "other internal parts" though.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6




Something about "other internal parts" though.


You added the "other". They are talking about "internal parts", refering to the internal beams they were talking about in the sentences before that.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: YouPeople

And the flaperon has cove lip doors, which need actuators, which are in the flaperon, which are both actuators, and other internal parts.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: YouPeople

Lol seriously? You're right, I added "other."

What I did not add was "internal parts."

Boy that changes the hell out of things, doesn't it?



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join