Plane Crashes

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   
There has been a string of plane crashes worldwide this year that could be reported as suspicious. In the thread linked below I posted some details of many of those crashes. Today there was another. A military cargo plane with ten onboard crashed into a mountain in Afghanistan. The plane was carrying equipment to be used by US led forces in the area



What seems odd about these crashes is the following points.

*Many of the crash site show pictures of the wreckage with just the tail still intact.
*Many of the crashes occured in bad weather.
*Many of the crashes had high profile and high ranking people onboard

I understand that bad weather can cause crashes but as previously said there has been a spate of plane crashes and many of them occured in Afghanistan. Many were also military helicopters. The taliban has claimed responsility for todays but the person claiming the responsibility is not known for his honesty, so that is an unknown point.

But here is where the story gets interesting ..................to quote


Bad weather may have played a role in the crash, Rasool said, holding up a piece of the wreckage. Clouds hung low over the area as rescuers searched for bodies. Several villagers said they saw the four-engine plane slam into the mountainside.



"The plane was swaying from side to side and flying very low," said Malang, a 50-year-old farmer who only uses only name. "There was no smoke coming from it. It then slammed into the mountain. There was such a loud bang and then flames shot everywhere."
But another witness, Farid Zia, said he saw flames coming from one of the plane's wings before it crashed


These witnesses do not report a shoot down. One in fact reports flames coming from the wings as it came down. Not consistent with being "shot down" where the flames and smoke would have been coming out from behind the plane or fuselage not wings.Unless both wings were shot out. Which is highly unlikely.


The crash occurred in cloudy weather during the morning.


Here is a key point. It says clearly in many articles that the airport gets closed in bad weather due to the mountains. But this accident may be attributed to bad weather except for one point. The plane was flying low and swaying from side to side before the crash.


It was carrying communications equipment for coalition forces, but it never made it," said Colonel Jerry O'Hara, adding that the aircraft belonged to a private civilian company.


The plane was Russian built and owned by Pakistan royal airways. SOme of the passengers were Russian and there was apparently russian rubles and notes spread over the crash site.


Lt. Col. Cristoni Riccar, a spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force, said 10 people were on board but could not immediately give their nationalities.
Aijaz Faizi, manager of Pakistan-based Royal Airlines, which owned the 20-year-old Russian-made Ilyushin 76, said there were only eight: five Russians, two Ukrainians and a Pakistani.
The reason for the discrepancy was not immediately clear.


It seems there is a discrepancy in passenger numbers. It seems to be a confusing and strange discrepancy to all involved.


Claiming responsibility, Taliban commander Mullah Dadullah described the plane as a combat aircraft.
"We used a new weapon to shoot down the plane," said Dadullah, whose claims have often proved unreliable in the past.


Here is where Dadullah admits to shoot down the plane. A new weapon he says.

So what does it all mean. We have a plane flying low and swaying side to side hitting a mountain. That suggests to me one or two things

* The plane was not controlled, the navigation system was gone before the crash, even in bad weather a planes instruments work correctly. The pilot would have in front of him his height and exact location, he would know not to fly low and he certainly wouldn't be swaying side to side.

Where is the conversations between control and the plane or is this going to be another on like cyprus where there was nothing but silence. If it was shot down by standard weapons there would have been a stream of smoke. Witness reports say otherwise.


So what is really going on.

Some theories.

If the plane was "shot down with a new weapon" then it is possible that the weapon is unconventional and actually may target navigation systems rendering the plane useless. The US navy is testing new sonar that some believe interfere with the navigation of whales. What if this could be modified to hamper navigation systems on helicopters and planes. A silent weapon.

What is somehow the plane was targetted and something killed the "drive shaft" as such, I don't know airplane speak. If that was wiped out then the pilot would not be able to control the plane and it would sway side to side before crashing.

Another theory is that somehow weather modification is involved with this crash and others. Create a small storm and a lovely electric charge beamed right at the plane. Blip, all communications, navigation and control in the plane all dead........This theory doesn't just go for this plane crash, so many plane crashes this years have been blamed on "bad weather" in areas that don't normally suffer such "bad weather" if the weather was that bad the airport would have been closed.

I would love to hear of others thoughts on this matter and certainly from people who know more about the workings of planes. How could this be done, what are the possibilities.

news.scotsman.com...
www.signonsandiego.com...
edition.cnn.com...
Reuters
abcnews.go.com...
Tuscaloosa News


Thread of posted plane crashes
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 11-11-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 11:05 AM
link   
A couple thoughts.
when the Russians invaded Afghanistan in 1979 till 1989, they never told the Russian people they were at war in Afghanistan. The Russiaan people were lied to much like the American people are being victimized by OSI propaganda being broadcast by the media. The Russian media was very instrumental in fooling the Russian people as well. Russian people didn't have the internet as a resource, therefore it was easy. The American government/media have to be much more persuasive in their lies. They have to pound em day and night. Strategy is if you say it enought, you'll eventually believe it. The Russian people finally suspected a war in Afghanistan after seeing and hearing so many stories in the markets and bars from Russian wounded soldiers. For the first couple years, the Russian people just thought the wounded soldiers were just madmen.
The book: "Charlie Wilsons war" goes into some detail on this.

Secondly, whole planes will be brought down to kill one man in an accident.
Happens sometimes. Bad weather is a stopgap excuse ala Ron Brown, JFK jr. ,Tower and a few others. Sometimes it's necessary to take down a commercial airliner to whack a guy in an accident because if you kill him another way it would expose your knowledge of the persons activity. You don't always want your enemy to know you're onto them. Accidental plane crashs are hard to disprove. I'll tell you this: American congressmen Murtha and Wilson sold Al Qaeda thousands of stinger anti-aircraft missles a few years back. AFTER Al Qaeda supported Saddam in the first Gulf war.
After AL Qaeda sided with Americas enemies. that is clearly treason. Now, if you don't believe me, read the book "Charlie Wilsons war" by 60 minutes producer George Criles. They admit it with their own mouth. They admit they created and funded AL Qaeda- except they call it by the english words "the database". American media uses the arabic words to cover the fact that Al Qaeda is an american government creation. Why is it that we never talk about the creation of Al Qaeda? Why is that? Why is it we don't talk about american congressmen selling stinger missles to al qaeda? Well, if an american plane gets shot down, the INFORMED people would get mad.
They'd know who to blame.
See, the american media lies- knowingly and willingly - to the world 24/7. Accept it.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
*Many of the crashes occured in bad weather.
*Many of the crashes had high profile and high ranking people onboard


This is interesting.
From October,
117 killed in Nigeria plane crash

Several high-level Nigerian officials were believed to be on board the privately owned jet, the office of President Olusegun Obasanjo told CNN. They were headed to Abuja for a meeting.

Reuters said the plane was believed to be carrying a U.S. consular official and some European passengers as well.

Bellview is a Nigerian airline popular with expatriates living in the West African nation and has been operating for about 10 years with no record of any incidents.

A storm was passing through Lagos, Nigeria's commercial capital, about the time the flight left, CNN's Africa Correspondent Jeff Koinange reported.

There were widespread rains and thunderstorms around the southwestern corner of Nigeria, particularly near Lagos to Ibadan, CNN's meteorologist Mari Ramos said.

CNN

And then this on November 14, 2005,
Black boxes missing at crash site


INVESTIGATORS have been unable to find the flight data and voice recorders from the site of a plane crash in Nigeria that killed 117 people in October, the head of the investigating team has said.

Angus Ozoka said the failure to find the "black boxes" meant it would take longer to determine what caused the Boeing 737, operated by Nigerian airline Bellview, to crash shortly after take-off from Lagos on October 22, killing everyone on board.
"We were not able to recover the black boxes - flight data recorder or cockpit voice recorder - although we found some strips of the casing," Mr Ozoka said at Lagos airport.

The wreckage recovered from the four-metre deep crater near the village of Lissa, about 30km from Lagos in Ogun state, has been taken to an air force base for further examination.

Mr Ozoka said the investigation would continue in Nigeria and in the United States. A US team has been helping the inquiry.

News.com.au

This is all very suspect. If you have a plane transporting VIP's why would the tower give clearance for take off given the weather?

And now, the black boxes are missing. Very convenient.


Sanc'.
edit: grammar

[edit on 13-11-2005 by sanctum]



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
*Many of the crash site show pictures of the wreckage with just the tail still intact.


There's nothing odd about that at all. When a plane crashes the tail is generally the last part to hi the ground. It also has the whole rest of the plane to absorb its impact. So it gets less damaged. Why do you think people in airliner crashes survive more often in the back?




*Many of the crashes occured in bad weather.


You said it yourself, bad weather can cause plane crashes. Afghanistan is also very mountainous. What does that mean? Well, surface winds get deflected upwards and cause highly turbulent flights. So high turbulence on top of bad weather is just a combination for disaster.



*Many of the crashes had high profile and high ranking people onboard


Why else would it really be all that news worthy?



Many were also military helicopters.


Helicopters are basically +5000 parts flying in tight formation. Turbulence and bad weather causes a whole lot more problems for them than it does fixed wing craft. So that, too, isn't surprising.



These witnesses do not report a shoot down. One in fact reports flames coming from the wings as it came down. Not consistent with being "shot down" where the flames and smoke would have been coming out from behind the plane or fuselage not wings.Unless both wings were shot out. Which is highly unlikely.


The engines were on the wings. If heat seeking rockets were used where would they hit? The cold fuselage or the hot engines?


But this accident may be attributed to bad weather except for one point. The plane was flying low and swaying from side to side before the crash.


The pilot may have been trying to get to the airport regardless of it being closed by trying to fly through mountain passes at low altitudes. Some wind shear (a sudden blast of wind on the plane) caused by the mountains could have cause the pilot to lose control.

In this case it could have been from the rear of the plane, causing it to stall (lose lift on the wings). The wings then would have dipped and the pilot would be attempting to use the rudder to regain control. That would have caused the swaying.



The plane was Russian built and owned by Pakistan royal airways. SOme of the passengers were Russian and there was apparently russian rubles and notes spread over the crash site.


And had it been an American plane it would have been US Dollars and nots spread over the crash site. What's your point?



It seems there is a discrepancy in passenger numbers. It seems to be a confusing and strange discrepancy to all involved.


When there's a major airliner crash how often do you hear discrepencies in the passenger count during the first reports? I don't see anything off with that.



Where is the conversations between control and the plane or is this going to be another on like cyprus where there was nothing but silence.


Not all airports have control towers. In fact, most don't.



If the plane was "shot down with a new weapon" then it is possible that the weapon is unconventional and actually may target navigation systems rendering the plane useless. The US navy is testing new sonar that some believe interfere with the navigation of whales. What if this could be modified to hamper navigation systems on helicopters and planes. A silent weapon.


Well altitude, attitude, and speed indicators wouldn't be affected by this since they're just mechanical. Even if those go out you can still fly the plane. Also, you don't need GPS to fly a plane. I'm sure they had charts.



What is somehow the plane was targetted and something killed the "drive shaft" as such, I don't know airplane speak. If that was wiped out then the pilot would not be able to control the plane and it would sway side to side before crashing.


You mean the control surfaces like the rudder, ailerons, and elevators? They could only do that by shooting them off or managing to shoot the wires. Both would be damn near impossible to do without damaging the rest of the plane.


Blip, all communications, navigation and control in the plane all dead........


Well, the controls are mechanical. The plane would still be able to fly.

I'm sorry, but it was just a regular old plane crash. Either cause by weather or pilot error. More than likely a combination of both. Your idea has a lot of holes in it.

[edit on 11/13/2005 by cmdrkeenkid]



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by sanctum
And now, the black boxes are missing. Very convenient.


Not really, it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack... Except the needle looks very similar to all the hay.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
It WOULD be possible to interfere with the ILS system very easily, simply by parking a vehicle next to it. One of the rules we had when we went down the taxiway for any reason was never drive past the ILS when a plane was on approach. However from the sound of things I don't think this airport HAD an ILS, and it certainly wouldn't cause the plane to sway or catch fire.

As far as the VIP plane that was mentioned, VIPs have a tendency to put a lot of pressure on the pilots, and many pilots, being human, have a tendency to give into the pressure, even when they know it's not a good idea. Many small airport controllers will also feel the pressure to get the important people out of their hair and on their way, so will give clearance to take off, even when they don't think it's a good idea. Or the pilots can say "We're taking responsibility, please give us clearance." and in many cases the tower will.

Both of these sound like simple plane crashes. If you study the statistics of crashes, you'll see some years where there are 0 fatalities out of 100,000 flight hours, and other years where there are 200 out of 100,000 flight hours or more. It goes up and down.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
It WOULD be possible to interfere with the ILS system very easily, simply by parking a vehicle next to it.


Yeah, I forgot about that. Isn't that only if the engine is running though? And are not deisel engines okay since they don't have spark plugs?

I don't remember the actual reason, but I though it was just because of the radio interference generated by the spark plugs...



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I believe it's just the vehicle itself. I've read a couple of incident reports involving autoland system problems because a plane was taxiing by the ILS when they tried to land. The large mass of metal causes the ILS beams to "bend" which can cause uncommanded control inputs as the system tries to follow the bend. Depending on which way the bend goes, the plane can even impact the ground.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I believe it's just the vehicle itself. I've read a couple of incident reports involving autoland system problems because a plane was taxiing by the ILS when they tried to land. The large mass of metal causes the ILS beams to "bend" which can cause uncommanded control inputs as the system tries to follow the bend. Depending on which way the bend goes, the plane can even impact the ground.


Ah, that's interesting! Not surprised by it, but I never heard of that happening. My something new for today, thanks!


Anyway, I suppose we should get back on topic.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Commander, its just a theory and thats why it is in Skunk Works. There are many crashes that do not add up lately, especially in Afghanistan. I know some can be accounted for but some strike me and a lot of others as suspicious. I know there is logical explanations but what I am looking for is those same logical explanations applied to why it may have come down for sinister reasons.

The spate of high ranking officials is too high in number to be co incidental. The figures are in the other thread of high profile deaths.

The black box was also missing from other major crashes like a previous one in Afghanistan. The Nigerian plane crash spoken of has officials already admitting it was no accident. Also the casing bits have been found or the skin but not the actual black box. Black boxes are built to withstand crashes.

I know there is plausible reasons why it may have been innocent but what I want to look at here is plausible reasons of how it may not have been an "accident"

I was mentioning the Russians because I wanted to figure out how they fit itno the scenario and work out what equipment was onboard.

I would like help working out if by the symptoms I described in the limited info have at my fingertips, how the plane could have been taken down and what this "new weapon" could be.

I agree about the shooting of the wing and heat seeking, but it seems there was two wings on fire which would mean two missiles wouldn't it? and no witness reports say anything along those lines.

many of the helicopter crashes spoken of are admitted shootdowns.

What is the ILS system, can someone explain that to me in greater details and how it can be knocked out?



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   
It's the Instrument Landing System that planes use on final approach. If you have an automatic landing system it ties into the ILS, so that it will know how high above the ground you are, and where the runway is etc. If you are hand flying it shows you if you are lined up on the runway and on glideslope. You aren't really knocking it out, you're just making it give slightly false readings by parking a vehicle or taxiing a plane by it while a plane is on final approach.

Basically it works by sending out a radio beam on a slope. The plane picks that up and reads the angle and tells you if you're on glide slope, high, or low, and if you're on centerline for the runway. Most smaller airports don't have them, only the Category X, 1 and maybe II airports. (Airport categories are defined by the number of passengers boarded. Cat X is the big airports, Cat 1 slightly smaller, Cat II regional airports). They have different systems for the different Category airports. Cat X would have the super high tech ILS that would let the autolanding systems land the plane, with the Cat II having the ILS that tells you how high you are on the guage in the cockpit.

If you park a large mass of metal next to the ILS antenna, which is really obvious but almost impossible to get to because it's next to the runway so you have to have all kinds of clearances to get to it, it causes those radar waves to bend slightly. If the autopilot is landing the plane when it hits that bend it's going to try to follow it so you will get uncommanded control inputs.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 06:50 PM
link   
So if they were in fact blinded visibly by bad weather and the ILS was knocked out then the plane wouldn't have a clue what angle or where it was?



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 06:58 PM
link   
There are other navigation aids that would help them, but they aren't nearly as accurate. It could get them down close to the runway, but not onto the runway like the ILS would. There are new systems that give them zero/zero visibility for landing in bad weather.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
The black box was also missing from other major crashes like a previous one in Afghanistan. The Nigerian plane crash spoken of has officials already admitting it was no accident. Also the casing bits have been found or the skin but not the actual black box. Black boxes are built to withstand crashes.


Who do you think would get to the wreckage of a crash first? People who may have malicious intent, or the people investigating the crash? Could it be that the people who just show up before the investigators do steal the black box to conceal why the plane really went down? I believe so!



I was mentioning the Russians because I wanted to figure out how they fit itno the scenario and work out what equipment was onboard.


Probably the same if not very similar equipment to what's in most airplanes. The equipment on board is all pretty standard.



I would like help working out if by the symptoms I described in the limited info have at my fingertips, how the plane could have been taken down and what this "new weapon" could be.


Your source said that their source of that is unreliable. You even stated that it said that. So who is to say there really is some "new weapon?" No one!



I agree about the shooting of the wing and heat seeking, but it seems there was two wings on fire which would mean two missiles wouldn't it? and no witness reports say anything along those lines.


Well, you have conflicting reports. One said no smoke, one said smoke and fire from one wing, not two. If you're going to believe that there was no smoke, then I would say that my wind shear hypothesis is the best bet. If you want to say there was smoke then I'd say the best hypothesis was just a mechanical failure, especially since there was no sighting of a rocket being launched or an explosion in the air.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Yes i understand all that Commander and as previously stated I know there are logical explanations for each of my points. But this is Skunk and I am looking for theories and ideas of what "could" have happened.

I am looking at this from the angle of finding other reasons and possible causes for crashes, not from the logical easy fitting explanations side.

I am theorizing on a possible conspiracy of plane crashes and what could possibly make them go down that is sinister.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Yes i understand all that Commander and as previously stated I know there are logical explanations for each of my points. But this is Skunk and I am looking for theories and ideas of what "could" have happened.

I am looking at this from the angle of finding other reasons and possible causes for crashes, not from the logical easy fitting explanations side.

I am theorizing on a possible conspiracy of plane crashes and what could possibly make them go down that is sinister.


So in this forum you're not allowed to remain skeptical of hypotheses such as what "could have" broughten this plane down? Because that's all I'm doing.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I noticed that the Nigerian Crash story came across the Ticker on Fox News and it was said the crash was likely caused by a lightning Strike.

I'm not so sure , but I didn't think that lightning brought very many planes down.

Actually I didn't think it brought down any larger aircraft.

I might be wrong about that though.

Anyway the ticker also said that so far there was no evidence that a lightning strike had brought down the plane, so I'd say that they just don't know why the plane crashed.

[edit on 13-11-2005 by lost_shaman]



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Lightning can and has brought planes down before. They are USUALLY shielded against it, however there have been positive charged lightning bolts that can very easily bring a plane down. They aren't common, but they do happen. They burn hotter, stronger, and stay in contact longer than regular lightning bolts. It also depnds a lot on the condition of the plane, where it hits, and how it hits, etc.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid

So in this forum you're not allowed to remain skeptical of hypotheses such as what "could have" broughten this plane down? Because that's all I'm doing.


Yes of course you can, a healthy scepticism is exactly that, healthy.

I understand fully what you are doing and I understand why, because there are logical explanations of why it came down.

That is the possibility of a taliban missile
possibility of pilot error
possibility of bad weather
possibility of pilot not having a clue

but now I am looking at other reasons too, reasons that can be fit and made to look accidental but are in fact sinister.

It's not just this plane crash and you are right to bring up the points you have so if it wasn't suspicious we can quickly discount it from the list I presented in the mysterious death thread.

Its a chain of evidence and in this case the dots don't join up to make a pattern, so far we have a higgedly piggedly mess of evidence that doesn't point to much at all, except that it doesn't all make sense.

I guess what I am saying is this. I am a computer technician. A system comes to me for service and i listen to the symptoms, troubleshoot. When symptoms are described a pattern forms and a diagnosis is made.

I look at it in the way that we have a computer running windows. Or in this case a plane flying along, same as all other planes of that model or computer of that model. It crashes, the computer, the plane. But there is a certain number of ways it crashes, each unique to the cause. If a computer crashes, at least one other computer in the world has experienced that very same crash, it would be rather rare and unique to find a set of symptoms that does not fit with a previous known cause. I have yet to find google does not have an answer for a difficult computer crash because somewhere someone has experienced those same symptoms. There are only so many possible scenarios.

Same with plane, we just substitute the word plane for computer, when a plane crashes an investigator looks at the symptoms to find the cause and there are only a certain pattern of symptoms for each cause. The variable are few. Planes are kept in better mechanical condition and working order than many of my clients systems are.

Sorry if that was double dutch but its a scenario I can relate it to.


Zaphod interesting you said that about the lightening strike because it takes me back along a path I have thought for a while. I have long believed there is weather modification forces at work in Afghanistan. For example, a desolate drought region held by the taliban and about to undergo an offensive by allied troops suddenly experiences flooding rains that break a 10 year drought.

and the biggy, I will find the links to tag to this post but first finish writing this while my mind is fresh. A few months ago I did a story on ATSNN about a police compound in the Philippines that was holding evidence of Al Queda bombings and detainees. It suddenly one night experienced a lightening bolt and was destroyed. All eivdence gone. It fascinated me because reading the story my mind did not see it fitting with a standard scenario, in fact it was quite odd and I started thinking about a weapon, a laser or lightening bolt weapon full of destruction.

Question is How why who and where.

With the Philippines case it could have been Al Queda destroying their own evidence but just a week afterwards Australia offered so many million dollars to the Philippines to rebuild and make new compounds.

If as thought by some that Al Queda is an American figment well it brings new thought into bearing. Its the who What When Where and Why.

www.atsnn.com...
My Afghan Flash Flood Story dated Sept 11

www.atsnn.com...
Philippines Blast dated co-incidently Sep 12
(note source story of "Lightening Bolt")

Also I am sure I was reading about another plane crash where a lightening bolt was described, I will dig it up.


What else happened around those two dates, Was there a weapon fired up at the time. A weather weapon? That can take out planes and detainee compounds and cause flash floods?



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Yet another plane crash with an official onboard. its getting to be a real occupational hazard to fly if you are a politician


www.news.com.au...
A RUSSIAN plane with eight people on board crashed overnight.
All passengers and crew were feared dead, Russian media reported overnight.
The Cessna light aircraft came down just outside Moscow and burst into flames when it hit the ground, news agencies reported.
RIA Novosti news agency reported that among the passengers was Igor Olshansky, an assistant to a deputy in the State Duma lower house of parliament. The identity of the other passengers was not known.






top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join