Hudson River Plane Crash Suspicious

Hi guys. I'm in the tri-state area and have seen a deluge of reports and coverage on this plane crash recently.
The problem that seems to be surfacing with the story now is two-fold.

The first is that recent articles point out that possibly (they can't seem to 100% confirm this..I wonder why?) the very same plane had experienced engine problems recently. In fact, in one article a business man who flies 50-60 times per year said that he experienced on that plane, what he describes as the loudest noise he's ever heard in the plane before, and likened it to the sound of the wing tearing off. Other passengers described the pilot saying over the intercom that something had happened and the engine stalled and that they needed to turn around but then they seemingly managed to get the engine started again because they continued onto their flight.
So now we have one piece of evidence, the very same plane had severe engine problems recently, prior to this accident.
And now the big kicker is that, it's been about a week since the accident and yet they STILL HAVE NOT FOUND the damn engines of the plane. Today's coverage explains how divers are still looking for the troubled engine(s) in the Hudson River. How can something as big as a passenger plane engine go missing?
Something definitely doesn't smell right here.
It could be as simple as the fact that the engine experienced prior problems and the airline company decided to cover it up and call it a "bird strike" and now claims the engine is "missing" so as to evade inspection/investigation that would surely uncover that there was in fact no bird strike.
There are other suspicious pieces of evidence of course, as I read on another thread for example that someone claimed that the pilot, this "hero" Sullenberger was sequestered somewhere for days and not allowed to speak to friends or family and had to be "debriefed" for some reason.

Anyone have any ideas what this could be? It definitely doesn't smell right...first we find out that the very same plane just recently had an engine shut down mid flight and now suddenly after a catastrophic crash, the engines go MISSING ??? Definitely something not right here.

one engine was still stuck to the plane and divers recovered the other.

that's what i heard or read somewhere.

Originally posted by ll__raine__ll
one engine was still stuck to the plane and divers recovered the other.

that's what i heard or read somewhere.

news.yahoo.com...


NEW YORK – Crews searching the frigid, murky Hudson River for debris from US Airways Flight 1549 have turned up shoes, hats and flotation devices, but the location of the missing left engine remains unknown.

The NTSB said Monday that the jet had experienced an engine compressor failure two days before the crash landing. Agency spokesman Peter Knudson said the flight had a different pilot that day, and the board planned to interview that pilot to learn more about the incident.

^ here's a direct quote from the above article showing that the same jet had an engine failure just days prior to this which passengers described as being the loudest noise they ever heard on a plane previously, akin to the wing tearing off.

If there was a conspiracy here I think they would already covered up and said they found the engine...

Or maybe they found it but don't want to bring it up because of the engines past problems and the fear that something will be found to show their negligence in not grounding the plane after the first incident. I doubt it's anything more than the Airline not wanting to bring up their nelgigence and ruining their creditbility.

Originally posted by Portugoal
If there was a conspiracy here I think they would already covered up and said they found the engine...

Or maybe they found it but don't want to bring it up because of the engines past problems and the fear that something will be found to show their negligence in not grounding the plane after the first incident. I doubt it's anything more than the Airline not wanting to bring up their nelgigence and ruining their creditbility.

well then by definition, it is a conspiracy. After all just because aliens, ultra dimensional beings, or reptiles are not involved doesn't mean it can't be a conspiracy.

I'll tell you where the real conspiracy is here.

Those darn birds. I'm sure in one of the video clips,I could here one of them yelling "jihaaaaad"

Also they are claiming that they smelled burning birds shortly after the birds allegedly hit the engines.

I found that VERY strange.

A secure, pressurized cabin, air that is supposed to be recirculated... That just doesn't make sense!

It isn't a conspiracy because it's not like this was a terrorist attack simulation or anything of that nature is what I meant...sorry for not being clear

Therefore I highly doubt anyone heard those birds yelling "Jihad!" or "death to America!!!"

The geese were part of MK Ultra.
The smell of burning poultry must have come from the galley or a passenger who smuggled some KFC on the plane.

Originally posted by star in a jar
Also they are claiming that they smelled burning birds shortly after the birds allegedly hit the engines.

I found that VERY strange.

A secure, pressurized cabin, air that is supposed to be recirculated... That just doesn't make sense!

The aircondition units gets heated air from the engines, so the smell of fried chicken is perfectly normal when a bird is sucked into the engine.

a bit of information...

every engine on those planes are scheduled for inspection after so many flight hours. If there were a problem prior to the engine's scheduled inspection, not only the mechanic that worked on the "problem" would be held responsible, but the inspector, who btw has a FAA number stamp assigned to them, would have also had to inspect the mechanics' work and sign it off as repaired, and ready for service. If the inspector missed something it could be traced back to him and he would be held responsible as well, fined big time, and maybe even loose his job.

Bird strikes are a very common problem with ANY airline, and can easily bring down a plane.

I know this, because I know someone that is an inspector for an airline and have had it explained to me.

Maybe they haven't found the "missing" engine, or are not making it public because it's possible it will take a little more digging....depending on how hard it hit the water, for all anyone knows it could have ended up buried in the crap at the bottom of the river.

Doubt there is any conspiracy here....no cover up.

~Holly

Originally posted by star in a jar
Also they are claiming that they smelled burning birds shortly after the birds allegedly hit the engines.

I found that VERY strange.

A secure, pressurized cabin, air that is supposed to be recirculated... That just doesn't make sense!

The cabin air is taken from the engines.... So not very strange at all The aircraft does not carry all the pressurized air needed for the flight, it's taken from the engines after the compression stage but before the combustion stage. It's called en.wikipedia.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink">bleed air

Ref the missing engine I thought they had located it on the bed using sonar or magnetic equipment or something.

I really think people looking for conspiracy here are over stretching, yep true the plane may of had a prev engine problem... that's not uncommon or even unusual.

I do agree it is a very timely good luck story given Obamas Inauguration, but still nothing strange about it.

Compressor stalls happen more often than you think.

RE: burning bird smell- yes the air is recirculated but outside air still comes in via the engine "bleed air" if I am not mistaken. Hence the smell.

RE: missing engine- the right engine was still attached to the wing when it was removed from the Hudson. The left one was missing as it was ripped off when the plane "hit" the water. An A320 has underwing-mounted engines and as such would be in direct contact with the water/ground when landing without gear down. It was actually fairly amazing to me that the right one stayed on the wing.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by md11forever]

Originally posted by rufusdrak
The NTSB said Monday that the jet had experienced an engine compressor failure two days before the crash landing. Agency spokesman Peter Knudson said the flight had a different pilot that day, and the board planned to interview that pilot to learn more about the incident.

^ here's a direct quote from the above article showing that the same jet had an engine failure just days prior to this which passengers described as being the loudest noise they ever heard on a plane previously, akin to the wing tearing off.

Not an engine failure, but a compressor stall.
That can happen even when there's nothing wrong with the engine.
It's procedure to trottle it back to idle and allow it to recover, then set thrust and continue the flight if everything else is normal.

I think that's what happend here.

When it was first on breaking news ( forgot what channel) Bank of America employees were mentioned as people the plane but that was the only time i heard of that. I could have heard wrong.

Please take heed to what I am about to say OP...

Not everything is a conspiracy

check it out! Three Lines!!!!

Originally posted by Sliick
Please take heed to what I am about to say OP...

Not everything is a conspiracy

You are defintely hiding something...defintely a conspiracy in those 5 words!

Originally posted by Sliick
Please take heed to what I am about to say OP...

Not everything is a conspiracy

check it out! Three Lines!!!!

ladies and gentlemen we have here a disinformation agent sent by the FAA.

edit: kidding....

[edit on 20-1-2009 by rufusdrak]

Originally posted by rufusdrak

Originally posted by Sliick
Please take heed to what I am about to say OP...

Not everything is a conspiracy

check it out! Three Lines!!!!

ladies and gentlemen we have here a disinformation agent sent by the FAA.

edit: kidding....

[edit on 20-1-2009 by rufusdrak]

No we're not... Yes I used WE.