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.

 

Buffalo plane crash

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
No distress call - no mayday according to air traffic control in Cleveland.




posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Congressman Lee (his district) just reported the address as 6038 Long St. Clarence Center.
Google Earth
earth.google.com...


Weedwacker knows of what he speaks.

Peace

[edit on 13-2-2009 by Zeptepi]



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Whisper67
 


Whisper67....on fire in the air?

We shan't speculate until the scene is suffieciently secured, and investigated.

Eye-witness testimony, though important, is still subject to the ;huh; factor.

Meaning.....IF the airplane DID have an engine fire, then IF the fire could not be extinguished.....and it burnt hot enough....well then, yes....the wing that held the engine might have burned as well. Just specualtion, mind you....but IF a wing could burn off, the airplane is uncontrollable after that fact.

CNN does NOT know how to relay the ATC tapes....so sad.....Anderson Cooper is lost, on air, live....

EDIT...Anderson Cooper is redeeming himself....

Being vectored for the ILS to runway 23 (although Cooper says twenty-three, when the actual term is "two-three") Sorry, Anderson....since you are NOT a pilot, you just don't get it.

Pilots, especially instrument-rated ones, know and can comprehend.

He goes on....PIREPS of rime icing....oh my. Even a Dash-8 has de-icing capablities!!!

SOMETHING else happened.....airplanes just don't fall out of the sky!

Birds? In clouds???

Let's see what this tragedy tells us......



[edit on 2/13/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I was watching AC 360 and he reported a secondary explosion well after the plane had crashed.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Agreed about the 'huh' factor. We'd also have to know the witness' point of sight as well.

Yes, Anderson is flailing - MSNBC has been playing this tape for a half hour now.

Just an update to my original post about being curious about the reporting response to this tragedy - there is now video and affiliate coverage that I would have expect to have seen prior to four hours into the incident. Talk about a 'huh' factor.

Thanks again weedwhacker for your analysis.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Volunteer firefighter made a report; witnessed the impact during his regular daily travel.

Aircraft descended on a steep angle, nose down, no landing gear viewed.
Witness describes the engine as sounding "wrong".
No visible damage could be seen from the witnesses angle.



---------

16,000 feet was the last recorded altitude.
No mayday call.
Aircraft disappeared from radar tracking at around that altitude.
Aircraft hit the ground nose down, gear up, no visible damage.
Engine sounded "wrong" ( I wish the witness would have elaborated on that.)


Well... the engine could sound "wrong" simply because of the rate of descent.

To me, this initially sounds like either a total electrical failure, or something went wrong with the pilots themselves (depressurization perhaps).

Here's the problems with those assumptions though, I've heard of crews surviving depressurization at well over 16,000 ft before, and I can't think of a way that every electrical system from communication to controls could fail at the same time like that.


Ungh... just heard an old lady saying how she gave up the option of an earlier flight to a girl who wanted to get home to her boyfriend... the girl wound up on the crashed flight.
That's about as much emotion as I can take for the night.

[edit on 13-2-2009 by johnsky]



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
If it piled in pretty much nose down then that suggests a stall/spin which would most likely be icing.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Whisper67
 


Rime icing.....and clear icing....either way, modern airplanes have mechanisms to remove the ice.

There are two strategies, used in flight....anti-ice and de-ice.

Anti-ice is what jets have....it is basically heated air directed to the leading edges of the wings, and the nacelles of the engines, when turned On by the pilots.

Turbo-prop airplanes might use another system....the de-ice....we call them 'boots'.....they are rubber 'bladders' than can be inflated, in order to break up any ice that may have accumulated on the leading edge of the wing.

So....'ANTI-ICE'....uses the natural heat of the jet engine....the same energy that keeps your cabin pressurized, and keeps you aloft, all at the same time....this excess heat can be directed to the RIM of the engines (called engine heat) and/or to the wing's leading edges as 'anti-ice'

If you see an airplane....usually a turbo-prop, with black rubber on its wings leading edges....then, it has the rubber boots to expand, when commanded by a pilot....and "de-ice". A TurboProp has, usually, a heated inlet....so, don't worry. It's just....in a TurboProp, you need the thrust, so you can't whitle it away to provide anti-icing.....besides, Turbo-Props don't fly in altiudes to ..... oh wait, yes they do!!!!

I have four or five thousand hours of both piston and turboprop time. Rest of my hours are jet time...the B-727, the A-300, the DC-10, the B-737, B-757 and B-767....and I've racked up about 20,000 hours total.

Not bragging, just stating the facts....

I HATE to see a plane crash! I will admit, I have NEVER flown a Dash-8....this was, I believe, the airplane involved in the Buffalo accident.

However, if asked, I can contribute....not to the actual airplane specifics, of course. But, from a pilot's viewpoint....



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   
No, if it was icing then they would have gotten a mayday out.

This certainly is puzzling.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   


Rime icing.....and clear icing....either way, modern airplanes have mechanisms to remove the ice.


When airliners take off or land it's usual to switch off bleed air because leaving it on reduces power available from the engines. Usually that's a SOP on any airliner.

When you've got good airspeed you can get away with some icing, but when you reduce speed on approach the icing can increase your stall speed and the icing problem can be quite imperceptible.

The aircraft wouldn't have had any anti-icing working if bleed air was off.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Here are a couple maps for anyone who's interested. These are some (rough) estimates of the flight path as it was approaching. It helps a bit to visualize things, I think.

Google Earth
Directions from 6038 Long St (crash site) to Buffalo Niagara International Airport

google maps




Skyvector.com
Official FAA sectional charts
Avalable at skyvector.com... search for airport ID "BUF".



(I'm new to all this, so I hope that these images work out ok. *fingers crossed*)

[edit on 13-2-2009 by rdquelle]



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 02:43 AM
link   
Nope they wouldn't have had time for a mayday. It was at pretty low altitude and icing can flip you on your back in a flash and trust me if you find yourself in a spin in an ILS approach all your attention is on flying the plane.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 


EXACTLY!!! Thanks, JohnSky.....for stating the obvious.

I would hate to criticze the 'Heroes' USAIR 1549....but, here I go!!!

Nope....won't do it!!!!

'Sully' put that airplnae down the best way he could....given the time constraints, he still did a PA to the Cabin...."Brace for Impact"

At my airline, we are taught the same Command....but, it is understood that you had minutes to brief before-hand....the fact that those three Flight Attendants knew to respond immediately, to what the Cockpit PA said....shows how well ALL airline crewmembers are trained.

Know this....regardless of the PA done by A Flight Attendant.....a PA from the cockpit will ALWAYS over-ride.

THAT is why they are taught to shout!!! that IS Why THERE is a megaphone on every airplane! THIS is why Flight Attendants have learn CPR skills....you passengers think they're there to serve peanuts/pretztles and/or beverages????

Let's get something straight, the Pilots do an exceceptional job at flying the airplane.....AND, the Cabin crew know their jobs, in an emergency....even as they are nice to you, and feed you peanuts and pretzels.

You see, EVERY crewmember gets "re-current" training, once every year.

THIS is what airline professionals undergo....and it is not well related. Until now.

A captain who must maintain a 'First-Class' physical....has to go in every six months, to renew this 'Physical'

Twice a year!! Now, get this....on your fortieth birthday, or thereafter....you have to have an EKG....AND, it MUST be sent ONLINE, live, to Oklahoma City, where all of the FAA Medical records for pilots are kept!

OK, with me do far???? In order to maintain a First Class physical, in order to be a Captain, you have to submit to a Doctor's Examinaton every six months. A Second Class physical, one needed by a co-pilot, is good for one year.

Back to the EKG....once you are 45, the EKG MUST be done once per year...liVE TO THE FAA....in order to maintain a First Class Phyical....
As with many airlines, Continental also has contracts with other 'feeder' airlines.....many who operate under the 'C



A Captain, to keep his "medical", has to see a doctor every six months.

EDIT...my computer burped....some formatting probs....but, I won't change...just wanted to say....

[edit on 2/13/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 03:37 AM
link   
at 16,000 feet reported altitude , unless they have a total electrical failure AND the batteries failed AND the locked prop turbo generator failed then they have enough time for a mayday call.

thats unless the crew were allready dead.


oh and yet again a Q400 crashes - at least this one wasn`t undercarraige failre like the last 6



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Well, the Dash-8 has a pretty lousy record of service lately...

Known Incidents/Accidents at English Verison of Wikipeia


9 June 1995: Ansett New Zealand Flight 703 from Auckland Airport to Palmerston North crashed...four killed.

9 September 2007: The crew of Scandinavian Airlines Flight 1209: right wing gear collapsed and the airliner skidded off the runway while fragments of the right propeller shot through the cabin and the right engine caught fire (11 injured).

12 September 2007: Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2748: similar problem with the landing gear. Immediately after this incident SAS grounded all their 33 Dash-8/Q400 airliners and, a few hours later, Bombardier recommended that all Dash-8/Q400s with more than 10,000 flights be grounded until further notice.

27 October 2007: Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2867 severe problems with the landing gear during landing in Kastrup Airport. Right wing gear did not deploy properly (or partially), and the aircraft skidded off the runway. The incident is being investigated by the civil aviation administration in Scandinavia and all Dash 8-400 aircraft within the SAS Group are grounded.


Still to add (not present in English verison of Wikipedia but written in the Swedish one):


21 September 2007: an Augsburg Airlines flight had to abort the landing procedure at Florence airport and return to Münich to perform an emergency landing due to on of the landing gears being stuck.

28 October 2007: the CEO of SAS put all Dash-8 permanently out of traffic.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 07:24 AM
link   
I'm definitely with redhatty on this question...... WHO was on the plane???

Have any names been mentioned yet??



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   
It was an extended version of the Dash-8, called the q400.

I know squat about planes and have only flown a few times but I've been on the Dash-8 for the majority of those flights (Northern Ontario to Toronto).

Interesting thing about the Dash-8's operated by Air Canada is that they don't have to have life-jackets on board even though the majority of there flights go right over the great lakes. They saved a total of 60 some lbs, if that's not a great example of profit over safety I don't know what is. You gotta love the almighty "Bottom Line".

No life-jacket isn't to big of a problem for me, After my last flight I told myself I will never fly again.

Peace



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ThatDGgirl
 


9/11 Widow Beverly Eckert was on the plane. Chairperson of Voices of September 11. www.buffalonews.com...



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   
apparently one victim has been named.
she is the widow of a 9/11 victim.
her name was beverly eckhart.
she was returining from a memorial birthday celebration for her late husband.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join