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.

 

Turkish plane crashes at Amsterdam airport (25/02/09 ,at least 9 people killed )

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Nobody thinking about the beam weapons from satellites? Or, all aircrafts can be taken over by automatic pilot from satellites – that is the other way. If you take a look at the passenger list of the Hudson river “event” it is obvious they were trying to execute all the bank employees at once (did not succeed) some people would earn an enormous amount of money on stock exchange. Secondly, the recent crash in New York, take a look again the passenger list and figure out what might be the reason. Both cases the engines “lost” the power. What a co-incidence! Like this time. Let’s see…google, what did the Turkish PM said on Jan-16-2009 about Israel and what did he say in Davos about Israel. Could be firstly interesting to take a look at the passenger list and connect the dotes…




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Not sure if it has been posted, but from another forum(non conspiracy related etc)




The boyfriend of a friend of mine at uni works at that airport. He rang her and told us he saw it happen and that at about 11am there was already 3 dead before the news stations (Sky news at least) were reporting deaths. He also said it was attempting a second landing having failed it's first attempt and circling back although this isn't mentioned anywhere on an news I've seen.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sty
 



Too much airplane crashes lately...
And can we please know at least one time the real cause????


sty

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by deccal
 


look at the anonymus post: the aeroplane actually tried to land. The crash was actually the second attempt. As I mentioned - the amount of SPARE fuel (or "for DADDY " how some pilots calls it) was reduced to a dangerous limit just in order to make the flights cheaper.

[edit on 25-2-2009 by sty]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by sty
 


I see...Then this can explain why there was no fire..because there was no fuel..
Then can we say that the cause is the global economical crisis?
If the crash was because of lack of fuel, it will be a scandal i guess.


sty

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by deccal
 


I hope I am wrong, but this is how it looks like - at least for now . I wonder if they would cover-up this kind of data if found to be true..

[edit on 25-2-2009 by sty]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
You guys really need to think about what you are saying.

How would not putting enough fuel in save them money? If they over fill the fuel tanks that just means they will need to put less in for the next trip. The excess doesn't get drained out at the end of each flight and chucked down a drain.

Common sense please before throwing wild accusations.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by deccal
reply to post by sty
 


I see...Then this can explain why there was no fire..because there was no fuel..
Then can we say that the cause is the global economical crisis?
If the crash was because of lack of fuel, it will be a scandal i guess.


There was no fire because there was no fuel, but the passengers smelt kerosene...
weird..



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex
.....Aircraft are designed so that crashes are as survivable as possible, just the accidents recently have been of the more survivable types, namely not straight into terrain type accidents.


I respectfully disagree!

Commercial aircraft could be made much safer if airlines and aircraft manufacturers' took public safety as serious as they should.

Unfortunately cutting costs to maximize profit is the norm in an ultra-capitalist society. Even in the best of times aircraft maintance is below par, not to mention poor pilot training. During a recession/depression, this trend is severly exaggerated. In fact, it is a miracle we don't have more crashes and more deaths...


sty

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Mdv2
 


even an empty tank can smell like fuel . However this will not mean you can still power 2 engines, right?
I just guess what could happen
but I guess we will find details soon. As a conspiracy note: I am also curious about the "pasangers" list..



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
just heard that a number of US airlines actually CHARGE junior pilots so they can increase there hours.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I know it's probably not the case (conspiracy), but we are seeing a big amount of crashes in the last month.....

Anything going on with GPS etc. etc?



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by sty
 


Here's a passengerlist of the plane:

www.samanyoluhaber.com...

I don't know how acurate it is.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
You guys really need to think about what you are saying.

How would not putting enough fuel in save them money? If they over fill the fuel tanks that just means they will need to put less in for the next trip. The excess doesn't get drained out at the end of each flight and chucked down a drain.

Common sense please before throwing wild accusations.


Then why did they used to jettison fuel all over Donington park racetrack before landing at east midlands airport? (used to turn the racetrack into an icerink in the wet)



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
You guys really need to think about what you are saying.

How would not putting enough fuel in save them money? If they over fill the fuel tanks that just means they will need to put less in for the next trip. The excess doesn't get drained out at the end of each flight and chucked down a drain.

Common sense please before throwing wild accusations.



The plane is lighter if it has little to none exces fuel, therefore it will use up less fuel, and is cheaper in fuel cost.

Common sense please...



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Both pilots are among the dead...


How could this crash happen?


Six people were last night fighting for their lives with nine already confirmed dead - including both pilots and an apprentice co-pilot - but aviation engineers expressed surprise that fire had not ripped through the plane and claimed one hundred more lives.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Video showing the crash site from air.





posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Does anything think it's weird how they seem to be showing this report on nearly every single news channel, what news is this??? Woah a plane crashed, move along please... i want to see some real news.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
No fire and reports of it comming in quiet. Maybe they ran out of fuel or a software or gage malfunctioned.

Anybody know does the 737 or all planes for that matter have an inerting system for the tanks Post TWA 800?

[edit on 2/25/09 by FredT]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


FredT....if you're asking about fire suppression "inerting" systems....no. (At least, not the ones I flew, here in the USA)

I think that tech is still in development....

For others....fuel exhaustion is WILD speculation. ANY pilot finding himself in a critical fuel situation would declare 'minimum fuel' to ATC and receive priority handling.

To imagine any flight crew accepting, at dispatch, a fuel load with inadequate reserves....well, it's difficult to comprehend.

The 737-800 has three fuel tanks...one center, one each wing, of course.

The fuel is burned FIRST from the center (if any is uploaded....depending on stage length). When I left, there was an active AD (Airworthiness Directive) from the FAA advising the center fuel pumps be turned off at 1,000 lbs remaining. (we used to run the tank dry, but as you mentioned with TWA 800, there were concerns about a pump getting hot, if not submerged in fuel) Second edit in here....I may be thinking of the B757...will look it up.

IF this policy was/is still in use, then there is STILL at least 1,000 lbs there....even IF they got low on fuel for some other reason.

Still, too early to speculate....we had trouble for a while with the R/R engines on the 757s....the 'flight idle' setting was too low, and sometimes an engine would 'roll back' when at idle, simulating a power loss. (When slats/flaps are extended, the Flight Idle circuitry increases idle speed automatically....our 'roll-backs' occured at altitude, during idle descents, clean config....so, they changed the idle speed.

I went off-track....the Turkish airplane had gear down, slats and flaps...this is certainly going to be an interesting case to watch.

[edit on 2/25/0909 by weedwhacker]

[edit on 2/25/0909 by weedwhacker]

EDIT here, found the AD....it is number 2002-24-51, available on the FAA website.

[edit on 2/25/0909 by weedwhacker]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join