It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Air France Plane down

page: 41
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:49 PM
reply to post by albertfothergill

Well, i admit the extreme ultra slim chance of this happening.
like many others in here im just throwing in observations and try to
ask the unasked.
much like the post on a earthquake corrolation or the sunflare theory!
both powerful physical effects that given the right conditions,
might have a effect not yet discovered!
im unlikely to ever win the lottery or get hit by a minute meteor fracment,
but they do land and strike objects on land,
ive seen pictures of a car being hit in the trunk by a meteor,
The only difference is that the plane was moving, but then again everything
in the universe is, and things still collide.
i would say chances and margins sometimes works against us!
still that leaves the pictures in the article?? what is it, if its a meteor
there well could have been more. it looks pretty big to me, it could have exploded on entry with the atmosphere and been fragmented covering a big
area and making the chance of getting hit bigger!!
does the timing work for this to be a valid possibillity?
I dont like using google translate, it provides false positives, in the sense
that the bible could easily be translated as a demonic bible,if it was to be translated by google from lets say chinese to swedish.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:56 PM

Brazil militaries said that none of the wreckage found in the ocean, belongs to AF447. Even the oil spot doesn't belong to the plane and probably belongs to a ship.

Conclusion: they don't have the slightest ideia where is the plane if we can call it a plane after what may happened.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:59 PM
what dise it belong to then?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:05 PM
It belongs to no one, ship garbage thrown over board.
None of the collected material as any relation with AF447.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by crustas

ok,,, seems strange they didnt realise that from the plane they saw it form and only taken them till now to say.......

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:09 PM
reply to post by rikgrimsby

you ever seen a 1 meter square peice of metal and can say its from anything?

nah didn`t think so /

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:09 PM
reply to post by Harlequin

true :/

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:13 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Interesting. I would have thought them more powerful and dangerous at those latitudes, given that thats where hurricanes and other large, violent storms.

How fast do such clouds move, then? If there were alot of thunderheads around, how wise or advisable would it have been to try and fly around them?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:24 PM
The military, stressed by the politicians to deliver information in fast-mode to feed the starved MEDIA and to show results, turns out to have been a bad taste joke.

Don't forget that Brazil wants to look good in the picture, and that is by producing fast results.

Not all that shines is gold.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:27 PM
I heard on Fox News, a pilot on another plane in the area saw a bright flash of white light. Unknown if it was the Air France plane.

So the buzz I'm hearing is a terrorist bomb or a UFO encounter.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 07:50 PM
Two pilots, one from TAM(Brazil) another from Air Comet(Spanish), said they saw a strong flash at the time and place where the accident took place. They observed it, when they were flying in that region. The spanish pilot also add that the flash were very intense and white and it took a vertical descent, disappearing six seconds after.

The first thing that came into my mind about intense and white flash is thermite, but that is just a stupid, probably.

[url=]source:[/ url]

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:10 PM
Well, I think something stinks here. How would they know so darned fast that the piece of metal wasn't from the plane? The plane didn't just disappear into thin air. I first thought terrorism as well, but wouldn't someone have tried to claim responsibility for that by now?

I realize that was a pretty big area but by now wouldn't you think there might be a piece of luggage or something floating around?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 09:37 PM
A bit OT, I'm new here... But I'll get the hang of it!

" A Continental Express pilot reported seeing a "missile or rocket" flying near his aircraft Friday night over Texas, the Houston Chronicle reported.

The pilot told the Federal Aviation Administration an object was spotted within 150 feet below his airplane around 8:15 p.m. Friday night over Liberty County, Texas, the newspaper reported.

Liberty County Chief Deputy Ken DeFoor told that officials met Tuesday with the FBI and the FAA to investigate the pilot's claims."


Also Hugo Chevez has cancelled a visit to El Salvador Due for the inauguration of new President Mauricio Funes sighting a perceived assassination plot.

..."In this case the information was very precise, [it indicated] that they were going to launch one or several rockets at the Cubana airline plane that was already ready to leave from Maiquetia [airport in Venezuela],” he said, and explained that the Venezuelan presidential plane was being repaired at the time and that Cuba had lent him one of its planes for his travels. Chavez and Morales were going to travel to El Salvador together in the plane."


What's that saying? Once is an accident, twice is a pattern, thrice is a program?

There is a definite anomalous pattern here regarding the frequency of news casts mentioning Missiles and planes... All in the last few days. I'd be interested t o hear the results of the forensic test on what's left of the fuselage for explosive or related material...

Who knows. Sorry for OT.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by Trunkeight]

[edit on 4-6-2009 by Trunkeight]

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 02:04 AM
I was unaware of the earthquake that occured just before midnight on Sunday. Seems to coincide with a solar flare that occured around midnight on the 30th. Yes the earth was between the crash site and the sun however similar charged flare to the South Atlantic Anomoly would spread out over the magnetic shield as it tries to deflect the blast. Would it exploit a similar charged hole and penetrate? Could a solar flare trigger an earthquake? According to The Smithsonian and NASA astrophysics data yes.

I know planes are shielded for lightning strikes and such. But I'm pretty sure they're not shielded for high level solar radiation.

[edit on 5-6-2009 by DEEZNUTZ]

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 02:07 AM
Well it is now a fact that the debris found was NOT part of the plane and that also means the oil slick./rap3ed

6:56am UK, Friday June 05, 2009
Salvage teams have yet to recover any wreckage from missing Air France Flight 447, despite earlier reports.

A Brazilian air force official said debris recovered from the crash site was not from the lost Airbus A330.

Brigadier Ramon Cardoso, director of Brazilian air traffic control, said: "Up to now, no material from the plane has been recovered.

Brazilian navy boat Grajau Class which is searching for debris from the Air France crash

Navy craft are searching for debris

"We confirm that the pallet found is not part of the debris of the plane. It's a pallet that was in the area, but considered more to be trash."

Items, including a cargo pallet and two buoys pulled from the sea on Thursday actually came from another source, he said, most probably a ship.

The pallet was made of wood and the Air France Airbus A330 did not have any wooden pallets on board.

He also said a big oil slick originally thought to come from the plane probably also came from a ship passing through the zone, 600 miles off Brazil's coat.

The fuel slick had originally been used as evidence to suggest the plane did not explode - now a theory under question.

A sudden event caused the autopilot to disengage. The 'cascade' is one system after another failing within seconds of each other. That included the cabin pressure. This suggests the pilots would have had little or no time to attempt to do anything.

A sudden event caused the autopilot to disengage. The 'cascade' is one system after another failing within seconds of each other. That included the cabin pressure. This suggests the pilots would have had little or no time to attempt to do anything.

Sky's foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall on the Air France flight's final four minutes

It is five days since the passenger plane went down off Brazil's northeastern coast, killing all 228 people aboard in the world's worst aviation disaster since 2001.

Investigators are still trying to work out why the plane ditched in a violent storm over the Atlantic.

Some think unusual weather may have caused instruments to fail, but they will have little to go on until they recover the plane's black box.

It is thought the box is now on the sea floor, miles beneath the surface, making it very difficult to retrieve.

Other potential causes - including terrorism - have yet to be ruled out.

France's accident investigation agency has established that a series of automatic messages gave conflicting signals about the plane's speed and the flight path went through dangerously stormy weather.

But the agency warned against any "hasty interpretation or speculation" after the French newspaper Le Monde reported, without naming sources, that the Air France plane was flying at the wrong speed.

[edit on 5-6-2009 by tarifa37]

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 02:24 AM

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by relu84

here is the wiki link:

Positive Lightning

It differs from normal lightning by many magnitudes. It's lightning on serious steroids.

Yes, magnitude 5-10 since it has to cover the distance from the CB cloud to the ground, and here is my question, what is ground here, is it the sea ?

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 03:36 AM

please read his page - he re0did it based on new data yesterday

cloud satellite tracks , nasa data , thermal imagin -

The opinion of Tim Vasquez - ex-USAF expert is that the turbulence in the main cloud cluster was the prime factor in the crash given the forces :

As of June 4, I still consider turbulence to be one of the prime factors. Extensive reanalysis of upper level data supports instability values of about 1100 J/kg, which is sufficient to be a danger to airline operations. Though commercial aircraft benefit greatly from airborne radar, these radar units detect mainly rain and hail. Updrafts, particularly if they are strong, may form what are referred to as "weak echo regions" and this can create highly turbulent areas which are not detectable on radar. Another concern is the extensive upper-level dry air shown on the SBFN sounding (not counting the anvil debris at 350-300 mb), which may have contributed to enhanced evaporative cooling around the margins of the anvil clouds and aggravated the turbulence experienced by the flight around the periphery of the storm. It is worth considering that cumulative periods of heavy turbulence crossing through the cluster may have caused minor internal damage that progressed in some way into an emergency

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 06:07 AM

Originally posted by reugen

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by relu84

here is the wiki link:

Positive Lightning

It differs from normal lightning by many magnitudes. It's lightning on serious steroids.

Yes, magnitude 5-10 since it has to cover the distance from the CB cloud to the ground, and here is my question, what is ground here, is it the sea ?

Could be sea, could be another cloud, could be the plane itself. Anything that may be polarized opposite of the origin of the lightning.

[edit on 5-6-2009 by maxweljames]

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 08:33 AM
From the known weather and flight trajectory data, I think it is fairly obvious what happened. You really don't need any exotic explanations for this tragedy.

The flight crew made a grave error by not changing course to avoid a massive CB cluster. They apparently flew smack into the middle of what we call In Texas, a supercell.

There's a very good reason airlines over land in the USA are FORBIDDEN by air traffic control from flying into a supercell. The wind shear forces are so violent, extreme turbulence is likely inside a supercell. "Extreme" means the crew loses control of the aircraft. That's how badly it's shaking and gyrating and being tossed about.

Think about the effect of hitting a 100 - 200 mph vertical updraft... when you flip a coin, what happens to the coin? Then, if you hit a downdraft of similar velocity, it would drive you down like being hit by a giant hammer.

Not to mention possible tornadic rotation, large hail, and enough water to flood and drown out engines.

Let this be a lesson to all airline flight crews... always change course and navigate around supercells and supercell clusters... don't play russian roulette with the lives of all onboard by arrogance, snobbery, overconfidence, thinking you can "pick your way though it"... don't think that because you are in a big, state-of-the-art heavy that you are invincible... you are not invincinble.

All airlines should hold one-on-one meetings with all pilots and ask "what is your opinion about remaining on course at cruising altitude on autopilot heading into severe weather?" If the pilot says something like "just some turbulence, but these babies are built to take it, no problem".... O.K., ground that guy until he can be trained on why it is forbidden to fly into a towering CB supercell.

From what I have seen here...

there is no reasonable excuse for the tragedy. Flying into that supercell instead of going around foolishly put the lives of all onboard in lethal peril when it could have been avoided.

You've got some big time corporate executives on board who don't want to be late getting into Paris. Well, tough cookies, GO AROUND the severe storm cluster and arrive late or make an alternate landing somewhere else. Lives are at stake.

As passengers, we have to trust that pilots will make decisions with due caution. I've been on many diverted flights in the USA because of severe weather. No one complained about hours of delay or in a few cases landing in some other city because the pilot simply announced to the cabin "we have severe weather ahead and it's best we go around it... this will cause a pretty major delay in our schedule but we have to go around this storm." Unanimous reaction is always "fine, just keep us out of danger".

I sincerely hope airlines initiate some special remedial training for flight crews regarding severe weather. Flying into the heart of a severe storm is not worth the risk for any reason.

If I were a pilot or flight crew, I would refuse to fly into a storm system like the one that downed Air France 447. I have been ticketed on flights before that were cancelled altogether because of such storm systems.

I think, from what we know of 447 flight path, the ride being autopilot until the end, and the weather data... this may well have been pilot error.

There should be protocol, if there isn't already, for crew to overrule the pilot and just stand up and say "Sir, we are not continuing on this heading straight into a CB supercell cluster. We are going around." There should be a way that a crew could relieve the captain of command when and if such captain endangers the lives of all onboard due to grave error in judgement.

Of course, if any further evidence is found, we could find out there was another contributing factor but you really don't need any. It was a killer storm they flew right into. Bad move. Insane risk taking. No excuse.

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:12 AM
It is very obvious what is happening. The CB clouds is some strange place that sucks people into LOST island.

They just vanished and the plane wreckage is no where to be found!

new topics

top topics

<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in