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.

 

Air France Flight 447 Did Not Break Up, Fell Intact Into Sea: French Investigator

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Air France Flight 447 Did Not Break Up, Fell Intact Into Sea: French Investigator


www.huffingtonpost.com


LE BOURGET, France — Air France Flight 447 plunged vertically into the Atlantic Ocean intact at a very high speed, a top French investigator said Thursday, adding that problems with the plane's speed sensors were not the direct cause of the crash.

Alain Bouillard, who is leading the investigation into the June 1 crash for the French accident agency BEA, says the sensors, called Pitot tubes, were "a factor but not the only one.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Interesting story, what would make the aircraft drop like a stone? surely even if it suffered a total engine failure would it not be able to glide for a while? and if it plunged almost vertically would the resulting g forces not tear the aircraft to pieces whilst in the air? What ever it was that caused this crash it must have been relatively sudden to cause the pilots to not send a mayday or position?

www.huffingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
was about to post this with the flight link:

www.flightglobal.com...


Speaking at the briefing, the BEA's Alain Bouillard said: "As of today we are far from having any real idea of the causes of this accident."


they don`t know and likely will never know - the black boxes as far as we are aware have not been found , and time is fast running out to find them.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
btw huffington had better change there translation as its to be honest bloody aweful:

heres the french

"L'avion est entré en contact de l'eau en ligne de vol avec une forte acceleration verticale"

which translated is:

The airplane made contact with the water on a line of flight with a strong vertical acceleration


sky news



"Alain Bouillard of the investigating team said the plane probably hit the water belly-first. He said the plane "appears to have hit the surface of the water in flying position with a strong acceleration".
The investigators also said that faulty speed sensors, which were suspected of being behind the crash, had been "a factor but not the cause". "


[edit on 2/7/09 by Harlequin]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by solidshot
 



Interesting story, what would make the aircraft drop like a stone?


I can only speculate;


surely even if it suffered a total engine failure would it not be able to glide for a while?


Absolutely correct.


and if it plunged almost vertically would the resulting g forces not tear the aircraft to pieces whilst in the air?


You're confusing G forces, with aerodynamic forces.

Recall EgyptAir 990, an intentional crash, from altitude, by the suicidal Co-pilot....he shoved the nose down into a dive...exceeding maximum airspeeds will damage, but not necessarily cause a full break-up.

Now, AF447 speculation? Based on this report, here's one plausible scenario.

To understand balanced flight, imagine the side view of an airplane, and picture what is called the 'center of gravity'. It is the point where all of the mass of the airplane can be thought to be acted upon by gravity. Center of mass, if you will.

Now, the wing provides lift, and the theoretical point where all of the upward force is concentrated is called the 'center of lift'. Both C/G and C/L shift, but only within a certain "envelope", and in any case for most airplanes (except exotic and experimental fighters and such) the C/G will always be forward of the C/L. This provides a 'dynamically stable' configuration. Of course, there is a rotational moment at work, so that's where the horizontal stabilizer comes into play. It provides a downward force as a moderating balance.

If you lost a portion, or all, of the horizontal stab, the airplane would nose over and there would be no control whatsoever.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Originally I thought (as well as most pilots whom I spoke to) that it had broken up in the air. Either way, remember no inflated life vests were found....and none on the bodies, so the crew did not have time to prepare for a ditching so that scenario is out....it was certianly sudden. All the wreckage was found to be bent in the same direction (as opposed to all sorts of directions which indicate a mid-air breakup).



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
What are the odds that the French are covering up a serious issue with the Airbus planes in service now to prevent a global grounding of all Airbus planes?

Very small amount of wreckage
Limited number of bodies to determine final minutes of flight

I call bull, they are covering their rears trying to ensure no global grounding of Airbus planes in service.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by stealthyone
 


what global grounding?

the same global grounding with the `serious` issues regarding the boeing 777 and engine roll backs due to fuel freezing?

the same groundings with the beoing 767 and its faulty brakes which don`t stop it in wet runways?

the same grounding witht the 737 / A320`s which sseem to fall out of the sky.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I thought the bodies recovered had no clothes or limited clothing which I always thought was due to falling from a great height outside a plane not in it ?

Any thoughts on that one anyone?



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

If you lost a portion, or all, of the horizontal stab, the airplane would nose over and there would be no control whatsoever.


while that'S totally true, you would still have half a minute to send a distress signal. the lack of mayday calls is a problem, because it implies foul play or negligience, doesn't it?!



Originally posted by scared angel
I thought the bodies recovered had no clothes or limited clothing which I always thought was due to falling from a great height outside a plane not in it ?

Any thoughts on that one anyone?


yes, lots of them (probably too paranoid), although i can't take media reports seriously anymore, so maybe they were simply badly smashed... no photos were released, which i can understand, to a point.

[edit on 2009.7.3 by Long Lance]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
As stated in my Facts Of The Conspiracy thread, something smells incredibly fishy, especially when the authorites said that the seats and plane parts found were from an entirely different plane


My guess (and I am sticking my head out here) it was the act of testing a new weapon or an assasination on the important passengers that were on that VERY flight.



[edit on 3-7-2009 by franspeakfree]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
My guess (and I am sticking my head out here) it was the act of testing a new weapon or an assasination on the important passengers that were on that VERY flight.
[edit on 3-7-2009 by franspeakfree]


It could only be that the plane has structural problems so early in its career and that no conspiracy need apply.

Similar to the nick name that was given to the plane "Black Widow", i just cannot remember if it was the DC9 or DC10, im sure someone will correct me here.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Long Lance
 



...you would still have half a minute to send a distress signal. the lack of mayday calls is a problem...


Not necessarily.

If it was a control problem first priority is regaining control. Calling a MayDay does no good, because no one else can help you!!!

AND, 'MayDay' is misunderstood, at least as it applies to aviation. A MayDay is usually assumed to be broadcast "in the blind" as a general distress call (as in a ship at sea). For airplanes in an ATC environment all you have to do is say you have an emergency, and that triggers immediate 'carte blanche' by ATC...priority handling, etc.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:35 AM
link   
How does a plane fall vertically? We arent talking about a helicopter here. Planes will glide for dozens of miles if they lose all power depending on altitude and this plane should have been at altitude as the incident dod not occur right after take off.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
How does a plane fall vertically? We arent talking about a helicopter here. Planes will glide for dozens of miles if they lose all power depending on altitude and this plane should have been at altitude as the incident dod not occur right after take off.

I agree with the statement above.

How ?



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 



...nick name...given to the plane "Black Widow", ...was the DC9 or DC10...


Actually, the DC10 was called a 'Widow Maker' for a while. Term came from the WWII era, because of high rates of fatal accidents with the B-26 'Marauder'. Later, in the 1960s, the F-104 earned the title.

The DC10 had its share of high-profile accidents early on, but most could be attributed to Human problems, not mechanical. Turkish Airlines crash -- someone failed to close a cargo door properly.

Most spectacular was the American Airlines crash in Chicago in 1979. Led to the grounding of the airplane for a while. Turns out, it was AAL's own maintenance procedure "short-cuts" that contributed to the engine breaking away from its mountings on the wing, not a design flaw.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
this article says it hit belly first..

news.yahoo.com...



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by whiteraven
 


As ~lucidity said, there are conflicting accounts of AF447, and how it struck the water, and in what attitude.

However, for whiteraven, here's an example of a dive and crash into water:

en.wikipedia.org...

First dive and recovery

At 4:09 p.m., the flight crew was able to unjam the horizontal stabilizer with the primary trim system, however, upon being freed, it quickly moved to an extreme "nose-down" position, forcing the aircraft into a dive. Alaska 261 went from about 31,500 feet to between 23,000 and 24,000 feet in around 80 seconds. Both pilots struggled together to regain control of the aircraft, and only by exerting a pulling force of 130 to 140 pounds (59.1 to 63.6 kg) on the controls were the flight crew able to arrest the 6,000 foot-per minute descent of the aircraft and stabilize themselves at approximately 24,400 feet.

Alaska 261 informed Air Traffic Control (ATC) of their control problems. After the flight crew stated their intention to land at LAX, ATC inquired if they wanted to proceed to a lower altitude in preparation for approach. The captain replied: "I need to get down to about ten, change my configuration, make sure I can control the jet and I'd like to do that out here over the bay if I may." Later, during the public hearings into the accident, the request by the pilot not to overfly populated areas was specifically commended by NTSB board members. During this time the flight crew considered, and rejected, any further attempts to correct the runaway trim. They proceeded to descend to a lower altitude and start to configure the aircraft for landing at LAX.


Second dive and crash

Beginning at 4:19 p.m., the CVR recorded the sounds of at least four distinct "thumps", followed 17 seconds later by an "extremely loud noise". The aircraft rapidly pitched over into a dive. Several aircraft in the vicinity had been alerted by ATC to maintain visual contact with the stricken jet and they immediately contacted the controller. One pilot radioed "that plane has just started to do a big huge plunge", another reported "Yes sir, ah, I concur he is, uh, definitely in a nose down, uh, position descending quite rapidly".



I'm not suggesting this is what happened in AF447's case, it is just an example.

Ed. (forgot to cite source)


[edit on 7/3/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Russians order Flight Changes, after Massive Magnetic Shift downs Airliners...



Commanders have issued warnings to all of their aircraft to exercise “extreme caution” during flights “in and around” an area defined as Latitude 17 North [North Atlantic Ocean] Latitude 3 South [South Atlantic Ocean] to Latitude 8 North [Indian Ocean] Latitude 19 South [Indian Ocean] between the Longitudes of 46 West, 33 West, 46 East and 33 East, and which covers the greater part of the African Tectonic Plate.

The reason for this unprecedented warning, these reports state, are the rapid formations of “geomagnetic storms” emanating from the boundaries of the African Tectonic Plate that due to their intensity have caused the loss of two major passenger aircraft during the past month leaving nearly 300 men, women and children dead.

The first aircraft to be downed by this phenomenon was Air France passenger flight 447, and which these reports say that upon encountering one of these geomagnetic storms, on June 1st, near the western boundary of the African Tectonic Plate close to Brazil’s Fernando de Noronha Islands, was “completely annihilated” causing the deaths of 216 passengers and 12 crew members as their plane plunged in pieces into the Atlantic Ocean.

macedoniaonline.eu...

If this report can be believed it would warrant further investigation.

Thanks WW for your explanation. The Alaskan flight would have been one heck of a ride.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by whiteraven
 


Sorry, raven, somebody beat you to that one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's a confirmed HOAX by Sacha Faal

Read the LatLong co-ordinates listed...total BS.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join