...and this is why we don't believe the Government, folks.

Ugh. I remember eating chocks as a kid.

reply to post by Phage


I'm just guessing here, but I'll bet you're a joy to go to amusement parks with. The 'how they did that' on every neat thing to see. I can just imagine.

Seriously, the updates are appreciated for knowing the actual story of what happened. At the time it crossed the headline wires (where I grabbed it) it was a situation of stating very little was known and the FAA statement of which I'd quoted being about the only thing I could see or find. Even their live helicopter news crew, which was broadcasting across the site I top linked in the op, sounded befuddled over the whole thing and they were just a short distance, orbiting above it.

It is good to solve the mystery tho! Mechanics and a jump on the wheel chocks. So wings had nothing to do with it. Hmm... Talk about an expensive "oooops!"

reply to post by Phage


I used to live in Chino and I'm positive they only cater to light aircraft. Unless something has changed.
Anyway chock one up for Chino !

Why is that building still standing ?

The government says HAARP is just a research facility and those antennaes are for communicating with submarines. And we KNOW that aint true. lmfao Sorry, i had to go there. I gave up on the government, after 9-11. Now, it's nothing but complete and utter B.S., coming out of the mouths of politicians.

So the gov finally released a picture ot the plane that hit the pentagon?

I smell photoshop!

And this is why we laugh at idiot conspiracy theorists - no pilots on board, and repeating a media claim that the FAA said that the wing hit the hanger, and the expanding that to a wing tip, then complaining that someone points out they are wrong!!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You might have noticed...the thread and story is not only NOT about believing the media report and initial version of the events, as reported, but actually highlighting HOW inaccurate it was vs. the visual evidence anyone could plainly see themselves.

Now the link in the OP has updated and dramatically changed in content since the thread was created, shortly after this happened. What had been there and been the only reports anywhere I could find on the internet at the time consisted of what is quoted in the OP and about 4 sentences after it. Nothing more. No further details. Just a reference to a statement obtained from someone at the FAA office and that formed pretty much the start, finish and end of their WHOLE body of facts to report.

Given that was what wrote the only information they had? I'm guessing they did, in fact, call the FAA and actually did talk to someone in Public/Media Relations or whoever it is the major L.A. studios talk to when they call those folks. What followed is more than likely what they were told.

....which is where this thread picked up about how FAA people making statements when there is no information to state is probably a really really bad idea. In that? Oh, I think it was a complete success for the point it was meant to make.

* I'd also noted in another post, but you apparently missed ...... The Helicopter owned by the reporting source was about 1,000 feet over this hangar at the time I made the thread, orbiting the scene and broadcasting the images you see in the OP linked pic live. Obviously the media knew it was a crock and inaccurate TOO...but they had only one statement from anyone, anywhere and what else to put in writing? The crew in the chopper sounded almost as confused and bemused as many on this thread.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


news.cnet.com...

Two decades later, perhaps the most enduring example of government waste is the $436 Pentagon hammer. The ignominious piece of hardware, though hardly the most egregious purchase of the time, struck a chord with the American public and became an emblem of the Department of Defense's procurement scandals of the 1980s.


There are many reasons to not trust our govt. Their eyesight is certainly suspect, as is their accounting methods.

Wing brushes against hanger lightly. The light force increases to heavy. As this happens, the wing begins to dig into the side of the hanger. At this point, the plane pivots in the dug in wing tip formed axis as the plane makes a hard left into the hanger. The pilot then reports, "my wing got caught in the hanger". The official spokesperson had only this information to go on, and ran with it.

Have you seen the movie, "flight" with denzel? I think the lesson here is dont trust pilots.

DAMN, Id hate to hear what their story is when a plane has trouble locking all trays in the upright position, The pic would go something like this, all the seats were sucked out of the plane, but everyone is fine, now please fasten seatbelts and Hold the F#ck on. LOL

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


While I'm normally 100% onboard with your thread silly wrabbit and I'm definately one to cross reference MSM with outside sources... via here! Today this morning on WGN News Channel 9 the reporters showed this picture and reported accurately, well I should say they didn't state a wing cliped the hanger as for the rest of the details... Well you know how the story goes

Good find either way on some shody reporting~

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


WOW, you really expect a lot from government...................don't ya.

Second

Contradictary statements. Either someone was half asleep when they wrote the article, or they are just that careless, or they have a 3rd grader writing their stories.

They shoulda just left the part out about the wing, they would have looked less dumb.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

And, finally, a direct quote:

“The plane was chalked on the ramp area while undergoing an engine run-up test. At some point, the plane jumped the chalks and ran into the hangar. There were three mechanics on the plane, but none was injured, the plane was not intended for flight,” FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said in a statement.

ktla.com...

The correct spelling is chocks.

edit on 6/13/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

A good argument to always have someone at the controls during those tests (in my opinion, which is like belly buttons, everyone has one).

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Well, to be fair, the wings did touch the hanger at the edges of the gaping hole caused by the nose.

Originally posted by eManym
The pilot must have gotten a text message while taxiing. Texting and taxiing don't mix well.

No the pilot was using auto take off...Oh wait he forgot it doesn't do that!

Originally posted by sulaw
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

While I'm normally 100% onboard with your thread silly wrabbit and I'm definately one to cross reference MSM with outside sources... via here! Today this morning on WGN News Channel 9 the reporters showed this picture and reported accurately, well I should say they didn't state a wing cliped the hanger as for the rest of the details... Well you know how the story goes

Good find either way on some shody reporting~

lol.... Thanks. I thought it was a decent find as well, given that shoddy reporting based on some goober in the FAA office was the whole point and direction of the thread.

I'm getting a bit of a laugh out of the folks suggesting I'm way off here by going on media reports ...when.. Umm.. Yeah.. The bad reporting IS the point. I dunno... Some saw it and some didn't. I guess it was easier to get context for when the original link had what they started the report with, when this happened. As the only people at that point reporting it? It was a whole different story from how it looks today. In that, I'm real glad I at least quoted and didn't just link to what doesn't exist as a reference to see anymore.

I think that might be one of thos planes they recalled for a sticking throttle cable isnt it?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Hey that's a really good point.

Thanks for the carrot to help these eyes see better friendly wrabbit.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Well, to be fair, the wings did touch the hanger at the edges of the gaping hole caused by the nose.

You guys/gals put things so harshly.

They were just merely making an 'unexpected detour'.