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.

 

Reports: 777 crash lands at San Francisco

page: 12
48
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SaneThinking
 


The odds of a bad fuse causing a false alarm are much greater than the odds of some electromagnetic storm that only affects two planes out of hundreds taking off, enroute or landing.

Small mechincal and electrical problems develop on airplanes just like they develop in cars.




posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

True, but if commercial pilots use it all they time they can get used to it. I'm not trying to jump to the conclusion of the NTSB report before it's investigated, but based on what we know so far, my best guess is, this was a factor and will likely be stated as such in the final report. But I could be wrong.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Thats why I furthered the question to you I enjoy your threads very informational. I as well used the RSOE like I do each morning and actually saw it show up last night after they finalized the RSOE report. I do as well watch the suspicious0bserver channel. But do my own diligence when it comes to digging.

I only brought it up further after reading many a news report from NASA on the coming solar cycle that was supposed to be a maximum, and they were warning of flight issues, power grid issues worst case scenario type stuff. Then to be watching the flux magnometer yesterday in real time upadating on my desktop (bit of a spaceweather telescope using nerd) there was a large amount of induction at that time, the earth was being bombarded. As I said it was quite the coincidence and felt since it dealt with aircraft you were the man to talk too


I agree with you and Earth, I as well would expect to see every damn plane fall outta the sky should this be the case. But then again when quebec suffered from solar storm damage, it wasen't earth wide more a local event.

Anyway thank you for your response, gonna keep my eyes open as always regardless.

SaneThinking



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaneThinking
Anyway thank you for your response, gonna keep my eyes open as always regardless.


Absolutely. You never know when you will see something unexpected. Eventually we are going to see an event that will affect flights, the question is how. Will we see navigation issues? Aircraft malfunctions? Or will they, as you said "fall out of the sky"? It's inevitable that eventually we'll see something caused by a magnetic storm.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

True, but if commercial pilots use it all they time they can get used to it. I'm not trying to jump to the conclusion of the NTSB report before it's investigated, but based on what we know so far, my best guess is, this was a factor and will likely be stated as such in the final report. But I could be wrong.


The pilots were probably not familiar enough with the airport beforehand, and the ILS being down for repair doomed them. Add lack of communication, distractions, or something else as well. Normally its a combination of factors.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by SaneThinking
 


The odds of a bad fuse causing a false alarm are much greater than the odds of some electromagnetic storm that only affects two planes out of hundreds taking off, enroute or landing.


I would have to agree I fly quite a bit over the SF Bay Area and its a busy corridor. If there was electromagnetic storm interference 214 would not have been the only one effected



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Normally its a combination of factors.


Normally an accident is described as a chain of events, where if one event was changed, it wouldn't happen. They'll probably see a breakdown in crew coordination, which is what usually happens in pilot error accidents.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by TheMagus

but i bet you didn't know that just five minutes earlier
0:18
at nineteen forty eight u t_c_
0:20
at the athens international airport across the planet
0:23
an Asiana airlines boeing seven seventy seven twenty engine d_r_ two
0:27
hundred had a fire breakout and barely got down in time to avoid major problems
0:33
same airline has to identify models taken out in the span of five minutes on
0:39
opposite sides of the planet


Wrong (the third time posted now). The Athens emergency WAS a Boeing 777-200ER, the same model as the Asiana flight, but it was Kenya Airways flight 117 from Amsterdam to Nairobi. There was no fire in the hold, just an alert that there was. The crew discharged the fire bottle and made a precautionary landing. The aircraft was returned to service today, and the flight continued on to Nairobi.

didn't read my post or watch the video did you ?
YT transcripts are very crappy [note the crossed out sexually,when the audio is :

's [is or it's ]actually
l see i missed an error

0:33
same airline has to identify models taken out in the span of five minutes on
0:39
opposite sides of the planet

should be

0:33
same airline has 2 identical models taken out in the span of five minutes on
0:39
opposite sides of the planet



so no, I was not wrong, YT transcript and the resultant reading comprehension was

the point of my post was to point out a possible spaceweather event
as a casual agency

thus you're only posting half the story

thought i'd contribute as there seems to be a cover up
[see rest of transcript ]

and this is a Conspiracy Forum


I will also point out that it's become exceedingly difficult to confirm there was no fire, or get to any reports on the athens report due to the web being flooded with reports of the SF case [not accusing you of contributing to the increasing noise to signal ratio, btw]

perhaps I should post my own thread, if you have no interest ?



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by SaneThinking
Anyway thank you for your response, gonna keep my eyes open as always regardless.


Absolutely. You never know when you will see something unexpected. Eventually we are going to see an event that will affect flights, the question is how. Will we see navigation issues? Aircraft malfunctions? Or will they, as you said "fall out of the sky"? It's inevitable that eventually we'll see something caused by a magnetic storm.


this is precisely my point, it's seems to have happened

but...



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 


Then there must have been two 777s making emergency landings for the exact same reason at Athens, at the exact same time.


A Kenya Airways flight made an emergency landing in Greece Saturday after smoke was detected in the plane.

The KQ Flight 117 from Amsterdam to Nairobi with 301 passengers was flying over Greece, when one of the smoke sensors in the cargo hold triggered a fire alarm.

The pilot announced a diversion on the PA system moments before the plane made a steep descent to land in Athens.

A former Nation editor Rashid Abdi, who was on board, paid tribute to Captain Muiruri saying he handled the matter professionally.



He said the aircraft, a Boeing 777 200ER, was diverted to Athens at 1am Kenyan time because there was a fire warning indication in one of the cargo holds.

www.businessdailyafrica.com...


Kenya Airways flight KQ117 from Amsterdam to Nairobi has made an emergency stop at Greece capital Athens, a press statement from the airline communications office has said.

"Kenya Airways wishes to inform its passengers and the general public of the diversion of flight KQ117 that was flying from Amsterdam to Nairobi with 301 passengers on board."

"The aircraft, a Boeing 777 200ER, was diverted to Athens at 0125 Hours Kenyan time after a fire warning indication in one of the cargo holds. As is the normal standard procedure in the industry, the fire suppression system was activated and the aircraft diverted to the nearest airport for further assessment."


The statement further says that tests have been conducted on the fire detection system and it has been found to be working properly.

The airline says that the crew and passengers have been taken to a local hotel and the flight is set to depart Athens at 1700 hours and is expected to arrive in Nairobi at 2255hours.

www.the-star.co.ke...

At the 0:28 mark where he shows the details of the emergency landing, it clearly shows Kenya Airways.

Asiana doesn't fly anywhere near Greece going by their flight maps. A space weather event wouldn't affect only two aircraft, half a world apart. It would have affected hundreds at least, if not thousands of them.
edit on 7/7/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 


So out of millions of planes in the air, these were the ONLY planes affected? You'll have to explain that one to me. And explain how Kenya Airways and Asiana both have planes land with the exact same problem, at the exact same airport, at the exact same time, when one of them doesn't fly near there.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Normally its a combination of factors.


Normally an accident is described as a chain of events, where if one event was changed, it wouldn't happen. They'll probably see a breakdown in crew coordination, which is what usually happens in pilot error accidents.


indeed its a combination of factors. maybe they didn't adjust their altimeter or maybe the altimeter guage malfuncitoned. maybe throttle stick got stuck. maybe the pilots did not speak good english to communicate with airtraffic control. maybe the pilots were arguing nonsense.




posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


With them having such a high decent rate, one possibility is that they started the Before Landing Checklist late, and were trying to get caught up on their workload, and stopped paying full attention to flying the airplane. They noticed they were coming in high, and started a sharp decent to get down to the runway, went back to their checklist, and failed to arrest the decent in time.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


With them having such a high decent rate, one possibility is that they started the Before Landing Checklist late, and were trying to get caught up on their workload, and stopped paying full attention to flying the airplane. They noticed they were coming in high, and started a sharp decent to get down to the runway, went back to their checklist, and failed to arrest the decent in time.


If I had to wager on anything I would stick to *not familiar enough with the airport* as the primary cause. A million things could go wrong and they could have corrected them. The weather conditions were pretty good as well.
edit on 7/7/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Yeah, but even if you're not familiar with the airport, you would realize you were in trouble well before you hit 86 knots at 75 feet. You should never be that slow that close to the ground unless you're over runway and about to touch down.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Yeah, but even if you're not familiar with the airport, you would realize you were in trouble well before you hit 86 knots at 75 feet. You should never be that slow that close to the ground unless you're over runway and about to touch down.


I agree but its considered a taboo to declare missed approach and declare a go around. If pilots do this too often they get sacked as incompetant. Its almost like saying you saw ufos enroute to your destination. It doesn't sit well with management.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by TheMagus
 


So out of millions of planes in the air, these were the ONLY planes affected? You'll have to explain that one to me. And explain how Kenya Airways and Asiana both have planes land with the exact same problem, at the exact same airport, at the exact same time, when one of them doesn't fly near there.





Normally an accident is described as a chain of events, where if one event was changed, it wouldn't happen.


but since nobody seems interested in comparing the causality chains in both events
in order to find a common factor, sequence of events, etc. which could show or dispove the hypothesis , and would rather poo-poo the whole idea and find easier scapegoats i.e pilot error... [what a coincidence btw]

never mind that the magnetic events occurrence is indisputable
or that


3:57
speculation
3:58
causation on my part
4:00
but the fact that the fully operational fact checker* that might allow me to
4:04
confirm or deny my claim
4:06
was turned off mid day yesterday

*NOAA's Real-time US Total Electron Content: Vertical and Slant

the tools and methods exist but if access to the tools is denied, or investigation is discouraged...

we're left having accept [or not]

the reports of "EXPERTS"

and that's not denying ignorance

is it now?



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 


So in the case of Asiana, instead of looking at the most likely cause we should jump to the conclusion that a magnetic storm somehow caused them to not be able to look out the window and see that they were too low? Even if a magnetic storm caused an instrument malfunction, they could SEE they were too low, therefor it's pilot error no matter how you slice it.

In the case of the Kenya Airways flight, the magnetic storm not only caused an indicator in the cockpit to light up saying there was a fire in the cargo hold, it also caused smoke to appear in the cabin, coming from the cargo hold area where the fire indication was? That's an amazing coincidence.

Then there's more coincidence that the magnetic storm only affected two Boeing 777s that were on opposite sides of the world from each other. There are over 1100 Boeing 777s in the world, with probably several hundred in the air at any given time. Why weren't any of those affected? Why wasn't any other plane in the world affected in the same way? There are 5,000 planes over the US at any given moment, and none of them were affected, except the Asiana flight? There are probably millions of planes airborne around the world on any given day, and not one of them was affected, except these two?

Amazing coincidence that.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 


San Francisco isn't exactly the bermuda triangle where military planes drop into the sea with bad compass readings, ships sink because of air bubbles or excessive methane, rogue waves appear out of nowhere, ufos drop from the clouds, time warps happen, etc.



If there was a real problem with electromagnetic storms that day than multiple airplanes would have had problems in that vicinity at that time. Athens greece is probably 7000 miles away from san francisco if not more. I am pretty sure the two events that occurred were completly unrellated and a freak coincidence if you will.

You are entitled to your opinion but i can't see why some people take this seriously. It puzzles me!
edit on 7/7/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   
ROFL

we get it already [i sanethinker, and the other poster ]
you're not interested

just blame the pilots






You are entitled to your opinion but i can't see why some people take this seriously. It puzzles me!

i find it curious that a pilot [or so OP claims to be ] is rather quick to jump on the pilot error bandwagon
it may come back to bite him in the posterior

it does not puzzle me at all how some always choose to stick their heads in the sand, and always select the "simplest explanation" [taken from the list that's been put into their heads ]
but that would be off topic
and my participation herein ends now.

continue to "deny ignorance" by being mere repeaters *COUGHING*
I mean Reporters



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join