Two Clinton Informants Killed In Russian Plane Crash

a reply to: Zaphod58

Of course it could be good old fashioned sabotage and the investigators were paid off. This is Russia we're talking about and Russia definitely doesn't want to be implicated in any international scandals. Form a conspiracy standpoint at least.

It could be synchroncity. If they were Clinton informants karma coming back to get them.

originally posted by: gpols
a reply to: Zaphod58

Of course it could be good old fashioned sabotage and the investigators were paid off. This is Russia we're talking about and Russia definitely doesn't want to be implicated in any international scandals. Form a conspiracy standpoint at least.

It could be synchroncity. If they were Clinton informants karma coming back to get them.

Doesnt matter the who , it makes for a good conspiracy.
And this is ATS (albeit in a new form )
Gosh , bring back the good old days of the early turn of the century

a reply to: gpols

And that's the problem. No matter what anyone says, or all the evidence of the same thing happening seven times in two days to other aircraft in this same area, the "it could still be a coverup" will always be trotted out.

a reply to: Gothmog

Exactly.

Well, things change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. I just hope all the extra traffic keeps ATS running strong.

ATS is and always will be the tin foil hat zone.

a reply to: Zaphod58

If the "it's still a cover up" people didn't exist ATS wouldn't exist though.

I mean people still whole heartedly believe that the earth is flat and the moon landings were staged.

So cheers to the "it's a cover up" people no matter how much evidence exists to debunk their theory.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: CIAGypsy

Except that it's far from unexplained. They already have the preliminary cause for it, and it was remarkably simple, and surprisingly common.

I know it is hard to belive for some, but these people have to travel too and many fly commercial. Which means when they crash, they die too.

Yeah ok, but are the two witnesses to Clinton crimes dead or not?

Even if this were a chance accident crash, pretty great news for Bill n Hill eh?

Zaph, this is from the same article I linked earlier....

Director General of Kazan Aircraft Enterprise JSC Magomed Zakarzhayev thinks that 4 minutes in the air doesn't mean it happened immediately after take-off. The plane covered quite a long distance for this time. This is why he considers the version of icing unlike:

''If it's linked with icing, it's the first minute right after take-off. In this case, the plane didn't fall immediately during take-off when it had a low speed. Do you remember Yak-40 fell with Artyom Borovik? In its case, it went up and then down and exploded. It fell on its wing because icing reduced lifting power and increased frontal resistance, while the pilot held the speed because he didn't know icing would affect so much. For this reason, it happens during take-off. And 4 minutes is a lot. Something different is the cause here,'' Magomed Zakarzhayev thinks.

a reply to: Urantia1111

List of crash victims

Ivanov Vyacheslav (32) is on the list. Of course, it could be someone with the same name. I didn't see Millian.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

He's talking about icing on the wings, not icing on the pitot tubes. Frozen pitot tubes can happen at any time. Some flights have had it happen in a few minutes, others have flown hours before encountering icing near the pitot tubes.

If the icing was on the wings, he'd be right, they either wouldn't have gotten airborne, or would have crashed immediately. But they're not talking about the wings. The accident he was talking about was because they removed snow from the wings but didn't deice them. The ice interfered with their ability to generate lift and they stalled on takeoff.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: gpols

And that's the problem. No matter what anyone says, or all the evidence of the same thing happening seven times in two days to other aircraft in this same area, the "it could still be a coverup" will always be trotted out.

I haven’t been posting on here recently just because how politicized ATS has become, but coming from a conspiratorial stand point if you wanted to sabotage something to knock witnesses out wouldn’t the perfect cover up to the entire situation be “well this has happened so much in the last few days that no one would ever think the plane was brought down on purpose, everyone will think it is just a freak of nature accident”

I’m just coming from a completely conspiratorial stand point here, it could very well just be a accident but I joined ATS for the conspiracy side of things not for the more common everything is a coincidence and accident side of things...know what I mean.

a reply to: caf1550

Except that, as I said in another post, even if you could rig something like this, there is no way to know they'd actually go down. There have been quite a few planes that flew on just fine with pitot tube issues causing faulty airspeed readings.

If you wanted to sabotage the plane and make it far more likely they'd go down, an engine, or flight control issue would be a much safer bet. If you could get the access to set something like this up, you could access those systems as well.

Then there's the problem of this plane having flown multiple flights that day. How do you ensure this specific flight was the one that went down. There would have been a lot of activity as they changed crew and loaded the plane for the next flight. Access would be an issue.

I know people want to believe in conspiracies, but sometimes something really is a coincidence. Not all the time, but not everything is a conspiracy.

How coincidentally convenient.

I don't think it is wise to investigate the group she is associated with, people seem to die from accidents and suicides quite often

a reply to: rickymouse

It is convenient because it's bs.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: gpols

And that's the problem. No matter what anyone says, or all the evidence of the same thing happening seven times in two days to other aircraft in this same area, the "it could still be a coverup" will always be trotted out.

I am going with "God was looking out for Mrs. Clinton and friends". Who would have guessed that one? It's not like you can really blame anyone for being suspicious though can you?

a reply to: CIAGypsy

Perhaps thats why the plane crashed, someone did not want them to retrun.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: seagull

It might not have. There have been a lot of iced over pitot tubes in recent years, so at least one manufacture put out instructions on how to deal with it if you suddenly get a differential speed warning, or your airspeed drops while in various phases of flight.

They had so many failures, not necessarily icing, but just failures, that an AD was issued recommending that they change from that brand to Thales.

They have pitot tubes which AREN'T heated? How do they work?

a reply to: Tempter

No, they have pitot tubes that had heaters fail or not get switched on. All pitot tubes are heated, as long as the heater is turned on.

Okay, I understand that better. They were just failures or not turned on.

As I understood it the pitot tubes HAVE to be heated so they can burn the oxygen.

a reply to: Tempter

They could calculate the air speed within ~10 mph or so from the ring laser gyro and the known prevailing winds.
Could be some layer confusion if the air speed sensor is pointed down, they could be getting returns from a lower layer at a shear boundary. Should be a warning algorithm based on the different readings that would easily detect something like an iced pitot tube.

a reply to: Tempter

They work just fine with the heat off. The reason for the heat is to keep them clear of moisture and ice. Both can lead to Bad Things happening. The B-2 that crashed on Guam was a result of the pitot heat not being turned on to clear the moisture out. That resulted in the system reading 10 degrees nose low, and something like 20 knots high on airspeed.