Ted Stevens plane crash in Alaska - It doesn't seem to add up

I am an Alaskan and like most Alaskans that day we heard about the plane crash we pretty much constanty discussed the issue and still are.

Ted Stevens has done so much for Alaska over the years that even though everyone knows he's probably corrupt they still voted for him in the last election against Mark Begich. Ted's big corruption lawsuit was ongoing at the time of the election and he still just barely lost against Mark Begich. That's how loved he was up here.

Anyone that lives up here knows who GCI is. If you have cable TV, you probably have GCI cable. If you have broadband cable modem it is probably through GCI. They also have cellular phone service and digital land-line service. I first heard that GCI employees had died the same day the plane crash was a big story in the news. I had heard "through the grapevine". I actually knew about the GCI employees before we knew that Ted Stevens was dead.

A very close friend of mine works for GCI, which is the company that owned the plane that crashed. GCI also owns the fishing cabin that the plane took off from that afternoon. Apparently, they put off the flight until later in the day because of the weather. They were flying out to a separate fishing camp in Dillingham to fish for silvers (silver salmon) when the plane inexplicably went down.

I've been reading all the news stories and trying to wrap my head around this plane crash and alot that is just now coming to light really makes you pause and wonder what the heck really happened.

First, I found a video on Fox News tonite that showed the crash scene but it doesn't seem to be working now.

Incredible Video of Erie Crash Aftermath

But here are some things that don't add up..

1) I read this on Fox News:
NTSB: Alaska plane carrying former Sen. Ted Stevens had system to alert pilot of land ahead

The plane that crashed into an Alaskan mountainside and killed former Sen. Ted Stevens and four others was outfitted with an alert system that warned pilots of dangerous terrain.

This alert system was mostly still experimental. From what I understand, Ted Stevens was a big proponent of this particular terrain alert system and for improving air safety in Alaska in general. From what I've heard, the system costs around 10,000 dollars to install.

It is horrible but ironic that he was such a big part of improving air safety and the aircraft outfitted with the very same system ended up crashing into a mountainside.

Did the system fail? Was it turned off?

2)

The plane was also equipped with an emergency locator transmitter, Hersman said at a news conference in Anchorage Friday. When properly registered, it issues a distress signal to a control center via satellites and provides registration information, such as the owner's name. She added that it was also unclear why that signal didn't activate.

But it is clear that the signal never activated and the system failed miserably.

It is possible that the system could have been damaged or destroyed in the crash. The whole front of the aircraft pretty much disentegrated anyway. However, this is just another safety measure that was installed on the plane for the specific purpose of improving air safety.. And it didn't work when it was needed.

SO.. Was it also intentionally disabled or turned off? Was it damaged or destroyed in the crash? Strange..

3)

Hersman told reporters that one of the survivors described Monday afternoon's crash by saying: "They were flying along, and they just stopped flying."

The same survivor said he didn't notice any changes in the plane's pitch or hear any unusual engine sounds right before the plane went down about 20 miles north of Dillingham in southwest Alaska.

We know the plane crashed into a steep mountainside. But why wouldn't the pilot have been given a warning by the terrain sensing system?

We know weather played a huge role in this crash. When the fog gets dense up here, it is almost impossible to see even a few feet from you. I'm not saying its impossible for the pilot to crash into a hillside on a foggy day. I'm just saying that the aircraft was outfitted with hardware designed to prevent this from happening and it crashed anyway. Not only that but the satellite distress system didn't work?

4)

Hersman said one survivor recalled that the group decided during lunch at the GCI-owned lodge to head to the fishing camp, a trip that had been put off in the morning due to poor weather.

The survivor said conditions had improved by the afternoon. He said he fell asleep about 10-15 minutes into the flight and woke up after the crash, Hersman said.

He woke up AFTER the crash? Holy cow!@! I don't know about you, but flying in one of these planes in inclement weather with zero visibility would make it impossible for me to sleep a wink on one of these flights.

My close GCI friend said he actually stayed at the GCI cabin once and the flight in the otter (possibly the very same plane) that he experienced was described as the worst flying experience of his life. One of those "near death experience" kinds of flights that some of you might've experienced over the years.

Not impossible for someone to sleep but, again, highly unlikely.

5)

GCI spokesman David Morris said about 13 people originally came to the lodge Aug. 7 for what was "primarily a Stevens trip."

For years, the 86-year-old Stevens used GCI's lodge to show politicians and regulators what life in rural Alaska was like.

Apparently the cabin was built for the specific purpose of GCI pandering/grooming politicians. I first heard about this infamous GCI cabin about a 2-3 years ago but when I was told about it I got the sense that it was kind of a "hush-hush" type of thing that I shouldn't discuss with anybody.

Now that I see what kind of people stay at the cabin, I understand.

You can imagine what people would think if they found out about all this a few years ago.. Politicians flying out corporate heads and their families along with federal regulators and other politicians out to the middle of nowhere to fish for salmon and discuss politics. That is, unless you didn't take them too! I hear the fishing is remarkable.

6)

Smith was a temporary replacement for the regular pilot, who had unexpectedly quit, Morris said. Smith was a longtime pilot for Alaska Airlines — retiring in 2007 after 28 years — and was qualified to fly the float plane and to fly in that part of the country, Morris said.

Hersman said Smith was estimated to have had 10 hours of air time in the float plane that crashed and another 35 hours in the same type of plane. He had thousands of hours in both single and dual engine amphibious aircraft.

Hersman said Smith didn't request a weather briefing before departure. However, investigators have been told there was Internet service at the camp and he may have checked conditions that way.

First, Smith was a seasoned pilot and knew exactly what he was doing. But does this make sense to you? This guy was probably one of the most amazing pilots in the world and he's going to rely on information and forecasts over the internet? I'm sure it probably happens alot up here in Alaska but it still seems odd.

Second, GCI needed a pilot for this "VIP" visit to their cabin and didn't want to let anyone down. Terry was an amazing pilot and probably perfect for the job. But he was also a temporary pilot. Had he even flown the route before? Did he know what the terrain was like near the landing site? Maybe he disabled the terrain system and underestimated the thickness of the fog. Alot of questions.. Not alot of answers.

I'm sure more about the crash will come to light when the NTSB is done with their investigation but alot of this just leaves me scratching my head.

-ChriS

I do not care how good a pilot you are, if your instruments fail and your in fog and you have every reason to think your on course then there is nothing you can do. You have to trust your guidance systems when you have no visibility. Although you should have multiple redundant systems in case one fails but many craft only have one set.

Did they autopsy the pilot? It's possible he had the craft on auto pilot and weather conditions caused the system to go off course.. just when the pilot was having a heart attack.. or something. This would account for the passenger not feeling like anything was wrong or the plane was not having trouble.

Originally posted by BlasteR
I'm sure more about the crash will come to light when the NTSB is done with their investigation but alot of this just leaves me scratching my head.

-ChriS

part of their investigation will be monitoring the public, including this thread, to see how much info we come up with and how it gets tied together,

meanwhile their crafting a story, or maybe NTSB can be trusted to give an honest investigation?

the situation certainly seems explainable with the pilot falling unconcious for some reason, but in order for us to understand how odd the alert systems absense is we need to know more about it, is it as simple as a switch in the cockpit he flipped off so it wouldnt annoy him?

or is it something which cant be switched off? btw who at gci died and why? was that only the crash or did the gci guys die somewhere else?

once the investigations results are out, i bet there will be a documentary on youtube explaining different angles...





edit- i'd also like to know why the first pilot quit, if he'd be willing to tell us, man with nothing to hide, hides nothing right?

i dont see why he wouldnt want to make public his reason for quiting considering it was a life saving decision, and he wouldnt want to seem suspect i assume.

[edit on 15-8-2010 by pryingopen3rdeye]

In no particular order:

I'm a pilot. The vast majority of us get our weather briefings and do our flight planning using a variety of online services. It's the exact same information you'll get if you call into one of the FAA briefers.

It's unlikely that the terrain avoidance system failed. They found themselves in severe instrument conditions with virtually no visibility. The pilot, no matter how good s/he is ca still get disoriented and make mistakes --- even withy the most sophisticted GPS based systems onboard. From looking at the crash scene I'd say the pilot was warned of the terrain. In most instances of CFIT (controlled flight into terrain) the plane will 'auger in'. It will fly at full speed straight into the obstacle and be destroyed. That's not the case here. The plane 'skiided in'. It looks to me as though the pilot was trying to out-climb the slope of the terrain but couldn't. This thing happens in canyons alot. People fly into some mountainous areas --- even in clear daylight --- and suddenly find that they can't turn around in the space they have and can't climb faster than the terrain.

I know we all love a great conspiracy but this is a tragic pilot error. It happnes all the time with well seasoned pilots.

The only thing really that is odd to me, is how Alaska just eats up politicians who just feel like going on casual flights to fishing grounds and relaxations. This isn't the first, and may not be the last.

I am interested though, so keep piecing it together.

The rumor is that HAARP can cause engines (planes) to fail as well as their electronics. The ex-NASA official & the multimillionaire also being on the plane as well as the HUGE # on plane crashes over the last 4 months
www.abovetopsecret.com...
make me believe that much more was going on.

take a look at the JFK Jr. crash sometime- stinks to high heaven.
- the war for humanity is full on, get it through your head.
-it's here, it's now, coming at you and the ones you love-
anywhere on the planet. get your affairs in order.
get your plan a bcdefg together.
get a shotgun, stockpile rice beans peas lentils
oats raisins nuts honey canned goods.
and think about your water supply.

the crash scene doesnt match the survivors story. the wreckage looks like trying to gain altitude, not flying strait into the hill. he would of heared the engine. the emergency beacon not going off is odd also, tho i have heared of alot of searches where the beacon didnt go off.

in my opinion there are alot of little things that by themselves may of happened, but all together feels odd to me. yet another coincidence is the pilots son in law died just a week or so earlier in the wreck on elmendorf airforce base. which i believe was the same type of plane as the mysterious one that crashed between the father and son in laws planes in denali. the story around that one seems prety fishy also.

but it all could of just been a major run of bad luck. it happens.

Originally posted by mutly
the crash scene doesnt match the survivors story. the wreckage looks like trying to gain altitude, not flying strait into the hill. he would of heared the engine. the emergency beacon not going off is odd also, tho i have heared of alot of searches where the beacon didnt go off.

in my opinion there are alot of little things that by themselves may of happened, but all together feels odd to me. yet another coincidence is the pilots son in law died just a week or so earlier in the wreck on elmendorf airforce base. which i believe was the same type of plane as the mysterious one that crashed between the father and son in laws planes in denali. the story around that one seems prety fishy also.

but it all could of just been a major run of bad luck. it happens.

That's true! The son of the pilot did die in the C-17 crash at Elmendorf AFB. From what I read they were preparing for an upcoming airshow when the plane went down.

I read about it online a few days prior to this crash and I had talked about it to a friend of mine just a day or two before.

How likely is it that the father who was obviously one of the best pilots in the world and his son who would've had to have been a great pilot to fly C-17's in the USAF.. would die in completely separate plane crashes just days apart?

I'm not necessarily screaming conspiracy here. Alot of you are probably better at connecting these dots and putting a theory together than I. IMO, everything so far points to a huge accident. But alot of the little details don't make any sense.

The kid sleeping on the plane until after the crash. The terrain sensing system was installed and should've been operating. The emergency satellite beacon failed to work whatsoever. This pilot was one of the best in the world but the plane crashed anyway with all these systems onboard to avoid just such an accident. The pilot being a "temporary" replacement (was it his first flight in this area?) and dying just days after his own son died at Elmendorf in the C-17 crash that killed others as well.

Unfortunately, the witness description that the plane "just stopped flying" doesn't help us understand what really went down that day. We will learn more from the NTSB investigation but so many of these little pieces don't fit.

The survivors went through some pretty horrific conditions just to last long enough for rescue personnel to arrive (which took 12 hours) and it is so extremely sad that the people that did die were probably scared out of their wits just before they went. The only good thing about the crash is that those that died didn't have to suffer very long.

I agree that the wreckage does look like the pilot was trying to pull up. At some point he would've seen the mountain through the fog and would've tried to instinctively pull up.

I'm almost thinking that the terrain sensing system worked the whole time and although it would've warned the pilot, he could've underestimated the height of the mountain with relation to his altitude. At some point he would've run out of time to pull up and clear it. And it probably would've only been seen at the very last moment because of the fog and the bad weather. The mountainside they crashed on was also extremely steep (I think I heard it was 40 degrees).

-ChriS