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.
We shall see.
The only thing known for sure right now is it was a 777. Their are multiple reasons why that type of plane has crashed over history.
Originally posted by opethPA
Originally posted by piequal3because14
reply to post by Zaphod58
This is not good by the number of events starting to unfold.
Reports: 777 crash lands at San Francisco,
Because planes have not crashed since they were first engineered?
Originally posted by badgerprints
The 777's have been a nightmare.
They have had all kinds of problems and failures.
As of August 2012, the 777 has been in eight aviation occurrences, including two hull-loss accidents, and two hijackings, with no fatalities among the passengers or crew. The only fatality involving the twinjet occurred in a refueling fire at Denver International Airport on September 5, 2001, during which a ground worker sustained fatal burns.
Originally posted by abecedarian
Originally posted by badgerprints
The 777's have been a nightmare.
They have had all kinds of problems and failures.
As of August 2012, the 777 has been in eight aviation occurrences, including two hull-loss accidents, and two hijackings, with no fatalities among the passengers or crew. The only fatality involving the twinjet occurred in a refueling fire at Denver International Airport on September 5, 2001, during which a ground worker sustained fatal burns.
Yeah, sounds like a nightmare. No fatalities between 1995 and 2013, except for a person burned as a result of a fueling accident.
edit on 7/6/2013 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)