Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Airman spots aircraft fuel leak at 35,000 feet
US Air Force ^ | 2009-05-14 | Tech. Sgt. Rey Ramon 18th Wing Public Affairs

Posted on 05/21/2009 6:05:16 AM PDT by justlurking

KADENA AIR BASE, Japan (AFNS) -- Most of us hear stories of Airmen saving lives in combat, but an Airman who saves the lives of more than 300 passengers is definitely a story worth hearing.

A fuel leak on a civilian aircraft caught the attention of Staff Sgt. Bartek Bachleda, 909th Air Refueling Squadron boom operator, during a flight from Chicago to Narita airport, Japan. After alerting the pilots and aircrew, the ranking pilot made the decision to divert the flight to San Francisco.

(Excerpt) Read more at af.mil ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

1 posted on 05/21/2009 6:05:17 AM PDT by justlurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: justlurking

I’m convinced it was something like this that brought down Flight 800 in 1996. That atomized fuel could easily have ignited and caused the explosion in the center fuel tank, and what’s more, could have caused the flare-like effect that so many people reported seeing.


2 posted on 05/21/2009 6:09:12 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham ("Baldrick, to you the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlurking
Great fortune to have that guy on board.

There's an old Army story about a guy riding on a CH-47 Chinook:

He notices a hydraulic leak along the inside of the port fuselage.
He runs up front in a panic and tells the crew chief.

"Relax", says the crew chief.
"You can panic when it stops leaking."
3 posted on 05/21/2009 6:09:30 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlurking

I’m not an aviation expert by a longshot, but wouldn’t 6,000 lbs. of fuel loss per hour have been noticed by the pilot/co-pilot through instrumentation/gauges?


4 posted on 05/21/2009 6:09:31 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32 (I'm a Patriot Guard Rider..www.patriotguard.org for info..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlurking

Outstanding


5 posted on 05/21/2009 6:10:38 AM PDT by Terrence DoGood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham

“That atomized fuel could easily have ignited”

Airplane fuel doesn’t ignite easy, especially at such low temperatures. It’s not gas. The main danger is running out of fuel.


6 posted on 05/21/2009 6:10:40 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham

Read Jack Cashill’s First Strike.


7 posted on 05/21/2009 6:12:44 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out (click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaDawg32
I’m not an aviation expert by a longshot, but wouldn’t 6,000 lbs. of fuel loss per hour have been noticed by the pilot/co-pilot through instrumentation/gauges?

This particular article doesn't say it, but another one I read on the incident reports that "The captain came into the cabin to check out the leak and said the cockpit crew had been aware that fuel seemed to be burning too quickly."

8 posted on 05/21/2009 6:12:47 AM PDT by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaDawg32

the crew was already on it. they were in the process of figuring out if it was a gauge issue or an actual leak.


9 posted on 05/21/2009 6:14:29 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: justlurking

With a leak that big, that aircraft is not going to make it all the way to Narita. But Petroplavsk is so beautiful this time of year!


10 posted on 05/21/2009 6:15:04 AM PDT by gridlock (L'Etat, c'est Barack...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
Airplane fuel doesn’t ignite easy, especially at such low temperatures.

No it doesn't, under normal circumstances. But look at the accompanying photo. The fuel is being essentially atomized as it exits the breech. Its surface area is being expanded immensely, and under those conditions, it's possible it could explode. If you read the cockpit voice recorder from Flight 800, you'll notice that just before the explosion one of the crew remarked "look at that crazy fuel flow indicator there on number 4." Compare that with the situation here. While the sargeant was visually noticing the leak from his passenger's seat, the crew had already been given warning by their instruments and were busy determining what steps they should take.

11 posted on 05/21/2009 6:17:47 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham ("Baldrick, to you the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham

Yours is one of the more reasonable speculations.


12 posted on 05/21/2009 6:26:52 AM PDT by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham
"caused the flare-like effect that so many people reported seeing."

You mean the effect that was video taped from the deck of a restaurant, shown on all the major networks and then buried...never happened.

13 posted on 05/21/2009 6:29:07 AM PDT by Deaf Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaDawg32
Certainly the flight computer should of noticed. The pilots were most likely asleep.
14 posted on 05/21/2009 6:30:40 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Nemo me impune lacessit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

I believe jack nailed it


15 posted on 05/21/2009 6:35:18 AM PDT by woollyone (I believe God created me- you believe you're related to monkeys. Of course I laughed at you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Deaf Smith
You mean the effect that was video taped from the deck of a restaurant, shown on all the major networks and then buried...

Yes, that one. I've no doubt that it happened; what I doubt is that it was caused by a missile.

16 posted on 05/21/2009 6:36:29 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham ("Baldrick, to you the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaDawg32
I’m not an aviation expert by a longshot, but wouldn’t 6,000 lbs. of fuel loss per hour have been noticed by the pilot/co-pilot through instrumentation/gauges?

There was a story on this a short while back. It seems the crew had noticed the loss, but were unable to determine where it was leaking from.

I'm certain the crew would not have gone oceanic knowing the fuel was disappearing at that rate.

17 posted on 05/21/2009 6:38:47 AM PDT by IYAS9YAS (Obama - what you get when you mix Affirmative Action with the Peter Principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pfflier
Yours is one of the more reasonable speculations.

I'm not too big on conspiracy theories, even those involving the Clinton administration. A couple of things convinced me this was an accident. First, a 747 mechanic posting on one of the USENET disaster boards noticed a series of small holes in the wreckage of the wing on the side of the explosion. He speculated, based on his experience, that those holes were caused by rivets in an engine cowling that had been improperly secured; and that the cowling blew back onto the wing, punching holes in the tank.

On the same forum, a number of individuals with military experience in missiles opined (among other things) that any missile launch, even of a portable missile (which wouldn't have had the range to hit the aircraft, and even if they did, wouldn't have continued their burn all the way to the point of impact) would have lit up the evening sky--something that no one observed either in the air or from the shoreline.

18 posted on 05/21/2009 6:41:27 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham ("Baldrick, to you the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham

Your theory couldn’t be more wrong. Others have pointed out that the fuel wont burn, let alone explode in those conditions of fuel leaking out of the wing and please as Others have suggested, read Dr. Jack Cashill’s Excellent book on TWA Flt 800 entitled “FIST STRIKE” and explore Mr. Donaldson’s website www.twa800.com . You appear to require much reading of previous investigations and analyses on the subject of TWA 800:-)


19 posted on 05/21/2009 6:46:21 AM PDT by True Republican Patriot (GOD BLESS AMERICA and Our Last Great President George W. Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: True Republican Patriot
Your theory couldn’t be more wrong. Others have pointed out that the fuel wont burn, let alone explode in those conditions of fuel leaking out of the wing ....

Cooking flour will explode if it's dispersed in the air.

20 posted on 05/21/2009 6:49:51 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham ("Baldrick, to you the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson