Posted on 06/17/2009 11:04:49 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
SAO PAULO (AP) — Bodies recovered in the Air France disaster show multiple fractures in the legs, hips and arms, a Brazilian official said Wednesday. Experts said such injuries suggest the plane broke up in the air.
"Typically, if you see intact bodies and multiple fractures — arm, leg, hip fractures — it's a good indicator of a midflight break up," Ciacco said. "Especially if you're seeing large pieces of aircraft as well."
Jack Casey, an aviation safety consultant in Washington, D.C., who is a former accident investigator, said the lack of clothing could be significant: "In an in-air break up like we are supposing here, the clothes are just torn away."
He also said multiple fractures are consistent with a midair breakup of the plane.
"Getting ejected into that kind of windstream is like hitting a brick wall — even if they stay in their seats, it is a crushing effect," Casey said. "Most of them were long dead before they hit the water would be my guess."
When a jet crashes into water mostly intact — such as the Egypt Air plane that hit the Atlantic Ocean after taking off from New York in 1999 — the debris and bodies are broken into small pieces, Ciacco said.
"When you've had impact in the water, there is a lot more fragmentation of the bodies. They hit the water with a higher force," he said.
If something caused the lower fuselage to burn or explode, "passengers would not be exposed to any blast damage" and the plane would still disintegrate in flight," he said. "These are scenarios that cannot be ruled out."
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Good Lord, I hope so.
“Experts said such injuries suggest the plane broke up in the air.”
This non-expert suggests that the injuries might have happened when the plane hit the water at 200 or 300 mph.
If it was a terrorist act and the only members of that group were on board then we’d never know - so far no terrorist org. has claimed they blew up the plane ....
Correct are their, about to be dead, bodies hit the water at that speed.
Floating in the open ocean for a few days also very effectively stips the clothing from dead bodies.
If they've solved the problem of how to do this, we'll know sooner or later.
Don’t assume just because no terrorist group has claimed responsiblity that it is not terroist related. Actually it is normal over that last years for Al Qeada and other to not claim responsibility for terrorist acts for months after, if at all. Do some research and you will find this is true.
That said, I am not saying that this was caused by terrorism, but I have been tracking incident closely and will add to my previous posts.
I am not one for conspiracy theories but this crash has some very disturbing coincidences.
May 26 - France opens a military base in Dubai. This is the first time France has opened a military base in a foreign country in 50 years. It was a well known fact that one of the things that motivated Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda was the establishment of US military bases and personnel in the Mideast, specifically in Saudi Arabia.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/05/26/France-opens-base-in-Dubai/UPI-22661243377455/
May 27 - A bomb threat is received on an Air France flight from Buenos Aires Argentina.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-eu-air-france-threat,0,2686261.story
Google Al Qaeda, Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay and you will find articles dating to 2003 about terrorists in this tri-border region, including information on attacks they have carried out.
May 31 - Air France 447 crashes mysteriously. Immediately authorities discount terrorism and focus on weather, mechanical issues and possible pilot error.
June 4 - Spanish pilots say they saw a bright flash of light that descended vertically for 6 seconds in the vicinity and time that AF 447 may have been lost.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/world/46957957.html
June 5 - The LA Times posts an article disputing that weather was as bad as reported, with analysis showing that the most severe storms were 150 miles from where AF 447 was supposed to have crashed.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-brazil-crash5-2009jun05,0,6741218.story
Further weather analysis shows that the plane flew through thunderstorms for about 12 minutes, or 75 miles, but that these thunderstorms were similar to what aircraft routinely encounter. In fact, 12 other international flights traveled along essentially the same flight corridor without incident.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/06/05/france.plane.investigation/
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/
June 10 – A report that 2 passengers on AF 447 were on a French Terrorist Watch List was quickly refuted by the same organization that a few hours earlier reported the information. Also reported was the Air France CEO disputed that the flight crashed due to air speed problems.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/170945.asp
June 11 – Reports that the bodies are scattered 50 miles apart in the ocean, indicating a break up of the plane at high altitude. The reports discount terrorism, but how anyone can dismiss terrorism as a possible cause of this crash with these facts is beyond me. I would think that this would be the first thing investigators would be looking at.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525792,00.html
June 17 – Forensic analysis of bodies recovered indicates that the plane broke up in the air. Although no bodies showed burns or damage from an explosion, such a cause can not be ruled out at this time.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090617/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_plane
I just don’t see how anyone can eliminate terrorism as a possible cause for this without more facts. When I hear Brazilian, French and US officials dismiss any talk of terrorism, I wonder how they can honestly say that!
Also a non-expert, but I can understand that if an aircraft hit the water intact the aluminum would go off like a fragmentation grenade. Whereas if the aircraft had a mid-air breakup, some of the parts would spin down toward the water and may actually decelerate.
I recall the video of the Iranian airliner that was accidentally shot down by the US Navy in the ‘80s. People thought it was a put-up job because most of the bodies were floating naked. In all likelihood the Standard Missile clipped a wing causing the aircraft to breakup in midair similar to this Airbus.
It still looks to me like the plane broke up due to entering severe weather - first snapping off the tail then the rest of the plane was torn apart. I’m not into conspiracy theories so right now the jury is out as to why the plane broke up.
Human bodies are like water balloons at 200 - 300 MPH. They are not intact in truly high speed collisions.
A free-falling human body will have a terminal velocity such that the parts remain attached after impacting the water.
Most turbulence in thunderstorms is up and down drafts. Thus the general stresses on the airframe are negative and positive vertical G-loads that stress the wings the most, and the connection of the wings to the fuselage. Lateral stresses (yaw) that might snap a tail off are more common close to the ground in my (flying experience).
I would offer that *IF* the plane was structurally damaged and stopped flying ‘normally’ then then the aircraft might tumble or otherwise impact an airstream sufficient to ‘snap’ the tail off. OR the fuselage could have already been coming apart and those forces knocked the tail off. The fact that the rudder (the moving part) is still attached to the VS tells me that rudder input did NOT shear off the VS assembly.
My *opinion* is that the airplane quit flying and then the tail fell off.
NET: I doubt ‘turbulence’ on its own would knock of a VS.
N.B IIRC, a B-52 lost a vertical stabilizer in CAT (clear air turbulence) and SAFELY landed the aircraft after flying hundreds of miles to safety. I will Google that now for a reference
Here’s the story with pictures of the B-52 with the VS that BLEW off. Not it did not SHEAR off (sideways.)
http://www.talkingproud.us/HistoryB52NoTail.html
amazing.
Correction : deep in the article tey use the word “shear”
See, it’s a Boeing plane ... Boeing builds their planes out of bricks ... I’ve seen pictures of B17’s that flew back to England after a bombing raid on Germany ... flying tanks.
I’ve flown into some CAT’s in executive jets (I’m an FO on one) - lots of up and down but plenty of yaw too - almost circular in some instances - like a dog wagging its tail ...
All I have to do is make a statement and then wait for responses to see if I’m right.
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.