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

To: Bryan24
If "clear air turbulence" riped the tail off of this plane, then every A300 in the world should be immediately grounded.

It wasn't "clear air turbulence." The theory is "wake turbulence" from a 747; apparently the A-300 was only 30 seconds behind the larger plane. The pilots specifically mentioned it.

I hadn't heard the missing bolts explanation, but a briefing from NTSB is about to begin, so let's see if they mention it.

12 posted on 11/16/2001 1:09:59 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: sinkspur
It wasn't "clear air turbulence." The theory is "wake turbulence" from a 747; apparently the A-300 was only 30 seconds behind the larger plane.

Not 30 seconds but 127 seconds.

15 posted on 11/16/2001 1:10:12 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
"...apparently the A-300 was only 30 seconds behind the larger plane. The pilots specifically mentioned it."

I heard (or read) that they they were 2 min, 7 seconds behind another plane...

21 posted on 11/16/2001 1:10:13 PM PST by goodnesswins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
A 747 cannot produce enough "wake turbulence" to rip the tail off an airplane. Toss it out of control? Possibly.

If a wing "failed" on the plane and flew back and hit the tail, I could see the tail getting ripped off. But most of the witnesses don't describe the plane that way.

I'll go WAAAAAAY out on a limb here. Bad bolts were used to fasten the tail and engines onto the plane. When the tail failed, the pilots firewalled the throttles. The plane began flying sideways (no tail) and the engnes bolts failed.

23 posted on 11/16/2001 1:10:13 PM PST by Bryan24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
It wasn't "clear air turbulence." The theory is "wake turbulence" from a 747; apparently the A-300 was only 30 seconds behind the larger plane.

Source, please. Everything I have read indicates they were at least 2 minutes back, as required.

The pilots specifically mentioned it.

Well, yes, but if you're an airline pilot and the plane is suddenly shaking like hell, you probably think of turbulence first instead of, say, the tail coming off...

25 posted on 11/16/2001 1:10:14 PM PST by Interesting Times
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Interesting. First it was 2m 20s, then 1m 30s, now a mere 30s. I wonder if it is part of a deliberate plan to keep changing the available evidence so that people simply give up trying to figure it out and rely instead upon the govt.
80 posted on 11/16/2001 1:10:45 PM PST by Melinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

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