Skip to comments.Bodies Found From Air France Plane Crash
Posted on 06/06/2009 9:56:25 AM PDT by traumer
Bodies from the Air France passenger plane that crashed in the Atlantic Ocean off Brazil have been found by search teams.
The news comes it was revealed the airliner sent out 24 automatic error messages in its final moments as its systems broke down one by one.
The head of the French agency probing the tragedy said signals from the jet before it disappeared showed its autopilot was not on.
Paul-Louis Arslanian said it was not clear if the autopilot had been switched off by the pilots or had stopped working because it received conflicting airspeed readings.
He said investigators were searching a zone of several hundred square miles in the Atlantic Ocean for the debris.
Plane manufacturer Airbus said an investigation found Air France Flight 447 had inconsistent readings from different instruments as it struggled in a massive thunderstorm.
The plane, with 228 people on board, disappeared early on Monday as it made its way from Rio de Janiero, heading to Paris.
The wreckage of the jet has not been found, despite days of intensive searching by air and sea.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.sky.com ...
I don't know if you've ever worked on any of your own cars or bikes, but a mostly empty or completely empty fuel tank is the single biggest hazard that home mechanics face. An empty fuel tank has tremendous explosive potential. Which is why the empty fuel tanks on military aircraft, including the 747 used as AF1, are filled with inert gas.
The TWA 800 fuel tank scenario is EXTREMELY plausible and very likely.
The Twilight Zone: Nightmare At 20,000 Feet
I feel the same on “discomfort” flying — and I get free tickets — (daughter an airline employee.) Am seriously looking into Amtrak for FreePer Wash DC trip — gonna do a “Dagny Taggert” for that one.
The TWA 800 fuel tank scenario is EXTREMELY plausible and very likely.
To put a stop to our space program which indeed happened for quite a few years afterward.
If I recall correctly (and that's a big if), before the Challenger, spectators were allowed to get close to the launch. When the space program started up again, you had to be miles away.
A rifle shot could have caused the explosion and it would look like an O-ring failure.
It’s possible that it was a bomb, I suppose, although supposedly the traces of bomb residue they found were from an earlier security test.
The initial reports in NY had many people who actually had seen something ascending towards the plane, which doesn’t prove anything in itself and was later explained as fireworks. But the Feds immediately launched teams of people to search the dunes. I read one report, one that was gone literally gone by the later edition of the paper, where they had found a tripod and “launching debris” in the dunes. So it wouldn’t have been a SAM (although that’s what most people thought) but some other kind of missile in that case.
I don’t know. This is all coming from what I remember and who knows what was true in those reports and what was confused and what was suppressed.
Ask George Stephanopoulos.
He might know.
Sure knew about TWA 800.
On a panel on MSNBC moderated by chrissy tingles some years ago added TWA 800 to the list of terror attacks. This panel also had jon carry as a guest and he agreed.
No, the plane was sending automatic computer generated information on the anomalies.
The last communication mentioned was to air traffic control in Brazil about the thunderstorms.
doubtful. Maybe a Friday night dump a year from now.
Enough of the fuel tanks to get the airplane to Paris were. That isn't all the fuel tanks on the aircraft. The center tank was empty.
I can totally relate to your fear of flying experiences. I went through the same thing. I found that what was causing most of my anxiety was the thought of not being able to have any control of any events that might occur up there. Not being able to feel the ground underneath me, nor being able to see who was “driving” gave me a feeling of helplessness.
Prayer did help tremendously, and still does. I can handle mild turbulence, but when that thing starts jumping and shaking for more than 10 seconds, I immediately go into “Our Father” mode, and put my life in His hands. It it’s a long flight (more than 2 hours for me is long), I order a scotch on the rocks and pop a few benadryl. When I wake up on the other end, I thank the Lord for allowing me to live another day.
I also found that sitting in a window seat distracted me from fear, and I also enjoy seeing landscapes and trying to identify landmarks along the way. I’ve gotten pretty good at at! Of course, at night it’s a different story, but if the sky is clear, I can follow clusters of lights and identify some towns/cities along the way.
Flying is OK. It’s crashing that presents the problem.
I flew a lot as a passenger in the early ‘80’s (there were several that period of time) and again in the mid-1990’s. Only had 3 that concerned me. One DC-9 out of Texas we were in a thunderhead and being battered around rather substantially. The pilot aborted at Oklahoma City and did a go around after high crosswinds on final.
One TWA jock set our 727 or MD-84 down so hard (can’t remember which plane) that I was rather certain we’d bust some landing gear. We didn’t.
The other was an Airbus 319 flying into Denver (new airport). We were in high winds and that plane wallowed and went side-to-side (tail swapping) that I really wondered if they could get it down OK. Obviously we did.
There’s a couple others, including a very long roll after toucvhdown in a Lockheed L-1011 (beautiful aircraft) on a heavily-snowed runway in Chicago. They just couldn’t use the brakes for quite awhile but no danger.
But that’s 4 flights out of over 100. I do avoid small planes, turboprop carriers, especially in the Northeast during wintertime. Sometimes that option might not always be available.
I’m guessing you’re joking, but just in case, there were well-documented problems with the sealing of the Morton Thiokol boosters including several near burn-throughs. On the 1986 Challenger liftoff, you can see the smoke being ejected at the seams.
As someone pointed out in an earlier post, the o-ring failure was not a unique or new phenomenon to the Challenger. Not only was NASA aware of it, but they also recognized the potential for catastrophic failure because of it.
Additionally, a "rifle-shot" placed exactly at the o-ring seam would be THE rifle shot in the history of rifle shots. I don't know if you've ever been to the Kennedy Space Center, but the closest one can get is about a mile. I don't think Carlos Hathcock could make that shot.
Thanks Carley, but are we on the same track here? I am writing about the day of the breaking news of the suspected crash (at the time it was suspected), (actually it was the first thread posted here at FR on the topic) there was a report that stated that the pilot was in conversation with persons at Air France at the time his communications abruptly ceased.
I am curious as to what that conversation was about. The news about the computer generated information came in later articles.
Frankly, since the TWA 800 shoot-down, the NTSB and other government agencies have lost all credibility in their reporting the cause and circumstance of major air carrier “accidents”/ disasters.
George Stephanopolous who was in the White House at the time, called it a "shootdown." I'll take George's word for once.
Too many witnesses in the TWA 800 to keep that one quiet, but they sure tried.
The condition of the bodies may provide some additional information about when the plane broke up (i.e. at what altitude). Too late for these people, but hopefully more information will make it possible to determine what went wrong and prevent it from happening again.
One drop will kill you in a matter of seconds!
That's me, too! Once on a Southwest flight I asked the stewardess for a Johnny Walker Black on the rocks. She gave me a dirty look and said, "You're going to have to tell me what that means, because I'm a flight attendant, not a bartender." I was so indignant I forgot to be nervous! The control factor is definitely, I think, what gets people so nervous, especially after reading accounts such as the recent crash near Buffalo, and the one in San Diego in 1978, where the flight crew were horsing around during a landing and not paying attention to what they were doing. Still, though, you can think of it as something like Russian Roulette, with a pistol that holds a million rounds. Not really much of a chance that anything disastrous is going to happen!
I think you’re remembering it wrong, or you read an early report that got it wrong. The pilot had sent a routine communication much earlier, mentioning the strong thunderstorm activity (which is normal and expected in that area). That was the last communication from the crew. Then they missed a standard check-in point a while after that, but reportedly that’s not very uncommon due to transmission problems from that location. It was quite some time after the last direct communication, and after the missed checkpoint, that the barrage of automated messages from the plane starting going out. Everything was fine the last time the crew was heard from directly.
I expect multiple people from Morton-Thiokol would have been very eager to point that out . . . if only there hadn't been incontrovertible evidence that the explosion was in fact caused by one of their faulty O-rings.
The most interesting point of this whole thread is that people no longer accept what the major media, corporations and government say. All explanations are now suspect and are investigated by the citizens.
This is a wonderful development. It is getting more difficult for demonic forces to play games with the truth. Overtime distortions of the truth will be found out and punished.
I am more inclined to think that there was an in flight detonation of some type. It is just too coincidental to think that there was a threat 4 days before then a plane goes missing.
Back in January 1982, I was flying out of Washington National in a little turbo-prop, on a day trip to New England for a college admission interview. The little plane seemed to be slip-sliding down the runway, and once it was airborne it was being buffeted around a lot by the wind. I arrived at my interview safely, but still nervous and nauseous. Return trip was uneventful. Next day, Air Florida Flight 90 took off from National, hit a bridge after being barely airborne for 30 seconds, and plunged into the Potomac, killing nearly everyone on board and few people on the bridge. I felt nervous and nauseous all over again, but *very* lucky . . .
AF90 was very tragic. They did not have sufficient speed, I don’t think, at V1 nor at VR, from what the transcripts seemed to indicate. They kept remarking “that doesn’t look right” as they were rolling.
The 727 ahead of them used extra power that day as I recall. Regulations or not, that pilot wanted a safe takeoff.
Yeah I was flying (passenger) at the time of that. We came into Boston’s Logan and I saw the runway, which looked to me like an aircraft carrier in the middle of the ocean. I remarked to my father “somebody’s gonna run off the end of that thing”. This was wintertime.
A few weeks later, they ran that DC-10 off the end of the runway and the cockpit section broke off. A few weeks after that, I came into Logan again and the DC-10 was parked near the end of the runway, like a fish missing its head.
The threat was in a different country. There are very frequent threats about bombs on commercial flights. Most we never hear about, and all have turned out to be hoaxes. We only heard about the one in Argentina, because of the unexplained Air France crash 5 days later. Until that, the Argentina bomb threat, and subsequent 1.5 hour delay of the flight, was so routine as not to be newsworthy outside of the Buenos Aires media market. And it's still not worth paying attention to.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you used to be able to get a lot closer, until after the Challenger.
I don’t particularly enjoy flying myself. OTOH, I do enjoy long road trips as long as I’m driving or at least in the front seat. I don’t like the idea of being trapped in a metal tube with a bunch of other people flying through the air with absolutely no control over my own fate.
Now that I’ve retired, I have no time constraints to be somewhere “on time” so I drive a lot more and get to enjoy the countryside as well.
I still drive a large comfortable SUV. When they finally force us all into little plastic wagons, I’m sure this will all change though.
I don't think so. I've seen over a dozen launches since I was a little kid back during the days of Apollo. We've watched from a number of different areas, but I can't ever remember being closer than a mile.
There were two different launch pads that were used. The Challenger was either the last to use the old one, or the first to use the new one. This might be the cause of some of the confusion. Also, I think that they've now gone to a third pad as their primary launch site. These are all slightly different distance from the viewing galleries.
It is getting to the point where every aviation accident has it’s instant conspiracy theorists...instead of wasting time on conspiracy theories, use that time to study for a pilots license (at least take a ground school...they are cheap at night schools). Or attend an A&P school and study for your FAA airframe and powerplant license.
We still have a few around here paying lip service to their lies, especially where TWA 800 is concerned.
Regarding the current Air France disaster, I thought an explosion had been ‘ruled out’ based on the wide oil slick they found. As explained by a Brazilian official, the oil would have burned up.
Then they announced the debris in that area wasn’t from this plane.
So I wonder if the oil slick/no terrorism theory still applies. I still believe the aircraft most likely failed from the storm, but their one explanation to disprove terrorism may have been taken away.
That’s my favorite airplane brand also. I don’t bother asking for a single malt since I know I would get a befuddled look!
There are no facts. Nobody knows what brought this plane down. Yet, according to the ostrich brigade, anyone who hasn’t ruled out terrorism, ya know, just because, wears the dreaded “tin-foil hat”.
Maybe it would make y’all feel better if we left open the possibility of a “man-caused disaster” instead.
This one’s easy. The center fuel tank is always suspect in these cases.
I would suspect those effects would be even more prominent in this crash. I agree with your reasoning here.
I’m gonna say it was a terroists attack. The chances of 24 error messages on such a plane... well it could bad programming also.
We are so fragile, for all our metal superstructures and technology.