NTSB News Conference

MSNBC

[Merovingian]

NTSB News Conference beginning......

[Gargantua]

Nobody cares to hear what the Numbing Trash Spewing Bullshi**ers have to say. They forfeited ALL their credibility with the TWA 800 In-FARCE-tigation.

[alancarp]

Reasons IN FAVOR of believing a terrorist attack:
(1) Roughly 9am flight departure, same as 9/11.
(2) Fully fueled jet
(3) New York is involved
(4) We believe other attempts at air piracy have been made in the past two months.
(5) Coincidences are possible; this one stretches the limits of credibility.

Reasons AGAINST believing a terrorist attack:
(1) Terrorists usually like to make sure that everybody KNOWS that they're being terrorized. It's certainly not obvious here.
(2) Accidents happen.

[Tai_Chung]

At the White House news conference, one of the news people was asking Ari Fleischer if he'd heard that one of the pilots radioed in "mechanical" something or other, and Ari was quick to clarify that "initial" reports indicated that there were no unusual radio communications and that first facts were often the first ones to change.

I don't know what there is to the story, but the news guy asking Ari the question pressed him more than once on whether he had heard it or not.

Here's what was reported on the ABC Message Board

"Apparently a pilot behind Flight 587 on the runway reported to the tower that he saw smoke coming from one of the engines."

[AppyPappy]

You're a real Menace. :)

[packrat01]

People need to master these concepts like sentences, words, what they mean, etc.

Eight years of practice under x42, and some STILL can't read American Newspeak.

[yikes]

There was visual evidence compliments of film footage from CNN of grosss incompetence at the scene where the engine fell. A fireman was fiddling with something on the engine while another fireman was hosing down the engine, thereby washing away any evidence of residue from a bomb, if there was one.

Furthermore, as pontential evidence in a criminal investigation, the engine was not cordoned off. Many people were just standing around gawking at it.

It was not a reassuringscene.

[mewzilla]

Terrorists, at least the true perps, rarely take credit for an attack, especially if it's horrifically successful. The people who matter to the terrorists (govts, their allies, their enemies) know who did it. And the act speaks for itself. Even OBL didn't take credit for Sept. 11th right away.

The best way to rule out terrorism is to check to see if any of the mechanics or maintenance personnel are unaccounted for.

And we should worry about other places for bombs besides inside the plane.

[r9etb]

Reasons IN FAVOR of believing a terrorist attack:

These are not good reasons:

(1) Roughly 9am flight departure, same as 9/11.

Only if those wily terrorists knew enough to factor in a 75-minute delay from the scheduled 0800 departure.

(2) Fully fueled jet

Well, yes. Quite common for a flight that is taking off...

(3) New York is involved

It's a busy airport, and the plane had to take off from someplace. OTOH, it's possible that the maintenance people in NY are deficient.

(4) We believe other attempts at air piracy have been made in the past two months.

But an explosion -- even if terrorist-induced -- isn't "piracy."

(5) Coincidences are possible; this one stretches the limits of credibility.

Not at all. Mechanical failure is perfectly credible, and there are already good indications pointing to engine failure.

[VRWC_minion]

and there are already good indications pointing to engine failure.

An engine separated from the plane seems like a good indication pointing to engine failure. Question is what caused it.

[VoodooEconomist]

I don't understand why the administration concludes it wasn't a terrorist attack simply because there was no unusual message from the pilot.

You need to brush up on your comprehension skills. The administration has concluded no such thing. All they have said is that based on the current available evidence, there is no reason to conclude that it is a terrorist attack. That DOES NOT mean that future evidence wouldn't temper that analysis. NO conclusions have been made - one way or the other.

[mewzilla]

If it was an accident, wonder if the engine was maintained with cheapie counterfeit and/or chinese replacement parts. I've heard reports that Chinese-made impeller parts are not terribly reliable.

[r9etb]

An engine separated from the plane seems like a good indication pointing to engine failure. Question is what caused it.

See Here for an article discussing "uncontained failures" of GE CF-6 engines.

One possibly ironic passage from the article: "To prevent this, GE is setting up special 'engine hospitals' around the world to inspect and doctor ailing engines quickly. A few of them serve particular customers, such as one at New York's Kennedy airport for American Airlines, a big user of the GE engines. "

[anymouse]

kingh99 - member since October 17th, 2001

[cgbg]

Very easy, quick verdict.

Well, it is encouraging to know the administration will be able to determine the truth in fairly short order.

The more interesting question is--will they tell us?

[Real Cynic No More]

"Once again, people are confusing "no evidence of (bleah bleah bleah)" with "no."

No one in government has said that it wasn't a terrorist attack. They've said there's no evidence it was a terrorist attack. No on in government has said Al Quaeda didn't send the anthrax. They've said there's no evidence Al Quaeda sent the anthrax.

There's a HUGE difference.

People need to master these concepts like sentences, words, what they mean, etc."

Well said and deserving of another bump!

[Mr_Magoo]

Mechanical failure is perfectly credible, and there are already good indications pointing to engine failure.

< grabbing tin-foil >

This was a 2 engine aircraft. So far it looks like both engines came off. One landed in a back yard and burned. The other landed in the gas station parking lot.

What are the odds of both engines on a 2 engine aircraft falling off?

< fashions hat to wear if needed >

[bootless]

Aviated, Navigate, Communicate

Bingo. There's quite a bit of good information on avsig.com, for people who want accurate info. Better than aopa.org and landings.com, imho.

It's a stone miracle that no fire resulted from the engine that ended up in the gas station.

One interesting item: a man who was walking with his four-year-old said his son pointed out the plane, saying, "Daddy, the plane is on fire." Children don't have the preconceived notion that planes explode in mid-air, or that they (ugh) "saw it stall", etc. I am anxiously awaiting the metallurgy results on those engines ... PP-ASEL - 270 hours! (grin)