Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Terror Suspects on Air France Flight? [Dan Collins]

Jammie Wearing Fool has the details. Could the TILT messages have something to do with an onboard explosion? This makes the search for the black boxes and other debris even more urgent.

I look forward to hearing what the gate agents and airport security have to say on this matter. I’m sure I’ll be outraged if I find out that 200+ people died because someone didn’t want to be guilty of profiling.

Very, very tangentially related: Stacy McCain implodes into a vast vortex of cosmos-bending suckitude.

Less tangentially related: Some anti-originalist down with the idea of a Living Holocaust Museum.

82 Replies to “Terror Suspects on Air France Flight? [Dan Collins]”

  1. Rob Crawford says:

    It struck me at the time that this is the kind of thing we’d expect from a shoe bomb — sudden loss, no warning. Sadly, we’ll likely never have a certain answer.

  2. Bob Reed says:

    This is a distinct possibility.

    Although I noted in a thread the other day how it is not inconcievable that extraordinary wind shear conditions in a line of cumulo-nimbus cloud formations could have litterally broken the Airbus into pieces, this would actually make more sense…

    It would explain, among other things, why amongst the error messages recieved was one indicating rapid cabin decompression, as well as that, judging by the extent of the debris field, the aircraft appears to have broken up at a relatively high altitude…

    God rest those souls on board that flight, in either case I’m sure their last moments were terrifying…

  3. Joe says:

    Terrorism? That is impossible. There are no terrorists capable of bringing down such a flight.

    They were thwarted once, they would never dare try it again.

  4. sdferr says:

    One puzzle under the terror strike theory though: the terror organization will usually let it be known that the deed was theirs in order to achieve their aim of terrorizing people. Otherwise, what’s the point (outside the possibility they were merely aiming to assassinate one person aboard the flight)?

  5. Bob Reed says:

    Good point sdferr!

    No one has taken responsibility for this act yet…

  6. SBP says:

    Yeah, I was wondering about that too, sdferr.

  7. Joe says:

    That is just crazy talk, it could never happen.

    Hmmm, they never admitted to the Air Egypt flight either…but what came a couple of years later…give me a second and I will remember. It will come to me.

  8. Joe says:

    There seems to be several steps or attempts before they are successful.

  9. guinsPen says:

    Otherwise, what’s the point

    Loose lips sink ships.

  10. Joe says:

    No point in bragging if you are testing out a new way to bring down airliners. Pick a flight not likely to get much scrutiny initially, hope they never figure it out, then wait for a much bigger bang later on, say several flights at the same time for maximum terror effect.

  11. Joe says:

    It could be weather, it could be pilot error, it could be terrorism. I just hope the investigators are considering all possibilities.

  12. Squid says:

    My friend Occam tells me it was mechanical failure.

  13. Matt says:

    My guess is an abortion doctor was on board and those terrorist christians brought the whole plane down to stop him. I’d begin looking for suspects from Operation Rescue as well as local churches.

    This christian thing needs to be nipped in the bud. Next thing you know, they’ll be chopping off heads for desecrating the Bible.

  14. Dan Collins says:

    Yeah, they were going to blow it up, but they never got the chance. Poor buggers.

  15. Joe says:

    Squid, well it was a French plane, so mechanical failure has to be the top of any list.

    To be fair, Air France has a decent wine selection and the food is good.

  16. sdferr says:

    Hmmm, they never admitted to the Air Egypt flight either

    They who, Joe? The Egyptian Government? Do you have any evidence that this flight destruction was conducted as an act of terrorism? That the pilot was acting on behalf of any organization? Or do you think he was rather more a lone wolf sort, committing suicide and taking his passengers along for the ride? What, in other words, are you getting at in citing this particular incident?

  17. gus says:

    I’m sure this tragedy was Right Wing anti-Abortion nuts.

  18. gus says:

    Sdferr, nonsense. Which terror organization claimed responsibility for the Arkansas shooting.
    Think outside the box friend.

  19. gus says:

    Sdferr, do you have any evidence that this was not terrorism. Is it a RULE for terrorists to have a MOTHER organization that puts out a PRESS RELEASE after a terror attack?
    Again friend, think outside the box. TERRORISTS do.

  20. sdferr says:

    What are you on gus? Can you read? Did my first post on this subject not say “usually let it be known”? Do you have any evidence from the rest of my comments on this subject that I have ruled out the possibility of a terrorist act? Because I haven’t thought that, nor do I see how my words can be read in that way. So, y’know, don’t be an intentional misreader, eh?

  21. […] tip and More:   Dan Collins, Protien Wisdom: I look forward to hearing what the gate agents and airport security have to say on this matter. […]

  22. John Bradley says:

    Completely off-topic: Jeff (and Ace) just made some dippy top-10 hot blogger-dudes on the right list.

    Jeff needs a better picture.

  23. Joe says:

    sdferr–I can say the chances the Egyptian Government crashed its own plane intentionally is small. Smaller than David Lettermans’ dick small.

    We never knew what really brought down the EgyptAir flight, but the likely explanation was the pilot. Was it al Qaeda related? Muslim Brotherhood? A (rather craven) suicide? A lone wolf terrorist act? An assassination or murder of someone on the flight? Call me crazy, but with the Egyptian blind sheikh, the connection of Egyptian Zawahiri to 9/11, and of course our favorite guy with female problems Mohammed Atta, I am rather suspicious of what happened to that flight.

  24. Joe says:

    John Bradley, at least it was a chick (Melissa) who made that list. She even had kind things to say about Ace.

    And yeah, Jeff needs a better picture.

  25. sdferr says:

    We never knew what really brought down the EgyptAir flight…

    I totally agree to that, even though you and I both believe it was the 2nd pilot who brought the plane down. That is, we don’t know why he did it, assuming he did.

    As to the rest of it, to me it sounds a lot like the conspiracy theory driven stuff Iraqis or Egyptians are famous for taking up at the drop of a hat. That is, I’ve heard reports from people I trust, Michael Yon or Mike Totten for instance, among many, that various Arab people they’ve encountered are quite willing to spin conspiracy theories to account for right about anything semi-political that they can’t explain otherwise.

  26. Joe says:

    It would be foolish Sdferr to latch onto one theory and claim it is the truth, but with a circumstance like the EgyptAir flight, any plausible theory has to be considered until ruled out.

    And talking about crazy, guess who is back! And he is complaining about the Joooooooooooooos! Hey Rahm, is your ear itchy?

  27. AlexinCT says:

    There is a reason the terrorists came up with the idea of blowing the plane up over the ocean (and preferably deep ocean): it delays confirmation that there was a terror attack because the evidence is so hard to find, and hence a reaction to prevent others. What if this was an operational trial run, sdefrr. If you plan to do it again, en-mass, you would let the idiots keep believing there was no foul play. At least until you could hit a bunch of them and score some impressive numbers. Not that 228 deaths is not a gruesome thing the terrorists would be dancing in the streets and passing out candy for, but if you have plans to drop several other planes, that’s small potatoes. I am not quick to jump on the terror bandwagon, but I hope that, at a minimum, the terror angle is considered, and some precautions are taken.

  28. Ric Locke says:

    Re: the Air France crash — you want to keep firmly in mind that Airbus Industrie is a jewel in the crown of the French Government. Think “Airbus = Obama” and “French Establishment = American Media”.

    If it turned out that a major lightning strike killed all the computers or that the turbulence broke the back of the airplane (or both), it would be a major black mark for Airbus and a blow to French prestige. They can be counted on to do whatever handwaving and bloviating they are able to manage to avoid that. Look how the robot revolt and subsequent crash, in front of the world aviation community at a major air show, got eventually spun. (The pilot knew what to do and tried it; the computers said non, m’sieu and refused to allow it. The crash was blamed on the pilot.)

    Jihadists go on vacation occasionally and get transferred to different parts of the enterprise just like any other business people. Even if it turned out that those guys were part of the Islamic People’s Front, it could just be that they were being sent to take charge of the car-b-que concession in the Paris suburbs.

    Regards,
    Ric

  29. Joe says:

    A little known fact is Jihadis love The Girl from Impanema. They can’t get enough of it. In fact, a jihadi will freeze and can be easly captured or killed if it is played.

  30. Dan Collins says:

    When my Mufti,
    When my Mufti nods at me
    I go to Rio
    di Janeiro

  31. Joe says:

    And Ric, a simple icing problem to a tube causing this jewel to crash would be a problem for Airbus. That may in fact be the cause.

    Or it may be something else.

  32. sdferr says:

    What if this was an operational trial run…?

    Well, yes, what if it was? How do we suppose this hypothetical will be demonstrated? Which, after all, is the point of studying the passenger manifest to start with.

    Facially, I don’t understand why my bringing up the question about terror orgs generally claiming their acts (and even, claiming acts they had nothing to do with at times) and the apparent failure of any organization to claim this one so far, prompts people to assume that I would endorse anything less than the most complete, most definitive investigation into the cause of the crash as can be had. It must have something to do with jumping to conclusions though, I guess.

  33. gus says:

    sdferr. No need to be an asshole son. Yes I can read. You made a point that terrorists usually do xyz. Terrorists are unpredictable. Try to be a little nicer next time ok?

  34. Joe says:

    Stacy McCain said the Wikio list makes him less hot than Andy Levy.

    Okay, I’ve got nuthin, you do suck Stacy.

  35. sdferr says:

    Oh, sorry gus, I hadn’t sensed your sensitivity in your willingness to assume that I don’t know that terrorists can be unpredictable. I’ll try hard to do better in future.

  36. Joe says:

    I’m proud to a crazy man
    I make anti semite comments when I can, yeah
    I blame the Jooos for all that is bad
    When Obama doesn’t love me I get all sad, yeah
    I’m proud to be a crazy man

    Every Sunday at 10 am
    There’s a meeting of the Crazy Man Prayer
    “This meeting will now come to order
    Is there any new business?”
    Member
    “Yeah, I think Jews suck”
    Minister Crazy
    “What was that?”
    Member
    “‘Jews Suck” bumper stickers
    Should be issued”
    Minister Crazy:
    “The brother says
    ‘Jews Suck’ bumper stickers
    Should be issued
    All in favour of what he said
    Signify by sayin’ ‘ay'”
    Members
    “Ay!”
    Minister Crazy:
    “If, however, you are opposed
    Signify by saying ‘no'”
    I’m proud to be a crazy man…

  37. Bob Reed says:

    Ric makes an excellent point about the nature of Airbus, and European, design philosophy vis-a-sis that fact that they tend to allow the computers to override the pilot’s input, where in the US we tend towards the computer controls disengaging at critical decision points…

    An example would be that, although our aircraft autopilots are sophisticated enough to easily land aircraft of all types and has been demonstrated on a grand scale by the space shuttle!.But, they typically disengage at an FAA mandated decision height, which used to be 100 AGL. And, while the pitot tube icing oft mentioned would not in and of itself cause this horrific accident, given that the aircraft’s autopilot is equipped with sophisticated inertial navigation intrumentation, if the computers had been FUBAR’d by repeated lightning strikes the crew would have been forced to rely on airspeed data from the pitot…

    All that said, a mistake in airspeed at best most likely would have preficated an aerodynamic stalling of the wing-no more. And given that they were at an altitude that would have easily allowed them to recover from such a stall, or even a worst case flat spin, I still would be hard pressed to believe that it would have led to this disaster…

    For my money, I’d lean towards catastrophic structural failure due to wind shear conditions inside the ferocious thunderhead formations. But terrorism can’t be ruled out…

    Good point though Ric, about the CYA desires of the Airbus consortium, owned in large part by the French government…

  38. Joe says:

    It works for Ward Churchill too:

    I’m proud to a pretend Injun man
    I steal others work when I can, yeah
    I blame the pale faces for all that is bad
    When my tenure is taken I get all sad, yeah
    I’m proud to be a crazy man

    Every Sunday at 10 am
    There’s a meeting of the Makebelieve Injuns Tribe
    “This meeting will now come to order
    Is there any new business?”
    Member
    “Yeah, I think Jews suck”
    Chief Crazy
    “What was that?”
    Member
    “‘Jews Suck” bumper stickers
    Should be issued”
    Chief Crazy:
    “The brave says
    ‘Jews Suck’ bumper stickers
    Should be issued
    All in favour of what he said
    Signify by sayin’ ‘ay’”
    Members
    “Ay!”
    Chief Crazy:
    “If, however, you are opposed
    Signify by saying ‘no’”
    I’m proud to be a crazy man…

  39. Joe says:

    For my money, I’d lean towards catastrophic structural failure due to wind shear conditions inside the ferocious thunderhead formations. But terrorism can’t be ruled out…

    Don’t forget the Joooooos, says Reverand Wright.

  40. Pablo says:

    Hey, is Reverend Hatey in DC?

  41. Joe says:

    Actually Jeremiah Wright is in Virginia.

  42. Jess says:

    I don’t think any of us will be able to do anything but speculate. Terrorism, weather, tech malfunction…who knows. Maybe they’ll find a black box soon that will provide some answers. In the mean time, god bless the people on that plane…

    http://www.newsy.com/videos/air_france_mystery_continues

  43. Come on right wingnuts! Obviously if Letterman had made a joke about President Obama’s daughters being impregnated by Alex Rodriguez, it would be just as hilarious and stupid to complain about!

  44. Bob Reed says:

    If it ain’t Boeing, I’m not going…

  45. sdferr says:

    Sounds like that Holocaust Museum shooter read too much into Obama’s Cairo speech, eh Rev. Wright? Pres. Obama hasn’t declared open season now, has he? In fact he denied the Jews’raelis had anything particular to learn from his visit to Buchenwald vis a vis their treatment of the poor put-upon Palestinians, despite what Tom Brokaw may think.

  46. Dan Collins says:

    Security Guard at Holocaust Museum dies. Prayers, please.

  47. Bob Reed says:

    Wow…

    That’s terrible Dan, to go in the line of duty at the hands of some nut-case…

    May God rest his soul, and comfort his family in their time of grief.

  48. Ella says:

    a) No one claimed responsibility for 9/11. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t a terrorist attack. Ditto the Bombay attacks. In fact, many terrorist groups claim responsibility for things they didn’t do, or multiple groups claim it, or no one does. There is no SOP for this.

    Then again, someone did call in advance to say this was going to happen. How is that not “taking responsibility”? If I call you and say, “Dude, I’m going to blow up your house,” and then your house blows up and I don’t follow up with another call, do you immediately say “gas leak” and leave it at that? ‘Cause I didn’t call to take double ex post facto responsibility?

    b) I am doubtful about wind shears and I basically reject any lightning-based theory. Thunderstorms are simply too common; I just flew in through a mild one last week. My dad, who has traveled on plans at least twice a month for almost 30 years, has been on several flights where the plane was struck by lightning multiple times and, once, by at least two bolts simultaneously. That’s purely anectdotal, and stuff can go wrong, but there hasn’t even been a lightning-related malfunction in over 40 years, much less a crash. That just seems ridiculous to me.

    Wind shears, on the other hand, may break a plane up, but they would to it by breaking off the tail or the wings and causing an irredeemable tailspin. There would be time to get out an emergency signal because it would take almost 2 minutes to hit the ground from a cruising altitude; the whole mystery around this flight is that that didn’t happen. If it exploded in air (which is the going theory, without an underlying cause) it is much, much, much less likely to be a wind shear than it is to be terrorism, because it would be run-of-the-mill terrorism to explode a plane, but a truly bizarre wind shear.

    c) It could well be mechanical or electrical failure of another kind. Something could have hit them mid-air like geese in New York or they could have had a part failure that led to an explosion of sorts. Then it would be near impossible to determine what caused it without more of the plane or the black box.

    d) But with a terrorist threat and two known terrorists on board and no other concrete data, I think Occam’s razor leans toward terrorism.

    My two cents.

  49. sdferr says:

    No one claimed responsibility for 9/11.

    That is simply not true. So, y’know, not a good way to start.

  50. Ella says:

    Saturday, October 30, 2004

    WASHINGTON — Usama bin Laden (search ) made his first televised appearance in more than a year Friday in which he admitted for the first time ordering the Sept. 11 attacks and accused President Bush of “misleading” the American people.

  51. Ella says:

    Oops, hit submit too soon.

    The point it, it was over three years later. We’re, like, 10 days into this Air France thing.

  52. Ella says:

    The “no one claimed responsibility” was certainly true days into the 9/11 investigation. We knew who did it because of who was on the flight and their associations with al-Qaeda.

    Much like the two terrorists who were on this plane.

    Again, it may not be terrorists. But on May 27, there was a threat against the airline from terrorists. On May 31, a plane carrying two terrorists exploded in mid-air, crashed in the ocean, and killed everyone on board.

    It is possible the mid-air explosion is weather related or mechanical. But I simply don’t see how advance warning of a terror attack doesn’t count.

    I also don’t see how waiting three years to admit to an attack is the same as “claiming credit” in the sense you guys are asking for in this Air France flight.

  53. Squid says:

    I was camping in the wilderness last week, so I’m way behind on this story. Link to source for May 27 terrorist threat against Air France, please?

  54. Bob Reed says:

    Ella,
    With all due respect, a wind shear event could have caused a structural failure in the fuselage in places other than the tail or an outboard wing section. Especially since the Airbus is designed with a lower structural strength and saftey factor than comparable Boeing aircraft.

    You are correct in saying that we will never be sure unless the black boxes are recovered and analyzed. But it is a bit dismissive to presume that the pilots could have gotten a radio message off after a catastrophic break up for several reasons; chief among these being if the antenna, or radio itself, were affected by the event or if same had been damaged by the lightning strikes…

    Best Wishes

  55. sdferr says:

    Look, Ella, you are correct to say that just because no-one has already claimed responsibility for this act only ten days in, that apparent fact doesn’t in itself prove that this is not an act of terror. No one here that I can see has said that it does. It may have been an act of terror and may be so demonstrated eventually.

    However, it has long been the case that terror organizations depend on the public knowledge of attribution for their acts to achieve the aims they have set out for themselves, such as disruption of air travel for instance, or making life in Jerusalem slow to a crawl as every man women and child is searched before being allowed into a shop, or ginning up enough fear in a populace that economic waste is generated in searches of baggage or persons before they are allowed to board an airplane. One meta-effect is the conversation we are having right now. Widespread dispersal of the information is key. So it is not an unreasonable question to ask, cui bono? Who claims credit. It is only one question and does not cut off any other questions either to follow or to proceed in parallel.

    As to your conclusions about the fellows tentatively identified on the plane, we shall see.

  56. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Sdferr’s feeling feisty today. Ella, I thought the same thing in regards to anyone claiming responsibility for 9/11. It was my recollection (although to be fair, my recollections are often quite hazy) that no group did take responsibility for 9/11. Also, I didn’t realize that there was a threat to this airline and that there were two known terrorists on board this flight. Things that make you go hmmmm…

  57. sdferr says:

    It’s been awhile since I’ve looked at the evidence of al Qaeda’s after attack claims in detail, or even the question how al Qaeda’s responsibility was first fixed by our government and where (for instance, were their communications intercepted covertly and held in secret? do we know?) or the further question, given the signature of simultaneous multiple attack carefully cultivated over the years, whether al Qaeda would need to make any separate claim in order to be understood, making the attack itself something of a form of communication that acts a little differently when it takes place live before your eyes on a tv screen and one that may have taken place far out at sea with no witnesses surviving the event.

  58. Ella says:

    Yeah, something got a bee in sdferr’s bonnet. Dunno what.

    Geez, this discussion has as much affect on reality as debating who is the killer on Harper’s Island.

    sdferr seems to be arguing against terrorism a lot based on the fact no one has claimed responsibility. See comment #4 and the agreement at #5. I took that to be a theory that terrorism wasn’t involved. And since he’s arguing for wind shears, I don’t think I’m misreading him to think that he doesn’t think it’s terrorism because no one has claimed responsibility yet.

    That argument has been the basis, or at least a support, for many of the arguments against a terror attack. What I was trying to say is that that really is bogus; no one claimed responsibility for 9/11. Three years later, Osama said al-Qaeda did it in another threat against the US, and the Gitmo detainees have said so under interrogation, but none of that is “claiming responsibility” in the way the sdferr means (and others, so this is really a cumulative argument against the Ubiquitous They, not sdferr – sorry to pile on). No one faxed in a letter to the State Department and said “it was me!” So I don’t see the big deal about no one doing it in this case.

    And, yes, a wind shear could have cause a failure somewhere else, but that is a really, really uncommon thing to happen. Most commonly, a wind shear simply pushes the plane down and it crashes on impact or something sticking off the plan breaks off, like the tail or the wing. It’s not normal for the think, well structured body of the plane to break up in mid-air. It is really uncommon for a wind shear to cause a crash, is all I’m saying. Also, there was a flight in visual range at about the same time (a Brazilian flight which reports seeing fire), a flight a few minutes before it and a flight a few minutes after it who didn’t report any problems at all. Wind shears are fast and abrupt, I know, but it is very unlikely that one plane in four would explode in mid-air from wind shears – which is crazy rare – and the others don’t even have to change course because of the storm.

    I think having two terrorists on the French security watch list on a flight from an airline in a location that had been threatened with a terrorist attack much more likely than an already rare meteorological event causing unusual effects.

    But that doesn’t mean I think sdferr is a bad person!

    No, for Harper’s Island, I don’t know who is guilty. I like the evil wedding planner/hotel manager theory, though, because that lady has bad hair.

  59. Ella says:

    Ramming planes into the WTC and Pentagon is hardly such a signature event that you don’t need to claim responsibility because everyone will just know. The last terror attack al-Qaeda did on us before that was the USS Cole attack, and there’s not really a direct stylistic link between the two. The multi-site thing is al-Qaeda-ish, but they’re not the only ones. Many, many times, there’s just a question mark, and investigators find out what group is involved because of connections between the perpetrators (emails, phone records), not because of press releases.

  60. Ella says:

    The “known terrorist” thing is being confirmed. Two with names matching known terrorists on the French security agency’s watch list were on that flight. They are trying to verify whether those are the same two men as on the list through their birthdays and, possibly, security footage. The French government said it could be a “macabre coincidence.” So there is that possibility, but the odds of that seem low to me.

    I’m a bad guesser, though. That’s why I don’t gamble.

  61. Swen Swenson says:

    It could have been a crazed granny attacking the pilot with her eyebrow tweezers. They screen for those, but maybe one slipped through..

  62. sdferr says:

    The presumptive bee in my bonnet is stupid shit like this:

    sdferr seems to be arguing against terrorism a lot based on the fact no one has claimed responsibility

    Once again, I’m not arguing against terrorism. I asked what I thought was a pretty ordinary question, not original to me at all, one that occurred to others to ask as well.

    since he’s arguing for wind shears

    who is the antecedent to “he’s” here, Bob Reed? Or are you aiming that at me (which, I wouldn’t assume, since I’ve said nothing about wind shear, but leave that sort of thought to people like Bob who has experience of it as a pilot.)?

  63. Bob Reed says:

    Ella,

    Thanks for the links. I am aware that most accidents involving wind shear for certain have occurred upon takeoff and landing…

    All I can tell you is that at NAVAIR we were instructed to avoid thunderheads like the plauge, mostly because of the bizarre phenomena that occur within the cells. And the aircraft we were flew enjoyed a much more robust structure than the Airbus…

    No offense meant; I wasn’t being dismissive of your opinions. All I am saying is that all possibilities are on the table until the black boxes are found. And, as Ric noted earlier, there is certainly motivation to attribute the attack to terrorism rather than any mechanical problems…

    Best Wishes

  64. Ella says:

    Hey, Bob.

    That’s cool; I certainly am not familiar with the mechanics of an Airbus. I really, really don’t mean to discount your experience, adn I’m sorry if it came off as that. (I was trying to discount sdferr! Ha ha. I kid.) I’ve been in a million and one severe storms — all on the ground, which I’m sure is 100% like flying in one.

    For the families’ sakes, I hope this is resolved clearly, just because, if it were me, I’d want to know. Weather, terrorism, pilot error, mechanical failure – I’d just want to know.

    For my part (and I recognize the ghoulishness of it), this is sporting speculation. The real determining point for me is where the plane broke up. If it was in the air, I still cry terrorism. If it was on contact with the water, then wind shear wins out. And I say that not was any real assessment of anything. Think of my opinions like Fantasy Football picks. They’re basically offered in that spirit.

    Is this the time to denounce myself?

  65. Bob Reed says:

    Hey Ella,
    All of us newshounds love to speculate; if not, your curiosity bone isn’t well developed…

    I too wish that the cause is finally nailed down, especially if it helps any of the families put this terrible episode behind them. All of our prayers should be with the victims and the families…

    My money is on a mid-air break-up; whatever the cause. Unfortunately, this means that the passengers last moments were horrifying, to say the least…

    So don’t denounce yourself on my account…Now maybe for sdferr…Only Kidding!

    All the best…

  66. Molon Labe says:

    Why would a terrorist blow up the plane in the midst of a violent thunderstorm? Wouldn’t even a stupid raghead recognize the potential ambiguity?

  67. Bob Reed says:

    Marone!
    Perche loro sono idioti!
    Capisce?

    Arrivederci!

  68. Ella says:

    Molon labe, maybe it was unintentional.

    This is pure conjecture, but I’m running with it.

    Let’s say that the raghead managed to sneak some explosive mixture past security (real tough ::snort::), intending to place it somewhere so that he could blow up the plane when it landed in Paris and make a nice visual. Much like those bombers going from Heathrow to NYC. But, the plane encountered terrible turbulance mid-Atlantic, setting off the explosive mixture prematurely.

    A lot of those compounds are not stable when they’re mixed by amateurs. There was a case in Norman, Oklahoma, where a student blew himself up outside the football stadium with backpack full of some kind of alphabet suit, ATAP I think. It was one of the things favored by suicide bombers in Israel. He had hopped over some gardening equipment, and the landing was enough to set it off. Basic TNT is the same way.

    It’s an idea.

  69. Ella says:

    Bah.

    s/alphabet suit/alphabet soup/

  70. Bob Reed says:

    Interesting Idea Ella…

    Or perhaps ingesting a binary compund, separately, in gel sacs; so that when the stomach acid ate through the gelo, the compunds would mix and *WHAM-O*…

    But, as you said, timed the whole reaction improperly, or got a little agita from the rough ride and, voila, a quickening-so to speak…

    Fascinating theory…

    We will see…

  71. sdferr says:

    Aloha Air 243 just started to come apart in flight, what was it Bob, stuff like metal fatigue, corrosion, failed glue joints and the like? So at this point, who knows. Could be weather, could be terror, could be something else.

  72. Bob Reed says:

    As a matter of fact you’re correct sdferr,

    I remember that event. Landed anyway even though it looked like a big bite had been taken out of it…

    In that case it was determined to be metal fatigue, if I recall…

    Now, although the Airbus is relatively new, any signifigant fuselage rupture, by weather effects or whatever, could easily lead to catastrophic failure…

    We really won’t know until the boxes, and wreckage, are fully analyzed. I certainly hope the Navy units we sent to assist the search are successful…

  73. sdferr says:

    They are saying the parts may be as much as 20,000 ft deep (or less, I hope). Which is way crap bad for any hope of finding the most important stuff but they will give it the old college try anyhow.

  74. Bob Reed says:

    you know sdferr,

    I have no idea how much water pressure those black boxes can take..? But I do know that it would be no probs for our guys to catch the pings at that range. And I read somewhere that there are deep dive robot submersibles on the scene just in case…

    I’m actually confident that the boxes will be found!

  75. sdferr says:

    I don’t know about the depth tolerances either Bob, I’ve read today that they are expected to ping for another three weeks +/- and that there is a French nuclear sub on station as of today doing searches for the pinging. Additionally the French have sent a research vessel with what I gathered are deep diving rov’s to go after any objects found. Still and all, the ocean is a crazy big place…

  76. Sammy says:

    I look forward to hearing what the gate agents and airport security have to say on this matter. I’m sure I’ll be outraged if I find out that 200+ people died because someone didn’t want to be guilty of profiling.

    I agree. I realize it’s not politically correct to make young white men undergo additional screening, but it’s time to throw PC out the window and keep Americans safe.

  77. Sammy says:

    On a more serious note – one of my favorite blogs:

    http://flightlevel390.blogspot.com/

  78. Rusty says:

    Here is my understanding; The flight parameters between a stall on an Airbus whatever and cruising speed at the optimum altitude is 25 knots. That means that if they loose speed by 25 knots the plane goes into a stall. Flying into storm cells at that altitude would certainly create a situation where the pilot needed to take control of the plane from the autopilot. I got the 25 knot info from an Airbus pilot. Once electrical systems started to go out the problems cascaded. As far as I know there are no manual backups in an Airbus 320, everything is fly by wire.

  79. Bob Reed says:

    Pretty intereseting stuff Rusty,

    An aerodynamic stall most likely would not have been catastrophic in that situation for several reasons. When an aerodynamic stall occurrs, the wing loses lift. Without lift, the only force acting on the body is gravity, causing it to descend like anything else would; I’m hesitant to use the cliche, “drop like a rock”, because it’s more like a baseball a pitcher has thrown because of the forward motion…

    At the altitude they were flying, stall recovery is no real problem; it is most often a serious problem at low altitudes where there is no time to recover…

    Let’s all hope they find the FDR soon so that we can get to the bottom of the cause…

    Best Wishes

  80. […] PASSENGERS on Air France jet crash killing 228 had jihadi-terror links …. (PW, […]

  81. Buy hydrocodone….

    Buy hydrocodone….

  82. Maxpedition Vulture | Wilderness Cafe…

    If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed to receive the latest news on cool gadgets like mobile/ cell phones, portable media players, digital cameras, video camcorders, home tools and more! Review of these products, video games an…

Comments are closed.