If the "dumping fuel" story is correct, it means the pilots had some time to react to the crisis. As I recall, a fully fueled jumbo jet ("Heavy") cannot land safely without dumping some fuel to lighten the load on the landing gear. Fuel would also be dumped prior to an emergency/crash landing to lessen the impact of any fire.

Link to NTSB Investigations:
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/aviation.htm

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

This morning there was a newsbrief about possible FOD (Foreign Object Damage)--and it was said that it may have been birds. In order for an aircraft engine to be FAA certified--it must be able to ingest a given pound bird without crapping out. Many of these tests were conducted by using grocery store chickens. This also goes for certifying windows--a certain lb bird shot at a window at such a velocity at so many mph w/o breaking.

About aircraft weight. Yes John, if an aircraft has too much fuel on board prior to landing the landing gear may be damaged from an overweight landing--and if this happens special inspections are performed. But to prevent this from happening, the aircraft can dump its excess fuel over designated areas.

All equipment on aircraft are monitored by hrs of operation and weight. An airframe is only rated for x number of hours and/or x cycles; a cycle being each time an airframe is pressurized and depressurized.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Yes, there is quality maintenance and half assed stuff.

Aviation maintenance in the military is different from civilian maintenance.

Military maintenance is "task oriented"--the mechanic does not necessarily need to "understand" all the in and outs of a particular system--but they must know how to inspect and troubleshoot/repair according to given procedures. A military mechanic can "ground" an aircraft.

A civilian A & P can legally work on all aspects of the aircraft, the exceptions being propellors and instruments. Unlike the military mechanic, the civilian mechanics must know the ins and outs of each system and what makes each individual component tick! Unlike the military mechanic, the civilian mechanic cannot legally ground an aircraft--but the aircraft status is recorded in the logbook by the mechanic. So, if an civilian mechanic deems an aircraft unairworthy, the pilot can still take the responsibility to fly it. Yes, there have been cases of aircraft owners/pilots trying to bribe mechanics!

The US supplied a lot of Stingers to the Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan war, any one of which could have found its way into Bin Liner's hands by now. Set your launcher up in an innocent looking Transit van parked on an industrial estate near the perimeter fence of the airfield, and you circumvent all security measures within the airport itself.

Many also thought (and a few still think) TWA 800 was brought down by an errant missle, but the NTSB report presented convincing evidence that fuel vapors in the center wing fuel tank exploded:
http://www.ntsb.gov/events/TWA800/default.htm

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Link

Distance between the planes was 800 Feet. FAA Standard is 1000 Feet.

AA587 was flying at 2800 feet when it entered the wake of JAL 747.

Flight 587 picked up speed and closed the gap on JAL 747 to 90 seconds. Planes were 4.3 miles apart. (FAA Standard 5 miles.)

Wake Turbalance:

A spinning mass of air, originating from wingtips of a heavy large airliner (e.g.747) trailling backwards.

Some air will circulate causing "rolling effect" to take place behind wingtips.

Two Vortices develop, one from each wing develop.

Heavy airlines give off most intense vortices.

An airliner, with a shorter wingspan and lighter weight, trailing a "heavy", should be alert to possibility of wake turbulance.

May cause following aircraft to enter an "unusual attitude: of which recovery is doubtful.

It seems fairly clear from eyewitnesses who saw plane begin to spin, watched as engine fell to ground, plane took a nosedive into Belle Harbor.

"According to DEBKAfile?s intelligence sources, a number of people linked to Al Qaeda in New York behaved suspiciously several hours before the crash; some, who were under surveillance following the September 11 attacks, managed to disappear, with the FBI unable to determine how they slipped away or trace their current whereabouts. Those sources also noted that the US F-15 warplanes, on 24-hour patrol in the skies of New York and other major US cities, were ordered immediately after the crash to search for any boats or unusual activity in the Jamaica nature reserve.

I certainly hope that this plane wasn't shot down. It's something I've been fearing all along. My house is near a major airport, and I'm keenly aware of the fixed departure and approach patterns that airports employ. Every one to two minutes, all day, a jetliner flies directly down the East-West street a block North of my house, on approach to the airport. There's another landing approach pattern, about one mile North, and still another a mile North of that. The planes fly the same routes, all day.

We can set up the best airport security in the world (although we are pathetically far from that), but the odds are that the next attack won't be by hijaakers -- it wouldn't work anymore. The hijaakings only worked the first time because of the element of surprise -- Hijackers are supposed to demand money and a flight to Cuba -- not take over the controls and crash the plane into a building! Every time someone has gotten out of control in a plane since 9/11, not only have the crew and/or passengers stopped them, but military jets have intercepted the planes within minutes.

There's no purpose in hijaaking a plane in order to crash it, when the odds are you won't be successful in taking the plane, and even if you do, there's no way you're going to get your plane to any worthwhile target.

But a van full of stingers would be a different story. A single person could take down a dozen planes in a matter of minutes. Pick a landing or takeoff path over a major city, and you have instant multiple disasters. Launch the attack simultaneously at a dozen or so airports, and who would ever feel safe boarding an airplane again?

And to top it off, there's rumors flying about a new wave of attacks starting on the 17th. Right before the thanksgiving travel rush.

You know you're in dark times when a plane crashes, killing 250+ travellers, and all you can think of is "thank god it's JUST a mechanical failure ..."

You can not let these guys win. You must go on living your everyday life as you did before September 11th. I know a lot of people in NYC who are afraid to fly, afraid to ride the subways, afraid to go into tall buildings etc...These people are nervous, worried, and many have become basket cases... When I go down to ground zero I get angry, and I stay angry at those who did this. I thank God that our service men and women are doing something about the terroists. I wish I were forty years younger and I would be with them. New Yorkers have banned together the way they should have when Viet Nam was going. We are unified and we will not let them win.

My apartment in Manhattan is in mid-town very close to the 59th Street bridge. Tall buildings are all around me. Planes go over head when taking off from Laguardia all the time. You know what...I don't even give it a second thought. I go where I have to go and I do what I have to do.. God Bless America...Semper Fi.

Also, if it were terrorists, wouldn't hitting a 747 or DC-10 be a better bang-for-the-buck 'headline-grabber' than an Airbus?

-Aaron