Lies and deception

I read today in the local Canadian newspaper that the crash of AA587 may have been caused by birds flying into the engine.

Again, airplane engines are tested for thousands of hours. Dead birds are pumped directly into the engine at 200mph or more. The engines are subjected to rigorous testing, sand, other debris is also injected into the engines for testing.

Very very rarely do airplane engines fail. They are built to the highest standards.

What will enventually come out in the end is that the mechanic or personnel who serviced this aircraft were negligent.

The media is being used to divert the public's attention else where.

EXACTLY our thought - word for word !! Negligences in maintenance ... sorry if others don't agree, but, then, we all have opinions (yeah, we know the "joke" regarding that expression)
- Ed and Mame -

Birds didn't cause the crash. The answer to the tradedy lies with the tail secton and the vertical stablizer/rudder. They don't just fall off. The reason for the crash is linked directly to the reason the tail section was found in Jamaica Bay.

PAAALEEEZZZ!Give it a rest!You have no idea what caused the crash,sooooo,wait for the NTSB report.You must be having a "slow" day on the north coast.tommy

There was no sign of birds or other debris in the engine and they showed no signs of failure..

The other stuff is an incorrect rumor

I don't know what caused the crash but just to let you know, a bird doesn't have to hit the engine to cause a crash. When Iworked on the B-1 program we lost one of our aircraft while on a training mission over Colorado. It was flying at low altitude when a bird of about 8 lbs. struck the area where the wing attached to the fuselage. By-By B-1. It augered in. Turned out that was a weak point in the aircraft that we didn't know existed. All B-1s were then modified to prevent this happening again. Other planes have been downed by bird hits on other areas of the craft.

I tend to agree that it was not a bird strike, rather something affecting the Verticle stabilizer. It came off in Jamaica Bay, the aircraft then crashed east of Jam. Bay in Rockaway.

Just hope that whatever the problem was they can find out quickly and prevent it from happening again.

Re: Lies and deception--longish observation

I happen to know a TWA mechanic with over 20 years experience--he works at JFK. AA has acquired TWA--many of you know that. He is an American man from New Jersey who, with his wife, owns a timeshare on the North Coast, vacations there very year and loves the DR and its people. Talk about motivation to pay attention! I am willing to bet that every airline mechanic takes ample advantage of the airline travel privileges and realizes the enormous burden of responsibility that comes with that job. If they are not on the planes that they fix, it doesn't take much imagination to conjure up the images of the vulnerable passengers that rely on the mechanics' skill and diligence. If AA was pressuring mechanics to cut corners, the pro-active climate that rewards whistle-blowers combined with the personal integrity of the mechanics would make it impossible for AA higher ups to succeed in that. The irresponsible ravings of ill-informed fingerpointers are not helping the DR's already bleak tourism picture. If you people are really concerned about the well-being of this country and its warm, beautiful people, you would be more constructive. Primarily by putting boxing gloves on your hands so you couldn't work the keyboards.

Re: Truth will never be known.

don't you get it?

Even if it was a terrorist attack the US govt would NEVER admit it. The US is involved in a propaganda campaign to paint everything in the US's favour. A terrorist attack is completely unfavourable to an economic recovery and the war effort in Afganistan. The press during wartime in the past has always been one sided and the truth is never told.

Take the black box for example, how come it's damaged? It is to keep the truth coming out just like the flight that crashed 9/11 over Pennslyvania that was shot down by a US fighter jet in my opinion.

It is my opinion that the cause of the crash was sabotage by an individual or group outside of the airoplane before it took off or whilst on the runway. The odds of another plane crashing in NYC after september 11 are too high..

Don't believe everything the US govt tell you!!

Re: Truth will never be known.

In fact, the media made one brief mention of a boat sighted off the south shore of Long Island near JFK--a reference to a plume of smoke seen. Then nothing else. Not another word. Drake is right of course that the government would hide info like that. But the absence of real information like that doesn't render defensible the smearing of AA by people without any real information.

Re: ok, now i am getting p. o'd

the Canadian newspaper article states:

"The NTSB was also looking at whether the plane's two engines might have failed after sucking birds inside, a phenomenon that has caused severe damage to airliners in the past. But the NTSB said an initial inspection of the engines found no evidence of such a collision and the engines appeared to be largely intact. JFK airport is located near federally protected wetlands."........Toronto Star Nov. 14/01

people, AA has lost 3 aircraft in 2 months. the workers there are devastated. the task of dealing with the aftermath of not 1 but 3 such tragic events is overwhelming, yet they have carried on most courageously. these workers are your neighbours, they attend the same church as you, their children are in the same sports leagues as yours.

please, give them some respect and stop this meaningless speculation and innuendo, most especially when you know absolutely nothing except what the tv actors on CNN purvey to you to maintain their advertising base.

First of all ANYTHING that is man made WILL fail. When I was in the AIr Firce we had a fighter that had one of engine doors drop down in flight. Doesn't sound bad until you realize that these doors were the bottom part of the plane. The pilot did an outstanding job getting the plane back to the ground. The damage was extensive. Of course right away everyone was jumping on the maintenance person that last worked on the plane. One night security found this young man on the back side of base drinking heavily with the plans of taking his own life because he almost caused a wreck and possible lose of life.

Do you know what we found? One of the bolt sheared its head. We then xrayed the engine bay bolts on all the airplane to see if this was a common condiction and we had bigger problems or was it an isolated failure.

Now if we are listening to the news, we hear about a problem with a ceramic disk that might come apart while the engine is running. Is this what happen, I don't know but the FAA had released a report last month on it.

Also I have seen birds really mess up airplanes including airplanes where I was a crewmember. It is true that the new engines do have more tolerance for birds then the orginal, however, it is still possible. Also I heard a report that dismissed birds very quickly after the orginal report. My guess is as a matter of routine, they might have checked to see if there was a large group of birds, or evidence of birds in the engine. Eliminate all possiblities.

I agree that if the tail section fell off that would be enough to rip the engines off the plane. I was on a plane were we lost most of our rudder function above a certain speed. Luckily we could make it back to base, because with out the speed and fully loaded, we were not staying in the air. That was not a fun flight.

All I'm saying is lets not blame the people too quickly because hardware does fail and it can fail all of the sudden before anyone, has a chance to even inspect it.
Jerry

Re: Truth will never be known.

Alot of truth in what Drake said,but the fact remains that the airbus A300 has had alot of problems since it's first flight at the Paris air show in 78.When preforming a low level fly over the computer took over and landed the plane,perfectly I might add, it just over shot the runway and landed it in the trees killing the pilot and destroying the plane in a giant fire ball
The engines on the doomed flight 587 are no better.They were general electric CF6 and there have been several crashes and close calls around the world becaues of this engine.I believe it was in july a pakastany flight leaving jfk lost power to one of these engines because it broke an internal mid shaft.They were able to come around and land so nothing was said
The whole mess is a very sad thing.My wife was very upset because her niece's grandmother was flying out to Santo Domingo monday,we called her niece in NY to see if every thing was ok and learned that the Grandmother was at jfk waiting for her flight when 587 went down.
Our prayers go out to all the people on flight 587 and to the familys in the DR,NY and where ever they are from.
Lets also pray that if the familys in the DR receive any money from AA that the DR government keeps their hands off of it

Re: Truth will never be known.

Sure will, think you will find cross control presure caused by the leading 747 caused vertical stabilizer to crack. The GE CF 4-6 is one of the most reliable and widely used in world

Re: ok, now i am getting p. o'd

That plane crashed due to a control surface failure (Vert Stabilizer)

Re: Truth will never be known.

HI, golda, azb

Re: ok, now i am getting p. o'd

You know "EVERYTHING!!!"

Re: Truth will never be known.

Vertical stabilizers just don?t fail like this and break away. There has to have cracks on the mounting rivets etc. Yes, the boeing 747 can cause enough turbulence behind it to flip a 737 in air if it were close behind. In this case the 747 was way ahead of the danger zone.
Argument for bird (sucked in) damage: yes, it is possible for an engine to stop functioning or even get severely damaged from inside if a large bird to be sucked in. This is a common occurrence and many engines get damages from bird strikes. I have seen many engines in the hanger of airlines where the bird had caused a total destruction of the inside of the engine of an airliner. Let me repeat myself: I have seen many engines get totally destroyed from a bird strike.
If you have access to enter a repair hanger of a commercial airline you would see lots of stuff that you would never see in media. Damaged engines(many), damaged fuselage etc. Airlines know how to hide such stuff from public eyes. I wouldn?t mention which airline but I had seen nose damage of a wide body aircraft with a simple bird strike. Don?t forget, the bird comes to you like a cannon ball at a few hundred miles per hour and punches a hole right into the fuselage or takes out perfectly aligned fine blades of a jet engine.
How many of you guys hit a dog on the street with your car at 50-60 miles per hour? My friend hit a normal sized dog at 50 miles / hour and totaled his car from the front. Now just imagine a large sized bird hitting fan blades of a jet engine (which spins at 30 thousand RPMs).
In any case, I don?t buy that the bird had caused such damage. It?s most likely a mechanic?s error. As I remember, the engine was over-hauled and remounted just a short time ago. If the engine was not mounted in a proper way then vibrations (on take off) can break the mounting disk and the engine can come off. I remember, I had volunteered in giving up my seat to a Japanese business man on eastern airlines from Miami to NYC. I got a free pass to travel anywhere eastern flied at that time. When I arrived at la Guardia airport in the evening to receive my bags which were on the flight that I got off from, I was told that the plane had to make an emergency landing in north Carolina for engine problems. Later, it was known that an engine had fallen off in flight over north Carolina. This incident was in papers but a very small article (Daily news). It was a Lockheed
L-1011 wide body aircraft.
So you see, engines do fall off from aircrafts.
Now getting back to the 547. If the engine did fall off then it might have struck the vertical stabilizer and might have sheered it off. According to co-pilot?s voice, he had ordered the plane for more thrust. This would not only make the plane go fast but it would actually give it more lift as well. If the nose was up (as it is on take offs) and the vibration was increased due to extra thrust then the engine can break loose and strike the stabilizer behind.
Eye witnesses did mention a piece of a wing coming off the plane in mid air. That may have been the vertical stabilizer as it does look like a small portion of the wing. If the engine was broken off the airplane; this would make the aircraft off balanced to one side and without the vertical stabilizer the plane couldn?t stay afloat in a leveled position. Thus the plane took a nose dive (nose is always heavier on an aircraft) and tipped to one side opposite to where the engine was missing.
In a case like this, the plane had no chance to make a landing to safety.
This is my best educated guess as to what had happened to flight 547.
Anyone else has any better explanation?