Report on crash of American Airlines Flight 587

[redbird146]

the ntsb never acknowledge what really happened because, just like the rest of america, it is corrupt. if they say the fire started due to negligence of maintaining the aircraft, then everyone will sue and claim compensation - they do not want this. aircraft are built to withstand a pilot moving his neccessary controls!

[queensattorney]

I'm not sure as to your point. It's not like the families didn't receive settlements from AA and Airbus.

[shaddoweaver]

air travel is spose to be safest form of transport. if so why do we have so many planes falling from the sky. seems its only as safe as the number crunchers can make it.

[queensattorney]

Air travel is incredibly safe. Do you know how many people are killed and injured annually in auto accidents just in the U.S. alone?

[ancestron]

Sometimes planes crash. Sometimes people screw up. even experienced pilots. No conspiracy. Horrible horrible accident, but no conspiracy.

[queensattorney]

Did you read U.S.Read's reports?

[tee85]

I don't even remember this event happening. All I remember about the news in fall 2001 was 9/11 maybe thats why it didn't get that much exsposer.

[Bollocks3000]

very suspicious indeed..possibly it was a real terrorist attack and didnt fit with the plans of Bush and Co and their staged WTC attacks so it was swept under the carpet so as not to confuse the matter..

[queensattorney]

"Didn't fit with the plans of Bush and Co. and their STAGED WTC attacks" -

Ladys and Gentlemen ... gather 'round. Here we have before us a 9-11 Truther ... a mystery of the modern mind. Can you offer any suggestions for how to stop this diseased thinking?

[mattkamper]

When was this report on TV?

[metsdudenj]

It was on veterans day, and this is an american holiday and im sure it was blown up. I dont think one of the passengers were responsible, it would be interesting to get the passenger list and see if any of them were not Dominican. ALso, a bomb could have been put on by the baggage carriers

[lirr56890]

that's a cover up people say that it was a terrorist attack and I evening no it was a terrorist attack.

[LatteLiberal]

Why can't liberals get it? We had to get the case closed quick so we could focus on 911 and the war in iraq and iran. Remember, this happened a month after 911. Sometimes you have to think about the big picture. Vote NO to liberal consumer and safty laws. Vote YES to trusting our President.

[godzilla1234567890]

It seems the NSTB likes covering shit up cuz look at the analysis of TWA Flight 800 back in '96.I read an article about a boy predicting the 9/11 attacks and it seems he predicted sometime in early November 2001 he said another plane would crash so it cant be an accident there was no fucking turbulence it was a sunny day i remember it why cant these fucks just be honest.

[mbitsko25]

WAKE turbulence, idiot. WAKE turbulence. If you don't know what you're talking about, shut up.

[godzilla1234567890]

listen bitch you shut ur fucking mouth u hear me u probably some little faggot living with his momma go choke on a dick u dont know shit bout turbulence ASSHOLE

[tm24fan]

You're the asshole here, and you do NOT know anything about turbulence, judging by your previous post. This plane fell victim to wake turbulence, which is caused by the wing vortex from another plane taking off disturbing the air. This can linger for several minutes. And it can be violent enough to roll even a decent sized jet like an A300 over, especially since the vortex in question came from a Boeing 747, the largest airliner in the world. Get your facts straight or go somewhere else.

[tm24fan]

Oh yeah that's to Godzille by the way, to avoid any confusion.

[godzilla1234567890]

how do u know asshole were u on the plane were u there no so shut ur fucking mouth u dont know shit bout turbulence it takes pretty severe turbulence to bring a plane down and planes can withtake it faggot thats what they were built to do. the boy in brooklyn who predicted 9/11 also predicted something would happen in november so u go look that up and it also happened on veterans day an american holiday this is to tm24fan

[metsdudenj]

I believe that this was terrorism. I dont believe that pilot error was to blame. Im pretty sure it was an explosion on board

[godzilla1234567890]

i believe that as well metsdudenj and normally i wouldnt say the gov't wouldnt cover anything up but it seems like they did just to keep the airlines from losing a shit load of money and lawsuits and this is right after 9/11 quite a few attempts to blow up planes have went through just look at shoe bomber richard reid which happened in december 2001 it showed we werent fully safe yet

[willzone1]

i can see that. after all, there were bangs and stuff.

[chippy147258369]

Wow, alot of harsh words...

[godzilla1234567890]

well it was only to prove a point but in fact i believe the official version of 9/11 but i know the gov't covered up some of it and 4 American Airlines flight 587 it couldnt have been an accident planes can take hurricane turbulence so how could pilot error b the blame if the man flying it has years of expierience from the offical story i would say the pilot had no idea what the hell he was doing especially since they didnt hit 35,000 ft yet and thats where the conspiracy came in

[benthebest1993]

omg u actully realy dum have u ever herd of wake turbulance or clear air turbulance just becouse it was a sunny day dosent mean there will be no turbulance

[queensattorney]

Of course there can be turbulence. But the point of U.S.Read's work was that there were tremendous clues missed by the NTSB. Read U.S.Read's reports released in 2004.

[celticlofts]

This would not be the first time the NTSB has got it wrong; they're only human for goodness sake. I remember the cargo door on a 747 opened in flight killing some passengers and the NTSB claimed it was incorrectly latched by ground crew. The father of one of the victims proved it was a wiring short that caused it. The NTSB had to alter their report accordingly. But overall I'd say the NTSB does a good job for the American taxpayer.

[PilotJudgment]

What! Can you post that story, I'd like to read it. Thanks

[celticlofts]

Sure buddy. It was UAL 811 I believe. I remember seeing it on tv. Just google UAL 811 for the story.

[PilotJudgment]

Great! Thanks!

[willzone1]

great info, good post. proved your point WITHOUT swears.

[celticlofts]

Did you read the account on UAL 811? Oh and thanks for the nice comment.

[robbyrosario]

I also read a post investigation report which stated that the turbulanse caused severe vibrations to the tale of the aircraft which weakened the structure. the pilots sudden and overly strong rudder movements basically finished the job the turbulance started.

[PilotJudgment]

Turbulance cannot bring down an airplane of that weight. Look at the NTSB report about the rudder inputs.

[LUCIALOVESMCR]

The pilot made the mistake of putting that much pressure on the rudder. It's like bending a spoon, if it's under that much pressure, it snaps off.

[robbyrosario]

just so you guys know this is not my domain name, its my frainds so if sumbody wants to say something negative say it about me not my fraind... thanx.

[robbyrosario]

I witnessed the crash, i lived on beach 119th at the time, 3 blocks away THERE WAS NO FIRE that guy in the video just wanted to be on TV. i watched the FAA take the tail out of the water, it had no charring on it, and it was a clean brake. fact it thease things happen, ATC should have told him to turn a lesser degree to avoid the wake of the 747. While wake turbulance is dangerous i still blame the crash on airbus's poor engineering, and pilot error, there was no need for that much rudder.

[PilotJudgment]

robbyrosario, it is not up to ATC to vector aircraft from potential turbulence. Basically, you just fly through it. The pilot is always commander of his ship. He decides what and what not to do. He could have refused to go when told he had clearance however, enough time passed to allow the 747 vortices to clear. The copilot lost SA and panicked.

[ChasenSFO]

Yes, the pilot always has the final say. If ATC vectors you 10 feet away from a 747, its your call to say "Unable". As for the NTSB, why would they ignore so many witnesses?

[PilotJudgment]

To my understanding, the NTSB doesn't "ignore" anything. Every bit of information is fully investigated.

[celticlofts]

Sadly that's not always the case. Read my other post.

[mkarnerfors]

On what channel and on what date was this sent? I was whinking about putting up a note up on Wikipedia but I need a reference.

[Twinhit]

IMHO, sounds like the US blew up another plane to reenforce the idea of "terrorists" being responsible for 9/11.

The media loves this stuff.

Information, misinformation.

Damage control and mass opinion manipulations.

Why?

Who benefitted?

Who has the power to cover it up.

Sheesh, even FDR, Eisenhower, and JFK alluded if not outright spoke about the Secret Societies.

If you think your free, think again.

[ttlyawesome]

Glad to see these idiots dont QUITE consider themselves "conspiracy theorists". Wake turbulence is real, I believe this happened to some other flights in the early 1990s, and it spun them down to a nosedive.

I doubt this was a terrorist thing. If there had been a bombing, it would have been noticeable when they re-assembled the plane from the debris.

[queensattorney]

The plane was not re-assembled.

[eltrut96]

Because...The airlines benefit from it and the big airline companies are in bed with the politicians. Airline sales were at an all time low. People were scared to death to fly and this happened only one month after 9/11. That's why it's pretty damned fishy. And actually the government does benefit from it also. Dubya kept on preaching about how air travel was safe with all the beefed up security. How would this make him and his cronies look? Get it?

[KokSquad]

ok that still doesnt show how it would benefit the government if bush is saying how safe it is by having a plane taken down 0_0

[eltrut96]

HUH? The conspiracy revolves around how this was possibly the first successful "shoe bomber". Not long after flight 587 blew up they caught Richard Reid AKA the "shoe Bomber" on another airline trying to ignite explosives that were hidden in his shoe. I never heard of anyone refer to flight 587 as being "taken down".

[queensattorney]

The fellas behind usread don't believe in a coverup. They do believe Fed. incompetence may have occurred. Don't we ALL believe THAT is possible??

[keeper45601]

I agree it could be many diffrent possibilities for the actual crash of thisa plane....the engine could of been on fire...or *broken down* for a long time after the fire even started..but the rudder usage was a little too much...asking me it could be many posibilities

[mickey5088]

There is evidence that contridicts the ntsb's official version. there is opportunity. There is also motive. Don't accept the ntsb's version of what happened. Do a little research. You'll find that our government has succesfully covered up a terrorist attack in the interests of protecting our airline industry. Remember that the 1996 olympics started that week in Atlanta. This was NOT an accident.

[queensattorney]

you're ferring to TWA 800; not AA 587

[Nicshooter]

Wake turbulence can really be dangerous, I do believe that version of the crash, but no one can really be sure what happened unless we were in the plane.

[hftfire]

When you understand the disolution of the drug "network" w/in NYC post 911; those who reside at the destination of this flight [Dominican Republic]; the deaths that have occurred to 'restructure' the boundaries of today's BILLION dollar drug network; the likely need to eliminate any one or more 'drug lords' in the process of such 'restructuring'; consider who is most influential in NY; and what 'they' have access to to implement such 'remedies'; the NTSB report states what!?!

[hftfire]

The first news team on scene interviewed a person who screamed repeatedly , "I saw the missiles take out the plane!" Why would someone with no agenda make up such a statement if in fact he did not see the flame, trailers, and subsequent explosion BEFORE the plane fell in three (3) separate pieces into three (3) different crash sites? This is precisely why the NTSB has asserted wake turbulence (wing vortices) that have never been in any recorded accident at 3000' AGL.

[queensattorney]

There were maybe 2 or 3 people who claimed to see a missile. Not enough to go on or even seriously consider.

[HLblacksheep]

The explosion was witnessed by hundreds; several stated they saw the missiles track; the plane fell in three (3) complete pieces; 1) entire epponage (tail and fuselage) in the water at bench mark 0.0 miles, 2) the entire midsection of plane (wings and fuel tanks) at 1.0 miles, & 3) 25' of the entire nose of the craft (no fuel - NO fire) at 1.1 miles. Planes do NOT disinegrate due to MILD turbulence!

[tehkick]

NTSB sucks. Having worked S.A.R. and seeing many accidents, I can say they are more than careless in comming to a probable cause. However, I always figured the larger commercial accidents were afforded more attention to detail than general aviation accidents.

[Cramsfordd]

Wake turbulence is legitimate, guys. Period.

[queensattorney]

Agreed. But ... wake turbulence is NOT the cause of the crash according to the NTSB. The separation of the tail is ... which they state ... was caused by the rudder movements. USREAD asserts the NTSB missed the initiating event.

[Semion1991]

I think the theory of wake turbulence is the truth and the pilot made a very big mistake by using the rudders very heavy and then the tail broke off. And I don't think they had something to do with any terror attack..

[AndrewMH095]

Maybe mechanical failure caused the tail to brake off.

[Swampertdude56]

yeah.... brobably therudder was swinging wildly and ripped the tail off.. thats what i believe

[gnxnational]

I never bought this "Wake turbulance" crap a few weeks after 9-11, the ragheads had to have had something to do with this. Finally the truthe is out there