This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on February 15, 2009 6:35 PM. The previous post in this blog was Out of service. The next post in this blog is The new excuse for everything. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Buffalo plane crash may not have been due solely to ice

... 26 seconds before the recordings were stopped by the impact, a warning alerted the crew that the plane might lose lift and fall out of the sky. An automatic system tried to push the nose down to gain airspeed, and yet the nose climbed to 31 degrees, far steeper than the steepest normal climb. Suddenly, the nose plunged to a down angle of 45 degrees, almost like a fighter plane breaking off to dive. Then it rolled right, beyond 90 degrees, all the way to 106 degrees....

[T]he crew had turned on the plane’s sophisticated de-icing system shortly after leaving Newark airport on the flight to Buffalo, long before the crash.

Comments (30)

This accident is begining to look like it was due to a tail stall. Especially after reading the severe pitch and roll variations after flaps 15.

Could the tail have gotten too iced up to function?

I think this will be ruled as a icing event. To recover from a tail stall, you do exactly the opposite of a wing stall by pitching the nose up. But 31 degrees is waaaay to much. Just guessing that they went into a tail stall, over corrected, and went instantly into a wing stall. That would explain the way the aircraft hit the ground. Again just an opinion from a former commercial pilot.

Do you think the de-icing system on the tail malfunctioned? Alternatively, was the Buffalo ice just too much for it?

Being "ruled as a icing event" makes the ruling that, but not the fact of it.

One 'weapon' which causes (scrambled) loss of electronic signals and controls, is a large quasi-directed pulse of electro-motive radiation, EMP, emitted from either rod antenna or aimed parabolic dish in close proximity to a (electronics-operated) target to be crippled. Electro-Motive Pulses are implicated in other 'unexpected, unexplained' plane crashes, where cell phones and radio listening in the area hear a brief burst/blast of static, and sometimes garage doors go up, unexplained.

Here and here, is a suspicious crash example, and a wider speculation of the genre, here:


In any event -- when provided -- the flight data recorder can animate a display of the plane's positioning moments before and subsequent to the loss of control.

Interesting stuff on icing and tail stalls here.

Oh, I have flown the Bombardier Dash 8 many times on Horizon.

Obviously we don't have much icing problem here (except for the last two months) but now my paranoia knows no bounds!!!

Ever since Paul Wellstone, I never believe any declarations of what happened - especially when the information is mysteriously in the press right afterwards, then turns out to be wrong.

Have you noticed how these three and I count Michael Connell's "crash" in December, all take place several miles from the airport as the planes are coming down?

Wellstone was 2 miles, Connell's was 3 and this one was 6.

The Wellstone one was two years after another candidate - Mel Carnahan - was killed in a small plane several weeks before the election with the balance of power in the United States Senate on the line then too. Damn suspicious.

The definitive example of this recent group was Michael Connell. If you don't know the story, it's not your fault. But I would look into it if you want to get a clearer picture of the Bush administration.

This one in Buffalo strays into the ultimate "Do Not Discuss" subject called 9/11. Who knows if that's part of it? It could just be an accident but let me just say, this is not the first person who spoke out about that event who has turned up in an untimely death.

Michael Connell I'm more sure about.

If organizations were shooting down whole airplanes to get one person, wouldn't they have to warn their friends and supporters when not to fly?
If NTSB is planting misleading information to make it look like an accident, wouldn't the conspiracy be dangerously big?
And wouldn't a lot of independent experts be asking how NTSB could be so wrong?
I'm not saying I couldn't be persuaded, but???

If organizations were shooting down whole airplanes to get one person, wouldn't they have to warn their friends and supporters when not to fly?

How much money would it take to get an airline mechanic somewhere to make a quiet little "mistake"? I doubt that it's happening, but I wouldn't call it impossible.

And the NTSB wouldn't have to be in on it if the evidence were burned up in a fiery crash, would it?

I'm not saying I believe that Beverly Eckert was deliberately killed here. My first inclination is to trust in the goodness of people, which is partly why my life has been one long disappointment.

There are possible reasons: She pushed for an investigation of 9/11, refused to accept a settlement, and sued the government so she could put people under oath, but that's old news.

Still, if there was more to 9/11 than the official story, then this has to be a tense time. You have a new administration, and people usually come out of the last one and start talking.
Just last week Beverly met with President Obama so that would be unsettling to anyone with vulnerabilities in this area.

Maybe it was a message to everyone who's still alive - don't go near 9/11. I'm sure it got through to President Obama. I mean one week you're talking to someone and the next she's dead?
That's going to make an impression.

Meanwhile we had a financial 9/11 this past September - what seems like a deliberate attack on our system - and the media barely made a sound. Silence on these matters is contagious.

At least the pain Beverly carried around, having talked to her husband right up to when his tower
dropped, is now over. For that, I'm grateful.

Some need to stop wrapping their heads in tinfoil..... I cannot wait until the tinfoil hat brigade's esteemed leader Rosie Odonnel to chime in........

I've listened to a lot of NTSB press conferences and they're always frustrating because direct questions are answered with, "I can't comment on that 'til we complete our investigation." The black box is flown back to Washington and then months later you get a report on what happened.
Have you ever seen an NTSB guy give a briefing this soon - two days after they got the flight recorder -
describing in detail what happened and blaming the pilots for being on autopilot 6 miles from the airport?
I'm not drawing any conclusions from that, but don't you think the pilots deserve a fairer shake than this?

I used to subscribe to a newsletter called "Aviation Safety". It was a monthly. It gave the best analysis of crashes both commercial and GA.... but never before several months after the event.

Mr. McDonald,

I doubt that you are aware that being on AP is normal during approach and wx. This is for making the workload that much more manageable and safer. In regards to your black box speculation, they were recovered in pristine condition, as evidenced in the photos showing the vertical stabilizer intact. Hence, the NTSB was able to recover all of the data very quickly. But, what do I know with only having nearly 17,000 hrs of flight time.

I was asking you based on you saying you had been a commercial pilot. I wasn't telling you, and my question remains, have you ever heard of an NTSB briefing that went into this detail before the investigation was complete?
By the way, they are going to remove the engines from the crash site today. I'm not an aviation guy but I would think examining those is a big part of it.
I bet if you asked the American public what happened the majority would say, "Icing caused this and they couldn't feel it affect the plane because they were on auto-pilot." Why? Because that was the story in the initial news cycle - something I've never heard an NTSB guy do.

Oh, by the way, the NTSB guy is backing away from the earlier comments in today's news stories: "Chealander says it remains a mystery what caused a seemingly routine descent by Continental Connection Flight 3407 to abruptly go wrong 26 seconds before the crash."

Maybe they should hold off blaming the pilots until they figured out what happened.

Mr. McDonald,

There have been so many mis-statements by the media on this terrible accident... Remember that " factual and good news " does not sell papers.....

Sure, that is a given, and I apologize if I rubbed you the wrong way on this. I am in the tinfoil brigade on several subjects including TWA 800, but I understand our portrayal as Rosie O'Donnell followers.
I do think it was a disgrace that a 9/11 widow had to sue her government to try and find out what happened that day.

By the way, there's another group in the tinfoil brigade you might relate to a little better:

Go to pilotsfor911truth.org. Maybe some of the tinfoil stuff will sound more convincing coming from your colleagues.

Mr. McDonald,
No apology needed. I do not buy into the 9/11 conspiracy, but that is another discussion entirely and I do not wish to detract from the subject at hand.

The accident scenario seems to match pretty closely the tail ice stall scenario from the NASA tests presented in the video Jack posted above.. Am I missing something?

Good vid link post Jack. Rather long but seems to describe the incident and why they should not have been on autopilot.

Great read on Michael Connell. Was not familiar with the story at all.

"Was not familiar with the story at all."

Why I cry.

"... the 9/11 conspiracy, but that is another discussion entirely ...," [Fonzi's RSVP to an invitation to look where (supposed) pilot eyes "might relate to a little better: pilotsfor911truth.ORG (*) " -- NOT an invitation to Fonzi to begin 'discussion'] "... and I do not wish to detract from the subject at hand." Fonzi, you already did.

The subject being: Thoughts Beyond Massmedia Restriction, (or "crash may not have been due solely to" the quickly-reported cause), and you hair-triggered, Fonzi, distracting us with a re-propaganda of the Massmedia Restriction we all already heard and are already beyond that barricade getting to stories which some people are 'less familiar with' ... like your (aggressively ignorant) lack of familiarity with Nine-Eleven flight data animations. (btw, the (*) above signals that the link goes into the website where the 3:00 minute video trailer is NOT censored ... er, I mean, 'Media Restricted' like the same video is on the front page of the website)

But, y'wanna know something? I falsely accused this before, so this time I'm wary and careful to word it differently: Sometimes when anonymous 'stranger' names suddenly appear here, especially ones making gobs o' comments to 'BELIEVE what TV(&radio) says, NOT question, NOT discuss,' then I imagine my or any response is going to LIARS Larson, kNOThead, and so adjust my words accordingly, writing To Whom It May Concern Behind LIARS BrickThick Denial Wall, ...

By the way to bye-bye, there have been six or a dozen multiple-fatality plane crashes in recent weeks, including a mid-air collision of two MILITARY fixed-wing craft in Texas (I think, maybe it was Cali), and two choppers in Afghanistan, and also including the no-fatalities Hudson River luck-and-awe landing, and all of them were reported in normal fashion and had no suspicious lack of flight-trouble conditions.

In Buffalo, besides Bush-enemy Beverly Eckert who calls for unRestricted Nine-Eleven information, also killed was Bush-enemy Alison Des Forges, the day before her "critical quote on the secret deal worked out between Rwanda's murderous U.S.-backed President, Paul Kagame, and Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) President Joseph Kabila, appeared in a Washington Post article written by Stephanie McCrummen from Kigali, the Rwandan capital," (quoting from Wayne Madsen Report .COM in "February 14-15, 2009 -- Critic of murderous Kagame regime in Rwanda killed in crash of Continental Flight 3407").

The view Beyond Massmedia Restrictions sees that suspiciously unexplained fatal crashes always have a Bush-enemy passenger, (never a Democratic-enemy, like Rove or Newt or Lamebrain or LIARS -- who each spend 1000's of hours flying in planes), and bad weather / plane trouble 'explained' fatal crashes don't have a Bush-enemy on-board, it seems.


I would advise you to take the tinfoil wrap off your head, especially when you walk by a microwave or use a cellphone...

Rosie O'Donnell called and wants to hire you Tenskwatawa......

The Michael Connell thing is crucial. Here's the guy who can testify about how the GOP used his program to match names of criminals to other names in Florida in 2000 thereby removing around 90,000 voters from the rolls - voters who would have easily turned the state away from George W. Bush.
Then in Ohio in 2004, with exit polls predicting a Kerry win, this guy's program runs the entire state's numbers and Bush comes out ahead.
Okay, he's ready to talk and his lawyers have already filed papers claiming a threat by Karl Rove to both him and his wife.
The administration is leaving in a month. What to do? Here you're trying to slap a legacy together for Junior and this one guy can testify that the whole thing was a crime?
Would this be the testimony that finally wakes up the public as to the blatant criminality of the Bush administration?

No, because mere weeks before the end of this administration, the man has the unbelievable good grace to protect his old friends by dying in a plane crash.

The only thing these craven bastards left out was the part about it being an act of God, to save their godly man. I don't think so.

Scary stuff. I have no idea what to think or where to turn.

And the Nigel Jacquisses of the world are all focused on gay nookie?

"I would advise you ..."

Save it, you might need it.

"Rosie O'Donnell called ..."

Good, there's you somebody to talk to.


High-trafficked POLL: Obama Should Commission An Independent 9/11 Special Prosecutor Investigation? -- By Gene Cappa - A United States Marine Corps Viet Nam Era Veteran trying to do what I can and expecting Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch, to do what they can to keep the nation strong and free by remaining true to the Constitution first of ...

It appears that the line of thinking today is that the pilot tried to correct for a tail stall when in fact he should not have. Could just be pilot error in the end.

Clicky Web Analytics