|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Breaking News!!!
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Tweaker
Another Plane down!
Updated: 11:19 a.m. EST (1619 GMT) -- 12 November 2001
BREAKING NEWS
Plane crash in NYC
American Airlines Flight 587 crashes on takeoff in NYC borough of Queens
The flight, an Airbus A300, left JFK airport for Dominican Republic
NYC Port Authority: 246 passengers, 9 crew
Senior administration official: Initial indications of explosion, source unknown
NYC Mayor Giuliani says two crash sites; 12 buildings affected
New York Fire Department dispatches 44 trucks, 200 firefighters
The Pentagon said surveillance flights in the area; no unusual activity reported
American Airlines information number: 1-800-245-0999
Posted by: Shalome
....
Posted by: Blackknight
Oh goody more good news.
Posted by: Gunslinger
Fortunately, on the terrorism front, it's looking like a technical problem - engine failure and apparently "seperation" (weird, huh?).
What sucks (other than the fact that a lot of people just died), is that my father is the Director (like a VP) in charge of maintenance for the entire fleet at American Airlines - specifically engines. I know he's having a shitty day.
*sigh*
I would try to call him, but I doubt he has time to talk to me.
Posted by: Lord_Buttplug
It could be a sort of terrorism. One well placed shot with a high power rifle would probably cause the engine to come apart.
Posted by: Tweaker
I hope everything works out for him Gunslinger. Lord knows people have suffered enough.
Posted by: Gunslinger
Eh. It's not his engine department, I found out. American uses two types of engines: Rolls Royce, and one other one. He runs the Rolls Royce division, as well as fleet maintanance. The maintanance thing isn't something that can be blamed on him, and the airbus planes don't use Rolls Royce engines. So, he's ok.
Also, the thought of a rifle shot is rediculous.
It would take the marksmanship of a machine to do it, and even then - well, actually, even a machine couldn't do it.
Posted by: Lord_Buttplug
The rifle shot isn't that hard to believe. I personally use to shoot deer at upto 350m and could place a shot in it's heart area ( about a 12 inch diameter ) and thats with a surplus WWI 30-06 rifle.
The engine nacelle of the CF6-80C2 engine that is used on the Airbus is approximately 83 inches or about 7 feet. With a good modern weapon, I might be able to hit that upto about 1000m-1500m. Someone with a sniper's training could put a round in that target at well over a mile and a half and probably much more than that.
Posted by: laborat
...then again the shooter could have been using "Smart Bullets".
no wait, that is still science fiction...or is it?
Posted by: Nfested
It's probably not terrorism, and I hope it isn't terrorism. The thought of someone using a rifle to shoot an engine seems pretty farfetched to me.
Posted by: Lord_Buttplug
You don't actually shoot the engine. You just want the bullet to go into the intake of the engine or hit the turbines, then the fun will begin, as the engine rips itself apart.
Posted by: AK47
refresh my memory-
How high do planes fly?
Posted by: Lord_Buttplug
Commerical airliners fly upto about 35,000 or 40,000 feet.
And before I hear a smartass comment about not hitting anything that high off of the ground, you need to think about something that a plane has to do to get to that height.
Posted by: Bishop
Depends on the rifle used, I suppose.
Posted by: Blackknight
Also remind me, how fast do planes fly at?
Posted by: redwench
depends
speed on a large jet shortly after takeoff would be around 250 mph. so yes, its unlikely a sniper could hit the target in the right spot to cause catostrophic failure. but its possible i suppose.
Posted by: Gunslinger
It's not plausible. It just isn't. Physics prevail. Marksmanship skills do not.
If anyone ever saw Flight of the Intruder, there was a scene where some local shot a copilot in the seta of a jet aircraft, with a rifle. Sorry, it won't happen. Even though a commercial aircraft travels slower than a jet aircraft, it is still just as rediculous.
Keep in mind, that someone with a rifle isn't going to get onto the grounds of JFK International unless they are a law enforcement person of some kind. By the time the aircraft gets to an area where someone off the grounds of the airport could see it (JFK is huge), the plane is already several thousand feet in the air. At the velocity, you won't hit it.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
I don't like the way this conversation is going.
It's been done before. Some yahoo shooting at 737's. So, although the possibility is slim, it has happened in fact by some idiots. So, let it rest.
Posted by: Digitalphatman
Its not terrorism, why must people constantly go its terrorism. Its very unlikely you will be affected personnaly by terrorism. So just stop worrying and complaining....GEt over it. Yeah someone took a gun to the plane and shot the engine off. It was nothing more than a tragic accident. Thats all!!!!! I am just getting so sick of hearing people who are afraid to open their mail or go shopping or gather in public for a christmas event. I don't wanna hear of another city cancelling New Years celebrations(or any other event for that matter) because people are scared of some big, ugly, and stupid terrorist. If you are so f-----ing scared go live in a hole. This is America, America is free, therefore bad things can happen in a free society. We just need to go on with our lives, not spend all our time running around like headless chickens worried about what might happen to us if we leave our house. And no we do not need any more laws or restrictions of freedoms protecting us. We need less goverment because to be honest they don't really do or help any one that much.
<Digitalphatman>
Posted by: Lord_Buttplug
I never said it was terrorism. I said it could be terrorism. As for being scared, I haven't been scared of much of anything since about the time you were born Digitalphatman. Now onto my explanation.
I never said to shoot the plane while it was in the air, as this would require a great deal of luck to get the round to enter the intake of the engine. If you read my reply to AK47, you would see that I meant that the shot would have to take place as the plane was either leaving the ground during take-off or getting ready to.
Now for the meat. From looking at the runways, only runways 22R, 31R, and 31L could have been used due to the minimum take-off distance of approximately 2000m for the A300 and the flight paths leaving those runways. Of these 3, 31R can be ruled out fairly easy, since the end of the runway has traffic passing it heading to the center of JFK. The shot could be done here, but it would be much more difficult, since the probability of detection would be much greater. The end of runway 31L ends by going over a park and beach (Howard beach and Frank M Charles Memorial Park). The end of runway 22R heads out into Jamaica Bay, however if you look at the end of that runway you will see a large marsh that extends several thousand feet from the end of the runway. Both of these runways could be gotten to and "a hide" setup fairly easily, especially at the end of runway 22R.
Now if you take the runway length and subtract the minimum take-off distance of the A300, you get a distance of 1460m for runway 22R and a distance of 2442m for runway 31L. If you take a more realistic take-off distance of 2500m, you end up with 960m and 1942m respectively. This would be with the plane heading towards you, so you can pretty much do away with it's speed at a factor, since the runways are about as flat as they can be (i.e. 1 foot difference between ends).
Now before I hear that shots of 2442m are impossible, there are a couple snipers from the Vietnam era that were using weapons that are no where near as good as the ones that are available today and made shots like those above. The first is Alderbert F.Waldron who holds the record for number of confirmed kills at 113 in 5 months. He is known for his shot from the deck of a moving river patrol boat in which he shot an enemy sniper at the range of 900 yards (830m). The second is Carlos Hath**** who probably holds the record for the longest confirmed kill shot. His shot was at a distance of 2500m using a converted M2 machine gun with a scope mounted on the side, which killed the NVA regular (i.e. about 2ft by 5ft). Now the current record for best group in the "light gun class" at 1000 yards (923m) is 4.0947 inches. This was attained by Skip Talbot firing a .50 cal sniper rifle (i.e. which cost about 3-4K nowadays).
The cross section of the engine used by the A300 is 83 inches (approximately 7ft), that would easily fit a man plus inside of its area. Therefore it is easily within the realm of possibility that someone with some snipers training could blow an engine using a single rifle shot even at these distances.
Posted by: The_Druidess
Now now people let's not give them any ideas huh. And as for it being an accident I don't know seems a little odd on the timming.But than again I'm suspicious of everything and everyone *whispers*(I still think labo stole my block of cheese) shhhh but anyhow that's my view on it  .
Posted by: TheeMon
ok, you can tell he does he research or is on crack and making sht up JK, so seriously how long it take you to obtain that info just to win an aurgment? *note* remind me never to aurgue him, and get AoD to aurgue him that would be funny *end note*
Posted by: EOT(US)
EOT passes Digitalphatman aka I am Mary Poppins a cup of chill  Talk about over-reacting? 
Posted by: Canis Lupus
*sigh* ... I guess we will never look at accidents the same way again...
Posted by: Blackknight
ahhh I fell down the stairs! A terrorist must have pushed me!
Posted by: Shalome
I'm secretly hoping that people start blaming their ID10T and PEBKAC computer errors on terrorists instead of viruses. It would make my troubleshooting life much more enjoyable.
|
|
|
|
|
