Conspriacy Theroy?

[GroundZero3]

I wonder why all these plans are going down all of a sudden. Kinda makes you wonder whether something is going on or it really is malfunctions in the plane. I remeber when that one plane 2 years ago that went down into the Atlantic and eye witnesses say they say a flame heading towards it before is crashed. And now they say the new plane that crashed they hear a loud noise in the recording. Call me pariond but its seems alot more are falling then they use too. Sure they can tell us it was malfunctions and tell us there doing everyhting possible to correct it but how do we know what is Fact and fiction? the goveremnet has lied nomorous times and there gonna be a time when we are gonna stop trusting.
Gz3

[M1pilot]

Having been in the aircraft industry for over 25 years, and with over 20 years experience as a test pilot on developmental production and experimental aircraft as well as an ACM instructor, I have to say that your conspiracy theory is amusing, anyways. In all the aircraft where I had incidents that led to forced or precautionary landings, or out & out crashes (including the one where I was severely injured), not once was I ever "shot down". In every case, it was an engine, airframe, or systems failure, or an unanticipated aerodynamic anomaly that caused the premature cessation of the flight. Aircraft that are in the "field" are there only because they have been certified after exhaustive testing, but they are, after all, only machines, and no matter how much care is taken to ensure operational, structural, and procedural integrity, failures do occur. It's unfortunate, but it is a fact of life. They as a rule do not crash from being shot down. Even the military lose more aircraft from normal operations than they ever do in combat.

-M1pilot

[Richard_Cranium72]

I think the airplane industry only does what it has to to stay in business(DUH) I don't fly anymore after flying for over 30 yrs. Weather is so unpredictable, like the "horizonal tornados" to the east of the Rockies in denver, and in Japan too. These are usually invisible, but can smash a plane. Don't forget about wind shear, weather aside, remember the crash because of low air pressure in the tires(falsified documentation) this can go on forever.. I personally have almost crashed for several reasons. Once leaving Minn/StPaul, the pilot took off with about 10% flaps, (I got it on video), as we left the "Ground Effect" the plane fell back towards earth,, the pilot overspeed the engines horribly and the temperature being very cold helped the plane stay aloft.. Coming into Denver on Ice, we sped past the half way mark, the 3/4 mark and took the last taxi way at about 80 mph. Over Kansas, during a particularly rough flight, the plane fell about 30,000 feet, all personal articles rolled about on the ceiling, we hit bottom and about ripped the wings off. Leaving Denver, a forklift ran into the plane, damaging it too bad to fly. Coming into Charlie Brown in Atlanta, the air traffic controllers failed to tell us that a tornado was aloft. When we broke through the haze, lightning was striking about twice per second. To and Fro winds were over 160mph causing the plane to stall and then upon reversing causing the wings on the Beechcraft Low-winger to bend up so far that you couldn't see the tips, this continued for about 25 cycles, our alternate airport Peachtree/Dekalb had also been struck by the storm strowing aircraft across the runway, about 15 planes torn loose from their moorings(Labor Day 1979). Twice in my neighborhood crashes happened because of pilot error, two jets(F-105's) and a business jet(Lear) I belonged to the civil air patrol during the 60's and grew tired of seeing bodies that looked like a cow that had been gutted. Take Hawaii Air, remember when the roof tore off sucking a stewardess out.. When I called the FAA about the one I had on film with the flaps up, three times I was disconnected during the call with lots of static and buzzing ensuing the termination to the call.. In short the FAA don't want to hear about any problems.. I've tried for brevity even though it doesn't look like it, by leaving out lots of stories that I know to be accurate also. DrVette

[GroundZero3]

Hey M1pilot what kind of planes did you fly?

[DaveLewis]

If you believe the conspiracy theories the US Navy can't allow a passenger airplane to fly over one of its ships or bases without shooting it down. If a ship actually shot down an airliner you have to silence every body on the ship (300+ crewmen) and everybody back at the base in an era when lots of people will run to the newspapers or TV stations at the first opportunity. If two people know a thing its not a secret anymore. We couldn't even cover up the "secret" of the atom bomb for long.

Maintenance standards slip, the weather is lousy, pilots screw up, and Murphy happens all too often. A gigantic conspiracy and cover up to get the USN or other as yet unnamed folks off the hook ? I don't think so.

[M1pilot]

"the pilot took off with about 10% flaps, (I got it on video)"...a certain amount of flap on some aircraft is a requirement in normal procedures, and definitely used in more critical circumstances (ie: soft field, rough field, short field, high load, high density altitude, float operations, just to name a few).

"the FAA don't want to hear about any problems"....can't agree with you on that one..the FAA go out of their way looking for problems! I've seen too many aircraft grounded, pilots violated, and maint. shops, & FBO's have their licences lifted by out of the blue ramp checks and facility visits. This is on top of the scrutiny that the industry receives through normal FAA requirements...which is considerable!

No doubt, if you fly a lot, you are going to encounter a lot of experiences that might scare you enough to not fly, but the bottom line is (as in driving) there is a certain amount of risk. And this is a risk that the passenger must assume as well. It's simple...if you can't accept the fact, don't go. Yes there are crashes, but the record over the years more than prove that air travel is the safest way to go.

DrVette, it's too bad your flying experience has been a bad one...... and I certainly don't want to try to change your mind about flying......but all you've said does not convince me that there is a conspiracy theory. Planes crash, cars crash, trains crash, ships sink, people get killed walking...that's life, man!

-M1pilot

[M1pilot]

GZ3.......I've flown over 70 types over the years, ranging from your basic ultralight and J-3 types to small jets. For work, I primarily flew Beech Barons & Dukes for a small charter outfit. I was engaged by the Canadian Forces in the early 80's to instruct ACM in the Canadair Tutor (this was under a joint civilian/military program that lasted for just under a year). During this period I had a chance to fly the CF-5 (T-38)and the T-33. I have a particular love of warbirds and experimentals and have a ton of time in Harvard's (T-6), and some time in the P-51, B-25,and A-26, as well as a few more obscure types such as the Cornell and Cessna Crane. I actually flew A-26's operationally for a few years while working for a fire suppresion company. The aircraft testing was primarily in the form of proving modifications to existing designs, that could range anywhere from powerplant and airframe mods to checking handling and structural integrity of a newly built experimental aircraft. I've owned a number of aircraft through the years (Piper Turbo Arrow III, Mk.21 Mooney, V-35 Bonanza, and an S1-T Pitt's Special). I've built two, an MJ5-H2 Sirocco, and my current plane... the M1 Mustang.

-M1pilot

[psyklone]

i'm not buying the conspiracy idea until i see a headline like "U.S. Government forces Microsoft to split: New Microsoft Aeronautical Design Division to begin production next week..."

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

[medo]

Hello,

I do not believe in the conspiracy theory.
I believe in the money/compromise theory. Aeroplanes lost its aura of exclusivity (some time ago) and nowdays are one of the most common travel solutions. Their numbers are so high and numbers of possible accidents are proportional. If you add a timetable, the cost of maintenance, human factors/negligence and competitions/profits than you have all those accidents. It's a part of our life.

Medo

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[Richard_Cranium72]

I agree with the odds, the statistics support the fact that air travel is the safest form.. However, my personal observation is that there are many unreported near-misses that go un-reported. also accidents are reported incorrectly. In my travels, the near-crash incidents have made me gun shy.. I've badly wrecked a couple of cars in 35 yrs of driving and walked away.. I'll stick to ground travel. Also, I don't need or use Prozac. fyi, DrVette

[Amarok]

Well here is one for the conspiricy bit. There is still one airline in the world that has yet to have an airplane crash. Quantas <I hope I spelled it right> Has not had a plane crash in its history.

Kinda funny why them and no one else? What are they doing diffrent than anyone else?

[M1pilot]

---------------------------------------------
"Well here is one for the conspiricy bit. There is still one airline in the world that has yet to have an airplane crash. Quantas <I hope I spelled it right> Has not had a plane crash in its history"
---------------------------------------------
Strong words, but not true! While they have a very good record they have had at least two crashes were the aircraft were destroyed, and have had their fair share of incidents were there has been damage caused. Some stats:

Aircraft destroyed & fatalities:
07/04/49 Avro 691 Lancastrian 1 - 5 dead
24/08/60 Lockheed L-1049G Super Constellation - 50 dead
-Nothing recent....good for them!

A couple of recent incidents:
02/09/99 B-747-438 - overran the runway when the captain decided (while the F/O was actually performing the landing) to not abort the landing even though the F/O wanted to.
23/09/99 B747-200 - No.1 engine scraped the runway on landing in extremely gusty winds.

Qantas (no U by the way) as I said, has a good record, and other airlines would do well to use them as a model in some areas, but they are not immune to the problems that other airlines or the rest of the industry are encountering.

-M1pilot




[This message has been edited by M1pilot (edited 02-06-2000).]