FRANCE 330 PLANE A "MAN MADE DISASTER"? AIRLINE REC'D BOMB THREAT

[4sarge]

FRANCE 330 PLANE A "MAN MADE DISASTER"? AIRLINE REC'D BOMB THREAT

There is still no clue as to what catastrophe befell the Air France 330 airbus that disappeared off the radar with no SOS calls and expoded or crashed into smithereens over the ocean and killed 228 people.

An Airbus spokesman said: "The A330 has an extremely good safety record and this is the first accident on a commercially operated A330."

An Air France spokesman said the airline received a bomb threat for a flight from Buenos Aires to Paris on May 27, but that warning proved to be false.


France's defense minister and the Pentagon have said there were no signs that terrorism was involved, and Jobim said "that possibility hasn't even been considered."(here)

So, the airline received a bomb threat but the possibility of terror "has not even been considered" (but the abortion doc whack job murderer is a deemed a "terrorist" immediately. I'm confused.

Air France announced a "catastrophe", saying the plane could have been hit by lightning. But French ministers yesterday said lightning alone did not explain the crash, which would be the worst air disaster in Air France's 75-year history. "All scenarios have to be envisaged," the French defence minister, Hervé Morin, said yesterday. "We can't rule out a ­terrorist act since terrorism is the main threat to ­western democracies, but at this time we don't have any element whatsoever indicating that such an act could have caused this accident."

The environment minister, Jean-Louis Borloo, today described "a race against time" to find the wreckage and the plane's black box flight recorder, without which the crash remained "incomprehensible". He warned that the black box would only emit signals for 30 days. But the Atlantic search area between the coasts of Brazil and Africa remains vast and depths range from 3,000 to 6,000 metres, with currents so strong that the box might never be found. Borloo said that in 2004, when a jet crashed off Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, even with an exact crash point located, it took 15 days to find the flight recorder at a depth of 1,000 metres.

UPDATE: Amaros translated this this from today's Le Figaro for Atlas Readers. "This is of course speculative as of now but this pilot seems to know the aircraft, the route and speaks of some nasty possibilities"


Air France affirme que l'appareil a connu une panne de circuit électrique. Quelles sont les conséquences d'une telle panne à bord d'un avion ?

AF maintains that the aircraft has encountered an electrical black out in flight, what would be the implications of such a malfunction during flight?

Il y a cinq sources d'énergie électrique à bord d'un appareil. Pour qu'il y ait une panne totale, il faudrait que ces cinq sources ne fonctionnent plus. Lorsque tout tombe en panne, une batterie prend de façon transitoire et partielle le relais, ainsi qu'un moteur qu'on utilise généralement au sol. Une sorte d'éolienne est déclenchée pour générer de l'électricité. Pour que le commandant de bord n'ait plus aucune capacité à piloter l'avion, il faudrait que toutes ces sources d'électricité soient endommagées. Ça me paraît difficile.

There are 5 electrical sources on board of this aircraft. For a total black out, all 5 sources need to fail. When a total black out occurs, a back up battery takes up the temporary function as well as a motor usually used on land to generate electricity. For the pilot to be totally disabled to fly the aircraft, all these above sources need to fail, a scenario I would consider difficult to occur.
Un foudroiement, comme évoqué par le ministre en charge des Transports Jean-Louis Borloo, ne pourrait donc selon vous pas provoquer une telle panne générale ?

An electrocution (lighting) as stated by the transport ministry spokesperson Jean-Lois Borloo, could not, according to you, cause such a general black out?

Je ne dis pas ça, mais je me demande comment on peut savoir qu'il y a eu un foudroiement. Ce que l'on sait, c'est qu'il y a visiblement eu une forte turbulence puis des problèmes électriques. On peut ensuite associer les deux, mais de là à dire qu'un foudroiement est à l'origine de tout cela… Dans l'histoire de l'aviation, on ne connaît pas aujourd'hui de cas de foudroiement qui aboutisse à la perte d'un avion.

I am not saying that, but would ask how do we know that there was such electic shock? What was reported was that there was visibly heavy turbulance and some electrical problems. We could automatically link the two but we know of no lightning bringing down a plane this way.
Un expert brésilien a émis l'hypothèse d'un amerrissage en plein océan. Cette hypothèse est-elle réaliste ?

A Brazilian expert hypothesized about an ocean landing. Does this hypothesis seem realistic to you?

Pour que l'avion puisse amerrir, il doit être pilotable. Et pour être pilotable, il faut qu'il y ait un peu d'électricité. Et s'il y a de l'électricité, il y a possibilité d'envoyer un message. Entre le moment où vous planez et celui où vous vous posez sur l'eau, il va s'écouler près d'une demi-heure. Cette possibilité est donc peu probable… En réalité, ce qui est à peu près sûr, c'est qu'on ne saura jamais ce qui s'est réellement passé. L'avion se trouvait au-dessus de l'Atlantique. S'il a explosé en plein vol, il y a des débris dispersés sur dix kilomètres de diamètre…

For the plane to land on water, it needs to be controllable. For the plane to be piloted, you need electricity. If there still is electricity, then a message can also be relayed. Between your plan to land on water and the landing you usually have up to 1/2 hour. So this theory carries little probability. The reality is that we will never be sure what really happened. The plane is at the bottom of the Atlantic, if it blew up during flight, debris would disperse over 10s of kilometers.
Vous parlez d'une explosion. Est-ce qu'un attentat aurait pu causer une panne électrique générale ?
You talk about an explosion. Could an attack cause a general electrical failure?


Absolument. On peut très bien imaginer qu'une bombe a provoqué une dépressurisation de l'appareil, et que l'avion prenne du temps à se démonter en morceaux. De même, ça peut carrément être une grosse bombe qui a fait exploser tout l'avion, ce qui expliquerait que l'appareil n'a pas eu le temps d'envoyer un signal d'alerte.

Absolutely. We can easily imagine a smaller bomb causing the cabin to depressurize and that the plane falls apart over a short period of time. At the same time, a bigger bomb can blow up the whole plane leaving no time for sending out emergency signals.
fishy......

[Ashkelon]

TWA 800

[jediagh]

Originally Posted by Ashkelon

TWA 800

Was shot down by a missle from a US Submarine in error during training exercises. France 330 I don't think was shot down by a missile (at least my tinfoil hat tells me otherwise).

Do we know who was on the plane. Yes a lighting strike probably did not bring down the plane but I could see someone paying someone else to ensure that the plane and all on board do not make it. Not a terrorst attack per say but a hit. That's what my tinfoil hat is telling me.