Tweet
Yes Gabriel, you are right. The fact that the plane didn't have the problem when it was at 1m above the runway and actually crashed about 0.5 nm from the runway has changed a lot of things.
-
-
Well, I had not seen yet any info related to where the plane crashed relative to the runway. Did it crahs 0.5 NM short? And it was on the extended centerline? And on a runway heading?Originally posted by ZK-OKH View Post
This type of info is usually readily available (you know, like a map showing all that, or aerial photos of the crash site)
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---Comment
-
Well look at that. Reading an italian aviation forum this interesting thing as been noticed:
Take a look at the white building in the left of this shot:
Then take a look at this video, 4:01. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1srEE7qq9jw
and now look at the B in this map:
Visualizzazione ingrandita della mappa
It's not sure but very probable to me. In every case the crash site is not so close t the airport since the AZ flight departed just 15 mins.Comment
-
Great WORK!!! ZK!!Comment
-
Okay - let's put one thing to rest: there has not been any indication that there was a structural failure of a composite part involved in this accident. Any speculatoin about that is totally foolish. Composites have been around for decades iun importatnt structural parts of commercial airliners and there have never been any problems so far. So I personally would be extremely surprised if this accident turned out to be caused by the structural failure of a composite part of the airliner.
Also, so far I have not heard anything conclusive about the location of the crash site. Let's wait until we get any definitive info on that.Comment
-
Peter,
If only you looked a little harder in this thread.. like up two posts you may be able to figure out where the crash site is.
Just sayin.. ZK puts up a great post on the site location and landmarks. And you grumble on about composites and no crash site location.
Try to keep up.Comment
-
Sorry, TheKiecker, but I am not sure where you get the right to tell me to which posts on this thread I want to reply.Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
As for ZK's post - the YouTube link doesn't work, at least not where I am sitting (and this is the danger you encounter when posting YouTube links) and apart from that I see one of the press pictures of the crash site and a Google satellite picture. For me, that is not a definte location of a crash site - and even ZK admits it's not sure but probable.
So, TheKiecker, unless you have anything to CONTRIBUTE, I and many other people here would APPRECIATE if you kept any non-relevant comments to yourself.
Thanks
Comment
-
Where did I tell you what posts to reply to? Ive got a pond out back and its stocked with red herring.
Im sorry to have addressed you. And while you may be accusing me of thread policing, Id like you to meet my friend kettle.
Im sorry you cant get the youtube link to work. But it pretty much pinpoints the building. So color yourelf uninformed on that post.Comment
-
No hard feelings, TheKiecker I just think it's important to be careful on any internet forum on how to address people and on how to phrase posts.
Comment
-
Peter I'm sorry you can't see the video. I've tried to find another one from the web but I couldn't. Anyway you can see clearly a builiding very similar to the photo I posted. Told that I've just reported what I've red in an italian aviation forum. Of course, and it's clear (I hope!),this doesn't want to be the truth.
About the crash location, you are right saying we don't have anything sure about the right place, but we know that it was inbound for rw9, the east-west rw. The video is a window sight during a landing on rw 9.Comment
-
No worries, ZK-OKH... We'll know about the location soon enough
Comment
-
Its all good Peter.
Take care.
Oh and ZK, I think you may have that pinpoint on the wrong side of that building.
Looks to me they are on the backside (NORTH?) of the building, the Vert Stab is pointing backwards. My two cents.Comment
-
I couldn't put it anywhere else. It did want a street to lie on...Comment
-
So you agree its on the back-side of the building with the VStab pointed backwards. Much closer to the airstrip than the point on the google map.. My apologies.Comment
-
For the life of me, I can't imagine why they would not request 27, especially since reports say a previous flight had to abort on 09. And they have the home field advantage here. They should get what they ask for. How much traffic is there on this strip at 6am? Why are they landing into the sunrise in these conditions on NDB's when a precision approach is available?Originally posted by mawheatley View Post
Is this some kind of game to them?
I'd really like to know.Comment
Comment