Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 6:27 am

What is the possibility that there is a bomb in the bulk?! There might have been a little bomb in the bulk hold that triggered the whole chain results of the accident. The fact told us that the vertical stabilzer came off first, and this is believed to be the cause of the loss of control. But what made the tail to fall apart in the first place? Was it really wake turbulence? I personally do not believe that wake turbulence would cause such a large structural damage to an acft. Turbulence or CAT can hardly cause such damage to the acft external structure since acfts are built to stand turbulence. Even pax got thrown up and down in the cabin during turbulence, the structure of acft itself should only suffer minor damage or even no damage at all.


The accident also remind me what happened to Alaska MD-80 that plunged off the coast of LA.

all thouhts are welcome
r panda
 
gf-a330
Posts: 1604
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 10:09 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:13 am

a little bomb .......oh really
 
Guest

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:17 am

Yeah, How LITTLE of a bomb can we get... And don't the bags go through X-RAY...
 
AWspicious
Posts: 2780
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 7:47 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:21 am

yeah... a little bomb.... shaped like a rivet... real James Bond stuff!

 Laugh out loud
Nevermind political correctness - Envision using your turn signals!
 
Guest

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:22 am

Its possible... I hope they cover it up though, and say it was a different problem.

 
woodsboy
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 5:59 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:23 am

CAT can most certainly cause structural damage to large aircraft. There have been incidents of trailing wing slats being crinkled, wing panels coming off or being deformed and even more signifigant structural damage.
 
Guest

RE: Critter,GF,AWSuxspicious

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:25 am

WOW, you guys really know your stuff... Did you know that CHECKED baggage isnt screened, the FAA just announcing today that they want to implement a system at all airports by 2004, to screen checked bags for bombs?

LOL

You guys are good!

HOW DOO YOUU do it?

 Laugh out loud
 
Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: Critter,GF,AWSuxspicious

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:33 am

pls note that there are many diff. ppl working on the ramp. The "little bomb" may not originally from the baggage itself. Employees or ramp rats are not necessarily checked by the securities before each shift.

r panda
 
Guest

RE: Critter,GF,AWSuxspicious

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:36 am

That too!
 
Guest

RE:Apology...

Thu Nov 15, 2001 7:43 am

I owe an apology AW SPICIOUS... I seriously thought that it was AWSuxspicous... Sorry.

 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 8:01 am

The accident also remind me what happened to Alaska MD-80 that plunged off the coast of LA.

Alaska 261 came down because a bolt or whatever (sorry for being so specific  Smile in the horizontal stab. jammed into a position which forced the plane to a rapid descent. If i'm not wrong here (feel free to correct me if i am) this was a fault specific to the MD series A/C? Therefore not applicable for the A300. Again, this is mere speculation and please feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.
 
boeing764
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2001 7:24 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:18 am

I don't think that a bomb in the cargo hold would result in such a clean seperation of the vertical stabilizer. It's my humble opinion that it was a mechanical failure on either the engine or the stab.
From Dr. King's America to Nelson Mandela's Africa, the journey of equality moves on.
 
AWspicious
Posts: 2780
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 7:47 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:25 am

Boeing757fan;
R U cuttin up my name or something? Cuz if U R, u'll hv 2 'splain yerslf. Ah don't git whr u cumin frum.
That thing bout the "rivet bomb" was just a walk on the light side. No offence to Red Panda.
I'm also aware of the insecurities posed by some ramp employees.... and groomers, too. Who's to say one of them can't have a hidden agenda.
Nevermind political correctness - Envision using your turn signals!
 
Pilot1113
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:42 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:34 am

This thread sucks. What kind of stupid arse comments are these. What is so hard in believing it was mechanical failure?

- Neil Harrison
 
boeingmd82
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:14 am

CAT Can Destroy A/C

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:37 am

BOAC Boeing 707-436 G-APFE, March 5, 1966

Clubbed sideways by a violent W-NW stream rolling over the cone of Mt. Fuji and round flanks. The tail fin was torn off along with the stabilser. Sudden pich up after stabiliser loss caused all 4 engines to fail sideways at the wing pylon attachments.

Braniff International Airways BAC-111-203AE, N1553, August 6, 1966.

Hit from behind by a violent wind gust, elevators and rudder torn off.

There's probably more out there, but I don't remember. The point is, that turbulence can destroy an aircraft. It's hard to imagine that wake turbulence from a B747 could cause a similar accident to an A300, but we must wait for the investigation. Remember, they also didn't think a DC-9 could be destroyed by the wake from a DC-10, but it happened May 30, 1972 - Delta DC-9-14, N3305L. We may find something totally new about the A300 after this investigation that can make th airplane safer, or change procedures to make us all safer.

BMD82
 
Guest

RE:Cactus...

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:44 am

I apologized, what else can I do... I thought thats what your name was...

R U cuttin up my name or something? Cuz if U R, u'll hv 2 'splain yerslf. Ah don't git whr u cumin frum.


SAY WHAT????????
Please, speak that without the wannabe Ebonics...
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 9:51 am

A bomb?? Surely you jest.  Insane

If there was a bomb, the bomb-sniffing dogs of the NYPD would have found them a long time ago. Besides, eyewitness reports show the fuselage crashed in ONE piece, not very consistent with a bomb explosion.

People forget that the amount of Semtex explosive used to bring down PA 103 was the equivalent of 80-90 sticks of dynamite. It was said the Semtex material filled almost the entire shell of the radio the hid the bomb.
 
Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:31 am

My thread is aimmed to enhance ppl's thoughts by providing another possibility. I don't know what some ppl out there just got so mad about.
It's not that I don't believe the accident may be a result of mechanical failure, but we can't rule out any other possibility, can we. Ppl out there saying sth. like "this thread sucks" should think twice before they write it. Comments like this would just downgrade the quality of a.net.
All pros and cons are welcome as long as you are not swearing for nth.

r panda
 
Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: Boeingmd82

Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:33 am

the post about 707 damaged by turbulence posted by boeingmd82 is sth. way more constructive than comments like "this thread sucks".

r panda
 
Super Em
Posts: 424
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 7:55 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:43 am

If a plane travelling at 550 mph encounters turbulence and doesn't fall apart,how could an a/c travelling half that speed suddenly fall apart? Very suspicious.
 
milesrich
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 2:46 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 10:52 am

Soon we will hear from the conspiracy nuts that AA587 was shot down by the same missile launcher as TW800
 
jfk747
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 12:20 am

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 11:05 am

Here is my bomb theory

A small amount of a plastic exposives in a rear overhead or in a rear bathroom. This would blow the entire rear tail off and causing a dive. This would also start a fire in the a/c. How the engine came apart I don't know.

THIS IS MY BOMB THEORY, I Honstly thing it was just an simple ancident. We need to turn off CNN and relax. All this bull shit from the media is hurting our thought Proccess

 
tygue
Posts: 220
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 1999 4:42 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 11:57 am

Your bomb theories contradict the fact that the stabilizer was found completely intact. Attatched to no other part of the fuselage, as well as appearing to be almost ripped off cleanly. No jagged edges or impact marks as a bomb would indicate.

Sorry too all the conspiracy theorists out there... this one's out of your hands.
 
Guest

I Still Say They Need To Cover It All Up

Thu Nov 15, 2001 12:05 pm

If it is a bomb, they need to cover it up... All they have to say is... "It was the extremely rare, and endangered, "Pink-Eyed Elephant Finch." They are almost microscopic. Thats why they are so dangerous, you cant see the silly things..They got sucked into the engines or pitot tube..."

People will believe that.

And the people will keep flying.

And AA will survive.
 
tygue
Posts: 220
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 1999 4:42 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 12:11 pm

I'm intrigued.

A swarm, perchance?
 
tincan
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 11:04 pm

RE: Possibility Of A Bomb In The Bulk (AA587)

Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:02 pm

I personally don't believe it was a bomb, but a failure that just caused the tail to fall off.

Jfk747, the engines might "shake" off because after losing the tail the plane violently flips around on its way down.
 
Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE:

Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:59 am

Bomb Theory in the bulk doesn't seem to hold. Ths for all comments and facts. We are now all enlightened.

So, the picture of the accident now is:

Vert. stab. came off for some reasons; then #2 engine got shaked off as the acft wobbled (wobbles cuz by loss of Vert. stab.)

Now we are shifting the investigation away from the engine to the vert stab.

so, Bird-strike theory and engine problem theory don't hold anymore.

hmmm..., waiting more news to come up.

r panda