Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rarebird who wrote (79274)	11/12/2001 3:46:33 PM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116752

Asking questions doesn't make me "poly boy". I have more to gain than lose if it be terrorism and little to gain if it isn't(though watching LUV). I haven't heard any lies, or truth, from this administration yet concerning this terrible incident. I just don't believe "trained observers" on the ground which have a limited training in aircraft. btw, you were the one who long agreed with Clinton when he said "I didn't have sex with that woman". Hahaha, you still believe that tripe about a BJ not being sex & that Al Gore invented the Internet, have no room to talk..

To: Rarebird who wrote (79274)	11/12/2001 6:52:52 PM
From: c.hinton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116752

For what it is worth the more you open your mouth the more I find myself disliking Zionism.I know that you are only one person and not representative of your race but you are so rude that I find my self disliking all that you say you stand for. Do your country<Isreal?> a favor by changing your style. Ps For what it is worth I was a member of ZBT <the jewish fraternity>at university.

To: Rarebird who wrote (79274)	11/13/2001 12:06:38 AM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116752

Did you hear, despite first reports, plane was Outgoing not incoming and the pilots DUMPED FUEL??? Does a pilot dump fuel anytime Except when he knows there is a problem? Does this say the pilot had enough time to know he had a problem? Does this Reduce the chance of an explosion totally unexpected in nature as one would find with a bomb? ?

To: Rarebird who wrote (79274)	3/28/2002 3:25:43 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116752

OT Update - T.Y.S. re: "Long-Far-Gone POLY BOY: I said in my post that I received the information from residents in Rockaway, Queens, who live within a couple of blocks of the plane crash. All of my contacts have told me that the local police said there was a bomb on the plane. I was not on the plane nor in Rockaway, Queens. So, take it for what it is worth. Or, wait for confirmation from Big Brother or accept further concealment from the Bush Administration, your holy authority in regard to such matters." How about the opinion of pilots that are forced to fly those Airbus death traps? You accept that? Yes,I was right - AGAIN Pilots Ask for Airbus Investigation Thu Mar 28,11:17 AM ET By JONATHAN D. SALANT, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - Federal safety officials are reviewing a request by eight American Airlines pilots to ground the Airbus A300-600, one of which crashed in New York last year. Spokesmen for the Federal Aviation Administration (news - web sites) and National Transportation Safety Board (news - web sites) said they have received a 70-page report from the pilots. "Serious consideration must be given to grounding the entire A300-600 fleet until its airworthiness can be assured," said a letter accompanying the report, signed by eight pilots. A copy of the report was obtained by The Associated Press. American Airlines and Airbus Industries say the plane is safe. The FAA has ordered new inspections of Airbus A300-600s but has not ordered the aircraft not to fly. The pilots presented the report Wednesday to their union, the Allied Pilots Association. Union representatives are helping the safety board's investigation of the Nov. 12 crash, which killed 265 people. The union has not endorsed the report. Some American pilots in January signed an e-mail petition asking the company to ground the Airbus, but the effort failed. This is the first time that any American pilots have taken their request to the federal government. But the pilots union has not taken a position. "The flying public must have assurances that every aircraft they board is designed and maintained to the highest standards," the pilots said. In a statement, American Airlines noted that only eight of its 400 Airbus pilots signed the latest letter, and said no one has refused to fly the plane. "If they don't think the Airbus is airworthy, why are they still flying it?" the airline statement asked. American Flight 587 experienced several sharp side-to-side movements before its tail fell off and the plane crashed shortly after taking off from Kennedy Airport. The FAA this month ordered inspections of A300-600 and A310 planes that experience similar movements. Both planes have tails made of nonmetallic composite materials. In addition, tails of A300-600 planes that have hit turbulence in the past or had sharp rudder movements had ultrasound inspections. American checked two planes and found no damage. The inspections came after safety board investigators found previously undetected damage to the tail of an American Airbus that swayed while trying to land at the airport in West Palm Beach, Fla., in May 1997. Two people were injured. The Airbus that crashed in November had been severely shaken by air turbulence in November 1994 while flying from Barbados to Puerto Rico, injuring 47 people, federal investigators said. In addition, the plane's tail hit the runway while landing at Montego Bay, Jamaica, in December 1997, safety board records show. No one was injured. FAA spokesman Les Dorr said future ultrasound inspections would depend on new evidence, because taking off the tail could cause damage to the plane. In their report, the pilots called for reviewing the process for certifying composite parts, and for redesigning the rudders. They said there have been several instances when the Airbus rudders moved on their own. Airbus officials have said tests show that damage that cannot be seen cannot weaken the tail, and company spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said the safety board's investigation has not found any safety problems with the plane. "The A300 was and remains a safe aircraft," she said. During their investigation, board investigators discovered that moving a plane's rudder in one direction, followed by a sharp movement in the other direction, could break off the tail fin. The safety board issued such a warning last month. story.news.yahoo.com