"Papa Bear" O'Reilly is onto US Airways about the 1549 Cover-Up!

Teller1900

Teller1900

En-Route
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,644
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
I am a dad!
Are you ****ting me? I saw this on another forum, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I particularly like the part about questioning the legitimacy of the the NTSB as an "organization." At least the "expert" did a pretty decent job, given the difficulties of using reason against a completely unreasonable argument.

IS US AIRWAYS HIDING SOMETHING ABOUT HUDSON RIVER PLANE CRASH?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,483984,00.html

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Factor Follow-up" segment tonight: Is there a cover-up in the case of US Air flight 1549, which crashed into the Hudson River on January 15? There was a welcome home party for the hero of that situation, Captain Chesley Sullenberger, in Danville, California, on Saturday. Captain Sullenberger has been kept away from the media, but said this:

CAPTAIN CHESLEY SULLENBERGER, US AIRWAYS PILOT: Circumstance determined that it was this experienced crew that was scheduled to fly at that particular flight on that particular day. But I know I can speak for the entire crew when I tell you we were simply doing the jobs we were trained to do.

O'REILLY: Now, that's the first time we have heard from the captain. And as we reported last week, just two days before the crash, the same plane experienced a mid-flight engine stall, a very troubling situation obviously. Yet, the National Transportation Safety Board told us the plane was checked out and airworthy. That is quite a coincidence. Same plane, engines give out two days before the crash.

Joining us now from Minneapolis, former airline pilot and current aerospace journalist Kathleen Banks. Do you think US Air is hiding something here, Ms. Banks?

KATHLEEN BANKS, AEROPSACE JOURNALIST: Hi, Bill. It's good to be back on "The Factor." Well, no, I don't, and part of the reason is this investigation is under control of the NTSB and not US Airlines. They are going to be assisting in this, but the NTSB is one of the most pre-eminent investigation bodies of the world.


O'REILLY: OK, all right. So you don't believe there is an active cover-up of anything. You believe that the National Transportation Safety Board, which is, you think — is a legitimate organization, a skilled organization, but come on, you have been around a long time in the aviation industry.

BANKS: Yes, I have.

O'REILLY: You have one plane and the engines stall in mid-air and then the pilots reignite the engines and it proceeds down to Charlotte, North Carolina, from LaGuardia and lands safely. Two days later, the same plane crashes because the engines stall. Now I know about the geese and the ducks and everything else, but that's a coincidence that I can't — I just can't say oh, ok, you know?
Click to expand...
 
"the NTSB, which you think is a legitimate organization..."

right - like O'Reilly has any idea about how to judge the legitimacy of the NTSB or anything else about this... :rolleyes:
 
O'Reilly does this. I've seen it before, when I was forced to watch his show sort of like Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange. O'Reilly's show had the same effect on me as Malcolm's treatment did on him in the movie.
 
Slow news day. Rockets in Israel is 'old news' right now. Nothing 'big' in Iraq/Afghanistan lately. Let's start the rumor of a cover up. That should hold us over until the next hurricane.
 
And then we can beat up on companies that try to purchase a single more cost-efficient aircraft to replace a couple older ones.
 
Best to ignore him or laugh at him. You're giving that sorry excuse for a journalist too much credit if you actually listen to him.
 
steingar said:
O'Reilly does this. I've seen it before, when I was forced to watch his show sort of like Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange. O'Reilly's show had the same effect on me as Malcolm's treatment did on him in the movie.
Click to expand...

So... you're going to retch if you see BillO topless? I don't have to watch the show to get that result...:vomit:
 
He's just misguided by Geraldo...Geraldo seems to think he has another Capone's cave (or whatever that debacle was...) here...

KATHLEEN BANKS, AEROPSACE JOURNALIST: Hi, Bill. It's good to be back on "The Factor." Well, no, I don't, and part of the reason is this investigation is under control of the NTSB and not US Airlines. They are going to be assisting in this, but the NTSB is one of the most pre-eminent investigation bodies of the world.
Click to expand...

Ole Bill'O ought to listen to his guest...instead of Geraldo...
 
Teller1900 said:
I particularly like the part about questioning the legitimacy of the the NTSB as an "organization."
Click to expand...

Not to defend Bill O or anything about this story, but I will share the following story but purposely nebuluously.

I witnessed a plane crash.

I was the second person to the scene.

Famous and politically powerful (at least regionally) person was the pilot.

The area had much political clout (a former board member of the NTSB was from there).

The final report of the crash has no resemblence to the facts of the crash.

"Shock and awe".
 
Last edited:
So, did they falsify evidence (and how do you know?), or did they just draw conclusions that aren't supported by the evidence?
 
TMetzinger said:
So, did they falsify evidence (and how do you know?), or did they just draw conclusions that aren't supported by the evidence?
Click to expand...

Tim,

If this is a question of me, I'd be glad to answer it in private but I won't answer publicly. I'm stupid, but not THAT stupid!

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
And people in the media wonder why people can't stand them. Myself included.
 
timwinters said:
Not to defend Bill O or anything about this story, but I will share the following story but purposely nebuluously.

I witnessed a plane crash.

I was the second person to the scene.

Famous and politically powerful (at least regionally) person was the pilot.

The area had much political clout (a former board member of the NTSB was from there).

The final report of the crash has no resemblence to the facts of the crash.

"Shock and awe".
Click to expand...

I would be 100% surprised to see "pilot error" in the NTSB report here. The amount of press coverage surrounding a ditched landing means that there would be hell to pay if the NTSB came out and said:

The pilot inadvertedly shut down the wrong engine and subsequently tried to restart the incorrect engine.

I would expect to see, provided that's what happened:

One engine sustained damage from the impact of the bird. The pilot determined that the airplane could not safely return to the airport, and elected to shutdown the other engine.

Mark my words.
 
SkyHog said:
I would be 100% surprised to see "pilot error" in the NTSB report here. The amount of press coverage surrounding a ditched landing means that there would be hell to pay if the NTSB came out and said:

The pilot inadvertedly shut down the wrong engine and subsequently tried to restart the incorrect engine.

I would expect to see, provided that's what happened:

One engine sustained damage from the impact of the bird. The pilot determined that the airplane could not safely return to the airport, and elected to shutdown the other engine.

Mark my words.
Click to expand...

That did not happen, thankfully.
 
O'Reilly is way off base on this one. Sounds like another example of "news" as entertainment. Trying to create controversy where there isn't any, just to keep ratings.

Good grief...
 
O'Reilly isn't paid to make sense. He's an entertainer IMO along the lines of Jerry Springer. His schtick just happens to be incoherent a-hole and it's working for him.
 
SkyHog said:
Has it actually been determined that birds collided with both engines?
Click to expand...

Do you want to believe that a highly trained crew screwed up and shut down the wrong engine?

THAT fact would have been released by now if it in fact had happened
 
Do you want to believe that a highly trained crew screwed up and shut down the wrong engine?
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be the first time:
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123021742

That flight had a crew of more than 2, including a flight engineer.

060403-F-0859C-018.JPG


-harry
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Do you want to believe that a highly trained crew screwed up and shut down the wrong engine?

THAT fact would have been released by now if it in fact had happened
Click to expand...

You don't think its possible for an airline pilot to make the most common multi engine mistake made?

I'm not saying it happened, what I'm saying is that if it did, we'll never know, and the NTSB sure ain't gonna publish that.
 
SkyHog said:
You don't think its possible for an airline pilot to make the most common multi engine mistake made?

I'm not saying it happened, what I'm saying is that if it did, we'll never know, and the NTSB sure ain't gonna publish that.
Click to expand...

Why not? Isn't that what they're there to do :dunno:
 
SkyHog said:
You don't think its possible for an airline pilot to make the most common multi engine mistake made?
Click to expand...

Possible, yes. Probable??? Well I guess ANYTHING is possible.


I'm not saying it happened, what I'm saying is that if it did, we'll never know, and the NTSB sure ain't gonna publish that.
Click to expand...

Oh, bull****, Nick.
 
AWACSEng said:
Just to clarify, they did not shut down the wrong engine. There used the throttle of the shut down engine instead of the still operating adjacent one. There were numerous failures in CRM that led to this mishap.
Click to expand...

Yeah, exactly. They reduced the throttle of an operative engine to flight idle, effectively removing it from the equation because the throttle was not blocked as it should have been, and then they advanced the throttle of the inoperative engine. In the process, they belly-flopped the only newly refitted C5 on the ground into pieces.

My vote is that the engine blades were severely worn from running the engines too hot, making the stall envelope on the blades more critical, and down goes plane, just like the one in Europe on December 15th. If there were birds, and there's no reason to believe there weren't, they were merely a contributor to the equation.

I think that because we're talking simultaneous shutdown, and the fact that it was so simultaneously perfect (as reported from the CVR) we're looking at a mechanical problem + birds. I just can't see how two engines perfectly stall together, except for the fact that on this family of airplanes, and with these engines it's been happening. The AD in question better have been performed. That's all I can say about that...

I think that's exactly what happened. But that's been pretty well covered in other forums from day one.
 
Last edited:
HIGHwing said:
I think that's exactly what happened. But that's been pretty well covered in other forums from day one.
Click to expand...

I guess we will never know. The FAA and NTSB have colluded to cover this up. USAirways has agreed and the crew has been paid off to keep their mouths shut. Why do you think we haven't heard from the Captain in any substantive form yet?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I guess we will never know. The FAA and NTSB have colluded to cover this up. USAirways has agreed and the crew has been paid off to keep their mouths shut. Why do you think we haven't heard from the Captain in any substantive form yet?
Click to expand...

You really believe that?:dunno:
 
vontresc said:
My Spidey sense is tingling.... I think that Greg is being a wee bit sarcastic....
Click to expand...

Ahh. My sensors must have been off line. It didn't sound like the kind of thing he would say.....
 
Teller1900 said:
Why not? Isn't that what they're there to do :dunno:
Click to expand...

Read the just released report on the NASCAR Bizjet crash, where they slam both the operator for dispatching an aircraft with a known electrical problem, and the pilots for accepting it.

<short version - On day 1, crew detected a burning smell. Made it go away by pulling the wx radar circuit breakers. Wrote it up in maintenance log and notivied operator - good job, crew. On day 2, operator dispatches airplane without any corrective action noted. Crew (one of whom knew about the discrepancy) accepts airplane. Somewhere along the line the breaker gets reset, and there is an inflight fire and crash> You could argue that the plane was technically airworthy, and I'd agree with you if the breaker had been collared and placarded INOP.

NTSB pulls no punches. I've met quite a few NTSB investigators and been to a couple of hearings (a cool way to spend time when you live near DC). They are as proud of their integrity, and they've earned it.
 
SkyHog said:
Has it actually been determined that birds collided with both engines?
Click to expand...

From my reading of the NTSB-released data (and only using the NTSB as a source), SOMETHING collided with both engines. Right engine had snarge in it - so that's highly likely a bird failure. Feather embedded in a portion of the wing too.

Left engine (the one that sank) had what the NTSB called "soft body impact damage", though nothing organic was found (so far). If there HAD been snarge in the left engine, being immersed for a couple of days would have gotten rid of it.

I may have the engines backwards, but don't think so.

Flight data recorder reportedly showed both engines spooled down simultaneously, which is not what you'd see in the case of a failure on one and a mishandling on the other.

Of course, if you don't have your tinfoil hat on, you may believe that the NTSB is orchestrating a vast cover-up.
 
HIGHwing said:
My vote is that the engine blades were severely worn from running the engines too hot, making the stall envelope on the blades more critical, and down goes plane, just like the one in Europe on December 15th. If there were birds, and there's no reason to believe there weren't, they were merely a contributor to the equation.
Click to expand...

Engines run too hot usually wear the turbine section, not the compressor section which is the section that stalls.

Dan
 
TMetzinger said:
Flight data recorder reportedly showed both engines spooled down simultaneously, which is not what you'd see in the case of a failure on one and a mishandling on the other.

Of course, if you don't have your tinfoil hat on, you may believe that the NTSB is orchestrating a vast cover-up.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I was thinking. Also, the inferred problem that maybe the engines weren't 100% due to to the previous compressor stalls is kind of ridiculus. The odds of those engines running with the damage described is very remote. The facts already reported shootdown the conspiracies.
Plus, airstarting those engines (even undamaged) can take up to two minutes if you are in the airstart envelope. Taking off with the APU doesn't look like it would have mattered either.

BTW, I prefer lead foil. It provides better shielding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top