NTSB Blames Pilot Molin In 587 Crash

[Sanibel]

The final report is coming out from the National Transportation Safety Board in the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 in Rockaway, NY November 12th 2001. The report focuses on pilot Sten Molin's over-use of rudder to try to correct an upset caused by wake turbulence from a Japanese 747 taking off ahead of them.

NTSB cited Molin's extreme movement of the Airbus rudder as having put too much stress on the aircraft's tail causing it to go beyond design tolerances and tear off. They say plane then lost control and plunged into Belle Harbor killing 5 on the ground and 261 onboard.


The only problem with this summary is that many witnesses saw and heard a blast come out of the aircraft prior to its break-up. A retired police officer said he happened to be jogging that morning and was gazing up at the plane when he saw a red and orange fireball emerge from the passenger cabin near the wing. The plane struggled for control and THEN the tail fell off AFTER the blast. NTSB discounted all eyewitnesses in this case, claiming they were unreliable.

A tollbooth security camera just happened to catch Flight 587 as it passed by. It clearly showed a smoke trail trailing the plane with the tail still attached. Since they are claiming the tail falling off caused the crash, they have yet to explain what caused this smoke trail.

Furthermore, cockpit recordings captured pilot Molin desperately reacting to some emergency prior to the point where NTSB claims the tail departed. A cockpit transmission recording caught Molin saying "Try Escape?" to the captain. "Escape" is a cockpit control button that disengages the take-off autopilot allowing the pilot to add more power in order to escape trouble. NTSB claimed the words caught on the recording did not say "Try Escape?" Instead they say it is unclear and came from another aircraft on the same frequency. However, Molin's father, also a pilot and familiar with radio voices, says the voice is his son's and he is saying "Try Escape?" A police officer friend of Molin's since childhood also says it's his voice and is saying "Try Escape?". Even better, a spectrograph analysis of Molin's answering machine matches the recording. Still NTSB says no.

Why?

[yoda]

I don't know how this goes in the Political Forum, but I will bite. I really don't know. One would think that the NTSB would be right, but who knows?

[nystate]

Typical. Blame it on the dead guys, they can't fight back.

I think Airbus should have taken most of the blame for this one. A pilot shouldn't be able to make the rudder fall off just by acting aggressively.

[Aslkahuna]

There is a claim from an AQ associated group that they bombed the aircraft though is has been discounted since supposedly no explosive residue was found.

Steve

[Brent]

I remember where I was when I first heard about it...

It was Veterans Day observed(a Monday). School was out. I went with my dad to help clean up a cemetary(cut the grass etc.). We were in the car on the way down when the radio broke in. At first it was said to be a small plane, so I said no big deal but it quickly became evident it was a jetliner. I suspected terrorism for the first day or two(it was only 2 months after 9/11, why not?).

[nystate]

There is a claim from an AQ associated group that they bombed the aircraft though is has been discounted since supposedly no explosive residue was found.

Steve

Yep, no evidence of an explosion or terrorism. Al Qaeda likes to claim responsibility for these kind of things. Remember what they said after the blackout?

[Sanibel]

The crash happened 2 weeks prior to Richard Reed being caught trying to ignite a shoe-bomb on another American Airlines flight.

It was the first crash ever where the NTSB declared it a mechanical failure the evening of the crash with the wreckage still smoking...

[Sanibel]

There's only evidence when you are looking for it.


Try http://www.USRead.com for the real evidence...

[Sanibel]

Don't know why this was moved? The NTSB violating its own investigatory laws is HIGHLY political...


.

[vbhoutex]

It was moved because it is not IMO political. If you want it lost among the political threads that is fine. Have another mod or admin move it back. Why not just post where it is put instead of complaining?

[nystate]

There's only evidence when you are looking for it.


Try http://www.USRead.com for the real evidence...

Link doesn't work...

The crash happened 2 weeks prior to Richard Reed being caught trying to ignite a shoe-bomb on another American Airlines flight.

It was the first crash ever where the NTSB declared it a mechanical failure the evening of the crash with the wreckage still smoking...

Well, there was no evidence of a fire onboard before it crashed. No traces of explosives, no evidence supporting and explosion whatsoever. Also, the explosion would have been heard and mentioned on the CVR (cockpit voice recorder).

[Sanibel]

Sure, whatever you say. But I'd like for someone to explain to me how a government agency violating US laws with impunity isn't "political"???


Easy now...

[nystate]

Sure, whatever you say. But I'd like for someone to explain to me how a government agency violating US laws with impunity isn't "political"???


Easy now...

How exactly did they violate US laws? The website you gave wouldn't come up for me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not always happy with the NTSB. In this case I think more blame should have been given to Airbus, but I do not think this crash was the result of terrorism.

[Sanibel]

The link works for me. You really need to read the information inside USRead to understand. Most people won't. The site is organized by credible journalists and aviation insiders.

To the point, they doubt any legitimate explosives test was done on 587 (they're lying). The cockpit recorder went to the manufacturer before it was tested by NTSB. I don't know why, I saw it on video when they found it and it was pretty intact.


But, let's cut to the chase. The information in my opening post is accurate. Why did NTSB need to deny it was Molin saying "Try Escape?"


The answer is because it throws their timeline off and shows something was happening well-before the events they say caused the crash. They don't explain the smoke trail either. Why?


http://www.USREAD.COM

[BEER980]

As I recall from back when it happened it could have been a cut hydraulic line. If the correct line were to be sabotaged it would cause the engine to reverse in flight and cause the same thing that happened to this plane. I would have to do some serious diging on this one as I wrote it off to unconfirmed terrorism like the mid atlantic one that went down.

[Sanibel]

Sure, but there's only one problem with that. A thrust reverser actuation by sabotage would register on the flight data recorder. This plane was witnessed as having leveled-off temporarily after the explosion and flown forward. Impossible in a thrust reverser activation case where the plane would have violently upended and spun out of control.

Is there something about the police officer seeing a blast emerge from the plane that anyone is having trouble with?


USREAD did a waveform analysis of the transmission from Molin saying "Try Escape?" NTSB denied it originated from Flight 587, however USREAD discovered the waveform analysis of the transmission showed a perfect match to that of the Kennedy Tower. In other words, when the JFK tower was transmitting Molin's radio was off and when Molin was transmitting JFK Tower's radio was off. Had to be 587 talking to the tower. It was within this waveform segment that Molin said "Try Escape?" Case closed.

These words were not recorded on the cockpit data recorder because the recorder suffered a gap in recording at this point. This told investigators that the data recorder (FDR) had suffered some sort of malfunction at that point. NTSB claims it lost power due to the engine ripping off, however the cockpit data processor was known to be working at that point. USREAD suspects that the wiring in between the cockpit and the FDR in the pane's rear was damaged somehow. This would explain the loss of data transfer from the cockpit. If a blast had occurred in the passenger cabin, this forensic would conform to the wiring running under the floor being damaged.

USREAD went further and showed that the engine was still attached at the time NTSB is claiming it ripped off and caused the FDR loss. This is why NTSB is forced to deny Molin's request to "Try Escape?" (A question he was asking the captain in order to go to full throttle and pull the plane out of its trouble) If they admit it they would have to admit that Molin was already in desperate circumstances at least 7 seconds prior to when NTSB claims the tail loss caused the lack of control. The same time a smoke trail was seen on the security video trailing the aircraft...

[nystate]

Sure, but there's only one problem with that. A thrust reverser actuation by sabotage would register on the flight data recorder. This plane was witnessed as having leveled-off temporarily after the explosion and flown forward. Impossible in a thrust reverser activation case where the plane would have violently upended and spun out of control.

Is there something about the police officer seeing a blast emerge from the plane that anyone is having trouble with?


USREAD did a waveform analysis of the transmission from Molin saying "Try Escape?" NTSB denied it originated from Flight 587, however USREAD discovered the waveform analysis of the transmission showed a perfect match to that of the Kennedy Tower. In other words, when the JFK tower was transmitting Molin's radio was off and when Molin was transmitting JFK Tower's radio was off. Had to be 587 talking to the tower. It was within this waveform segment that Molin said "Try Escape?" Case closed.

These words were not recorded on the cockpit data recorder because the recorder suffered a gap in recording at this point. This told investigators that the data recorder (FDR) had suffered some sort of malfunction at that point. NTSB claims it lost power due to the engine ripping off, however the cockpit data processor was known to be working at that point. USREAD suspects that the wiring in between the cockpit and the FDR in the pane's rear was damaged somehow. This would explain the loss of data transfer from the cockpit. If a blast had occurred in the passenger cabin, this forensic would conform to the wiring running under the floor being damaged.

USREAD went further and showed that the engine was still attached at the time NTSB is claiming it ripped off and caused the FDR loss. This is why NTSB is forced to deny Molin's request to "Try Escape?" (A question he was asking the captain in order to go to full throttle and pull the plane out of its trouble) If they admit it they would have to admit that Molin was already in desperate circumstances at least 7 seconds prior to when NTSB claims the tail loss caused the lack of control. The same time a smoke trail was seen on the security video trailing the aircraft...

About the witness reports of a fire- Witness reports about these things are often highly inaccurate. They said the same thing about US Air 427, which we know had no fire on board before it crashed.

If there was an explosion, you would hear the explosion on the cockpit voice recorder. You would hear the flight crew mention the explosion as well. The explosion would leave specific marks and burn patterns on the aircraft. None of these occured.

The fact is, the A300's rudder snapped off because it was not designed to handle the situation that it found itself in. Once you lose your rudder, there is no hope.

Also- of indeed he did say "Try escape," he could have been referring to the wake turbulence that they were experiencing.

[nystate]

Also, this link can probably explain it better than I can-

http://www.ntsb.gov/events/2001/AA587/flight_path_web01.wmv

[Sanibel]

About the witness reports of a fire- Witness reports about these things are often highly inaccurate. They said the same thing about US Air 427, which we know had no fire on board before it crashed.

If there was an explosion, you would hear the explosion on the cockpit voice recorder. You would hear the flight crew mention the explosion as well. The explosion would leave specific marks and burn patterns on the aircraft. None of these occured.

The fact is, the A300's rudder snapped off because it was not designed to handle the situation that it found itself in. Once you lose your rudder, there is no hope.

Also- of indeed he did say "Try escape," he could have been referring to the wake turbulence that they were experiencing.

Again, this would probably satisfy somebody looking to briefly dismiss all the years of forensics gathered by USREAD, but can only do so by bypassing everything they collected like you do here with superficial excuses. The flaw in what you write here is that you expect an NTSB that called the crash a mechanical error on the evening of the event (totally unprofessional) to then go out and do an honest investigation.

Your offhand attempt above at dismissing the obvious USREAD forensics makes the fatal mistake of ignoring the smoke trail caught on the tollbooth security camera. I'm sorry but that is firm evidence - not mistaken eyewitnesses. You obviously aren't paying attention to the facts.


If you are sincere, answer one simple question:

If the tollbooth video shows a smoke trail coming from 587 while the tail is still attached, what caused it? (NTSB offers no response)


You're very simply ignoring the complex forensic pattern USREAD established. The Airbus' sensors determined the wake vortex hitting the aircraft was 1/10th of a gravity. .1 G's is laughable in aviation terms. Are you suggesting, while police officer witnesses saw an explosion coming from the cabin, that Molin was going to emergency throttle in order to react to 1/10th of a G? I don't think so.

But this is furthered by the loss of cockpit data recording at the very same moment. Are you suggesting a G force of 1/10th of a G knocked out the FDR as well? MAN! That had to be some wake! Remember, they are claiming the wake caused Molin to overreact and rip the tail off. Molin is going to full throttle long before the recorder recorded him fluttering the rudder (7 seconds). What is he going to full throttle for? 1/10th of a G??? (Ask any professional if pilots go to full escape mode for 1/10th of a G?) Meanwhile the video shows smoke trailing from the aircraft at this point. Now get this straight, a smoke trail and full throttle a full 7 seconds before Molin is recorded fluttering the rudder. WHY?

The bridge security video was in frame for the explosion part of the sequence. Somehow this part of the tape did not make it to the public. A group called "NTSB Watch" is now filing a Freedom Of Information lawsuit against NTSB to get the entire tape...


"Once you lose the rudder there's no hope".


Absolutely wrong. Look up JAL 1985. A 747 lost its tail due to a bulkhead failure and flew on tail-less for several hours. It crashed into a mountain when it reached an area it couldn't turn away from. Of all recorded tail departure events in aviation history, most are able to fly on for some time before crashing. 587 was the first commercial aircraft to ever have a tail just fall off...

[Sanibel]

If there was an explosion, you would hear the explosion on the cockpit voice recorder. You would hear the flight crew mention the explosion as well. The explosion would leave specific marks and burn patterns on the aircraft. None of these occured.

The group 'NTSB Watch' is suing under the Freedom Of Information Act for the NTSB to compare the cockpit data recorder recording from 587 with that of United Airlines 811 and other events where the fuselage was breached.

These known breach accidents will provide a test sample oscilliscope match with to see if AA 587's vibrations caught on the FDR, and reacted to by the pilots, match the same sound pattern as these known fuselage breach events.

You're crediting NTSB with investigating this honestly.

1) Never before did they declare a crash an accident the evening of the crash while the wreckage was still smoking. They hadn't even looked at the evidence yet.

2) They blatantly denied it was pilot Molin saying "Try Escape?"

3) A police officer is normally a top-credibility witness. They ignored not only a police officer, but a fire fighter too. 27 other persons witnessed some kind of flames, explosion, or explosion sound PRIOR to the tail falling off. NTSB categorically ignored them. A wake vortex encounter doesn't cause flames and smoke (find one for me). A tollbooth video is not a 'mistaken witness'.


At this point any reference to NTSB is no longer credible...