CNN crash video as capture by USCG

[FLAV8R[_1_]]

Apparently the Coast Guard has some sort of video camera running
that captured the impact of the Cirrus against the building.
CNN has posted it on their website under "Watch Video".
The video is of poor quality but you can definitely see the explosion upon
impact.

David

[FLAV8R[_1_]]

The link to the video on CNN is a directly below the article on the
Canadian troops fighting Taliban militants in Afghanistan that
have stumbled across an almost impenetrable forests of marijuana plants 10
feet tall.

Forest? Stumble?

What would Forest Gump do?

[Ron Snipes[_1_]]

I watched the video last night. The explosion is visible, but the aircraft
prior to impact is not visible, at least to my eyes. I watched it several
times.

What I was looking for was whether the aircraft was doing aerobatic manuvers
or not. The eyewitnesses said acrobatic, and the news geeks kept repeating
acrobatic. Mayor Bloomburg said it right, since he's a pilot.

First it was a helicopter or an airplane, then a cessna and finally a
Cirrus. The newsroom computers must not have a Fact-Checker along with the
Spell-Checker. At least they didn't say a four seat Piper Cub. I've heard
that before.
ron


"FLAV8R" > wrote in message
...
> Apparently the Coast Guard has some sort of video camera running
> that captured the impact of the Cirrus against the building.
> CNN has posted it on their website under "Watch Video".
> The video is of poor quality but you can definitely see the explosion upon
> impact.
>
> David
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Peter R.]

Ron Snipes > wrote:

> What I was looking for was whether the aircraft was doing aerobatic manuvers
> or not. The eyewitnesses said acrobatic, and the news geeks kept repeating
> acrobatic.

I discounted those reports the moment I heard them, since loss of control
could easily be mistaken for aerobatics to the untrained eye.

Unfortunately, one of the first sound bites on CNN was that of an otherwise
astute eyewitness who was supposedly a pilot. He stated that it looked to
him like the aircraft was doing aerobatics just before the crash.

Coming from a pilot, that was the absolute wrong thing to say, given the
implications of the comment to the general, non-GA experienced public.

--
Peter

[[email protected]]

Peter R. wrote:
>
> I discounted those reports the moment I heard them, since loss of control

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> could easily be mistaken for aerobatics to the untrained eye.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


What in your opinion is the average human IQ? 30?

Ramapriya

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> What in your opinion is the average human IQ? 30?

The average IQ is exactly 100.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Matt Barrow]

> wrote in message
ps.com...
> Peter R. wrote:
>>
>> I discounted those reports the moment I heard them, since loss of control
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> could easily be mistaken for aerobatics to the untrained eye.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> What in your opinion is the average human IQ? 30?
>

What does IQ matter to a matter of naiveté?

[gatt]

"Ron Snipes" > wrote in message
.. .

> What I was looking for was whether the aircraft was doing aerobatic
> manuvers
> or not. The eyewitnesses said acrobatic, and the news geeks kept repeating
> acrobatic. Mayor Bloomburg said it right, since he's a pilot.

CNN showed a witness on the ground saying that the airplane hit the building
belly-first because they seemed to be trying to avoid the buildings.

All political/media issues aside, think for a minute about what you would
have done at the controls in that situation.
-c

[Flyin'[email protected]]

> CNN showed a witness on the ground saying that the airplane hit the
> building belly-first because they seemed to be trying to avoid the
> buildings.
>
> All political/media issues aside, think for a minute about what you would
> have done at the controls in that situation.

What kind of wind speed goes through that area with all the buildings
around? Enough to force the plane belly first into a building?

--
Mike Flyin'8
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
http://flying.4alexanders.com

[gatt]

> wrote in message
...
>> CNN showed a witness on the ground saying that the airplane hit the
>> building belly-first because they seemed to be trying to avoid the
>> buildings.
>>
>> All political/media issues aside, think for a minute about what you would
>> have done at the controls in that situation.
>
> What kind of wind speed goes through that area with all the buildings
> around? Enough to force the plane belly first into a building?

Why don't you tell us, since apparently you know all about it.

-c

[Flyin'[email protected]]

> Why don't you tell us, since apparently you know all about it.

You are a real piece of work.

--
Mike Flyin'8
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
http://flying.4alexanders.com

[gatt]

> wrote in message
...
>> Why don't you tell us, since apparently you know all about it.
>
> You are a real piece of work.

You, yesterday:
>>> It was then that I lost total respect for the media and since then I
>>> have never intentionally sat down to watch the news.

Me, today:
>> Hey...waitaminnit...you just said you don't even WATCH THE NEWS.

You, today:
> Huh??? Not me....

I may be a piece of work, but at least I'm an honest one.

-c

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

I think your misquote was directed to some FL8VR or something of the
like... Certainly not me... If there is one thing I can NEVER be
called is a liar. You sir, have crossed the line.



> wrote in message
...
>>> Why don't you tell us, since apparently you know all about it.
>>
>> You are a real piece of work.
>
>You, yesterday:
>>>> It was then that I lost total respect for the media and since then I
>>>> have never intentionally sat down to watch the news.
>
>Me, today:
>>> Hey...waitaminnit...you just said you don't even WATCH THE NEWS.
>
>You, today:
>> Huh??? Not me....
>
>I may be a piece of work, but at least I'm an honest one.
>
>-c
>
>

The Ultimate BBS!
Telnet://ubbs2006.synchro.net
HTTP://ubbs2006.synchro.net:81

[gatt]

"Mike 'Flyin'8'" > wrote in message
...
>
> I think your misquote was directed to some FL8VR or something of the
> like... Certainly not me...

Noted. I confused you with the other '8' poster. My error.

>If there is one thing I can NEVER be called is a liar. You sir, have
>crossed the line.

Except that I just called you a liar. So apparently, you can be called
a liar; your claim otherwise more or less makes you one. :P
Killfile me, or, what is it now, pistols under the duelling tree?

Otherwise, I apologize again for confusing you with the other guy.

-c

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

>"Mike 'Flyin'8'" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I think your misquote was directed to some FL8VR or something of the
>> like... Certainly not me...
>
> Noted. I confused you with the other '8' poster. My error.
>
>>If there is one thing I can NEVER be called is a liar. You sir, have
>>crossed the line.
>
> Except that I just called you a liar. So apparently, you can be called
>a liar; your claim otherwise more or less makes you one. :P
> Killfile me, or, what is it now, pistols under the duelling tree?
>
> Otherwise, I apologize again for confusing you with the other guy.

As much as I didn't want to.... I had to laugh at that one. ;-)

See you at high noon under the tree. >:-\




Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com

[FLAV8R[_1_]]

Well now I'm confused..
What is it that I have lied about?
I don't intentionally watch the news but I do catch it from
time to time when it is on at work or when Yahoo puts it
in my face while signing in.

David - aka: FLAV8R
"Mike 'Flyin'8'" > wrote in message
...
>
>>"Mike 'Flyin'8'" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>> I think your misquote was directed to some FL8VR or something of the
>>> like... Certainly not me...
>>
>> Noted. I confused you with the other '8' poster. My error.
>>
>>>If there is one thing I can NEVER be called is a liar. You sir, have
>>>crossed the line.
>>
>> Except that I just called you a liar. So apparently, you can be
>> called
>>a liar; your claim otherwise more or less makes you one. :P
>> Killfile me, or, what is it now, pistols under the duelling tree?
>>
>> Otherwise, I apologize again for confusing you with the other guy.
>
> As much as I didn't want to.... I had to laugh at that one. ;-)
>
> See you at high noon under the tree. >:-\
>
>
>
>
> Mike Alexander
> PP-ASEL
> Temecula, CA
> See my online aerial photo album at
> http://flying.4alexanders.com

[Andrew Gideon]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:00:59 +0000, gatt wrote:

> CNN showed a witness on the ground saying that the airplane hit the
> building belly-first because they seemed to be trying to avoid the
> buildings.
>
> All political/media issues aside, think for a minute about what you would
> have done at the controls in that situation. -c

I'd have yanked the mouth closed before the "witness" could spew further.
Some of the early "witness reports" cited were pretty amazing in their
detachment from reality.

My favorite was probably the people that saw the helicopter clearly before
it crashed into the building.

- Andrew

[Bucky]

Peter R. wrote:
> I discounted those reports the moment I heard them, since loss of control
> could easily be mistaken for aerobatics to the untrained eye.

I remember once I was cruising down the freeway and saw a small plane
spiralling out of control at high speed, heading straight for the
ground. I would've screamed, but my breath was already sucked out of my
lungs. Then at the last second, the plane was able to pull up
miraculously. Then I realized that it was a stunt plane doing
acrobatics. But seriously, I wonder how many other drivers were
thinking the same thing and if it caused any accidents.

The moral of this story is that aerobatics could easily be mistaken for
loss of control to the untrained eye. =)

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

Someone confused your post for mine... no big deal...

>Well now I'm confused..
>What is it that I have lied about?
>I don't intentionally watch the news but I do catch it from
>time to time when it is on at work or when Yahoo puts it
>in my face while signing in.
>
>David - aka: FLAV8R


Mike Alexander
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
See my online aerial photo album at
http://flying.4alexanders.com

[[email protected]]

Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> What does IQ matter to a matter of naiveté?


It's imho the only thing that matters. The reasoning of an event/action
is fundamentally reliant on whether a person has
subnormal/normal/above-normal IQ.

If the hordes of acrobatics videos I've seen are anything to go by, not
one maneuver has appeared comparable to the equally large number of
crash videos seen. That acrobatic maneuvers are controlled is easy
enough for anyone normal to tell. And in the event in question here, it
wasn't as if an F-16 (where one might not have known for sure whether
it was out of control) streaked across the sky and crashed but a small
aircraft!

Ramapriya

[Mxsmanic]

Bucky writes:

> The moral of this story is that aerobatics could easily be mistaken for
> loss of control to the untrained eye. =)

Impact with a building is usually a pretty good criterion for
distinguishing between aerobatics and bad flying.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Matt Barrow]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> What does IQ matter to a matter of naiveté?


> It's imho the only thing that matters. The reasoning of an event/action
> is fundamentally reliant on whether a person has
> subnormal/normal/above-normal IQ.

_Reasoning_ has little to do with IQ. _Analysis_ has everything to do with
IQ.

[irrelevant stuff snipped]

[Mxsmanic]

Matt Barrow writes:

> _Reasoning_ has little to do with IQ. _Analysis_ has everything to do with
> IQ.

Both are strongly influenced by IQ. However, acquired knowledge is
much less correlated with intelligence. Thus it is possible to be
naïve and smart, or sophisticated but not very bright.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.