PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF447
Thread: AF447
View Single Post
Old 8th Jun 2009, 18:15
  #661 (permalink)  
theamrad
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ireland
Age: 52
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Andy S - you’re not the only one
Unfortunately, this thread is decaying into utter chaos again. Someone mentioned before that it was starting to look like Airliners. Net. Personally, at times, I think this looks worse than the equivalent there.

This, inspite of numerous warnings from the MODS – and also from other Pruners (i.e. PJ2 and Rainboe, for example. )
In the eight pages growth while I slept, there is precisely nothing new or even interesting; what I read is manufactured, regurgitated (because someone was too lazy to read the thread - the Vazquez presentation is cited at least five times) or picked out of thin air.

The thread is bulging with explanations to the newly-curious about why in many cases their wild notions about what happened are wrong.
PJ2 really hit the nail on the head concerning the regurgitating of the same stuff again and again ad nauseum. Such as repeated postings of “the original acars list”, “the ‘updated’ acars list” or Tim Vasquez’s Meteorological analysis . (something around 15 times between 2 threads).
The thread title is AF447 – NOT ‘BASIC Meteorology for student PPL’s 101 or BASIC principles of flight for the uninitiated.

What I find intringuinly is why this forum is banning pilots who weekly fly the leg SouthAmerica - Europe on AB330/340 and knows very well what they are talkin´ about...
Would that be referring, in part at least, to the numbties who needed to be told what pressure altitude means, or possibly what the relationship defining MACH number is, or even why it had to be a b*m* because it dropped off’ radar and wasn’t squawking 7700(!!!!)????

However, be aware that from now on, any posts with content that is considered by the moderators to be based on un-attributed sources or more importantly theories from anyone without a proper understanding of LH, heavy metal flying will be deleted and the poster banned from the thread for future posting. We will decide on who has a realistic understanding of those criteria by reading what is posted and using our own experience as current airline pilots and crew who do LH flying on heavy metal.
mods

I made my first post on the subject of AF447 - about the use rad altimeters as back up - about 10 minutes ago. . . .. . . . Its was removed. What is going on here?


For new people, who just won't bother to read the whole thread (and I know it is long,) or who don't have time, a good summary of what we've been covering is here: (and you should read it!)
Captain Crunch – Not a bad job at all. Interesting to note that despite the caution concerning constant change and a ‘story’ that is rapidly evolving– there are a couple of folks there (I think aptly might be referred to as wiki editor pedants) who object(esp on grounds of ‘original research’) while managing to demonstrate a lack of relevant knowledge akin to some of those posting drivel here while trying to masquerade as pilots or aviation related pros.

Also apparent lack of damage on the side and leading edge has some implications but I don't intend to be the first one to write it down on the PPRuNe.
I think I know what your getting at – but I wouldn’t see what you say as being indicative either way just yet. Of course, I hope (forlornly) that the speculators won’t start off………..wasted hope – me thinks! Nonetheless – we’ve already had – It’s the full vertical stabilizer……it isn’t ……it is……it isn’t………


Scriabh – I’m not an airbus expert – but if you ask on the Tech forum, I’m sure some of the Airbus types would be happy to explain.
theamrad is offline