Airbus 380's Massive Structure.

[wsherif1]

KABZ

Your statement,

"Go read about manouvering speeds and weights, and your jap sailboat theory doesn't hold water, cos it is on the TOP of the water."

OK, then put a deep keeled, high masted sailboat on top of the water. In strong wind and heavy sea conditions the heavier mass of the larger deep keeled boat will offer more resistance to the wind and sea forces, which in many cases dis-mast the boat along with other damages. Meanwhile my japanese friend is bobbing along, in his 12 foot sailboat, up and over the seas.

18 Wheeler

Your statement,

"I seriously doubt that a 747 would come apart from a bit of wake turbulence. Having flown them for nearly 3,000 hours through a lot of different conditions I know that they can handle severe turbulence for many hours at a time without any problem at all."

I retired off the 747, Great Aircraft, loved those picture windows!

TWA 800, flying in a completely stable airmass, smooth as glass, little or no dispersion of the wake turbulence, was struck broadside by the wake. A 13.5 foot piece of the keel beam fell out of the aircraft into the initial debris area along with a number of other items. There was no evidence of fire or exlosive damage to any of the items in this area! The cockpit clocks stopped eight seconds after the NTSB's, "END OF Data Line"!

The NTSB removed essential evidence from the FDR Chart in their coverup. P.S. I have copies of the FDR Charts both before and after the removal of the data, along with an enlarged copy of the FDR Chart which shows the data that was removed!