PDA

View Full Version : Swissair 111: An Alternate Theory


grizzled
15th Sep 2011, 03:31
A former RCMP arson investigator who was assigned to the SW111 investigation says he was muzzled. He believes the fire was the result of an incendiary device. Here's the link:
Swissair crash may not have been an accident: ex-RCMP - Canada - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/09/14/swissair-investigation.html)

According to the CBC this guy's work and conclusions were supported by a number of other people, including some scientists who analysed the metallurgy of the remains. CBC's investigative news program "The Fifth Estate" will run a story on this theory on Friday.

PLEASE try not to turn this into a conspiracy theory thread. I (and others I'm sure) will provide links and summaries after the program on Friday.

Lyman
15th Sep 2011, 03:49
It should be interesting. Absent in the article is some balance as to the possibly innocent presence of Magnesium and its alloys in the cockpit area. It is (was) a common material in a/c construction due its light weight and strength.

Obviously, any individual who is a part of an investigation has the duty to sunlight his concerns.

I'll watch, definitely, thanks for the hu.

bubbers44
15th Sep 2011, 04:59
About a year after Swissair 111 I was flying a B757 from Miami to Tegucigalpa, Honduras about a year after the 111 crash. I looked at our smoke in cabin and cockpit procedures and saw they had not been changed so to not have the same thing happen to us slightly changed the procedure since they had crashed a year before. I wrote up my report of what I did with smoke fumes throughout the aircraft 60 miles out and what I did immediately to shut down non essential systems and two weeks later all of our checklists were changed to what we did.

Simplifying two engine cockpits to eliminate the more complex FE manned 3 crew cockpits has caused these kind of safety problems. Sometimes an easy immediate action can prevent serious problems by stopping the source of smoke by a couple of switches.

ironbutt57
15th Sep 2011, 06:43
Do your trouble shooting on the way to the nearest suitable landing site...

infrequentflyer789
15th Sep 2011, 11:22
Grasping at red herrings. Why would you blow up an aircraft over the ocean if you were after the diamonds?


Normally you would be after the insurance, whilst not losing the diamonds (if they even ever existed). You can't find what wasn't there, but the insurance will struggle to prove (assuming you got all the proper documentation, which you would, naturally...) that something wasn't on a plane that's blown up over the ocean.

In this case though, that doesn't stack up as the fire was too close to land, and wreckage is shallow enough to go looking fairly easily. Turns out the insurers have been prevented / dissuaded from even looking by relatives who don't want the site disturbed. There may be more complex money laundering or other issues behind it - Swiss banks and all that... - but much more likely it was an accident.

BartBandy
15th Sep 2011, 12:55
interesting....anyone else never hear about the diamonds before?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/09/14/swissair-investigation.

Left Coaster
15th Sep 2011, 13:12
Ah HAH! So that's why the TSB boys from Canada spent all that time sifting through tiny bits of wreckage vacuumed up from the floor of the Atlantic...they were looking for diamonds instead of what might have caused the crash...well at last I can sleep...:D

Rollingthunder
15th Sep 2011, 13:49
I wouldn't put paid to anything an RCMP officer deduces - they are notorious for being bad investigators. Once the TSB got involved they were significantly out of the loop.

Would also question why diamonds were travelling W to E. Usual routing is E to W.

Checkboard
15th Sep 2011, 14:52
PLEASE try not to turn this into a conspiracy theory thread.
So you post a conspiracy theory, and then ask for the thread not to be about a conspiracy? :confused: :rolleyes: :ugh:

ehwatezedoing
15th Sep 2011, 14:59
I knew professional diver who was hired with others to retrieve bodies amongst other things from the wreckage at the bottom.

According to him, they were all strip searched to the bone after each dive.
No way anyone of them could have smuggled a diamond. Or anything else for that matter.

So you all know...Frogmen were not part of the "coup" :suspect:



Just trying to avoid the word conspiracy :p

Blacksheep
15th Sep 2011, 15:55
Sometimes an easy immediate action can prevent serious problems by stopping the source of smoke by a couple of switches. Read the accident report. To anyone with a technical bent the conclusions are obvious enough.

The crash aircraft's IFE power could not be isolated on the flight deck: the switch was at the control panel in the cabin. A result of the report was an Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandating the disabling of a surprisingly large number of IFE systems installed by Supplementary Type Certificate, until a power supply isolation switch had been installed on the flight deck.

grizzled
15th Sep 2011, 17:13
Checkboard...
You're quite right. It was very late when I posted this item and I didn't have my Tin Hat on. THEY must have influenced my thoughts. ;)

RT...
Couldn't agree more re the RCMP (at least in the last 20 years or so). I have direct experience with their lack of skills / motivation. The TSB, on the other hand, is a most professional and reliable organisation. Having said that, their investigations do suffer at times from lack of funding and hence sometimes not getting past the more direct causes. I know this from my own experience. (NOT an issue in the Swissair accident).

My point in posting this thread is that there are many ppruners (myself included) who will be interested in what is presented as "evidence".

John James
15th Sep 2011, 17:47
Anybody watch the video link?
Had to endure 5 commercials to see it on our 'pbs' but the guy sounds credible and they spent months going through his notes
Anyway -Fifth Estate cbc is doing an indepth show, I think Fri the sept 16th that I want to catch
If the rcmp [small letters] denounce his suspicions then its all the more reason to consider his incendiary device claims imo.
Massive amounts of bureaucratic money is not necessarily an indicator of truth finding- look at the 9/11 'investigation' :hmm:
...and our government doesnt like to play the terrorist card because it just makes them appear ineffective - they'd rather try to grope the innocent like my 98 pound 71 year old partner and avoid profiling
oh canada

hf4you
15th Sep 2011, 21:23
Uh oh, thread veering into 9/11 conspiracy theories. Lets not go there. Please.

Incendiary device has to have been a possibility, but can't believe that evidence of such would have been suppressed. Given the highly fragmented nature of the wreckage, solid evidence of anything would have been tough to find. Even the wiring theory was a best guess.

I would guess they had some evidence of terrorism, but not enough to prove anything, and they didn't want to alarm the flying public without solid evidence.

I've got the PVR set to tape Friday's show, but given the state of journalism these days, not expecting too much.

Lyman
15th Sep 2011, 23:14
Jazzman

Using "Logic" to demonstrate a conclusion without evidence is ridiculous.

What you want to say is that a terror plot is out of the question. You cannot.

It isn't. So you'd rather rely on "Good Will" among Men? It can't have happened, because it is after all, unlikely?

What you talkin'? Let's see the evidence, hear the man's Pitch, and make up our mind, eh?

Lyman
15th Sep 2011, 23:17
Jeez, Lyman, replying five minutes before he posted is pretty cool?

Chu Chu
16th Sep 2011, 01:10
And why no claim of responsibility? Generally the point of terrorism is that folks will know about it. Of course, a conspiracy theorist can make up facts to explain anything, so logic becomes somewhat pointless.

atakacs
16th Sep 2011, 01:59
Terrorism needs a motive. Where's the motive in setting fire to a Swiss aeroplane? Can't find an American one at JFK?

Terrorism is not necessarily involved in that alternate theory - a few hundred million $ of diamonds might help steering an investigation (not that I really believe it in this case)...

pigboat
16th Sep 2011, 03:32
On another board someone asked "What was the motive?" and "Why a cover-up?"

And magnesium on an aircraft? Next the CBC will be telling us there was aluminum on there too.

con-pilot
16th Sep 2011, 05:02
I heard that there was kerosene derivative on board as well!

The wings were full of it!!!!!!!!! :eek:

Cacophonix
16th Sep 2011, 08:32
It is a tale of a small, unknown company backed by politically connected investors who used a flawed regulatory system to its advantage. The investigation exposes a lack of FAA supervision and the agency's reliance on thousands of private companies to certify major airplane alterations. Among the findings:

•IFT benefited from lax FAA oversight. After the crash, the FAA said the IFT system's design and installation were unsafe. The agency didn't catch the problems sooner because no one directly employed by the FAA reviewed the system's design or installation plans, supervised the installation or signed off on any work. All of that was done by a company that the FAA authorized to approve airplane modifications on its behalf. Yet the FAA had repeatedly criticized that company, Santa Barbara Aerospace (SBA), for violating regulations and even briefly revoked its operating authority as IFT systems were being installed on Swissair jets in 1996.

•Swissair's entertainment systems were installed in Switzerland in a rushed process that violated FAA procedures. In many instances, SBA did not follow proper certification procedures, and inaccurate or inadequate design data were used. Much of SBA's paperwork required to prove the system was properly certified is missing or was never completed. The Swiss government said it allowed the Swissair jets to fly with the IFT system because it relied on forms completed by FAA designees attesting that the system met U.S. safety standards. One form that the Swiss relied upon was used in violation of the FAA's rules for certifying changes to foreign-registered aircraft.


USATODAY.com - Doomed plane's gaming system exposes holes in FAA oversight (http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2003-02-16-swissair-investigation_x.htm)

Another terrible mid air fire and a more likely candidate for a cover up.

SAA 'murdered people aboard Helderberg' - South Africa | IOL News | IOL.co.za (http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/saa-murdered-people-aboard-helderberg-1.38760)

Blacksheep
16th Sep 2011, 14:11
Santa Barbara Aerospace or Southern California Aerospace or even for a time Lucas Aerospace (USA) were a once good company on a terminal downwards spiral.

We had to send a recovery crew to Santa Barbara to fly one of our aircraft out quickly before the receivers seized all assets at their final demise. Some of their men were working in the cabin at the time and we let them out at LA and gave them the taxi fare back. If the aircraft had been "locked in" when they folded it would have taken ages to get it released and would have cost us a fortune, keeping a 767 grounded while lawyers argued the toss. While owned by Lucas, they did some very good work: as SBA they were absolutely hopeless and their paperwork was appalling.

er340790
16th Sep 2011, 15:38
Would also question why diamonds were travelling W to E. Usual routing is E to W.

Not at all. For starters, all the rough diamonds from the NWT (Diavik, Ekati and Snap Lake mines) are flown to Antwerp for cutting + polishing.

Pretty sure I never heard mention of those stones back in 98/99 though... could have been a decent storyline for Tom Clancy - bringing down a plane onto which the diamonds had never been loaded.

BUT... ever dealt with an insurance loss-adjuster??? For $0.5BN they would have checked everything 1,000 times.

= A.C.C.I.D.E.N.T.

3 Holer
17th Sep 2011, 09:34
This whole thing is.......well, "Jubyious", to say the least.

stuckgear
17th Sep 2011, 10:02
I heard that there was kerosene derivative on board as well!

The wings were full of it!!!!!!!!! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/eek.gif


Diabolical. you'd think there would be rules against such things. It's GWB's fault !

GrumpyOldFart
17th Sep 2011, 14:33
I heard that there was kerosene derivative on board as well!



Oooooh! This is getting creepy.

This week, a rogue trader with a Swiss bank is nicked for fraud.

Another rogue trader was Nick Leeson.

Leeson was a derivatives trader.

Coincidences? I think not.

Solid Rust Twotter
17th Sep 2011, 14:58
Ah, you'll be wanting the chemtrails site then. It's two doors down on the left.....

Hurkemmer
20th Sep 2011, 18:59
one of te brightest minds of the time happened to be on board, a man who led the theories behind the LHC, Klaus Kinder-Geiger.

The tragic death of a young theorist (http://bullarchive.web.cern.ch/bullarchive/9838/art3/Text_E.html)

parton cascades and quantum chromo aside, the princes, diamonds and UN sort of drift into the background afaik...

philbky
24th Sep 2011, 23:28
Also on board was Dr J Mann who was WHO's top executive dealing with the fight against AIDS who did much to demystify the disease, alert the world to its potential dangers for everyone and motivated drug companies into finding ways of preventing HIV rapidly becoming AIDS in every case, whilst at the same time helping to bring certain African governments out of their denial of the causes and consequences of the disease. His wife was also on the flight.

SR111 was pretty much a bus service for UN and UN agency staff so I'm amazed the conspiracy lunatics didn't cotton onto this one sooner.

The holes in the cheese lined up perfectly that night. A badly designed entertainment system caught fire and spread to the insulation in the aircraft, long banned by the USAF but used by MDD who knew the potential dangers when the MD11 was designed. A serious situation became a disaster when poor decision making in the cockpit, slavishly following company procedures instead of getting the aircraft on the ground, led to electing first for Boston and then deciding to dump fuel before landing at Halifax, so close to the crash site. An overweight landing may have caused deaths and injuries but an immediate landing may have saved lives.

I briefly knew Dr Mann in his early days working on the WHO AIDS project. Out of respect I visited the memorial at Peggy's Cove in 2009. His memory, and the memory of the others who died, don't need the tragedy revived as the latest conspiracy theory by those who can't accept that accidents happen and believe every mass loss of life, particularly in aviation, is the result of terrorism or some malevolent authority or corporation committing an act that it then has to cover up.

Cacophonix
25th Sep 2011, 10:44
The holes in the cheese lined up perfectly that night. A badly designed entertainment system caught fire and spread to the insulation in the aircraft, long banned by the USAF but used by MDD who knew the potential dangers when the MD11 was designed.


Amen to that but I wonder if you are being too harsh on those pilots..

Could, might... have landed?

There is good reason to wonder if pilots could have landed safely at Halifax even if they had chosen not to dump fuel and proceed direct... at or above MMO/VMO.

There was/is a military field at Shearwater but it is likely that the pilots did not factor that into their planned alternates...

Those poor folks were in a bad place and had no way of knowing how rapidly the fire would progress.

As you say that bad place was most likely caused by shoddy electrical installation that had not seen proper oversight by the relevant authorities...!

Caco