Weather situation looked challenging and will probably be found to be major contributor. Cold front with sharp wind shift reported at both Houston-Pearland and Galveston around time of incident. Above this low-level wind shift, strong low level jet from SW. Likely some severe turbulence and erratic winds in vicinity of sharp right turn made when left turn denied. Reports of "good weather" in area also credible as these conditions confined to immediate vicinity of the cold front and radar echoes. A few miles either side partly cloudy and warm, not overly windy at surface. Could even be a lightning strike on the fuselage contributing to this unfortunate outcome.

I distinctly hear the sound of the word "Pull" from the GPWS system, and I think I hear the stick shaker going off too at 2:33 of the video

I took the snippet and slowed it down quite a bit, and repeated the bits. I have also separated the "OK" from the noise that proceeds it. You can clearly hear the lack of background noise on the OK portion, and then what sounds to me like the gpws "PULL" sound and maybe the stick shaker??!!

Same here, I put the Bose noise cancelling headset on and turned them right up. You can here "pull' very faintly in the background instantly after the crew member says "OK". Could well be from an EGPWS.

I dont hear GPWS also the link arrival there is no way at that point he would be low enough for a GPWS right after he was calmly discussing going east or west with ATC.

Did anyone consider an explosion howsoever caused.

I didn't think birds could fly that high but apparently some can all the way up to normal cruising altitude for a commercial jet.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...flight_heights

Although personally I still feel this aircraft's age may have more to do with the sudden failure in question. I wonder if anyone has yet discovered the number of hours or cycles it had flown and/or any details of any previous accident damage repairs undertaken?

Yes, its already on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Air_Flight_3591

Edit: Not sure if this has been discussed/eliminated as a potential issue: Wikipedia and https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...pany-airplanes

what "clacker", it has an aural alarm..very distinctive

I guess I went too far and gave the wrong wording. I ment to say something flight control issues. Apologies out there.
At 6000' cabin pressure is no longer an issue.

Can hear something in the background of the "OK" transmission, it sounds like an automated voice, it does sound like PULL but it could just be a bit of confirmation bias

As usual on the first day following a major crash, the speculation outruns the factual information. There are several more possible failure scenarios not yet mentioned here which could have caused this apparent loss of control. I thought of quite a few myself in the first moments after reading the first couple of news reports. But I see little point in sharing them until there's at least some factual basis, however small, upon which to build theories as to the sequence of events which led to this crash.

I'm not satisfied to simply "wait for the report" either. However these things often take a little time to develop into the basis for informed speculation. When time-synced, the ATC radar and com recordings will provide some early clues. Examination of recovered wreckage may also reveal investigative paths to be further pursued. Finding the CVR and FDR is going to be a high priority in the early stages for obvious reasons.Finding them In the mud beneath 5 feet of water may present some challenges, but it's been done before. (in the Everglades at least twice that I know of)

So fear not, in due course enough facts will emerge to facilitate informed speculation. Until then I have no basis to eliminate either any of my own or anyone else's pet theories. This is a normal circumstance.

Boeing have built aircraft for a couple of years now, so I expect they have a clue on how long they last before problems set in.

I expect and the manufacturer that the "average" flight of a B767 to be much greater than 2 hours. So if the manufacture says 50,000 cycles (flights) is the limit, then we are talking way over 100,000 flight hours. But they are not concerned on hours - why are you?

Report from KHOU including eyewitness reports. They say the plane was low and then nosedived. The area where it crashed is shallow and muddy, with police working to ensure nothing is moved before the NTSB arrives today.

It is on the subtitles but all I hear is OK

The FR24 data, as usual, contains numerous artifacts and synchronisation issues.

That said, once cleaned up it appears to show a slight but unmistakeable climb interrupting the descent just before reaching 6000', starting about 10 seconds before the beginning of the final dive.

It's exaggerated, obviously, in this foreshortened view (apologies for the skewed verticals):

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....acd45a5f99.jpg

That restriction no longer applies.

First fatal loss of a B767 on US soil since the 2001 NY events and worldwide since 2002.

Very lucky it didn't hit a mile out from the bay where the town is. RIP to the lost souls on board.

I did warn that the previous plot was foreshortened ...

Here it is in profile:

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....233159755e.jpg

Does that help ?

I don't know if this has been mentioned earlier, but I'm curious why there doesn't seem to be much fuel on the water in the vicinity of the crash site.

Of course exactly what is heard on that clip is up to interpretation, but I think what is clear to me is something happened right after he said ok, because the cockpit goes from quiet to cacophony right after he finishes the word. I anxiously await the CVR transcript. So sorry to all those involved, crappy day for aviation that's for sure.

Doesn't the 767 have a stick shaker? If I remember right, they are awfully loud, and sound similar to what I hear on the tape there.

Interesting - crossed my mind while looking at the news chopper video.

Comment from Chambers County Sheriff Brian Hawthorne"

"The environmental impact is extremely minimal as very little fuel, if any, spilled on the water, Hawthorne said."

Out of respect for those fine men/women deceased can those of you that have no clue what you are talking about please shut up.

Having flown the 767 for 11 yrs there was NEVER a speed restriction on the windows. That restriction belonged to the 757 and was 313 kts below 8000 ft.
That is negated by the FAA restriction of 250/10000' so anyone of you fly by night self appointed rocket scientists should know that....including you morons at CNN who couldn't tell the difference between the two.
As for WX, BS. I've been going into IAH for close on the last 12 years in the whale and that minor convective signature doesn't cause that ROD.
Why don't you muppets stop embarrassing yourselves and give the professionals a go....ie the NTSB ?

It seems he means diversion to Dallas Fort Worth plus 30 minutes flight time.

If you follow the posts above, at post #65 or so it was brought to attention that there seems to be no (or very little) fuel spillage around the crash site. Following that conversation Sailvi767 mentioned that with that type and the weather around the time of the crash, he would expect the plane to carry about 16000 lbs of fuel at the time of the crash and went on to explain this might not cause a big spill. Fire wall asked whether 16000 lbs on 767 would be enough for a diversion plus 30 minutes. Sailvi767 replied that he would prefer a bit more in those conditions.

Sorry everyone for adding 0 value to discussion by this post.

For a domestic Part 121 flight here are the fuel requirements:

The windscreen and surrounding structure is common between the 757, 767, and 777, and I'm not aware of any windscreen penetrations on any of those types.
However there is still a risk with large birds - during the development of the 757-300 and 767-400ER, it was determined there was a vulnerability with the forward bulkhead - a large enough bird could penetrate into the flight deck. I don't know if the requirements changed after the initial 757/767 cert, or it was due to better analysis tools, but the bulkhead had to be beefed up in some areas. I'm reasonably sure it was never retrofit.
90,000 hours is not that old for a 767 - even before I retired I was aware of several passenger 767s that had more than 100,000 hours and were still going strong.

odd that the rate of descent increased but airspeed seems to have stayed at 240...