Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 4deck on June 05, 2011, 09:18:44 PM
-
A friend of mine ad a vid he wanted me to see, but I found something else.
This is the story apparently
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Airlines_Flight_7908
Anyway some plane was flying over. They say a C130, but theres somekind of russian dialect in the audio.
I highly doubt the pilot of the down a/c could even breath let alone, utter words, so no idea about the audio. Don't think its a fake, but HOLY CHIT, what a way to go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_Cp2anHN3U&feature=aso
All souls lost.
-
That wasnt the airline it was an iranian awacs and it got shot down
-
That wasnt the airline it was an iranian awacs and it got shot down
I don't know where you got your information, but it is false. It was a Caspian Airlines Tu 154. You didnt read 4decks link, so ill post it again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Airlines_Flight_7908
-
I don't know where you got your information, but it is false. It was a Caspian Airlines Tu 154. You didnt read 4decks link, so ill post it again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Airlines_Flight_7908
it also said that the pilot looked like he was trying to land... That plane was cartwheeling to the ground
-
it also said that the pilot looked like he was trying to land... That plane was cartwheeling to the ground
"According to authorities, the aircraft's tail suddenly caught on fire."
his tail burned off. Read further into it.
-
"According to authorities, the aircraft's tail suddenly caught on fire."
his tail burned off. Read further into it.
Just because it catches fire doesnt mean its going to burn off and also in the video the tail is not on fire nothing is.. It was shot out of the sky thats why the explosion was there the debris
-
Just because it catches fire doesnt mean its going to burn off and also in the video the tail is not on fire nothing is.. It was shot out of the sky thats why the explosion was there the debris
Aluminum burns. Very well. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the tail burned off, but hey, maybe im wrong. You know exactly what happened, and you also know for a fact that it wasnt a Tu154, and the 158 people aboard didnt die, right?
-
That video he posted was not of the TU154 that crashed it was of an iranian awacs that was shot down but the incedent with the tu154 did happen thats not just a video of it
-
Yeah, Im reading the mixed comments on youtube, now there saying its was another aircraft.
I don't know, I just ran across it.
What I do know is this, that plane obvously suffered catastrophic failure. And the people inside it, definitly didnt make it out. The volent motions, and g's involved, I would like to think they passed out. Unfortunatly who knows.
I'm going to bed now, But i'll try to get the straight and skinny on this. Theres an old addage that goes like this though.
I don't mind going when my number is up. I just don't want to go when the pilots number is up. :salute
-
Guys,
The Russians don't fly F-4. The Iranians do. That was an IL-76 tanker that crashed trying to refuel a F-4.
-
Aluminum burns. Very well. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the tail burned off, but hey, maybe im wrong. You know exactly what happened, and you also know for a fact that it wasnt a Tu154, and the 158 people aboard didnt die, right?
You realize that aluminum won't burn as a thick chunk, right? It has to be a powder with a great deal of oxidizer (for instance, rust) to actually achieve that supremely hot burn.
-Penguin
-
You realize that aluminum won't burn as a thick chunk, right? It has to be a powder with a great deal of oxidizer (for instance, rust) to actually achieve that supremely hot burn.
-Penguin
Aircraft aluminum is VERY thin.
-
Aircraft aluminum is VERY thin.
dont forget the support structure underneath that aluminum sir
-
Not thin enough, it has to be a fine powder. It's why you still find wreckage of planes even after all the fuel has burned.
Here's an article on thermite that should clear up any confusion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite)
-Penguin
-
http://nycaviation.com/2011/04/video-iran-air-force-il-76md-awacs-plane-crashes-during-2009-military-parade/
-
Ah thanks Kilo for clearing that up. Still trajic event though. What a way to go.
-
Yep, an IL-76 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOnsIGcZS-M&feature=related
-
I don't know where you got your information, but it is false. It was a Caspian Airlines Tu 154. You didnt read 4decks link, so ill post it again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Airlines_Flight_7908
Or maybe you did not read the comment on that video.
Plane not in flames
Plane is not trying to land
But hey, don;t let that stop you from knowing everything
-
You realize that aluminum won't burn as a thick chunk, right? It has to be a powder with a great deal of oxidizer (for instance, rust) to actually achieve that supremely hot burn.
-Penguin
penguin, sometimes you make way too easy. it's not a "thick chunk" that's being discussed. sheet aluminum will burn very easily as long as there is a source to provide the necessary heat...and the fumes are very toxic. once it has started the burn process, it can be very difficult to extinguish...the u.s. army found that lesson out in the early stages of the bradley fighting vehicle testing...and that's not thin sheet aluminum.
-
Just because it catches fire doesnt mean its going to burn off and also in the video the tail is not on fire nothing is.. It was shot out of the sky thats why the explosion was there the debris
If you look a bit closer you'll notice the reason the tail isn't on fire is because it has separated from the fuselage.
-
That video he posted was not of the TU154 that crashed it was of an iranian awacs that was shot down but the incedent with the tu154 did happen thats not just a video of it
The IL-76 wasn't shot down, it collided with an F5E. It was during an airshow in Tehran.
-
That IL-76 had an interesting story too, it apparently was one of the two IL-76s that was in Iraq but that survived the first persian gulf war by fleeing and defecting to Iran ('91). Iraq originally had three IL-76s modified with French assistance for AWACS, and one was destroyed in the first gulf war (by guess who :rock ). Was a mystery what Iran did with them until one of the two surviving Iraqi AWACS IL-76s showed up in 2009 in Iran as the "tanker" when it crashed due to a midair collision (the one in the youtube video... kinda obvious it was a military tanker and not a commercial airliner in the video, you can see the massive amounts of fuel being ejected out of it as it cartwheeles before it impacts the ground in that video).
It is rumored that, possibly as a result of the crash involving the other, the second Iraqi IL-76 is no longer airworthy in Iran. However it is also rumored that the two Iraqi IL-76s were upgraded for Iran via Russian technicians and came into service as Iran's only AWACS-capable aircraft in the spring of 2008 (and remember, these things have been in Iran since '91... :headscratch: ). If these two IL-76s were indeed their only AWACS aircraft I doubt they would of pulled out the remaining one due to a midair collision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Iranian_Air_Force_mid-air_collision
-
penguin, sometimes you make way too easy. it's not a "thick chunk" that's being discussed. sheet aluminum will burn very easily as long as there is a source to provide the necessary heat...and the fumes are very toxic. once it has started the burn process, it can be very difficult to extinguish...the u.s. army found that lesson out in the early stages of the bradley fighting vehicle testing...and that's not thin sheet aluminum.
Hmm, perhaps I'm wrong. Would you care to provide a link?
-Penguin
-
Hmm, perhaps I'm wrong. Would you care to provide a link?
-Penguin
How about trying that thing called Google search, wealth of info right at your finger tips. :aok
-
Hmm, perhaps I'm wrong. Would you care to provide a link?
-Penguin
I'll provide a link for gyrene's reply you quoted and request a link for
Aluminum once burning can be very hard to extinguish
here is a US DOE internal archived paper that links for ya:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem00/chem00831.htm
a quote from above link:
3. Aluminum metal (especially powdered) can react with water in the
presence of base or acid to produce hydrogen gas. Any modest amount of heat
or other energy source -- a match, a static spark, light, a cosmic ray!, and
so on will ignite the hydrogen which in turn will ignite any nearby
combustibles. The reactions are:
2 Al + 2 (OH -1) + H2O ----> Al2O3 + 2 H2
Al( metal) + 6 H( +1) ----> 2Al( +3) + 3H2
In these reactions it does not make much difference what the counter
ion is because these are general oxidation reactions of metals producing
hydrogen gas.
Aluminum foil will dissolve in either strong base or acid quite readily, and
in a confined space could get very hot, very quickly and set of the
combustion of hydrogen.
It is also worth noting that these latter reactions may not be able
to be extinguished with EITHER water or CO2. The addition of water just
provides more "fuel" to the fire -- generating more heat than the cooling
effects of water. I am not sure about Al, but I have witnessed an attempt to
extinguish a sodium fire with a CO2 extinguisher, that caused the fire to
flare UP almost exploding. The reaction:
Vince Calder
I remember going through Aircraft Fire Fighting School in the Navy that we were taught to smoother the fire , and depending on where the fire was and what was burning, we had to decide which type retardant we had to use.. most times was the Hagon???? Foam spray extinguishing agent....... hell that was like 25 years ago so I might have the name wrong........
anyways
TC
-
we had to decide which type retardant we had to use.. most times was the Hagon???? Foam spray extinguishing agent....... hell that was like 25 years ago so I might have the name wrong........
Could be halon gas, inert heavyer than air gas that's used to smother fires in ships, server rooms etc. where water damage must be avoided.
-
Halon is banned by international treaty.
-Penguin
-
Halon is banned by international treaty.
-Penguin
:huh :rofl :lol you really are full of... :huh ...go back to your toys...
http://www.epa.gov/Ozone/snap/fire/qa.html#qA1 (http://www.epa.gov/Ozone/snap/fire/qa.html#qA1)
you can learn more here
http://www.h3rcleanagents.com/support_faq_2.htm (http://www.h3rcleanagents.com/support_faq_2.htm)
production of halon was banned in developed nations in 1994...it's still being used and distributed in many of the countries that agreed to the ban from stockpiles and recycling efforts. several countries still actively produce it.
-
Oops, my mistake. I should have read more throughly. :(
-Penguin
-
It's OK penguin... we all make mistakes, heck I made one in 1983... or was that 84... hmmm
-
It's ok Shuff, we all eventually forget our first and later dissolved wedding anniversaries. :D
-
penguin, it wouldn't be a big deal, we all make mistakes, but you're a constant fountain of b.s. information...sometimes worse than raptordude
-
Hmm, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, care to provide another link? :angel:
-Penguin
-
Could be halon gas, inert heavyer than air gas that's used to smother fires in ships, server rooms etc. where water damage must be avoided.
yep, I figured I had mispelled it......... and yes we used it to smoother the fires of the fire's oxygen
but we used it Halon ( or also known as AFFF, but I figured posting it as Halon would be easier for most to recognize ) along with Purple K as well ( Purple K is also known as PKP )... PKP is for Class B and Class BC fires
no offense Penguin, but I just overlooked your reply regarding the montreal treaty / CAA ruling back in 1990 / 1992 and 1994........ everyone makes a unwise post and are mistaken from time to time, including myself.....
last I knew though, was for some special situations AFFF or an Alt-mix of it is still used to this day, I do believe
all those treatys ever did was cause alot of us to have to spend more money going and getting "Certified" and "Licensed" to show some OSHA or EPA Inspector that we were qualified to use such things or use Refrigerants if one is an HVAC-R Tech
that Ozone hole in the sky is nothing more than a pressure relief valve for the Earth's Atmosphere....... sometimes it will be very small, other times it will be the size they originally found it to be back in what was it '47?, while other times it might be a bit larger, but then it will get small again etc....... but leave it to some bureaucrats to make another red tape law to make corporations and companys and workers have to spend more dollars and make a select few rich ........ just a lil ol opinion.....
anyways, sorry I got off track on this thread regarding the original topic
TC
-
It's OK penguin... we all make mistakes, heck I made one in 1983... or was that 84... hmmm
Pics or it didnt happen :neener:
-
yep, I figured I had mispelled it......... and yes we used it to smoother the fires of the fire's oxygen
but we used it Halon ( or also known as AFFF, but I figured posting it as Halon would be easier for most to recognize ) along with Purple K as well ( Purple K is also known as PKP )... PKP is for Class B and Class BC fires
Halon is not AFFF (also called Light Water). Halon is a gas and works by interrupting the chemical reaction - it does nothing with the O2. AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) is a soap like agent that floats on the surface of the fuel blocking the release of flammable vapors.
-
halon's what we have in our fire bottles on the Blackhawk.
-
yep, I figured I had mispelled it......... and yes we used it to smoother the fires of the fire's oxygen
but we used it Halon ( or also known as AFFF, but I figured posting it as Halon would be easier for most to recognize ) along with Purple K as well ( Purple K is also known as PKP )... PKP is for Class B and Class BC fires
Halon is not AFFF (also called Light Water). Halon is a gas
Yes Sir, you are correct....although HALON is really a Liquefied Gas... and my apologies for running my past real life experiences about Aircraft Fire Fighting, Fire Fighting & Damage Control all together....... most of which was 24 + years ago, except for a short stent of being a 1st Responder on the HAZMAT team back in 05 thru 08 in FL at NAS JAX....... having had used all of the different fire supression agents I mistakenly ran some of them together as being the same, my apologys for the mistyped mistake you had to correct me on there... thanks
Halon is a gas and works by interrupting the chemical reaction - it does nothing with the O2.
this partially incorrect. the 1st part is right, but 2nd part is not....... it does do something to O2......
HALON has 4 abilities: these are # 1 -to deprive or smoother the fire of oxygen, #2 it also is capable of cooling the fire's heat & fuel source, #3 as well as dilute the fuel source. The 4th ability and primary of the 4, is the ability of chemically reacting to the fires 3 components to disrupt the triangle's chain reaction
AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) is a soap like agent that floats on the surface of the fuel blocking the release of flammable vapors.
yes it does that, but it also cuts off the oxygen by smoothering or seperating the oxygen from the fuel source
sorry for any misleading in my previous post, where colmbo corrected me on it....
:salute :cheers:
TC
-
Fifth ability- mess up the atmosphere very, very badly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halon_104 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halon_104)
-Penguin
-
Fifth ability- mess up the atmosphere very, very badly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halon_104 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halon_104)
-Penguin
I sure hope you don't believe everything you read on the internet or see on TV
places like wikipedia or tv channels like the History & Military channel are always misleading people
did you know the EPA outlawed R-12 refrigerant and told everyone they had to either replace their cars AC or convert it to R-134A and did the same for AC's in homes ( R-22 to R410A )
and anyone who worked with refrigerants were ordered by the EPA to become certified.... in the study material they tell us all how CFC's and then HCFC's burn up the ozone
then years later they came out and said "We were wrong" hence my post earlier about the hole in the Ozone Layer....... it is a money maker scheme and nothing else
Ozone in the atmosphere of the earth is a natural occurance, that is how the eath cleans itself naturally most times via lightning strikes which put off ozone
too much ozone is a bad thing and is harmful to younger people, older people and people with breathing problems........ it will eat and scar your lungs/lung tissue
and look at all these people with ozone generating air cleaners and electronic air filters in their homes......
anyways.... I am getting off of the original topic
sorry bout that
TC
-
Well, it's not like I have oodles of up-to-date books on HVAC lying around, so the internet is a very good resource indeed. Furthermore, it was one of the big things on the article itself. Do you mind posting the link to your research? It'd help me cross examine what I find.
-Penguin
-
Well, it's not like I have oodles of up-to-date books on HVAC lying around, so the internet is a very good resource indeed. Furthermore, it was one of the big things on the article itself. Do you mind posting the link to your research? It'd help me cross examine what I find.
-Penguin
yes the internet "can" be a good source for information, but I recommend cross checking / verifying and also read more than 1 or 2/ a handful of reviews or articles/white papers etc.... it is all debateable anyhow..... enviromentalists verses coprorate verses yada yada yada......... each side will always claim that they are right
If one is interested in the truth or the facts, then they must get neck deep in it personally by research, testing, experiments, etc.... and come to their own conclusion of what is actually what :aok <---- this goes for anything in Life
all my factsheets/data/books/test equipment are packed up in storage "seriously" ....... all my bookmarked weblinks are on my other Downed computer that I need to pull the HD's out of and move over to this new one ( or back up to an ext drive maybe )
btw I do not do research or testing or work anymore , I am disabled & retired :old:
:cheers:
TC
edit: Penguin, if you genuinely need help finding info regarding something, I am not saying I would not help you try to find material regarding what you might need help on.........
-
yes the internet "can" be a good source for information, but I recommend cross checking / verifying and also read more than 1 or 2/ a handful of reviews or articles/white papers etc.... it is all debateable anyhow..... enviromentalists verses coprorate verses yada yada yada......... each side will always claim that they are right
If one is interested in the truth or the facts, then they must get neck deep in it personally by research, testing, experiments, etc.... and come to their own conclusion of what is actually what :aok <---- this goes for anything in Life
all my factsheets/data/books/test equipment are packed up in storage "seriously" ....... all my bookmarked weblinks are on my other Downed computer that I need to pull the HD's out of and move over to this new one ( or back up to an ext drive maybe )
btw I do not do research or testing or work anymore , I am disabled & retired :old:
:cheers:
TC
edit: Penguin, if you genuinely need help finding info regarding something, I am not saying I would not help you try to find material regarding what you might need help on.........
It's all good, TC. I'll take your word for it; I never knew how much work went into this. :eek:
-Penguin
PS Italicizing your wasn't the best idea, it made me sound like a dweeb