Can we talk about this C-130 crash?

[MiloMorai]

That is amazing eyesight to see a bird at that distance.

Dumb female commentator > a jet she says.

[colmbo]

That is amazing eyesight to see a bird at that distance.

Dumb female commentator > a jet she says.

Well early on the turbo props were referred to as "jet props"....and they are turbine engines which a "jet" engine is also.  I notice Robin has had her lip inflated.

[pembquist]

So you trust a knowingly cut framed shaking on purpose HLN media production over an analysis done by an actual recording of the situation, which has been posted before. I guess that explains whats wrong with half our society these days....

I don't trust the "analysis" by some anonymous youtube poster with creepy clown intro's. If I am understanding you correctly what I am supposedly seeing is the product of a conspiracy to destroy an airplane and cover it up with some kind of missile which causes the evidence to be destroyed after the crash. The conspiracy also involves "the media" who rather than just not showing security camera footage instead manipulate the security camera footage so that it is misleading. However these devious forces that can do all this are also just not very competent so they failed to do a good job on the video.

Is this what you believe?

Do you really think being skeptical of this kind of youube video is what is wrong with 1/2 of our society? I think it is a problem if people are NOT skeptical of this kind of youtube video.

[Zimme83]

That's what I think.   There is clearly a three-quarter turn spin-related auto-rotation right before impact.

Ugly.

A text book example of a stall resulting in a spin.

[WEZEL]

2 different cameras with a slightly different angle, one vid has white truck the other red trucks.......

[DmonSlyr]

Ok,this is some of same footage used TO show a possible second object striking the plane.....Obvious that this is a bird    https://youtu.be/52-f2Wnh9WY    Its amazing what folk can do with editing

This is literally the same footage the guy used from HLN and you can clearly see the cut frames from the same camera angle. 76 cut frames. It's proven. It's not a bird. Birds don't fly that fast. Birds don't disappear.

So the footage from another camera on the lot shows no missing frames, no magic missile or drone destroying the wreckage, no conspiracy, no coverup. It is amazing what the tinfoil hat crowd believes and puts together in order to push their skewed conspiracy agenda

False... Stop being a Meadwad.

I don't trust the "analysis" by some anonymous youtube poster with creepy clown intro's. If I am understanding you correctly what I am supposedly seeing is the product of a conspiracy to destroy an airplane and cover it up with some kind of missile which causes the evidence to be destroyed after the crash. The conspiracy also involves "the media" who rather than just not showing security camera footage instead manipulate the security camera footage so that it is misleading. However these devious forces that can do all this are also just not very competent so they failed to do a good job on the video.

Is this what you believe?

Do you really think being skeptical of this kind of youube video is what is wrong with 1/2 of our society? I think it is a problem if people are NOT skeptical of this kind of youtube video.

Yes I do. There's clear evidence that MsM tampered with the video. Just because it's "anonomous" doesn't make it fake. This is yet another CIA trick. "Only believe our MSM". Fools and delusions only believing large fascist MSM while simultaneously believing that those same corps are evil. I just don't get it. There's a lot you can learn from anonymous news sources.

[icepac]

You can stall/spin a plane in any attitude.

[DmonSlyr]

I read somewhere else that they had two engines out and had communicated that to ATC.  Not sure if true, would seem we would have seen that in the media now.

Two engines out would certainly explain what is seen in the video.  I wondered about a prop issue -- runaway or uncommanded reverse thrust.  Something got them slow and caused them to lose control.

Why would they even roll the plane with this kind of risk? Too me it seems like sabatoge. There's been a lot of computer failures that have been causing crashes also. If all of the controls failed in the aircraft, this is how a plane would fall given it's speed, correct? That's just what it looks like to me.

[colmbo]

Why would they even roll the plane with this kind of risk? Too me it seems like sabatoge. There's been a lot of computer failures that have been causing crashes also. If all of the controls failed in the aircraft, this is how a plane would fall given it's speed, correct? That's just what it looks like to me.

They didn't roll the airplane, physics rolled the airplane.

[scott66]

Not sure how deep down this rabbit hole I'm willing to go on here but this isn't the first time us"Tin foil hat types"have been correct in matters similar to this.. While I don't consider myself to be a conspiracy activist I don't drink the our government never lies to us Kool-Aid.. Including media

[Vraciu]

They didn't roll the airplane, physics rolled the airplane.

Maybe he means "roll" as in takeoff roll, i.e. thinking they took off with two bad engines...(?)  No.  No no no.

[Ack-Ack]

Why don't y'all just wait for the NTSB report to come out, unless you just like mental masturbation that much....
 

Because Violator will just excuse away the NTSB report as nothing more than that department being part of the "conspiracy" he's constructed in his head.  Quite frankly, he'll ignore any logical reason why the plane went down as it doesn't fit the tin foil narrative he's constructed in his mind.

[Ack-Ack]

Why would they even roll the plane with this kind of risk? Too me it seems like sabatoge. There's been a lot of computer failures that have been causing crashes also. If all of the controls failed in the aircraft, this is how a plane would fall given it's speed, correct? That's just what it looks like to me.

Why would anyone "sabotage" a 60 year old "Hurricane Hunter" C-130 that was on it's way to being decommissioned after maintenance repairs were done on it in Savannah?  Did you know that the PR ANG has the oldest air fleet of any state's ANG units?  Did you know that there are serious issues with PR ANG aircraft maintenance, where a lot of their planes are not flyable do to maintenance issues and lack of spare parts?

[DaveBB]

I read somewhere else that they had two engines out and had communicated that to ATC.  Not sure if true, would seem we would have seen that in the media now.

Two engines out would certainly explain what is seen in the video.  I wondered about a prop issue -- runaway or uncommanded reverse thrust.  Something got them slow and caused them to lose control.

If that's the case, then it is entirely plausible.  In the mid-90s we lost a C-130 from the local ANG that was practicing 2-engined flight.  I worked with a crew chief who helped with the crash recovery efforts who told me about the incident.  It probably boils down to the C-130 not having enough rudder authority to control flight with 2 engines out on the same side, or having a very high minimum airspeed for 2-engined flight.  Either way, this isn't the first time it's happened.

[Vraciu]

Why would anyone "sabotage" a 60 year old "Hurricane Hunter" C-130 that was on it's way to being decommissioned after maintenance repairs were done on it in Savannah?  Did you know that the PR ANG has the oldest air fleet of any state's ANG units?  Did you know that there are serious issues with PR ANG aircraft maintenance, where a lot of their planes are not flyable do to maintenance issues and lack of spare parts?

It was only thirty years old, maybe forty, last I read.   Lots of active duty planes older than that I suspect.