Letters From U.S.Readers


Home Page || Send E-Mail to the Editor ||

Letters From Readers

March 24, 2003

In response to Images to Steel a Nation's Heart

Just for starters, how is it remotely possible for a 727 to be parked in some third-world country--out in clear satellite view-- and not be known to US intelligence? for years!!??

Cheney/Halliburton needs so desperately to tie 9/11 to this oil war, but Muhammed Atta was Egyptian-- and none of his psycho buddies were Iraqi.

The uranium shipments from Nigeria--an embarrassingly childish forgery to prop up support for the oil war. Weapons of Mass Distraction????

C'mon, say you're not buying it. Please. Your 587 analyses were too sharp. Killing third world women & children to appropriate their oil because you've already burned most of yours is wrong.

Robert F. "Pump Some Gas & It'll Come Out Red" Alexander
Houston

U.S.Read response: The Iraqi's didn't try to hide the jet. Their official line was that they were doing "counter-terrorism" training.

Read the David Rose and Frontline pieces mentioned in the article. Is 9/11 an Iraqi operation? No. And maybe yes. Bottom line is ... Iraq was exporting terror, Atta did meet an Iraqi agent, and we have no way of being certain Saddam won't (or hasn't) given WMD's to Al Qaeda or other terror groups. And ... there were many non-Iraqi Arabs trained at Salman Pak. This doesn't even make you in the least a bit uncomfortable??

Bob ... do you really hold the position that Iraq has no WMD's? Even if the U.S. had deliberately forged those documents (not proven it was the U.S. ... maybe it was a reverse framing by unknown foreign entity ... make fake docs ... show to Western Intel ... they buy into it ... then you expose the fraud and make it appear to be a Western fraud thus discrediting all WMD evidence) ... this in no way discounts the work of U.N. weapons inspectors (not to mention U.S. intelligence) over the last 12 years that found great quantities of these weapons, and the consistent flow of high-level defectors who have told of same.

You say "Killing third world women & children" as if that is the mission objective ... as if we don't take great care to minimize this. If this war was all about oil we'd have taken Iraq a long time ago. Bush Sr. would not have stopped Gulf War I until he had seized the oil. But you see Bob ... the fundamental difference between me and you is that I believe Bush believes civilization and our future are at stake ... that we are under a real threat of WMD's in the U.S.

9/11 changed the man ... and that change was not about taking over Iraqi oil fields. So we can debate back and forth in futility. I generally have more faith in the sincerity of the Bush administration ... until they prove me wrong. If we win this war (and I believe we will) ... in the end you will see whether or not we "appropriate" Iraqi oil. But you've already passed judgement.

January 30, 2003

Deep Down

Let's imagine Jamaica bay is one of the deepest caverns on earth and American Airlines Flight587 is down so deep under water that any recovery would be impossible (No black Boxes). Would the NTSB be able to come to a determination of the cause of the crash? If the only recorded events were the air traffic controller tapes, radar pings and the eyewitness statements. Sure the forensic evidence is of the utmost of value, and expert testimony on airframe systems and the like, can add evidence to support to the determination of the crash. Would the efforts of the NTSB investigators been forced to have focused more on eyewitness accounts and do intensive on site interviews with the witness with survey and measurement equipment? We would think so! To this day the only people to have made any effort to talk to witness on site were from a fellow citizen, Vic Trombettas @ usread.com and a BBC documentary company. Two hundred and sixty five persons died that morning on November 12, 2001. That they may have been murdered is as good a speculation as the sea gulls, wind turbulence, prior hurricane damage or pilot error.
A single murder investigation in New York City would have numerous detectives talking to witnesses many times over in the quest for a perpetrator for years. Either the NTSB has all the evidence it needed and we eyewitness are in fact unreliable. Then the "smoking gun" should be released. The fact remains that few if any eyewitness were interviewed in depth, on site with personal trained to take statements and measurements. Why? When a missing person, rightfully so, can tax the law enforcement resources of a city for months. Two hundred and sixty five people dead in a time of war in a still unexplained crash should have at least accounted for two trained agents to have done on site follow up interviews with the three hundred plus witnesses.

Tom Lynch

Eyewitness to the Crash of Flight 587

December 17, 2002

Please send my congratulations to Shira Feldman for an excellent review of Buzzsaw. This is "must" reading for all who care about the future of our democracy. I mean, both the book and the wonderfully summarized review.

Bob from New Jersey

November 18, 2002


Just a belated note of encouragement to keep up your good work on the Flight 587 investigation. As a professional newspaper writer and editor for nearly 30 years, and a private pilot for 15, I add my voice to the cry of "Shame!" directed at the NY Times for running such a specious smear of First Officer Molin. Sensationalist swill like this has no place in a respected newspaper. I began to have major doubts about the NTSB's priorities in this accident when, within a very short time, the Board issued its infamous warning against extreme rudder inputs. That caused me and just about every other well-trained pilot to scratch our heads and wonder why our instructors had put so much emphasis on maneuvering speed if Va actually means nothing to the ability of a properly certified aircraft to withstand maximum control inputs. I think the operative phrase here is "properly certified." Money talks, and its voice has overwhelmed reason and ethics in too much of our society today, not excluding the fields of journalism and government regulation.

Brian Bragg

October 18, 2002

There is something fishy about this NTSB investagation. Airbus must be applying much pressure; it is very hard to get any good info on this. You are the only good source I have found.

Our pilots are a very intelligent group, and believe me, they know how
to fly big aircraft. This aircraft was defective when it left the factory.

Vic, you do a good job. Hang in. I'll be a regular on your site. Hope you keep on it. Frank Daley
Captain American Airlines (Retired)

October 15, 2002

Dear Sir:

Why haven't any news media picked up on the tragic events of flight 587 and what can we do to expose this nightmare? I'm curious as to why nothing has been done or said about this. Any and all information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Dan Martin
: Reply from U.S.Read:
: Dan:; Vanity Fair did a very good piece in their Sept. 2002 issue titled "Pilot Terror". The author, David Rose, is from the UK. The interest in the U.S. media is non-existent unfortunately.; I have been asking the same question since the accident. I'm not sure there's one answer. It's a combination, I believe:; 1. They dare not challenge the NTSB
2. They don't know how to challenge the NTSB
3. They don't know why they should
4. They don't care too much about this crash since it was overshadowed by 9/11
5. They don't care too much about this crash since it was mostly Dominicans on board.
It wasn't a high profile crowd.
6. They dare not challenge Airbus because they fear lawsuits.
7. The media learned the lesson from Flight 800 ... it doesn't pay to second guess the
FBI or NTSB because in the end their story will prevail. So they'll just pass on to the
public the NTSB's press releases, etc., and call it a day.; Not U.S.Read.; Thanks for writing Dan.; Victor

October 13, 2002

Sir:
As an aviation professional for over 30 years, I want to express my thanks for the fantastic coverage of this mishap. I hate to say it, but the usual suspects are being blamed (pilots), and its your coverage that is bringing to light facts that are leading to questions that have yet to be answered.
Thank you.
Jan Burden

October 12, 2002

I read your article with great interest about Spirit Air. It sparked a distant memory about a non-governmental web site that somehow has all the personal information about all FAA Pilots, A&P's and FAA Examiner's. You just do a name search and you get full name, full address, and what FAA licenses are held by the individual. Just think what a treasure trove this information is for an illegal wanting to work, or a terrorist. Also if my memory is correct, up until at least a couple of years ago, this same web site gave the actual license numbers, too. When I got my A&P license the FAA required your SSN for a license number, and they didn't freely offer that you could get another number, other than your SSN. I wrote the FAA when I found my information on this web site, demanding that they stop giving out my information, including my SSN. The letter that I got back said that it was public information, but they also changed my A&P license number from my SSN to another random number. Since that time, it appears that license numbers, including SSN's, have been deleted from this web site. It makes me wonder how many other web sites are out there with other SSN type license numbers or any license numbers on public display?

Try it for yourself: http://www.landings.com/_landings/pages/search/certs-ap.html

I work for a major airline. Please don't use my name or position, as my company can be very vindictive when they want to be. Even or especially when it comes to the truth. By the way, thank you for trying to find the truth. There are many of us still around who appreciate your kind. If I can be of help, feel free to ask. I was in Military aviation and this is my 3rd airline, so I may be able to help you somehow. On that note, a colleague of mine and I believe that airplanes just don't fall apart in the sky unless they are designed wrong, maintained improperly or blown-up. Blaming the pilots was wrong. During the last 20 years, there have been several Boeing airplanes that have spiraled to earth, thousands of feet, only to recover damaged, but in one piece.

Sincerely,

Bob


Gentlemen:

I must be truthful and say that I have not followed any of the continuing investigation of Flight 587. I glanced at the Vanity Fair cover and saw the article mentioned on the cover. It captured my curiousity! I purchased the magazine and read the article. Most stunning! I can see a definate example of gross negligence of all investigative parties involved. To have the facts and data from many reliable pilots of the very same kind of aircraft tell of "uncommaned rudder movement" and not pay attention to that is simply ludicrus at best! I could not help but think of all the media attention and the name calling and so forth that The Boeing Company endured with the investigation and tests of the "rudder reversal" on their 737 aircraft. This aircraft underwent major studies, many tests and was eventually recomended by the NTSB and the FAA to have safe gaurds, including the redesign of the rudder control and replacement of the rudder control of all 737 modified to reflect the change. Now what really bothers me is if American Airline pilots are reporting problems with the Airbus A300, American Airlines spokesmen are denying said accusations and the NTSB and the FAA are saying that there is no problem, isn't that a bit short sided on all parties involved, and a cover up?
I wonder how far this investigation would be if Flight 587 were a Boeing 767 that had gone down instead of an Airbus A300. Something smells here, and to think that as a long time A&P Mechanic,( 21 years) I so much desired to work at the NTSB.

Thomas M Miller, of Portland, Oregon


Dear Editor:

I just finished reading the VF article and found it, and your mission, fascinating. God bless you. I am a long term Manhattan resident and aviation buff with some technical competency and 30 years as a frequent - passenger - flyer. The David Rose article is superbly researched and well-written, BUT it makes NO connection between the explosion/fire/smoke seen by many witnesses and the long up-front technical sleuth work about the A 300-600 composite tail design. No wonder: there cannot be any other other connection than (1) an explosion amidship caused (2) severe yaw forces, which then caused (3) the vertical tail weakened in 1994 to break loose. The vortex theory is ridiculous from a pure statistical point of view: with 6,000 flights per day (before 9/11) in this country alone, if wake vortices were a mortal danger, airliners would crash or loose structural parts several times a year. What was so unique on that calm November 12, 2001 morning to make a plane lose its tail? Nothing! Therefore, the "terrorist theory" is the only valid theory. That was my first reaction that morning upon watching the news and hearing the early details. So we do have a cover-up, indeed, much substantiated by your research. The rationale for the cover-up is understandable, but the consequences make it wrong. I hope the NTSB and the FAA come clean in October, but I won't be holding my breath.

My own theory? Flight 587 carried the first shoe bomber.

I wish you courage and determination in this endeavor,

Philippe Defechereux


Editors U.S. Read,

Thank you for your efforts in making this information available to all...
I found your site through the Vanity Fair article. One thing made clear is how the "Party Line" coming out of officialdom can be so unreliable, wrong, dishonest and more than likely harmful to our society. The resignation letter of AA's fleet manager speaks volumes.

Apparently Airbus, and AA have concluded that the occasonal loss of passenger jets is preferrable to burdening the financial health of carrier's like AA with effective inspection procedures of composite components.

Sincerely.

Bill McMahon Watertown, MA


Dear Mr. Trombettas,
First of all, I want to thank you for the important work you're doing with this web site. What an incredible service you're performing. I am full of admiration for the integrity and excellence of your work.
Second of all, I want to respond to your letter to Kofi Annan and to some of your posted exchanges on the subject. I confess that I'm very dismayed to see the whole problem put down to the barbarity and ignorance of the Palestinians. I thought the U.S. Read web site was all about critical thinking, nuance, and logic; but the discussions about Israel posted here are all about a recourse to coarse generalizations that defame an entire race of people.
Whenever I see that kind of black-and-white, us-against-them theorizing, I become suspicious. As horrible as apartheid was, as completely as I opposed it then and oppose it now, I don't think I ever would have been swayed by a diatribe that painted the white Afrikaaners as barbarians with innately flawed minds and nonexistent capacity for compassion. I wouldn't buy that logic in a discussion of the problems in Northern Ireland or in Bosnia. Those kinds of extreme generalizations, completely belittling or dismissing the people on one side of a conflict, reek of bigotry, even when the generalizations are being made about people whose actions deserve to be criticized.
As for the reality of what's happening on the ground in Israel and the territories, I want to ask you and your readers: do you believe everything you see on the network news? Obviously not--the work on this site proves that the media needs to be probed, just as the actions of government agencies need to be questioned. Are you bothering to do a thorough probing of your own information on the Middle East, by giving a fair read to the work of your opponents?
Mr. Trombettas, you seem to want it both ways--at times you state that the Israelis have never used human shields, at other times you seem to acknowledge Israeli wrong-doing but imply that any amount of international law-breaking is justified by the actions of Palestinian civilians. There's ample evidence that the Israelis have used human shields and violated Geneva conventions in other ways, and I invite you and your readers to check the web sites of Amnesty International and any number of major human rights organizations (including Israeli organizations) to verify that evidence. Are all these organizations making up lies out of "bias" against the Israelis? Why would they be? Do you discount the work that they do entirely? Let's not forget why rules such as the Geneva Conventions were created in the first place. Some kinds of violence shouldn't be permissible, even during a situation of war. Is there any hypothetical Israeli action against the Palestinians that could conceivably outrage you? Or do they have an open license to be as violent with Palestinians as they wish, knowing that the world will go along with it?

If your answer--and the world's answer--to that last question is yes, then I don't see why the Israelis would bother trying to achieve their ends by more peaceful means. If the answer is "yes," then Palestinians will never be convinced that abandoning violence is the answer for them, either. That means more tremendous suffering for people on both sides. I'm not a fan of that, and that's why I'm asking these questions.
Thanks again,
Sarah Cunningham Chicago, Illinois

U.S.Read reply:
: Dear Sarah:; Thank you for your passionate response and thank you for your compliments. Truly appreciate it.; Sarah, do you believe that sometimes ... when a husband and wife are divorcing ... that one of them might share more of the blame; that one of them may have done very bad things? Do you believe when we were attacked by Japan, that we were on the "right" side? Do you believe that had you been alive then that you would have been passionately Pro-American, and shown that passion by wishing for and working towards the destruction of Japan's and Germany's military might? I ask sincerely. I wonder if you allow for the possibility that sometimes, "someone" on one side of a conflict, can be more at fault? Whether that "someone" is an individual, a group of individuals, a race of individuals, or a nation.; I know what I believe. I believe the answer to that question is yes. When 60-plus percent of Palestinians approve of terror bombers it's fair for me to generalize. If we treat that democratic indicator of the will of the people, then that "People", that majority, is ... barbaric. And I make no apology for that. They've had many opportunities over the last 45 years to govern their own territories in Peace. But they lost those opportunities because they either wanted all Jews dead or they made ridiculous demands, or they sent more terror bombers. They've sown to the Whirlwind, and now they have reaped it. What I have noticed is that every time Israelis and Palestinians have talked Peace, the terror increases against Israelis! This is supposed to encourage the Israelis? The Israelis, through Barak, made a tremendous offer to Arafat, and what did the Israelis get as a show of gratitude? Intifada.; I'm sure you know that many Arabs, many Palestinians, cannot have Peace while they are neighbors to filthy infidels, i.e. Jews (and Christians). Only recently have Arab nations begun to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. How magnanimous of them. But there are many Arabs and Palestinians who still fight for one goal ... the extermination and/or expulsion of the Jews from the Middle East. I've never heard one Israeli leader say "death to all Palestinians, death to all Arabs!". I've heard many Arab Leaders call for the destruction of Israel.; Sometimes, the choices, and the decisions, can be as simple as black and white. I'm sorry, but this is my view today. I do leave the door open however, that tomorrow I may see things differently.; To directly answer your question ... Palestinians are more at fault than Israelis. That's my view.; Peace unto you Sarah. You are a clearly a peace loving person and we need more like you in the world. :-); Vic


Editor: I cannot fully express my appreciation for your work on AA 587. As a working journalist, I have been ashamed of my profession since the 2000 presidential campaign. September 11th deepened by disgust. Then AA 587 crashed, and the media swallowed the government's story hook, line, sinker, rod and reel. If the AA flight had been loaded with Anglo American tourists, sadly, the coverage would have been more aggressive. A lot of people are depending on people such as you and David Rose. The truth will set us free. David Bennett Santa Fe, NM USA

September 23, 2002

First I'd just like to thank you for the great work you are doing. Everyday since November 12, I've been worrying more about our own government cover-ups, and lack of interest on the part of "journalists" other than terrorism. It seems to me that Marion Blakey got her reward for doing what she does best...PR. I am interested in attending the NTSB hearings, but don't know if my schedule will allow it, or if I can tolerate what I imagine will be more of the same. I would like a copy of the CD you are making available from the council (hearings). Matt Woodson Bedford, NH 03110 Thanks from a concerned citizen.
August 22, 2002

Hello, I am from Canada and have been following the story of AA Flight 587 with great interest ever since the event occurred.

I just wanted to commend you for all the hard work you have done on this issue. I had been searching all over for information and was unable to find much coverage in the traditional media and was frustrated by the lack of updates on the NTSB website.

I even resorted to sending letters to the Editors of a few mainstream media outlets such as CNN, MSNBC and the CBC here in Canada asking about the lack or reporting on this issue and received no responses at all. (go figure) .

I thought there may have been some kind of edict issued by the U.S. Government to the media to keep quiet about the issue due to the sensitivities regarding Air Travel and Homeland Security after "911" but after watching and reading exhaustive coverage of the event of "911" for many months after I was perplexed. Especially since the American Media from my perspective are very protective over their rights towards Free Speech and all.

I just have one question, has there been any mention of investigations into the passenger manifests for the Flight for any clues regarding anything suspicious or any analysis done of the Security procedures in place for Airline boarding at JFK at the time of the incident? Would this be under the wing of the FAA?

Does anything stand out on that account? I realize you are focusing more on the technical aspects of the Flight timeline and find your analysis fascinating.

Sincerely appreciative,

Robert Pfeffer

Victor's reply: Thanks Robert. Hopefully, in October (Public Hearings on AA587) we'll all see the kind of information we've been waiting for that will shed more light on this.

The FBI will only say they did an investigation but do not want to get into the details of what, especially in re the passengers. That I can understand. As for security procedures at JFK ... there continue to be security problems to this day .. just several weeks ago a JFK worker was arrested for smuggling illegals on board planes.

August 22nd

Thank you for this website.

I simply do not believe the present thesis regarding flight 587. (Pilot error)

If it were not for the experience we have with the explanation for flight 800, I would probably not feel this way. While there may be problems with the composites, and the computer programs used on the Airbus 300/320, it is still my belief that the similarities between the two events are too suspect to be accepted without closer scrutiny.

There are eyewitness reports that the right wing of flight 587 was on fire before the crash of flight 587

Similarly, there are many eyewitness reports of a streaking trail extending upward to flight 800 before it broke apart.

I would also call attention to the fact that both James Kaelstrom and James Hall worked both these events.

If these two are not born liars they are, at least, convicted by the facts of each case.

I recommend reading an article by Ms Kristina Borjesson contained in the book entitled INTO THE BUZZSAW .

Also there is a book by Jim Sanders entitled TWA FLIGHT 800.

Jim Sanders, and his wife, were arrested by the FBI, on orders of Attorney General Janet Reno, for receiving evidence under illegal circumstances.

STEPHEN LODAHL

Vic's reply: You're welcome Stephen. Anyone who carefully looks at the data has to come to the same conclusion (about Pilot error).

I must correct you on a couple points:

1. A missile streaking up to a plane (flight 800) is different than a fire seen coming from the plane (flight 587). So ... these are not similar in the sense you described. What happened to Flight 587 could be the result of mechanical failure.

2. Kallstrom and Hall did not work Flight 587.

I won't call Kallstrom or Hall liars. But I would pay $100 to have them chained to a chair for 4 hours in a debate with some of the fine citizens who have been fighting to get answers on Flight 800 for six years now (http://flight800.org).

Although I do believe more and more that AA 587 was an accident, I have not been able to put terrorism to bed yet. Some of it has to do with the witness reports you refer to.


July 23, 2002

I remember the vow I made back in 1950 where I would never let anyone tell me what I should do as a Design Structural Dynamics Engineer after the crash of test AF-2S/R at Grumman Aircraft Corporation. My analysis predicted failure at 1.10 design speed. I vowed I would use 1.25 Vne (never exceed speed) and that is what I would do for a transport at the minimum considering all the lives at stake. Also, I would take the worst case scenario which would be maximum pressure chordwise and spanwise across the vertical fin and that cause by full deflection of the rudder multiplied by 2 for a step function application since the rudder is a dynamic loading function. Then I would use the Q for 1.25 Vne. This would cover all scenarios. In addition I would do a complete "modal analysis" verified by ground vibration tests to make certain there are no flutter problems. Only then would I, as a structural engineer responsible for a plane like the Airbus, be able to sleep nights. Furthermore, I am sure that this was done. This leaves material failure or an explosion as the only way flight 587 could have crashed. Not pilot error which should never be used as an excuse unless 1.25Vne had been exceeded.

I have a Master Degree in Aeronautics and completed all my Doctoral Requirements at MIT where I worked full time as a staff engineer, a member of the faculty, and assistant project engineer on the Deep Submergence Vehicles. Before that I was assigned to the Apollo Displays and Control Group doing technical assurance work on the command service module and the LEM, lunar excursion module.

Vincent Rosa

July 15, 2002

It should be clear by now ---to anyone who has followed the AAL 587 story --- that the NTSB and the US Government are conducting and orchestrating an extremely sloppy, unconvincing, and highly transparent cover up. And, like with TWA 800, AV WEEK and the major media are not asking the NTSB the tough questions. As with TWA 800, the NTSB and FBI discount and name call the eye witnesses "KOOKS" and "conspiracy theorists" without even talking to them. Since the NTSB and the FBI succeeded with this strategy on TWA 800 they are quick to use again. It worked then and why shouldn't it work now! It should be clear that the airline and air travel industry would have taken a second knock-down punch, only two months after 9-11, if the NTSB's Chairman Marion Blakey had told the truth, i.e. --- Flight 587 went down after an on-board fire had suddenly broken out at 2000 feet and the airframe began to disintegrate. She and we now know she is covering up the truth but ----and this is important --- she was, and still is, somehow convinced this was "The right thing to do."

But she is wrong, her logic is flawed, her good intentions are misguided. I believe --and pray --- that unlike TWA 800 she and the NTSB will ultimately be exposed as conspiratorial liars.

We, and particularly the families of the innocent victims of AAL 587, need the truth ---- not what some government official in Washington thinks its safe to tell us.

Anonymous
-----------------------------------
July 15, 2002

Small Independent Newspapers

The Flight 587 eyewitness meeting was held July 10, 7:30, PM.

The banquet room of The Beach Club is filled with about one hundred and fifty people and one torn burnt page of the Koran. A Larry Katzman representing Congressman Anthony Weiner office, Councilman Joe Addabbo and Assemblywoman Audrey Pheffer. Two reporters: a Warren Woodberry of the Daily News, and Merli English of Newsday were present. There appeared to be a few more reporters also present. On Friday the front page of the Wave had a detailed review of the meeting. Having read the Daily News and Newsday newspapers Friday, Saturday and not finding any mention of this meeting. Still thinking that this story as
reviewed by the above reporters must be newsworthy and was held for the Sunday's editions. This Sunday's newspapers were read and not a mention of
the event, in which one hundred and fifty citizens expressed concern.

Well, what is to be expected of the same media, which when back on January 7, when six citizens formally requested to be allowed to testify as eyewitness
in a letter to the NTSB. Of the Four major New York newspapers only one the N.Y.Post thought it to be news worthy enough to cover it in a small article. On a slow news day, six citizens volunteering for jury duty would be headlines.

It makes one wonder, how much the informed public is really informed and the importance of small independent newspapers.

Eyewitness Tom Lynch

------------------------------------
July 15, 2002

At the request of the Reader, Peter from the Bronx, I am reposting his original post from February 3rd.

Thoughts from Peter (Bronx, NY) on February 3rd

Last week, I traveled to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic on business on an American Airlines A300. Needless to say, I was quite reserved about even getting on the plane but thank God, everything went well. This was my first flight since the September 11th attacks and as would be expected, I was a bit nervous and visually checking everyone out.

Based on what I have read about this incident, I sincerely believe that this was an act of terrorism. My theory and thoughts on the incident seem to be supported by all of the eyewitness accounts .

Having just recently traveled to Santo Domingo on an A300, I took the opportunity to look over the plane and figure out, in layman terms, why there would be explosions, engines would fall off, and fire would be seen spewing out of one side of the plane. My thoughts went out to the victims of this incident as I sat in the plane and imagined what they had experienced that morning.

My theory about this incident is as follows. I understand it, there are aviation professionals who visit this site. Maybe you can discuss this with them for their opinion and not make these thoughts public. My intention is not that of creating hysteria but rather a great sense of getting to the truth of this matter.

a) On September 11, airliners were used as missiles on New York and Washington landmarks. On November 12, an Airliner was used as a bomb into a new York neighborhood.

b) The person(s) who executed this "bombing" knew two things: Security at Kennedy Airport, particularly for Caribbean flights, is lax, to say the least. I know this first hand. I have gone through those gates about 10 times in the past 4 years.

Two, that they only had minutes before they were over water and their "bomb" would not be as effective. They therefore had to execute their terrorism within the first 1 - 5 minutes of the flight.

c) While on the A300 recently, I noticed that there is a bathroom located on either side of the plane just forward of each wing. It is my belief that an explosive device, whether it was just placed there or was attached to a person, was detonated from this location. The person(s) would have entered the bathroom just prior to take off and stayed there. In this case, it would have been the bathroom on the right side of the plane.

d) Upon detonation, whether there was one or two of them, the explosive blew a hole through the fuselage. Debris from this explosion was sucked in by the right engine which in turn caused the fire and smoke which was seen coming from the right side.

I think that we know the rest. The pilots lost control of the aircraft, tried several maneuvers to no avail and the plane came crashing down. In the process, the airplane lost tail, engine, etc...

I believe that the NTSB and US government in general would be rather reserved and embarrassed to admit that this was an act of terrorism having already been on high alert and having deployed the Reserves just months prior.

As I have read on this site, the NTSB drew their conclusion before the black boxes were recovered and while the plane was still smoking. This is an absolute miscarriage of an investigation...drawing a conclusion before even beginning to look at the facts.

My job takes me to among other places, Santo Domingo, on a regular basis. I sincerely feel that the public has been misled from the very beginning with the initial statements of Ms. Blakey declaring this an accident. An incident, yes... an accident, NO.
I feel that the NTSB and the other branches of government associated with this investigation give the public a FALSE sense of security when they declare something an accident that really is questionable. Fact is, they endanger the public. Whether the motivation is to not further hurt the economy or not is no justification to outright lie to and mislead the citizens of the United States!!! They need to understand that people are not idiots and we are not going to swallow just anything that is handed to us.

Furthermore, we are in a war environment. This investigation, if it really is one, is taking way to long to produce its conclusion. We can not afford the comfort of a stretched out, long term investigation with no clear conclusion.

We need the truth NOW!!!

Thanks for listening Vic. I hope to get the thoughts of your professional readers.

Peter's thoughts on July 15, 2002:

I would like to add on this occassion however, that the chances of this plane crashing where it did was at least 1 in 100,000. In viewing the maps provided on your site detailing the flight path, crash and debris field of 587, one can't rule out that even statistically, this crash is suspect and lends itself to a more controlled, premeditated act and to a specific target... mainly that of American soil, with American citizens.

I am asking that my initial opinion about this crash be placed higher on the list and easier to read because in following the developments of this crash as reported on usread and Wave, it appears that this is what we'll eventually find. The NTSB, FAA and other individuals and publications can try to hide facts...but thanks to you and others like you, they will not be successful in doing so!!


Peter
Bronx, NY

June 28th

From Bob Gurr

In Response To "Witnesses - Notoriously Unreliable"

Very careful look at what has been reported. Too bad that witnesses seldom get a chance to relate their observation to a good listener back at the exact scene. Also too bad the NTSB just reported bare statement content with no attempt to reconstruct ALL the viewpoints.
I once had a bike crash, related to a friend what had happened, then had doubts about what had happened. Returned two weeks later and found evidence at the scene, then correlated this with the damage to the bike and found a different conclusion. And I was a "participating" witness.
Last week the world could view an in flight breakup of a C130A, with observers at the scene giving certain recollections. I was sure of what I had seen viewing the video the first time. A day later when I could run a copy of the broadcast slow motion version frame by frame, I learned that what I was sure I saw, was indeed not EXACTLY what happened. And I consider myself to be the greatest mechanical disaster witness in the world. Sobering for me.

June 28th

From Michael Hull In Response to "Witnesses - Notoriously Unreliable"

Your readers might be interested to know that statistical calculations on the
probabilities that what these eyewitnesses reported did in fact happen can be
performed. The NTSB can express all of the opinions that it wishes but
mathematical truth is superior to NTSB opinion.

Since the NTSB has over 349 witness statements we can calculate the
statistical accuracy of their reports and the NTSB better take note.

Of the 349 eyewitnesses interviewed let us assume that only 40 of them are
"credible". Furthermore, let us assume that the observational capability of
each of these eyewitnesses is so poor that he/she can report an observation
correctly in only one out of five observations. There is then only a 20
percent probability that an event reported by such a witness would have
actually taken place as described. With two of these witnesses independently
describing the same event, the probability rises to 36 percent and with ten
witnesses it rises to 89.26 percent. With forty such independent and
similarly "unreliable" witnesses the probability rises to 99.99 percent that
the event reported did in fact take place. This is as close to certainty as
one can come mathematically. Further, even if one assumes that the
reliability of these 40 eyewitnesses was so poor that each of them could
report an observation correctly only one time out of ten, the probability
that the event did indeed take place as described by the witnesses is still
98.52 percent. The NTSB has 349 eyewitnesses!

The equation is as follows:

Probability of Event (P) = [1-(U^N) ] X 100 Percent Probability (P) equals
one minus the Unreliability (U) raised to the power of the Number of
Participants (N) all multiplied by one hundred.

For example: If you give a coin to one person and ask them to flip it and you
hope to see a "head" what is the probability that you will get it? Answer
50%. What if we give two people a coin each and ask both to flip their coins
and we hope to have one "head" show up, the probability that we will get it
is now 75%. With three people the chances that we can get at least one head
is 87.5% and with four people it is 93.75%.

Another way to look at these probability calculations is as follows:

Assume that one has identical pieces of equipment which need to operate for a
set period of time but each can do so with only 50% reliability.

How many pieces of equipment do we need to operate simultaneously to ensure
with 99.9% probability that we will get the job done? Answer 10.

Now if a witness is "right" in an observation only 10% of the time (or
another way of putting this is that the witness is unreliable in 90% of his
observations) then if one had 50 such witnesses what is the probability that
what they said happened, actually happened? The solution is shown below:

Accuracy of Witness Groups at Ten Percent Reliability

No of Witnesses Probability that Event Happened 1 10.00 % (N=1 and U=0.9)
5 40.95 % (N=5 and U=0.9)
15 79.41 % (N=15 and U=0.9)
20 87.84 % (N=20 and U=0.9)
35 97.50 % (N=35 and U=0.9)
50 99.48 % (N=50 and U=0.9)

Sincerely,
Michael Hull
Bardonia@aol.com


June 2nd, 2002

From Stan in Greenwich, Connecticut

In Response To William Melvin's Letter below dated May 13th

Just a brief note about your letter to the editor.
The Lockheed Electra wings failed due to an engine mount bolt failure. The designers felt that three (Yes, 3) bolts would be enough to hold this giant turboprop engine in place. The 4 bladed prop is 13.5 feet in diameter with a constant chord of 18 inches, (a foot and a half all the way to the blade tip) When one bolt failed the engine went into a "whirl mode". This was and is a phenomena known to the engineers. The whirl mode caused the whole wing to start to vibrate until the wing failed. This was traced down by the fact that some dogs started to howl when the stricken aircraft flew over. The government put a speed limit of 250 knots on all Electra's until they found the cause. The fix was 6 bolts to hold the engine and they stiffened the wings. They are flying over 40 years now without a wing failure. It was engine bolts, not wings that were at fault. Check a book called, "The Electra Story", I believe written by Rod Sterling or Sirling.

The Navy plane that landed in China and had to be taken apart to get it back; was of same design.
The hard over rudder problem was a Boeing 737, not 727. Two 737s had fatal crashes from that rudder hydraulic control valve problem. One near Pittsburgh and the other near Colorado Springs. The first crash was blamed on wake turbulence and resulting crew error for over a decade. It is interesting that wake turbulence was blamed in the Pittsburgh and the AA587 crash, initially. After another incident, the NTSB got it right.

May 31st

Thank you for your incredibly hard work researching the Flight 587 tragedy, which has fascinated me since the day it happened. Could you answer one brief question: Have the cockpit voice recorder transcripts been released in whole or in part to date? Ian van de Burgt Columnist Business Edge magazine Calgary, AB Canada

Victor's Reply: Thank you. Unfortunately, the NTSB has chosen not to release the transcripts until the first hearing (scheduled possibly for later this year). The only CVR data they have released is what they discussed in November (in NY) at the Press Conferences. That would be the two airframe rattles, the wake comment, the call for max power, and the losing control comments. These comments are in my timelines.
--------------------------------------------------------

Your site is very interesting. Can freedom of information (FOIA) requests turn up anything? What's become of the videos of Flight 587? Have they ever been shown to the public?

Steve Driscoll

Victor's Reply: Thank you. FOIA won't give us anything now since all info is technically part of an "ongoing" fed. investigation. The videos ... since Feb. we've heard not a peep about them. No public showings.

May 30th

After viewing daily news reports on the war against terror ... after daily reports on how the FBI boondoggled this and that ... how the president knew of the 9/11 attacks, etc., etc., I'm convinced each and every American is now a member of the US MILITARY! WE ARE ALL INDISPENSABLE!!!!! I think it safe to assume the FBI screwed up the TWA 800 investigation as well.

Gerard I.
Pilot
May 29th

In Re "Evasive"

Didn't the NTSB learn anything from their handling of TWA 800? What a mess that investigation is in.
The best way to get someone to read a book is to ban them from reading it. The best way to get people to seek the truth is to try and hide it from them.

Cheers,
Mudman

May 18th

Brian, a friend of U.S. Read, sent this in response to U.S. Read's Open Letter to Kofi Annan:

Sorry Victor, but beg to differ with you here.

The Israelis bear the burden of a 1st world civilized society to uphold war laws put in place to prevent barbarism and war crimes. The IDF had a choice and decided to violate many Geneva convention type rules like using kids as shields, bulldozing civilian housing with women and children inside, refusing UN inspection, attacking civilian housing, property, infrastructure, etc. These acts are clearly not justifiable within a modern society. Beyond that, Israeli treatment of a people whose land they have taken is less than commendable.

Just as you disclaim, I am no Palestinian or backer of terrorism, but there are some things that the US is clearly avoiding recognizing here. Brutality by the Israelis of the Palestinian civilian population is one of them. Tolerating clear violations of human rights and our own constitutional standards is another.

Yes, there is a violent, lawless, and uncontrollable faction on the Palestinian side, but this doesn't preempt or forfeit the rights of law abiding and victimized Palestinians who simply want to exist. As far as I can see here Victor, the proposal these Israeli defenders give to a people who were born there is to yield to Israeli rule, remove yourself from the way of the settlers in the occupied territories (condemned by the UN and ignored by the US and Israel), and go away because God gave us this land. I don't see how that could be construed as just or fair? At this point I think fighting terrorism is being used as an excuse for land confiscation and conquest. I hate to see Americans sold this line by a side that is being less than honorable in its dealings with the victims. Bulldozing isn't justifiable by any existing convention and would be illegal if done in the US. In the meantime the settlements keep growing. The Palestinians are pushed onto reservations where they are treated like criminals in their own land and now the Israelis want the reservations too with our blessing!

I would feel a whole lot more comfortable if the US and Israeli took measures to compensate the displaced Palestinians with firm guarantees and lands first. If terrorist acts occurred afterwards, then those factions are on their own and deserve whatever fate they get. What kills me is that the price of this war on terrorism could have paid for a Palestinian homeland that probably would have satisfied their anger.

Victor responds:

Brian ... thank you for expressing your thoughts.

I do not think Israelis have used children as shields. On the other hand, have you ever wondered why so many Palestinian children, (children!), are seen in street battles between Palestinian men and Israeli soldiers? My mother wouldn't let me out of the house when there was lightning. The parents and mentors of these children are the ones who have manipulated and violated their sacred trust to protect their children. I have seen so many pictures of Palestinian children with automatic weapons. How can this be justified? It cannot. It is clear evidence of the rampant violence in those communities towards Israelis. It is not just Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

The Israelis bulldozed houses that were housing militants and terrorists. These houses had also been booby trapped by the cowards. It is against the Geneva Convention for combatants to hide in the homes of civilians. The homes were bulldozed only after sufficient warning was given to civilians to leave. You should be aware by now, that there was no real massacre of civilians in Jenin, that it was all Pro-Palestinian propaganda. Yes, "some" civilian deaths? Very probable. It is the terrible consequence of war. But not a war crime. I have seen many references in Arabic newspapers where Jenin residents admitted that few civilians perished. UN Inspection? I would not want to be inspected by anyone who is biased against me. Pure and simple.

The Israeli's want to live in Peace. They have agreed to a Palestinian State. Provided there is security. Provided Arabs and Palestinians agree Israel has a right to exist. Which until very recently ... the majority of the Arab world and the PLO, called for the complete destruction and eviction of the filthy Jews from the land. The most successful Arabs in the Middle East, the ones who can VOTE, and experience the "pursuit of happiness", are Arabs who have lived in Israel! That alone proves how honorable Israelis are. They allow Arabs to be citizens when Arabs don't afford Arabs that same respect. And that leads into the larger point of Arab hypocrisy. The Middle East is malignant with hypocrisy, racist propaganda and calls for genocide (2 years ago ... a cleric during Ramadan in Mecca begged Allah for His blessing in bringing about the destruction of the Jews!). We know of corruption in the Palestinian Authority now. Even Yasser TheRat has admitted to it. The Saudis also are filthy hypocrites, deflecting the Jihad wrath of their own people towards the U.S. and funding the families of homicide bombers.

Palestinians, generally, have never "simply wanted to exist". They have always wanted the complete expulsion of filthy Jews from ALL of Palestine (Israel). The U.N. offered Palestinians a State in '47 or '48. Why did they reject it? Because they felt Jews did not have a right to a homeland. My ... how their injustice has come back to haunt them. That is why Brian, every time Palestinians and Israel move closer to Peace and a State for Palestine ... the homicide attacks increase. Because the powers that are truly in control in Palestinian territories do not want Peace with Israel. They want death to the Jews. I cannot believe that, prior to the last few weeks, Israel has never previously gone after terrorists with the resolve and force they did in the West Bank. Wow. That is some restraint. Do you remember when Sadam Hussein was bombing Israel with ScudsIsrael did nothing! They are slow to wrath, and have been more patient than I ever could be.

The settlements. I don't think this is a black and white issue. Don't forget the Arab effort to exterminate the Jews in '67 involved the West Bank area. Israel occupied an area where hostile actions against them had been encouraged. Have the Israeli's done anything wrong? Of course. But it boils down to this. Israelis are generally civilized, peace loving people who do not believe the killing of innocent civilians will be rewarded by their God. The Powers that truly control Palestinian territories believe their God honors such horrific acts. You cannot negotiate with such madness. You can only kill it.

From Reuven Chosen in reply to U.S. Read's Open Letter to Kofi Annan:

(My reply to Reuven is contained within his letter in italics)

Dear Mr. Trombettas,
I was fascinated to read your letter/questions to Mr. Anan, the UN Secretary-General. I intend to answer all your questions and I believe I can do it better than Mr. Anan since I was born and live here in Israel. But before, let me tell you that you, like so many of the public in Israel, have been brainwashed by the terrible Israeli blatant Demagoguery. You may not know, but Demagoguery is a disease much worse than cancer - the patient does not feel any pain but his actions will end up in a tragedy. Now to your questions! As a matter of fact there is one answer to all of your questions. Everybody in the world is against homicide of any kind (not only of innocent people, also the guilty shall not be murdered/executed).

Victor: Wow Reuven. One answer to all of my questions!? Pretty simplistic don't you think? I think you live on a different planet than me. On my planet ... not "everyone" is against homicide of any kind. Please provide your full address with a star map so we can find your solar system!. On my planet ... there are these crazy Islamic extremists who derive great joy from the slaughter of large numbers of innocents, there are Jew-haters, there are haters of Freedom and Democracy who will kill ANYONE to advance their goal. Don't come here ... you will be disappointed.)

Reuven: But what happens when you bring people to desperation. Have you ever been in prison for one day? one hour?! These people are in jail for 35 years (the occupied territories are the closest thing to jail that you can imagine). Even more important: in a regular jail one is not humiliated. The Palestinians were horribly trodden on and humiliated. Parents were beaten in front of their children (most of the time without any reason) houses demolished (again for ridiculous reasons). And when the Oslo accords were signed the Palestinians gained hope as most of us Israelis who saw the dawn coming. During Rabin's days we could all of a sudden to travel to all Arabic countries. People here started to do business with all the neighboring countries.

Victor: The real jail for Palestinians and Middle Eastern Arabs is not the alleged jail created by the Israelis. The real jail is a disgust for true freedom. True democracy. True RELIGIOUS freedom. Freedom to dress as you wish. Freedom for women to study and work and vote and gain power. Freedom to worship Jesus. Freedom to watch foreign movies. Freedom to dream of a career and live in a land that encourages you to pursue your dreams. These people, through their own ignorance and hatred have built their own prisons. Prisons of the Mind. And it is only they themselves who can free themselves.

Reuven: But the leadership that replaced Rabin were against any settlement of relations with the Palestinians. Barak ,who according to Israeli Demagoguery, proposed a generous solution, has a long record of Arab hatred. Listen to this: he was one of the leaders who voted in the Knesset against the Oslo agreement. But even worse: while talking about a Palestinian independent state he built new settlements in the Occupied Territories increasing the Israeli colonialist population there by 50%!!!.

Victor: Just wondering. Do you think Yasser has a "long record" of Israeli hatred? Nah ... I guess not.

Reuven: One major lie, just as an example: The present Intifada started not by the Arabs. It was started by Israel!!! The Palestinians killed the first Jewish person only after about 30 Palestinian civilians and policemen were murdered (many of them with sniper rifles (not self defense, I assume).

Victor: It's clear you think more lies come from Israel than Palestinians. Yasser has a nicely vented room set up for you in his Ramallah hole. If I lived in Israel, I'd tell you to pack your things and go. But I don't.

Reuven: If you would take the trouble you could have found out for yourself some more hair raising stories. You should ask you one question and only this one: why are the Palestinian youth committing these suicide bombings?

Victor: I did as you suggested ... I asked myself that one question. And this is the answer that came to me: "Because Palestinian Demagogues have raised them to hate Jews. Have taught them that killing ANY Jew is rewarded by Allah. That killing ANY Jew (and themselves in the process) will provide their family with money from the Saudi Hypocrites and other Perverted Demagogues".

Reuven: Is it that they are genetically defect? Are the Arabic genes different?

Victor: No. Their minds are!

Reuven: The answer is: No, they are normal people that want to raise their families like you and me. (by the way the Arabic countries were the place where Jews flourished more than in any other place, in Christian countries Jews suffered the worst anti-Semitism).

Victor: That's right Reuven. And it was Christians who attacked Israel in '48. Christians who attacked in '67. And it is Christian suicide bombers that keep Israelis on edge. The real Demagogues are Pro-Palestinian Propagandists and they have successfully brainwashed you. Secondly, conservative Christians in the U.S. are Israel's best allies right now. Reuven, do you have coffee on your planet?? Looking forward to your star map with coordinates.

May 15th 2002

Alice M. in Citra, FL writes:

Hello Victor,

As a former resident of the Rockaways I have been following the investigation of the crash of Flight 587 with great interest and thank you for your informative web site and its detailed information.

Thank you in advance and keep up the good work.

Steve H. from Wilmington, DE writes:

Words of thanks should be going towards you. You have taken the time, effort, and solid commitment to pick up a torch where most would relish, for one reason or other, to see its flame extinguished.
" Patience is a virtue ". This quote must be extended to your family and close friends, for without it,sadly the voice of knowledge for the people who matter may have remained a whisper.
I do believe in many respects ... US Read can be taken wherever you wish.

Here I would like to offer, "Gratis ", anything my 30 years can afford you. It covers a lot of operators, manufacturers, O/H agencies, regulatory authorities and countries in the world. Feel free to have it at your disposal.

Victor writes: I have received many such offers from many kind folks with all sorts of aviation and investigatory (including NTSB) experience. It is probably the sweetest payback for me that I have made so many new friends through this feeble effort. A former NTSB investigator has encouraged me, "you're providing a service and doing a noble deed. You're providing information the NTSB should have been giving out. Keep up the good work". I will.

Giora, in San Jose writes:

In response to your open letter to Secretary General, Kofi Annan:

The charter of the UN reads as follows:: "The purpose of the United Nations is to bring all nations of the world together to work for peace and development, based on the principles of justice, human dignity and the well-being of all people".
According to Webster's Dictionary, dignity means: "the quality of being worthy of esteem or honor".
How can you investigate people who's grand ideas of being worthy of esteem and honor are "martyrdom" by suicide?
These people shouldn't (and can't) be members of the United Nations because the meaning of "dignity" for them is so different from the meaning of the same word to the rest of us. Those who send people to commit suicide, while trying to achieve their purpose ( no matter how important it is to them) - have abandoned the human race's values system. Any communications with such people makes as much sense as to trying to squeeze tomato juice out of an apple.
Mr. Kofi Annan knows that but, he feels that he needs to do something...and what do bureaucrats do? Produce endless, useless paper trails. So, why are you surprised? After all, any Nobel Prize Winner can tell you that you can't get tomato juice by squeezing an apple.

May 13, 2002

Open Letter from William W. Melvin

To: Norman Mineta, Secretary of Transportation

From 1968 until 1993 when I retired, I was on the ALPA (Air Line Pilots Association) Airworthiness &
Performance Committee and was Chairman most of that time. My Committee was
very much involved in the structure discussions in the early 80's when
composite materials were first being proposed for aircraft. The FAA assured
us that composite materials would not be used as primary structure for
transport aircraft.

In April of 1988 the top of the Aloha 737 blew off and that caused a
considerable effort toward the assurance of continued airworthiness of
transport aircraft. Congressman Oberstar held hearings on a bill for aging
aircraft. In the ALPA testimony, I cannot find any reference or concern over
the continuing airworthiness of composite structure. I believe this is
because we were sure that composite materials would not be used for primary
structure.

The Airbus which crashed in New York was manufactured in 1988. What tests
and methods are in place to provide assurance of continuing airworthiness of
composite material when used as primary structure? We apparently didn't deal
with the problem in 1988. I have read recently that Airbus is intending to
build the entire center section of their next aircraft from composite
materials.

Metal structure has a long history of fail safe design with the ability to
determine overload from visual and other inspections. Such is not the case
for composite materials. You surely recall the failure of composite
structure which cost Don Engen his life. I hope we do not have to see a
second failure on a transport aircraft to learn a lesson, as was the case of
the Lockheed Electra wing failures and the B-727 rudder hardovers.

There may be some sophisticated means to test and determine the continued
airworthiness of composite materials. If such a method exists and is not
required or if one is not immediately developed and another failure occurs
on an Airbus, the consequences to Airbus and any airline which flies their
aircraft will be devastating.

Sincerely,
William W. (Bill) Melvin


May 11th, 2002

Hi Victor,

Thanks again for the fine job that you are doing. The "timeline" and "Eleven" are impressive. Your efforts are, in my opinion, suitable for publication. I know about the 'WAVE' article, but have you thought about contacting the major papers or magazines? (Perhaps the new 'Sun'?) I would certainly encourage you to do so.

When I first read the FAA transcript I thought the 'nice game' comment was not credible. I've spent enough time at the Bangor Flight Service Station to know that pilots don't carry on conversations about games of any kind on the radio - especially busy ATC frequencies. I could not - and so far have not - come up with an aviation context for 'nice game'.

I'm glad you have gotten confirmation from the AA pilots about 'try escape'. It seems much more appropriate given the context and circumstances than the FAA interpretation. It reminds me of other cockpit shorthand phrases like 'TOGA' that are uttered to initiate time sensitive procedures.

It surprises me that the FAA did not try to manipulate the sound file the way you and I have. Surely they must have more time and technology than we have. Were I responsible for the ATC transcript I would not be satisfied with inexplicable phrases and "noise" on my transcript!

From the work that you have done it is clear to me that unfortunate events were occurring on that aircraft well before the rudder fluctuations began. Equally clear is that the aircraft experienced serious disruptions of multiple avionics systems before, during, and after the rudder deflections.

Victor, I am a skeptic who places a premium on logic. I make my living troubleshooting complex systems and have heard a lot of technical B.S. from vendors and manufacturers. Therefore, when I say that the job you are doing is praiseworthy and that I agree with your interpretation of the available evidence you must be doing something right. Good work!

Take care - let me know if I can be of any assistance.

Peter Gunn

Victor writes: Peter is an I.T. Specialist for a University in Maine and was very helpful in confirming the "try escape" comment on the JFK Departure Control Transcript that we now know is an established procedure. This is a significant find because this comment comes between the two lateral movements (which were 20 seconds apart), and 7 seconds before the rudder movements begin. I quote an A300 Pilot who told me, "this is NOT a NORMAL procedure!". Along with the transponder transmitting erroneous readings, and rumors have it ... possible timing problems in the Cockpit Voice Recorder ... we have substantial circumstantial evidence there was something else goin' on on board that plane that affected electrical systems.

May 10, 2002

Kudos' to Captain Ray Lahr! His article (May 3 NTSB/NASA Press Conference) was right on the mark. It made my day when I opened The Wave, a local weekly newspaper in the Rockaway's on May 10th, and Ray's article was on page two in its entirety. Another American Patriot is standing tall !!

Tom Lynch

Victor writes: Tom is one of the eyewitnesses of inflight fires, explosions, smoke ... all before the vertical stabilizer separates.
April 21, 2002

From Glen
Colorado
Work history includes NASA in Tape Recording and Telemetry Systems Engineering
Also a CVR/FDR expert

Re: Eleven

Victor paints a very clear picture of NTSB "flummery" ---as Nero Wolfe would call it.

April 21, 2002

From Bob D
in New Jersey
Former Navy Pilot
Retired Commercial Airline Captain and Flight Ops Management

Re: Timeline v2

Finally studied the new timeline, and find it very well presented. Huge amount of work went into that. Bravo!

April 21, 2002

From Steve Grass
Editor
http://www.intellreport.com

Last night I was poking around your site, and in that late night mind set that lack of sleep creates, pondering the picture - large and small. This morning I read "Eleven" There is no point in my complimenting you further on your work, since you know I think it is outstanding.

April 21, 2002

From Chuck Stoy
in Sun City, AZ
Aeronautical Engineer
Former Military Pilot

Re: "Eleven"

I think you are getting to the heart of the matter when you bring up the flight control issue. As a former pilot, I can't think of anything that would immediately get a pilot's DEAD SERIOUS attention as surely as "losing control" of the plane he was flying. If a pilot says he is losing control - I'd believe him - take him seriously, until someone proves he didn't say the words. Like this is not something being said jokingly.

Response from Victor Trombettas to Chuck Stoy:

Thank you Chuck. I believe the NTSB takes this very seriously. I'm dismayed, however, that their investigative focus continues to be the eight second sequence which contains the five rudder movements and the cessation of rudder data. The timeline clearly points to something well before that as the cause.
April 21, 2002

From John
Indonesia
Semi-retired Kiwi Civil Engineer living and working in Indonesia as a Quality Assurance Specialist. Registered with the American Society of Non-destructive Testing, as a 'Level III' in Magnetic Particle, Liquid Penetrant and Radiographic (X-ray) Testing

I've also followed KAL007, PANAM 103 and TWA 800 closely with considerable concern on the veracity of those who control the release of information. I'm sorry if I come across as arrogant but the impression one gets from outside the US is that your citizens are, by and large, poorly informed on crucial issues by a compliant national news service. Journalists kicking against the pricks are ostracized as 'Conspiracy Theorists', or worse still, 'Liberals', whatever that means in American English!

March 30, 2002

from "Fliptails"

In response to the story of the B52 that landed with a mostly severed tail and rudder, Fliptails said, "I think anyone can see the difference between the B52's two third's missing tail and an A300's completely missing tail ......... talk about sensationalizing!"
: Response from Victor Trombettas to Fliptails:; Fliptails: You're right. I didn't make that clear or offer any alternate thought. Thanks for the criticism and if you check the story again you'll see that based on your appropriately stern rebuke I have edited the page and added a thoughtful comment from another Pilot. I still think Ray Lahr raised an interesting thought. We all know about Japan Air Lines 123 that suffered major damage in the empennage, also lost most of the tail (looks like the rudder remained), lost hydraulics, and did not immediately plummet but flew around for a while before crashing.

Fliptails also commented on the concept pictures of what a tail-less A300 would look like: "Maybe they would have seen it like that if they were that close and at the same altitude!!!!!! Giving misinformation????
: Response from Victor Trombettas to Fliptails:; Here I have to disagree with you. Even if you shrink the picture ... it is still very obvious there's no tail. More importantly, (a) many witnesses are adamant the tail was there and (b) Kenny Good's statement gives us a very clear point in the timeline as to when it did break off.; One witness' reaction to seeing the plane flying by her house without the tail and engines was "I thought it was an ICBM". If you think about a plane with no vertical stabilizer and no engines ... you can understand this poor woman's reaction.

March 25, 2002

From Martin, a former Logistics Engineer at McDonald Douglas Astronautics

The NTSB's decision to closely examine the vertical stabilizer lugs would
appear to be a serious attempt to put an end to the speculation about the
cause of flight 587's crash. It is my suspicion that the NTSB may be
speculating that the pilot of flight 587 was convinced his rudder was "hard
over", because the pilot seems to have gone through the procedures to
recover from it. Many pilots are aware that several 737 aircraft (not
Airbus) have had catastrophic crashes that some experts have associated with
a 'hard over rudder deflection' problem. Without warning, usually during
takeoff or landing, the 737's rudder moves to a hard over right or left.
Unless rudder control is reestablished, depending on the altitude, the 737
rolls upside down and dives straight into the ground. 737 pilots (and no
doubt others as well) have been briefed on how to recognize the problem and
initiate a recovery. It would not be a strenuous leap of logic to assume
that an Airbus pilot would also employ the same recovery procedure if he was
convinced (true or not) that his rudder was hard over. While emphasizing
that I am not a pilot, my research has indicated that the recovery may
involve giving alternate 'extreme rudder peddle' commands. This needs to be
confirmed by someone who has been briefed on the FAA approved recovery
procedure. Of course, I may be reading too much into the motivation behind
this latest test. But it would be a "non-terrorist" solution to their
problem. And that's got to look attractive to the NTSB at this point -
considering they announced that it was not a terrorist event a couple of
months ago.


About the CT-Scan of the lug bolts:

1. From what I've seen of the photos, it appears that none of the vertical stabilizer lugs actually failed. The vertical stabilizer itself failed. It is important to understand that since the moment that the vertical stabilizer failed, the lugs were not subjected to any other further
2. We know that an unknown lateral wind force caused the vertical stabilizer to fail. That force must have subjected the lugs to stresses unique to the lifetime of the components.

3. Such a force would have had to permanently distort the lugs enough to leave a sub-microscopic fingerprint.

4. An estimate of the magnitude of lateral wind force at the moment of failure would resolve a major question about the cause of the crash. If the vertical stabilizer failed as a result of either normal or even extreme wake turbulence forces, the argument could be made that the vertical stabilizer caused the crash. If, on the other hand, extraordinary forces were involved, then the vertical stabilizer must have failed secondary to some other event.

5. A CT-Scan of the lugs is going to be used to "read" the fingerprint and determine the relative force that was applied to the lug.
There are, however, potential problems to this test. Here are just a few of the most obvious:

A. Is the CT-Scan the most accurate tool to approximate the maximum force that was placed on the lugs, and there-by the vertical stabilizer?

B. What is the degree of error in the test, and does that degree of error overlap the distinguishing aspects of any of the possible conclusions? This is important because it offers the opportunity for the NTSB management to draw subjective conclusions.

C. Can the examination of just the lugs make a distinction between "hard over rudder deflection" stress, and the lateral stress associated with some unknown problem not related to the rudder (both of which would take the vertical stabilizer well beyond operational specifications); or should the empennage be included so any extreme "lateral rotational-torque" put on the vertical stabilizer can also be measured and evaluated (which would be specific to a rudder problem)?

D. Can the steps certified by the FAA to recover from a 'hard over rudder deflection' on the 737, take the Airbus beyond its design specifications?

From Martin, a former Logistics Engineer at McDonald Douglas Astronautics

Victor:

By the way, I don't think I've commented on what you are doing. I think you are a very brave man. You are risking your reputation, focus by a variety of government agencies, your privacy by the press, and personal safety by a world full of terrorists and nuts. Whether your actions precipitate facts that illuminate the truth of flight 587's crash or not, you are a true patriot and I want you to know that I'm proud to help you in whatever limited way I can.

Martin
---------------------------
Response from Victor Trombettas to Martin:

Gee. Thanks Martin! Very kind words. My reputation has already been tarnished by public statements
made by my wife. I'm not sure I can recover from those! ;-)

Seriously ... thank you for your support!

Victor
March 25, 2002

From Ron Schmiedeke, a retired Quality Control Test Engineer
in Aviation, Missile, and Aerospace
According to the LA Times story today they are only checking tail sections for a plane that has had a bad flight history. They still should be checking all planes with the composition tail sections. Not just a visual exam but a live loading of the tail section with sensitive microphone attached listening technique like I previously mentioned to you before. When the composition fail they go all of the sudden and you don't fly around waiting for the failure to occur. Pretesting has been my field for years. How do you think we got into space and the moon shot that placed the men on the moon surface? Everything was pretested and evaluated prior to the assembly and launch. Also, from the video that you sent out it sounded to me like a fan compressor outage of the engine. This can happen after the plane pitch is upwards at take off because the engine front opening is unable to obtain all the air that it needs to compress. The pilot going to full throttle at this point when the nose of the plane is pointing up causes less air to enter the compressor when it is requiring more can create a turbulence that is devastating to the engines. Therefore the engine back fires causing more havoc. If this occurs in one engine the plane is thrust severely to one side causing heavy loading on the tail section this then creates an explosion as the engine when the unburnt fuel ignites. This can occur in the engine or aft of the engine during a take off. Air vortexes spinning off the wing of another heavy body plane near bye can created air turbulence which is detrimental to a jet engine with a compressor feature.
Curious Ron.

March 11, 2002

From Michael Hull

To: The Editor, US Read

The United States suffered a second 'Pearl Harbor' on September 11, 2001 and
apparently American Airlines is the focus of terrorism with two new attacks.
AA Flight 587 was destroyed on December 12, 2001, the fourth anniversary of
the conviction of Osama bin Laden's associate, Ramzi Yousef, for the original
1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

On December 22, 2001 a terrorist attempted to blow up AA Flight 63 using a
bomb in his shoe. He attempted to take the same flight the previous day on
December 21, the anniversary of the bombing of PA 103, but was denied a
boarding pass. His attempt used a method similar to that planned by Yousef
to blow up 11 U.S. airplanes over the Pacific Ocean - killing at least 4,000
people. The plot crumbled when Yousef's Manila apartment caught fire while he
was making bombs.

Prior to the downing of TWA 800 I observed a missile launched close to I95 in
Connecticut. The incident was reported to the FBI, the NTSB, the FAA, the NY
Times, Boeing, and TWA shortly after the TWA 800 downing. The peculiar lack
of interest which was shown in my report by both the FBI and the American
news media, stimulated me to investigate the TWA 800 incident further. The
results of this investigation are the subject of my website at
http://hometown.aol.com/bardonia.

While investigating the TWA 800 incident it became increasingly clear
terrorists have been striking at aircraft in US airspace for at least one
year prior to the crash of TWA 800. These attacks have continued up to the
shoe bomber incident aboard AA Flight 63. Alarmingly, attempts appear to be
ongoing in the Washington DC area to down aircraft as evidenced by this
report in the Washington Times. The report is eerily familiar to my own
experience on I95 prior to the downing of TWA 800

February 21, 2002
'Rockets' reported fired at two jetliners Tom Ramstack The Washington Times
An Alexandria woman said she saw a "flare or rocket" ascending toward a US
Airways flight landing at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport last
month, similar to a report from a Southwest Airlines pilot landing at
Baltimore-Washington International Airport Sunday. The Federal Aviation
Administration is investigating a report by the pilot of Southwest Flight 454
that he saw what looked like a model rocket pass on the left side of his
aircraft Sunday evening. The FAA says it has no reports of the rocket
sighting by the Alexandria resident, Joyce Mucci. The trade association
public relations coordinator said she observed the incident while driving
home from work Jan. 20 at sunset near Reagan Airport. "It was like a rocket,
kind of a reddish thing that came up from the river bank," Mrs. Mucci said.
"It was aimed toward the back of the jet. Maybe the pilot didn't see it."
Mrs. Mucci said she doubted it was a model rocket. "It did not look like any
model rocket I've ever seen," she said. Her son used to play with model
rockets when he was a child. "When he was a kid, we used to make model
rockets, and they don't look like that. It was right toward the back of the
jet, right behind the engine. It went at an angle like it was aimed at the
jet." She added, however, that the object did not get close enough that it
could have brought down the airplane. "It may be nothing, but it's important
for somebody to follow up on this," Mrs. Mucci said. She said the "flare or
rocket" rose from a spot down the slope of the Potomac River beyond the
jogging trail next to Reagan Airport, halfway between Memorial Bridge and the
airport. She said she called a Federal Aviation Administration telephone
number the next day. She left a message on voice mail but received no reply.
After news accounts of the incident at BWI Sunday, Mrs. Mucci called the FBI
yesterday. "The FBI guy said, 'Hold on a minute,'" Mrs. Mucci said. "Then a
woman in the background said, 'I don't want to talk to another psychic.' Then
I was put through to somebody's voice mail and I didn't leave a message." FAA
Eastern Region spokesman Jim Peters said he had no information on Mrs.
Mucci's January report. "We have no record of receiving a call from Mrs.
Mucci on or about that day," Mr. Peters said. He also said he had "no idea"
of how often other people say they have seen rockets near airplanes. FBI
spokesman Chris Murray said, "Our office is unaware of that incident."

Southwest Flight 454 was on approach 12 to 14 miles southeast of BWI at 3,000
feet at 7:10 p.m. Sunday when the pilot said he saw the rocket. The FAA
acknowledged the incident at BWI publicly for the first time Tuesday. Mr.
Peters said yesterday the agency was looking into it. Fraser Jones, spokesman
for the national office of the FAA, said reports of rockets flying toward
airplanes are rare. "We don't tally those that I'm aware of," Mr. Jones said.
"I have not heard of reports of that kind before." Local airport authorities
also said they are unaware of a "flare or rocket" near Reagan Airport in
January. "I haven't heard anything about that," said Tom Sullivan, spokesman
for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which manages Reagan and
Washington Dulles International airports. "If it was reported by our tower,
our police would have been alerted." Mrs. Mucci's report was the first time
he heard of someone seeing a projectile apparently fired at a commercial
airplane in the Washington area. Occasionally, passers-by mistakenly report
"near misses but not rockets," Mr. Sullivan said. The only similar report of
a rocket fired at a commercial airplane in the United States followed the
explosion and crash of TWA Flight 800 off the coast of New York on July 17,
1996.The National Transportation Safety Board explained the witness' reports
by saying that after the front part of the plane broke off during an
electrical fire and fuel-tank explosion, the wings and rear part of the
fuselage continued climbing at a sharp angle, creating an upward streak of
light.

I contacted Ms Mucci about this incident through a source in Washington and
she replied to me as follows:

February 26, 2002 E-mail to Michael Hull from Joyce Mucci
Dear Michael: Jack forwarded your email to me after my story was published in
the Washington Times. I called the newspaper out of frustration with the FBI
(in particular) and the FAA. Needless to say, I do not have to tell you that
I "saw what I saw". However, I am convinced that unless you are a paid
informant, pilot, law enforcement officer or lawyer, the FBI and the FAA have
no use for your information. So much for the public relations outreach by the
administration. The area that I witnessed the "rocket, flare or whatever" is
inaccessible by car. Additionally, if someone was down there with a missile
no one from the bike path or the road would see them. The rocket was on a
trajectory out and up toward the aircraft (just aft of the right engine). It
seems complete nonsense to believe that it was a kid's rocket. Someone fired
something at the jet while on final approach to Reagan. It also interesting
to note that the area from where the rocket came is between the Memorial
Bridge and the 14th Street bridge. It would be difficult to fire a missile on
planes approaching from the south because on the east side of the Potomac is
Bolling Airforce Base and on the west is Old Town Alexandria. Keep up the
good work. By the way, if my plane is shot down coming out of the Reagan,
tell everyone it was not a center fuel tank explosion.

So, Victor, keep up your critical investigative work on US Read. The public
deserves to know just how big the terrorism problem is that we have on our
hands.

Sincerely Michael Hull

March 6, 2002

From Glen: work history includes NASA in Tape Recording and Telemetry Systems Engineering
Victor, if you can find the time I suggest you and your usread.com site visitors read Michael Crighton's book "AIRFRAME". Crighton's book came out about a year after TWA FL 800 disintegrated over the Atlantic with all 230 souls on board lost. MC writes like he was living in the FDR lab at the NTSB while the NTSB was processing --or should I say mis-processing ---the FL 800 FDR tape. At one point MC reveals what a lot us believe, i.e. the aviation industry really doesn't want the FDR to work. I agree and point out the British AAIB (their NTSB) asked for 60 seconds of battery backup, when aircraft 115V 400 Hz engine power is lost for FDRs and CVRs after Pan Am 103. But the US FAA and NTSB remain out-to-lunch on this improvement. Glen, Littleton, CO.

March 5, 2002

From Eric, An Active American Airlines Pilot

I haven't looked at all the information your website offers, and I
haven't seen the timeline.

I admire you for taking the initiative to fathom what happened to Flight
587. It truly was a tragedy and the one thing we pilots rue for sure, is
an aircraft coming apart.

An uncontrollable aircraft is the one emergency no one can train for.

Eric


March 1, 2002

From Bob Durant, Navy Pilot, Commercial Airline Captain, and Flight Ops Management

Vic,

Your timeline is brilliant! The NTSB has already given bits and pieces to
the press, and I think will continue to do so. Now the press, to the extent
it is interested, has a timeline bringing all the data into a logical, easy
to read focus. Will the NTSB react to your timeline? No. Will mainstream
journalism use it as a benchmark to judge future NTSB pronouncements?
Remote, but possible.

March 1, 2002

From William Sherriff, Retired from American Airlines as Captain and now an Aviation Safety Consultant:

As we know TWA 800 was not brought down by a missile! AA 587 was also not
brought down by a bomb!

Check your time line at 16:04.5. "The NTSB in their release say FDR shows
lateral acceleration increases to 0.8g yaw rate of 10 deg/sec, left bank
through
25 deg. with pilot applying right wheel, pitch down to -30"! 12.5 seconds
later the crash.

This is the story of a classic 'Dutch roll'. The instantaneous yaw motion as
a result of the 0.8g 200 mph tangential, rotating vortices, in the CORE of the
vortex from the 747, striking the vertical fin broadside and turning the full
area of the fin into a massive control surface, induced an immediate 'Dutch
roll'. At the same time twisting off both engines due to the high inertia of
their mass.

We did not need a bomb to cause this accident only physics!
--------------------------------------------------
Response from U.S.Read to William Sherriff:

Hello Captain.

Congratulations, Sir, on what appears to have been a distinguished career.

There are countless aviators, and non-aviators who to this day believe the
90+ (I think the number is higher?) witnesses who say they saw a contrail
rise from the horizon and terminate in the explosion of TWA 800. I
believe there are also respectable people still at NTSB, and at least one
former Board member I know of, who do not believe the initiating event on
800 was the fuel tank explosion. There is an increasing number of aviators, and
non-aviators who when presented with the facts of the timeline of 587 ...
begin to consider other possibilities. And when weighed with witness
statements, raise very serious questions.

I am open-minded. I got involved because I saw two very disturbing
indicators from the NTSB on the day of the crash indicating a bias on their
part. An obvious disregard for witnesses, and a bias towards an accident.
All I was looking for that day was a "we will look into this" response. No
... that afternoon they said "ALL Indications (including the inflight
explosion accounts?!) pointed to an accident".

Sir ... the max power and losing control comments (including the "losing
control" comment at 16:03 on the tower tape, which *is* on the tape and
other people and computer experts have picked up) all came before 16:04.5.
Came before the pilots (or some malfunction?) had deflected the rudder five
times (mind you, the NTSB said earlier the rudder had been deflected three
times ... now it's five). The Math does not yet support the wake turbulence
theory. When we have that data I will accept it. There are MANY aviators
who don't buy into the SIGNIFICANT role NTSB and others are ascribing to
wake turbulence in the crash, even if it did cross 587's path.

George Black Jr. made a misleading statement AFTER the NTSB had done a
prelim. sync of the CVR and FDR on Nov. 15 & 16 (in fact, they had even
synched the tower noises to the CVR to the moment the pilots had lost control
... which is exactly what my timeline shows) and stated the max power and
losing control comments came AFTER the tail was gone!? Whether he was
terribly wrong, or terribly deceptive is not for me to figure out. I will
say this ... his statements have had a profound effect on public opinion as
to the cause of the crash. Including among aviators.

All I'm doing is setting the facts straight. Pretty pathetic isn't it?
That an non-aviator can see serious discrepancies in the NTSB's public
statements.

I'm also making sure dozens of respectable U.S. citizens and fine New
Yorkers are not treated like delusional idiots for saying they saw pre-tail
separation fires, explosions, smoke, etc. Mind you ... based on witness
statements ... and the Coast Guard Pictures of the rudder that my humble web
site was first to post .... indicate the rudder broke apart and separated
(maybe just partly) several seconds before the vertical stabilizer. The
major (comatose) media and the NTSB have not talked about this.

You said something very disturbing, "We did not need a bomb to cause this accident only physics!" Is that when we start looking for a bomb? When we "need" it? Isn't the evidence ALL taken together and CORRECTLY disseminated by the lead agency in charge, the way to go? If physics alone can explain this crash ... why did the pilot go to max power and just 2 seconds later state they were losing control all BEFORE the rudder went bad at 16:04.5?
Victor Trombettas

Previous Letters from 1/15/02 - 2/27/02


Submit your email to the Editor. Please provide your full name, city, and state. Thanks for your comments!