parris_k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On 31 Jan, 16:03, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>> On 31 Jan, 15:44, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>> On 31 Jan, 14:44, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 14:27, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 13:24, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> B1ackwater wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' )" <tributyltinpa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23434850-details/Flight+to...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> #begin quote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The co-pilot of a Heathrow-bound plane was dragged kicking
and screaming
>>>>>>>>>>>> >from the cockpit after suffering a mental breakdown while in
control of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the flight.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He began yelling and "invoking God" as the Air Canada 767
flew at 37,000
>>>>>>>>>>>>> feet over the Atlantic. He was held down by other crew
members and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> passenger, a member of the Canadian armed forces.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The co-pilot then had restraints fastened to his wrists and
ankles and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was handcuffed to a seat. The flight from Toronto made an
emergency
>>>>>>>>>>>>> landing in Shannon and the co-pilot, who had been crying and
screaming
>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to witnesses, was taken off the plane.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was taken by ambulance to a psychiatric ward where he is
being
>>>>>>>>>>>>> treated for a suspected nervous breakdown.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 146 passengers on the overnight flight continued their
journey and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> got to Heathrow eight hours behind schedule after the drama
on Monday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Passenger Sean Finucane told of his shock as he witnessed
the co-pilot
>>>>>>>>>>>>> being carried out of the cockpit in restraints.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He said today: "He was very, very distraught. He was yelling
loudly at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> times. When they tried to put his shoes on later he swore
and he
>>>>>>>>>>>>> threatened people. His voice was clear so he didn't sound
drunk or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything. He was swearing and was very distressed."
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr Finucane, from Lanca****re, told how the pilot kept
shouting: "I need
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to talk to you God."
>>>>>>>>>>>> RADical man ...
>>>>>>>>>>>> But then I guess any high-pressure profession suffers
>>>>>>>>>>>> from a dispro****tionate number of mental breakdowns.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just hope it doesn't happen to your doctor when he's
>>>>>>>>>>>> transplanting a kidney or something :-)
>>>>>>>>>>> Al Qaeda put some LSD in his coffee.
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah but it sounds startlingly like that Air Egypt plane that
>>>>>>>>>> was piloted into the sea after leaving the US. Pilot was
>>>>>>>>>> also raving.
>>>>>>>>> Your proof for this being?
>>>>>>>> Its a matter of record.
>>>>>>> No, it's a matter of record that people have SAID he was barking.
>>>>>>> It being named as the cause of the crash (or even being a fact)
isn't.
>>>>>>> Not by a long stretch:
>>>>>>> http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/aab0201.htm
>>>>>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200111/langewiesche
>>>>>>> An opinion piece is "proof"?
>>>>>> Wow. You're like the guy speeding through the neighborhood
>>>>>> who runs down a cat and then claims the cat committed suicide.
>>>>>> Wait here, we'll try to find its note.
>>>>> That's yuor answer to the question "an opinion piece is proof?" ?
>>>>>>>> I am curious to know why you asked?
>>>>>>> I'm just a stickler for accuracy..
>>>>>> If you have a rebuttal of the CVR transcript as contained in
>>>>>> the item above, lets have it.
>>>>> It's the interpretation of teh CVR rather than what is on it that is
>>>>> interesting.
>>>>> But as long as you recognise you have no proof, only interpretation
of
>>>>> evidence...
>>>> You are just babbling here.
>>> Not at all. I'm trying to show you the difference between proof and
>>> evidence.
>>> You claimed you had proof.
>>>> Offer some factual rebuttal
>>>> of the CVR and flight recorders technical data that
>>>> shows that you have any vestiges of credibility on this
>>>> topic.
>>> I'm not the one claiming that it has been "proven" that the co-pilot
>>> was "raving" by citing an opinion piece.
>>> I have already referred you to the _factual_ re****t on the crash.
>> Oh grow up.
>
> Temper temper. May I suggest you consult a dictionary for a definition
> of "raving", for a start.
> THe first officer was CLEARLY not "raving" accoring to any of the
> primary, secondary or tertiary definitions in the dictionary.
>
>
>> Here's the same thing from atsb
>
> NTSB.
>
>> - your link which Langewiesche
>> wrote about:
>>
>> The National Trans****tation Safety Board determines that the probable
>> cause of the EgyptAir flight 990 accident is the airplane's departure
>> from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean
>> as a result of the relief first officer's flight control inputs. The
>> reason for the relief first officer's actions was not determined.
>
> I agree. That's hardly the proof you claim it is (i.e. that the pilot
> was "raving")
>
>> Except that he was the one that pushed the craft into a steep dive,
>> and switched off the gas while shouting "I rely on God, I rely on
>> God"
>
> Incorrect.
>
>
>> and failed to help the desperate first officer who tried to pull the
plane up.
>
> The captain was the one trying to "pull the plane up". The relief
> first officer was the one who was apparently trying to crash the
> aircraft.
>
>> Moron.
>
> Suits you better than "Wolfie",or is it an insult you decide to throw
> out because you simply can't admit you're wrong?
>
> Even if we accept the Egypt air relief first officer was, in fact,
> insane, it DOESN'T sound a great deal like the incident under
> discussion because:
>
> 1) the Air Canada chap didn't try to crash the plane
> 2) The EgyptAir chap wasn't raving. In fact, he was rather calm and
> collected on the CVR.
>
>
You obviously don't read too well.
--
Wolfie
|
