--- In sr111@y..., stuart_allsop <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Mark and Barbara,
>
> I wanted to comment that I'm not at all convinced that this person
is
> who he claims to be, or has the information that he claims to
have. I
> tried to post these same sentiments here right after "beanspillers"
> first post, but for some reason that only Yahoo knows, the post
never
> made it.
>
> The way I see it, beanspillers post tells us essentially nothing
that
> we didn't know already, and is wrong on several technical points.
>
> For example, he claims that by law wiring must be installed in
> conduit. While this is true of houses, it is NOT true of
aircraft.
> Wiring is run in the open spaces of the airframe itself, not in
> conduit. There is no such requirement as he claims "all of this
> wiring was laid bare in the space above the cabin, instead of in
> conduit as required by law.". Not true.
>
> He also says "all the A/V equipment was stored in Galley 8 just
ahead
> of the leading edge of the port wing", but that is NOT where the
IFEN
> was installed! It was in the overhead of the first class cabin,
just
> behind the cockpit bulkhead, in the vicinty of doors 1L and 1R. It
> was nowhere near the "leading edge of the front wing". That is
more
> or less where the main power bay is, but NOT where the Audio/Video
> (ie, then IFEN), was installed.
>
> Next, he says "The wiring exited the cabin throught the ceiling,
and
> ran along the top of the cabin bulkhead, and down into the first
class
> secxtion and to the LCD screens in the back of the headrests in the
> first class section. " As far as I know (and I'm not 100% certain
on
> this), but the LCD screens were NOT installed in the head rests,
but
> rather mounted on stalks that folded up into the seat frame. If
you
> think about it, it isn;t much use to have the creen in the head
rest
> of the seat in front of you in first class: If the person in the
seat
> in front of you reclines their seat, the LCD screen is now facing
the
> floor, where you cannot see it. So I'm pretty sure that
beanspiller
> is wrong on this point too.
>
> Finally, he says: "The temperature in the cockpit was approximately
> 3000 degrees farenheight. It was so hot, that kevlar was burnt.
> Everyone from the cockpit, back to the middle of first class were
> unconcious upon impact." There is no way of knowing that for sure,
> and the forensic evidence that was mentioned indicates that this is
> probably not true. While localized temperatures in the region of
> electrical arcing may well have reached temperatures of 3000
degrees,
> the interior of the cockpit and cabin could not have. At that
> temperature, even aluminium vaporizes, and since the recovery
effort
> came up with many pieces of aluminium, there could not have been
such
> high temperatures. Also recall that the sheepskin seatcovers from
the
> cockpit were recovered, basically in tact, but with molten plastic
on
> them. Since they were in tact, it is impossible that the
temperature
> in the cockpit was anything close to 3000 degrees. Not even 300.
>
> I'm sorry, but I don't buy this at all. It seems very suspect.
The
> kindest thing I can say for this person is that maybe they were
leaked
> some information, but got it totally confused and didn't understand
> it, and garbled it even more in that post.
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
> --- In sr111@y..., "markfetherolf" <fetherolf@y...> wrote:
> > --- In sr111@y..., "beanspiller_ca" <rburnell@a...> wrote:
> > > Ok here goes. The cause of the crash has been identified, but
will
> > > not be released for some time. How do I know this..?? I have a
> > friend
> > > who was involved in the aircraft reconstruction in Shearwater.
He
> > has
> > > informed me, that the cause was wiring, but it was not the
kapton
> > > wiring. It was the wiring for the inflight entertainment
system.
> It
> > > seems that all the A/V equipment was stored in Galley 8 just
ahead
> > of
> > > the leading edge of the port wing. The wiring exited the cabin
> > > throught the ceiling, and ran along the top of the cabin
bulkhead,
> > > and down into the first class secxtion and to the LCD screens
in
> > the
> > > back of the headrests in the first class section. The
> investigators
> > > discovered that all of this wiring was laid bare in the space
> above
> > > the cabin, instead of in conduit as required by law. This
explains
> > > why the flight data and cockpit voice recorders stopped working
6
> > and
> > > a half minutes before impact. The aircraft hit the water
inverted,
> > > and on an approximate angle of 79 degrees. The temperature in
the
> > > cockpit was approximately 3000 degrees farenheight. It was so
hot,
> > > that kevlar was burnt. Everyone from the cockpit, back to the
> > middle
> > > of first class were unconcious upon impact. It is not known if
or
> > > when this will be released. It still has to be accepted by the
> > CTSB.
> > > I have also seen pictures of some of the debris. I was shown a
pic
> > of
> > > a piece of metal that was very blued and heat distorted. It was
> > very
> > > obvious that this piece of metal had been exposed to a very
high
> > heat
> > > to look like this. When I asked where it was from, I was told
it
> > was
> > > part of the door frame from the front passenger door behind the
> > > cockpit. I hope this helps some people. I'm putting my neck on
the
> > > line printing this, but you have a right to know.
> > >
> > > Beanspiller_ca
> >
> > Please see continued discussion regarding this at
> > http://swissair111.org and I want to praise the poster for coming
> > forward with this information and invite him to the new sr111
site.
> > Barbara

Stuart, With all due respect to your pov I want to point out that
Beanspiller has clearly stated that he is not in anyway involved in
aviation nor an expert. As he has said, he received this information
from a friend who was involved in the investigation. Mark has spoken
to this person who was kind enough to explain how he came by this
information and he was convinced that this man was telling the truth.

Also I wondered if you had seen the recent article in the Swiss
paper? As I stated on the other swissair111 site, it is a reputable
paper and they claim to be quoting from sources that have read the
draft report. Furthermore, how surprised can any of us be that the
IFEN would be named as a suspect in the crash of sr111 given all the
information we have read about the way it was installed on that
aircraft? Remember the wiring to it was found to be burnt following
the tragedy.

The paper also mentions that the pilots' actions (following the
lenghty swissair checklist)also contributed to the crash. We already
know that is true because one of the TSB's updates regarding sr111
states that they are very concerned that pilots aren't responding
quickly enough to smoke/odor in the cockpit situations and they
recommend getting the aircraft down as soon as possible.

Barbara