Crash of US 1549 flight in Hudson river - Fake or Real ?

[Surcouf_Revival]

On January, 15, 2009, US 1549 flight allegedly ditched in the Hudson river. Throughout original discussions, several 911movement members, including our prestigious Reality_Shack (and now Cluesforum) board members, have always been doubtful about the event :

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 9#p1141299

On the second anniversary, where do we stand on this issue ? Who wants here to debunk another hoax ?

[simonshack]

Surcouf mon vieux,

Real or fake - it certainly served as a "reminder" of 9/11 to everyone in the world. That's enough of a fact - as far as I'm concerned.

[simonshack]

Come to think of it - it must have been a French commercial for their "fantastique avions" Airbus !

From Wicked Pedia:

All 155 occupants safely evacuated the airliner, which was still virtually intact though partially submerged and slowly sinking, and were quickly rescued by nearby watercraft. The entire crew of Flight 1549 was later awarded the Master's Medal of the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators. The award citation read, "This emergency ditching and evacuation, with the loss of no lives, is a heroic and unique aviation achievement." It has been described as "the most successful ditching in aviation history."

Here's a different angle of the ditched, floating plane and its "155" lucky occupants :

Compare it to this... (similar positions of people at left - in spite of wildly different camera angle)

Or this...

Or this...(all people at right - left wing of plane - in same position as above, in spite of different timeline & camera angle)


I am able to count maximum 55 people on the wings...are the other 100 passengers patiently waiting inside?

By now, the fairytale has been cornered by the evil Easter Bunnies !


( ... )

[Surcouf_Revival]

by simonshack » January 16th, 2011, 1:53 am

I am able to count maximum 55 people on the wings...are the other 100 passengers patiently waiting inside?

by fbenario » January 16th, 2010, 2:59 pm

You gotta wonder what incentives were given to these dozens and dozens of people to act as 'survivors'. Money? The opportunity to be part of some fake "terror-preventing" scenario? It boggles the mind.

AND TOTALLY PISSES ME OFF.

Shall we understand that the passengers were not as many as we are said ?

[simonshack]

Shall we understand that the passengers were not as many as we are said ?

Surcouf, mon vieux...

Are you back here only to ask questions or to provide some answers?
This is not an information board. If you are passionate about this miraculous Flight 1549 - let us know what you think about it.

D'accord, mon cher?


(For everyone's information - just to let you know what sort of relations we're talking about here - and since the problem of Internet anonimity is such a big issue for some: I've invited Surcouf to my home in Rome - twice. The first time, with all his nice family - five kids and wife).
Yes - I have a big ol' house with lots of guest space!

[fbenario]

Shall we understand that the passengers were not as many as we are said ?

If you've got any believable evidence that there were any passengers at all (or a plane) involved, please post it. It would be very much appreciated.

[Surcouf_Revival]

by fbenario » January 18th, 2011, 3:30 am
If you've got any believable evidence that there were any passengers at all (or a plane) involved, please post it. It would be very much appreciated.

Hello gentlemen,

sorry for some delay in answering but I need to have access to a third party computer as my original Surcouf ID and the related IP address seems to have been banned from the forum for unclear reasons. Without accusing too fast some obscure NSA manipulators, maybe moderators of Cluesforum could provide a more simple explanation to that.
In the meantime going back to the subject, yes, there has been some preliminary evidence about the plane ditching. I have enclosed below a few pictures taken live from the deck of the Intrepid museum.



View of Union City / New Jersey from the Intrepid aircraft carrier (museum) flight deck across the Hudson River



From the witness testimony, witness that I know personnally (Mr Nicolas Mxx, living East Hudson Ave, Englewwod, NJ, available for interview), he was visiting the museum on the aircraft carrier flight deck when the ditching occured. He was able to take several pictures (that the four shots here below are a part of) before being asked by security personnel of the museum to leave the deck. He specifically mentioned that there was a significant drift of the plane southward during the rescue.














Can we find any trace of alteration in those pictures ?

[brianv]

No, but they are taken from the exact same position that we've seen previously in other footage and stills! Strange that!

[simonshack]

OMG.

Just compare these 2 pictures. And think.

[Mercurial]

Gobsmacked! It took me a couple of minutes to notice which direction the dinghies were headed. Unbelievable

[antipodean]

Maybe they went back to retrieve their hand luggage.

[Surcouf_Revival]

by Mercurial » January 21st, 2011, 3:07 am
Gobsmacked! It took me a couple of minutes to notice which direction the dinghies were headed. Unbelievable

Is it so unbelievable ? I am not an image expert nor pretend to be one. But what do I see from those two pictures ?



From the first one (where the large white catamaran coming from behind is heading to the crash scene), we can see indeed two dinghies. The left dinghy seems clearly to attempt to be rescued by the large NY WATERWAY boat with the US flag, rescuees in the dhingy looking for help from people situated on the front footbridge of the large boat.
The right dhingly, right next to the A320 cockpit and front left door, is not necessary heading back for those people "to retrieve their hand luggage " but most probably heading to the other shuttle boat (smaller boat perpendicular to the fuselage).



From the second picture and position from the catamaran, we can infer it was taken a short time after.


Position of the smaller shuttle is now parallel to the NY WATERWAY shuttle after a possible backwards manoeuver. Because both the left wing and southward drift, it would make sense to perform such a manoeuver before leaving the zone. The white turbulences at the rear of the boat would also indicate a backwards propulsion. The dinghy, hidden by the boat, is maybe dragged away.
I was not there but it would make some sense to me looking at those pictures, at least as much as your views.
Anything I missed ?
Going back to the point, any trace of alteration in those pictures ?

[brianv]

I dont know what's happening with boats coming and going but the rightmost boat seems to have been refitted all before the cat has travelled 20 ft it seems!

[D.Duck]

Surcouf,

I dont see anything wrong in your pictures.

So what happened, well I wasn't there so I dont know but from what I can tell the pictures are real.


Best
D.Duck

[simonshack]

I dont know what's happening with boats coming and going but the rightmost boat seems to have been refitted all before the cat has travelled 20 ft it seems!

Brian,
Good point - it's a rather puzzling affair; the catamaran appears to have traveled a fairly short distance between the two shots. My green dots below are to show just how much the background - in the second shot - has 'drifted' in relation to the foreground. It seems implausible that the southward current would explain such a dramatic perspective change in such a short, apparent timelapse.

Hence, I'd suggest Surcouf to submit two questions to photographer NIcholas:

1 - Approximately what timelapse is there between the two pictures?
2 - Was Nicholas running northwards as he was shooting on the Intrepid aircraft carrier - or was he stationary?


The mysterious Mr Nicolas Mxx should be happy to mix up a couple of answers, non?