Can we trust Air Crash Investigators ?
The preliminary report for the Germanwings flight 9525 incident was released on May 6th 2015. We have based this article on analysis of this incident mainly by the questions raised and conclusions drawn are applicable in a wider sense to all of the more recent incidents we have reported on, and possibly many more historical incidents that we have not had time to investigate as yet. The point here is to try to expose serious inconsistencies in the official line on this and others similar events so as to raise highlight the possibility that our investigatory bodies, at least in Europe, may well be involved in trying to cover up incidents that are related directly to climate engineering insofar as they are the result of catastrophic failures in Climate Engineering dispersal systems fitted to the aircraft involved.
To question a report produced by the investigative bodies of the aviation industry and one which has been prepared with the cooperation, contribution and supervision of many people is bold to say the least, but nonetheless we feel we have grounds to. We also feel it is essential to try to investigate options other than the official line to explore if our theory that this flight was indeed the victim of yet another catastrophic failure of pressurised CE systems fitted to this, and other Airbus A320 series aircraft, along with Boeing 737s.
Despite the seeming solidity of the report and investigation as a whole, we feel there are some glaring problems with the report and official line on this incident. The fact that the report is comprehensive does not mean it is factual. If one has to lie, make it a good one.
Unlike similar incidents such as Las Vegas/British Airways and the more recent Instanbul/Pegasus incidents, we have much less to go on here and what we do have is tenuous and unconfirmed so we have to admit our case is weak, but significant all the same.
All the of the recent incidents we have noted as being suspicious have involved reports of loud bangs or noises. In the case of the Germanwings 9525 reports from witnesses on the ground stated – several loud noises were heard – loud bangs – banging The notes below are from the official report and show that the aicraft started its decent at approximately 11.30 local time. metal like noises. All these reports were described as happening well before the aircraft crashed. One such report states:
The owner of a camp site in the French Alps near the scene of the crash says he heard a series of loud noises coming from the air before the Germanwings A320 Airbus crashed. Pierre Polizzi told AP the noise began at 11:30 local time.
“There are often fighter jets flying over, so I thought it sounded just like that. I looked outside but I couldn’t see any fighter planes.”
“The noise I heard was long – like 8 seconds – as if the plane was going more slowly than a military plane speed. There was another long noise about 30 seconds later.”
This was not mentioned again, either in the mainstream media or the official report. Why not?
An excerpt from the official report shows that the doomed aircraft started its decent at 09.30GMT or 11.30 local time
At 9 h 30 min 53 (point), the selected altitude on the FCU changed in one second
from 38,000 ft to 100 ft(2). One second later, the autopilot changed to ‘‘OPEN DES’’(3)
mode and autothrust changed to ‘‘THR IDLE’’ mode. The aeroplane started to descend
and both engines’ rpm decreased.
At 9 h 33 min 12 (point), the speed management changed from ‘‘managed’’ mode
to ‘‘selected’’(4) mode. A second later, the selected target speed became 308 kt while
the aeroplane’s speed was 273 kt. The aeroplane’s speed started to increase along
with the aeroplane’s descent rate, which subsequently varied between 1,700 ft/min
and 5,000 ft/min, then was on average about 3,500 ft/min.
Interestingly slightly further on it states:
the autopilot and autothrust remained engaged;
So we have established here that loud noises were heard at the point when the aircraft was seen to begin its decent.
Another suicidal pilot?
The official story seems to have followed the newspaper reports almost to the letter. That in itself should ring alarm bells because the media story was rushed out almost immediately, before any real evidence had emerged. This seems to be the norm now, that our mainstream media decide almost immediately what has happened, and the Air Crash Investigators then set about trying to confirm it in an official way. Surely this is the wrong way to do things. Yet another suicidal pilot? This story was also used in the disappeared Flight MH370, which supposedly flew off into the south Pacific Ocean never to be seen again. The interesting point about that story was that it is totally impossible to lose a plane nowadays., Inmarsat have global tracking systems that track every aircraft in the sky, anywhere on the globe, even if they are not broadcasting flight data via the normal Mode-S and ADS-B systems. Even before we consider that though we must, once again ask ourselves if a pilot would really bother flying off into the sunset if he were trying to commit suicide, or whether the authorities concocted the story so as to try to make the wreckage ‘un-findable’. If local police or investigators find the wreckage of an aircraft loaded with chemicals and dispersal systems it would reveal not only the true nature of the crash, but also prove conclusively that these programs exists and on a global level. Obviously they can’t allow that to happen so no expense is spared to ensure everybody is put off the real scent with elaborate concoctions.
Interestingly a search for suicidal pilot reveals this story has been used several times previously to these events. The latter part of that article claims the host country in every case, disagreed with the investigators version of events, mostly blaming mechanical failure. This raises very serious concerns about the validity of the investigators and their reports obviously, and add some wight to our claim that we simply cannot trust what we are told about all these incidents.
Leaving aside the evidence, we feel the overall story simply does not make sense. Why would a pilot commit suicide mid flight? Even if a pilot were, for some bizarre reason, to decide to do so one would expect it to be more spectacular or meaningful, but none of these incidents have any sign of intent whatsoever. In this case the aircraft simply slowly descended following reported loud bangs. It was mid flight and in the middle of nowhere. This is not what one would expect an aircraft piloted by a suicidal pilot to do. It is however, what one would expect from an aircraft that had suffered a breach of the fuselage and decompressed. Again we state that we are in a difficult position as we are not aviation experts but this is just basic logic, intuition and common sense here.
All of this speculation could be resolved if we were to be allowed to listen to the flight recorders record of events. Sure we have had transcripts but anyone can write any old nonsense and publish it.
Where is the evidence?
We are currently exploring the possibility of legally forcing authorities to release publicly or privately, the recordings, so we, or relatives of the victims, can verify exactly what happened. We are pretty sure what we will not hear is a pilot banging on the door of the cockpit.