Affirmed, it's 22.8-year-old.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chi Shing YU [QMD]" <csyu@hkpc.org>
To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU>
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: CHINA AIRWAYS CRASH - 5/26/02
> Just one correction, the plane is 23 years old (not 13), produced in 1979.
>
> C.S.
>
>
> >>> "Michael A. Burris" <yul@prodigy.net> 05/27/02 09:06pm >>>
> AIRLINE / MICHAEL:
>
> We might add for #7, a course sudden change...which could have been to =
> avoid
> another missile or a/c, yet I assume that if it were another a/c, they
> would have gotten the warning siren. Somewhere I recall reading that it
> broke into four pieces. A 13 year old plane isn't that old that it should
=
> it
> fail like that. assuming its seen every type of weather imaginable in
> that space of time. The disaster happened 20-30 minutes in flight at
> 35K. Might it have meant an aggressive climb-out to that altitude ---
> maybe approaching stall warning? Lesson's learned from the AA suggest
> that wake turbulence might sever the tail, but not slice the a/c into
> four pieces at that height? And as for the fuel tank...wouldn't they
> have upgraded their a/c since TWA 800? Well, CI has a poor safety
> record. Devilment seems to be my leading theory...
>
> --Mike Burris
> Cambridge, Mass
>
>
>
> >On Sunday, May 26, 2002, at 12:54 PM, Michael A. Burris wrote:
> >> Here is a recent story. It does seem very odd that an aircraft should
> >> fail in this way. --- Mike Burris
> >
> >Well, there are the usual speculations:
> >
> >1. Bomb on board.
> >2. Fuel tank explosion, like TWA 800.
> >3. Shot down by Chinese missile.
> >4. Shot down by Taiwanese missile ("Oops!")
> >5. Mid-air with a previously undisclosed small a/c.
> >6. Freak weather (gust overpressure) caused structural failure
> >7. ???
--
B. RDS. from Benjamin PO Yu (ICQ#7860443)
" I know that I shall meet my fate,
somewhere among the clouds above.. "
From " An Irish Airman Foresees His Death "
by William Butler Yeats