re: Plane Crash Near Mar-a-Lago

quote:

---

The other factor is at altitude the thinner air means aerodynamic stall speed rises. But aircraft also have a speed limit (contrary to some claims ITT). If you exceed the max mach number, you cannot control the aircraft. If you stall it you cannot control it. When those two speeds get too close you can't do anything. Recovering from the stall requires exceeding the mach number. Slowing down to get back to controlability aerodynamically stalls the aircraft. Not something that usually happes at 32,000 for a Lear60, but accumulating ice on the wings or tail raises the stall speed..

---

Honestly asking as I have no idea, does all this happen in a manner of seconds? Seems like they went from asking to ascend, to a 10,000ft / min descent. I understand a stall but on an aircraft like that is that in a manner of 5-10 seconds at most?

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

> 11 prior U.S. Learjet 60 accidents
> 6 on landing. 2 on approach. 1 on takeoff. 2 while taxiing.
> 0 en route

> worldwide: 3 prior fatal Learjet 60 crashes on record:
1. Brazil — 2022, overran the runway.
2. South Carolina — 2008, overran the runway on rejected takeoff.
3. Venezuela — 2013 struck terrain on landing approach.

> 0 fatal crashes from high altitude
> 0 crashes during cruising phase of flight

> oct 23 — NORAD confirms air defenses around Mar-a-Lago
> nov 1 — Bahamas-bound Learjet 60 goes into a dive from ~35,000 ft over South Florida
> closest tracked point to Mar-a-Lago — 3.9 miles away, still at ~21,000 ft
> hits the ground 5.7 miles from the estate

> ~27,000 ft gone in 65 seconds
> 13,000 of those feet gone in 20 seconds
> average over that stretch — 39,000 ft/min
> the tracker's vertical-speed readout tops out at 32,640

> closest same-model case I found was in 2023
> Learjet 60 at 41,000 ft near thunderstorms. crew loses pitch and roll control
> captain estimates 10,000 ft/min down, recovers at 38,500 ft. everyone lives

> the 3 previous fatal Learjet 60 crashes I could find worldwide killed 7 people combined
> this one killed 9

> first, most deadly, and only high-altitude Learjet crash in 33 years of service, within 4 miles of brand new short range air defense at Mar-a-Lago

bonus fact:

> In October 1980, a Learjet 25 pitched up and stalled at 45,000 ft over Missouri. Both engines flamed out. The jet began responding to the pilots again around 32,000 ft. They restarted the engines between 24,000 and 28,000 ft and landed in Wichita LINK

---

This seemed pretty wild, so I checked with Grok to see if all of this was true:

quote:

---

Statistical anomaly highlighted: The post correctly points out that in 33 years of Learjet 60 service, all prior fatal crashes worldwide occurred during takeoff, landing, or approach phases with none en route at cruise altitude; this incident killed 9, exceeding the combined total from the previous three fatal cases.
Flight data matches reports: The aircraft (N722BD) descended from ~35,000 ft with extreme rates (10,000–30,000+ ft/min) after pilots reported icing, moderate turbulence, precipitation, and requested a climb; ATC audio captured a mayday and overspeed condition before impact near Greenacres, FL.
Location coincidence noted: The crash site was roughly 6 miles from Mar-a-Lago shortly after NORAD air defense confirmation nearby, prompting the poster's call for skepticism of anomalies without requiring a conspiracy theory, while NTSB/FAA investigation continues.

---

No wonder this thread brought so many trolls to the mat so quickly.

Hard to say from a single frame. Could easily be compression artifact type shite. Pretty much the same reason why I disregard the posts claiming that the wings appear to have passed through power lines without downing them. There's just not enough to say for sure. Only three frames total.

quote:

---

NEW: Witnesses say it sounded like a missile.

---

This is why witnesses are stupid. How many people have EVER heard a missle before, much less be able to distinguish how one sounds?

Aviation witnesses almost always "looked up and saw a fireball!" and "hear the engine sputtering" (on turbine aircraft) almost every time. Every. dam. time.

Saying it is "stupid" doesn't make it any less true.

This guy put together a great analysis on it.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

More detail in the thread.

There is nothing unusual about this to me. It's a plane crash, and they unfortunately happen all too often. Now, of course, we have clear dashcam footage of the plane, and ATC audio of the pilot explaining conditions they were flying through.

Everything is not a conspiracy. And this plane being absolutely pulverized on impact and leaving virtually no debris to be found, is exactly the sort of event I've been explaining to people for 25 years since the plane that went down in Shanksville also left basically nothing to be found. People have been saying ever since then that it wasn't a plane, but when a plane nosedives at that kind of speed, there isn't going to be anything left. It has happened in numerous other instances that I know of.

quote:

---

There is nothing unusual about this to me.

---

Same for me.

This plane flew right into the core of a storm whose tops were spiking at about 47,000 feet. The severe updraft, combined with the turbulence and icing, brought this plane down like a rock. This is why they teach you to fly around weather and not into it. You are taking your life into your own hands in situations like this one.

I hate to be that guy, but now days with AI, I question everything. Can an person even talk coherently while moving that fast? Seems like they’d pass out moving that fast.