@@mg123rules They were descending. The air flow would have pushed the plane down had they turned right or left. If they were climbing they could have made it. In the official report, the co-pilot was to blame as he thought they had cleared the mountain pass.
@@mg123rules Yes they had distance but they also had a fully loaded plane, that was preparing to land. If the plane had more fuel and less passengers the pilots could have made it, but weight is always factored in when pilots are landing or taking off. They were not flying very far so they would have less fuel to make a last ditch effort to climb above the ridge. Even if by some act of god they had made it over the ridge, they would have had less fuel to land as it would have taken a significant amount to climb with all the weight they were carrying. They would have ran out of fuel and crashed.
What is the point of this film, it only tells us what we already know. In addition, it is amateurishly made with bad sound and a lot of clips from other films and documentaries. Do you have permission to steal material from other productions?
First of all, why watch a documentary on something you have knowledge about? And why watch one specifically that was made by a young teenager? Also... this was my first time making a 'documentary'
Tha narater of this document makes eronious mistakes. At 8 minutes into the piece, I have detcted three errors. I hit the stop button. I am not downplaying this maritime disaster, I am just telling you, the vocal author is uneducated on such matters. This piece is YuTube trash.
I mean it's nothing to be proud about lol. You're aren't at anymore of an advantage than those who have flown on any aeroplane 😅 if anything surely you're more at a disadvantage. Except the ones that crashed of course.
Have you ever been a passenger in an automobile? The chances of dying in a car crash are 1 in 5000. The Chances of dying in an airplane crash are 1 in 11 Million.
If you would like the livery for this aircraft, here: forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/35828-f27-600-fuerza-aerea-argentina-texture/&tab=comments Enjoy!
The cost factor and the question of technical problems is a very poor lie: You realize. They wanted at first pay around 350 Mio. USD for the concrete sarkophagus. For comparison The Kursk was raised for the costs of 50 Mio. USD by Mammoet, 7 years later (inflation). It was an Atomic submarine with 18 thousand tons weight (3 000 tons more than the Estonia) and was laying in more depth with around 108 meters depth in the Barent sea. The action was about 19 hours and was 1 year after the sinking. You realize how absurd it is to say the raising for 50 Mio. USD is to costly but building a 30 cm thick concrete sarkophagus underwater on open sea for around 350 Mio is pocket money. The Swedish government threw sand and stones on the Estonia which costed around 50 Mio. USD. For that money they could have raised it. They had obviously the money for this. It was obviously technically possible and money was there. You realize how absurd your point is? Which other ferry should get a concrete sarkophagus anytime before in the total history of ship disasters? Which ship did? Did the Herald? Did the Jan Hewelius? Start asking yourself what a strange idea it is to put a wreck under 30 cm thick concrete? What is the use? Why paying 7x as much as the raise costs?
This is not my point, this documentary is only made thanks to the information out there, the information was gotten from official sites, so it's their point and not mine. And plus, they raised a Korean ferry that sunk taking down 299 people, after it sunk, they raised it full with those 299 people and investigated the accident, why didn't they do the same to Estonia you know what I mean? And the government might have not want to raised it at all because they might have been hiding something.
@@prdocumentaries7553 If it is not your point than you should point this out and not pass on like these are facts. Would it not be the task of a documentary to fact check such things and rectify official positions when they contain lies obviously?
@@jp-legal These "lies" are not confirmed, and I can't do anything about it. There's a reason why conspiracies are still being made, people don't agree with the government and some do, I myself have mixed opinions.
