And this is interesting because according to the public data, the data looks kind of... um messed up in a way it wasn't able to to give accurate readings during this exact time that the nosedive was happening but we can kind of see where it goes down and as it goes down you see the speed ramping up right so at the very top it's like almost 600 knots um which is like 688 miles an hour and then right here we see that this is the first maneuver where the plane is uh well i wouldn't say leveled because it goes back up almost immediately um but if you're if we're just looking at this this this data what what does this tell you and about the extreme stress that the airplane faced but also the people inside of the airplane

So a couple of things to think about here.

The first thing is when we're talking about these excessive pitch excursions and increase in speeds, that when we talk about structural engineering of aircraft, it's not always about...

the numbers that you achieve, but rather the rate that you achieve them.

So, in other words, if you quickly go from, and I'm just going to pick some numbers here, you know, from 400 knots to 600 knots, but you do that fairly slowly, that is obviously completely different than going from 400 knots to 600 knots in three seconds, right? That's a completely different mechanical load on the aircraft.

So when we look at swipe data, and that is, when you look at something like this, and I have another one over here, that's why I'm looking over here, is that, you know, look how quickly that peaks.

That you do have a very, you know, and those coincide.

One thing I was curious about, we discussed the data being fine for an initial analysis, but that we have to be careful uh with basic data basic public data like this what about the more interesting more more detailed data is that something that is going to be made public is there a law specifically international airline law that requires data to be made public when an event like this happens

That's head-scratching, isn't it?

Well, I think on the surface, Jim, it does look like that.

Until you look at how Boeing intentionally...

And that is the exact word, intentionally deceived the FAA to get that aircraft certified without requiring any simulation training for the airlines.

I mean, that's what it came down to.

The second part is an unbelievably horrible engineering design that was also done on the cheap.

And that is that they had a very powerful flight control system.

You've suggested before that there are other possible explanations other than a pilot suicide for this crash.