What exactly the croc did to cause the crash.
No. See previous questions.

Did the accident happen because a driver was scared by the crocodile?
NO
What exactly the croc did to cause the crash.
No. See previous questions.
Did the accident happen because a driver was scared by the crocodile?
NO
Did the crocodile cause everyone to move forward or aft, thus changing the center of gravity of the plane?
Did the croc damage the plane in some way?
By biting something vital?
peeing/ pooping in the wrong place?
Stepping on something?
knocking something over?
[quote=“Ana_Byrd, post:799, topic:987214”]
Did it cause the plane to crash?
No.
Did it do something to the air in the cabin? E.g., causing a drop in air pressure?
No.
[/quote
I’m a little unclear here on what remains to be solved. An airplane was carrying a crocodile (among other cargo), the croc startled the pilot and caused a crash, and the crash killed 20 people. Aside from the slight incongruity of a crocodile being transported by plane (but hey, they have to get to zoos somehow), this all seems straightforward.
Your narrative is not accurate.
Did the crocodile cause everyone to move forward or aft, thus changing the center of gravity of the plane?
This is it!
This happened in Democratic Republic of Congo. A man had a crocodile in a duffel bag, yes a duffel bag. A flight attendant saw it and freaked out. She hustled to the front to tell the pilot, but the rest of the passengers saw the crocodile and panicked. They ran to the front and even thought the pilot told them not to all gather in the front, they did so anyway.
There was one survivor to tell the story.
Well, two. The crocodile survived, but was killed by a machete soon after.
A crocodile stashed in a duffel bag got loose on an airplane, frightened passengers and led to a crash that killed 20 people on board, according to inquiry into the accident.
Anyone else have one?
I’ve got one, though it’ll be several hours before I’m available to answer questions.
A toy company in the early 2000s released an unsuccessful line of collectables. If you were to try to collect them now, you would likely find that the pieces that were meant to be the least valuable are now the hardest to find, and the pieces meant to be the most valuable are now the most common. The reason for this is directly tied to the reason these toys were unpopular. What is that reason?
Were they toys that needed to be put together in order to work? As in, was putting them together part of the fun?
Were they battery-operated?
Were they supposed to be cute?
Were they supposed to be played with at all? Or more for display?
If they were meant to be played with, did you need more than one person to play with them properly?
Did they come with a main part and then accessories or components sold separately?
Were they cards?
Were they coins?
Did people deliberately save the ones that were “supposed” to be valuable, while tossing out or ruining the ones that were “supposed” to be common?
Was counterfeiting involved?
Did the “common” ones have random variations?
Are there other collectibles in direct competition to these that were more successful?
Did people deliberately save the ones that were “supposed” to be valuable, while tossing out or ruining the ones that were “supposed” to be common?
This was predicted to happen with The Death of Superman when it came out. The black bag versions were kept dearly, but the standard over the counter normal edition was not valued.
However, both are not worth anything I think. Everyone kept everything.
Were they toys that needed to be put together in order to work? As in, was putting them together part of the fun?In a way, but not in the way you probably mean.
Were they battery-operated? No
Were they supposed to be cute? No
Were they supposed to be played with at all? Or more for display? **They were supposed to be played with **
If they were meant to be played with, did you need more than one person to play with them properly? Probably the intent, but you could play with them alone.
Did they come with a main part and then accessories or components sold separately? No
Post not empty.
Were they cards? No
Were they coins? No
Post not empty.
Did people deliberately save the ones that were “supposed” to be valuable, while tossing out or ruining the ones that were “supposed” to be common? Not deliberately. But dig deeper.
Was counterfeiting involved?No
Did the “common” ones have random variations? No
Are there other collectibles in direct competition to these that were more successful? No
Post not empty.
Were they edible?
Have we likely heard of this collectible?
Is the valuable part used for its initial purpose?
Were the “valuable” ones more durable?
Were the collectibles toys?
Were the collectibles suitable for children under 3?
Were the collectibles suitable for children under 7?
Were the collectibles sold in their own right, as opposed to a cereal box promotion or the like?
Were the collectibles sold in brick and mortar stores?
Were the collectibles found primarily in toy stores?
Were the collectibles perishable / did they come with perishable components (such as with Pez dispensers)?
~Max
Were they edible? No
Have we likely heard of this collectible? Not likely - it’s fairly obscure
Is the valuable part used for its initial purpose? Please clarify
Were the “valuable” ones more durable? Yes, and this is part of the solution, but not the whole solution
Were the collectibles toys? Yes
Were the collectibles suitable for children under 3? No
Were the collectibles suitable for children under 7? Maybe
Were the collectibles sold in their own right, as opposed to a cereal box promotion or the like? Yes
Were the collectibles sold in brick and mortar stores? Yes
Were the collectibles found primarily in toy stores? I think so
Were the collectibles perishable / did they come with perishable components (such as with Pez dispensers)? No
Post not empty
Could they be redeemed or traded in or whatever for something?