Originally Posted by
G0ULI
The important thing to realise in relatively high speed impacts is that while the forward part of a vehicle (aircraft in this case) may come to a complete rest, the remainder of the vehicle is still moving with essentially the same forward speed and inertia. It is this phenomenon that causes bullet splatter with small projectiles, crumple zones to work in motor vehicles and substantial parts of an aircraft fuselage to split away and carry along a debris track from the initial impact site.
Yes, I describe it this way in my document.
Your video assumes and essentially wings level initial impact of the fuselage section with the ground. I suggest this is inaccurate and a substantial bank angle was maintained after contact with the railroad embankment. That is the only way the aircraft profile would have been able to pass between the trees. It is also more likely to result in the tail section being upside down and facing the direction of travel.
This is my attempt to show what the CAB explicitly posited as the impact sequence. I think it's ridiculous. The CAB said it pancaked and slid. I agree that it couldn't fit between the trees that way.
The aircraft could have impacted wings level, the nose broke away and then the remainder bounced and flipped over the trees, but this is a more complex scenario and therefore less likely to have occured.
I would not have suggested it, but for the tightness of the gap and the simulator run showing what a simulated Electra minus the forward fuselage did. I probably wouldn't have thought of it, had Concours77 not shown me the error of my own hypothesis. It's remarkable that the sim plane landed in the right attitude and within fifty or so feet of the observed location.