Originally Posted by
Beamr
BUK (which were used to take MH17 down) is a high altitude system with a sizable warhead (70kg up to 25km).
If this was shot at with a MANPADS as speculated, it fits the bill. Eg Igla-S warhead is only 1,2kg with ceiling of 3500m.
Currently we have no clue how far from the aeroplane the warhead explosion occurred so it's hard to estimate the warhead's size. That it was HE-Frag warhead of an anti-aircraft weapon is, given the entry and exit punctures on the vertical stabilizer, beyond reasonable doubt. However, weather at Grozny was reported as visibility around 3000m and overcast ceiling around 500 ft so chances of infrared homing missile getting anywhere near the Azal 8243 are non-existent. Whatever was the system used, probably its operator was sımply shooting at the radar blip.
Despite the caveats like SHradecky's "
Due to GPS jamming and spoofing in the region existing radar data do not tell the true flight path and can not be used to analyse the aircraft's problems.", the flight parameters posted by physicus and tracks posted by DTA and Denti have no telltale signs of jamming/spoofing and their last parts are eerily consistent with ground witness videos, so I would recommend them to be taken seriously.
What I've managed to gather about E190 is that it has triple hydraulic system driving rudder, elevator, ailerons and spoilers, no mechanical backup ("manual reversion" in Boeingspeak). Unlike A320, its RAT is driving electrical generator, not hyd pump. Flaps, slats and THS are electric only. Main gear wells have no doors closing them, MLG wheels merely lay flush with the aircraft bottom, B737 style. While there are nosewheel door that are closed with the NLG extended, I couldn't find any reference to them being powered, rather than being just mechanically connected to nosewheel leg. Maybe some current Embraer pilot could shed some light on the (in)significance of their position to the hydraulical woes?