Such aircraft is usually nose heavy when empty, 40 tonnes of fuel … probably not much in the tail, but with 26% CG anyone with the graph will tell ?
Also the aircraft was in straight line as shown by the nose gear marks.
Pictures clearly show multiple impacts, multiple structural deformations and failures.
Initially nose tip collides, impact visible just below ENG 2, which provokes immediate major structural failure just behind cockpit area, then another major structural failure about 10 meters further aft before ENG 1 and 2 finally contact the wall. In the same time nose landing gear detaches and flies away + major tail strike occurs.
To this point it is already a lot of energy dissipation … but that’s far from over.
Look at these left side engines,
they just want to climb the wall, a 20 meters fuselage section is now on the other side of the wall, MLG is suspended in the air.
Then under ENG 3 and 4 thrust the tail moves 15 meters laterally …
Anyway, very lucky these nine persons on board … No mention if seat belt were fastened in the flight deck or in the cabin ?
Another point of interest from the CVR :
Originally Posted by page 14
« euh… cabin is… aircraft is moving forward »
« Aircraft is moving forward »
« parking brake off »
13 seconds … and that’s it ?
The full event is on video tape … no chance to see it ?
Still not many to comment on the absence of braking marks contrary to what is reported by the BEA ?
And still nobody to comment on the early crab movement of the aircraft 120 meters away from the wall, and so with only 3 tires marking the ground ?