JD-EE
I am not sure from reading your scenario and from the picture that you factored in the mass and viscosity of the water. It takes time for the water to get out of the way. I rather envision the plane was somewhat flattened by the time you have the plane in the trough it makes in the water. That would violently compress the air in the cabin adding to the shredding effect on the body of the plane.
Well, in a way I have, but haven't shown compression on the bottom side of the fuselage. Though I have implied that when I said that energy involved at impact has either got to be absorbed by the aircraft or it gets imparted into the water in the form of a wave with amplitude and horizontal length - corresponding speed and vector of the energy inputs, i.e. the medium is not compressible. Check again and you find I made reference to the air/seawater densities and the potential mass to be displaced. Newtons 2nd Law works only in a vacuum and consequently varies with the medium density - 1/865 in the air/seawater example.
Photographic evidence would indicate that vertical moment at impact was much greater than the horizontal one, but that could be misleading when the area presented in the vertical plane was many times that in the horizontal plane. This factor alone needs to be taken into account in dealing with the forces involved, and perhaps the the entry vector needs to be broken up and the accelerations to zero reassessed based on the square area presented in each plane.
It really boils down to - a bigger surface area present at impact results in higher rates of acceleration to zero, equaling higher g forces. The high-board diver enters the water quietly and with only a ripple, a belly flop creates a large noise and a splash (also a hurt "belly").
PJ2 has mentioned the radome top half was found virtually intact, and that could even be partially explained away by the predominate force acting on it was upwards and the bottom half was shattered by the equipment within.
Machinbird has ventured that the AoA was in the region of 35 ~ 40 degrees. The AoA used in my earlier example was 61 degrees and as I have already indicated, the numbers using a vertical moment of 90KTS and a horizontal moment of 50KTS do not result in the "g" forces I perceive were involved.
I'll run some other numbers, but need to consider what sort of drag vortex could result in whatever terminal velocities we are dealing with. Just doubling the horizontal moment to 110KTS gives an AoA of 42 degrees, which results in an impact velocity of 69.2 m/sec, or (69.2m/s / 0.25sec) / 9.8N = 28.2g. Now that is no where near a high enough "g" force to cause the damage it did. So, I am now looking at not only the upward thrust on the underside of the fuselage and main wing spar, but also the drag factor (lift) induced by water flowing over the top of the wing. Comment has been made by the BEA suggesting that it was an upward vector that tore off the Port Outer Spoiler and attached framing from the wing, but what was happening back at the wing root could well be another matter. The THS would probably be responsible for over-stressing the framing in the empennage.
My initial calculation assumed that the a/c was arrested in about 7 meters along the entry vector, but on this later consideration I am more inclined to believe it was only half that, and the forces involved on the intact aircraft were around 28.2 * 2 = 56.4g.
I'm still inclined to believe the terminal vertical moment was more than 90KTS, more likely 120KTS, and when combined with the 50KTS horizontal moment would give an AoA of 67.4 degrees and an entry vector of 130KTS, or (66.9m/s / 0.125sec) / 9.8N = 54.6g. Note: I halved the time to zero acceleration.
BTW, in an earlier post I mentioned that the deformation of the fuselage on impact would probably have reduced the cabin volume and avoided an implosion due to the low cabin pressure. A very minor point at that stage.
As always, I am liable to be found wrong, so feel free to challenge my assumptions.
mm43