It's intriguing that this failure occurred at level-off. If the THS failed and slammed into the full DOWN position (nose-up trim) could the resulting force of it slamming against the stop cause sufficient loading for it break out of the tail, remembering that aerodynamic forces will also be grabbing the tail as it moves?
I'm not convinced it failed symmetrically/cleanly as some think. The side that we have seen may appear that way, but I suggest that the rest of it departed with the other half of the THS.
It is curious also that the underside of the hole where the THS "attaches" to the tail is missing. We can see the upper part of the tail around the hole, but the lower section immediately below is missing, like it was ripped out when the THS departed the aircraft.
As far as I'm aware, a failure of this kind has never occurred on Airbus aircraft before, so I think this would be the first time for this failure mode to occur "for real".
I know parallels have been drawn with the Alaska Airlines flight where the jack-screw failed, but in that instance the tail remained attached to the airframe for some time. What if in this instance, the whole THS and tail assembly failed immediately?
I'm struggling with the bomb theory for the fact that too much of the interior seems lacking in overall damage that can't be explained by disintegration/impact.
If we can trust the reports, that the passengers seated in the aft section suffered metal penetration is hardly surprising, as they are in a 400+ kts airflow with aircraft debris flying at them. It would make sense that the passengers in the forward section didn't suffer this, as they were shielded from the airflow. As for the blunt-force trauma and head injuries of the forward seated passengers, that would be explained by the forces imparted on them, both by the violent pitch-over, and of things flying around the cabin generally.
Note also that the passengers were found in two main groups, and there are no reports of anyone "missing", which had a bomb been detonated, I would have expected in the immediate vicinity of any device.
Have a look at the Comet crashes that were due to fatigue fractures - this crash looks far more like that.
It makes no sense that the tail would break up in the way it apparently has if it detached from the rest of the airframe first. Sure, it would tumble, but for a major part (THS) to detach like it apparently has pre-impact, it doesn't make sense.
Last edited by ECAM_Actions; 5th Nov 2015 at 06:08.