Two Russian pax a/c crashed within minutes of each other
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, I see Shadow. A shotgun cartridge fired from a pen held in your hand. How devilishly clever (and brave)!
Now sarcasm aside, loosing a cabin window would not be a catastrophic event as the outflow valves would simply close and maintain the pressure differential in the cabin to almost normal levels and no rapid descent would be required. There certainly would be a sudden rush of air initially, most probably ripping the pen gun out of your perpertrators hand so there would be no more pen gun to ignite your aerosol can of accelerant.
I hope you find this explanation clear enough.
Now sarcasm aside, loosing a cabin window would not be a catastrophic event as the outflow valves would simply close and maintain the pressure differential in the cabin to almost normal levels and no rapid descent would be required. There certainly would be a sudden rush of air initially, most probably ripping the pen gun out of your perpertrators hand so there would be no more pen gun to ignite your aerosol can of accelerant.
I hope you find this explanation clear enough.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deptford
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. . . and this from Newsday:
"I just think we're talking about negligence," said Sergei Ignatchenko, the chief spokesman for the Federal Security Service, in a telephone interview. "Our planes have already used up their resources. Unfortunately, they're ... still flying."
Ignatchenko acknowledged the improbability of catastrophe striking two planes at once without terrorist intervention. "It's too much of a coincidence," he agreed. "We're not denying terrorism ... and we're checking it, of course. But as of now on the sites we haven't discovered any explosives or any trace of any violence. That's why we're saying the main reason is the violation of safety rules."
...
Putin's passive tone contrasted with his traditional response to apparent terrorist attacks, which he usually blames on Chechen rebels even before an investigation. When a bomb killed more than 40 people on the Moscow subway in February, Putin said no circumstantial evidence was needed to accuse the Chechens and vowed to eliminate them.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...news-headlines
"I just think we're talking about negligence," said Sergei Ignatchenko, the chief spokesman for the Federal Security Service, in a telephone interview. "Our planes have already used up their resources. Unfortunately, they're ... still flying."
Ignatchenko acknowledged the improbability of catastrophe striking two planes at once without terrorist intervention. "It's too much of a coincidence," he agreed. "We're not denying terrorism ... and we're checking it, of course. But as of now on the sites we haven't discovered any explosives or any trace of any violence. That's why we're saying the main reason is the violation of safety rules."
...
Putin's passive tone contrasted with his traditional response to apparent terrorist attacks, which he usually blames on Chechen rebels even before an investigation. When a bomb killed more than 40 people on the Moscow subway in February, Putin said no circumstantial evidence was needed to accuse the Chechens and vowed to eliminate them.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationwo...news-headlines
Rotate on this!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys kill me...there is momentous slagging of journos ...if u can be arsed to read back thru this thread u will see more sensationalist assumptions than u can poke a stick at!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well here's some sensational assumptions from Siberia Airlines, the TU154 operator:
17:32, Moscow time
Siberia Airlines official statement
We have information from the crash site of TU-154 in the Rostov region.
By visual estimates of eye-witnesses who were at the crash site, large fragments of the aircraft are scattered in the distance of about 1,5 kilometers. The big scattering distance of large fragments is an indirect confirmation of the version according to which the plane was destroyed in the air as the result of an explosion.
We remind that during the night the air company received a telegram from the Main Center of the Russian Unified System of Air Traffic Control. The telegram informed about a hijacking alarm from one of the missing planes. Later it was confirmed that this hijacking alarm came from the TU-154 plane of Siberia Airlines. It happened just before the loss of contact with the aircraft and its disappearance from the radar screens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17:13, Moscow time
Information about the technical condition of the aircraft
The plane TU-154B-2 (RA-85556) was manufactured by the Kuibyshev aviation plant on September 27, 1982 with the production serial number of 82À556. This aircraft was one of the youngest in the TU-154B series and flew no more than 60% of its life time. The design life time of the aircraft of this series is 50 000 flying hours from the start of operation. This plane flew only 30 751 hours.
TU-154B-2 (RA-85556) underwent one major overhaul at civil aviation repair plant # 411 (Minvody). The overhaul was completed on August 25, 1993. The plane had a scheduled maintenance service on August 10, 2004.
The first, second and third engine units averaged 2000 working hours after the major overhaul (out of 6000 hours permitted) , and the auxiliary engine unit worked only 569 hours out of its life time of 1800 hours.
17:32, Moscow time
Siberia Airlines official statement
We have information from the crash site of TU-154 in the Rostov region.
By visual estimates of eye-witnesses who were at the crash site, large fragments of the aircraft are scattered in the distance of about 1,5 kilometers. The big scattering distance of large fragments is an indirect confirmation of the version according to which the plane was destroyed in the air as the result of an explosion.
We remind that during the night the air company received a telegram from the Main Center of the Russian Unified System of Air Traffic Control. The telegram informed about a hijacking alarm from one of the missing planes. Later it was confirmed that this hijacking alarm came from the TU-154 plane of Siberia Airlines. It happened just before the loss of contact with the aircraft and its disappearance from the radar screens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17:13, Moscow time
Information about the technical condition of the aircraft
The plane TU-154B-2 (RA-85556) was manufactured by the Kuibyshev aviation plant on September 27, 1982 with the production serial number of 82À556. This aircraft was one of the youngest in the TU-154B series and flew no more than 60% of its life time. The design life time of the aircraft of this series is 50 000 flying hours from the start of operation. This plane flew only 30 751 hours.
TU-154B-2 (RA-85556) underwent one major overhaul at civil aviation repair plant # 411 (Minvody). The overhaul was completed on August 25, 1993. The plane had a scheduled maintenance service on August 10, 2004.
The first, second and third engine units averaged 2000 working hours after the major overhaul (out of 6000 hours permitted) , and the auxiliary engine unit worked only 569 hours out of its life time of 1800 hours.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now sarcasm aside, loosing a cabin window would not be a catastrophic event as the outflow valves would simply close and maintain the pressure differential in the cabin to almost normal levels and no rapid descent would be required.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Russian Flight Recorders Reveal Little
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: August 26, 2004
Filed at 7:49 a.m. ET
MOSCOW (AP) -- The recorders extracted from the wreckage of two planes that crashed nearly simultaneously have not revealed reliable information on the disasters' causes, a top Russian official was quoted as saying Thursday.
Vladimir Yakovlev, the Russian president's envoy for the southern region, where one of the planes crashed, also said that the main theory about the catastrophe ``all the same remains terrorism,'' the ITAR-Tass news agency said.
Officials have said that several possibilities were being investigated as the cause of the crashes that killed 89 people late Tuesday, including inferior fuel and human error and that they believed the planes' ``black box'' recorders would clarify the situation.
However, Yakovlev said that the recorders ``had gone out of service already before the fall of the airliners,'' ITAR-Tass said...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/inte...ane-Crash.html
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: August 26, 2004
Filed at 7:49 a.m. ET
MOSCOW (AP) -- The recorders extracted from the wreckage of two planes that crashed nearly simultaneously have not revealed reliable information on the disasters' causes, a top Russian official was quoted as saying Thursday.
Vladimir Yakovlev, the Russian president's envoy for the southern region, where one of the planes crashed, also said that the main theory about the catastrophe ``all the same remains terrorism,'' the ITAR-Tass news agency said.
Officials have said that several possibilities were being investigated as the cause of the crashes that killed 89 people late Tuesday, including inferior fuel and human error and that they believed the planes' ``black box'' recorders would clarify the situation.
However, Yakovlev said that the recorders ``had gone out of service already before the fall of the airliners,'' ITAR-Tass said...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/inte...ane-Crash.html
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backrush
HOTDOG
Well I can clearly recall in my early teens using, as both a gun (with steel ball-bearings and marbles) and as a shotgun (with airgun pellets) a handheld length of metal (lead) water pipe, closed off at one end and with a hole drilled for wick protrusion of penny bungers. It had a very effective aimable range of 20 to 30 yards against queues of empty beer bottles. It was a potentially lethal weapon out to a far greater distance. In fact we even built a mortar and that was my first fascinated fumbling with ballistics. If you've ever owned a pistol or small derringer you'd know that they can pack quite a wallop.
Can't say that I've ever had a real explosive decompression in a 4 eng airplane but in three different Air Forces I've had to undergo the annual AVMED training and that always included an explosive decompression in the chamber from FL250 (only). I imagine that FL330 would be an even more shocking and dazing experience. If I wanted to instantaneously (and then permanently) incapacitate the unknown of an airmarshal (or two) whilst giving the inaccessible boys up front a shock and some very distracting tasks, I'd go for the explosive (or at least rapid) decompression. Time of useful consciousness after rapid decomp is limited to about 30 odd seconds at FL330, but from your AVMED training you'd know that it depends upon the individual. But it’s going to be enough time to follow through.
This decompression was caused by a tyre failure
Narrative:
Flight SV162 experienced an explosive decompression of the cabin while climbing through 29,000 feet over international waters near the State of Qatar. The aircraft had departed Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and was enroute to Karachi, Pakistan. An emergency descent was initiated and a successful landing was made at Doha International Airport in Qatar. Two passengers were killed when they were ejected from the aircraft through a hole in the cabin floor which had resulted from the forces of explosive decompression.
According to your theory that shouldn't have happened - but maybe you were just imagining a small calibre hole.
regarding Ignatchenko:
The Russian preference is obviously for the non-terrorist scenario. I hope that doesn't color the quality of their investigative zeal. I'd be far happier if the UKAAIB or NTSB was involved, even in observer status (only).
The only way to defeat terrorists is to outwit and out-think them. They only have to get it right once. Security is all about getting it right all the time - and I don't mean missing a pair of nail-clippers in hand-luggage. Whatever plan might have led to the downing of two airplanes simultaneously, a few things are starting to become clear:
a. Effective terrorism is all about having a non-complex and flexible plan and to the greatest extent possible, making it re-usable by concealing its detail (no PanAm103 piece of circuit-board that leads to a Swiss delay-fuse that's traceable to a Libyan Agent). The shoe bomber Reid was the first manifestation of that concept. "Nil residue, frustrate their forensics" I hear their master bomber saying.
b. They seek to maximize public and industry angst by reinforcing the concept that: "No matter what precautions you take, we can still get at you - and what's more, do it in multiples - just so that you know it's us. And you do know, don't you, even though the denials are vehement and official."
c. Muddying the waters by concealing whether or not it actually was a suicide action, sabotage, stowed luggage, hand luggage or a cargo-hold device.....acid, lithium, caustics, accelerants or a phial of nitro-glycerine in the wheel-well.
d. The problem with modern warfare is that the defenders are always strategizing based upon re-fighting the last campaign - yet the “offenders” are busy improvising, innovating, probing and exploiting your weak points (as perceived by them). Perhaps we do need more sensationalism and less denial.
Leave you with this thought in respect of the unburnt bodies. If I was sitting forward and started a fierce little fire that then cranked up a lot of smoke, where are the pax going to run to? Are they going to sit in their seats nearby as the smoke billows and fills the cabin, with belts on and burn? Don't think so. The phenomenon is called backrush – and it’s something that no-one wants to even envisage. But nevertheless the question arises. What does it do to your C of G and controllability when all of the pax are clustered cowering against the rear bulkhead?
More comprehensive, informed and convincing comeback please. And I always carry two pens, because they're always being pinched by other thoughtless people.
A shotgun cartridge fired from a pen held in your hand. How devilishly clever (and brave)!
Can't say that I've ever had a real explosive decompression in a 4 eng airplane but in three different Air Forces I've had to undergo the annual AVMED training and that always included an explosive decompression in the chamber from FL250 (only). I imagine that FL330 would be an even more shocking and dazing experience. If I wanted to instantaneously (and then permanently) incapacitate the unknown of an airmarshal (or two) whilst giving the inaccessible boys up front a shock and some very distracting tasks, I'd go for the explosive (or at least rapid) decompression. Time of useful consciousness after rapid decomp is limited to about 30 odd seconds at FL330, but from your AVMED training you'd know that it depends upon the individual. But it’s going to be enough time to follow through.
This decompression was caused by a tyre failure
Narrative:
Flight SV162 experienced an explosive decompression of the cabin while climbing through 29,000 feet over international waters near the State of Qatar. The aircraft had departed Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and was enroute to Karachi, Pakistan. An emergency descent was initiated and a successful landing was made at Doha International Airport in Qatar. Two passengers were killed when they were ejected from the aircraft through a hole in the cabin floor which had resulted from the forces of explosive decompression.
According to your theory that shouldn't have happened - but maybe you were just imagining a small calibre hole.
regarding Ignatchenko:
The Russian preference is obviously for the non-terrorist scenario. I hope that doesn't color the quality of their investigative zeal. I'd be far happier if the UKAAIB or NTSB was involved, even in observer status (only).
The only way to defeat terrorists is to outwit and out-think them. They only have to get it right once. Security is all about getting it right all the time - and I don't mean missing a pair of nail-clippers in hand-luggage. Whatever plan might have led to the downing of two airplanes simultaneously, a few things are starting to become clear:
a. Effective terrorism is all about having a non-complex and flexible plan and to the greatest extent possible, making it re-usable by concealing its detail (no PanAm103 piece of circuit-board that leads to a Swiss delay-fuse that's traceable to a Libyan Agent). The shoe bomber Reid was the first manifestation of that concept. "Nil residue, frustrate their forensics" I hear their master bomber saying.
b. They seek to maximize public and industry angst by reinforcing the concept that: "No matter what precautions you take, we can still get at you - and what's more, do it in multiples - just so that you know it's us. And you do know, don't you, even though the denials are vehement and official."
c. Muddying the waters by concealing whether or not it actually was a suicide action, sabotage, stowed luggage, hand luggage or a cargo-hold device.....acid, lithium, caustics, accelerants or a phial of nitro-glycerine in the wheel-well.
d. The problem with modern warfare is that the defenders are always strategizing based upon re-fighting the last campaign - yet the “offenders” are busy improvising, innovating, probing and exploiting your weak points (as perceived by them). Perhaps we do need more sensationalism and less denial.
Leave you with this thought in respect of the unburnt bodies. If I was sitting forward and started a fierce little fire that then cranked up a lot of smoke, where are the pax going to run to? Are they going to sit in their seats nearby as the smoke billows and fills the cabin, with belts on and burn? Don't think so. The phenomenon is called backrush – and it’s something that no-one wants to even envisage. But nevertheless the question arises. What does it do to your C of G and controllability when all of the pax are clustered cowering against the rear bulkhead?
More comprehensive, informed and convincing comeback please. And I always carry two pens, because they're always being pinched by other thoughtless people.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More from Pravda (English translation):
From ITAR-TASS (English translation)
The recorders extracted from the wreckage of two planes that crashed nearly simultaneously have not revealed reliable information on the disasters' causes, a top Russian official was quoted as saying Thursday.
Vladimir Yakovlev, the Russian president's envoy for the southern region, where one of the planes crashed, also said that the main theory about the catastrophe "all the same remains terrorism," the ITAR-Tass news agency said.
Officials have said that several possibilities were being investigated as the cause of the crashes that killed 89 people late Tuesday, including inferior fuel and human error and that they believed the planes' "black box" recorders would clarify the situation.
A government commission appointed to investigate traveled Thursday to one of the crash sites, where a Tu-134 with 43 people aboard went down about 120 miles south of Moscow. Workers ended their search work there, but were continuing to comb the other wreckage of a Tu-154 with 46 people aboard that fell to earth in southern Russia.
Domodedovo airport said in a statement that both planes "went through the standard procedure of preparation for flight ...(and) the procedures were carried out properly."
Still, there was skepticism that technical failure or human error could bring down two planes at almost the same time hundreds of miles apart. "That's pretty far out there on the chance bar," said Bob Francis, former vice chairman of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, reports Associated Press.
The Russian Emergency Ministry told CNN crews had recovered the bodies of all 35 passengers and eight crew members flying aboard a Volga-Avia Express Tupolev 134 aircraft, but did not say how many bodies had been recovered from the second crash, a Siberia Airlines Tu-154.
The Siberia Airlines plane carried 38 passengers and eight crew, the airline said. Russian officials said the crash site spread over a 40-km radius.
Russian media poured scorn on official statements that the two plane crashes within minutes of one another were most likely the result of technical fault or human error.
"Russia now has its own September 11," said the headline of a frontpage article in Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily, in reference to the 2001 suicide attacks on the United States involving four hijacked commercial planes, which killed about 3,000 people.
Vladimir Yakovlev, the Russian president's envoy for the southern region, where one of the planes crashed, also said that the main theory about the catastrophe "all the same remains terrorism," the ITAR-Tass news agency said.
Officials have said that several possibilities were being investigated as the cause of the crashes that killed 89 people late Tuesday, including inferior fuel and human error and that they believed the planes' "black box" recorders would clarify the situation.
A government commission appointed to investigate traveled Thursday to one of the crash sites, where a Tu-134 with 43 people aboard went down about 120 miles south of Moscow. Workers ended their search work there, but were continuing to comb the other wreckage of a Tu-154 with 46 people aboard that fell to earth in southern Russia.
Domodedovo airport said in a statement that both planes "went through the standard procedure of preparation for flight ...(and) the procedures were carried out properly."
Still, there was skepticism that technical failure or human error could bring down two planes at almost the same time hundreds of miles apart. "That's pretty far out there on the chance bar," said Bob Francis, former vice chairman of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, reports Associated Press.
The Russian Emergency Ministry told CNN crews had recovered the bodies of all 35 passengers and eight crew members flying aboard a Volga-Avia Express Tupolev 134 aircraft, but did not say how many bodies had been recovered from the second crash, a Siberia Airlines Tu-154.
The Siberia Airlines plane carried 38 passengers and eight crew, the airline said. Russian officials said the crash site spread over a 40-km radius.
Russian media poured scorn on official statements that the two plane crashes within minutes of one another were most likely the result of technical fault or human error.
"Russia now has its own September 11," said the headline of a frontpage article in Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily, in reference to the 2001 suicide attacks on the United States involving four hijacked commercial planes, which killed about 3,000 people.
MOSCOW, August 26 (Itar-Tass) - Damage caused to the cockpit voice and flight data recorders recovered from the wreckages of two passenger planes that crashed near Rostov and Tula on Tuesday evening will not prevent recovering information from all five devices in full, a source close to the investigation team has said.
According to the expert, the quality of recording contained in the flight data recorder of the Tupolev-134 that fell near Tula is bad, but data is recoverable. The recording of conversations of the plane’s crew is being studied.
The decoding of information from the three black boxes of the Tupolev-154 that crashed near Rostov is in progress.
The presidential representative in the Southern Federal District, Vladimir Yakovlev, a short while earlier said the examination of black boxes retrieved from the wreckages had provided no authentic clues yet as to what might have caused the disasters.
Speaking upon arrival at the site of the Tupolev-154 crash in the Rostov region, Yakovlev said the black boxes had been out of order before the liners crashed.
In his opinion terrorism remains the main version behind both cases.
According to the expert, the quality of recording contained in the flight data recorder of the Tupolev-134 that fell near Tula is bad, but data is recoverable. The recording of conversations of the plane’s crew is being studied.
The decoding of information from the three black boxes of the Tupolev-154 that crashed near Rostov is in progress.
The presidential representative in the Southern Federal District, Vladimir Yakovlev, a short while earlier said the examination of black boxes retrieved from the wreckages had provided no authentic clues yet as to what might have caused the disasters.
Speaking upon arrival at the site of the Tupolev-154 crash in the Rostov region, Yakovlev said the black boxes had been out of order before the liners crashed.
In his opinion terrorism remains the main version behind both cases.
Paxing All Over The World
Conspiracy theory coming up!!
They have found the answer in the Boxes but say that the info was not conclusive as this allows them to keep 'searching for the criminals'....
They have found the answer in the Boxes but say that the info was not conclusive as this allows them to keep 'searching for the criminals'....
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: England
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Shadow
Why would they need an aerosol spray-can of accelerant? Vodka is highly inflammable is it not? That would do the job and being a Russian airliner it would be available in copious quantities.
Otherwise the theory seems credible. Maybe there are accelerants like petrol (or better) that would cause a fire to propagate further and faster. An accelerant with its own oxidizer would do even better after a decompression. Incendigel maybe? (aka napalm). That's not hard to make. I can imagine the fire-fighting being non-effective after a decompression, even assuming that the pilots got quickly established in a full-blown emergency descent. The cabin vulnerability and inability to effectively fight a sudden fire would be optimized for the terrorists by their having first caused a decompression event.
That's a multiple compounded complex emergency that I just don't want to even think about. Not sure how the sudden appearance of the rubber jungle would affect the propagation of a fire (with oxygen and all - and the masks catching fire). If I was sitting up front behind my locked door I'd imagine that I'd have no idea whatsoever of what was going on down the back.
I'm also beginning to suspect that both the TU-134 and TU-154 passenger lists are best guesses only. Haven't seen any consistent figures being cited. That might mean that individual identities may never be established - and the presence (or absence) of bad guys eventually may remain "an unknown". If so, that's not good. It increases the fear factor.
Why would they need an aerosol spray-can of accelerant? Vodka is highly inflammable is it not? That would do the job and being a Russian airliner it would be available in copious quantities.
Otherwise the theory seems credible. Maybe there are accelerants like petrol (or better) that would cause a fire to propagate further and faster. An accelerant with its own oxidizer would do even better after a decompression. Incendigel maybe? (aka napalm). That's not hard to make. I can imagine the fire-fighting being non-effective after a decompression, even assuming that the pilots got quickly established in a full-blown emergency descent. The cabin vulnerability and inability to effectively fight a sudden fire would be optimized for the terrorists by their having first caused a decompression event.
That's a multiple compounded complex emergency that I just don't want to even think about. Not sure how the sudden appearance of the rubber jungle would affect the propagation of a fire (with oxygen and all - and the masks catching fire). If I was sitting up front behind my locked door I'd imagine that I'd have no idea whatsoever of what was going on down the back.
I'm also beginning to suspect that both the TU-134 and TU-154 passenger lists are best guesses only. Haven't seen any consistent figures being cited. That might mean that individual identities may never be established - and the presence (or absence) of bad guys eventually may remain "an unknown". If so, that's not good. It increases the fear factor.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX USA
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not clear on the condition of the flight recorders.
Were the recorders working sometime during the flights, and did they record data during the flights? Were the recorders stopped manually sometime before the end of the flights? Were the recorders stopped during inflight breakups? Were the recorders damaged by the crashes, thus making data difficult or impossible to recover?
I think what happened to the flight recorders could yield some interesting clues, besides the recorder data itself.
Were the recorders working sometime during the flights, and did they record data during the flights? Were the recorders stopped manually sometime before the end of the flights? Were the recorders stopped during inflight breakups? Were the recorders damaged by the crashes, thus making data difficult or impossible to recover?
I think what happened to the flight recorders could yield some interesting clues, besides the recorder data itself.
Last edited by Flight Safety; 26th Aug 2004 at 15:01.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't believe this, it has yet to be established if it was terrorism, sabotage, technical or whatever and some jerks are talking about if it were vodka, petrol or a home-made gun that bought the aircraft down.
Please spare a thought for the bereaved!
Please spare a thought for the bereaved!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
come on, we all know the real way to do it:
A) If you are not female, dress up as one..
B) Carry on:
1) 3 feet of surgical tubing.
2) A cellphone-gun, which also works works as a cellphone
3) A directional antenna for said cellphone
4) A bayonet concealed in the handle of a pastry brush
5) 3 liters of barrel-strength scotch (preferably single malt)
6) A fake infant doll.
7) blankets
8) A tautly written political-religious manifesto
Put the whisky in an aerosol container, and wire the release to start on a timer triggered by the outer marker of the reciprocal ILS approach to your departure runway. Stuff the contraption in the infant doll, and wrap it in blankets. Carry it on. If anyone asks, "little Glen" is sleeping. If anyone comments on the alcohol smell, explain that he just had his 1-month-old birthday party.
On board, insist that Glen gets airsick unless he's sleeping right below one of the portable O2 bottles in the overhead bins.
After takeoff, walk down the aisle, and give the cellphone-gun and antenna to some hapless passenger. Explain that you're waiting for an important call, his seat has better reception (since where you're sitting hte hydraulics are preventing you from getting a clear signal) and could he please cock the gun and point it out the window, while moving the antenna lengthwise along the floor, to improve the chances of staying on a given cell station.
naturally, he will agree.
Go back to your seat. When the timer on the baby is one minute from startsing the flow of scotch, pick up the airfone, and call your ccellphone. The guy holding itwill be so startled, h\e'll pull the trigger, and maybe puncture the window.
The discharging of a firearm in the cabin will surely cause some confusion, so while they're busy subduing that guy, scream "my baby" and toss the doll into the nearest seat where the sound system isn't working. Stand up and grab the O2 bottle.
Now, get out the surgical tubing and the pastry brush. Remove the bayonet, and cut off just enough tubing to run from your seat to the baby. Stick the tube into the O2 bottle, put the other end on the baby, and start the flow.
the sparks from the audio system should start the conflagration.
Now, pull out your manifesto, remove your wig, and stand in the back of the plane, reading it line-by-line.
Er, seriously, explosive decompression is gonna need a lot more than a window going out. With any system as complicated as commercial aviation, where each flight involves the interaction of thousands of people, there are going to be plenty of ways for motivated persons and individuals to catastrophically break it. Most of those ways are pretty simple.
Fatal accidents are very rare and spectucular occurrences. If they're not intentional, they often involve freak circumstances; for these reasons, they attract conspiracy theorists. Heck they attract conspiracy theorists even when they're intentional. I'm waiting for the first "It was a radical group of Elks, intent on turning Israel into a Buddhist State" post.
Contaminated Fuel would have to be contaminated to the degree that it either leaves no traces of its presence (as in the case of all the other flights that used it) or causes massive structural failure.
Sorry, unless there's some other surreal possibility, such as a ramp "fender benders" that nobody noticed, it looks like bombs, a fairly common cause of in-flight breakups, unfortunately.
A) If you are not female, dress up as one..
B) Carry on:
1) 3 feet of surgical tubing.
2) A cellphone-gun, which also works works as a cellphone
3) A directional antenna for said cellphone
4) A bayonet concealed in the handle of a pastry brush
5) 3 liters of barrel-strength scotch (preferably single malt)
6) A fake infant doll.
7) blankets
8) A tautly written political-religious manifesto
Put the whisky in an aerosol container, and wire the release to start on a timer triggered by the outer marker of the reciprocal ILS approach to your departure runway. Stuff the contraption in the infant doll, and wrap it in blankets. Carry it on. If anyone asks, "little Glen" is sleeping. If anyone comments on the alcohol smell, explain that he just had his 1-month-old birthday party.
On board, insist that Glen gets airsick unless he's sleeping right below one of the portable O2 bottles in the overhead bins.
After takeoff, walk down the aisle, and give the cellphone-gun and antenna to some hapless passenger. Explain that you're waiting for an important call, his seat has better reception (since where you're sitting hte hydraulics are preventing you from getting a clear signal) and could he please cock the gun and point it out the window, while moving the antenna lengthwise along the floor, to improve the chances of staying on a given cell station.
naturally, he will agree.
Go back to your seat. When the timer on the baby is one minute from startsing the flow of scotch, pick up the airfone, and call your ccellphone. The guy holding itwill be so startled, h\e'll pull the trigger, and maybe puncture the window.
The discharging of a firearm in the cabin will surely cause some confusion, so while they're busy subduing that guy, scream "my baby" and toss the doll into the nearest seat where the sound system isn't working. Stand up and grab the O2 bottle.
Now, get out the surgical tubing and the pastry brush. Remove the bayonet, and cut off just enough tubing to run from your seat to the baby. Stick the tube into the O2 bottle, put the other end on the baby, and start the flow.
the sparks from the audio system should start the conflagration.
Now, pull out your manifesto, remove your wig, and stand in the back of the plane, reading it line-by-line.
Er, seriously, explosive decompression is gonna need a lot more than a window going out. With any system as complicated as commercial aviation, where each flight involves the interaction of thousands of people, there are going to be plenty of ways for motivated persons and individuals to catastrophically break it. Most of those ways are pretty simple.
Fatal accidents are very rare and spectucular occurrences. If they're not intentional, they often involve freak circumstances; for these reasons, they attract conspiracy theorists. Heck they attract conspiracy theorists even when they're intentional. I'm waiting for the first "It was a radical group of Elks, intent on turning Israel into a Buddhist State" post.
Contaminated Fuel would have to be contaminated to the degree that it either leaves no traces of its presence (as in the case of all the other flights that used it) or causes massive structural failure.
Sorry, unless there's some other surreal possibility, such as a ramp "fender benders" that nobody noticed, it looks like bombs, a fairly common cause of in-flight breakups, unfortunately.
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SHADOW,
Find a copy of the show from the Discovery channel called "MYTHBUSTERS". They tested your theories at length and completely debunked them. episode 10 from season 1
They took powerfull handgun rounds and fired them at aircraft windows (and all around the rest of the structure of a DC-9 that was FULLY pressurized.)
Made a hole in the window about the size of a quarter. All around the test dummies in that seat they spread those styrofoam packing peanuts. None of them were even disturbed by the tiny amount of air leaking out of the small hole. The window did not blow, and neither did the fuselage when hit by the small arms fire. They then set a bomb off against a window, and the pressure SLOWLY leaked out of the aircraft when the window was blown out of the frame, again, not really disturbing the passengers seated nearby (except for the effects of the bomb) In effect a bomb against the window of the aircraft is pretty similar to the least risk bomb location for your aircraft anyway (though somewhat smaller in size)
It took setting a sizeable bomb to actually cause a decompression of the aircraft. And that bomb blew out a lot more than a window.
Even if you actually lost the window the "Glass" (It aint glass which is why it doesnt shatter but sure dues scratch when they clean it badly) wouldn't be how you would lose the whole window pressure in the cabin very fast. The outflow valves are the same size as the windows or larger, so in effect the loss of a window would be the same as a controlled cabin dump as in a smoke clearing procedure.
The concept of losing a window from gun fire or your improvized weapon is a very nice hollywood story line, but neither realistic nor a threat to the aircraft.
Cheers
Wino
Find a copy of the show from the Discovery channel called "MYTHBUSTERS". They tested your theories at length and completely debunked them. episode 10 from season 1
They took powerfull handgun rounds and fired them at aircraft windows (and all around the rest of the structure of a DC-9 that was FULLY pressurized.)
Made a hole in the window about the size of a quarter. All around the test dummies in that seat they spread those styrofoam packing peanuts. None of them were even disturbed by the tiny amount of air leaking out of the small hole. The window did not blow, and neither did the fuselage when hit by the small arms fire. They then set a bomb off against a window, and the pressure SLOWLY leaked out of the aircraft when the window was blown out of the frame, again, not really disturbing the passengers seated nearby (except for the effects of the bomb) In effect a bomb against the window of the aircraft is pretty similar to the least risk bomb location for your aircraft anyway (though somewhat smaller in size)
It took setting a sizeable bomb to actually cause a decompression of the aircraft. And that bomb blew out a lot more than a window.
Even if you actually lost the window the "Glass" (It aint glass which is why it doesnt shatter but sure dues scratch when they clean it badly) wouldn't be how you would lose the whole window pressure in the cabin very fast. The outflow valves are the same size as the windows or larger, so in effect the loss of a window would be the same as a controlled cabin dump as in a smoke clearing procedure.
The concept of losing a window from gun fire or your improvized weapon is a very nice hollywood story line, but neither realistic nor a threat to the aircraft.
Cheers
Wino
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering that few of you, except for a couple of people here, have any experience with Russian aircraft or their operation or the workings of Russian SSCA/MAK accident investigation or the workings of the FSB/Russian Interior Ministry or the Russian methodology of handling such events...
I would suggest that such speculation as above is both premature and pointless until further in depth official investigation has revealed conclusive substance/direction to the happenings...as well as being highly insensitive and disrespectful under the circumstance...and especially insensitive/misleading should our constant shadow of the Media/Journos here on PPrune pick up on such unqualified comment and publish to be seen by all and sundry including the relatives of those concerned
I would suggest that such speculation as above is both premature and pointless until further in depth official investigation has revealed conclusive substance/direction to the happenings...as well as being highly insensitive and disrespectful under the circumstance...and especially insensitive/misleading should our constant shadow of the Media/Journos here on PPrune pick up on such unqualified comment and publish to be seen by all and sundry including the relatives of those concerned
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Virginia, USA
Age: 74
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not the first time two airplanes crashed on the same day from the same organization. I seem to recall two USAF C-141s crashing on the same day, I believe one in Sondrestrom, Greenland (during landing), and the other in the UK (thunderstorm) back in the mid 1970s. These airplanes crashed hours apart, however, not minutes, as in this Russia situation.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino, thanks for that info, very interesting.
BR, your attention is drawn to the title of this forum, specifically the word "Rumours." If you don't like what's being written, no need to read it!! But if what is being discussed couldn't be, they would be little point having this forum.
BR, your attention is drawn to the title of this forum, specifically the word "Rumours." If you don't like what's being written, no need to read it!! But if what is being discussed couldn't be, they would be little point having this forum.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Rumours' is one thing - insensitive and unqualified speculation is another - particularly as it is known from experience that such comment on Pprune is picked up and (mis)used by our 'friends' in the media