MH17 down near Donetsk
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wind profile may help to get an idea of the drift of falling debris:
34731 URRR Rostov-Na-Donu Sounding
Can't say much about the accuracy.
34731 URRR Rostov-Na-Donu Sounding
Can't say much about the accuracy.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on the flight path given by flightradar24, on a heading of 118 for the last 5 minutes, MH17 was flying towards TAMAK with only 30 nm to go and definately not towards Rostov (RND). Could be there was communication about an alternative flight path and it would certainly be interesting to find out if there was more to it...
The dutch safety council sais it needs more time to investigate MH17 but it will not investigate who's quilty.
Is that standard/normal? Does anyone know?
Is that standard/normal? Does anyone know?
AIBs do not seek to apportion blame or guilt.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 61
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Schiedam
Age: 43
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is not much information about this but the Public Prosecution Office (Openbaar Ministerie) is conducting a criminal investigation into the plane crash.
Source:
OM onderzoekt moord en oorlogsmisdaden bij MH17 - AMSTERDAM - PAROOL
Source:
OM onderzoekt moord en oorlogsmisdaden bij MH17 - AMSTERDAM - PAROOL
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sydney (Aust)
Age: 78
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bit that gets overlooked is the fact that the heading for the airway should have been about 106. The reason it's larger is because MH17 offset from the airway for a while and therefore had to fly a greater heading to reach TAMAK.
So, you're saying it was earlier heading more directly east? that would place it north of where it should be. Would that be enough deviation for them to scramble some fighters up to tell them to get back in their right lane? maybe not scramble, but if they already had some in the air?
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 54
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a serious issue with what here and in many forums is considered elementary:
That explosive decompression would automaticaly lead to in flight break-up.
This is more exception than rule. In most cases the plane remains intact, even on higher altitude.
In this case the total area of holes would be the size of a cargo door. Not exceptionally large.
So what caused the breakup?
That explosive decompression would automaticaly lead to in flight break-up.
This is more exception than rule. In most cases the plane remains intact, even on higher altitude.
In this case the total area of holes would be the size of a cargo door. Not exceptionally large.
So what caused the breakup?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by blackbird69
So what caused the breakup?
Just a hunch mind you!
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: NC
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it conceivable that with electrical wiring and possibly hydraulics destroyed that some of the control surfaces could be driven into the stops? Even if that is possible, could it cause the plane to break up at cruise speed?
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Washstate
Age: 79
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what caused the breakup ?
So what caused the breakup?
feel the difference ? Now multiply that force by 8 to 10 and thats for a small area of say 25 square inches. Now multiply that by say 800 for a approx body diameter closed tube into the ' wind "
In addition, plane losing control may dive or nose up or twist or turn
Forces above 3 to 4 g would exceed max design overload - ultimate - in a few seconds or less.
Last edited by SAMPUBLIUS; 13th Aug 2014 at 18:44. Reason: changed 25 inches to 25 square inches and 80 to 800
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sydney (Aust)
Age: 78
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That explosive decompression would automaticaly lead to in flight break-up.
This is more exception than rule
This is more exception than rule
There were perforations which a "normal" decompression would not have. So it would open up along those like tearing toilet paper along perforations. There is that one piece often photographed, which was just behind the cockpit, curled back before it tore off. It would loosen the next piece it is attached to, before totally separating. That gives the next piece a protruding edge (and distorted profile) to start peeling back from.
The cockpit came down more or less in one piece because it has a triple strengthened frame and skin (to resist bird strikes and hail). And the main fuselage damage started behind the cockpit, so the floor and right side still held it on, while the business class port wall and roof ripped off in one joined piece. The starboard wall came off later, and the floor twisted and broke next. With the plane "scooping" wind, port wing control surfaces damaged and port engine not running, it would have to be falling in a sharply banked dive, probably the first half of a spin dive. that would be enough Gs to separate the floor and drop the cockpit.
The sudden change of centre of gravity, coupled with more "scooping" would have levelled it off a bit and certainly turned it to port about 80 degrees. Possibly adding a last "flick" to the tail that would be the last straw/Gforce to break up the rear into 2 sections. It all broke roughly along the lines where the sections are joined together, as these are the weakest spots. Wing tips fell off, either shaken loose or being hit by other pieces of debris.
With 1 1/2 wings and one dead engine, the heaviest strongest wing section then continued on to crash at a flat low angle, probably no faster than a fast landing speed (it didn't go in deep and it didn't leave a skid furrow).
Oh and another thing -- in decompressions where the plane remained intact and flyable, there always were PILOTS left to fly it and controls left to take their commands. Here the pilots and the avionics were the first to go.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Paris Match article that was quoted earlier in the thread (Exclusif-Notre enquête sur les lieux du crash. Comment le MH17 a été abattu - Paris Match) is one of the best looking analysis I have seen so far, and concludes that the detonation point was next to business class. Not sure they are exactly right, but it is worth reading (google translate will do a passable job for non french speakers, or poor/rusty/lazy french speakers like me).
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LE MISSILE A EXPLOSÉ DERRIÈRE LE SIÈGE 5A, missile exploded behind seat 5A
I pray (is that permitted to be expressed here?) that my post be within the limits allowed mere aviation mortals....that the words communicated fall within the permissible correct and approved narrative, so help me PPRUNE.
I pray (is that permitted to be expressed here?) that my post be within the limits allowed mere aviation mortals....that the words communicated fall within the permissible correct and approved narrative, so help me PPRUNE.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: cheese
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is possible the rear steel rocket part of the missle impacted somewhere into (through?) MH17 as well. That tree sized piece moving at a very high velocity would do significant damage.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Mos Espa
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LE MISSILE A EXPLOSÉ DERRIÈRE LE SIÈGE 5A
If something hit a plane near seat No 5A then Seeker and Fuse can continue fly after detonation of warhead (which hit by multiple strike elements a cabin).
Then it another fact about launch site Snezhnoe.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 61
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://secure.flickr.com/photos/jer...s/14714323731/
http://aviaforum.ru/showpost.php?p=1593510