Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR

Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:20
  #301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 79
Posts: 199
I'm struck by the similarity of these three holes in the picture's foreground to shrapnel damage:


Can anyone suggest how else a wing impacting inverted could have sustained these sharply defined, punched inward, holes?
PersonFromPorlock is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:20
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 792
@ Modesto

You speak with the wisdom of someone who saw and knows. Having called that fine land home for some years, I can only second your every word.

Ahlan wa'Sahlan
andrasz is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:27
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 2,412
The EASA Safety Information Bulletin for North Sinai has been around since last year:

http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/SIB_20...IB_2014-30R1_1

There has been much mis-information about this zone, and airlines who do and don't fly through it. Worth reading it to find what it is we have been avoiding for a while now.

We route to avoid it (including above FL260), always.
HundredPercentPlease is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:29
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New England
Age: 80
Posts: 22
rear fuselage

Quote:

"but where is the rear fuselage? Did it break at the wing box as well as the tail section?"

Blown to smithereens?
Kubarque is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:41
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,864
Can anyone suggest how else a wing impacting inverted could have sustained these sharply defined, punched inward, holes?
For comparison, here is a hi-res picture of a piece of the MH17 wreckage with what were deemed to be missile warhead puncture marks:

http://www.theunhivedmind.com/wordpr...17370giant.jpg

You can see the many small pits on the surface of the MH17 panels just under the cockpit window.

Is that part of the A321 wingtip in the Egypt crash aluminum or plastic?
Airbubba is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:47
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 78
Posts: 1,460
Things that can happen when you lose the tail

It is fairly clear that the tail came off/ apart while inflight.
One of the major functions of the tail is to supply down force to balance the wing's pitching moment. If the tail is suddenly removed, the aircraft will pitch down abruptly and its pitch rate momentum may be sufficient to carry into another cycle if the initial pitchover does not destroy the wing integrity/symmetry completely.

Another function of the tail is to minimize yaw. With sufficient yaw, the static system may become pressurized by dynamic airflow causing altimetry measuring systems to indicate too low and rate of climb indications to go strongly negative. Likewise, if the aircraft then momentarily points back into the airflow, altitude will appear to increase and rate of climb will go strongly positive.

Once the aircraft pitches strongly nose down, deceleration will be extreme, and the inertial system will respond assuming it is still powered. The only source of electrical power is the engines, and the loss of data at ~FL280 is probably indicative that the engines were shed at that point. The RAT system probably would not function in such a chaotic environment.

One characteristic of Airbus C* aircraft control systems is that they attempt to maintain their velocity vector direction until disturbed by an outside force. The slight decrease in climb rate at 04:12:34 might result from air venting through a fuselage rupture causing a net nose down force.

Structural failures can be instantaneous, but frequently there is a cascading breakup sequence. I suspect that there was such a cascade of failures in this case leading to the obvious departure from controlled flight.

The FR24 data should be looked at in this context.
Machinbird is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:49
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 650
That looks not unlike what happens when aluminum melts, and then drops away when the oxide layer holding it together breaks. Usually when I'm about to put the filler rod to it . . .
Chu Chu is online now  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:55
  #308 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,742
Hundredpercent, can you comment on the 260 restriction with a presumed threat ceiling of 15k?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 18:58
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 129
Has there been sign of HS ?
If we make the guess that there was a rear pressure bulkhead failure, would that not potentially carry away some/all of HS?

The pics I've seen show the empennage but with only a somewhat fractured VS....
Smott999 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:03
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 792
100+ posts and six pages down only two meaningful pieces of information emerged since I posted a summary (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9164634) this morning, the satellite map of the main wreckage locations and the video of the crash site, both confirming my initial assessment.

It is now confirmed that the tailplane separated early in the breakup sequence (the large tail part is located 2.3 kilometres from the main wreckage), with most of the rear fuselage disintegrating up till the wing box, however front of that the structure remained essentially intact and fell to the ground in one piece.

What is highly significant (and I'm surprised nobody else picked this up) is that the entire horizontal stabilizer is missing from the tail wreckage. On some of the published photos it is possible to see that the tail cone aft of the rear pressure bulkhead with the HS structure and APU has cleanly broken away. The tail cone with the APU is located about 400 metres to the South of the tail structure, however I have not seen any photo or video of the Horizontal Stabilizeter (perhaps it is the piece of wreckage marked on the map another couple of hundred metres south of the APU/tailcone).

We do not yet know whether the separation of the tail was a cause or effect, however the tail structure is a fairly strong one and usually survives low velocity ground impacts in one piece even if the rest of the airplane disintegrates. A rupture of the rear pressure bulkhead could produce exactly the kind of damage to the tail as we are seeing, and would render the aircraft instantly uncontrollable.

Of course an alternate explanation would be an explosion in the rear fuselage, but the lack of any credible claim for responsibility makes that scenario more unlikely (such actions are typically made to publicise a cause, no matter how perverted it may be, keeping silent about it defeats the whole point).
andrasz is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:11
  #311 (permalink)  

FX Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 64
Posts: 900
I think it would be fairly obvious if this plane had been shot down by a SAM. It was evident from the word go that MH17 was and that was with interested parties at the crash site and in the area trying to cover it up.

You would need a BUK-style missile to get to a plane's cruise height. ISIS don't have that sort of weaponry. Even if mobile systems did fall into their hands in Libya (which is highly doubtful) you can't drive them across the desert to Sinai without someone noticing.

My son went through Sharm earlier this year. He says the security was 'standard' although there were loads of army guards there.
angels is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:12
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 129
To be fair, I did ask just recently about the HS a few posts up....

I've been wondering if a RPB blowout would blow it away from the rest of the empennage.

Wondering if they have found it, as it does not seem to be part of what's left of the tail.....
Smott999 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:15
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: ch
Posts: 3
@ Machinbird

Very plausible
pavlik1 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:15
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: No longer welcome status
Posts: 249
Originally Posted by angels View Post
I think it would be fairly obvious if this plane had been shot down by a SAM. It was evident from the word go that MH17 was and that was with interested parties at the crash site and in the area trying to cover it up.

You would need a BUK-style missile to get to a plane's cruise height. ISIS don't have that sort of weaponry. Even if mobile systems did fall into their hands in Libya (which is highly doubtful) you can't drive them across the desert to Sinai without someone noticing.

My son went through Sharm earlier this year. He says the security was 'standard' although there were loads of army guards there.
Israeli's not calling it and lets face it they have enough "equipment" watching for missile launches.
racedo is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:20
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 792
@ Smott999


Indeed you did, while I was typing.

The missing HS together with the APU and the entire tail cone is consistent with a RPB rupture. Given that the rest of the tail structure has reached the ground relatively whole and intact, if this was indeed the case the investigators probably know it already.
andrasz is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:26
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,445
Chronus

The absence of ground scorch marks around the well incinerated centre section debris field suggests a large part of the airframe was ablaze before impact with terrain. It exhibits the hall marks of an intense dynamic fuel fed fire, consuming much of the centre section of the airframe in flight, at altitude.
Not conclusive

There are plenty of other explanations and evidence to examine.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:29
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Honestly I can't think of anything less transparent than a joint Russian-Egyptian investigation

I have enough faith in Russian investigators. You can say what you want about Russians, but they have some excellent aviators, engineers, and experts. I do think they will be able to discover what happened. There should be enough clues now, wreckage, recorders, radar data, mx records; further, there will be quite a bit of public pressure in Russia to figure this out.
deptrai is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:36
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 118
Tail cone/APU

Back at NH is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 19:54
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,349
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Even a very major hydraulic leak doesn't make an airliner fall out of the sky
A persistent leak can cause delamination of the metal/plastic sandwich that makes up the skin of the aircraft and of the compoisites in other components. In the wrong area the delamination could cause stresses, weakness and fatigue in unexpected ways that could lead to unexpected rupture of the skin if it is part of the pressure vessel or complete failure of major components if it is actually a load bearing area.

Flaw Found In Airbus Rudders: NTSB Orders Inspection Of AA 587 Aircraft | March 31, 2006 | www.rockawave.com | Wave of Long Island
Ian W is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2015, 20:26
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 73
Posts: 0
LOMAPASEO

Neither did I suggest it was "conclusive" nor did I ever entertain such thought.

"There are plenty of other explanations and evidence to examine."

But of course there is much evidence to examine and am sure these will be considered as and when they become known.

My comments were no more than observations derived from the photographic evidence appearing on this forum. Metal scorched and melted by intense fire and heat laying on an arid soil which does not exhibit any signs of the effects of such fire and heat. Would it therefore be incorrect to assume that there was no fuel discharged from ruptured tanks when a section of the aircraft impacted the ground. If this assumption is correct, would it not reasonably follow that the fuel must have burned whilst the aircraft, intact or otherwise, was in the air.

Do you have any other explanations or evidence for us to examine and comment on.
Chronus is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.