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 8th Nov 2015, 16:52
  #1781 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Arizona
Age: 72
Posts: 62
Center fuel tank explosion?

n in-flight explosion at FL310 resulting in a fireball cannot be due to structural failure. It must either be a bomb, or involve an engine explosion puncturing fuel tanks.
How about a central fuel tank explosion similar to TWA800? Has that been completely prevented by actions taken since TWA800, or is it still a possibility? Such an explosion would explain all the evidence that I've seen.
Mesoman is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 16:54
  #1782 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,341
Originally Posted by funfly View Post
That might be the case but it will be of more concern if this was a structural failure.

To some extent we can take precautions against outsiders taking action even though these actions may only be to reassure passengers and to make it more difficult for the perpetrators. Structure failures would reflect on the airworthiness of a lot of aircraft currently in service with far more repercussions.

FF
Strangely, considering this forum, this point seems to have been grossly underestimated. Rather than join those running around trying to prove it was a bomb it might be best to work painstakingly to show that it could not have been a structural failure.

The Horizontal Stabilizer and rudder broke off. It would appear that only one half of the HS has been found and it shows extreme structural failure breaking upward without apparent impact damage from aircraft structures. This is a failure most aircraft engineers would say was close to impossible to envisage even if there had been a bomb in the rear of the aircraft. I think I am right in saying that there is not a case of a 321 crash where the horizontal stabilizer has broken away cleanly at its attachment point.
We will be living with terrorist bombs on aircraft for decades to come and there are ways of ensuring security. But we also need to ensure that there is no problem with maintenance or airframe design that might cause this type of breakup. So the investigators really need to find the other HS and show how and why they broke off the aircraft.
Ian W is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 17:16
  #1783 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 36
Possible sequence?

I'm also puzzled as the damage to the HS/VS, a possible explanation would be:

-explosive event (decompression due to skin failure and/or bomb) detach fuselage skin directly in front of VS, that goes up to the VS increasing the load instantly over the design limits, VS crumbles it basis, deforming the attachment of the jackscrew assembly, this would go forward, pulling the HS upwards (or jackscrew break free with similar consequences).
-This put the AC in a nose down attitude instantly, bending the engine pylons upwards and probably detaching the APU/tail cone.
-The HS exceeds the design limits also, breaking in the left side and departing.
-The remaining HS departs with the underside of fuselage probably still attached and also maybe the jackscrew assembly.
-The remaining tail fuselage becomes detached later maybe under aerodynamic and or rotational forces.

Last edited by Mauersegler; 8th Nov 2015 at 17:34. Reason: "departs" replaces "goes down"
Mauersegler is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 17:23
  #1784 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,131
Originally Posted by Mesoman View Post
How about a central fuel tank explosion similar to TWA800? Has that been completely prevented by actions taken since TWA800, or is it still a possibility? Such an explosion would explain all the evidence that I've seen.
If a fuel/air explosion in the CWT or ACT was found to be the cause, the fallout wouldn't bear thinking about - both from the airworthiness point of view (all Airbus narrow-bodies grounded?) and politically (large quantities of international humble pie being eaten).
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 17:48
  #1785 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 409
For what it is worth from today's NYPost

“The indications and analysis so far of the sound on the black box indicate it was a bomb,” said the Egyptian investigation team member, who asked not to be named due to sensitivities. “We are 90 percent sure it was a bomb.”

Interesting quote from Tim Clark:

“What happened in Sharm al-Sheikh last week, and to a lesser extent with the … (Germanwings) aircraft, are game changers for our industry,” Emirates Airlines President Tim Clark said, referring to the crash of a Germanwings airliner in the French Alps in March, believed crashed deliberately by its co-pilot.
“They have to be addressed at industry level because no doubt the countries — U.S., Europe — I would think will make some fairly stringent, draconian demands on the way aviation works with security,” he said at the Dubai Airshow.
b1lanc is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 17:53
  #1786 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Clinton WA
Age: 71
Posts: 74
What it wasn't

After 1800 posts is a lot of certainty by posters had emerged, yet the current set of posted conclusions are significantly divided in direct opposition. A lot of certainty is going to eventually be proven wrong. What we do know so far as possibilities, though less so as probabilities:

The ‘event’ may have been of long (20+ seconds) or short (3 seconds) duration.

Primary cause may or may not have been an onboard explosion, missile strike, mechanical failure, or fatigue failure.

Explosion may or may not have been a bomb, missile, battery+, or other, and may not have, by itself, been sufficient to cause the results, meaning more than one item combined to produce an explosive effect, intentionally or by happenstance.

An intentional 'bomb'-- pyro or non pyro—may have been loaded by happenstance, or placed very intentionally at a very specific location for a very specific reason.

A fire in the aft hold so far cannot be ruled out as primary or located with certainty in the event sequence.

HS failure, tail section parting, aft fuselage parting, and any of the three HS support points may each have been primary in sequence.

HS shearing off may have been up, or down, or multiple ups and downs of high or low frequency….and the HS or support structure may have been previously compromised by chemical or mechanical action.

Loss of any of the three HS support points dooms the airframe and frees the HS to large movements in response to both positive and negative loads. The range of possible sequences of resulting actions of the loss of one of the HS pivots in an AC departing normal flight attitudes have not yet been argued and there is as yet no consensus.

It is generally deemed to be in the best interests of the public and of the investigation that the public including PPRuNe should not know all that is known.


Of note:
Engine pylons are weaker against abrupt yaw than abrupt pitch loads.
Maximum accelerations in pitch or yaw by an intact airframe will be lower than accelerations by an incomplete airframe.
A missile strike does not always result in a warhead explosion. Especially if the warhead explosive has been removed.
“Smoke” in the video may have been added not to enhance an effect but to obscure something, like the absence of smoke, or to misdirect from something else. If you can refrain from laughing, ask why that might be done. One reason might an absence of explosive fingerprint.

The list or people, organizations, political entities, government agencies, and governments who/which for a wide variety of perhaps extremely bizarre reasons known only to themselves might want to “down” a very specific or just some random airliner to leverage some very large political rock is very very long, with most of them probably thinking in terms of a false flag operation rather than advertising their name.
Leightman 957 is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:04
  #1787 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
I can make some summarizing again if you don't mind.

1) I'm sure investigators, contrary to PPRuNe detectives, has all photos of all parts of plane and some of them have plenty of time to look at them at site and even touch them with their own hands. So there is no "mystery" of lost part of HS and VS (for them, or we will know).
2) We cant beat them in game "look we found some suspicious holes, it's a bomb!" so if there was clear evidence of explosion it will be found and nailed already.
3) There is no clear evidence of the way relaxed security at SSH make bomb planting possible or we already will read about suspects arrested.
4) All other "clues", such as sat surveillance, phone intercepts etc. are too weak to make case strong enough to pinpoint it. They can however add flavors after it will be solved through other means.

Major mess organized in Egypt by other countries in my opinion can be not directly driven by any proof but by the fear that in current conditions - even if this was not terrorist case - bombing can be easily made. For example, if you found that your jewelry was stolen, you will check locks and latches and repair them immediately, asking somebody to guard your house till you will go to hardware store, even if most probable case was that your housemaid stole them.
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:06
  #1788 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Clinton WA
Age: 71
Posts: 74
HS second pic

Kulver, Thanks so much for your continuing supply of photos. Your last HS pic at 1790 shows a LOT of leading edge damage not previously visible. The damage is generalized along the visible length (as it would be by a large flying skin section), and not an impact at a single point.

Would posters who have suggested a failure of the left HS tip upward agree that the LE damage in this pic would have probably decreased the strength of the left of HS and increased the probability of the line of failure at the HS center sections as observed? Absent any pic so far of the right HS, how would LE damage to it impact a proposed sequence of events?
Leightman 957 is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:13
  #1789 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
Your last HS pic at 1790 shows a LOT of leading edge damage not previously visible.
Are you sure it is leading edge? As PPRuNe conclusion was it's left wing of HS, for me it looks more like elevator was torn off.
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:14
  #1790 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
Leightman, I hesitate to question a pro but is it not the trailing edge/elevator that is damaged or missing, rather than the leading edge?


ETA, crossed posts with Kulverstukas
susier is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:16
  #1791 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alternate places
Age: 72
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by Leightman 957 View Post
. . . .

Would posters who have suggested a failure of the left HS tip upward agree that the LE damage in this pic . . .
Leightman 957, I believe we're seeing the top of the LH HS, and the damage is along the trailing edge.
FDMII is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:17
  #1792 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 55
Posts: 708
@ Leightman 957

That is the LEFT HS and we are seeing the top surface. The damage is to the trailing edge, probably caused by elevator flutter. But yes, it could have contributed to the weakening of the structure.

Kulver, thanks for the contribution, once again the first new information after so many pages of circular arguments.

Edit: wow, a few of us jumped on this quiet fast, 3 comments to the same extent before I finished typing
andrasz is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:20
  #1793 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
And if it is trailing edge, we now face strange picture about any control surfaces (rudder, elevators, slats etc.) are torn off or missing (not shown to us).
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:21
  #1794 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 36
Thanks for the new picture Kulverstukas,
As PPRuNe conclusion was it's left wing of HS, for me it looks more like elevator was torn off.
(edit: yes, we see the upper side of HS -left side- and the elevator is torn off, the leading edge is ok, see the other picture here http://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2015/...22868c7e21.jpg)
looks like it was suddenly put in the wrong angle... that and a smashed VS...
Mauersegler is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:23
  #1795 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Absolutely 100% certain that is the top of the LH HS and not the underside of the RH? Because if it was, it would clarify a lot of previous suggestions in very short order.
Bertie Bonkers is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:27
  #1796 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
It doesn't look as impact damage, rather as something with vector left to right (I mean last pic).
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:31
  #1797 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Torquay UK
Age: 91
Posts: 163
thank you Kulverstukas

Originally Posted by Kulverstukas View Post
And if it is trailing edge, we now face strange picture about any control surfaces (rudder, elevators, slats etc.) are torn off or missing (not shown to us).
Sorry, Please, are we sure this last H S picture is the Left? not a djfferent one (>starboard?)
wilyflier is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:37
  #1798 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N. California
Age: 75
Posts: 184
This is an outstanding thread, a credit to PPRuNe but there are two kinds of posts I've mostly skipped over. The first kind are the "picture analysis" posts which seem to be a separate subject to me. The second type of posts I discount are the ones that propose that if the front joint of the HS were to disengage the HS would flop to 90° to the flight path. I don't have a picture of a ready to install 321 HS but if someone can find such a picture I'm sure it will show that about 2/3rds of the surface area is behind the pivot point. Thus MD80 fanatic is correct in his statement that the HS would align itself with the wind direction in case of loss of the front connection.

It is possible that when the tail section separated from the rest of the plane the VS caught the 280kt (IAS) wind blast and overpowered the HS effects and caused the HS to snap from leading edge down to leading edge up (or even back and forth) and imposed destructive loads. But that can only be a theory for now.


A second point that has been bothering me a bit is all the finger pointing at ISIS. The Russians have been very busy for the last few weeks bombing Al Nustra front positions (read: Al Quida), so they are more likely to be the group with a grudge against Russia.

Again: great thread!
Propduffer is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:45
  #1799 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
The triangular shaped protrusion at the top left of this image:


http://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2015/...22868c7e21.jpg


appears not to be present in the second photograph just provided.
susier is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2015, 18:48
  #1800 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,022
A second point that has been bothering me a bit is all the finger pointing at ISIS. The Russians have been very busy for the last few weeks bombing Al Nustra front positions (read: Al Quida), so they are more likely to be the group with a grudge against Russia.
Is there huge difference between dealing with different terrorist organizations?

"Even before the military operation in Syria, the General staff of the Defense Ministry made a responsible decision. The essence of this solution lies in our traditional Russian desire to adhere strictly to the principles of legality and justice. So now, all of our munitions are divided into two categories: regular and moderate. Against ordinary terrorists, we use only conventional munitions. Against moderate terrorists, we use solely moderate ammunition. So don't worry, we take into account the moderation of some of the terrorists and treat them with justice."

To clarify, I asked: "Tell me, how your conventional munitions differ from the moderate?"

"Our conventional munitions differ from moderate exactly the same as regular terrorists in Syria are different from the moderate terrorists: they are painted with different paint, in a lighter and more moderate tones," - said the officer and hung up.
Kulverstukas 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 © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.