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 9th Nov 2015, 13:18
  #1881 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brighton
Posts: 39
The tail is dirty because its the APU compartment. It gets warm when the APU is used and any dirty water is going to evaporate and leave any residue behind far easier than the main fuselage. There's a sudden transition in dirt because of the firewall doesn't transmit the heat much further forward.

Airplanes don't get cleaned much these days, for various reasons, cost, environmental considerations, fleet size, etc. hence there are a few dirty looking aircraft around. Google images of a B747 and you will soon see evidence of a hydraulic leak from a rudder.

All I see here is just dirt. Skydrol or grease are most likely in the mix too, there are lots of grease points up there and it will get washed down. The transfer/paint scheme is deteriorating but that is not unusual especially at leading/trailing edges and areas where airflow vortex and turbulence occurs. This is not an indication of poor maintenance, a defect or the back of the plane falling off, but purely an aircraft that has obviously been used a lot.

Last edited by Filler Dent; 9th Nov 2015 at 14:20. Reason: bad grammar
Filler Dent is online now  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 13:47
  #1882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: NO
Posts: 38
Just that tear in the tail from a slightly different angle (to me anyway) - click for full size.


Edit: also noting that top of fr77 looks bent forwards in sardak's post yesterday.

Last edited by RYFQB; 9th Nov 2015 at 14:01.
RYFQB is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:09
  #1883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The blasted heath
Posts: 238
@Filler Dent

That my take on it as well.
A lot of aircraft are stained/dirty in that place and it is normal wear and tear.
gcal is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:10
  #1884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: North of the South Pole
Posts: 1,004
Is it not the case that the fin and the tail plane were smashed up because they were hit by the hold door, by baggage and large pieces of fuselage after the bomb exploded and as part of the disintegration?
ZeBedie is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:12
  #1885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,340
Originally Posted by andrasz View Post
@ Bertie


The logic is not entirely flawed, but there are two things firmly against it:


The slots in the fuselage side conform to allowed HS up (max 5 deg) and down (12 deg) movements, and as we have seen on several photos it is framed by strong support beams. That would limit the possible downward movement of the HS in your scenario.


As the HS moves down, the aircraft nose pitches up, and this would be recorded on the FDR prior to loss of sgnal. As the FDR loss of signal was abrupt without anything but normal parameters, the tail separation had to be one of the first events.
If the malfunction was with the jackscrew which shares the same compartment as the DFDR/CVR then whatever failed could also have broken the DFDR connection - this could also account for the CVR damage.

The strong support beams would have prevented the internal structure of the HS moving but not prevented the external structure breaking off due to the aerodynamic load/flutter. The effect could be a zoom climb then with loss of left and right HS a severe negative G bunt - both well outside the normal performance envelope. Strangely, this is what is seen on the FR24 recordings.

Just a thought
Ian W is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:16
  #1886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,340
Originally Posted by ZeBedie View Post
Is it not the case that the fin and the tail plane were smashed up because they were hit by the hold door, by baggage and large pieces of fuselage after the bomb exploded and as part of the disintegration?
As was pointed out before the leading edges of the HS and VS do not show any damage - so they were not 'hit' by anything. Yet both left and right HS broke away from the empenage. Only aerodynamic loads well outside the design limits could do that.
Ian W is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:25
  #1887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: london england
Age: 62
Posts: 15
For baffling reasons, my earlier post today, where I agreed with other posters that experienced investigators have probably reached a conclusion over whether the crash was caused by a bomb on board, pointing out they could get quickly to a dry arid crash site, has been deleted.

I also asked the make up of the investigation team. So I'll I try asking again, can anyone tell me the make up of the investigation team?
Nightingale14 is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:27
  #1888 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leighton Buzzard
Posts: 4
Parts Missing

I am completely new to PPRuNe. I am a light aircraft pilot and engineer. I have read this thread as it has developed over the last week, and followed with interest as the various parts have been found and photographed.

A028 has provided a recent update on which parts of the aircraft are missing, and I agree with his list. However, there is one other part of the aircraft that I have not been able to account for since the beginning of this thread.

Early pictures showed the two engines that had separated from the wings and fallen to earth some distance from the wings etc. Both engines APPEAR to be generally intact, except the left engine fan which rests in a sooty condition on it's own having separated from the engine.

However the picture of the left engine is misleading since everything forward of the Turbine section seems to be missing. This means that the compressor and combustion sections ie, a very large part of the engine, have not so far been shown to us.

Has anyone seen where these parts have gone ?
Barry Plumb is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:32
  #1889 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 338
@Nightingale14 investigation team

You can read my rough transcript of the press conference that i posted before. The chairman stated parties and number of investigators. So 47 in team plus 11 advisors makes a total of 58.
A0283 is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:42
  #1890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 741
Originally Posted by Smott999 View Post
PN I'm seriously asking about how, given the video showing extended moments of black smoke engulfing the rear of the aircraft, how could the tail empennage, still attached in the video, wind up apparently soot-free?
Thick boundary layer at rear... ?
HarryMann is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:42
  #1891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 44
However the picture of the left engine is misleading since everything forward of the Turbine section seems to be missing. This means that the compressor and combustion sections ie, a very large part of the engine, have not so far been shown to us.

Has anyone seen where these parts have gone ?
Exactly. And this made me wonder if there was an uncontained engine failure that started things off. Could bits of hot flying turbine parts could have ignited the center fuel tank and also created the outward hull punctures as they emerged from the other side? I would think that a catastrophic failure would also sound like a big bang on the CVR.
areobat is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:44
  #1892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: NO
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
The effect could be a zoom climb then with loss of left and right HS a severe negative G bunt - both well outside the normal performance envelope. Strangely, this is what is seen on the FR24 recordings.
I don't think a zoom climb was recorded by FR24.
RYFQB is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:45
  #1893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
In the photograph posted by RYFQB, (thank you for this) there is an abundance of marking to the lower (or higher, as it would have been originally) part of the VS which is directly in line with the missing HS.


What is the likelihood of the VS having failed first, and then being hit by a detaching HS?


Can we think of any other possible cause for the scraping and so on to this area?


Link: http://d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net...nai-flight.jpg


Also why the 'double line' scrapes to this segment? I have not seen those before. (The two sets of parallel lines on the VS going horizontally)
susier is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:46
  #1894 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 338
@Barry Plumb on engines

Both engines found with both fans. Each of which has separated.

Remarkable issues:

a. Engines impact - not really possible to have a good look of what is behind the respective LP compressors. As i wrote earlier, you would expect a part to be buried, but the ground appears to be very rocky/hard. So we have to wait for photos... we will probably get answers when they are lifting them lateron.

b. Fan spinner with soot. At first sight no soot or burn marks on the cowlings and the rest. Again remarkably clean. Only thing that i could come up with is that residual (burning) fuel and oil, after impact, could only escape out to the front, but the distance to the engine discounts that, or there must have been a minor explosion blasting the fan away from the engine (which appears unlikely - the other fan has separated too without soot). The rest of the engines appear to show little or no damage by inflight fire or low or high speed fragment damage.

c. One thing that is visible on a number of photos, from seats to very heavy components, is that they appear to have landed, throwing back and forward rocks and sand, and then the components 'bouncing' one to one and a half meters. Something that i have not really seen before. At Lockerbie one of the engines smashed straight through an asphalt surface. And again suggesting a very rocking/hard surface and subsurface. As well as some sort of forward residual speed of these components.

d. Broken fan blades on one of the fans. You would need to have a matching set of photos of the cowling to see if there have been any blade excursions. Planes and engines are of course designed and tested to contain such failures.

As usual in this stage. Part of an answer but also new questions.

Last edited by A0283; 9th Nov 2015 at 17:37.
A0283 is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:53
  #1895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
For those wondering about the role of Israel - Israel provided intel on suspected bomb on Russian jet -- report | The Times of Israel

Please note however that Times of Israel is not always a totally reliable rag. Will be interesting to see if a more reliable source backs this up.
Blake777 is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 14:58
  #1896 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: NO
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by susier View Post
Also why the 'double line' scrapes to this segment? I have not seen those before. (The two sets of parallel lines on the VS going horizontally)
I wondered about those, too, but maybe they are some kind of imprint/reflection of some internal structure? Isn't there a (fainter) third line above, close to the breaking point?
RYFQB is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 15:10
  #1897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Estonia
Posts: 75
Lef hand engine

Exactly. And this made me wonder if there was an uncontained engine failure that started things off. Could bits of hot flying turbine parts could have ignited the center fuel tank and also created the outward hull punctures as they emerged from the other side? I would think that a catastrophic failure would also sound like a big bang on the CVR.
If there was a large uncontained LH engine compressor failure, all the compressor parts flown out at high speeds and fan separated at the event, then it would be difficult to explain sooting and charring of fan that lies only some 20 or 30 meters away from the engine. There was also a comment by one russian expert exploring LH engine rear part about melted non aluminium metal. Then most probably - loose fan hitting fuselage at right point - fuselage would have been broken in half before wings.

It is most probable that the engine got damaged in the falling phase, still attached and working by ingesting flames from fire.
Left side of the forward fuselage have marks of inflight fire and sooting up to the nose cone.
Prada is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 15:28
  #1898 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,340
Originally Posted by RYFQB View Post
I don't think a zoom climb was recorded by FR24.
It was recorded the thin trace - then someone 'computed' a different trajectory smoothing where changes were not thought realistic.
Ian W is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 15:35
  #1899 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,218
Engines

Prada

It is most probable that the engine got damaged in the falling phase, still attached and working by ingesting flames from fire.
Left side of the forward fuselage have marks of inflight fire and sooting up to the nose cone.
Agree

Sooting likiely associated with a free fall in flames while still attached to wing and later separated due to spin/spiral side loadings.

I believe the other engine which also shows up in the news videos is quite similar in completeness and ground impact damage.

Nothing of major interest except the suggestion of fire forward of the wing while the engine was still attached.

Incidently, I've never heard of a tail separation causing a fuselage break forward of a wing box but we'll see what turns out in this report as all will be revealed eventually.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2015, 15:49
  #1900 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 338
Still missing update 8

Another set of pictures that i am still looking for is a better top down view of the main impact site. From the cockpit section to the wing.

When you look at the available images it COULD look like roughly three section segments that lie in a zig zag, one segment behind the other, between cockpit and wing.
You may have expected a denser debris field. But we dont know how long there was a fire and what rescuers had to do to put out the fire and recover the passengers.

When you estimate the distance between wing and cockpit, and then would add distance because of the possible zigzag ... what do you get? Has anyone measured either one of those two distances?

The max total length that i expect would run from behind the front pax door to a number of frames before the third pax door.

Early on i wondered whether the whole fuselage was visible. But the clear section segment around the third pax door rejects that. Which means that my impression is that we are still missing the aft cargo hold as described in update 7.
A0283 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.