BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wycombe, there's a BHX MON flight as well that's been in the hold at DELMA for a good fifteen mins. Will be interesting to see what happens with the TOM flight. Nothing's been in or out of SSH for a while now.
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53° 32′ 9.19″ N, 9° 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a quibble, but the Airbus technical advisors do represent the state of manufacture and as such their findings are expected to flow through the Investigator In Charge.
It is likely that any outside influences in what the press prints come only from within states (Prime ministers, presidents etc.) and not from technical advisors on-site.
It is likely that any outside influences in what the press prints come only from within states (Prime ministers, presidents etc.) and not from technical advisors on-site.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Given the 33 km^2 area, if we assume a circle, the body was actually found no more than 3.24 km away from the main crash site."
Reports on finding the toddler were very clear she was found a great distance from the crash site. Greater than 21 miles was what was reported, and investigators needed to greatly expand their search area, especially along the earlier flightpath.
Nowhere in any of the reports was there any ambiguity as to the child being found distant from the crash site.
Reports on finding the toddler were very clear she was found a great distance from the crash site. Greater than 21 miles was what was reported, and investigators needed to greatly expand their search area, especially along the earlier flightpath.
Nowhere in any of the reports was there any ambiguity as to the child being found distant from the crash site.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR24
Planes appear and disappear with some regularity on FR24. Some of these blank areas are sharply defined. Has to do with coverage i guess. Not something to worry about. Extrapolate and wait...
This is something i warn people about when they are tracking flights of family members. Especially when they have a dicky ticker. Could scare the beep out of people unfamiliar with the tool. Love the tool though.
This is something i warn people about when they are tracking flights of family members. Especially when they have a dicky ticker. Could scare the beep out of people unfamiliar with the tool. Love the tool though.
Very diplomatic.
A later phone conversation with tourists in the resort suggested that the locals' previously warm reception was eroding, not surprisingly given that many will likely lose their livelihoods.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
been chaos at sharm this afternoon they are really screwing around by the look of it
3 thomson flights heading to sharm
TOM716 has crossed gulf of suez heading to sharm - now appears to have landed but not on arrivals
TOM620 cross coast north of cairo
TOM844 changed course short of coast and appears to be diverting to Cyprus
TFL091P almost got to sharm and has gone back to cyprus
844 + 091P on Paphos approach
TOM716 now appears to have landed but not on arrivals
monarch 8008 been circle NE of sharm over Dahab seems to have given up and appears to be diverting to hurghada
Tom 620 next to try
tom362 also going into paphos appears to be a diversion
whilst looking at paphos tom 620 cleared from fr24 well before sharm but suspect like 716 has landed at sharm
in summary 2 Tom landed, 1 Tom 1 Tui Paphos, 1 monarch hurghada
3 thomson flights heading to sharm
TOM716 has crossed gulf of suez heading to sharm - now appears to have landed but not on arrivals
TOM620 cross coast north of cairo
TOM844 changed course short of coast and appears to be diverting to Cyprus
TFL091P almost got to sharm and has gone back to cyprus
844 + 091P on Paphos approach
TOM716 now appears to have landed but not on arrivals
monarch 8008 been circle NE of sharm over Dahab seems to have given up and appears to be diverting to hurghada
Tom 620 next to try
tom362 also going into paphos appears to be a diversion
whilst looking at paphos tom 620 cleared from fr24 well before sharm but suspect like 716 has landed at sharm
in summary 2 Tom landed, 1 Tom 1 Tui Paphos, 1 monarch hurghada
Russian plane crash: US president Obama says bomb 'possibly' brought down Metrojet airliner - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
We have moved beyond "unnamed officials speaking on condition of anonymity" to Obama and Cameron. Its pretty unlikely they would be putting their credibility on the line unless there was good reason to do so.
People here initially said there had to be an innocent explanation for MH370. Most people now accept there is no innocent explanation.
It was the same with Germanwings. People said there had to be some innocent explanation, and more and more implausible theories were put forward. It was only when the French Prosecutor released clear evidence that people accepted the truth.
I have the greatest respect for air accident investigators. Their untiring efforts over many decades have made air safety such that we generally take it for granted.
But air accident investigation goes back many decades. To a time when design faults and mechanical failures and serious navigational errors were relatively common. And to a time when air crashes were generally accidents. And to a time when painstaking examination of the wreckage was often the only path to finding the truth.
But the world has changed. Innocent errors are less common. And malevolent actions are more common. Air crashes are now more likely to be a crime than at any time in history. At the same time, criminal investigators and intelligence services have access to tools like satellite data and cell phone records and metadata. Tools that did not exist when modern air accident investigation was born.
There is absolutely a place for traditional air accident investigation. But increasingly this will take place in parallel to other forms of investigation. The world has changed, and we must change with it.
It is sometimes the job of "unnamed officials" to leak information in advance of political leaders. Such "leaks" are rarely non-authorised.
To the best of our knowledge, ISIS has never claimed responsibility for something it has not done. There is no valid reason to suspect this is any different.
Russia's entry into the Syrian conflict likely put ISIS in a bind. ISIS really had to strike at Russia in some way. The alternative was to do nothing, and thereby send a message that ISIS feared Russia.
If this recording was of some other event, it is likely that event would have been found by now. There can't be that many examples of mid-air explosions of large aircraft that have been captured on video.
Bear in mind this may be quite a different type of bombing. Historically bombs have got onto planes in passengers bags. The location of the bomb within the hold was random. This time, we have a plane sitting at night at air airport where security is lax. The bomb may have been carefully placed somewhere in the tail so as to cause certain structural failure as well as immediately take out the recorders.
We have moved beyond "unnamed officials speaking on condition of anonymity" to Obama and Cameron. Its pretty unlikely they would be putting their credibility on the line unless there was good reason to do so.
People here initially said there had to be an innocent explanation for MH370. Most people now accept there is no innocent explanation.
It was the same with Germanwings. People said there had to be some innocent explanation, and more and more implausible theories were put forward. It was only when the French Prosecutor released clear evidence that people accepted the truth.
I have the greatest respect for air accident investigators. Their untiring efforts over many decades have made air safety such that we generally take it for granted.
But air accident investigation goes back many decades. To a time when design faults and mechanical failures and serious navigational errors were relatively common. And to a time when air crashes were generally accidents. And to a time when painstaking examination of the wreckage was often the only path to finding the truth.
But the world has changed. Innocent errors are less common. And malevolent actions are more common. Air crashes are now more likely to be a crime than at any time in history. At the same time, criminal investigators and intelligence services have access to tools like satellite data and cell phone records and metadata. Tools that did not exist when modern air accident investigation was born.
There is absolutely a place for traditional air accident investigation. But increasingly this will take place in parallel to other forms of investigation. The world has changed, and we must change with it.
It is sometimes the job of "unnamed officials" to leak information in advance of political leaders. Such "leaks" are rarely non-authorised.
To the best of our knowledge, ISIS has never claimed responsibility for something it has not done. There is no valid reason to suspect this is any different.
Russia's entry into the Syrian conflict likely put ISIS in a bind. ISIS really had to strike at Russia in some way. The alternative was to do nothing, and thereby send a message that ISIS feared Russia.
If this recording was of some other event, it is likely that event would have been found by now. There can't be that many examples of mid-air explosions of large aircraft that have been captured on video.
Bear in mind this may be quite a different type of bombing. Historically bombs have got onto planes in passengers bags. The location of the bomb within the hold was random. This time, we have a plane sitting at night at air airport where security is lax. The bomb may have been carefully placed somewhere in the tail so as to cause certain structural failure as well as immediately take out the recorders.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Age: 62
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The toddlers location as reported does not make sense. Does anyone know the source for this information?
Maybe it is a simple error of communication or a translation error.
The alternative is to accept a breach of the fuselage that allowed the poor child to exit, the plane then continued to fly its previous track, and the pilots did not make any call. It doesn't seem to add up.
Maybe it is a simple error of communication or a translation error.
The alternative is to accept a breach of the fuselage that allowed the poor child to exit, the plane then continued to fly its previous track, and the pilots did not make any call. It doesn't seem to add up.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not necessarily. While very unlikely, the jackscrew nut or some other attached component can fail catastrophically, instantly releasing the stab to full nose-down control.
The relatively low damage to the tail section makes it not very likely that something happened exectly there.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE jackscrew and coupling
There are now several pics of the damaged tail section which **seem** to show the coupling between the jackscrew and HS- sort of an 'H' shaped part normally attached by large pins on left and right sides. *post 1317 and 1004 for examples *
What bothers me is that that part visible in the wreckage does not seem to be broken, ie: the 'ears" on the ends of the 'H' section seem to be undamaged. Which in turn means that the pins were pulled out in the reverse direction of normal installation.
Those pins are massive compared to other parts, and the "H" section is probably a machined part. Given the expected tumbling and impact damage of the tail section evident- it is IMO dfifficult to understand how at least two pins on the legs of the "H" either fell out or were removed without any obvious sign of damage. ( ears not damaged, pins or portions of pins not evident )
Could it be that the pins/jackscrew parts were removed by ground personnel before any of the released photos were taken ?
OTOH that 'H" shaped part is *probably* not part of or related to the jackscrew at all - it does appear to be relatively thin. ??
NOTE added see post 1308 claiming H shaped part is of APU flap door assembly. Even so- how to explain removal of 'pins'/'links' ????
What bothers me is that that part visible in the wreckage does not seem to be broken, ie: the 'ears" on the ends of the 'H' section seem to be undamaged. Which in turn means that the pins were pulled out in the reverse direction of normal installation.
Those pins are massive compared to other parts, and the "H" section is probably a machined part. Given the expected tumbling and impact damage of the tail section evident- it is IMO dfifficult to understand how at least two pins on the legs of the "H" either fell out or were removed without any obvious sign of damage. ( ears not damaged, pins or portions of pins not evident )
Could it be that the pins/jackscrew parts were removed by ground personnel before any of the released photos were taken ?
OTOH that 'H" shaped part is *probably* not part of or related to the jackscrew at all - it does appear to be relatively thin. ??
NOTE added see post 1308 claiming H shaped part is of APU flap door assembly. Even so- how to explain removal of 'pins'/'links' ????
Last edited by CONSO; 6th Nov 2015 at 15:26. Reason: added post ##- and post 1308
There are many things that don't add up or outright contradictory. For example everyone takes it for granted that the bodies in the back were 'burnt', just because an unverified source says so. With the forward fuselage burnt and the rear not, I would expect it exactly the other way around. I find it hard to fathom how there could be unburnt bodies in the front, which crashed pretty much intact. I recall the well informed captain whoever in charge of the committee 'monitoring' SAR activities (the same who said the pilot reported engine trouble) stating that the wreckage was in two pieces, with the tail burnt. Perhaps something was lost in translation, or outright incorrect.
Also these 'heat flashes' have never been confirmed by any official US government source. Sources 'close to the Pentagon' or 'informed about the investigation' are as credible as my own ramblings (maybe less).
For now all we can rely on are the released photographs (and satellite map) which conclusively tell us the following:
- The plane broke up in mid-air, with the severance and fragmentation of the tail and rear fuselage early in the sequence
- The wings (minus engines), centre and front sections hit the ground in one piece
- The wings and centre section was apparently engulfed in a fireball fed by fuel from ruptured tank(s) as the soot and scorching marks on the engines far away from the ground fire cannot be explained otherwise. The dumping of much of the on-board fuel is also necessary to explain the relatively small ground fire (the nose section just 15 metres from the wing shows no sign of fire)
- The lack of anything but normal data with an abrupt stop on the FDR is consistent with what we could expect (and did predict)
Everything else is unconfirmed hearsay at the moment, as Kulverstukas well summed it up a few hundred posts ago there was absolutely no meaningful new information since two days, and we all go round and round in circles.
It is hard to judge whether the UK etc. and now Russian government reactions are based on any real intelligence or they are just the usual willy waving exercises. There is a lot of political capital that may be gained by appearing to do something on a matter where public expects firm action.
Also these 'heat flashes' have never been confirmed by any official US government source. Sources 'close to the Pentagon' or 'informed about the investigation' are as credible as my own ramblings (maybe less).
For now all we can rely on are the released photographs (and satellite map) which conclusively tell us the following:
- The plane broke up in mid-air, with the severance and fragmentation of the tail and rear fuselage early in the sequence
- The wings (minus engines), centre and front sections hit the ground in one piece
- The wings and centre section was apparently engulfed in a fireball fed by fuel from ruptured tank(s) as the soot and scorching marks on the engines far away from the ground fire cannot be explained otherwise. The dumping of much of the on-board fuel is also necessary to explain the relatively small ground fire (the nose section just 15 metres from the wing shows no sign of fire)
- The lack of anything but normal data with an abrupt stop on the FDR is consistent with what we could expect (and did predict)
Everything else is unconfirmed hearsay at the moment, as Kulverstukas well summed it up a few hundred posts ago there was absolutely no meaningful new information since two days, and we all go round and round in circles.
It is hard to judge whether the UK etc. and now Russian government reactions are based on any real intelligence or they are just the usual willy waving exercises. There is a lot of political capital that may be gained by appearing to do something on a matter where public expects firm action.
Last edited by andrasz; 6th Nov 2015 at 15:27.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rog747 wrote in Post http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9171772
Surely, we can rule out Row 9 being a emergency aisle row - as parents with a young child would not have been put in that row?
re row 9
i do not know what config metrojet had on their 321 re door 2/row 9
i think their config was the legal A321 max at 220Y so row 9 would be 2 rows ahead in zone A (fwd cabin, fwd of the door 2)
i do not know what config metrojet had on their 321 re door 2/row 9
i think their config was the legal A321 max at 220Y so row 9 would be 2 rows ahead in zone A (fwd cabin, fwd of the door 2)
