BREAKING NEWS: airliner missing within Egyptian FIR
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.
http://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2015/...22868c7e21.jpg
appears not to be present in the second photograph just provided.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
"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.
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.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Torquay UK
Age: 95
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good point propduffer
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!
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!
(a)My poor memory of early construction picture showed two rear pivots well aft.
(b)even so, loss of control stiffness would likely lead to flutter to destruction
very rapidly indeed, coupled with shredding and shedding of trailing edge components., rapid up downbending loads
Sorry to repeat. I've been there seen that.
Kulvers, I think we are talking about a different thing.
The part I am talking about is on the top left of the piece in the photo I linked to; it is a triangular shaped protrusion to the side.
It ought therefore to be present on the top right of the piece in the second photograph as the angle is reversed, if indeed it is the same piece.
I cannot see it. (I don't think this is the same piece of the plane)
The part I am talking about is on the top left of the piece in the photo I linked to; it is a triangular shaped protrusion to the side.
It ought therefore to be present on the top right of the piece in the second photograph as the angle is reversed, if indeed it is the same piece.
I cannot see it. (I don't think this is the same piece of the plane)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Torquay UK
Age: 95
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thank you Kulverstukas
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, Please, are we sure this last H S picture is the Left? not a djfferent one (>starboard?)
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.
http://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2015/...22868c7e21.jpg
appears not to be present in the second photograph just provided.
to 99.9 %, compare here (curvature as inverted wing, metallic attachment point to the rear, same composite failure upwards):
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...B6henruder.jpg
and the other picture of the same HS (LH)
http://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2015/...22868c7e21.jpg
Kulverstukas
Number 1, there. Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to annotate a photo and then insert it here 
Also I think the profile of #3 (squarish protrusion to the upper surface) is slightly different in the two photographs.
It could of course be a camera/distance issue, I'm not certain.
Also I think the profile of #3 (squarish protrusion to the upper surface) is slightly different in the two photographs.
It could of course be a camera/distance issue, I'm not certain.
Gave me second thoughts at first, but just spent a couple of minutes comparing the two photos, they are definitely the same, just a trick is played by the camera angle.
The triangular bit (1) is the remnants of a frame on the underside of the skin much behind the fracture plane.
There are several broken layers of the composite skin. The brownish one is the middle at (3) is hiding the gray plane which is visible clearly from the other side.
The triangular bit (1) is the remnants of a frame on the underside of the skin much behind the fracture plane.
There are several broken layers of the composite skin. The brownish one is the middle at (3) is hiding the gray plane which is visible clearly from the other side.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I told you, this video was shoot from point where #1 is located (if a bit further, then it's under lower text overlay). Triangular thingy is a rib and possibly pivot point for elevator, thus reinforced. Which can explain why it stays.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alternate places
Age: 76
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Clinton WA
Age: 75
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HS top? LE?
Ok, thanks FDM, LE/TE very clear by your pic. Deleted all previously written in this post, except: So What caused the flutter? Control linkage failure? HS pivot failure?
Very difficult to imagine a force breaking the HS along the line it did break.
Very difficult to imagine a force breaking the HS along the line it did break.
Last edited by Leightman 957; 8th Nov 2015 at 18:28. Reason: Original post text proven all wrong.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: U.S.
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ slats11
Anyone with basic understanding of the dynamics and effects of an explosion at 31 thousand feet at 400 knots would and should instantly recognise that the video cannot show this accident, smoke will never propagate that way under those conditions.
Also such black smoke comes from a sustained incomplete combustion of heavy carbon compounds (heavy fuels, plastics, rubber, etc.), a bomb (especially high explosives)will give off a puff of white smoke, as the essence of a chemical explosion is instantaneous complete combustion. [...]
Anyone with basic understanding of the dynamics and effects of an explosion at 31 thousand feet at 400 knots would and should instantly recognise that the video cannot show this accident, smoke will never propagate that way under those conditions.
Also such black smoke comes from a sustained incomplete combustion of heavy carbon compounds (heavy fuels, plastics, rubber, etc.), a bomb (especially high explosives)will give off a puff of white smoke, as the essence of a chemical explosion is instantaneous complete combustion. [...]
I'm generally skeptical, too, and dismissed the video when it first came out, but as details of the crash have become clearer, I'm not as certain anymore.
To refute your absolute claims, I'd like to refer you to the following video which shows practice shoot-downs of drones by US Air National Guard planes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xISpZYajveA
In particular, look at the "kill" at 3:22 - the missile hit apparently releases and ignites a plume of fuel from the target drone, which initially burns brightly, and then turns into a puff of black smoke.
If you continue watching, for a while, there's only a small flame visible on the wreckage until a few seconds later when the flame gets larger and a visible trail of black smoke develops again.
This is by no means conclusive proof that the footage is real, but it refutes your very absolute claims that the black smoke is impossible under the conditions of the flight.
I'm still very skeptical of the reality of the footage, but I think your absolute rejection is based on shaky arguments.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE Phoenix #1781 (permalink)
#1781 (permalink)
Nope - There are way too many crackstoppers-stringers, frames ( circumferentials ) involved to act like a puncture ballon.
https://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/m...sion-minimyth/ show what can happen using same differential pressures as at altitude.
Note the section of body part at 1:40 they are hiding behind showing typical inside absent interior trim. And the extra reinforcing around the windows, the long stringers, and part frame( circumferentials )
As to the photo- it **might** be the result of the plane tumbling at speed so the body ' tube" is into the airstream .
"Unrolled" fuselage is not relevant, since the aircraft at cruise altitude(inflated state) behaves as a punctured balloon.
https://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/m...sion-minimyth/ show what can happen using same differential pressures as at altitude.
Note the section of body part at 1:40 they are hiding behind showing typical inside absent interior trim. And the extra reinforcing around the windows, the long stringers, and part frame( circumferentials )
As to the photo- it **might** be the result of the plane tumbling at speed so the body ' tube" is into the airstream .
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FDMII
An interesting picture of the L/H HS from Kulverstukas - it seems it is, as it logically should be, an inverted airfoil - doesn't it?
If so, it looks like the found part would be from the Right side? Don't you think?
And if so, it also looks as if the Leading Edge is missing?
Of course my eyes are not what they once were...
An interesting picture of the L/H HS from Kulverstukas - it seems it is, as it logically should be, an inverted airfoil - doesn't it?
If so, it looks like the found part would be from the Right side? Don't you think?
And if so, it also looks as if the Leading Edge is missing?
Of course my eyes are not what they once were...
