Ukrainian Aircraft down in Iran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 62
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(i) do not have the capability to identify 'non-threats' in the broad terminal area of one of its major commercial airports, and
(ii) identified an (unknown) foreign aircraft/air vehicle incursion in that same airspace at around that time that they considered it appropriate to respond to with a SAM ?
Any air defence system worth its salt has the capability to sort the 'wheat from the chaff' so to speak. Commercial RPT flights that squawk on what is effectively a civilian version of a IFF system shouldn't be processed as a target for the system to respond to.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's 40 years since I operated through Teheran but I still remember well how the place is surrounded by some pretty high terrain. No pilot needing to make a quick return from the position of the incident would voluntarily make a right turn. All the traffic pattern is to the south where the terrain is relatively level.
Re the front end of a missile located at some distance from the crash site: I would think that the damage pattern from a continuous rod warhead, which this would imply, would not be consistent with the "holes" seen. I think the higher resolution image showing that some of the "inward pointing holes" turned out to be stones on the wing is very significant.
The ring-rod system seems more ideal for high-altitude shootdown of aircraft and not useful for a short range defense against missiles.
I make no claim that a missile of any kind was involved, but if the TOR M1 was, it was certainly capable of bringing the plane down and would leave a lot of small holes.
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: With hardship in an old Astra
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm... curious how the head of the missile, following an explosive separation from the body, (which from the charred remains seems to have left it with questionable aerodynamic symmetry), managed to land:
a. Flat (rather than with a nose down component induced by the aft fins).
b. With zero axial or transverse velocity (suggested by the lack of disturbed earth around it).
c. Positioned almost exactly in the centre of a comparatively narrow ditch.
d. Aligned with the ditch axis to within a degree or so.
e. Without transferring any chips or scrapes to the surrounding brickwork from the body and fins.
f. Without causing any accumulations against the brickwork of ejected stones or soil, etc., from what must have been a fairly healthy impact.
... rather brings to mind the old rule about camouflage: "There are no straight lines in nature...!", which sought to alert the unwary to possible human interference in the immediate surroundings...
b. With zero axial or transverse velocity (suggested by the lack of disturbed earth around it).
c. Positioned almost exactly in the centre of a comparatively narrow ditch.
d. Aligned with the ditch axis to within a degree or so.
e. Without transferring any chips or scrapes to the surrounding brickwork from the body and fins.
f. Without causing any accumulations against the brickwork of ejected stones or soil, etc., from what must have been a fairly healthy impact.
So you posit that the Iranian SAM defence batteries :
(i) do not have the capability to identify 'non-threats' in the broad terminal area of one of its major commercial airports, and
(ii) identified an (unknown) foreign aircraft/air vehicle incursion in that same airspace at around that time that they considered it appropriate to respond to with a SAM ?
Any air defence system worth its salt has the capability to sort the 'wheat from the chaff' so to speak. Commercial RPT flights that squawk on what is effectively a civilian version of a IFF system shouldn't be processed as a target for the system to respond to.
(i) do not have the capability to identify 'non-threats' in the broad terminal area of one of its major commercial airports, and
(ii) identified an (unknown) foreign aircraft/air vehicle incursion in that same airspace at around that time that they considered it appropriate to respond to with a SAM ?
Any air defence system worth its salt has the capability to sort the 'wheat from the chaff' so to speak. Commercial RPT flights that squawk on what is effectively a civilian version of a IFF system shouldn't be processed as a target for the system to respond to.
Of course, mistakes/blunders are to be found in any organization. The shoot-down of Iran Air 655 by the U.S.S. Vincennes is a perfect example. The Navy crew made a tragic mistake, but the pilots of the Iran Air flight put themselves and their passengers at risk by operating a civilian flight in an area of military hostilities. Naturally, that doesn’t justify what happened, but it does show how unintended consequences can lead to tragedy when civilians enter a zone considered hostile by a military force.
I wonder if the Ukraine 737 crew was aware of the fact that they were starting their flight shortly after a ballistic missile attack launched by Iran? It strikes me that every surface-to-air missile site in Iran would have been on high alert at that moment just like the crew of the Vincennes was years earlier. You say that any air defense system can easily “separate the wheat from the chaff”. True, but the Aegis system and the crew on the Vincennes failed to do so, didn’t they?
I remember looking down when turning final at Mehrabad International Airport, then a joint use airport and the only one serving Teheran at the time. The Iranians had just installed the British Rapier short range missile defense system. The crew manning the sites around the airport perimeter tracked us every time we landed and I assume they tracked plenty of civilian aircraft too. These were live missiles and we were one switch away from being accidentally shot down. Based on the crazy blunders I saw each day; I was rightfully nervous.
Could an excited Iranian missile defense site commander or one of his underlings get trigger happy and finish off an airliner with an engine fire, perhaps not showing an IFF code and making an unusual flight path toward the capitol city of Teheran? Unlikely, but so are many accidental shoot-downs.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bristol
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danilov: "We are studying the version of the defeat of the Ukrainian" Boeing "anti-aircraft missile of the Russian SAM" Tor "and intend to look for fragments of the rocket"
NSDC Secretary Alexei Danilov in a comment on censor net reported:A commission on the UIA plane crash in Tehran includes experts involved in an international investigation into the attack by Russian troops on Malaysian MF-17 on July 17, 2014.
"According to the decision of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, the State Commission for Investigation of the Boeing Accident arrived at Tehran tonight. The group consists of 45 people, representing 12 ministries and agencies.
A meeting is currently underway with the participation of representatives of the competent authorities of Iran, including Iran's ICAO, an international civil aviation organization. Different versions of a sudden plane crash are studied, among the main ones:
- the defeat of the aircraft by an anti-aircraft missile (SAM), in particular, "Thor" SAM, as information on the detection of fragments of a Russian missile near the crash site has already appeared on the Internet;
- collision with a UAV or other flying object;
- destruction and explosion of the engine for technical reasons;
- explosion inside the plane as a result of a terrorist attack.
The commission includes experts involved in an international investigation into the attack by Russian servicemen on the Malaysian Boeing MN-17 on July 17, 2014 in the airspace of Ukraine, as well as the examination of fragments of the Russian anti-aircraft missile "Buk" that shot down a Malaysian aircraft. As you know, our experts have shown a high level of professionalism in this matter.
Our commission is currently agreeing with the Iranian authorities on the issue of the site of the disaster, and intends to search the fragments of the Russian anti-aircraft rocket "Thor" according to the data that was published on the Internet. We use all the experience of investigating the attack on the Boeing MN-17 to establish the truth in the case of the death of a Ukrainian aircraft in Tehran.
We are currently conducting effective diplomatic talks with the Iranian side, there is every reason to hope for cooperation on all issues, including the participation of our commission in deciphering the "black boxes" of our aircraft. The investigation into the deaths of Ukrainian citizens is under the personal control of the President of Ukraine, and we will immediately inform the Ukrainian society and the media of any data that may be published. "
"According to the decision of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, the State Commission for Investigation of the Boeing Accident arrived at Tehran tonight. The group consists of 45 people, representing 12 ministries and agencies.
A meeting is currently underway with the participation of representatives of the competent authorities of Iran, including Iran's ICAO, an international civil aviation organization. Different versions of a sudden plane crash are studied, among the main ones:
- the defeat of the aircraft by an anti-aircraft missile (SAM), in particular, "Thor" SAM, as information on the detection of fragments of a Russian missile near the crash site has already appeared on the Internet;
- collision with a UAV or other flying object;
- destruction and explosion of the engine for technical reasons;
- explosion inside the plane as a result of a terrorist attack.
The commission includes experts involved in an international investigation into the attack by Russian servicemen on the Malaysian Boeing MN-17 on July 17, 2014 in the airspace of Ukraine, as well as the examination of fragments of the Russian anti-aircraft missile "Buk" that shot down a Malaysian aircraft. As you know, our experts have shown a high level of professionalism in this matter.
Our commission is currently agreeing with the Iranian authorities on the issue of the site of the disaster, and intends to search the fragments of the Russian anti-aircraft rocket "Thor" according to the data that was published on the Internet. We use all the experience of investigating the attack on the Boeing MN-17 to establish the truth in the case of the death of a Ukrainian aircraft in Tehran.
We are currently conducting effective diplomatic talks with the Iranian side, there is every reason to hope for cooperation on all issues, including the participation of our commission in deciphering the "black boxes" of our aircraft. The investigation into the deaths of Ukrainian citizens is under the personal control of the President of Ukraine, and we will immediately inform the Ukrainian society and the media of any data that may be published. "
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you got a source for that exact wording, because as far as I know the cowling will never be able to contain an errant blade, only the fan casing will? Moreover,
- the fan appears to me to be too far forward to be able to puncture a wing tank;
- the AD's regarding fan blade attachment on the CFM56 engines have been around for so long that there should be a great deal of awareness around about this issue, to the extent that this shouldn't be an issue anymore;
- the two Southwest aircraft which had uncontained engine failures were 10-15 years old, and the present aircraft is only about 3 years old;
- from a statistical point of view since several years there is a huge amount of B737's with these engines around, logging a tremendous amount of flying hours, yet such a catastrophic engine failure has never happened....
- the fan appears to me to be too far forward to be able to puncture a wing tank;
- the AD's regarding fan blade attachment on the CFM56 engines have been around for so long that there should be a great deal of awareness around about this issue, to the extent that this shouldn't be an issue anymore;
- the two Southwest aircraft which had uncontained engine failures were 10-15 years old, and the present aircraft is only about 3 years old;
- from a statistical point of view since several years there is a huge amount of B737's with these engines around, logging a tremendous amount of flying hours, yet such a catastrophic engine failure has never happened....
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/19/ntsb...-accident.html
It's 40 years since I operated through Teheran but I still remember well how the place is surrounded by some pretty high terrain. No pilot needing to make a quick return from the position of the incident would voluntarily make a right turn. All the traffic pattern is to the south where the terrain is relatively level.
Your memory out of Tehran is correct - those mountains are very impressive.
In looking at the area it seems so ordinary. Malls, a go-kart track, car wash, furniture store, just like any other suburb. It's amazing that there weren't casualties on the ground. There are hundreds of houses the plane might have hit.
There's a CNN photo with a water tower in the background that I'm trying to match with Google Earth.
HERE
This plane operated from Imam Khomeini International, 10 miles to the south-southwest of Mehrabad International Airport within Tehran proper. The Imam Khomeini airport didn't open until May 2004.
Your memory out of Tehran is correct - those mountains are very impressive.
In looking at the area it seems so ordinary. Malls, a go-kart track, car wash, furniture store, just like any other suburb. It's amazing that there weren't casualties on the ground. There are hundreds of houses the plane might have hit.
There's a CNN photo with a water tower in the background that I'm trying to match with Google Earth.
Your memory out of Tehran is correct - those mountains are very impressive.
In looking at the area it seems so ordinary. Malls, a go-kart track, car wash, furniture store, just like any other suburb. It's amazing that there weren't casualties on the ground. There are hundreds of houses the plane might have hit.
There's a CNN photo with a water tower in the background that I'm trying to match with Google Earth.
I think its at 35°33'33.36"N - 51° 6'8.87"E
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Belfast
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=NutLoose;10657824"Ukranian passenger jet crashed after being hit by Iranian TOR M1 missile"[/QUOTE]
A blog written in broken English, written by a guy with a Russian name, using a gmail address as a primary contact?
Yup, I think that one scores slightly lower than Twitter on the credibility scale.
For a real response to this image, check the AVHerald reporting on the crash. It looks unrelated to the crash.
A blog written in broken English, written by a guy with a Russian name, using a gmail address as a primary contact?
Yup, I think that one scores slightly lower than Twitter on the credibility scale.
For a real response to this image, check the AVHerald reporting on the crash. It looks unrelated to the crash.
Of course the key remaining question is what caused the initial fire and the apparent total loss of electrical systems. I doubt the CVR/FDR will be of much use, both would have stopped recording at the time of electrical failure.
Have said it before, but with all the noise on the thread it is now deeply burried so let me repeat: in a totalitarian society (and let's not open a debate whether Iran is one) EVERYTHING that appears in formal news outlets is controlled by the authorities. I would find it extremely unlikely that if any Iranian military unit would have committed such a blunder (which by itself is not at all inconceivable), free access would have been given to local press to the wreckage, and photos permitted to be published. Were that the case, by sunrise authorties would have known in full detail what happened, and as a knee jerk reaction would have done everything in their power to supress incriminating information.
Last edited by andrasz; 9th Jan 2020 at 11:06.
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DaveReidUK the profile you posted looks like a perfectly normal takeoff profile including acceleration phase. or am I missing something?
(I have been captain on 737 for 11 years)
DaveReidUK the profile you posted looks like a perfectly normal takeoff profile including acceleration phase. or am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the fact that the first part of the profile (to around 02:42:34) is pure fiction. The aircraft was on the runway until that point; the BBC would have us believe that it climbed steadily from SL to the airfield altitude (3300').
Why they didn't simply truncate the graph so that it started at the point of rotation, I don't know.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems while searching for victims rescuers have turned over the VS as part of their search. There is very clearly a hole punched through from the right hand side and exiting the left hand side. Yes of course this could have occurred on impact but still eerily similar to the type of holes seen on MH17. I also note that the left hand side has had much of the paint burnt off while the right hand side seems unscorched by comparison. A post crash fire would have burnt and sooted both sides to one degree or another and more molten metal would be seen, So I assess this burning of the left hand side to have occurred in flight. This indicates the left hand side the aircraft was on fire and quite severely given the paint had burnt off.
The sideways nature of the puncture hole means its cause cannot reasonably be attributed to loose debris trailing from further forward of the aircraft eg exploding turbine or fan blade. . Based on the left hand side scorching it is likely that most loose debris (which could be seen trailing in the video) would have presumably come down the left hand side of the aircraft so again it is not reasonable to assume the right to left sideways puncture came from debris.
So the hole either occurred in the post flight impact or by some externals source whilst in flight.
I have also attached an image of the right wing tip and remaining winglet. As might be expected it appears to have escaped the fire. The lack of underside wingtip scratching suggests at least that it wasn't a right wing down impact. The crew then either had some control to stop the right hand turn and wings level prior to impact or alternatively no control as the aircraft wobbled through increasing aerodynamic challenges as flying surfaces were destroyed by the intense fire.
below is the the APU and HS surfaces: The assembly has come to rest upside down as far as I can tell. Again fire seems to be associated with the left hand side and the intensity has melted through the leading edge and some of the side too. While the right hand leading edge cant be seen, the general condition of the RH HS seems less affected by fire.Again, I assess that this damage was as a result of inflight fire not post impact fire. Note the puncture hole in about the centre of the exposed RH spar.(Remember the assembly is upside down so right is on the left and left is on the right!).
Finally, these three images of the what I am guessing is the remains of 2L. Note the white streaks around the frame. More evidence of the intensity of the fire on that side of the aircraft. The RH engine tail cone and aft cowling. (can someone confirm this is in fact the RH. I am assuming so since it appears less burnt. Note the hole.Finally a portion of what I guess is the left hand side of the cabin with paint burnt off.
Assessment: Suspicious looking holes on the right hand side of the aircraft, fire on the left. What else can we glean?
A SAM Head is found DURING the search of the downed aircraft crash site in Tehran, in a crash that took place during a very tense period of time due to Iran launching missiles into Iraq, with unusual puncture evidence, the Iranians do not want to release the CVR and Data Recorder, and we are wanting to look at something other than what is patently obvious?
When it looks like a Duck, waddles like a Duck, and quacks like a Duck.....you know...it might just be a Duck!
https://defence-blog.com/news/ukrain...1-missile.html
When it looks like a Duck, waddles like a Duck, and quacks like a Duck.....you know...it might just be a Duck!
https://defence-blog.com/news/ukrain...1-missile.html
Last edited by SASless; 9th Jan 2020 at 13:01.