Looks like a Captain , Training Captain and FO up the front. 30,000 737 hours between them.

The 9M331 missile post dates Iran-Iraq 1980-88 round 1 war. the predecessor 9M330 wasn't in inventory in that area as far as I am aware. Iran had 29 TOR M1 systems delivered in January 2007, from a contract signed in 2005. On 7 February 2007 Iran reported successful test firing of the weapon system. It is unlikely that a planned test firing of a short range system such as the SA15 Gauntlet is done in a manner that results in the photo that has been shown on social media and this forum. (the location.... not the condition).

The war head of the 9M331 is aft of the forward control vanes, and is a 15kg blast frag device. The head of the missile is not a seeker head as such, it is a passive radar guided system, reportedly not a beam rider, so there is a datalink going on giving course corrections. The TALR launch vehicle has two radar systems, an acquisition radar, and a fire control-tracking radar. The acquisition is able to track multiple targets at one time, the FCR can reportedly manage 2 missiles at one time. In operation, if fired deliberately against a single target, a delayed one-two launch would be employed for maximum PK, with a time interval that would act to negate a target notching to defeat a single missile. A single launched missile would possibly be an accidental launch, a double shot would more likely be deliberate.

My previous concerns are allayed to an extent, not identifying a possible device would be potentially escalatory in effect to the crazies on both sides of this match. An accidental shoot down is not in the highly improbable end of the Venn diagram of factors in the loss, given Iran was undertaking an attack on a neighbour, and had reasonable concerns of a further counter attack. The human tragedy is not diminished by any means, a lot of families and futures just got torn up, either by an accidental shoot down in a dark time in international politics, or by unknown technical causation. If so, it is hardly an unforeseeable consequence of the action taken against Gen. Sulemani; once "rifle" is called, stuff is going to happen, and more often than not it is not as desired, but causing heightened tension with people that have sophisticated weapon systems is a risk. Recall CG-49, the Ticonderoga class USS Vincennes, Capt Will Rogers III, and Iran Air 655; that was a similar level of stress and a really bad outcome, with a high tech system, and humans acting under stress.

I sincerely hope that it was none of the above, and that we find some novel failure mode of a HPT/LPT that resulted in the disaster, that at least can be then rectified, but as yet there is no rupture evidence to support an engine fault.

Boeing, CFM and Ukraine Air will be quite anxious to fix anything wrong with the engine or aircraft. Ukraine has access to the crash site and most evidence and I am confident they will share that with the manufacturers in the interest of flight safety. The lack of such evidence may be food for all kinds of political discussion.

Give it a week

PS
That was one hell of an inflight fire to take out the broad leading edges of the wing, Not seen one that severe in commercial service

The continuous rod warhead is pretty common in anti-aircraft missiles; effectively a charge expands a structure of end welded rods at right angles to the flight path, generating a circle of steel of large diameter. If it intercepts the aircraft before it flies apart it acts like a saw blade. Here's a drawing. With a shaped charge it seems possible for the guide head to survive as the end is probably designed to direct the explosive force to fling the rod(s) out.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b2ee1607f9.jpg

I'm not at all sure one can assume that the direction of ground impact has any correlation whatsoever to the direction of flight before an assumed muissile strike. If a wing comes off and the wreckage rolls and spins on the way doen it could hit the ground on any heading imaginable regardless of where it started from.

Let's be careful about such assumptions.

Agree. The poster above who analysed the direction the aircraft landed in, determined a right turn was initiated immediately after the transponder data ceased and this found the aircraft on its final heading.

Controlability after the event that stopped the transponder transmissions may have led to a descending spiral from which the pilots couldn't recover.

However, without any crew communication to ATC, what the the pilots intentions were may never be known unless Iran releases a translated CVR transcript....and I'm not not holding my breath on that one!

An early video taken from a cell phone shows the aircraft in a steep spiral as it came down. it certainly did not look like a controlled turn.

Where did you see a photograph of a wing?

Regards,
Grog

"Flight data from the Ukrainian Airlines Boeing 737-800 is openly available online. It shows that the plane climbed normally after taking-off from Tehran. It reached nearly 8,000ft (2,400m) before the aircraft's data suddenly disappears. According to a former air crash investigator, any suggestion of engine failure feels premature. This possibility can't be ruled out at this early stage but an airliner such as the Boeing 737-800 is designed to keep flying if there is an engine failure.
Plus, if there was a failure then we would normally expect the flight data to show the plane's climb becoming less steep."
See altitude data graphic.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51042326

Firstly, thoughts and prayers for the families of this tragedy.



ADS-B uses output from the Dual GPS.

Hydraulics:

3 Systems: SYSTEM A, SYSTEM B, STANDBY SYSTEM

SYSTEM A & B operates independently

SYSTEM B and STANDBY are connected through a hydraulic servicing line
The Bleed air supplies air pressure to System A & B reservoir.
Fuel in the main wing tank help cool the hydraulic fluid A & B with help of a Heat Exchanger.
An engine driven pump supplies about 6 times the volume of hydraulic fluid of an electric driven pump.

SYSTEM A

Powered by Engine 1 hydraulic pump and an electric pump powered by IDG 2. It supplies power to :
- Primary flight controls (Ailerons, Elevator & Feel, Rudder)
- Engine 2 thurst reverser
- Autopilot A
- Two flight spoilers on each wing
- Ground spoilers
- Nose wheel steering
- Alternate Brakes
- Landing Gear
- Power Transfer Unit

LOSS OF SYSTEM A
With the loss of system A the following systems are inoperative :
- Autopilot A
- 2 Flight spoilers on each wing and all ground spoilers
- Normal landing gear extention and retraction
Considerations :
- Single autopilot = CAT III not available
- Plan a manual gear extension
- Once extended the gear will not retract again ( decreased G/A performance, additional fuel burn )
- Ground spoilers unavailable, increased landing distance
POWER TRANSFER UNIT
When System B pressure is low, In flight with flaps 1 - 15, PTU control valve opens and supplies power
from system A to system B with help of standby fluid.
The purpose of the PTU is to supply power to operate the autoslats and the leading edge flaps and slats.
SYSTEM A FLUID LEAK
Hydraulic fluid to the engine 1 hydraulic pump is supplied by the system A reservoir via a standpipe.
Should a leak occur in the engine 1 hydraulic pump the system A level would decrease to about 20%.
Should a leak occur in the system A electric hydraulic all system A pressure is lost.
A leak in engine 1 hydraulic pump would not prevent operation of the PTU

SYSTEM B
Powered by Engine 2 hydraulic pump and an electric pump powered by IDG 1. It supplies power to :

- Primary flight controls (Aileron, Elevator & Feel, Rudder)
- Engine 2 thrust reverser
- Autopilot B
- Autoslats, Leading edge flaps and slats
- Trailing edge flaps
- Two flight spoilers on each wing
- Normal brakes
- Alternate Nose Wheel Steering
- Landing Gear Transfer Unit
- Yaw Damper

LOSS OF SYSTEM B
With the loss of system B the following systems are inoperative :
- Autopilot B
- 2 Flight spoilers on each wing
- Yaw damper
- Normal leading edge and trailing edge flaps

LANDING GEAR TRANSFER UNIT
In case of engine 1 failure during takeoff, with the landing gear lever selected up and either main landing
gear not up and locked system A assists landing gear retraction via the landing gear transfer unit.

SYSTEM B FLUID LEAK
Any leak downstream of the system B resevoir will cause the loss of system B pressure.
However there remains sufficient fluid for the operation of the PTU.
STANDBY SYSTEM
The standby system is linked to the system B reservoir.
If a leak occurs in the standby system, the system B reservoir level will decrease to approx 72%.
A standby electric pump provides backup hydraulic power to :
- Engine 1 & 2 thrust reversers
- Standby rudder
- Leading edge flaps & slats ( extension only )
- Standby yaw damper ( loss of system A & B )

Thank you for the explanation and drawing. If this type of weapon was used it should be possible to find debris from the rods ring, even if very far from the crash location. It should have a peculiar look, that even without mentioning the guiding head. It is also possible that Iran authorities want and manage to keep such a finding secret, although from images one can't see significant military presence.

Having looked at the pictures of the debris field and what's left of the aircraft (look at the centre wing tank section) I would suspect the following:

1) SAM
2) On board explosive

In a word, terrible.
Time for the world to "get it together".

Initial crash report

https://www.cao.ir/news/organizatioa...1-%D8%B4%D8%AF

use chrome to translate

The report confirms that Iran has invited the USA to take part in the investigation.

Translation:

Initial report of 752 Ukrainian Airlines Flight Accident Report released
0 views | Release Time: January 23, 2010 at 9:50 pm

The preliminary report on the accident investigation of the Ukrainian plane was released by the National Aviation Accident Investigation Team.
Ali Abedzadeh, head of the National Aviation Authority, said in a statement that measures taken since the launch of the investigation so far are based on a number of key issues, including: gathering preliminary information, setting up a crisis management team in the area, dispatching rescue teams to search and rescue sites, The first steps were to get passengers information from the airline and other authorities, such as the Migration Police, identifying the accident investigator and dispatching the accident team to the scene, Imam Khomeini Airport and Mehrabad Airport.Initial notification of the accident was carried out and according to the Code of Conduct for Civil Aviation Accidents and Incidents approved by the Cabinet, 11 accident investigation teams were formed.

The head of the civil aviation agency said: flight recorders (black boxes) have been found and have been handed over to the accident investigator. Documentation and evidence of the crash site were reviewed and the remaining parts of the aircraft were collected and transported to a safe location. Black boxes containing the Flight Recorder (FDR) and the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) were found by search and rescue agents and are in the possession of the accident investigation team. Both devices were damaged by accident and fire. There is memory in both devices, but physical damage is visible on them.

Abedzadeh stated that the Accident Investigation Team, in accordance with the standards set forth in annex 13 of the Chicago Convention, invited all States recognized as beneficiaries of this document to introduce their representatives in the disaster investigation process and now designate their own specialized team. And they are in the process of sending their aircraft to Iran to carry out their duties.

Describing the flight conditions of the aircraft, he said: "The aircraft first rises to an altitude of 8,000 feet and then the aircraft's information is removed from the radar screen and the aircraft collides with the ground and collapses. No radio messages were received by the pilot regarding unusual circumstances. According to eyewitness reports (people on the ground and high-altitude flight crew who observed and reported the incident), a fire was observed and added to the range, and after the aircraft collided with the ground, an explosion caused a collision. The crash happened and the plane's trajectory indicates that the plane was initially heading westward, turning right after the problem and was on its way back to the airport at the time of the crash.

He further said: "The accident site documentation shows that the plane's first collision with the ground was in the grounds of an amusement park. Has been.

Abedzadeh continued: Initial notification was given to Ukraine as the country of registration of the aircraft, the United States as the manufacturer, Sweden and Canada as the applicant countries whose nationals were in the aircraft, and Ukraine requested to be involved in the accident review process. Has introduced a team to participate in the disaster investigation, identification and transfer of the bodies of its nationals and other duties under the circumstances of the registrant and exploiter country, whose representatives will soon arrive in the country.

He said the plane had 167 passengers and nine crew members, all of whom died in the crash. There were 146 passengers with Iranian passports, 10 with Afghan passports, 5 with Canadian passports, 4 with Swedish passports, and 2 with Ukrainian passports and 9 flight crews, all of whom were Ukrainian nationals.

The head of the Civil Aviation Authority also said: "Some passengers may have multiple nationalities and be reported in another report with another nationality." The above list relates to a passport that left the Islamic Republic of Iran. The bodies and remains of the occupants were identified and transported to forensic medicine under the supervision of judicial authorities for identification and transfer formalities.

By gathering and completing the information, he said, the latest findings of the accident investigation will be formally published and publicly available.

The scheduled flight of Boeing 752 to Tehran-Kyiv Boeing 737-800 from the Ukrainian International Airlines with a UR-PSR registration mark departing from the park at 5:45 minutes and departing at 06:13 on Wednesday. 2010/8/18 Flight from Imam Khomeini Airport Runway. The above flight, under the control of the Imam Khomeini Airport Watch Tower, continued to climb, then delivered to the Mehrabad Flight Approximation Unit and was allowed to rise to 26,000 feet. After cutting off communication with the traffic control unit at 6:18 pm near Saba Shahr, Tehran province fell.

Abedzadeh at the end criticized some of the material published in the cyber space regarding the accident of the Ukrainian plane and the issue of the black boxes on the plane. Failure to send overseas flight registration boxes was a mistake taken by the reporter.

Well, finally a bit of new info in that report : the aircraft fire/problems was also observed from the air , the FDR/CVR will be investigated in the usual normal way with the usual international investigation teams, Aircraft was transferred from TWR to APP sector in ACC with standard communications, and under radar control , so we will know what happened.. The report does not looks like a cover up and tend to give us facts . This does not really fit the rogue missile theory or mistaken identity . Mehrabad ACC is a joint military site , sharing the same radar data .
My guess if it was a missile , the military would of course know and the regime would react differently. A bomb or explosives on board is still a possibility though..But with an international team coming to the site in the next days , we will know soon I think

Unless the USAF or Saudis had an E-3 up and on their boarder the chances of seeing anything over central Iran is ZERO.

Really? ;)

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 US (and allies) will have every possible surveillance asset trained on Iranian airspace currently.

If this event has involved a missile the current (lack of ) reaction is surprising

There is a very limited number of scenarios that could result in this event. The focus clearly appears to be on de-escalation and treating this like any other aircraft incident is the best way for parties to de-escalate.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....27d5277661.png


Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

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.

This pic of a spent TOR-M1 warhead will have to be explained by the Iranians..


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2441edee9b.jpg

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.

From Wikipedia, the TOR M1 is designed for missile intercept, so a rod armament seems unlikely; it's more likely to use the equivalent of buckshot to create a cloud of projectiles rather than a ring. The same article lists the warhead as Frag-HE, though photos in the Wikipedia page show a curve to the guidance head while the photos here seem very conical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_mi...m#9K331_Tor_M1 However the system can also use the 9M330, which looks very much like the photo of the fragment. https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2...sile_9M330.jpg

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.

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:... 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...

Don’t ever underestimate the ability for humans to make mistakes or otherwise screw up. I lived in Iran for a number of years working as in instructor pilot for the F-14 program. The ability for Iranians to commit blunders was astounding. The first in-country F-14 flight performed by an Iranian pilot resulted in two million dollars’ worth of damage during the very first landing attempt in spite of me warning this particular Major not to try landing the Tomcat like he normally (incorrectly) landed his F-5. I’m still dumbfounded at some of the things the Iranian pilots and other IIAF personnel did. That was many years ago, but recent events tell me that not much has changed since then.

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.

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"

( I am not permitted to post the link, it is on censor net )

[Boeing] said “enhancements are being introduced” to inlet and fan cowls to improve “their ability to withstand an engine fan blade out event as well as to increase the overall capability of these structures.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/19/ntsb...-accident.html

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.

HERE
 

I think its at 35°33'33.36"N - 51° 6'8.87"E

Yes, I identified the coordinates where the v/stab came down (35.5596 51.1045) in an earlier post which the mods seem to have deleted. The water tower is about 200 meters WSW of that point.

[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.

From the video it appears that the aircraft was flying (under what degree of control is another story) at some altitude above the ground (certainly higher than power lines) up till the point of the big flare-up, then plunged to the ground in seconds. One may propose an educated guess that the flare-up was the result of an in-flight structural failure releasing fuel (or the existing fire progressed to the point of igniting one of the fuel tanks), from there the wreckage fell on a ballastic trajectory. Soot on parts of the wreckage (eg. VS) with no adjacent ground fire traces support this.

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.

DaveReidUK the profile you posted looks like a perfectly normal takeoff profile including acceleration phase. or am I missing something?

You are right. Looks like all was normal until something suddenly happened. Airspeed graph also shows normal speeds for a 2 engine climb out .

(I have been captain on 737 for 11 years)

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2851aa06b8.jpg

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.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e7a9cf65c9.jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....a7bfd5c7e0.jpg

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.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....031f05e4f0.jpg

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!).
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....66c5320035.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fea7f9853c.jpg

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?

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....437f53fc5b.jpg

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....8c6e840d70.jpg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e9a1658000.jpg

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