In post 120, the discoloration is what nearly molten aluminium looks like.
Per

What, and it's taken the whole day for them to find this... yeah, right...Social Media is not a medium to be trusted...
However, as our early Posters will revel in the fact - the pebbles/ stones are the same size as the fragmentation holes on the airframe. We must bear in mind that the whole f'ing World is dumbing down to this sh1T.

Post this image? - I want proof it's taken from the same location as the crash site or it's negligible.
Can you provide a source please, credible and checkable.

Boeing recently said it was revamping engine cowlings on the Neo to better contain engine failures. This comes as a result of NTSB recommendations after the fatal accident on Southwest Airlines about a year ago when an engine fan blade broke off in flight, punctured a cabin window and sucked a passenger partially out the window, causing the first US passenger fatality in more than a decade. Does it seem unreasonable to think that such a failure, or worse, could puncture the wing and fuel tank resulting in something like this crash? The NTSB also recommended regular inspections of the fan blades in the CFM engines used on this aircraft type. I wonder if Ukraine Airline is doing these inspections.

Possible scenario:

1. Uncontained engine failure of the right engine (e.g. turbine disc, similar to QF 32). Unlikely for a CFM 56 engine but not impossible.
2. Shrapnel from the engine failure damages airframe, tanks, systems, hydraulics and takes out radio, transponder and electronics.
3. Massive fuel leak (similar to QF32)
4. Hydraulic failures make A/C control difficult, therefore wide, descending right turn
5. Aircraft on fire due to fuel leaks
6. Explosion of damaged fuel tank while the plane descends. Explains further, shrapnel like damage.

The root cause is unlikely for the CFM 56 but not impossible.

The rest is easily possible taking into account the massive damage to the A380 on flight QF32. A little less redundancy (and the A380 has got a lot redundancy compared to a 737) and they would have crashed as well.

The exhaust duct is titanium and corrosion resisting steel not aluminium

1. After the missile exploded the search head will be gone. Destroyed, evaporated, whatever.
2. The search head would be found where the missile hit - many miles away (if it was a missile) and not at the crash site.

It’s 2 that seems a real long shot....?

​​​​There are multiple examples of the same missile type leaving the head intact after the missile explodes, posted in that Twitter thread.

I think it would be wise to avoid making extremely general statements about munitions/weapons that we're not familiar with.

The Search Head would be utterly destroyed; by it's own munitions dispersal pattern. I think this is a Search Head from one of the undetonated rockets that failed on the earlier rocket strikes on USA bases. Nothing to do with the aircraft accident.

Social Media at it's best - worst.

Yes. The chances that the seeker would survive warhead detonation in such good shape don't seem very high. And it shouldn't be anywhere near the crash site.

The social media post and the photos are unconvincing.

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....

A SAM missile search head from a rocket strike? :confused:

What would happen if a pickle fork failed during climb out? Could this result in something similar?

I have my doubts about the relevance of that photo to that incident too, but this notwithstanding

- regarding point 1, how did that (charred) seeker head then end up on the ground in this state?
- regarding point 2, nobody has claimed that if was photographed at the crash site....

Well the pictured head is certainly consistent with a TOR -M1 missile and is not from a ballistic missile (too small). There is no reason why the seeker head of the missile would be distroyed in the detonation. It is ahead of the charge and from the photo has a fairly substantial looking domed structure at the rear. It is surprising what close to the charge will survive a detonation. Lots of forensics from detonations have led to convictions in the past. I have personally seen an optical seeker head thar survived detonation remarkably well.

In that case, disregard as I have no experience welding titanium and overheated steel does not look like that.
Per

Boeing Neo??/ Ehmmm you mean MAX.

100% sure UIA did those inspections.

Observations:

The only 'outward peeling' apparent to me (closest to camera) coincides with a score mark that lines up with the tear in the metal - when i first saw this it looked like something scraped along the surface and ripped the metal up... especially as the 'score' stops at the point the metal would have been if it was still flat against the engine...

Also how does an uncontained engine failure result in debris creating inward facing holes? It is possible these were inflicted on impact, but the same could be said for the tearing mentioned above.

Additionally, an uncontained engine failure could have been the result of external action - so you would have evidence of both outward in and inward out.

9M331 missile heads look like that after explosion of the charge below them. Pictures can be found on the internet from combat use e.g. recently in Syria.
But agreed, no evidence is there to show a link in time and location to the Tehran crash site. The picture could be from anywhere and anytime.

Using a few aerial photos from your link and Google Maps' 'Measure distance' feature, I found the debris field to be 330 metres (1,080 feet). I don't have forum rights to post my screenshot. :(