IS in Egypt claimed to have shot down the Russian plane that crashed in the Sinai

a reply to: Zaphod58

breaks in two?

a reply to: Hyperia

Yes, it's entirely possible. Aircraft are designed to operate in certain directions. For example, the engine mounts are designed and stressed to hold the engines while the wing and engine move forward, and in an up and down motion. Move the engine sideways, and the mounts fail quickly. I know of two incidents that happened without even looking. One landed badly damaged, one crashed.

An American Eagle ATR crashed in a corn field after the crew successfully recovered from a dive. They went into a second dive, and during the recovery attempt the tail section snapped off.

This aircraft slowed to 71 knots, and began going from a steep dive into a steep climb. It did it at least three times before data was lost. They went from a 6,000 foot per minute dive, immediately into an 8,00p foot per minute climb, back into a dive, and into one more climb. They were in the process of nosing over from that climb when data was lost.

That's a lot of stress to put on an airframe this old, with this many cycles on it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I heard today it a 5 mile debris field..sounds large..does that sound right?

a reply to: vonclod

Yes and no. It all depends on the type of debris. If the tail or large pieces were found that far, it's a big debris field. If it's lighter pieces, and bodies, it's large but not unexpectedly so.

Here is the radar track. The movement of the aircraft does not appear to consist of violent changes of altitude to me, but I'm not qualified to interpret that kind of data.



An Australian expert on the normal capabilities of the aircraft is interviewed at the beginning of this video.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Ok thanks

a reply to: ipsedixit

The radar track wouldn't necessarily show them if there wasn't enough of a change.

This is apparently the data from the aircraft itself.

Condolences to the victims. That being said, hopefully it was a bomb because Putin will decimate ISIS if it's found out they were the ones who were responsible. No one else has had the balls to do anything about their rampant, indescretionary terror campaign. Other western (including the US) and ME countries have been done next to nothing to halt their destruction of human life and cultural icons.

a reply to: ipsedixit

The title of this thread is wrong....

IS did not claim to have 'shot' down the plane!

a reply to: Drinking
cave men couldn't but people who salvaged military tech after a battle might be able to. that region has been in constant war for decades and didn't the muslim brotherhood almost take over eygpt a few years ago i am sure the eygptian military might have lost a antiaircraft midssile battery during that time.

a reply to: combatmaster

The original title, which was in French, used the verb abattu which is the past participle of abattre which means strike or knock down.

The Mods, quite rightly, translated it because if it were left in French many members would have seizures. It's a public safety issue.

I was in Sharm El Sheik only 2 weeks ago!

a lot of the press are reporting that security there is really tight, but I beg to differ.

Don't get me wrong, you wouldn't get through with a ticking box, but there were many things that caught my eye in the airport that surprised me.

BBC now reporting that an 'external influence' brought it down.

If it's confirmed to be ISIS, gonna be interesting times for sure while we wait for Putin's response.

The Manchester Guardian has a good run down of possible causes for a mid air break up of the aircraft, but there seem to be indications particularly related to the action of a bomb on board. The tail section was reported to have been burning and part of the skin of the aircraft was peeled outwards.

www.theguardian.com...

Aviation security specialists say Sharm el-Sheikh has measures as tight as most airports, but do not discount the possibility of a bomb. A slew of unverified reports from Egypt have left the picture confused, but according to one official quoted by Reuters, the tail section appeared to have separated from the main body of the plane and was burning, which could indicate an explosion.

Details of images from the wreckage in Sinai appear to show the skin of the fuselage peeling outwards, which some sources suggest also points to an onboard explosion.

a reply to: jw3714

That's according to the airline, who of course will say that. Other reports say no evidence of either explosives or an external impact have been found yet.

Here is a picture of the tail section. Part of it does seem to be bent outward but not in a way that would indicate an explosion specifically, in my opinion. I don't see evidence of fire in this picture either.

www.armradio.am...



Le Monde was saying that it will be a few days before the flight recorders are analyzed.

a reply to: ipsedixit

There's evidence of a cargo hold fire, minus explosion. It's not clear if it was pre impact or post crash.

Here is another view of the tail, showing a small bit of skin peeled outward, and is the brownish discoloration scorching or dirt? The picture is taken from a web page trying to make the case that the crash was faked by Russian intelligence services, which I think is ridiculous. I just grabbed the shot for this thread.

nodisinfo.com...



The photos I've seen don't point to a bomb, but there are not many cases of mid air structural failure of an aircraft where there are no other indications of problems.

Bush, Chaney and Rice "claimed" that 19 cave people effectively invaded what was the most armipotent superpower in history at the time and that cloud-high edifices fell in an hour and a half from "jet fuel" -- another, from paper fires!

>claims

The New York Times notes two previous instances of tail strike repair jobs that years later were involved in catastrophic failures of aircraft, in one case with explosive decompression.

www.nytimes.com... ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

There have been at least two previous cases in which airplanes either broke apart or became unmanageable long after similar tail repairs were done.

A China Airlines Boeing 747 en route to Hong Kong from Taiwan in May 2002 broke into several pieces as it was climbing to 35,000 feet, killing all 225 people on board. The repairs made 22 years earlier on the tail failed, causing a sudden and explosive decompression, according to the analysis by the Taiwanese government.

A Japan Airlines 747 suffered a similar failure in 1985, seven years after a tail strike had been repaired. The crew struggled to control the plane for some 46 minutes after takeoff before it crashed, killing all but four of the 524 people on board.