USAF E-11A down in Afghanistan

The burn pattern is interesting as it’s high up on the tail but the video on the ground shows the flame burning in the opposite direction.

Looks like it went in on fire.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: yuppa

It all burned in the post crash fire.

Regarding this what would be the course of action if say ..
The aircraft or a aircraft was carrying sensitive material/technology, the aircraft crashed but the news on the state of the crew was unknown but the wreckage was in danger of being over run by enemy forces before a dispatched group of soldiers were able to secure the site. Would an air strike be carried out to protect the material before it fell into enemy hands even though the state of the crew was unknown (alive or deceased)

originally posted by: ThePeaceMaker

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: yuppa

It all burned in the post crash fire.

Regarding this what would be the course of action if say ..
The aircraft or a aircraft was carrying sensitive material/technology, the aircraft crashed but the news on the state of the crew was unknown but the wreckage was in danger of being over run by enemy forces before a dispatched group of soldiers were able to secure the site. Would an air strike be carried out to protect the material before it fell into enemy hands even though the state of the crew was unknown (alive or deceased)

An air asset would probably need a TPOD to blow it up that may be able to give a good indication of the state of the crew.

Consider though it looked like a crash landing, the pilot was probably in contact all the way in.

From Twitter

#BREAKING Russian intelligence sources have confirmed that Michael D’ Andrea, the head of US intelligence operations against Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, has been killed in Taliban's shoot-down of a US military plane in Ghazni.

twitter.com...

a reply to: Agit8dChop

It wasn't shot down though.

There were reports of some crew surviving, but they were never confirmed.

a reply to: RexKramerPRT

To get a feel for how the system works. If you're halfway capable and have more than two working brain cells to rub together you want to know as much as possible about the various capabilities at your disposal.

a reply to: Forensick

May have suffered an engine fire in flight.

a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

No. They'd send in the QRF and use air assets to protect the site until they got there. They'd only hit it if they knew for certain the crew was dead.

a reply to: solidshot

Unless the Taliban has aircraft suddenly, or the crew was overridden and ordered to fly low over Taliban territory, this wasn't shot down.

Reports that US forces have recovered bodies from the wreckage, but they don't seem to mention numbers?

news.yahoo.com...

a reply to: solidshot

Two.

www.stripes.com...

A close look at the aft section appears to show that the APU may have been running at impact. That could indicate they were having engine problems prior to impact.

Iranian TV is issuing a picture from the movie Zero Dark Thirty as part of their claim that Michael D'Andrea died in the crash.

Task and Purpose

SEAL Team 6 recovered two bodies along with the data recorder, and destroyed any sensitive equipment that remained.

taskandpurpose.com...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: odzeandennz

Considering it was intact and under control at impact, I'd say mechanical.

Yes, considering how the Delta flight that sprayed east Los Angeles with jetfuel last week kept it in the air at heavy weight, one has to wonder what sort of mechanical might have caused this one.

The fuselage and engines were fairly intact, yet the few humans we saw were crispy critters.

How very different this crash was to the one in Shanksville where nothing could be seen from above or on foot.

s reply to: Zaphod58

I don't think that means much on this particular aircraft.


I'm not sure I'd be so quick to eliminate the MANPAD possibility. Particularly, after the reports of engagement on the way to the site. We're not going to hear the full story on this one, I think.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Barring a technical issue bringing them down to MANPADS range, there aren't any that would even get close to the altitude they're normally at though. Even descending into Kabul, on what would be a normal descent, at that point they'd still be around 20,000+ or so.

The APU door may not mean anything. It was just something to note that may suggest an issue.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It would definitely need to be on an approach or descent for this aircraft. I think the response might have been faster with a purely mechanical issue.

a reply to: RadioRobert

One statement from an Afghan official was it was believed to be going between Kandahar and Kabul. Ghazni, where they came down is still 80+ miles from Kabul. That's still a long way out to be down into MANPADS range already.

a reply to: Zaphod58

True enough. But if it was ferrying VIPs, it wouldn't be the first time someone asked for something stupid. Like an eyeball's look at the types of traffic on the highway.