dara88 wrote:

southsidesilver wrote:

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

You know not all missiles make sounds when in flight, I think your imagining something more like a Rocket. Very different.

They are claiming it was a Tor Missile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Y5DT4oPpc
Doesn't it make any sound?

Lets say the guy saw the first missile but he was too late to film it. But he took his phone out nevertheless and was on high alert. He heard another missile has been deployed and quickly started filming. The initial bang would not be included in the video, but only the sound of the flight, which isn't very strong, especially if you aren't behind the missile.

Its definitely not impossible he took the video. Anyways there are 1000s of videos in the internet where where people are just filming random stuff and something happens. Tehran is a big city with many people so everything is possible.

sgrow787 wrote:

litz wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

This would be advantageous if you were concerned about enemy forces geolocating a stationary radar source to take out.

No kidding ... with only a few seconds of radar pulse, following by a launch, you can boogie on out to another physical location in next to no time, making any kind of reprisal difficult at best.

Out of curiosity, does the US have a comparable version of the TOR-M1?

Maybe the ESSM?

sgrow787 wrote:

Polot wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Out of curiosity, does the US have a comparable version of the TOR-M1?

Of course.

Link?

I don’t have any link but do you seriously think Russia is the only one to have developed a short range all weather SAM system?

If the Russians did it you can basically guarantee the Americans have an equivalent in their arsenal. Whatever the weapon is.

sgrow787 wrote:

litz wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

This would be advantageous if you were concerned about enemy forces geolocating a stationary radar source to take out.

No kidding ... with only a few seconds of radar pulse, following by a launch, you can boogie on out to another physical location in next to no time, making any kind of reprisal difficult at best.

Out of curiosity, does the US have a comparable version of the TOR-M1?

Something like this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaparral_(missile)

dara88 wrote:

xmp125a wrote:

dara88 wrote:

So you think a fired missile doesn't have a sound, someone would record a video from the dark sky without any obvious reason, and a hit plane with a full tank doesn't ignite immediately. Well, I totally disagree with you. I'm not telling that there is not a chance that the plane had been hit, but this video... well I think it's totally fake.

Oh jeez. Sound travels much slower than light, so there is a delay. And, there were two missiles fired, per western intelligence. Perhaps the first missile - the one that missed - basically caused people to start filming what the hell is going on.

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

Your previous suggestions were borderline valid but this is just insane. You’re assuming now that you know exactly how any human on earth would direct their camera during a moment like that? They likely didn’t even know what was happening and were just pointing in the direction! There were likely many others that did the same thing and this is the only one that got a decent shot

BawliBooch wrote:

Could unsafe cargo like Li batteries cause an uncontained inflight fire capable of bringing down a 737? Aircraft would have been full of fuel for the medium haul trip to Kiev which could have contributed to the fire.

I can’t think of a rationale for shipping a large batch of Ali ion batteries into Iran, but on a flight out??!

SEA wrote:

dampfnudel wrote:

L410Turbolet wrote:

Look no further than MH17.

I think the circumstances are somewhat different, but it’s possible that just like that event, it was the fatal mistake of a jittery, inept crew that led to this tragedy. It’s also possible that it was an intentional act like I mentioned previously.

Why would Iran shoot down an airliner full of its own citizens intentionally?

Someone with a grudge against the government and wanted to make them look bad. Possibly some other motive. At the moment, it looks more like it was a tragic accident, but then again it wasn’t long ago that the presumption was it was a technical fault so we still have a fluid situation here.

Just some perspective with the missile and sound.

We hear sound all the time of commercial air plane flying at low altitude. Depending on wind direction and whether there is ambient noise or blocking buildings, we can either hear it or not at all. So the lack of sound is not necessary a negative proof. Compare the sound of the missile rocket vs a turbojet at take off throttle, depending on the frequency, the 737 fan noise would travel further than the missile jet noise. So it would not be a surprise to not hear the missile if you can not hear the 737 either (depending on the direction of the missile or the plane).

The other sound you may hear is the sonic boom as the missile go + MACH. But again, depending on where are you standing, the boom may be small (because the small size of the missile) or not audible (if the missile is going away from you).

bt

washingtonflyer wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

litz wrote:

No kidding ... with only a few seconds of radar pulse, following by a launch, you can boogie on out to another physical location in next to no time, making any kind of reprisal difficult at best.

Out of curiosity, does the US have a comparable version of the TOR-M1?

Maybe the ESSM?

I think I said "comparable", meaning it needs to be land based, mobile, autonomous, self contained (as in not dependent on any other systems). The ESSM is ship based. Wow the noise factor with you A nutters.

ptwings wrote:

Interesting geolocation-analysis done here about the last video:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ELINTNews/st ... 9046226944

Buried in that thread:

https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1215348488164298752

https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1215371018237292544

xmp125a wrote:

Or there may be a genuine minor problem with a plane, they prepared perhaps to divert, and unwillingly overflew an area that no one expected civilian plane to be in, the trigger happy guys sweating and wondering when the US planes or missiles will appear, simply pulled the trigger...

I offered a similar theory upthread but someone pointed out that the turn was hardly started before flightradar24's ADS-B data ceases. Also, it's unlikely the crew would deviate from the expected heading without contacting ATC.

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

dara88 wrote:

Yeah it'd definitely not Hollywood. Nobody will take a video of the dark sky with the target being right in the middle of the frame; at 6:15 AM. And without any reaction after the so called missile hits the target!

If the reports are to be believed, and two missiles were fired, it's possible that he saw the first missile hit and then started recording, with the plane in the middle of the frame. It would still have its lights on, so the plane could be tracked by eye, but invisible to the camera because of the dark conditions. The second missile then hits the plane. He could also have started recording because he heard the missile launch, which is very loud, unlike a missile in flight.

As for the lack of a reaction, this guy is probably scared sh**less, contemplating war coming to his doorstep and what that entails.

dara88 wrote:

PixelPilot wrote:

dara88 wrote:

Troll with over 250 photos on A.net. You guys can just say whatever you want, but definitely the Boeing company wants to blame it on others, so would Donald Trump.

Ah. That's where this was heading.
I just dunno for what reason.
Anybody with half brain would understand that if that was the SECOND missile, then the person saw/heard the first one. Pretty good reason to start recording and focusing on something that was visible (hence the plane tracking on that vid).
I'm not gonna even go into how our eyes see things and how a tiny sensor camera does. As a photographer as you say you should be pretty aware of that.
But since this is about Boeing and Trump then well I can't help you with logic.

I'm not telling anything about the plane not being hit by a missile of any kind. I'm just stating that this video is fake.

Video has been validated. NYT and Wapost have the geocache from the original upload.

I'm curious about what Ukraine will do about this.
But I think they feel a bit bullied by Iran and probably scared to do anything.
I think they're gonna defer to the US.

Dara based on your name I can see you are Iranian or of Iranian descent. I know you want to defend your country and believe it did no wrong but sometimes you have to take a step back and just look at everything piling up... mistakes happen. And this plane was shot down

LEJCargo wrote:

dara88 wrote:

southsidesilver wrote:

You know not all missiles make sounds when in flight, I think your imagining something more like a Rocket. Very different.

They are claiming it was a Tor Missile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Y5DT4oPpc
Doesn't it make any sound?

Lets say the guy saw the first missile but he was too late to film it. But he took his phone out nevertheless and was on high alert. He heard another missile has been deployed and quickly started filming. The initial bang would not be included in the video, but only the sound of the flight, which isn't very strong, especially if you aren't behind the missile.

Its definitely not impossible he took the video. Anyways there are 1000s of videos in the internet where where people are just filming random stuff and something happens. Tehran is a big city with many people so everything is possible.

Yeah definitely not impossible, but the video is a bit fishy in my opinion. We should wait for the investigators' report. Also, I've heard that the surveillance footage of the plane when it was still at the airport could be out soon. Let's see if they release it or not. Heard from some friends at IKA airport that one of the plane's engine cowlings were open during the 1 hour delay and UIA's maintenance were working on that engine. But could just be a rumor...

kennethP3 wrote:

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

dara88 wrote:

Yeah it'd definitely not Hollywood. Nobody will take a video of the dark sky with the target being right in the middle of the frame; at 6:15 AM. And without any reaction after the so called missile hits the target!

If the reports are to be believed, and two missiles were fired, it's possible that he saw the first missile hit and then started recording, with the plane in the middle of the frame. It would still have its lights on, so the plane could be tracked by eye, but invisible to the camera because of the dark conditions. The second missile then hits the plane. He could also have started recording because he heard the missile launch, which is very loud, unlike a missile in flight.

As for the lack of a reaction, this guy is probably scared sh**less, contemplating war coming to his doorstep and what that entails.

Yeah could possibly be as you said when I think about it more.

adamant365 wrote:

Rossiya747 wrote:

MadameConcorde wrote:

ISNA pictures. They are quite telling.
Not sure this batch was already posted on the thread or not.

https://www.isna.ir/amp/98101813851/?__ ... GNgLQLwfes

in the first photo you can see a human organ. Very sad and presumed terrible actions by the Iranians.

Many of those photos are quite graphic. I've seen a lot of really ugly things before both in photo/video and real life, but I still find these images very disturbing.

Indeed.
I've known a couple of people who been at an aircraft crash site. I know I never want to.
I also note that the ground location appeared unpopulated by luck. It looks to be fairly close to a town and the death toll could have been far higher if it went down in the middle of that.

Who wants to take bets that Iran will say the FDR and CVR are damaged and no data can be downloaded....

I have a feeling

Polot wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Polot wrote:

Of course.

Link?

I don’t have any link but do you seriously think Russia is the only one to have developed a short range all weather SAM system?

If the Russians did it you can basically guarantee the Americans have an equivalent in their arsenal. Whatever the weapon is.

Sure. The US doesn't have war zones near its border, so no immediate need for mobile air defense systems. It's got missiles being fired from fighter jets and drones. And ships (the ESSM).

dara88 wrote:

So you think a fired missile doesn't have a sound

The missile was over 2 miles away, so the sound was probably too faint to be picked up by the phone mic. (The sound delay from the explosion was about 10-11 seconds, which gives distance of 2.1-2.3 miles).

dara88 wrote:

someone would record a video from the dark sky without any obvious reason

What do you mean a dark sky? There was a bright, fast, streak of light moving from left to right. That person probably started recording when he saw the mysterious light that was moving much faster than an airplane.

dara88 wrote:

and a hit plane with a full tank doesn't ignite immediately.

Huh? It did ignite immediately. That's what the light from 0:02-0:06 moving from right to left was. Also, the SA-15 detonates shrapnel before hitting the target, not after hitting the target. So it would send shrapnel flying through the airplane, causing fuel leaks and such, but it doesn't blow up the plane directly.

I haven't seen any reason to discount the video as fake: https://twitter.com/NarimanGharib/statu ... 6937928705

You can also look at maps that OEMInsider made: https://imgur.com/a/V1SlDty

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

Dara based on your name I can see you are Iranian or of Iranian descent. I know you want to defend your country and believe it did no wrong but sometimes you have to take a step back and just look at everything piling up... mistakes happen. And this plane was shot down

I just hope investigators find other reasons for this crash. I had friends on that flight, heading for Canada.

dara88 wrote:

Yeah definitely not impossible, but the video is a bit fishy in my opinion. We should wait for the investigators' report. Also, I've heard that the surveillance footage of the plane when it was still at the airport could be out soon. Let's see if they release it or not. Heard from some friends at IKA airport that one of the plane's engine cowlings were open during the 1 hour delay and UIA's maintenance were working on that engine. But could just be a rumor...

Again, how would a presumably uncontained engine failure (i.e., explosion) shut all of the a/c's electric systems in an instant and bring down the whole jet? The closest such case we've recently seen was that WN 737 that killed a passenger who was half sucked out of the window and bled to death.

The plane was shot out of the sky and you are really starting to (unintentionally?) sound like a troll. Someone pulled a trigger and killed 176 people. Let's try to respect them, especially all the children who died.

dara88 wrote:

LEJCargo wrote:

dara88 wrote:

They are claiming it was a Tor Missile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Y5DT4oPpc
Doesn't it make any sound?

Lets say the guy saw the first missile but he was too late to film it. But he took his phone out nevertheless and was on high alert. He heard another missile has been deployed and quickly started filming. The initial bang would not be included in the video, but only the sound of the flight, which isn't very strong, especially if you aren't behind the missile.

Its definitely not impossible he took the video. Anyways there are 1000s of videos in the internet where where people are just filming random stuff and something happens. Tehran is a big city with many people so everything is possible.

Yeah definitely not impossible, but the video is a bit fishy in my opinion. We should wait for the investigators' report. Also, I've heard that the surveillance footage of the plane when it was still at the airport could be out soon. Let's see if they release it or not. Heard from some friends at IKA airport that one of the plane's engine cowlings were open during the 1 hour delay and UIA's maintenance were working on that engine. But could just be a rumor...

Dara88--Since you seem to be in Iran and perhaps in Tehran, DO give us more insight into what you know; what people in the aviation industry in Iran are saying; what the press is saying; what the mood is in the country, etc.

Having members all around the world, with different opinions, is what makes a.net so remarkable.

Your Iranian aviation photos on a.net are amazing.

It was a tragic accident.

I don't think anyone has room to be throwing stones. The region is tense and missiles have been fired. While it seems incomprehensible they shot down their own civilian plane, I would remind people catastrophic failures, like this, are a chain of events. It isn't as simple as gross incompetence.

sgrow787 wrote:

Polot wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Link?

I don’t have any link but do you seriously think Russia is the only one to have developed a short range all weather SAM system?

If the Russians did it you can basically guarantee the Americans have an equivalent in their arsenal. Whatever the weapon is.

Sure. The US doesn't have war zones near its border, so no immediate need for mobile air defense systems. It's got missiles being fired from fighter jets and drones. And ships (the ESSM).

Mobile air defenses don’t just stay at home protecting the motherland...

Russia has air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles too. I bet you their navy can launch some as well.

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

Most surface-to-air missiles, especially smaller systems like the SA-15, have a motor that only burns for a few seconds. During that time it accelerates the missile at extremely high G-loads, so by motor burnout at, say, five seconds (I don't know the exact numbers for the SA-15, but 5s is close enough for this discussion), it's already going Mach 3+. From there the missile has enough kinetic energy to maneuver towards, track, and close distance with the target.

Once the motor burns out, there will indeed be no sound. We don't know the range from the site to the impact, but it's very plausible the missile could coast for the 15s or so of elapsed silence in the video. There will also be nothing to follow with your camera - the missile is so small, and obviously doesn't have lights on it, that it would be impossible to see it at night.

LEJCargo wrote:

Lets say the guy saw the first missile but he was too late to film it. But he took his phone out nevertheless and was on high alert. He heard another missile has been deployed and quickly started filming. The initial bang would not be included in the video, but only the sound of the flight, which isn't very strong, especially if you aren't behind the missile.

Its definitely not impossible he took the video. Anyways there are 1000s of videos in the internet where where people are just filming random stuff and something happens. Tehran is a big city with many people so everything is possible.

The plane was virtually invisible in the video until the missile hit it after which it caught fire. Before the missile hits, the plane is completely black and there is no fire. This leads to me believe the video is either of the first missile hitting and starting the primary fire, or maybe the first missile missed and this video of it hitting the plane was actually the second missile and the only one that hit the plane.

Since he was recording a very fast missile, I am leaning towards the second scenario.

ptwings wrote:

Interesting geolocation-analysis done here about the last video:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ELINTNews/st ... 9046226944

THIS pretty much put it to rest for me. I spent about an hour trying to geolocate the video capture point, seems perfectly matching the vid
My heart goes out to families involved

Interesting to see how criminal regime in Iran will handle this.. They made such a huge deal about IR655 shoot-down even though US navy was forthcoming and transparent that it was an error, they never forgave the US and milked it to hell for their propaganda. What goes around comes around. Here's a mirror Iran regime take a look

hamiltondaniel wrote:

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

Most surface-to-air missiles, especially smaller systems like the SA-15, have a motor that only burns for a few seconds. During that time it accelerates the missile at extremely high G-loads, so by motor burnout at, say, five seconds (I don't know the exact numbers for the SA-15, but 5s is close enough for this discussion), it's already going Mach 3+. From there the missile has enough kinetic energy to maneuver towards, track, and close distance with the target.

Once the motor burns out, there will indeed be no sound. We don't know the range from the site to the impact, but it's very plausible the missile could coast for the 15s or so of elapsed silence in the video. There will also be nothing to follow with your camera - the missile is so small, and obviously doesn't have lights on it, that it would be impossible to see it at night.

You can't hear the sonic boom of a missile accelerating upwards from the ground.

hamiltondaniel wrote:

dara88 wrote:

I meant that the missile, during its travel, is not making ANY sound. And why wouldn't the person follow the missile? If you were filming, wouldn't you follow the missile instead of the plane?

Most surface-to-air missiles, especially smaller systems like the SA-15, have a motor that only burns for a few seconds. During that time it accelerates the missile at extremely high G-loads, so by motor burnout at, say, five seconds (I don't know the exact numbers for the SA-15, but 5s is close enough for this discussion), it's already going Mach 3+. From there the missile has enough kinetic energy to maneuver towards, track, and close distance with the target.

Once the motor burns out, there will indeed be no sound. We don't know the range from the site to the impact, but it's very plausible the missile could coast for the 15s or so of elapsed silence in the video. There will also be nothing to follow with your camera - the missile is so small, and obviously doesn't have lights on it, that it would be impossible to see it at night.

Sounds very logical. Thanks for the explanation.

Polot wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Polot wrote:

I don’t have any link but do you seriously think Russia is the only one to have developed a short range all weather SAM system?

If the Russians did it you can basically guarantee the Americans have an equivalent in their arsenal. Whatever the weapon is.

Sure. The US doesn't have war zones near its border, so no immediate need for mobile air defense systems. It's got missiles being fired from fighter jets and drones. And ships (the ESSM).

Mobile air defenses don’t just stay at home protecting the motherland...

In terms of immediate need, the cost of developing a weapon system... yeah they do.

xmp125a wrote:

Pentaprism wrote:

The fact they are claiming the Crew tried to turn back means either it wasn't a missile or they are planning to try to cover up.

Or there may be a genuine minor problem with a plane, they prepared perhaps to divert, and unwillingly overflew an area that no one expected civilian plane to be in, the trigger happy guys sweating and wondering when the US planes or missiles will appear, simply pulled the trigger...

If you look at the FR24 data on the flight, they were exactly where they were supposed to be climbing out of IKA. There was a slight course correction at the end which a previous person commented here was also done by a previous flight.

litz wrote:

Doesn't even have to be the 2nd missile ...

If this whole thing started with a technical issue (compressor stall, birdstrike, etc), that alone could have made enough noise to attract the filmographer's attention.

All you need is a "BANG!" sound in the sky, and you go "what was that?" and pull out the phone.

Though, why would somebody film an _explosion_ in the sky, on what looks like an airliner, caused by a bright missile streaking across the sky, but then stop filming seconds after the 'missile' hits? Was their phone's memory full after 19 seconds? The initial video at least bothered to keep filming for 34 seconds, until the jet hit the ground and a bit longer. I would've been curious as hell to see how this develops, if I were filming.

Why is there a brief flash of light, but no sustained fire? Don't we see the jet go down as a flaming wreck? What would serve as an ignition source if not the missile?

How would a missile take out ADS-B & communication but leave the aircraft intact enough to fly on for well over a minute?

sgrow787 wrote:

Polot wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Sure. The US doesn't have war zones near its border, so no immediate need for mobile air defense systems. It's got missiles being fired from fighter jets and drones. And ships (the ESSM).

Mobile air defenses don’t just stay at home protecting the motherland...

In terms of immediate need, the cost of developing a weapon system... yeah they do.

I don’t even know what that is suppose to mean. The US has bases near war zones. The US has allies near war zones. They have ground based mobile surface to air systems.

joeblow10 wrote:

Other accounts on twitter say Iranian state media reports it had a “technical fault after taking off”... totally unconfirmed, but if it was indeed a Ukrainian airliner, would imagine it would be PS752 headed to Kiev based on the timeline

Technical fault like a Manpad missle?

dara88 wrote:

LEJCargo wrote:

dara88 wrote:

They are claiming it was a Tor Missile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Y5DT4oPpc
Doesn't it make any sound?

Lets say the guy saw the first missile but he was too late to film it. But he took his phone out nevertheless and was on high alert. He heard another missile has been deployed and quickly started filming. The initial bang would not be included in the video, but only the sound of the flight, which isn't very strong, especially if you aren't behind the missile.

Its definitely not impossible he took the video. Anyways there are 1000s of videos in the internet where where people are just filming random stuff and something happens. Tehran is a big city with many people so everything is possible.

Yeah definitely not impossible, but the video is a bit fishy in my opinion. We should wait for the investigators' report. Also, I've heard that the surveillance footage of the plane when it was still at the airport could be out soon. Let's see if they release it or not. Heard from some friends at IKA airport that one of the plane's engine cowlings were open during the 1 hour delay and UIA's maintenance were working on that engine. But could just be a rumor...

The investigator's already confirmed that both engines have no signs of fire damage or any kind of internal failure/explosion. They most probably were in working condition up until plane's collision with the ground. The fire was coming from the hull or wings.
So far all the facts corroborate on external missile strike. But you keep pushing your agenda and saying otherwise...

dara88 wrote:

I just hope investigators find other reasons for this crash. I had friends on that flight, heading for Canada.

My condolences.

I know it may be hard to believe, but it’s not actually that weird that someone would have a video of this incident. While it is very unlikely that any individual would be in the right place and time to witness something, it’s somewhat likely that SOMEONE would be in the right place and time to witness it. (Analogy-my odds of hitting the lottery are slim, but the odds someone hits it are high.)

So everything points to a "technical failure".
Only that the failure was from Iran army, and so, that's what they knew since the start.
Maybe it was their approach to the truth without saying what really happened.

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

Who wants to take bets that Iran will say the FDR and CVR are damaged and no data can be downloaded....

I have a feeling

Have you seen the photos of the FDR/CVR being recovered? They are smashed.

sgrow787 wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

sgrow787 wrote:

Out of curiosity, does the US have a comparable version of the TOR-M1?

Maybe the ESSM?

I think I said "comparable", meaning it needs to be land based, mobile, autonomous, self contained (as in not dependent on any other systems). The ESSM is ship based. Wow the noise factor with you A nutters.

IDK what you're hoping for but isn't the Patriot system exactly that? Just truck it around to wherever it's needed.

mxaxai wrote:

litz wrote:

Doesn't even have to be the 2nd missile ...

If this whole thing started with a technical issue (compressor stall, birdstrike, etc), that alone could have made enough noise to attract the filmographer's attention.

All you need is a "BANG!" sound in the sky, and you go "what was that?" and pull out the phone.

Though, why would somebody film an _explosion_ in the sky, on what looks like an airliner, caused by a bright missile streaking across the sky, but then stop filming seconds after the 'missile' hits? Was their phone's memory full after 19 seconds? The initial video at least bothered to keep filming for 34 seconds, until the jet hit the ground and a bit longer. I would've been curious as hell to see how this develops, if I were filming.

Why is there a brief flash of light, but no sustained fire? Don't we see the jet go down as a flaming wreck? What would serve as an ignition source if not the missile?

The missile is a kinetic weapon -- it throws a bunch of shrapnel out, not dissimilar to shotgun pellets.

Unless there's something that specifically ignites fuel in the airstream, it's just going to flow out of the holes and disperse.

Eventually, the aircraft structure starts to break apart, and then you get ignition sources, and flames.

mxaxai wrote:

How would a missile take out ADS-B & communication but leave the aircraft intact enough to fly on for well over a minute?

If that shrapnel shredded the E/E bay, or cut vital wire harnesses? easy ...

PixelFlight wrote:

flybucky wrote:

Now that we have learned from CBS that there were 2 missiles fired, I wonder if the flash we saw at 0:05 in the first video was the second missile hitting. A second later, that's when a bunch of flaming debris that falls off.

https://twitter.com/MohamadAhwaze/statu ... 81504?s=19

I think that the apparent flash at 0:05 is a focus adjustment of the camera, as all others details do the same, not just the aircraft.

Very astute observation. You're right, at the same moment, the car's tail light also "flashes" due to the mis-focusing.

And with the new video showing the actual missile hit, we know the explosion would have looked much bigger, and we would have heard the explosion 10-20 seconds later.

Sigh... I knew I was expecting too much from the Iranian government. Apparently them shooting it down is a "big lie" and "psychological operations"

Today, in a very well-calculated move in psychological operations as quoted by an informed source of Pentagon who spoke on condition unanimity has published news pompously that two missiles hit the Ukrainian plane. This is a lie and nobody will claim responsibility of the big lie.

The statement also recommended the US government to attend to the results of the investigation committee instead of lying and developing psychological operations.

It is regrettable that the US government's psychological operations system and its informed or uninformed allies are adding salt to the pains of the bereaved families with these lies and victimize affected families to reach their goals in the psychological operations.

https://en.irna.ir/news/83628098/Iran-g ... lane-crash

I too am wondering about actual Iranians and what they think (dara?) I know you're more distrustful of the US and more trustful of Iran, understandably, but are you buying what they're saying?

Armodeen wrote:

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

Who wants to take bets that Iran will say the FDR and CVR are damaged and no data can be downloaded....

I have a feeling

Have you seen the photos of the FDR/CVR being recovered? They are smashed.

I don't know which pictures you saw, but they look completely fine. Memory module on one of them seems completely intact.

D L X wrote:

dara88 wrote:

I just hope investigators find other reasons for this crash. I had friends on that flight, heading for Canada.

My condolences.

I know it may be hard to believe, but it’s not actually that weird that someone would have a video of this incident. While it is very unlikely that any individual would be in the right place and time to witness something, it’s somewhat likely that SOMEONE would be in the right place and time to witness it. (Analogy-my odds of hitting the lottery are slim, but the odds someone hits it are high.)

I often think the same thing, but I think we just have to remember that nowadays, video is EVERYWHERE.I often have to remind myself when researching an event from more than a just a few years ago how rare it was to have video of everything until recently.

I think a great example of this is the first flight that hit the WTC on 9/11. There is the one video taken by those two documentatarians who happened to be embedded with the NYFD that day, who looked up and caught the AA 762 flying into the building. Other than that, there is no other known footage of the accident. Meanwhile, today, when anything happens, someone is able to produce a video. Perhaps it is a part of the surveillance state, selfie culture, the proliferation of the smartphone or a combination of all of the above.

strfyr51 wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

Other accounts on twitter say Iranian state media reports it had a “technical fault after taking off”... totally unconfirmed, but if it was indeed a Ukrainian airliner, would imagine it would be PS752 headed to Kiev based on the timeline

Technical fault like a Manpad missle?

Well, they would’ve been right about the technical fault in their initial statement. They just failed to mention the technical fault occurred at their air defense site.

LEJCargo wrote:

Armodeen wrote:

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

Who wants to take bets that Iran will say the FDR and CVR are damaged and no data can be downloaded....

I have a feeling

Have you seen the photos of the FDR/CVR being recovered? They are smashed.

I don't know which pictures you saw, but they look completely fine. Memory module on one of them seems completely intact.

I went and looked again and you’re right, they aren’t that bad. Some impact and fire damage but the general shape etc is still there. Apologies.

dampfnudel wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

Other accounts on twitter say Iranian state media reports it had a “technical fault after taking off”... totally unconfirmed, but if it was indeed a Ukrainian airliner, would imagine it would be PS752 headed to Kiev based on the timeline

Technical fault like a Manpad missle?

Well, they would’ve been right about the technical fault in their initial statement. They just failed to mention the technical fault occurred at their air defense site.

And even that wasn't really a technical fault ... the equipment worked exactly as designed, to devastating effect.