|Quoting okie (Reply 70):|
The issue I have at this point if time line is correct.
If it is as ATC indicated 700ft agl at 4km out add 2 more to get to the center of the field for the camera (just a guess) when aircraft informed of a go around. I really have issues with getting a plane into that configuration to be near nose down from 700ft in 5-6km from spatial disorientation near a lighted airfield. I would think either the angle of impact would have been less of an angle or farther down track but that is just a guess I could be wrong.
You're not the only one baffled... I am too.
If the 735 was on default lighting then the speed of the video shouldn't be too far from realtime speed, if not slowed down slightly. But no timestamp.
Based on the light configuration, the airplane does look like it's nose down instead of heavily banked etc, and does not appear to be pulling a large AoA...
700' AGL at 4km out, means at just over 2NM, and end up approx 2.5nm later... at a 60deg (looks like over 45 anyway) or down trajectory is difficult to imagine. But, in 2NM airplanes can go up pretty high, and from a go-around, one can easily gain 1000ft in 2.5NM if not more, on a 735.
I would throw out the assumption of a lighted airfield... the cloud base is 700-800ft AGL at the time.
Add all that with the missed approach procedure (assuming ILS 29), "at 1070, then left turn 112, climb 2060 according to chart"...
The thing is, we don't know from what altitude did the go-around start, but I assume that they climbed into the overcast and was commencing the turn when something happened. If the aircraft had shot 2 previous approaches and this mishap occured on the 3rd abort... I wouldn't be surprised if they fell victim to spatial disorientation extremely quickly.
Even in good visual conditions at night, spatial disorientation is a risk. Do they have spatial disorientation training at Tatarstan?
Questions questions questions... let's hope answers come through in the end.