Kolavia A321 Crashes In Sinai / Egypt - Part 2

frigatebird · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:12 pm

Quoting HALtheAI (Reply 188):
Besides the others mentioned, there's also Lauda 004.

I was thinking about that before. Could a thrust reverser have been deployed mid flight like with the Lauda Air crash? Just read the Wiki article which says a bomb theory was also considered during the first days of the Lauda Air crash. Could an accidentally deployed thrust reverser cause this kind of accident with an A321 or would fly by wire prevent such an event?

DocLightning · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:14 pm

Quoting EMAman (Reply 195):
1. Primary radar would have detected a streak - the israelis would have good coverage - havent seen this come forward yet

This is the most damning bit as the Israelis, being no friends of IS, would not have been quiet about it.

GlenP · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:16 pm

But Gekko isn't shoulder launched, it requires a rather large vehicle to transport it around see:

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=sa+8+gecko&view=detailv2&&id=190FD04F63EA9DF144C987C542D683AB71FEF3E0&selectedIndex=0&ccid=dDZrZoAK&simid=608010929988701856&thid=OIP.M74366b66800a01278f593c89f3919504H0&ajaxhist=0

or

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=sa+8+gecko&view=detailv2&&id=74D9CEDD2BCD15D3B2DCB04B09EB854DAF5319FC&selectedIndex=11&ccid=n70Ro%2bsp&simid=608029630286530592&thid=OIP.M9fbd11a3eb29e05a96f8a73550662e47o0&ajaxhist=0

Additionally, not only has Ansar Beit al Maqdis (the self-proclaimed) ISIS affiliate in North Sinai never been suspected of having access this, or any other such sophisticated system, one must ask where they would have acquired them; seeing as the Egyptian armed forces have never been a user of this particular Soviet SAM system - having been, mainly, US supplied since the mid-1970s.

[Edited 2015-11-01 08:18:09]

CF-CPI · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:17 pm

Quoting btblue (Reply 198):
The horizontal and vertical stabilisers separated - a great deal of soot around where the APU is and, as noted on another forum, there is what appears to be a leakage of fluid from the horizontal stabiliser.

A precedent, albeit long ago. Mohawk Airlines flight 40 rendered uncontrollable due to an uncontained fire in the tail, ignited by fluids and the APU:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohawk_Airlines_Flight_40

AIRWALK · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:20 pm

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 200):
Could an accidentally deployed thrust reverser cause this kind of accident with an A321 or would fly by wire prevent such an event?

Not possible, weight on wheels is required to unlatch them and allow activation

cat3appr50 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:29 pm

Been looking through the FlightRadar24 data having been posted to date and can’t seem to find consistency in the time, etc. sequence. If this was an inflight breakup, which the position of a deceased person/passenger (BTW not a “cadaver” but a “person”, in fact it was a child) reportedly found 8km away from the primary crash site seems to indicate, then it would seem that the (accurate) actual flight path after the root cause event occurred (lat./long) sequenced with REAL time would be critical. In addition the V/S, altitude, and ground speed also sequenced with REAL time (and actual flight path) would be critical. Can someone post the most recent best FR data sequenced with REAL time?

Are there more details of the reported past repair of the pressure bulkhead after a reported past serious tail strike incident in terms of extent of the original damage, when (year) the repair was made, and post repair signoff (including required non-destructive and visual examination of the repair). How many pressure cycles did this aircraft encounter post the repair (relative to potential fatigue failure). Of course, catastrophic pressure vessel failure due to non-fatigue is also possible relative to a repair, and pressure vessel overpressure unrelated to a repair is also a potential root cause. IMO failure on climb at only around FL310 is concerning.

solarflyer22 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:34 pm

Quoting liquidair (Reply 82):
If that chart is right it looks like a cockpit struggle... Either between pilots or between man and machine.

That's what I thought. Its extremely abnormal. I am thinking it was a loss of control like the Alaskan Air flight. It looks like the elevator went awry or something.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 201):
This is the most damning bit as the Israelis, being no friends of IS, would not have been quiet about it.

I find the MANPAD/SAM unlikely. As you said, the missile itself will show up on Radar and after MH17 they knew very quickly it was a SAM that hit it. Aside from altitude, those shoulder fired SAMs would have hard time catching up from the rear of A321 at cruise speed. Thats 550 MPH + 30,000 ft. There is not enough fuel in the missile for that. Its burn time is only like 7-10 seconds.

You never know, maybe the Egyptian military hit it by accident (with a real SAM). They killed a dozen tourists by accident in the Sinai just last month.

This plane was owned by AerCap leasing (USA based) so I am sure though used they would have checked it out very closely. Including the tail strike repair.

SPQR · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:34 pm

Quoting diverted (Reply 87):

Quoting aircatalonia (Reply 92):

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 94):

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 97):

The photo you guys have been looking at, with the cockpit on its side may not be how it was initially.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...es-jet-abort-three-months-ago.html

the third pic shows it laying upside down

osiris30 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:59 pm

Did anyone else notice the stuff these big red arrows point to:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...299019-image-a-1_1446394104751.jpg

Thoughts and/or comments from those who know this aircraft. What exactly is in that part of the aircraft normally, etc.

GlenP · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:03 pm

Looks like the Daily Heil is attempting to claim they've found evidence of a bomb, but I always thought the area in question housed the APU; it also doesn't look like bomb damage, from pictures the NTSB have released over the years.

EMAman · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:04 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 206):
You never know, maybe the Egyptian military hit it by accident (with a real SAM). They killed a dozen tourists by accident in the Sinai just last month.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 201):
This is the most damning bit as the Israelis, being no friends of IS, would not have been quiet about it.

As the second quote says, I think the israelis would still have bought this forward by now

flyingturtle · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:08 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 208):

Foam insulation. It both helps against the cold air outside, and the engine noise. The thing peeled down is the aircraft skin.

David

cougar15 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:11 pm

Quoting SPQR (Reply 207):
The photo you guys have been looking at, with the cockpit on its side may not be how it was initially.

second that, especially as there is a Petrol powered Generator and ´the jaws of lifé at the front of the Picture! I am sure the Picture we all see is not how it actually landed/end up on the ground, due to subsequent SAR efforts!

osiris30 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:11 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 211):
Foam insulation. It both helps against the cold air outside, and the engine noise. The thing peeled down is the aircraft skin.

Well that I understand. My question was what is in that area of the aircraft normally, just the insulation or is there any sort of 'interesting' structure in that area. Anything that would lead to the skin of the aircraft behaving in that way?

Btblue · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:17 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 208):
Did anyone else notice the stuff these big red arrows point to:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...299019-image-a-1_1446394104751.jpg

Thoughts and/or comments from those who know this aircraft. What exactly is in that part of the aircraft normally, etc.

I did question this a while back - the fuselage is torn back indicating pressure/force escaping out? You should also note the tail has chip marks on it. This could be unrelated but could indicate the explosion or breakup threw back debris while at speed chipping the tail fin and taking out the horizontal stabiliser (damaging one of them - there is one however standing vertically intact minus elevator in the debris field).

The Horizontal stabiliser has clearly detached as it appears elsewhere on images.

Ty134A · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:17 pm

as far as i know, the red box on some pics is used by russian carriers to secure weapons and other dangerous goods. is is still locked, and damage is minor to it. it is located usually in the read bulk compartment. sure it would show some traces if there were an incident in the rear bulk compartment.

BUT as far as i know the kolavia a321 don't have containers which leads me to the assumption that only compartment 3 and 4 were used, with the rearmost 5 (with the red box) being empty. and usually a full load of luggage fits well into 3+4...

but then again, if it was a bomb, it would not have detonated in the rear section most probably. and even the bulk section 5 is located under the rear three rows.

zeke · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:19 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 213):
Well that I understand. My question was what is in that area of the aircraft normally, just the insulation or is there any sort of 'interesting' structure in that area. Anything that would lead to the skin of the aircraft behaving in that way?

Where you see the outward peel is near the last window on the LHS of the aircraft. It would be near a rear lavatory. Lavatories are often used by passengers illegally smoking.

flyingturtle · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:20 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 213):
Well that I understand. My question was what is in that area of the aircraft normally, just the insulation or is there any sort of 'interesting' structure in that area. Anything that would lead to the skin of the aircraft behaving in that way?

You have the rear door in this approximate area.

The injuries to the plane's skin shows that the tail was torn off in a somewhat downward motion (if you look at the normal attitude of the plane), and then the forward part of the plane sheared off in a gently rolling motion. At the crown area, the damage is very, very clean. There was no compression damage.

That's how I imagine it...

David

Acheron · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:22 pm

Quoting SPQR (Reply 207):
The photo you guys have been looking at, with the cockpit on its side may not be how it was initially.

They probably turned it over to remove the bodies of the pilot and copilot.

Btblue · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:23 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 216):
Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 213):
Well that I understand. My question was what is in that area of the aircraft normally, just the insulation or is there any sort of 'interesting' structure in that area. Anything that would lead to the skin of the aircraft behaving in that way?

Where you see the outward peel is near the last window on the LHS of the aircraft. It would be near a rear lavatory. Lavatories are often used by passengers illegally smoking.

And there looks to be what seems scorching in that area, below 321. It may well just be dirt but the frame looks to have dropped and not dragged and gathering the dirt.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...299019-image-a-1_1446394104751.jpg

[Edited 2015-11-01 09:25:44]

osiris30 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:24 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 216):

Where you see the outward peel is near the last window on the LHS of the aircraft. It would be near a rear lavatory. Lavatories are often used by passengers illegally smoking.

Thanks Zeke that's what I was trying to understand. I'm not familiar enough with the airframe to understand the reference area. Near a lav is interesting not only for smoking concerns, but for anyone needing privacy for god knows what (if that is what happened). It's also entirely possible that part broke away for some unknown mechanical failure and the wind peeled it back like that.

SCQ83 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:25 pm

Russian false flag IMO. A good way to legitimate their pro-Assad intervention in Syria.

DDR · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:34 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 221):

What? I don't understand what you are saying.

GlenP · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:37 pm

Quoting DDR (Reply 222):
Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 221):
What? I don't understand what you are saying.

Not that I'd poke the idea with at very long stick, but the implication appears to be that the Russians caused the accident as an excuse to be bombing ISIS in Syria & Iraq.

hoya · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:38 pm

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...99019-image-a-30_1446385664386.jpg

This is a piece of the engine cowl, right? Notice all the black soot on it, yet it's away from the main debris field where presumably a lot of the debris was consumed by fire. Could this indicate the engine was on fire before the plane impacted the ground?

Also - http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...299019-image-m-4_1446394416533.jpg - the nose cone is pretty much intact. Either it separated during the dive, or shows that the plane did not impact the ground anywhere close to nose first.

DocLightning · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:38 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 221):

Russian false flag IMO.

That's a ghastly thing to say in the absence of any concrete evidence.

lowbank · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:39 pm

in thread one I posted abour possible engine failure, disc to be precise. some of the photos that can be seen now are adding more to that.
the front fan set can be seen on the floor away from any other debris, the nose cone has evidence of burning on it. the paint looks blistered and the blades are blackened. that suggests the engine was ingesting fire because it does not look like that has happened on the ground. added to that the wing thats burnt is severly burnt.

also on the pic of the engine, it looks like the engine broke apart in the air and not when it hit the ground, again there is some charring at the center of the engine in the pic, again suggesting an engine failure. also in the same pic the inside of the cowl looks like its got soot or blackening on it, thats a cold duct and would not normally be like that.

so I think it might be engine failure followed by a fire due to parts penetrating the wing.

those poor people, my thoughts are with the families,

we should hear something quickly now they have the black boxes.

MadameConcorde · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:42 pm

Quoting GlenP (Reply 209):
Looks like the Daily Heil is attempting to claim they've found evidence of a bomb

I would not trust the Daily Fail for any thing aviation related.
Royal gossip, yes. Aviation? NOT.

EMAman · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:42 pm

See the picture

A very clean break, this could infer that this was a stress fracture

GlenP · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:43 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 225):
we should hear something quickly now they have the black boxes.

I should think the Egyptian CAA will wait for the representatives of all concerned parties to assemble before announcing anything. If nothing else, this would help to prevent any accusations of a cover-up; though as seems to be the case with pretty much every such accident these days, I suppose there will still be the conspiracy theories surface before too long.

EMAman · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:45 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 221):
Russian false flag IMO. A good way to legitimate their pro-Assad intervention in Syria.

Absolute stupidy, the Russians were the first to dispel terrorism rumours, and Putin seemed to open a case against the air line within an hour

garpd · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:50 pm

No impact scarring. Wings level on impact. Extreme corners torn off and also showing vertical and little to not lateral travel. Tells me this thing was in a flat spin and broke apart before impact.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enb4soLA2Tw

This was no dive. This looks like a stall and stall induced flat spin.

[Edited 2015-11-01 10:03:08]

Btblue · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:52 pm

Video of the debris field.

Engines and tail a distance from the main crash site that consists of forward fuselage and wings.

http://youtu.be/Enb4soLA2Tw

joejosh999 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:55 pm

Wings inverted.
Cockpit impacted upside down.

VS and tail/empennage well separated and impacted right side up. Note that HS and tail cone missing, clean break on fore empennage , and outward curled metal edges.

This thing was in pieces well above impact, and with the tail-strike history IMO we have a good bit of evidence pointing to in-flight failure of RPB, taking HS with it.

Would love to know where HS/apu unit are found.....

osiris30 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:59 pm

Quoting btblue (Reply 232):
Video of the debris field.

Engines and tail a distance from the main crash site that consists of forward fuselage and wings.

Tail seems furthest away. Might suggest it came off first. odd that both engines appear the same distance from the wings as each other (but quite far away).

Unless I'm mis-seeing what I think are engines... Very very weird.

SCQ83 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:00 pm

Quoting GlenP (Reply 223):
Not that I'd poke the idea with at very long stick, but the implication appears to be that the Russians caused the accident as an excuse to be bombing ISIS in Syria & Iraq.

Well now the Kremlin is saying that the plane broke mid-air.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...own-on-Egypts-Sinai-Peninsula.html

Justa wait a few hours and at Russia Today they will talking about a bomb and some Islamic terrorist implication.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:03 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 235):
Justa wait a few hours and at Russia Today they will talking about a bomb and some Islamic terrorist implication.

Well, why don't you just wait and see if that happens? In the meantime, we're going to move forward without the conspiracy drama.

-Dave

KirkSeattle · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:03 pm

Here's the report of her tail strike back in 2001 when she was only 4.5 years old and with Middle East Airlines.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20011116-0

Doesn't have any info on the repairs.

The burnt wing and the engine fan separating from the engine are interesting as well.

Fan blades
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...99019-image-a-21_1446395532896.jpg

Engine

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...99019-image-a-27_1446384955185.jpg

KirkSeattle

Btblue · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:05 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 234):
Quoting btblue (Reply 232):
Video of the debris field.

Engines and tail a distance from the main crash site that consists of forward fuselage and wings.

Tail seems furthest away. Might suggest it came off first. odd that both engines appear the same distance from the wings as each other (but quite far away).

Unless I'm mis-seeing what I think are engines... Very very weird.

Remember the American Airlines 587 Crash, New York. The Vertical Stabiliser detached and during the descent both engines broke off - a similar scenario here given the tail detached.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:06 pm

Quoting btblue (Reply 238):
Remember the American Airlines 587 Crash, New York. The Vertical Stabiliser detached and during the descent both engines broke off - a similar scenario here given the tail detached.

Yes, very reminiscent. And sad.

-Dave

Viper911 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:07 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 221):
Russian false flag IMO. A good way to legitimate their pro-Assad intervention in Syria.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 235):
Well now the Kremlin is saying that the plane broke mid-air.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...own-on-Egypts-Sinai-Peninsula.html

Justa wait a few hours and at Russia Today they will talking about a bomb and some Islamic terrorist implication.

you're just making a fool out of yourself, just stop it.

Viper911

Kaiarahi · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:10 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 231):
This looks like a stall and stall induced flat spin.

Quoting btblue (Reply 232):
Video of the debris field.

The video is inconsistent with a flat spin. It looks like it pancaked at high vertical velocity with relatively low forward velocity.

The vertical stabilizer is not that far from the rest of the wreckage.

I would suggest a progressive failure of the rear pressure bulkhead, which first broke the wiring harnesses to the horizontal stabilizer resulting in an uncontrollable pitch up and stall, with the empennage subsequently separating as a result of pressure on the inactive horizontal stabilizer causing the stabilizer to detach and continuing to increase the bulkhead failure.

[Edited 2015-11-01 10:13:11]

joejosh999 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:11 pm

Tail section w VS 5km from main wreckage. Def separation in flight.
Bodies now found up to 8 miles from main site.

Could be as straightforward as prior tail strike causing pressure blowout of rear bulkhead and eventual tail separation.

Still no sign of HS that I've seen, perhaps that separated immediately at 31k and not yet located.

ranold76 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:13 pm

Looking at the scene and coupled with the fact the pilot was having radio issues etc, could an electrical fire cause a sudden loss of controls, thus putting the craft in an irrecoverable stall/pancake dive?

Kaiarahi · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:15 pm

Quoting joejosh999 (Reply 242):
Tail section w VS 5km from main wreckage.

Quoting joejosh999 (Reply 242):
Bodies now found up to 8 miles from main site.

Source?

hoya · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:23 pm

Quoting btblue (Reply 232):

Wow, the plane split in two. The aft fuselage - behind the wings - along with the horizontal stabilizers (beginning of RT film) somehow separated from the front half, and the vertical stabilizer got ripped off separately. Looking at the video there's nothing around the rear fuselage and horizontal stabilizers except for the engines (0:16 mark in the video), and nothing around the vertical stabilizer (0:18 mark).

The rest of the fuselage, from the wings forward, fell straight down inverted (0:29 mark) further away. What would cause the plane to split into two like that? Literally it snapped in half mid-air.

[Edited 2015-11-01 10:31:31]

joejosh999 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:25 pm

Check pprune main thread.
More details here
http://www.airlive.net/2015/10/break...etrojet-a321-crashes-in-sinai.html

GlenP · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:28 pm

Oh well, it would appear that the tinfoil hat brigade seem to have come out from the woodwork with depressing rapidity.

lancelot07 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:38 pm

Quoting EMAman (Reply 228):
A very clean break, this could infer that this was a stress fracture

The upper parts, yes. And i notice some metal rolled outwards, but not burned.
But what about the lower half ? Is it there at all ? And i am missing the horizontal stabilizers.

But then, the fotos do not look like a steep dive, that would occur if the tail had broken off at cruise.

cat3appr50 · Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:43 pm

Responding to Btblue Post #238
Agree, in addition to a potential pressure bulkhead failure or pressure vessel overpressure failure (or an overpressure resulting from another source at the rear of the aircraft) as I noted earlier, another possibility seems could be a potential root cause failure relative to the horizontal stabilizer. It’s difficult to understand (if Flightradar24 data is accurate) how an aircraft can go from that extreme of high negative V/S to high positive V/S in that very short increment of time, and if that extreme may be related to a sudden anomaly in horizontal stabilizer operation/control eventually leading to an in-flight breakup. A gross overspeed doesn’t seem to be indicated (from FR data if accurate that is).

From past accidents relative to stall entry and (lacking) proper stall recovery, peaks of positive V/S and negative V/S have occurred but don’t seem to be to the extreme in terms of time increment and V/S values as in this situation (again if FR data is accurate).

Obviously the DFDR data will provide the definitive proof and true root cause.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net