American made 737-800 disintegrated upon crashing Russia -62 dead

New Posts

  • #21
Are we doing Air Canada MD - 11 similiar? Value jet? Smoke in cockpit. Tail impact first is well just is .............................. There is a reason for the two hour ciricling - we both know that is so atypical for a go around - crew had to be problem solving something. Aint weight of aircraft (not a fuel dump for weight reasons) Had to be something flight crew was trying to deal with beofre deciding whatever --- and end up thinking we just got to get on the ground (dc 9 Air Canada toilet?)

LOss of avionics? It cant be a landing gear deal they did first attempt--

Hey if the machine (looks like it) fire before imaact cant rule terrorism, now can we?

The tail strike seems so much like a stall
decompresion?
 
  • #22
  • #23
Hi Taste -- how are you??
 
  • #24
U2forever said:
CARIIS, L-1011 is my favorite airliner too. My first flight was an L-1011, Augusta-Atlanta-Miami-Puerto Rico-US VI,
The flight from Puerto Rico to US VI was on a little puddle jumper and I was terrified. I was 14 1/2 y.o. 1980.

I was astonished at the size of the airplane and all the passengers it held.

:goodpost:
Click to expand...

It's funny but my first flight was on an L-1011 too! London Gatwick to Mallorca, May 1987. I was 15 and in awe of it's size!

I saw the CCTV of the crash last night on twitter and thought the engines looked to be on fire just before impact
 
  • #25
I need to know in all your opinins did she not look like she was on fire before impact

[video=youtube;resmD0PSzHs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=resmD0PSzHs[/video]
 
  • #26
CARIIS said:
Are we doing Air Canada MD - 11 similiar? Value jet? Smoke in cockpit. Tail impact first is well just is .............................. There is a reason for the two hour ciricling - we both know that is so atypical for a go around - crew had to be problem solving something. Aint weight of aircraft (not a fuel dump for weight reasons) Had to be something flight crew was trying to deal with beofre deciding whatever --- and end up thinking we just got to get on the ground (dc 9 Air Canada toilet?)

LOss of avionics? It cant be a landing gear deal they did first attempt--

Hey if the machine (looks like it) fire before imaact cant rule terrorism, now can we?

The tail strike seems so much like a stall
Click to expand...
Do you think it could be terrorist related? Due to length of circling. The Pilot trying to gain a few extra minutes to gather time/plan to disarm etc.
It seems plausible to me. Looking at the cctv. There is a definite fire ball before the plane hits ground. Maybe a bomb/suicide bomber.
Maybe the pilot did what he did. By trying to do a landing. To try to message air control visually that there was a problem 'on' board.
Idk. Weather would of been a huge issue. But as said in an earlier post. The runways/airport would of shut down. Re routing panes to another Airport that was accepting.

Thoughts on this. As I'm thinking back to the Russian plane last year downed in the desert. By a can of "fizzy drink".
Same sort of obliteration. Vast area of debris. Except this one almost made it home... now THAT IS SCARY.

Thought's?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
  • #27
  • #28
CARIIS said:
I need to know in all your opinins did she not look like she was on fire before impact

[video=youtube;resmD0PSzHs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=resmD0PSzHs[/video]
Click to expand...

Yes she did.
 
  • #29
Yes, to me, in this video there does indeed appear to be a "fireball" on the plane prior to it striking the ground. And it kind of looks like it "dropped like a rock" almost. Does not look like a typical landing approach.

CNN is reporting the plane dropped 4,000 ft. in the last 60 seconds of flight. Also reporting winds of 60 mph and heavy rain.

And yeah, circling this airport for two hours? Surely they could have flown well out of the bad weather area in two hours!

I don't understand the reports that the pilot was flying in the large circles around the airport "trying to reorient" to the airport. What? He could not even see the airport? And yet he attempted to land during an active storm?

Sounds like some poor decision making.
 
  • #30
CARIIS said:
Hi Greg

I hope your feeling better !
Click to expand...

Hi CARIIS I'm much better thanks I hope you are well too. It's so sad we are here discussing another air disaster but it is inevitable unfortunately.
 
  • #31
It is still being reported over and over again that "the tail clipped the runway". And yet the reports are clear that the plane never even made it to the runway.
 
  • #32
AlwaysShocked said:
Yes, to me, in this video there does indeed appear to be a "fireball" on the plane prior to it striking the ground. And it kind of looks like it "dropped like a rock" almost. Does not look like a typical landing approach.

CNN is reporting the plane dropped 4,000 ft. in the last 60 seconds of flight. Also reporting winds of 60 mph and heavy rain.

And yeah, circling this airport for two hours? Surely they could have flown well out of the bad weather area in two hours!

I don't understand the reports that the pilot was flying in the large circles around the airport "trying to reorient" to the airport. What? He could not even see the airport? And yet he attempted to land during an active storm?

Sounds like some poor decision making.
Click to expand...

I don't know why he didn't abort and fly to another airport nearby. Is it pressure from head office that prevented him from doing so?
 
  • #33
I don't think we can link to other forums but some pilots seem to feel it's not fire but landing lights. They seem more concerned about the steep angle of descent. If I'm not allowed to even post this, let me know or delete.
 
  • #34
Elainera said:
Yes she did.
Click to expand...

TY for clearing me up That IMO is so important-- translates to the two hour running around in the air was problem solving !! TY! To anyone else does it look like on fire before impact???
 
  • #35
CARIIS said:
TY for clearing me up That IMO is so important-- translates to the two hour running around in the air was problem solving !! TY! To anyone else does it look like on fire before impact???
Click to expand...
It looks like fire to me, too.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
  • #36
Is it normal for airports not to have CCTV on runways and around the airport gates to record any potential accidents? I know this is an old airport that is being replaced with a new one in 2018 but you would hope there would be better video than what we have seen.
 
  • #37
Wyle_E_Coyote said:
It looks like fire to me, too.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's my opinion too I wonder if the plane hit something before final impact.
 
  • #38
Hmm it could be the glare of landing lights. My first thought was fire as it seemed so bright. I've just watched the video again and paused it over and over. It happens so fast but there may be 3 'glares' of light I'm seeing with the middle one brighter. Landing lights are starting to make sense.
 
  • #39
skibaboo said:
Hmm it could be the glare of landing lights. My first thought was fire as it seemed so bright. I've just watched the video again and paused it over and over. It happens so fast but there may be 3 'glares' of light I'm seeing with the middle one brighter. Landing lights are starting to make sense.
Click to expand...
I dunno... it looks like it's flickering to me, and it looks like it in the other video as well.

That being said, I'm sure pilots have a better eye for landing lights than I do!

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
  • #40
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 63 more.
Total: 2,713 (members: 64, guests: 2,649)

Online statistics

Members online
64
Guests online
2,649
Total visitors
2,713
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
632,857
Messages
18,632,626
Members
243,315
Latest member
what123
Back
Top