Flight 752 brought down by Iran - mod warning in |OP

Woodsie1

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yeah, no ssue there at all at all :rolleyes:

Something wrong with your comprehension?
Never said there was no issue.

alastair wrote: »

Yes I did say that. And what of it?

Are you being obtuse for the craic?
You said the investigation wasnt completed.

charlie14

Woodsie1 wrote: »

American planes from American airports crashing in America
Its not the same situation.

If it was a plane from another country crashing on the main runway of say, JFK International, should the wreckage remain on the runway until the country that owned the plane were finished examining it do you believe ?

alastair

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Are you being obtuse for the craic?
You said the investigation wasnt completed.

It wasn’t. But that’s the norm. The investigators are interested in the wreckage, not the site. They refer to photos taken and maps if it’s of any relevance. They cleared the debris from the site and continued the investigation in a secure environment.

Woodsie1

smurfjed wrote: »

they might have followed ICAO ANNEX 13, but what about the other requirements relating to actually conducting the investigation ?

Removing the aircraft parts in such a rapid manner has given them the opportunity to sterilize the crash scene by removing any other aerial vehicle parts.

alastair wrote: »

There wouldn’t be any other aerial vehicle parts there. The pic of the missile head was not at the crash site. If it was hit by a missile the fragment holes in the skin if the plane will be sufficient to determine if it was hit by one.

Ala, youve got an opinion there from somebody who knows way more than you or I about aviation and the procedures...quit while your behind,youre making a clown of yourself.

Woodsie1

charlie14 wrote: »

If it was a plane from another country crashing on the main runway of say, JFK International, should the wreckage remain on the runway until the country that owned the plane were finished examining it do you believe ?

In suspicious circumstances?...an hour or two after missiles were fired from nearby?....hell yeah they should get them in

charlie14

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Ala, youve got an opinion there from somebody who knows way more than you or I about aviation and the procedures...quit while your behind,youre making a clown of yourself.

I would contest just how much that poster knows of ICAO Annex 13 from that post tbh.

alastair

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Ala, youve got an opinion there from somebody who knows way more than you or I about aviation and the procedures...quit while your behind,youre making a clown of yourself.

If it was a missile hit it, the fragment impact holes are more than enough to establish that. That’s the fact of the matter.

Woodsie1

charlie14 wrote: »

I would contest just how much that poster knows of ICAO Annex 13 from that post tbh.

Youd be an awful fool if you did

Beasty

Woodsie1 and pearcider are now threadbanned. The way some of you are continuing to bicker more are likely to follow, or indeed I may just close the thread altogether as I'm getting quite dizzy with the number of circles you are all going round

Do not respond to this post in thread

smurfjed

I would contest just how much that poster knows of ICAO Annex 13 from that post tbh.

well I have read its 72 pages more than once.

Now would you be so kind as to tell us where that annex explains how to conduct an investigation?

charlie14

Woodsie1 wrote: »

In suspicious circumstances?...an hour or two after missiles were fired from nearby?....hell yeah they should get them in

Again we do not know if a missile brought it down.
Either way it really makes little difference.

Proper procedures were followed, so unless you can show Ukraine, Canada. or Boeing had a problem with it, I really don`t see what your problem with it is.


If you really want to get rid of pieces of wreckage you would leave all the wreckage out in the open and simply let "civilians" wander around and take what you wished to get rid off.

alastair

The Ukrainian investigators main complaint (aside from rubberneckers on site taking souvenirs) was that they weren’t getting debris into the reassembly warehouse fast enough.

Gatling

Nothing in here about international best practices just an investigator giving a short interview regarding the Ethiopian airline crash.

It's not just best practice in the interview it says parts that can be salvaged can be removed to a secure location for reconstruction ,
We were told there would be no need to collect all the debris would be spread too far , nothing in the interview says that at all
Neither does icao annex 13 which is a actually a group of manuals several hundred dollars/euros each,

But anyway there is a lot of investigation that has to take place first before anyone just bulldozed through the site , which also makes no reference to parts being removed straight away for preservation.
We've been led to believe that once the FDR and CVR are recovered there is little need to examine the site because all the data is stored

From link

"At the beginning of the inquiry, the investigator-in-charge, usually an investigator from the lead country’s aviation safety board, coordinates with local first responders to determine what hazards may be present at the crash site, and ensures safe access for investigators to visit the wreckage. Dangerous debris could include hazardous cargo, flammable or toxic materials and gases, sharp or heavy objects and pressurized equipment. Human remains or blood from injured victims may also pose dangers of disease, meaning investigators must protect themselves against viruses, bacteria or parasites.

The investigators on the scene take photos and videos of the wreckage and collect as much physical evidence as they can. They also conduct interviews with eyewitnesses and draw charts showing the debris field and any indications of how the aircraft hit the ground, such as the angle of impact, the distribution of debris and other details.

If parts of aircraft can be salvaged, they can be moved to a secure facility such as a hangar for wreckage reassembling. This can assist in determining missing or damaged components, and gaining a fuller idea of what happened.

Investigators also collect all the documents related the plane, its crew and its recent flights for forensic analysis.."


*also this isn't the average crashed aircraft investigation it's a military shooting down a civilian aircraft *

alastair

Well the Ukrainian air crash investigators, hard at work in their secure warehouse, with the reassembled plane, haven’t made any complaint about the documentation of the site, and they have been happy enough to voice other complaints.

And they are investigating a number of possibilities, including a non-military-related-accident.

smurfjed

Neither does icao annex 13 which is a actually a group of manuals several hundred dollars/euros each,

Nope, ICAO ANNEX 13 is a single agreement consisting of 72 pages that costs around $200. It forms part of 19 Annexes signed by ICAO member countries, each deals with a separate aviation agreement.

markodaly

The Ukrainian team is reported to be threading a fine line as not to upset their hosts.
We will see tomorrow if the Iranians will double down on their lies, or they actually come clean, or if indeed the plane fell out of the sky on its own accord due to technical failure.

As an aside, the Iranian regime must be feeling the heat and would be worried events could lead to open revolt and protests like what happened last year.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Genuine me wants to think it was Iran

Tinfoil hat me thinks it was Trump




Genuine normally wins.

smurfjed

@alastir, this appears to contradict your last statement.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EN7nzi6WoAIBRO6.png

Gatling

smurfjed wrote: »

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EN7nzi6WoAIBRO6.png

Best practices .


Definitely adhering to international best practices in how to destroy a shotdown aircraft crime scene and remove any real evidence ...
I can only imagine what's happening to any human remains in the wreckage


But , but,but icao annex 13 says it

skepticalme

Bodies have already been transported to Ukraine.

An Ri rua

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

This wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, shoot down a plane that has many Canadian citizens on it (Trump hates Treadue) and accuse Iran of it. Get worldwide support for further actions against Iran. Classic US deflection/distraction tactics (see WMD lies) to garner support for another invasion.

100% plausible and my thinking for the past few days.
The Iranians shoot down a plane that was just gaining altitude, leaving Tehran? Give them some credit. That's less likely than likely. A plane full of Iranians, Canadians and Ukrainians. And they did it. Because they're nervous.
Who stands to gain from this action? Hours after the concerted missile attacks?
For a seasoned, professional army with almost 40 years exposure to hardcore warfare and with over 2 years of probing and testing US defences and resolve, with only one death recently, that sound particularly sloppy.
I would hold off on judgement of this event until we know more.

Cheerful Spring2

Iran has released a statement, I believe it's legit. Here the claim the pilot was heading towards a military site by mistake. The anti air- defences were activated and shot it down.

Why was the plane turning around and heading that way, did something happen?

https://twitter.com/AbasAslani/status/1215842598356647936

tuxy

It will be interesting to see if the plane did alter from it's planned course and why.

Manic Moran

An Ri rua wrote: »

100% plausible and my thinking for the past few days.
The Iranians shoot down a plane that was just gaining altitude, leaving Tehran? Give them some credit. That's less likely than likely. A plane full of Iranians, Canadians and Ukrainians. And they did it. Because they're nervous.
Who stands to gain from this action? Hours after the concerted missile attacks?
For a seasoned, professional army with almost 40 years exposure to hardcore warfare and with over 2 years of probing and testing US defences and resolve, with only one death recently, that sound particularly sloppy.
I would hold off on judgement of this event until we know more.

Just quoting this for posterity. Occam wins again.

Cheerful Spring2

tuxy wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if the plane did alter from it's planned course and why.

Unclear right now maybe learn more Tomorrow.  Iran has not spelled out why the pilot changed course and turned- That sounds like he's heading back to the airport?

Do civilian aircraft not show up as a primary- plane recognition ID on the military site radar?

Strange if doesn't. Careless person if the plane is identified and still shot it down? Plenty of unanswered questions. 

My theory was the plane appeared on the military radar screen as a "UFO" and they shot it down. But I felt the plane, lost its transponder and lights for this to be true?

Right now the evidence is - plane turned towards a Iranian military site and was shot down. 

tuxy

I don't think there is any evidence of that yet.

How did it take Iran this long to figure out it was responsible for shooting it down?

jimmycrackcorm

tuxy wrote: »

I don't think there is any evidence of that yet.

How did it take Iran this long to figure out it was responsible for shooting it down?

Playing the waiting game to see if nothing indicated it. But the evidence mounted.
Much like the Saudis after the murder in the Turkish consulate.

Iran looks totally incompetent now. Can't do real damage with their missiles and can't even tell the difference between a passenger key and a warplane.

If the US was sending planes then they would be duality bombers without a hope of being shot down

tuxy

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Playing the waiting game to see if nothing indicated it. But the evidence mounted.

What I mean is there is no evidence yet that the plane turned towards a Iranian military site.
Wasn't it only in the air 3 minutes?

Cheerful Spring2

tuxy wrote: »

What I mean is there is no evidence yet that the plane turned towards a Iranian military site.
Wasn't it only in the air 3 minutes?

Where the plane got shot down in Parand(a province in Tehran) there is an IRGC military site close by.

tuxy

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Where the plane got shot down in Parand(a province in Tehran) there is an IRGC military site close by.

Do you know if the intended flight path was in that direction?
I assume Iran would not allow any flight path that close to a sensitive military instillation.