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

Manic Moran

Just for the sake of additional pedantry, some surface to air missiles actually do have contact fuses. British Aerospace famously marketed Rapier as a "hittile". The advantage is that you get better effects from a small warhead on a small missile than you would if you have a proximity fuse. The trade off is that you get more chance of a complete miss with no damage at all. Given this, contact fuses are rare, but certainly not unheard of.

I think some posters are confusing plausibility, probably and possibility. It is certainly both possible and plausible that a genuine accident could happen in Iran on that night. As our entrenchant poster observes, the chances of such an accident do not change when missiles are flying. I strongly suspect, however, that the demonstrated probabilities of someone shooting something they shouldn't in regions of conflict are far higher. Thus, while it would have been wrong to definitively conclude an accident was not at cause, using it as a working theory is fine. It would have been even more wrong to not be suspicious of the Iranians and their surprisingly rapid conclusions

smurfjed

@Boggles

The area was not "bulldozed".

They used the buckets of machinery to collect the debris. It's in the pictures and not a very hard concept to understand TBF.

Do you think that its sensible that the aircraft FDR is sitting in a pile of rubble?

woohoo!!!

Spook_ie wrote: »

But wouldn't the heightened tension caused by Trumps trumpeting and tweeting of ready to target 52 targets etc. Within Iran not have played a part in a missile unit being on high alert.

The Vincennes incident was primarily caused by the crew being over trigger happy from being on alert.

It's a foul up by the Iranians and they've now accepted this. And I think a dislike of Trump is the reason why some are attributing blame also to the US. Now I don't like Trump but it's far too much of a stretch to lay it on him. If it was Obama, would the same posters be saying the same? I don't think they would.

But the clincher is US planes were not in the area.

smurfjed

The facts have to be laid out in the final report, it's the only way they can issue safety recommendations to try and prevent it in the future.

I would be very surprised if that was covered in the final report as the political situation is outside the scope of technical expertise of accident investigators.

charlie14

smurfjed wrote: »

@Boggles

Do you think that its sensible that the aircraft FDR is sitting in a pile of rubble?

I would be very surprised if the flight recorders were not found among wreckage.

smurfjed

@charlie12 ref 116.

I found the ill informed speculation by some here unseemly.

But 3 years later we are discovering that some of that speculation was in fact correct. But continuation of this discussion should be across in the proper thread.

alastair

Manic Moran wrote: »

Just for the sake of additional pedantry, some surface to air missiles actually do have contact fuses. British Aerospace famously marketed Rapier as a "hittile". The advantage is that you get better effects from a small warhead on a small missile than you would if you have a proximity fuse. The trade off is that you get more chance of a complete miss with no damage at all. Given this, contact fuses are rare, but certainly not unheard of.

I think some posters are confusing plausibility, probably and possibility. It is certainly both possible and plausible that a genuine accident could happen in Iran on that night. As our entrenchant poster observes, the chances of such an accident do not change when missiles are flying. I strongly suspect, however, that the demonstrated probabilities of someone shooting something they shouldn't in regions of conflict are far higher. Thus, while it would have been wrong to definitively conclude an accident was not at cause, using it as a working theory is fine. It would have been even more wrong to not be suspicious of the Iranians and their surprisingly rapid conclusions

Sure - like I said:

Assuming the most likely explanation was that it had been shot down isn’t anything like evidence that it had been shot down

I actually own an ex British Army forward control Land Rover 101 - who’s relations were used for moving around the Rapier missile set-up.

Thoughts on anyone “blowing up an airliner“?

smurfjed

Look at the picture again, you have knowledge of the ICAO requirements, does this look correct to you? Considering where the recorder is located in the aircraft, would you expect it to be beside a laptop?

charlie14

smurfjed wrote: »

@charlie12 ref 116.

But 3 years later we are discovering that some of that speculation was in fact correct. But continuation of this discussion should be across in the proper thread.

Some of the speculation was not, and we have yet to see from a final report just how much was incorrect.

charlie14

smurfjed wrote: »

Look at the picture again, you have knowledge of the ICAO requirements, does this look correct to you? Considering where the recorder is located in the aircraft, would you expect it to be beside a laptop?

It looks as if someone picked it up and dumped it there and someone then took a photo and posted it.

I did say earlier about securing the wreckage.
From that photo is it not clear why the accident investigation team decided to remove the wreckage off-site to a secure location ?
Something again a lot of conspiracy theorists here had a problem with.
Even from their footwear it is obvious those in that picture should not be anywhere near a crash site.

batman_oh

alastair wrote: »

That was a crash. Not a plane being blown up.

Pathetic that you are clinging to this as some sort of warped victory instead of admitting you were wrong. It’s a bizarre thing to see!

Timberrrrrrrr

Curious_Case wrote: »

Yes, was that the armour piercing rounds ??

Yes, they turned depleted uranium rods from nuclear reactors into armour piercing shells to kill off tanks/armoured troop carriers.

alastair

batman_oh wrote: »

Pathetic that you are clinging to this as some sort of warped victory instead of admitting you were wrong. It’s a bizarre thing to see!

I wasn’t wrong though, so what do you expect me to say?

smurfjed

@Charlie12, now look at this from an investigators eye, is the damage of the FDR consistent with the damage of the aircraft area surrounding its location?

Gatling

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yes, they turned depleted uranium rods from nuclear reactors into armour piercing shells to kill off tanks/armoured troop carriers.

Did you carry or use depleted uranium when you were there

lalababa

The largest most advanced and probably most aggressive military in the world,the US ,who can assassinate individuals anywhere in the world with pin point drone strikes from the edge of space have the terrorists and anybody else ****ting themselfs. Then you have a military like Iran who are at best 3rd/4th tier, attacking us bases. An Iranian would be expecting very Swift and deadly reprisals. They would be goggle eyed looking at the radar.
Anything coming their way and they'd freak.

charlie14

smurfjed wrote: »

@Charlie12, now look at this from an investigators eye, is the damage of the FDR consistent with the damage of the aircraft area surrounding its location?

As I said already, it looks to me as if it was picked up and dumped and that people, who from their attire should have been nowhere near a crash, site then took a picture.

To me it shows how ill informed some here were on securing wreckage and that the Iranian Civil Aviation Authority Crash Investigation Team were more than justified in there decision to remove the wreckage from a site that was patently far from secure.

Cheerful Spring2

Hassan Rouhani (president of Iran) said "missiles" were launched at the plane. This means higher than one. Now it make sense why the first video released by Bellingcat shows no airplane.  They likely launched another anti-air missile at the plane and it missed the target and detonated. Iran army internal review identified one of their mobile anti air units fired missiles at a plane, they claim, when the plane turned towards an IRGC sensitive military site?  Still unclear for me- Iranian officers not realize it was a noncombatant civilian aircraft ( was not ID as one on the scope?) Was their technical defect. Or maybe t it was just a trigger-happy badly trained Iranian officer who fired the missiles?

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Hassan Rouhani (president of Iran) said "missiles" were launched at the plane. This means higher than one. Now it make sense why the first video released by Bellingcat shows no airplane.  They likely launched another anti-air missile at the plane and it missed the target and detonated. Iran army internal review identified one of their mobile anti air units fired missiles at a plane, they claim, when the plane turned towards an IRGC sensitive military site? 

Or they just simply fired 2 missiles at the plane to guarantee it was taken down ,
The moment the plane was it hit , it was flying in a straight trajectory actually it was likely still climbing from take off which was only around 120 seconds from initial take off

Timberrrrrrrr

Gatling wrote: »

Did you carry or use depleted uranium when you were there

No my regimnent were never issued with them, we were in areas where they were used and still get yearly medical checks due to the dangers of being in the vicinity of spent rounds.

Gatling

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

No my regimnent were never issued with them, we were in areas where they were used and still get yearly medical checks due to the dangers of being in the vicinity of spent rounds.

That's a scary thought

Snow Garden

Lunatic/Terrorist general killed in Iraq
52 people trampled to death in a funeral
Claims a rocket attack on airbases resulted in multiple US deaths and significant damage etc etc etc All nonsense.
Shoot down a passenger jet killing all on board

A great week for Iran.

Cheerful Spring2

Gatling wrote: »

Or they just simply fired 2 missiles at the plane to guarantee it was taken down ,
The moment the plane was it hit , it was flying in a straight trajectory actually it was likely still climbing from take off which was only around 120 seconds from initial take off

Statements when this first happened said two missiles were fired. Rouhani just said missiles were launched at the plane, higher than one. Yes they definitely launched further missiles to guarantee it would be taken down.

I thought it was 3 minutes into its flight? 

First happened Iran declared the plane was turning around to head back to the airport. Still unclear if one missile damaged the plane and pilot tried to go back, but did not make it, the plane exploded and crashed?

smurfjed

First picture that I have seen of the cockpit.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Statements when this first happened said two missiles were fired. Rouhani just said missiles were launched at the plane, higher than one. Yes they definitely launched further missiles to guarantee it would be taken down.

I thought it was 3 minutes into its flight? 

First happened Iran declared the plane was turning around to head back to the airport.

It took 3 minutes to take off from impact on the ground ,

Iran said ,it's been repeatedly proven Iran has and is still lying ,
Flight 752 was flying in a straight trajectory , after it was hit it crashed impacted somewhere off to the right of its flight path only after it hit ,most likely the aircraft lost all control was it rapidly plummeted and broke up ,

Iran is lying so stop saying Iran said that this is how and what happened

alastair

Snow Garden wrote: »

Lunatic/Terrorist general killed in Iraq
52 people trampled to death in a funeral
Claims a rocket attack on airbases resulted in multiple US deaths and significant damage etc etc etc All nonsense.
Shoot down a passenger jet killing all on board

A great week for Iran.

Lots bad for sure.

On the other hand:
US Given their marching orders out of Iraq.
Successful missile attack on supposedly protected military base.
Congress attempting to curtail illegal presidential assassination strategy.
Massive support for Soleimani evident on the streets, bolstering the regime following on from protests.

Gatling

smurfjed wrote: »

First picture that I have seen of the cockpit.

Seems it was likely hit on the right , might explain how flight 752 veered to the right of its path,
And where it impacted rather than what Iran is claiming the the aircraft turned to a military base and at the same time was returning to the airport

Actually that damage is interesting ,it looks like it was sliced off the rest of the aircraft fuselage,
wondering if the missiles detonated either side of it causing this particular damage

Cheerful Spring2

Gatling wrote: »

It took 3 minutes to take off from impact on the ground ,

Iran said ,it's been repeatedly proven Iran has and is still lying ,
Flight 752 was flying in a straight trajectory , after it was hit it crashed impacted somewhere off to the right of its flight path only after it hit ,most likely the aircraft lost all control was it rapidly plummeted and broke up ,

Iran is lying so stop saying Iran said that this is how and what happened

Incident happened two-plus days ago, not weeks or months ago. Iran has admitted they shot it down. What are they lying about?

Curious_Case

Gatling wrote: »

Iran is lying so stop saying Iran said that this is how and what happened

It's reasonable to reference a quote though . . .
if Iran claimed that a sparrow brought the plane down then it would be quite truthful to say "Iran claims the plane was brought down by a sparrow"

Cheerful was accurately referencing a quote from Iran (truthful or not)

Gatling

So just taking stock of the thread so far .

Iran shoots down flight 752 .

Iran said it was a technical issue and the plane was returning to the airport,

Iran said it was an engine fire ,

Iran said it didn't shoot down any aircraft ,

Iran said it's air accident investigation concluded it was caused by technical difficulties .

It might be have been an American missile .

Iran said that they didn't shoot down flight 752

Canada said Iran shot down flight 752

The US said Iran shot down flight 752

Iran said it was psychological warfare blaming them on shooting down flight which they say didn't happen.

Iran invites an international investigation team to Iran to fully investigate the crash (shooting down)

Iran said that they didn't shoot (flight 752) it down

Iran suddenly announced it shot down flight 752 which was flying towards a sensitive military site ,

Iran said that flight 752 was returning to the airport at the same time as flying towards a sensitive military site,

Iran said a lot in 3 days since they shot down flight 752.


So the final conclusion is Iran shot down flight 752