Perceval said:
Avala said:
But, if the data provided by the US satellite is true, that there was 'heat flash', and if they didn't detect any heat trail from the ground, and if they can detect heat trails, than it could not be a meteor.
There may not have been a heat trail.
Flightradar24 has weighed in with its data at the request of French and Egyptian authorities:
"According to its chronology, the Airbus A321 began losing vertical speed from 576 feet per minute to negative 320 feet per minute at an altitude of 30,750 in the span of one second at 04:13:14 GMT.
The aircraft began descending at the speed of 3,584 feet per minute with increased vertical speed of negative 3,584 feet per minute at 04:13:15. By 04:13:18, its vertical speed was negative 8,384 feet per minute.
An unknown event that cut the plane’s vertical speed by more than half at an altitude of 29,750 feet occurred at 04:13:19. As the plane reached maximum descent of 24,960 feet, FlightRadar stopped processing altitude data at 30,670 feet at the descending altitude of 20,352 feet per minute.
The new data was released at the request of French and Egyptian investigative authorities."
To put that in more intelligible language: The plane was ascending at 10km/h at 30,750ft when it suddenly started descending at 65km/h within one second. Three seconds later it was descending at 153km/h. It went on to reach a downward "terminal velocity" of 456km/h before radar data was lost.
Here's my question. If for some reason the plane's engines abruptly failed while on an slight ascending course, and the plane began to fall, or rather glide, how long would it take the plane to register a descending speed of 153km/h? 3 seconds?
Free fall speed (i.e. no air resistance) for an inert object after 3 seconds is 108km/h.
Has anyone ever slapped an object straight downwards as it was flying past them, like a frisbee for example?
FlightRadar works with the data from the plane's radio transponder and its accuracy depends on how many ground receivers are in area in question. Plus, its accuracy decreases under the height of 30.000 feet, which is usual flight altitude for commercial planes (and above that altitude. And with that we can see that the plane didn't reached its cruising altitude. Plus, the duration of the flight says that also, since the usual time duration for that is around 20 minutes). So, flightradar's data can be only orientational.
The speed of descending or ascending is speed of plane gaining altitude and loosing it (going up and down) which is not the true plane's airspeed (the horizontal speed, to put it more simply). It would be more interesting if flightradar gave the plane's indicated airspeed and changes of it. Also, if they gave GPS data of plane's exact position in the moment of the event and after it, because that would tell did the plane get apart instantaneously or was continuing to fly as the whole. If the plane fell apart immediately horizontal distance traveled after the event would be much shorter than if the plane stayed in one piece (for some time) and was gliding through the air.
But, flightradar gave one interesting thing (if I understand it correctly, it is written not so clear), that plane loss half of its speed in just one second, which is impossible. That could be done only if plane falls apart in that same second. Its like hitting the wall. In the case when engines fails speed is gradually decreasing (getting slower) because of inertia. So, no gliding and no much distance traveled in that case.
Here's my question. If for some reason the plane's engines abruptly failed while on an slight ascending course, and the plane began to fall, or rather glide, how long would it take the plane to register a descending speed of 153km/h? 3 seconds?
Immediately. But if it starts to glide the speed would decrease gradually, or increase gradually (but much faster) if in free fall. There is a difference in fall and glide, the gliding is controlled fall. For example gliding from that altitude with good pilot, plane can travel hundreds of kilometers.
If that was a meteorite, I would say that it was rather small and that it didn't smashed the plane at the moment of impact, but more just pierced through the hull and substantially damaging it. It did slowered the plane at the moment but they managed to keep it under control some small amount of time until the whole superstructure fell apart due to damage and physical forces.
As people say: my 2 cents
edit: now when I visualize the picture, it really could look if something was hitting the plane from above pushing it in back slide and wide downward spiral and plane falls apart because of that movement/forces and taken damage.
