Plane Crashes

Looks like it was indeed an unfortunate fire from the Russian defence system that downed the AZAL plane.

3 days ago, Azerbaijani news agency Caliber, published what they claim to be preliminary investigation results.

Preliminary investigation: AZAL aircraft shot down by Russian air defence Exclusive data by Caliber.Az
26 December 2024 16:49

According to reliable government sources, Caliber.Az has learned that the preliminary results of the investigation have determined that an Azerbaijan Airlines (AZAL) aircraft, en route from Baku to Grozny, was attacked on approach to Grozny by the Russian air defence system Pantsir-S.

Furthermore, as a result of the use of Russian electronic warfare (EW) systems, the communication system of the Azerbaijani aircraft was completely paralysed. This disruption caused the aircraft to disappear from radar within Russian airspace and only reappeared in the area of the Caspian Sea.

According to Russian sources, at the time of the flight over Chechnya, Russian air defence systems were attempting to shoot down Ukrainian drones. The head of the Security Council of the Chechen Republic, Khamzat Kadyrov, confirmed the drone attack on Grozny on the morning of December 25, stating that there were no casualties or damage. In this case, the Russian side should have closed its airspace to civilian aircraft, but this was not done. Why a no-fly zone was not declared over Chechnya remains a significant question. ...

For the Azerbaijani side involved in the investigation, the situation is absolutely clear. No one is claiming that this was done intentionally. However, given the established facts, Baku expects the Russian side to acknowledge its responsibility for shooting down the Azerbaijani aircraft, issue an official apology to the Azerbaijani people, and conduct a full investigation, the results of which should lead to holding all responsible parties accountable.
Click to expand...

As is known, the Grozny airport refused to allow the aircraft to land. Moreover, the Azerbaijani aircraft was also denied landing permissions at the airports in Makhachkala and Mineralnye Vody. The disoriented crew, subjected to air defence fire and electronic warfare (EW) systems, was redirected to the Kazakh city of Aktau. It can be assumed that this recommendation was given with one goal: to have the aircraft crash into the Caspian Sea, where all witnesses would perish and the aircraft would sink. However, this is merely our assumption. Alternative versions circulating in Russian media are deliberate disinformation attempts to mislead public opinion. Video recordings from the aircraft cabin indicate that two passengers were injured by shrapnel. All eyewitness testimony, including reports of explosions heard outside the aircraft, points to the involvement of air defence systems.

Today, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in a sense confirmed those findings and had some bitter words toward Russia in his interview with a TV channel (link goes to yandex translation)

29.12.2024 [18:27]

Of course, the final version will be known after the black boxes are opened. But the initial versions are quite reasonable and based on facts. And the facts are that the Azerbaijani civil aircraft was damaged from outside on the territory of Russia, near the city of Grozny, and practically lost control. We also know that our aircraft was rendered uncontrollable by means of electronic warfare. This is the first damage inflicted on the aircraft. At the same time, as a result of the fire opened from the ground, the tail section of the aircraft was also badly damaged. Immediately, on the same day that our delegation organised those videos in the city of Aktau, the public was also informed about this issue.

The fact that the fuselage was punctured certainly shows that the version originally thrown in by I don't know who about a collision with a flock of birds was completely off the table. It's possible that when the aircraft was damaged, when it was hit, the pilot could have perceived it as a collision between birds and the aircraft. Because it probably could not have occurred to anyone that our aircraft would be fired at from the ground in a country friendly to us. Unfortunately, however, some circles in Russia preferred to stick to this version. One of the things that upset and surprised us was that the official structures of Russia put forward versions about the explosion of a gas cylinder. That is, it openly showed that the Russian side wants to hush up the issue, and this, of course, does no one credit. Of course, our plane was shot down accidentally. Of course, there can be no question of a deliberate act of terrorism. [...]
Click to expand...
 
mabar said:
The week of accidentes.

"Dec. 28, PAL Airlines (operated by #AirCanada) Dash 8-400 (C-GPNA) flight #AC2259 from St. John's to #Halifax landed at Halifax Stanfield Int'l Airport with left landing gear damaged, resulting in the wing scraping the runway and catching fire"
Click to expand...

The Bombardier Dash 8-400 has notoriously unreliable landing gear
(probably due to maintenance, which requires special attention on these models?)

I remember a longer time ago (year 2007), when Scandinavian Airlines had several crash events at landings within a few weeks (due to collapsing landing gear), which lead to that SAS immediately got rid of all their 27 Dash-8 400 planes - which of course also lead to a financial crisis in an already financially weak airline riddled with red numbers.

en.wikipedia.org

2007 Bombardier Dash 8 landing gear accidents - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
More flight incidents occured last week:

  • 27th of December Boeing 737 Olso – Amsterdam Loud noice heard in plane. Plane landed at Torp Sandeflord and landed in grass.
  • 28th of December Boeing 777-200 Amsterdam – Bali technical problems
  • 28th of December Boeing 777-300 Amsterdam – Shanghai After three hours returned due to problems with the drinking water supplies.
www.dutchnews.nl

Two more KLM planes turn back after "technical" problems - DutchNews.nl

Two KLM aircraft were forced to return to Schiphol airport on Sunday night because of technical problems. The first, a Boeing 777-200, was heading for Shanghai but returned to the Netherlands after three hours of flying time. The airline told news agency ANP there were problems with the drinking...
www.dutchnews.nl www.dutchnews.nl
 
Possible "drone" connection:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1875635552399081726
A whistleblower came to ASA [Americans for Safe Aerospace, Graves's org] regarding a mid air collision between a Gulfstream jet and an unidentified metallic object that occurred off the coast of Florida on December 11 at approximately 27,000 feet and resulted in engine failure and an emergency landing.

There are indications that the unidentified object may have been a drone operating off the east coast with atypical characteristics.

The whistleblower is concerned because this altitude is highly regulated Class A airspace that requires flight plans and transponders, but in this instance, there were no flight plans for the object and the object was not transponding.

We can largely eliminate the possibility of common objects because:

- a weather balloon would have been transponding
- this altitude is too high for hobby drones and illegal for any drone
- there is no biological indicator of a bird strike
- video of the engine shows metal damage

I am concerned the incident is being downplayed by FAA. The report is being classified it as an “incident” and not an “accident,” which would require public announcement, investigation by NTSB, and an explanation.

What is going on here? @realDonaldTrump @FAANews @NTSB @SeanDuffyWI

Major air safety events should be handled transparently.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom