Russian Passenger Plane Crashes Over Egypt

[Nević Nenad]

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.

As I understand it, this particular data was via GPS.

Plane gets its position via GPS but sends it to the ground receivers (flightradar) via radio transponder. On receiver's density and distance depends accuracy. The plane's black box will have more accurate position data.

http://www.flightradar24.com/how-it-works

FlightRadar didn't gave the GPS data on the plane's physical (geographical) position, distance traveled from the moment when event happened till the moment when plane was lost on instruments. That data could tell, to the some extent of course, in what physical state was the plane after the event. Was it able to continue normally, glide or get into free fall.

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.

Why do you say immediately? How could a plane travelling on an ascending trajectory at 10km/h gain 153km/h descending trajectory "immediately"?

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.

As I've mentioned several times, the theory does not involve a space rock actually hitting the plane but rather the shock wave from a space rock exploding above the plane.

Because I was confused with 'register'. The plane would 'register' any change immediately, but it would take some time to start to physically behave in such manner (going down), which I now assume was the question? Also, I was confused with 'glide', in such case it would be free fall, not gliding. Fall and gliding are different. I believe I answered that with this:

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.

I agree with the shock wave, it would done essentially the same as if hit. I was assuming the physical hit because of lack of the meteorite's heat trail. I don't know much on the meteorite's but wouldn't be there the heat trail from the burning in the atmosphere, especially if the meteorite exploded (and thus made shock wave)? The alleged lack of the meteorite's heat trail is the only what puzzles me. Is it possible? Also it would help if they said in what altitude they registered the "heat flash". If higher in the atmosphere, that maybe would explain why there is no heat trail, but in that case it would be one very mighty explosion and the shock wave. Just applying 'everyday' logic with that, I am aware that I don't know enough on that.

 

[Joe]

Any chance thee could have been some weird 'portal' effect involved along with whatever else was happening up there?

Based on what was said in a previous session about the Air Algeria flight, yes.

If I understand the gist of current questions correctly, you're trying to figure out how a plane can be going up, then literally one second later, be recorded to be going down...

Not just going down, but transitioning from going up at 10km/h to going down at 160km/h in the space of three seconds. I doubt that's possible even if the pilot decided to send the plane into a nose-dive with full engine power. The point being, something appears to have pushed it downwards with great force as it was flying through the sky.

 

[Laura]

As I've mentioned several times, the theory does not involve a space rock actually hitting the plane but rather the shock wave from a space rock exploding above the plane.

I agree with the shock wave, it would done essentially the same as if hit. I was assuming the physical hit because of lack of the meteorite's heat trail. I don't know much on the meteorite's but wouldn't be there the heat trail from the burning in the atmosphere, especially if the meteorite exploded (and thus made shock wave)? The alleged lack of the meteorite's heat trail is the only what puzzles me. Is it possible? Also it would help if they said in what altitude they registered the "heat flash". If higher in the atmosphere, that maybe would explain why there is no heat trail, but in that case it would be one very mighty explosion and the shock wave. Just applying 'everyday' logic with that, I am aware that I don't know enough on that.

It is possible that a charged meteor/comet fragment makes no heat trail at all until it begins to explode/break up. In this case, that could have been at 31,000 feet. From that point inward, there would be a heat trail, but before that, it might not/probably would not.

 

[Nević Nenad]

And then if meteorite was electrically charged would it be possible that the explosion/EM outburst could be triggered by the plane's proximity, as a metal object and also charged? Just another speculation of course.

 

[kalibex]

Not just going down, but transitioning from going up at 10km/h to going down at 160km/h in the space of three seconds. I doubt that's possible even if the pilot decided to send the plane into a nose-dive with full engine power. The point being, something appears to have pushed it downwards with great force as it was flying through the sky.

Something which does not mesh with our current, conventional understanding of physics.

The only possible metaphor I can think of right now is that a space and/or time 'slip' sort of situation may have been involved with - or possibly caused by - the speculated cosmic/electrical phenomena. As the Cs have hinted at before, as you noted. Must be frustrating (except they probably no longer get 'frustrated', heh) for them to try to pick a metaphor that is suitable for our level of understanding...

 

[Kisito]

_https://reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3r862g/fulfords_monday_november_2_2015_briefing/
According to Benjamin Fluvord, would have an F16 aircraft have attacked the Russian airbus.
Since, now all Israeli planes would be blocked by an elrctromagnetic cord.

 

[Siberia]

One more speculation: could it be that maybe the fireball didn't explode, but the plane did? I mean, is it possible that the fireball (or vortex, or microburst, whatever) caused the kerosene tank to explode?

 

[Keit]

One more speculation: could it be that maybe the fireball didn't explode, but the plane did? I mean, is it possible that the fireball (or vortex, or microburst, whatever) caused the kerosene tank to explode?

Yeah, that's probably the idea, as Niall said in the following comment, and as speculated in this exclusive. If the plane breaks apart, then all the systems inside either explode or go off.

Don't assume fire. If it was a meteor event, the meteor would have exploded some way away (and up) and THEN the downwards and outwards blast shockwave (just displaced air, no 'fire') would have simply broken the plane apart along its main structural connection points.

 

[Nević Nenad]

One more speculation: could it be that maybe the fireball didn't explode, but the plane did? I mean, is it possible that the fireball (or vortex, or microburst, whatever) caused the kerosene tank to explode?

If I may try to answer, if the tanks are in their normal condition, undamaged, that is very unlikely. They are made, and the whole plane of course, to endure much static electricity discharging, because of the lightnings. Lightnings hits the planes very often. For such explosion you need fuel and the spark, and you cant have spark in undamaged fuel tanks.

 

[Konstantin]

This is the new from today

_http://sputniknews.com/world/20151104/1029589834/media-box-a321-explosion.html

An engine explosion has been identified as a main lead in the investigation into the cause of the crash of a Russian passenger plane in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, following preliminary analysis of the aircraft's black box recorders, local media reported on Wednesday.

So all the meteor, micro-burst, scenarios are possible cause of engine explosion. How and why can an engine explode. Probably if something is sucked inside , or if something hit the engine powerful enough, or electrical discharging. Just a speculation and loud thinking.

 

[Keit]

If I may try to answer, if the tanks are in their normal condition, undamaged, that is very unlikely. They are made, and the whole plane of course, to endure much static electricity discharging, because of the lightnings. Lightnings hits the planes very often. For such explosion you need fuel and the spark, and you cant have spark in undamaged fuel tanks.

Interesting. Would a shockwave be capable of inflicting the "needed" damage?

 

[Renaissance]

_https://reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3r862g/fulfords_monday_november_2_2015_briefing/
According to Benjamin Fluvord, would have an F16 aircraft have attacked the Russian airbus.
Since, now all Israeli planes would be blocked by an elrctromagnetic cord.

Fulford makes up info out of thin air, distorts other data and has been continually wrong. I don't know how he manages to keep a following. He's not a reliable source, to say the least. There's a forum thread on him somewhere if you do a search.

 

[Siberia]

An engine explosion has been identified as a main lead in the investigation into the cause of the crash of a Russian passenger plane in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, following preliminary analysis of the aircraft's black box recorders, local media reported on Wednesday.

So all the meteor, micro-burst, scenarios are possible cause of engine explosion. How and why can an engine explode. Probably if something is sucked inside , or if something hit the engine powerful enough, or electrical discharging. Just a speculation and loud thinking.

Yeah, that's what I meant, thank you Konstantin. Perhaps it was a combination of factors: an old and weary engine plus very strong (electrical?) impact leading to the plane explosion. Who knows, will wait for more news.

 

[Nević Nenad]

If I may try to answer, if the tanks are in their normal condition, undamaged, that is very unlikely. They are made, and the whole plane of course, to endure much static electricity discharging, because of the lightnings. Lightnings hits the planes very often. For such explosion you need fuel and the spark, and you cant have spark in undamaged fuel tanks.

Interesting. Would a shockwave be capable of inflicting the "needed" damage?

Of course. The plane would take damage in wide range, from just loosing some rivets to totally falling apart. Which depends on the intensity of the shock wave.

People are usually confused with explosions as fire and the shock wave, while in fact any explosion IS shock wave. Sudden and rapid change in the local air pressure, no need for fire.

 

[Nević Nenad]

If I may try to answer, if the tanks are in their normal condition, undamaged, that is very unlikely. They are made, and the whole plane of course, to endure much static electricity discharging, because of the lightnings. Lightnings hits the planes very often. For such explosion you need fuel and the spark, and you cant have spark in undamaged fuel tanks.

Interesting. Would a shockwave be capable of inflicting the "needed" damage?

Of course. The plane would take damage in wide range, from just loosing some rivets to totally falling apart. Which depends on the intensity of the shock wave.

People are usually confused with explosions as fire and the shock wave, while in fact any explosion IS shock wave. Sudden and rapid change in the local air pressure, no need for fire.

Just to add a thought: if they can detect 'heat flashes' and 'heat trails', they can detect meteorites, so they would see increase in the numbers. So, THEY ACTUALLY KNOW? :)

Sorry, double post. I hit 'reply' (to my last post) and not 'modify'.