Russian jets crash within minutes of each other

"C J Campbell" wrote in
:

AP is saying two Russian jets crashed less than six minutes apart. Both
airplanes departed Moscow. One crashed 120 miles south of Moscow and the
other is presumed crashed 600 miles south of Moscow.

Fuel problem???

In article ,
"James M. Knox" wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in
:

AP is saying two Russian jets crashed less than six minutes apart. Both
airplanes departed Moscow. One crashed 120 miles south of Moscow and the
other is presumed crashed 600 miles south of Moscow.

Fuel problem???

Unlikely -- if it were a fuel problem, they would have had plenty of
time to get off some radio calls describing their problems. According to
the news, at least one got off a hijacking TXP code.

My thought is Chechen Islamist terrorists attempting to make a statement
about the upcoming Chechen elections.

Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news et:

Fuel problem???

Unlikely -- if it were a fuel problem, they would have had plenty of
time to get off some radio calls describing their problems. According
to the news, at least one got off a hijacking TXP code.

My thought is Chechen Islamist terrorists attempting to make a
statement about the upcoming Chechen elections.

You are right, of course. At the time all I had heard was that they both
went down, within minutes of each other. No word about radio calls or not.
Based on later news, I agree that fuel issues are VERY unlikely.
Unfortunately, that brings up the distinct probability that it was
deliberate.

jmk

James M. Knox opined

Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news et:

Fuel problem???

Unlikely -- if it were a fuel problem, they would have had plenty of
time to get off some radio calls describing their problems. According
to the news, at least one got off a hijacking TXP code.

My thought is Chechen Islamist terrorists attempting to make a
statement about the upcoming Chechen elections.

You are right, of course. At the time all I had heard was that they both
went down, within minutes of each other. No word about radio calls or not.
Based on later news, I agree that fuel issues are VERY unlikely.
Unfortunately, that brings up the distinct probability that it was
deliberate.

And if it were fuel issues, _lots_ of planes would be having problems.


-ash
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?

"Ash Wyllie" wrote in message
...
James M. Knox opined
And if it were fuel issues, _lots_ of planes would be having problems.

Must be that 80 octane stuff...

On 8/26/04 9:41 AM, in article
, "James M. Knox"
wrote:


My thought is Chechen Islamist terrorists attempting to make a
statement about the upcoming Chechen elections.

You are right, of course. At the time all I had heard was that they both
went down, within minutes of each other. No word about radio calls or not.
Based on later news, I agree that fuel issues are VERY unlikely.
Unfortunately, that brings up the distinct probability that it was
deliberate.

jmk

Of what use is a terrorist act if nobody knows it's terrorism? If this is
terrorism in order to make a statement, the guys responsible need to work a
bit more work on their press releases.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino
Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
www.wizardofdraws.com
www.cartoonclipart.com

"Wizard of Draws" wrote in message
news:BD53EFFD.1E032%jeffbREMOVE@REMOVEwizardofdraw s.com...

Of what use is a terrorist act if nobody knows it's terrorism? If this is
terrorism in order to make a statement, the guys responsible need to work
a
bit more work on their press releases.
--

Maybe both their missions failed, in the same manner that the flight that
crashed in PA failed here, and because their real objectives weren't met
they felt there was no need to bring attention to themselves.

It is very hard to draw conclusions under the circumstances.

"James M. Knox" wrote in message
2...
"C J Campbell" wrote in
:

AP is saying two Russian jets crashed less than six minutes apart. Both
airplanes departed Moscow. One crashed 120 miles south of Moscow and the
other is presumed crashed 600 miles south of Moscow.

Fuel problem???

What fuel problem would cause a jet to go down *right now*? Airliners glide
decently and a crew with even a little training would get off a mayday call
and try and work the situation in the time it would take a flamed-out
airliner to go down. A back of the envelope figure is that an airliner
probably has a sink rate of 2500 fpm or less in glider mode... Remember the
Gimli Glider? It glided for 10-15 minutes before landing, and a Soviet
airliner probably wouldn't do much worse...

KB

Kyle Boatright wrote:
What fuel problem would cause a jet to go down *right now*?

TWA800

Gimli Glider? It glided for 10-15 minutes before landing, and a Soviet
airliner probably wouldn't do much worse..

There was a Gimli glider style landing performed by Tupolev Tu-204 (757 lookalike)
performed at night in Siberia after running out of fuel on the way to an alternate.
They were lucky to be flying a latest Tupolev, since the older Tu-154
(one of the involved in yesterday's crash) have no RATs and their hydraulic system
is completely dependent on the engines running (there are three of them plus APU after
all), once they flame out, the -154 becomes uncontrollable and enters agriculture.
Tu-134 on the other hand is old enough not to posesses hydraulic controls at all,
other than a yaw damper, so this shortcoming becomes an advantage in such case.

--
HECTOP
PP-ASEL-IA
http://www.maxho.com
maxho_at_maxho.com

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 at 20:51:11 in message
, Kyle Boatright
wrote:

What fuel problem would cause a jet to go down *right now*? Airliners glide
decently and a crew with even a little training would get off a mayday call
and try and work the situation in the time it would take a flamed-out
airliner to go down. A back of the envelope figure is that an airliner
probably has a sink rate of 2500 fpm or less in glider mode... Remember the
Gimli Glider? It glided for 10-15 minutes before landing, and a Soviet
airliner probably wouldn't do much worse...

More recently wasn't there an Airbus (I forget which type) that lost
fuel over the Atlantic and glided some 70 nm(?) to the Azores and had
enough height left for a circuit before landing? Modern airliners are
efficient partly because they have very good Lift/Drag ratios.

I agree that the sink rate is around 2000 ft/min or so but it is
Lift/drag that gives you the distance. I guess that airliners cruise
around 250 knots IAS and that that is near the optimum Lift/Drag ratio
point.
--
David CL Francis