Disaster Dozens killed as passenger plane crashes in Kazakhstan - No it wasn't a Boeing.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
BBC LINK // ARCHIVE
1735125387065.png

Dozens of people have died after a passenger plane crashed with 67 people on board in Kazakhstan, local officials say.

Authorities in Azerbaijan, where the flight originated, say there were at least 30 survivors.

Azerbaijan Airlines flight J2-8243 caught fire as it attempted to make an emergency landing near the Kazakh city of Aktau.

The plane was en route to Grozny in Russia but it was diverted due to fog, the airline told the BBC.

Video verified by Reuters news agency shows the plane heading towards the ground at high speed, with its landing gear down.

Seconds after it seems to attempt to land, a huge fireball erupts.

The airline said the plane "made an emergency landing" about 3km (1.9 miles) from Aktau.

It took off from the Azerbaijani capital Baku at 03:55 GMT on Wednesday, and crashed around 06:28, data from flight-tracking website Flightradar24 showed.

There were 62 passengers and 5 crew members on board the Embraer 190 aircraft, the transport ministry said.

Those on board were mostly Azerbaijani nationals, but there were also some passengers from Russia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan.

Out of the 25 known survivors, 22 were taken to hospital, the emergency ministry said.

Unverified video footage showed emergency services pulling people out of the wreckage and survivors crawling out.

Both Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan have launched investigations into the cause of the accident. Embraer told the BBC it was "ready to assist all relevant authorities".

The BBC has contacted Azerbaijan Airlines for comment.

The aircraft involved was an Embraer E190, the Brazilian company is a smaller rival to Boeing and Airbus, it traditionally has a strong safety record.

 
To play Devils Advocate until we know for sure, the shrapnel could also be from the engine coming apart and shooting its flaming inards out like a shotgun.

But yeah missile is a distinct possibility. The destination was Chechnya.
No uncontained engine failure is going to pepper the tail and rudder with shrapnel.
 
What did they do with the three? Just dust them off and wish them well? Like...no one thought, "Hey these people just walked out of a fireball maybe we should check them out?"
Weirdly this would be the third time in a week that plane crash survivors did not require hospitalization and immediately started helping investigators.
 
The video from the inside shoes what could be damage from shrapnel on the overhead compartments.
given the way the guy underneath it is rubbing his head i'm going to say he was launched into and took it out with his head, those panels fall away all the time in rough turbulence they're designed to be "softish" and cushion impacts.

That caught my attention too when I saw it on Google News, and it's actually the new headline of OP's BBC article. Archive.today got the old one again for some reason.
the pessimistic editor has clocked off for the day and the optimist editor has started their shift.
 
No uncontained engine failure is going to pepper the tail and rudder with shrapnel.
I think there wouldn't be a chunk of the plane bigger than a piece of ripped paper if it was an engine failure. It looks pretty clear that the hydraulics failed causing the uncontrollable climbs and dives. Someone mentioned it already but when a plane loses all its hydraulic systems it enters fughoid motion. When the pilots have no control over the control surfaces the aircraft drops which caused it to gain speed which naturally caused it to climb which caused the speed to drop and then forces the plane into another descent.

They would also have no control over the alierons if their hydraulics failed meaning if there was an imbalance of thrust they would just flip over and nose dive.

All 3 hydraulic systems would have to fail because each one will feed some portion of the elevator.
Screenshot_20241225-094153_Firefox.png

But I also think if they were hit by a missile in the tail they'd probably break up as commercial airliners aren't very missile proof.

The most successful landing involving a full hydraulic failure was a DHL plane that got hit by a missile over baghdad in 2003 and it only survived because it hit off the outer wing. They managed to do the nearly impossible task of utilizing the engines to turn, climb, and descend before the burning wing broke apart and landed safely. But nearly every other incident has ended in fatalities.


I've also noticed if you look under the plane that the RAT hasn't deployed. It's a small windmill that drops under the plane automatically if it detects that electrical power has been lost.

The flaps are also fully up.

Screenshot_20241225-095435_Firefox_1.png
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Not entirely sure this was an accident:
Look at the photos on post 68
Russia been getting trigger happy again?
It's full of mostly Kazakhs and Russians departing from Russia. It would most likely be a Ukrainian drone(s), which were in the vicinity attacking Grozny, Chechnya at the same time.
 
No uncontained engine failure is going to pepper the tail and rudder with shrapnel.
Yeah, every engine failure I've seen which breaches the cowling results in damage to the wing and fuselage lateral to the engine, not behind it

Besides, the obvious puncture damage on the stab looks to have been parallel to the skin rather than originating from a forward direction (and thus an oblique angle.) Debris hitting the stab from the engine would have left obvious signs, like steeply angled holes or even long gouges
 
Not entirely sure this was an accident:
Look at the photos on post 68
Russia been getting trigger happy again?
There's been damage similar to that in other air crashes not involving a missile.

proxy-image(5).jpgproxy-image(6).jpg

Korean airlines 801, crashed due to pilot error. I think if it was a missile we would be saying more substantial damage. This could very well be post impact damage from the front of the plane breaking apart into thousands of pieces and shrapnel hitting the rear.

While the image quality isn't good, you also can't see any damage from before impact.
 
There's been damage similar to that in other air crashes not involving a missile.
It's seemingly unthinkable to people that a plane which just fucking crashed might have suffered unusual damage during unplanned lithobraking.

The damage could have been caused by almost anything, so good on ya' for pointing out other examples.
 
I'm going with bird strike leading to loss of power and hydraulics... Then our old friend Newton took over
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Imago
I think there wouldn't be a chunk of the plane bigger than a piece of ripped paper if it was an engine failure. It looks pretty clear that the hydraulics failed causing the uncontrollable climbs and dives. Someone mentioned it already but when a plane loses all its hydraulic systems it enters fughoid motion. When the pilots have no control over the control surfaces the aircraft drops which caused it to gain speed which naturally caused it to climb which caused the speed to drop and then forces the plane into another descent.

They would also have no control over the alierons if their hydraulics failed meaning if there was an imbalance of thrust they would just flip over and nose dive.

All 3 hydraulic systems would have to fail because each one will feed some portion of the elevator.
View attachment 6787966
Yes, a perfect, well documented example of that behavior is United Airlines Flight 232.
But I also think if they were hit by a missile in the tail they'd probably break up as commercial airliners aren't very missile proof.

The most successful landing involving a full hydraulic failure was a DHL plane that got hit by a missile over baghdad in 2003 and it only survived because it hit off the outer wing. They managed to do the nearly impossible task of utilizing the engines to turn, climb, and descend before the burning wing broke apart and landed safely. But nearly every other incident has ended in fatalities.
Luckily there haven't been a lot of civilian airlines getting hit with missiles. How survivable it is will largely depend on the type of missile, distance from the aircraft when it explodes, and where it hit.
 
Back