Yes they blamed Ukrainians for MH17 before the plane hit the ground.

I have thought about that as well. I have not flown the 321 either, but several of my friends do and say it is way underpowered.
One puckering photo my friend took at cruise, FL340, near max TOW, showed cruise speed and vls touching.
I would not have been comfortable.

I have definitely lost hope for the news stations ever getting it right, or giving realistic possibilities.

Bad judgement always been a problem with this friend of yours?

If this turns out to be the cause, I will say I'm surprised it took this long to happen. US airlines/airports AND the government had better smarten up before it's too late here. :mad:

This picture shows a clean break forward of the vertical stabilizer, but on the TOP of the fuselage:

http://cdn4.scmp.com/sites/default/f...?itok=fAkC27qn

Wasn't China Airlines 611 broken at the bottom of the structure first, and if so, would that have created a clean break at the top? It will be interesting to see what a metallurgist makes of it.

I disagree. I have complete faith that my government is serious about keeping me safe.

http://v020o.popscreen.com/eG9pOXBtM...r-business.jpg

Maybe not the case here but......

Someone should also keep an eye out for 400 SAMS that were "displaced" :rolleyes:

'400 surface-to-air missiles' were 'STOLEN' from Libya during the Benghazi attack, says whistle-blowers' attorney | Daily Mail Online

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...-digenova-says

My degree is mechanical engineering, and I've done some accident-investigation work.

Just as in electriciy, where an electron takes the path of least resistance, so too goes fracture propagation.

It might result in a clean break, seen here.....or it might not. Too many variables. Often times, the last portion to fail shows signs of twisting and deformation, as it carries loads never intended for it. This may result in a jagged edge.

Keep in mind that in positive-g flight, the top of any fuselage will mostly be tensile (tension) loads, while the bottom will be in compression, due to the fuselage's weight, plus the typical download of the horizontal stabilizer.

Failure in tension is mostly governed by material strength...steel stronger than aluminum, etc. Each alloy has specific numbers.

Failure in compression is usually about column-buckling, and that is complex with many variables.

Now, if there were a sudden catastrophic INCREASE in cabin pressure, tensile loads would increase (like over-inflating a balloon), whiles compression loads would decrease.

Enough to cause a failure? Or a clean break?

Too early to say.

I'm dubious.

To start, there are scads of Stingers missing from our "help" to the Afghanis 30 years ago. Estimates range from hundreds to low thousands.

But the bigger question for the article: why would the CIA store 400 stingers in a country with no air threat?

As to his claim that embassies were closed because someone could fire a Stinger at it.....too much Hollywood. The warheads in a MANPAD are basically a grenade, so an RPG would be worse, and God knows how many of those are out there.

Finally: if he actually knew how these things guide (assuming they still work), he would know it's not a point-and-shoot Bazooka.

You could aim it at a building, and it might jink and go after a Shwarma Stand.