This is one thing I find interesting...
Black said the Airbus stopped sending transponder signals at an altitude of about 3,000 feet, indicating that something -- such as a major structural failure -- cut the unit's power. "Primary" target returns -- indicating aircraft or large pieces of debris without working transponders -- began at that point, Black said.
Which occurred at 144 seconds, 37 seconds after the first "airframe rattle" (a travel distance of, say, a bit more than a mile-and-a-half).
Could the first "airframe rattle" be the vertical stab coming loose, but not separating? Then, could the "wake turbulence" mentioned at 114 seconds be a "weathervaning" effect from the slowly detaching fin? And does the second "airframe rattle" at 121 seconds denote the departure of the vertical stab and rudder some 6 seconds before one of the pilots announces "loss of control" at 127?
Seventeen seconds later, about half a mile away, the plane breaks up and goes straight down.
This chain of events seems to put the vertical stabilizer in its proper place on the flight path, a half mile short of impact.
Black said the Airbus stopped sending transponder signals at an altitude of about 3,000 feet, indicating that something -- such as a major structural failure -- cut the unit's power. "Primary" target returns -- indicating aircraft or large pieces of debris without working transponders -- began at that point, Black said.Has there ever been anything other than a explosion or on-board fire that caused enough damage to an airframe that power (and/or the audio input) to the cockpit voice recorder is lost before impact? Oh yeah, I forgot: an exploding center fuel tank. I wonder if anyone has the titanium balls to try that theory.