Anonymous ID: cbd63e Aug. 14, 2018, 1:48 p.m. No.2599136   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2599084 (lb)

I agree.

That seems to be a pretty good conclusion so far based upon all the available evidence.

Keep on digging.

Anonymous ID: cbd63e Aug. 14, 2018, 2:28 p.m. No.2599608   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9669 >>9690

>>2599489

Reduction of plane into small pieces does indicate high energy impact. A low energy impact would not cause the plane to break up so much, i.e. the major structures fuselage wings etc would be relatively intact. Check & estimate angle from the wreckage to the broken off trees & branches.

A low angle & low energy crash into trees would tend to leave a broad swathe removed at a gentle angle. Debris would be spread along a long debris field.

Anonymous ID: cbd63e Aug. 14, 2018, 2:39 p.m. No.2599716   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2599669

No, but I am a plane nut & been around planes since I was very small. Have crawled over many wrecks on airfield crash/fire dumps. Used to work vehicle crash recovery though. Crashed vehicles leave similar sorts of debris fields that tell you what happened. The rest is simple common sense.