Caught in the Crossfire? New Details on J2-8243

‍DALLAS — New information has surfaced concerning the crash of Azerbaijan Airlines (J2) Flight J2-8243 in the hours and days after the accident. 

Various data have emerged, ranging from intelligence suggesting possible military action against the plane to denial of an emergency landing.

But first, a recap:

The Facts

Flight J2-8243 was a scheduled flight from the airline’s home base in Baku, Azerbaijan, to Grozny, southern Russia.

On the day of the flight, December 25, an 11-year-old Embraer E190 was scheduled to operate this service. On board were 67 souls, 62 passengers, and five crew members.

Flight J2-8243 took off from Baku’s runway three-four at 8:05 am local time and was soon seen at 30,000 feet, heading toward Grozny. Radar jamming detected in the Grozny area caused the flight to disappear from publicly available radar services. 

The Embraer jet reappeared at 10:08 am Baku time, two hours after it was due in Akhmat Kadyrov Grozny International Airport (GRV), squawking 7700 midway over the Caspian Sea and heading for Atkau, Kazakhstan. Various reports suggest that the flight crew had radioed the ground with a general emergency concerning a flight control systems failure.

The plane oscillated left and right and pitched up and down as it approached SCO. The pilots managed to crudely line the aircraft up with runway 11 at Aqtau International Airport (SCO) before aborting the approach two miles from the runway.

They then attempted to realign themselves with a left-hand 360-degree turn but missed the runway and attempted the same maneuver, this time to the right.

It was during this right-hand turn that the aircraft impacted the ground and cartwheeled. The rear fuselage detached and was thrown clear, landing largely intact on its roof.

Of the 67souls on board, the BBC reports 38 people perished in the crash. This leaves 29 survivors. Of those 29, injuries vary; however, some from the rear fuselage section were observed walking immediately after the crash.

Investigators and the press have been particularly drawn to photos of the aircraft's tail. These photos show the tail having been impacted by small objects of some kind, with inwards bent puncture marks, suggesting external impacts from the left-hand side of the aircraft.

Video footage from inside the aircraft also shows the oxygen masks being deployed, indicating that the cabin was also breached and the aircraft could no longer pressurize. 

What Impacted the Aircraft?

Reports are suggesting that the aircraft could have been accidentally targeted by a Russian surface-to-air missile system - specifically an SA-22 Pantsir-S air defense system. 

The missiles this system uses deploy what is known as a “proximity fuse” or “proxy fuse” for short. Instead of making contact with its target, the proxy fuse detonates within the blast radius of its warhead, surrounded by shrapnel pieces that are blasted in all directions. 

Pantsir-S, 95-Y-A-6, and 57-E-6 missiles use proxy fuses and fragmentation warheads to disable their targets and are well-suited for short-range settlement defense against small targets like drones or helicopters.

So why would a surface-to-air missile system be installed near GRV? The city has consistently been a target for Ukrainian long-range drones, with the town being of strategic importance to Russia’s war in Ukraine. 

Before Ukraine’s Christmas Day attack, three other strikes were confirmed on December 4, 12, and 15, as reported by RBC-Ukraine. On December 25, the Ukrainian armed forces confirmed the attack on Grozny, using slow, guided drones to attack a military facility belonging to the Russian National Guard. 

This was also corroborated by the Grozny-based Telegram user “Protests in the World.” 

The user uploaded a video of a Ukrainian drone flying low over their location at 8:50 am local time on December 25. Flight J2-8243 was due to land at GRV at 8:20 am. 

Damage to the aircraft

The damage a proxy fuse missile can cause to an aircraft varies depending on the size and strength of the missile, from peppering holes in the hull, disabling or otherwise compromising alerions, to outright shredding the plane. 

Judging from the damage observed at the crash site and the fact that the plane made it to Kazakhstan, the missile was either not strong or near enough to the plane to cause compromising damage to the plane’s exterior. 

The damage observed suggests that the missile detonated above the aircraft, towards the tail, behind the aircraft, and on the left-hand side, judging from the concentration of damage and the direction of puncture holes in the plane’s skin. 

However, damage was likely far more extensive concerning the plane's interior. Damage was observed on the aircraft’s tail, home to critical hydraulic pipes and electrical wiring. The aircraft’s continuous oscillating and pitching suggests the pilots had significant difficulty controlling the plane, presumably losing hydraulic pressure.

We know the pilots had requested an emergency landing due to a flight control system failure. The fact it made it across the Caspian Sea in this condition is remarkable.

How Can a Commercial Plane Be Targeted? Psychology-Precedent

Having established the “what” and the “why,” we must now demonstrate how a surface-to-air missile can target a passenger plane on a scheduled flight with such ease.

Due to the radar jamming in the area, Flight J2-8243’s movements cannot be ascertained. However, what we know about drone strikes is that the drones do not arrive all at the same time and that radar systems are not turned off immediately after the strike is perceived to be over. 

Precedents have shown in recent history that heightened-ready missile operators can often make mistakes, especially when unidentified objects appear on their radar screens from unexpected directions.

Errors can also happen when these operators lack the time and information to create a clear picture of the threat. In a kill-or-be-killed situation, such as in the region in question, reflexes and emotions can play a more-than-usual role. This is known as “Scenario Fulfilment,” in which a person in a high-pressure situation who has trained for scenarios to the point that responses become automatic faces a problem that differs from their training scenarios. 

This was first studied in depth following the 1988 shootdown of Iran Air (IR) Flight IR-655 by the American-guided missile destroyer, the USS Vincennes. 

Flight 655 departed its origin city of Bandar Abbas behind schedule, so the crew of the Vincennes, who had the Bandar Abbas flight schedule available to them, did not recognize the flight, which was due to directly overfly the ship.

The Vincennes were already under attack from a different direction by Iranian gunboats, and an unknown aircraft overflying them appeared to the crew as a coordinated attack against the ship. Consequently, the ship’s Tactical Information Coordinator mistook the plane as descending towards the Vincennes when it was still climbing. 

This mistake and the fact that IR-655 was still flying towards the ship, albeit at altitude, cemented the crew’s belief that they were under attack. When the plane breached nine miles from the boat, it was fired upon and destroyed, at the cost of all 290 souls on board.

Judging from this information, we can especulate that Flight J2-8243’s circumstances somewhat mirror that of IR-655 from the perspective of a missile operator. The city was already under attack from the air, and with little information and little time to evaluate, a black-and-white decision had to be made during a very grey situation.

Either let an unidentified target on his radar screen through and risk it causing more casualties in a city he is tasked with defending, or fire on it and eliminate the perceived risk. Blinded by the fog of war, the decision is simple: protect the city with the intelligence at the operator’s disposal. Take no chances.

Debrief, Next Steps

We do not know the exact time at which the plane was fired upon, if indeed this is what happened. However, we know that, after an initial incident, Flight J2-8243 was denied emergency landing clearance in Russia. It is unknown whether the pilots were directed to Aktau by air traffic control or if they selected Aktau themselves; however, this is where the plane was produced as per radar data. 

Aktau provided a good diversionary airport because of its long runway, the journey across the Caspian Sea, which mitigated the risk of ground casualties, the elimination of the need to fly back over the Caucasus, and its proximity to Grozny, 25 nautical miles closer than Baku.

Some passengers were observed wearing their life jackets, indicating the possibility of a water landing. The pilots flew significantly below 10,000 feet, allowing the passengers to breathe the unpressurized air.

Despite the pilots' best efforts, the plane did not reach Aktau’s runway. It impacted the ground at 10:28 a.m. Baku time, roughly 3 miles/ 5km northwest of the airport.

Response from Russia, Azerbaijan

While the Kremlin has remained silent on the matter thus far, NBC News and other outlets report that five other airports in Russia, including Moscow’s four airports, were temporarily closed, citing unspecified safety concerns. They have since reopened.

Immediately following the crash, the Azerbaijani president, Ilham Aliyev, declared December 25 a day of mourning in the country and established a commission to investigate the crash. J2 also established a phone line for the affected families and published the names of the passengers and crew. Meanwhile, Baku’s airport has been flooded by people laying flowers and paying respects to the 38 who perished.

Update: External Interference

Azerbaijan Airlines said on Friday December 27 that, according to preliminary data, the cause of the plane crash was "external physical and technical impact." Meanwhile, Rosaviatsia reported that the J2 E190 failed to land in Grozny as planned due to the "Carpet" regime, introduced due to terrorist attacks in Ukraine.

As more information comes to light, we’ll share more details on all our channels as the investigation develops.

Stay connected at every stop along your journey! Get any Saily mobile data plan at 5% off with the code AIRWAYSMAG5 + up to 5GB free!