My opinion is that the Russian crash site is more accurate than the Turkish crash site. Indeed, we know that there was both rebel groups and government forces in the area. The location given by the Russians, somewhere around Kepir, can correspond to this. The location given by the Turks, however, corresponds to an area under rebel control.
Which crash site? The first one they claimed was miles away from the second one, and now the second one they claimed was pretty close to the one the Turks initially estimated.
Either way, the Belgian physicists were way off.
I'm talking about the crashsite on the Russian map. I haven't seen any other. Where is the other one?
As for the physician, his calculations are based on the Turkish version (we only need Turkish data). So if the calculations are ok, then the Turkish version is necessarily wrong. We know the distance between the hit and the crash (around 8 kilometers). We also know the time it took for the plane to fall and crash, so his estimation is realistic.
If you check the BBC website (
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34950355), they have the initial Russian estimate alongside the Turkish one. The one from the site Reje linked is the new one, which is closer to what the Turks estimated.
We don't know the distance between the hit and the crash, and as I said before, it is definitely not 8km from the camera. The physicists based their calculations off of a perfect environment, assuming a sphere falling for the 40 seconds. However, the plane instead nose-dives, which transfers some of the velocity it had going forwards into it's speed approaching the ground, plus any extra thrust from the engine for any part of the descent that it was still working for.
That being said, I'm glad you've stopped complaining that the altitude was "too low" for the SU-24, given that it's used for low altitude bombing.
Also interesting to note is that this happened before, minus the blowing up of the Russian plane.
Last time the SU-24 was accompanied by an SU-30SM which kept a lock on the Turkish F-16 which came to escort it for over 5 minutes. The Turks stated that they would engage the next plane to do so, and I guess they kept their word.
It was also due to a "navigational error". The Russians really seem to have shitty satnav, maybe they should use TomToms
http://theaviationist.com/2015/11/24/ruaf-su-24-shot-down-by-turkey/Also, Olaf, if you're interested in trying to find the location of the crash, that link would be pretty useful I think. There's another angle in the photo. Also this video (from ~2:11) seems to have another angle in it: