It's out of range for a stinger attacking a fast, agile fighter - NOT out of range for one attacking a slow, lumbering, straight-line path 747.
Also, stingers are heat seekers. The stinger would go for an engine not the center of the plane.
Apparently there are also A/C heat exchangers on the belly of 747s, making them quite warm. However, I do not believe that the attack was necessarily a stinger - it could have been any type of missile, including radar guided that would have gone for the conrner-cube like metal making up the wing root.
At a 2000 miles an hour it would take 5 seconds to fly up and hit the plane. Count off 5 seconds, it is quite awhile.
The stinger burn is said to be 6 seconds, and this time is comparable to what some of the witnesses reported.
1. Identify which witnesses you're supposedly referring to.
2. Provide the readers with quotes from their reports supporting your allegation.
3. Provide the readers with the reference source URLs for those witness reports.
I would be very surprised it goes anywhere near that speed.
Most anti-aircraft weapons uses shrapnel typically ball bearings to actually take the plane out with I believe. That leaves very distinctive evidence of what happened.
My primary point is if it was an AA missile, it is very unlikely to be a stinger. It would have been something bigger and more sophisticated IMO.