Russian Airbus A321 crashed in Egypt

TheBeastie

1 MW
Joined
Jul 27, 2012
Messages
2,095
Location
Melbourne Australia
When I saw the news that ISIL had claimed responsibility but it had quickly been rebuffed by Russian officials etc I thought fair enough. But at the same time I thought 'out of the all the airliners that could fall out of the sky in the middle east, what are the odds that it was a Russian plane considering the timing of the massive Russian offensive against ISIL in Syria'. And I thought those odds are pretty dubious.

http://qz.com/538394/everything-we-know-about-the-russian-plane-that-crashed-in-egypt-and-isils-claim-of-responsibility/

Considering that people have managed to get beheaded in Turkey etc it seems plausible that someone working for ISIL could of got a bomb on the Russian airliner, making them think it was a missile is just icing on the cake to throw them off course a bit and add a bit of extra terror on top.
I saw one report on RT that said Russia has hit more targets in their single month of bombing in Syria then the entire time the US has been bombing Syria.
*edit, added* -> https://www.rt.com/news/320168-syria-russia-operation-month/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=54c_1446276923

Anyway time will tell what happened, maybe I am too paranoid.
 
My guess is MOSSAD. They have no problem with blowing civilian airplanes then blaming terrorists. Also, this after Obama announcing sending ground troops to Syria. Regardless, my thoughts and prayers go out to the families and friends who lost their loved ones.
 
How hard can it be?
I don't really have much of a comment on this 7K9268 specific crash; I'm going with the bomb-somehow-on-the-plane theory at this point, but it's not much more than a guess. The destruction took place up-high and quickly, and I don't see shrapnel holes in the wreckage. The plane departed from a place named Sharm el-Sheikh (For me, that's evidence of a bomb in itself). This all indicates an on-board bomb.
The lack of a definite cause reminds me of TWA 800, which was killed at 5,600 meters. An imagined short circuit in the main fuel tank was kind-of blamed, but the people at the TWA repair facility in Kansas City all think it was a non-exploding missile fired, maybe mistakenly, by the US Navy that did it.
But regarding the ability to down a plane, any technically talented group with a bit of backing could accomplish it. I say this just by looking my my own abilities. Although I can boast of being mechanically inclined, I'm a nobody from an engineering standpoint. But if you gave me a couple of million $ USD (that's not much by plane-killing standards), even I could pull it off. Naturally, it's irresponsible to discuss details of something like this publically, but how hard can it be? (Remember, in '99 the poorly armed Serbs took out the most advanced warbird in the sky, the F-117.) 10,000 meters is not the moon.

Something worth watching here is the efficiency and speed of the investigation in contrast to that of MH17. This investigation won't slowly drag on until people are tired of it.
[youtube]Enb4soLA2Tw[/youtube]
 
Bombing a plane is hard enough that a former PhD professor at Berkeley, a Harvard graduate known as the Unibomber, et. al., failed; as did Obama mentor William Ayers. Both succeeded at killing prior to going after planes, it just proved a bit more elusive. Ayers may have been able to do "Tens of thousands of dollars of damage" to the Pentagon on the ground, but planes eluded him. If you think just detonating the bomb on an airliner will bring it down, just ask the Unibomber.

The one interesting lead to be pursued was the tail dragging damage the plane suffered some years back. What does the metal fatigue really do to the structural integrity over the years?

I think Flight 800 is an example of how unsubstantiated rumors carry incredible weight in the face of better documented causes discovered during proper investigation. A missile struck and detonated without bringing down an airliner in Africa around a decade ago.
 
Dauntless said:
Bombing a plane is hard enough that a former PhD professor at Berkeley, a Harvard graduate known as the Unibomber, et. al., failed; as did Obama mentor William Ayers. Both succeeded at killing prior to going after planes, it just proved a bit more elusive. Ayers may have been able to do "Tens of thousands of dollars of damage" to the Pentagon on the ground, but planes eluded him. If you think just detonating the bomb on an airliner will bring it down, just ask the Unibomber.

Unibomber was a nut. (He picked some targets only because they had "wood" in their names.) Just because he garnered media attention for his simple crimes doesn't make him smart. His bombs were primitive and built with nutty compulsiveness (repetitive disassembly-reassembly) rather than engineering quality.
Anyway, the Wiki article states if the bomb had properly detonated, it would have downed the plane. So the plane was indeed vulnerable if someone with some skill had made the detonation mechanism. A lot of crafts-people right here on ES could have done better.
And if you think getting an undergraduate degree from Harvard proves intelligence, just look at other people who have attained that.
Kaczynski is a disgusting loser, who can't even write rationally, and that's all the attention I'll give him.

I couldn't find any reference about Bill Ayers (and there is more than one person with that name, so be careful) trying to bomb a plane. The small Pentagon bomb had nothing to do with an airliner. What are you talking about?
Also, it doesn't seem that he killed anyone. The closest he got to that was when his friends blew up themselves while they were assembling a bomb allegedly designed by Ayers.

Dauntless said:
The one interesting lead to be pursued was the tail dragging damage the plane suffered some years back. What does the metal fatigue really do to the structural integrity over the years?

Media is reporting that most mechanical failures, even a major engine fire, would not have destroyed the plane so quickly. However, there's a peculiarity in the graphs. (The graph is interactive, so posting a pic of here only shows a one condition. Go to the link.) The issue is being discussed in the English language airline forums. The final minute or so of the flight shows a rapid increase in altitude yet no change in (ground speed, I assume, since the data is not from the box) speed. And you will note in the RT video, the main debris are separated from the tail section.
China Airlines Flight 611 was a rear separation.
7K9268.gif



Dauntless said:
I think Flight 800 is an example of how unsubstantiated rumors carry incredible weight in the face of better documented causes discovered during proper investigation. A missile struck and detonated without bringing down an airliner in Africa around a decade ago.
I'm not sure what you are saying, that some documented cause is correct? What would that be? The short-circuit idea?
As I said, I spoke to TWA people locally, and they liked the missile shoot down and cover-up theory. I didn't look into it enough myself, but the evidence looks compelling.
 
IIRC mid-air breakup of an airframe has happened at least once before due to improper repair following a tail-strike during take off/landing.

I've never heard of a non-exploding missile.
 
Well it wasn't shot down from the ground. You need serious hardware for that as the Russians well know. And those tank systems would be picked up on satellite and social media as the BUK units were.

Probably the result of metal fatigue from an earlier tail strike. If the plane was inspected properly then it might be prudent to re-examine the use of planes badly damaged by tail strikes.

One thing is certain Metrojet's premature statements shouldn't be trusted.
 
Well, the Libians made it happen 30 years ago pretty effectively..and by remote detonation too...( Lockerbie) !
Kind of like Osama bin laden blowing up the world trade center? Google Mossad false flags, or CIA project Ajax or Bluebird. From blowing up nightclubs to taking down airliners, these "intelligence" agencies are responsible for most terrorism in the world. It is no coincidence that as Merica is putting boots on the ground in Syria that a Russian airliner goes down. Remember the Lusitania?
 
Punx0r said:
IIRC mid-air breakup of an airframe has happened at least once before due to improper repair following a tail-strike during take off/landing.
Air China 611 is the best example of a improper repair of tail-strike damage, but I understood the industry learned from that. It was a spectacular wreck.
Punx0r said:
I've never heard of a non-exploding missile.
Missiles fail to explode all the time. One of the Exocets that hit the Stark didn't explode, for example.

As one TWA repair guy, a customer of mine and a military man, put it to me, "The moment I learned the Navy was practicing missile firings in that area, I knew what happened." The Navy says they were out of range, incidentally.
I never liked the short circuit in the main fuel tank theory. The investigation group just made up that one without any good evidence, and plenty of car gas tanks have electric pumps inside.


[youtube]ZabYjhbUof4[/youtube]
 
I see, I thought you meant a non-exploding missile by design rather than as a malfunction.
 
Some Russian officials are angry that the UK had grounded all flights to the UK out of Egypt.
But I think its a fair decision because the Lockerbie bombing had a ridiculous amount of warning that was ignored at their peril.
I believe this is a lesson the UK has had trouble forgetting. I guess if anything goes wrong now they can't argue they weren't warned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103#Helsinki_warning
16 days prior to the attack), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a security bulletin saying that, on that day, a man with an Arabic accent had telephoned the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki, Finland, and told them that a Pan Am flight from Frankfurt to the United States would be blown up within the next two weeks by someone associated with the Abu Nidal Organization; he said a Finnish woman would carry the bomb on board as an unwitting courier.


https://www.rt.com/uk/320820-thomas-cook-sharm-sheikh/
British authorities announced on Wednesday evening they believe the crash of a Russian passenger jet in Sinai on Saturday could have been caused by an Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) bomb aboard the plane. As a result, the British Foreign Office called for all flights to be grounded.

[youtube]9jMEEaGSz8w[/youtube]

I have watched a fair amount of episodes of "Air Crash Investigation", I don't know why looking back, I think I just enjoyed watching them... Anyway from memory airliners falling apart mid air from extreme poor maintenance or anything other then deliberate destruction (like bomb) is rare, but it has happened. The vast majority of all airline crashes have been problems where the pilots struggled with the plane for a considerable amount of time before crashing. When I say "considerable" I mean at the very least a voice in the black box recording saying they have a problem...

http://natgeotv.com/uk/air-crash-investigation
If you never watched an episode there are a fair amount on youtube etc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IufRBBNuGYA
 
TheBeastie said:
Some Russian officials are angry that the UK had grounded all flights to the UK out of Egypt.

You must mean *Egyptian* officials, not Russian ones. The Russian transportation agency has only said that a militant group is unlikely to have a missile capable of reaching that altitude, but an obvious possibility is that a bomb was placed on the plane at Sharm el-Sheikh.
"Hany Ramsay, deputy head of Sharm el-Sheikh airport, said Britain’s conclusion that the plane may have been brought down by a bomb came 'too soon' and may be aimed at damaging the country’s vital tourism sector."

Personally, if I were a vacationer, the Arab resorts would be pretty far down the list of my choices. You never know if that religion is going to somehow cause you problems.
 
Nehmo said:
."
Personally, if I were a vacationer, the Arab resorts would be pretty far down the list of my choices. You never know if that religion is going to somehow cause you problems.
Sure, but don't forget the millions of folk around the world with family or ancestral links to those parts. I takes a lot to keep families from getting together.
 
Completely irresponsible by the Tories. This type of scaremongering is something that they seem to specialise in. And UK authorities are now looking to get more powers so that they search people's browser and email history without a warrant. When that's your goal a bit of fear raising comes in handy.

There is no evidence of a bomb. They should shut keep their fat mouths shut until that changes. I hope they get decimated in the next election. First Past the Post is one of the stupidest ways to vote in governments.

They can still cut ground flights but to make up "evidence" is reprehensible.
 
I think the call has been made on the balance of probability: catastrophic airframe failure is probably less likely than a bomb. We also don't know what secret information has been delivered by the intelligence agencies.

Put it this way, if it turns out to have been a bomb in the luggage hold, I won't be surprised.
 
Punx0r said:
I think the call has been made on the balance of probability: catastrophic airframe failure is probably less likely than a bomb. We also don't know what secret information has been delivered by the intelligence agencies.

Put it this way, if it turns out to have been a bomb in the luggage hold, I won't be surprised.

There is no problem with the call. That's a wise move. Security in that Egyptian airport is a well-known joke. It's the fact that they uttered such a statement without waiting for the investigation's findings. That was done for one reason and one reason only political opportunism.
 
Or, ..as we now hear.... They had the evidence from the data recorders ( every channel going dead instantly ?) and ..."Blind Freddy"...., noticed the evidence of schrapnel on the insides of the fuselage !
Fair call , I say
 
Hillhater said:
Or, ..as we now hear.... They had the evidence from the data recorders ( every channel going dead instantly ?) and ..."Blind Freddy"...., noticed the evidence of schrapnel on the insides of the fuselage !
Fair call , I say
I only noticed the shrapnel reports today but they been bouncing around for 2 days..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3304921/Is-proof-Russian-jet-bombed-Photographs-wreckage-holes-appear-result-shrapnel-plane.html

'Sound of explosion' can be heard on black box of doomed Russian jet: French media interview with anonymous investigator rules out engine failure
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3306171/UK-spies-uncovered-ISIS-bomb-plot-Cameron-facing-furious-backlash-Egypt-Russia-British-spooks-deciphered-intelligence-ruled-disaster-accident.html
Yep and now even Putin grounds Russia-Egypt flights for crash probe duration...

[youtube]N5n_F-7eLdE[/youtube]
 
With newly released information from the Voice Data Recorder, the world is beginning to accept the view that an onboard bomb destroyed Metrojet 9268. Russia has suspended all commercial flights departing from Egypt (the whole country), and other countries and airlines have implemented similar restrictions.

But these restriction-announcements are being put through political-economic filters that are borderline absurd. I'm not exactly clear on the various motives, but the political heads of state and their subordinates are all being careful to use non-accusatory wording in their announcements about the plane's destruction. An onboard bomb is a "possibility" according to Obama, and White House spokesman Josh Earnest said new security protocols (as yet undescribed to the public) will apply to fewer than 10 overseas airports in "the region in which the Sinai Peninsula is located." Other than that, there aren't any official new restrictions from the US government.

Apparently, the European governments don't want Egypt looking like a home for ISIS bombers, and Egypt, itself, wants to preserve the tourist flow.

And although Russia is the victim here, some US media sources are suggesting that even Russia is reluctant to promote the bomb theory because that means (the media sources conclude) ISIS has had a retaliatory victory. However, Alexander Bortnikov, Director of the Russia's FSB, recommended a suspension of all flights to Egypt "until we determine the real reasons of what happened." And Russia's Putin simply canceled flights without much of an explanation. As an added precaution, the Russian government won't even allow the homebound tourists to have their luggage accompany them; luggage, except for carry-on, will be transported on separate cargo flights.

Moreover, practically all media sources are repeatedly cautioning us to allow the investigators to come to a conclusion. Someone would be rash to jump the process, the media would have us believe.

But the issue is about the safety of innocent civilian passengers, and that trumps political concerns. If it's unsafe to fly from an Egyptian airport, then airliners shouldn't fly from them. A state wishing to not offend Egypt, could say these precautionary moves don't represent a conclusion or a definite political assessment.
skynews.img.1200.745.jpeg
 
The Russian plane crash in Sinai, Egypt, was caused by a terrorist attack as traces of explosives have been found in the wreckage of the plane,
“During the flight, a homemade device with the power of 1.5 kilograms of TNT was detonated. As a result, the plane fell apart in the air, which can be explained by the huge scattering of the fuselage parts of the plane,”

https://www.rt.com/news/322393-russian-plane-crash-terrorist-attack/
Frankly I am dubious that after the first day of investigation of the plane crash that Putin didn't know it was a terrorist attack, now that France has suffered an ISIS attack its not so embarrassing for Putin to allow this fact come out officially as a degree of political heat directly on him is now subsided.

Link below shows previous history major terrorist attacks in Russia.
https://www.rt.com/news/322495-deadliest-terrorist-attacks-russia/
 
Back
Top