It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian civilian aircraft goes off radar, reportedly crashes over Egypt

page: 16
30
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Russia Today is reporting what the British government is saying about the crash (that it may have been a bomb). Here's the link:

Russia Today

Also, Ireland has suspended flights to/from Sharm El-sheikh or near Sinai:


The Irish Aviation Authority has directed the country’s airlines to suspend operations to and from Sharm el-Sheikh Airport as well, AirLive.net reported. The world’s largest charter airline, Thomson Airways, which flies from the UK and Ireland, has also temporarily suspended its flights to and from the Egyptian resort destination with immediate effect.


Russia Today live update plane crash

I've been leaning towards a bomb as the cause of this crash. What puzzles me (unless it's due to an overabundance of caution) is that Putin hasn't spoken up about this since this happened. Why is that?

He strikes me as the type of person who, if he finds this was a deliberate act, won't hesistate to strike back.....rather harshly I may add.




posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: hiddenNZ

Ab explosion is an explosion. If the aircraft exploded from a bomb, or an uncontained engine failure the blast injuries are going to be similar.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

There's a lot being said by a lot of people, none of whom are the actual investigators. Is a bomb possible? Certainly. Is a mechanical problem possible? Definitely. So far everything from the investigators themselves is leaning towards mechanical.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: mzinga

I feel like the intel agencies wouldn't release this info unless they had some significant intel to support these statements, (or there is another reason related to the big geo-political chess match).



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

Read the quote.


The source said there is a "definite feeling" in the intelligence community that it was a bomb, and not mechanical failure, and that Isil is the likely culprit.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

They've tested passenger remains and found no evidence of explosives. With injuries caused by an explosion at least one set of remains would have tested positive.
edit on 11/4/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   
More mainstream outlets are covering this latest development, inc. CNN.

Re. the above source (Telegraph), here is an excerpt that brings up a point I've been making about Putin:


By suspending all flights between Britain and Sharm el-Sheikh pending a security review, David Cameron has now given the clearest indication yet that governments believe terrorism may be at the root of the disaster.
If so, Vladimir Putin and his advisors will have to think hard about how to respond.



Pollsters say Russian public support for the Syrian adventure, though high, is fragile. While many Russians are happy with the abstract idea of ‘bombing terrorists,” few are prepared to take casualties by getting involved in a far-away civil war.

However, one reason for that ambivalence is that many Russians don’t really see Isil as an imminent threat to national security. If Isil’s claims of responsibility turn out to be genuine, it may actually boost public support for Mr Putin’s war in Syria - at least in the short term.

Either way, he and his government will come under massive pressure to respond, forcefully and visibly, against the perpetrators.


Telegraph

Putin just can't keep still about this for much longer. Not only for the sake of the victims' families, but his reputation as well. He doesn't come across as one who will sit on something like this for too long.

How he will react will, in part, be due to who is responsible (ISIS), and whoever helped ISIS - if this turns out to have been a bomb.

Is it possible for there to be no residue even if there was a bomb?

Doesn't the shrapnel on some of the bodies indicate a bomb?

How do you think Putin will respond?



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

Anything that explodes leaves shrapnel. The shrapnel recovered could have been parts of the engine that were thrown through the side of the cabin.

All explosives leave some trace. Either on what they were sitting on, or on objects around them after detonation. There should be some trace of them found on the passengers if it was a bomb.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
It looks like the UK acted on the US intelligence but not much coming out about the intelligence apart from "additional activity in the saini region that caught our attention" before and after the crash all related to "internal messages seperate to the public claims of responsibility already made"
edit on 4-11-2015 by ashpack because: typo



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Apparently on scene personnel noticed oddities about one of the engines while working to recover remains, before the recorders were analyzed.



posted on Nov, 4 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: dianajune
I've been leaning towards a bomb as the cause of this crash. What puzzles me (unless it's due to an overabundance of caution) is that Putin hasn't spoken up about this since this happened. Why is that?


Because Putin is a professional at what he does, and is waiting for the professional investigators to conclude their complicated and in-depth investigation so that he knows what he's talking about before putting his foot in his mouth?


Or maybe he could blame it on an internet video?


Not enough firm facts publicly out there yet. Could be anything.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
They're flip flopping a little bit, but are still focusing on the engine. Yesterday they said an engine explosion, now they're saying an engine fire led to an explosion.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
They've tested passenger remains and found no evidence of explosives. With injuries caused by an explosion at least one set of remains would have tested positive.


Can you quote the source for this? I haven't seen it said anywhere that any bodies have been tested for explosive residue.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
Because Putin is a professional at what he does, and is waiting for the professional investigators to conclude their complicated and in-depth investigation so that he knows what he's talking about before putting his foot in his mouth?


Yeah, so professional he tried to block investigations into the downing of flight MH17, then tried to present false evidence about it being shot down by Ukrainian fighters.

The man is a sociopath.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013


Traces of explosives were not found on bodies recovered from the crash site of Flight 7K9268, according to a Russian news agency.

"Preliminary tests did not reveal traces of explosives on the bodies of those killed," a Russian source inside the centre carrying out forensic tests on the remains told Tass late last night.

m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk...



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Could an engine explosion cause those shrapnel holes that can be seen in various places with the majority looking like they came from inside the aircraft (peeling outwards).
Could this just be debris being sucked out during a decompression?

Sorry about pic quality. Plenty of news articles with a much clearer version.



edit on 5-11-2015 by ashpack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ashpack

Both. An uncontained failure is going to throw pieces through the engine and into the fuselage. Depending on where they hit, if nothing is in the way they will keep going out the other side. They will also cause damage inside the fuselage and cause other explosions, again depending on where they hit. Those will also send shrapnel flying.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   
how long does it take to get info back from the flight recorders? I seem to recall a recent crash taking 2-3 days.

This seems to be taking forever which is fuelling speculation - I'd have thought they would know or have a pretty good idea by now.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Yeah I don't think it will be possible to draw any conclusions now without some hard evidence.

I have been to Egypt quite a few times to both Sharm & Hurghada. This article I came across mirrors my thoughts on the accident from what we know so far and my experiences in Egypt and with Russians in Egypt.

pando.com...



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: dashrunner

Weeks. You can get preliminary data within a day or two. If you want detailed data, you're looking at up to a month if the recorder is in good condition.

To transcribe the CVR, you run it through decoding software, then listen to it to determine if it's usable. Then after listening once or twice, you get a group of people together, and they all listen and take notes on what they hear. Then they compare notes. If there are any parts that are hard to distinguish, a majority of the group has to agree on what they heard.

The DFDR records so much information about the aircraft that it takes a long time to do a detailed analysis of everything it got up to the crash.

Right now the CVR recorded unusual sounds prior to the crash that are not consistent with a bomb. With a bomb there is usually just a sudden end to the recording.

The FDR and on site investigators both appear to have found engine related problems prior to the accident.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ashpack

International Aero has investigators from Pratt&Whitney on site. If they did see unusual engine damage at the crash site they'll find it.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join