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: 5
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ashpack

Second one has a patch of blue that appears to match the Metrojet blue.




posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   
This particular aircraft was built in 1997. It went to Metrojet in 2012, and had 56,000 hours over 21,000 flights. This marks the second fatal accident for the A321 series since it entered service. It's the third hull loss for this series.
edit on 10/31/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Kokatsi

Blowing up Russia

on topic Russia is dismissing the possibility that ISIS shot the plane down. That brings us back to pilot / mechanical / environmental errors / issues or a bomb.

I think it would be....backwards...for ISIS to claim responsibility knowing what the Russian response would be.
edit on 31-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Kokatsi

Not trying to argue about what Russia would or wouldn't do, but stalin killed millions of his own. Just saying.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: justwanttofly

With all due respect, please do some research on thrust reversers before making a claim that in flight at altitude TRs can deploy. They cannot, only on the ground with the weight on wheels switches sensing the aircraft is in ground mode can TRs activate. There are other protection capabilities built in, and I don't want to bore with details. Have you ever flown a jet, or are you an armchair pilot?

You can get a inadvertent TR deployment during takeoff but not once you are airborne. In the air TRs are mechanically locked.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: HickoryStick

What about Lauda Air Flight 004?
edit on 31-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: HickoryStick

Wrong. If the switch goes bad they can and have deployed.

There have been several that recovered from it and landed safely as well. Lauda 004 was unable to.

Squat switches work, but go bad. They're also supposed to keep landing gear from retracting on the ramp, but they don't always. I've seen quite a few failures of squat switches.
edit on 10/31/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10/31/2015 by Zaphod58 because: Removed snarky tone and added information



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kokatsi

Blowing up Russia

on topic Russia is dismissing the possibility that ISIS shot the plane down. That brings us back to pilot / mechanical / environmental errors / issues or a bomb.

I think it would be....backwards...for ISIS to claim responsibility knowing what the Russian response would be.


Given how evil ISIS is, nothing would surprise me. It would be brazen enough to accept responsibility for this, knowing how Putin will respond.

What if ISIS did this with assistance provided by someone else? That possibility spooks me.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

Going down the hypothetical path is a possibility. Russia has a large segment of their population who are Muslims and 2 republics where its dominant (Chechnya / Dagestan). I dont know what Russia security is like when it comes to civilian air operations.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That was in 1991. One of the outcomes was the FAA mandating positive mechanical locks of TRs in flight, which all new aircraft now have. Aircraft produced prior to 1991 would be retrofitted by FAA mandate.


edit on 31-10-2015 by HickoryStick because: Wrong date given.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: HickoryStick

And switches fail. I've replaced more than one squat switch.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: HickoryStick
a reply to: Xcathdra

That was in 1982. One of the outcomes was the FAA mandating positive mechanical locks of TRs in flight, which all new aircraft now have. Aircraft produced prior to 1982 would be retrofitted.



This is Zaphod58's area so I will defer to him.


Update:
Reuters - Lufthansa, Air France avoid flying over Sinai after crash


Two of Europe's largest airlines have decided to avoid flying over the Sinai peninsula while they wait for clarity on what caused a Russian airliner carrying 224 passengers to crash in the area on Saturday.

German carrier Lufthansa (LHAG.DE) and Air France-KLM (AIRF.PA) have decided to avoid the area for safety reasons, spokeswomen for the carriers said on Saturday.

"We took the decision to avoid the area because the situation and the reasons for the crash were not clear," a Lufthansa spokeswoman said. "We will continue to avoid the area until it is clear what caused the crash."

Lufthansa has less than 10 flights a day that cross the area, she said.

"Air France confirms it has set up, as a precaution, measures to avoid flights over the zone of Sinai," the spokeswoman for the carrier said.

edit on 31-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Here is the latest blurb from Russia Today's live update about this:


17:03 GMT
The Russian Air Transport Agency has advised Kolavia to suspend flights to Egypt “until further notice” in view of the airplane crash, RIA Novosti reports citing its sources.


Interesting. Why all flights unless they think this wreck was caused by more than a mechanical failure?

Russia Today Live Update



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Agreed, then you also know that there is more then one wow switch, TRs have to be armed etc... Point is, TR deployment in flight is so very remote.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: HickoryStick

It is very remote, but it wouldn't be the first time something way down the list of possibilities happened and brought a plane down.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

Because they learned from MH17. There's a remote possibility that Isis did this and they reacting out of an overabundance of caution this time.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

MSNBC ‏@MSNBC 10m10 minutes ago

UPDATE: Pilot of Russian airliner that crashed in Sinai requested landing before losing contact.




China Xinhua News ‏@XHNews 10m10 minutes ago

Black box of crashed #Russian plane found, dead bodies arrive in Cairo morgue xhne.ws...




Ruptly ‏@Ruptly 14m14 minutes ago

Investigative Committee officers arrive at Kogalymavia offices
ow.ly... #7K9268




CNN ‏@CNN 19m19 minutes ago

There is no evidence of terrorism in Russian plane crash, an Egyptian official says. cnn.it...




RT ‏@RT_com 21m21 minutes ago

Russian A321 fell 'almost vertically', technical fault behind crash youtu.be... #7K9268




Ariana Gic Perry Retweeted
The New York Times ‏@nytimes 30m30 minutes ago

Russian flight's pilot radioed that he had technical problems and needed emergency landing, reports say nyti.ms...

edit on 31-10-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: HickoryStick

And switches fail. I've replaced more than one squat switch.


Airbus and Boeings nowadays have squat switches on the landing gear leg, radio altimeter protection, and the reverser lockout mechanism can't be activated unless both throttles are at idle.
So it is unlikely to be an unlocked thrust reverser.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

Better safe than sorry comes quickly to mind. On going investigation. They don't know anything, just yet. Strong suspicions, yes...confirmation, not quite.

Nothing nefarious in taking such precautions.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Ivar_Karlsen

Oh I agree it's unlikely. Just that at this point nothing should be ruled out other than a shoulder fired missile.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join