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.

 

Only external force could have broken apart crashed Russian airliner – owner

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:05 AM
link   



The Russian passenger jet that crashed in Sinai, Egypt, must have been damaged by a force in flight and couldn’t have just broken apart, the airline of the ill-fated Airbus A321 said.



www.rt.com...

That's it so far. As such, I'm not sure T&C about quoting an entire story from another source, but it's just one sentence so far.

So the official position out of Russia was an external influence brought down the plane. They (he- the owner) doesn't accuse anyone thus far for all we know it hit a really large bird but doubtful.

I really hope this doesn't lead back to western nations and I really hope this doesn't point the finger at Russia itself. There are a lot of chess pieces at play, center board is no doubt the ME and is becoming crowded.
edit on 2-11-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-11-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Now we may have a name to associate with "owner"


There were no attempts by the crew to report an emergency on board, Metrojet (Kogalymavia) deputy chief Viktor Yung said.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Of course they're going to say that. They're covering their ass. If their pilots screwed up or their maintenance screwed up again they could be shut down for good.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

I think they may have used a laser or some new kind of weaponry. It stinks as a response to the Russian involvement in Syria and their downing of the jet over Ukraine. Tit for tat?

The U.S really hate what Putin has done. They have put special forces in Syria on the ground as human shields and to protect their investments in the forces they hoped would oust Assad. Lol, perhaps the Beast has gathered his armies together at Megiddo as it seems they are all operating in Syria now; Israel, Turkey, Saudis, UK, France, U.S, Russia and lots more. If you drop bombs on flesh and blood you are a beast.

The U.S has acted in a very disgusting way. What they have allowed to happen in Syria has completely turned me off Obama. They stood by as forces they were financially and militarily backing (or backing by proxy) slaughtered thousands of Christians who have lived there for two thousand years because they thought they would help get rid of Assad. Boo to you, U.S military machine. I don't mean U.S people, I love you guys very much.

Look! They can do all this and MORE. Keep up with modern weapon technology because it is being used!:

www.theguardian.com...
edit on 2-11-2015 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   
This is not only confusing news but also worrying. As claimed by "experts" that Isis militants in the area did not have the capabilities to take this down then who did?
Are we talking drone? Or those Isis in the area being armed with more advanced weaponry.

Again confusing and worrying. Either way it doesn't change the fact these poor people have been wiped from the face of the earth.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Of course they're going to say that. They're covering their ass. If their pilots screwed up or their maintenance screwed up again they could be shut down for good.


But now that they've said this publicly, people are going to want to know what led them to this. With so many civilians dead, it wouldn't take much for public opinion to turn on you.

What does he mean only external forces? Bird migrations? Dust storm? BUK S2A?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   
ISIS has claimed to shot it down, and has shown video of it going down.

That could be the first place to look for culprits...



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Such an idiotic thing to say. Do you not think 3 separate investigating groups from different countries will be able to verify this?

Please stop with the baseless comments with no way of proof. The same old tactics of repeat and it will stick.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: liteonit6969
This is not only confusing news but also worrying. As claimed by "experts" that Isis militants in the area did not have the capabilities to take this down then who did?
Are we talking drone? Or those Isis in the area being armed with more advanced weaponry.

Again confusing and worrying. Either way it doesn't change the fact these poor people have been wiped from the face of the earth.


Why was this reported Monday morning? They just finished their analysis first thing this morning over a cup of Joe? Or intentionally dropping on a Monday morning for maximum propaganda effectiveness.

I'll hold off on any such assumptions until a better storyline emerges. I do find it curious how I said over the weekend that whoever tries to craft the storyline could very well be the culprit. *shakes head*

Let's see what developments transpire of the next 24 hours.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

He's trying to reassure the people that fly on his planes. If someone shot it down then they were not responsible for flying unsafe aircraft.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Rosinitiate

He's trying to reassure the people that fly on his planes. If someone shot it down then they were not responsible for flying unsafe aircraft.


So you're saying that no information will be forthcoming that led him to this conclusion?


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:26 AM
link   
a reply to: liteonit6969

Holy crap you're right. The plane crashed two days ago and they've already finished the investigation. Please point out where the "three investigative groups" said anything about a cause. The ONLY person saying anything about a cause has a vested interest in not being at fault. Amazing that he would say something like that already.

Plane had technical issues for a week. Pilot complained about the condition of the aircraft. Airline has a history of poor maintenance. Aircraft had a previous tail strike that could have weakened the fuselage.

Yep. Sure as hell it was shot down. That's the only thing that could have brought it down.
edit on 11/2/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Here is his explanation, which is based on the plane breaking up mid-air. I hadn't realized that was determined yet but I haven't followed any of the investigation either.


The company believes that serious structural damage by an external force may have caused the crash.

“The only possible explanation is a mechanical force acting on the aircraft,” Aleksand Smirnov, who supervises the company’s fleet, said. “There is no combination of system failures that could have broken the plane apart in the air.”

The airline Kogalymavia, which uses the brand name Metrojet, owns the Airbus A321 that crashed in Egypt just 20 minutes after it took off Sharm el-Sheikh International Airport. All 224 people on board died in the disaster, making it the deadliest incident of this kind in Russian aviation history.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Not at this point. They haven't even finished decoding the data recorders. It usually takes a week to ten days to have early ideas as to cause. Unless the pilot got on the radio and told them what was happening, this early into a crash it's usually almost impossible to point to a cause.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: liteonit6969

Holy crap you're right. The plane crashed two days ago and they've already finished the investigation. Please point out where the "three investigative groups" said anything about a cause. The ONLY person saying anything about a cause has a vested interest in not being at fault. Amazing that he would say something like that already.

Plane had technical issues for a week. Pilot complained about the condition of the aircraft. Airline has a history of poor maintenance. Aircraft had a previous tail strike that could have weakened the fuselage.

Yep. Sure as hell it was shot down. That's the only thing that could have brought it down.


The spokesman for Putin, Dmitry Peskov, said the same thing. Too early for speculation let's get a few facts first.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate



That's going to put a lot of strain on the airframe, without necessarily having an external cause.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

The facts we do have right now are pointing to a mechanical failure, pilot error, or a combination of the two.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Not at this point. They haven't even finished decoding the data recorders. It usually takes a week to ten days to have early ideas as to cause. Unless the pilot got on the radio and told them what was happening, this early into a crash it's usually almost impossible to point to a cause.


So some early Monday morning propaganda with my coffee...Sweet!

It was reporting like they were about to drop a bombshell, but I think you're right, owner blowing wind to get the smell waffling in another direction perhaps.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Rosinitiate

The facts we do have right now are pointing to a mechanical failure, pilot error, or a combination of the two.


They're rebuttal to that is you can't have a complete break up in air from mechanical failure. I can follow that logic. They're also (RT not owner now) that Egyptian president and others highly doubt the claims of ISIS shooting it down

If it's deemed non-mechanical than there's going to be a problem. I guess ultimately it comes down to that little black box huh?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:47 AM
link   
External forces could of course be air pressure, gravity and a whole host of other natural things trying to stop an aluminium pressure vessel from flying.

So do you blame nature for rapid depressurization or poor maintenance of the alloy can?

Its almost an act of god, yeah that will do, I dont have to maintain anything in a dangerous environment with 240 people paying for their safe passage, I will just leave it up to god..disgraceful and completely disrespectful that this person has made any statement against the cause of 240 dead, especially a statement about cause and looking to apportion blame elsewhere.

In fact, is this even a verified statement because its bang out of order on the deceased and their families.




Alexander Smirnov, Metrojet’s deputy director, said an engine failure would not have caused the plane to crash. “An engine failure doesn’t lead to catastrophe,” he said on television


This is all he said according to the Australian.
edit on 2 11 2015 by Forensick because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join