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: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

Yes official statement from the owner but downplayed by Putin through his spokesperson.




posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:56 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.


And you base this this on the inside information you have? Since you are so sure?

There was no distress call, doesn't that make you think of something else?

Is Egyptian air traffic control or anyone else listening in covering up a distress call?
edit on 2-11-2015 by OHTheHumanity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: OHTheHumanity

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.


And you base this this on the inside information you have? Since you are so sure?

There was no distress call, doesn't that make you think of someone else?

Is Egyptian air traffic control or anyone else listening in covering up a distress call?


And that's where I get stuck. To be mechanical and have a complete break up where you can't issue a distress call is troubling. Unless it was structural around the cockpit maybe, I don't know.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




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


To me it looks like you are actually insisting that it crashed due to a mechanical failure, and that this is the only possible scenario.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

What is also interesting to see is that when compared to the situation with MH17, with the absence of a distress call, a completely opposite position is now being taken. In the case of MH17, the absence of a call was indicative of a direct shoot down, and in this case, it is allegedly a coverup.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:12 AM
link   
I think it was a bomb. Some of the fuselage skin has been pushed outwards near the tail section.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: OHTheHumanity
a reply to: Zaphod58




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


To me it looks like you are actually insisting that it crashed due to a mechanical failure, and that this is the only possible scenario.

Actually it looks like he is saying you are jumping the gun, we have almost no facts, and the few facts we do have say mechanical failure is very possible.

He never insisted at all, other than insisting you don't form conclusions with no evidence.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: liteonit6969




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


Exactly. I guess Zaphod thinks that they are all in on the conspiracy to save the image of this airline. I love how Zaphod responds all sarcastic like his argument didn't just blow up.




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


First off you were the one making absolute claims here. Second, this was the claim that your exchange was about,




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


You were suggesting that this claim is untrue, and therefore it has to be a coverup. It was then pointed out to you that such a coverup would have to include the investigative parties.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9

"The LaWS was deployed on the Ponce in late August 2014 to the Persian Gulf with the U.S. 5th Fleet. The deployment is to test the feasibility of a laser weapon in a maritime environment against heat, humidity, dust, and salt water and to see how much power is used. The system has scalable power levels to be able to fire a non-lethal beam to dazzle a suspect vessel, and fire stronger beams to physically destroy a target; range is classified."

Notice the "range is classified" bit. The plane came down in northern Sinai near to the Med'. Could a war ship operate a laser canon over that range?

en.wikipedia.org... (look at all this stuff).

I am not saying it is this, but these modern weapons will baffle with magician-ship trickery.

Just how does a plane break into pieces mid air? It either has a major defect where the fuel explodes, bomb on board or is targeted to cause an explosion. A laser canon could have focussed on the fuel tanks and heated these until they exploded.

I really do think that commercial aircraft are being used as pawns in a game of war sometimes, well obviously they are. We have seen so much of it, from 911 to the Ukraine downing. It is real and a tactic.

The debris is spread over 8 miles approx. This plane undoubtedly blew up mid air and at high altitude. Now to look for what caused the explosion.

edit on 2-11-2015 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:27 AM
link   
could it have had a mid air collision with another aircraft?

*nevermind i cannot read upside down very well lol
edit on 2-11-2015 by oddnutz because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Nobody said 3 separate investigators came to this conclusion. I said there are 3 separate groups of investigators who will be able to verify whatever is claimed in the media. There are the Russians, egyptian and Americans. I'm sure we will get a hint of truth from on of them.

I dislike how the Russians have come out and claimed an outside force caused this. Then they ask for no speculation until there are facts. It's a bit contradictory.

I wonder how Russia will handle this if it has been shot down. I feel the public will demand a firm response and the government will be willing to give it.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: liteonit6969
a reply to: Zaphod58

Nobody said 3 separate investigators came to this conclusion. I said there are 3 separate groups of investigators who will be able to verify whatever is claimed in the media. There are the Russians, egyptian and Americans. I'm sure we will get a hint of truth from on of them.

I dislike how the Russians have come out and claimed an outside force caused this. Then they ask for no speculation until there are facts. It's a bit contradictory.

I wonder how Russia will handle this if it has been shot down. I feel the public will demand a firm response and the government will be willing to give it.



The situation is expected to become clearer after the data is recovered from the plane’s flight recorders. They were recovered from the crash site and are “in good condition” Vladimir Puchkov, the head of Russia’s Emergencies Ministry told the media on Monday, after inspecting the devices. Egypt is to decide where the analysis of the records will be conducted, according to international rules.


In the end, it comes down to flight recorders correct? They were recovered and in "good condition".

Egypt gets to pick who does the analysis, personally I think it should be open to international observers and maybe it is. But those recorders should provide clear insight into mechanical failure.
edit on 2-11-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Vy the russians this will be portraied as the revenge on mh17.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: liteonit6969

The Americans don't have crap to do with it. There is a team from Airbus, Russia, and Egypt and they're all working together. There are no Americans, it wasn't an American built plane, and it wasn't registered in the US so why would the Americans have anything to do with it?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: OHTheHumanity

I'm insisting that we don't jump to conclusions. The data so far points to mechanical based on previous history of the aircraft and comments by the crew. But since Isis says they shot it down the by God thru must have since they'd never lie.

Hell you know what. Jump to all the conclusions you want. It was shot down by a US laser mounted on an Isis plane that flew above them and blew them up. See I can do it too.

Why bother waiting for facts when you can jump to random conclusions.
edit on 11/2/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: OHTheHumanity

I'm insisting that we don't jump to conclusions. The data so far points to mechanical based on previous history of the aircraft and comments by the crew. But since Isis says they shot it down the by God thru must have since they'd never lie.


The data so far suggests a physical impact (or force) against the structure.


‘The only explainable cause is physical impact on the aircraft,’ says Metrojet official, ruling out technical fault or mistake by crew.


Source



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Poor Zaphod, when will you learn? Logical arguments are not accepted here. It was obviously a laser or something something America did it.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




I'm insisting that we don't jump to conclusions.


Sure you are.




Of course they're going to say that. They're covering their ass.


You are clearly stating this as fact.




Hell you know what. Jump to all the conclusions you want. It was shot down by a US laser mounted on an Isis plane that flew above them and blew them up. See I can do it too. Why bother waiting for facts when you can jump to random conclusions.


I didn't jump to any conclusion, you did.

Again you are using a straw man argument to twist your way out of it.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




Of course they're going to say that. They're covering their ass.


Btw, can you expand on that? Are the investigators going to cover up the distress call that, according to you, did actually take place, but is denied by the owner of the airline?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: OHTheHumanity

Quote where I said they made a distress call. I'd love to see that. I'd like a direct quote please.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join