EgyptAir flight from Paris to Cairo has vanished from Radar

It has issues because it's by far the most popular aircraft ever built. There are over 9,000 of them that have been built to date, and they're still building them. The updated aircraft look similar, but have had changes made to them as they were updated, including to the pressure bulkheads.

More info was added to the article in Newsweek. The survivability in a 737 incident seems to be fairly good?

Additional reporting by Clark Merrefield.

Take comfort: survivability rates are very high even in violent crashes during landing (as long as there’s no fire). But the newest models of the 737 Next Generation series have suffered shattered fuselages, which makes passenger evacuation difficult – for example, emergency slides are often unusable.

December 2009, Kingston, Jamaica: An American Airlines 737-800 splits open after running off the runway during a rainstorm. All 154 passengers survive, some with injuries.

August 2010, San Andrés Island, Colombia: An Aires Airlines 737-700 rips apart after landing in an electrical storm. One passenger dies, 30 injured.

July 2011, Georgetown, Guyana: A Caribbean Airlines 737-800 ruptures after running off the runway in a rainstorm; 163 passengers survive, some injured.

www.newsweek.com...

I wonder if this is connected to the news that Egypt cut the last of the electricity flowing into Gaza.... maybe they accidently shut off a critical system or just got a planeload of revenge on their hands.

a reply to: Caver78

live updates www.theguardian.com...

no distress call...dawn about an hour ago and the search team has reached the area of the last coordinates and will begin a search

no special cargo and the pilot had lots of experience (6000 + hours flying)


count updated to 66..... 56 passengers, 3 security, 2 cockpit, and 5 cabin crew

Sources are confirming that it was an A320, not a 737. A spokesman for the Egyptian Civil Aviation Authority said it most likely crashed into the sea.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Altho I'm late to the party, I'm not married to any make or model aircraft.
( except Harriers for reasons unfathomable)

Boings new 737MAX looks to be very promising in new upgrades to existing problems and fuel efficiency.

www.businessinsider.com...

I don't think this will be a 2 year ocean search, like Malaysia MH-370 has been. What would be the "least bad" news.. a bomb, or a structural defect caused the crash?

a reply to: research100

Thanks!

I'm still thinking mechanical or structural defect, but will defer to Zaphod!

a reply to: Zaphod58

The MSM is on the story, but they have nothing to really report because there is so little info. What irks me is they are interviewing people from the NTSB and talking about family notifications, also talking about floating black boxes.... certainly not the right time to be concerned about end game activities when we do not even know if it is still flying....
Hey, is it me?, or am I being paranoid that this is going to be a long one.

a reply to: carewemust

Either would be bad enough. A structural problem that could bring down an aircraft could mean a fleetwide issue that could be major. A bomb, put on the aircraft in Paris would be pretty significant too, because so many large aircraft depart from there every day. If they could get a bomb on board this one, there's no reason they couldn't get one on a 777 or 747, or large aircraft with hundreds of people on board.

a reply to: charlyv

They all are. The FlyDubai flight that crashed two months ago only just completed transcribing the CVR, and it was only a little over 2 hours long.

A news alert from Reuters quotes a French airport official as saying: "It did not land. That is all we can say for the moment.

what an odd choice of words.

if the plane was at 37,000 feet and only 20minutes away from landing.. shouldn't it have been lower or in its descent stages?

a reply to: Agit8dChop

It depends on the approach they're required to do. If it's a straight in approach then they should have been lower. Other types of descents they're drop faster, so they start them later. Usually around 100-150 miles is when they start a descent, so they were probably getting ready to start the descent.

For all you number sleuths out there.. (saw this on twitter)

MH370 took off 7/3/14...
that's exactly 804 days ago.

Egypt Air Flight 804 crashes today.

*queue twilight music*

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: carewemust

Either would be bad enough. A structural problem that could bring down an aircraft could mean a fleetwide issue that could be major. A bomb, put on the aircraft in Paris would be pretty significant too, because so many large aircraft depart from there every day. If they could get a bomb on board this one, there's no reason they couldn't get one on a 777 or 747, or large aircraft with hundreds of people on board.

Thanks for that reply, Zaphod. If I were a frequent U.S. domestic flyer, I'd be more concerned if a structural defect was the cause.

I'm surprised that more bombs have not been put onto planes. That indicates high-integrity of airport employees around the world. Even if someone offered them a large amount of money, they can't be bought. Not even the tarmac ground crew. That's a good thing.

a reply to: Agit8dChop
a reply to: Zaphod58

Usually around 100-150 miles is when they start a descent, so they were probably getting ready to start the descent.

Interesting premise. This would be a flight event coinciding with the loss of radar telemetry.
Prayin for those on board.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

I am looking at the map and flight plans. It appears to have gone down over water. There are several countries that could and probably would start looking right away. By air and by sea. The area where it could have gone down in is not really huge. I don't understand how it could take so long.

Twitter says (cant confirm this is legit..) but the 41minute gap between the last 2 datapoints shows the plane did a course change?




ps.. i can see why people like twitter now.. ive never really used it!

a reply to: reldra

How did it go down? Was it intact going straight down? Did it break up and cover a huge area? The way that it went down completely changes the debris field, and the area that it went down. It doesn't seem like a big area, but until they find it, it could be a tiny area, or it could be a massive area.

There are bombs that detonate when a plane drops below a certain altitude. But that's probably not the case here, because 37,000 is quite high.