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.

 

EgyptAir plane crash cause feared to be Fire bomb hidden in plane's toilet after black box recorder

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And if they're still using a derivative of Kapton wiring, it would have spread even faster.




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: CraftBuilder
Meteor?
I'm curious if they will pick up anything on the cockpit audio that suggests an impact.


I'm glad someone asked this. Thanks!! A meteor or bolide (or a part thereof) is what I'm most curious about.


It has to happen at some point. I think when it does it may be a pretty difficult thing to pin down or accept as the probable cause. Especially if the impacted part of the plane isn't recovered.

Thanks for the kudos.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
This could be an interesting twist. Haven't seen it confirmed, but worth at least taking a look at.

Independent



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   

The Facebook page of the chief spokesman for Egypt's military showed the first photographs of debris from the plane


You know the trust level needs to be low for most of these world incidents with Facebook being used as a press outlet often.

I can hear it - "Our official site is the Facebook"

It's getting sad.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you. Boeing feels appropriate anyway since I live so close.


There is a famous saying in aviation - "If it ain't a Boeing I ain't going." But in my experience, the operator is more important than the equipment.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: F4guy

As much as I like Boeing, I thoroughly enjoyed flying the A340 to Asia, on all three airlines I flew on them. The 764 that I flew on was nice but the A340 was a nicer flight.
edit on 5/22/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: F4guy

As much as I like Boeing, I thoroughly enjoyed flying the A340 to Asia, on all three airlines I flew on them. The 764 that I flew on was nice but the A340 was a nicer flight.


I was speaking from a pilot's point of view. The Frogjets are too much like video games, with limited, or no, control feedback. And sidestick controllers are just wrong. The 777 software got it right.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: F4guy

I know, and I've always heard that about the Airbus, but from a passenger perspective some of the Airbus are pretty comfortable. I prefer Boeing still.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And if they're still using a derivative of Kapton wiring, it would have spread even faster.


Holy... If they did not replace that window and heater system after given the mandate, it is going to be really important.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: F4guy

I know, and I've always heard that about the Airbus, but from a passenger perspective some of the Airbus are pretty comfortable. I prefer Boeing still.


The comfort level on any passenger jet is also a function of operator choises. They select the width and pitch of the seats and decide on layout, such as a 2-4-2 on widebodies, or a 3-3 versus 2-3 on the narrowbodies. Although it seems like everyone is using a 3-4-3 for coach class on the 380 with a 31 pitch and 17.5 with. That's why I almost always jumpseat when possible rather than cram into coach.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

The change mandate came through the FAA, which would only affect US owned aircraft. I'm not sure if Airbus sent out an AD requiring them to be changed, or merely inspected and monitored.

FAA AD for PPG windows
edit on 5/22/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: charlyv

The change mandate came through the FAA, which would only affect US owned aircraft. I'm not sure if Airbus sent out an AD requiring them to be changed, or merely inspected and monitored.


Manufacturers don't send out ADs. They issue Service Bulletins, which are sometimes adopted by the FAA in ADs, but not always. The JAA used to require SBs to be accomplished. I don't know if the successor EASA also does so.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: F4guy

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: charlyv

The change mandate came through the FAA, which would only affect US owned aircraft. I'm not sure if Airbus sent out an AD requiring them to be changed, or merely inspected and monitored.


Manufacturers don't send out ADs. They issue Service Bulletins, which are sometimes adopted by the FAA in ADs, but not always. The JAA used to require SBs to be accomplished. I don't know if the successor EASA also does so.


You would think that with the current scrutiny on aircraft safety amidst all of these incidents lately, the insurance companies would insist... Sad it is probably a prime mover in what does get fixed.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: CraftBuilder

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: CraftBuilder
Meteor?
I'm curious if they will pick up anything on the cockpit audio that suggests an impact.


I'm glad someone asked this. Thanks!! A meteor or bolide (or a part thereof) is what I'm most curious about.


It has to happen at some point. I think when it does it may be a pretty difficult thing to pin down or accept as the probable cause. Especially if the impacted part of the plane isn't recovered.

Thanks for the kudos.



there is this also.... 2 pilots saw a ufo with green lights fly over their plane,then, it suddenly disappeared 1 hour before the air egypt crash

www.dailymail.co.uk... -s-biggest-news-outlets.html
edit on 23-5-2016 by research100 because: added sentence



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: research100

Yeah, that's a huge reach, even for the media. Although being the Daily Fail it doesn't surprise me.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
My first thought is that this is terrorism and intentional. But...those asses are usually quick to claim responsibility which is kinda the definition of terrorism. No point in killing people if the people think it was a malfunction...you have to take responsibility so they know it is terror and fear more.

So my second thought is it can't be a terrorist group. Unless they decided they didn't want the type of device discovered and/or it was a lone wolf and the group itself wasn't consulted.

In other words...who the hell knows and I'm impatient.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Domo1

Neither of the recorders have been found, let alone recovered and decoded.

As for the source?


Smoke detectors were set off and a cockpit window was either blown out or opened to ventilate the 13-year-old plane as it spun out of control.


That should tell you everything you need to know about the source.


hahalol

"Dag, it's a bit stuffy in here, lemme just OPEN THE WINDOW"

I'm sorry, but that makes me giggle a little..



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join