224 feared dead in plane crash in Eygpt

TerrorFirmer

224 people are feared dead after a Russian passenger plane crashed in Egypt.

The Airbus A-321, carrying mainly Russian tourists, was on its way to St Petersburg from the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.

The Egyptian prime minister says the jet came down after losing contact with air traffic control, just 23 minutes into the flight.

Search and rescue officers say all passengers and crew are likely to have died.

Wreckage of the plane has been found in a desolate mountainous area of central Sinai.

Egyptian security sources told Reuters that there were no indications the plane was shot down.

Very sad.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/31/russian-plane-crashes-in-sinai-egyptian-pm-says

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34687139

Fr_Dougal

RIP to those who lost their lives.

Rescuers have said that they can hear voices from the wreckage.

seamus

Doesn't initially look like anything nefarious here. Aircraft stalled and dropped out the sky. Probably pilot error.

RIP.

kneemos

seamus wrote: »

Doesn't initially look like anything nefarious here. Aircraft stalled and dropped out the sky. Probably pilot error.

RIP.

Better let the authorities know.

SteelyDanJalapeno

Can't believe how anybody can survive a descent like that

TerrorFirmer

kneemos wrote: »

Better let the authorities know.

They have said the pilot reported technical difficulties and tried to divert to Cairo.

bear1

seamus wrote: »

Doesn't initially look like anything nefarious here. Aircraft stalled and dropped out the sky. Probably pilot error.

RIP.

Thats a bit assumption to make.

Fr_Dougal

bear1 wrote: »

Thats a bit assumption to make.

Flight recorder was found, they've ruled out terrorism.

bear1

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Flight recorder was found, they've ruled out terrorism.

Doesn't necessarily mean pilot error.

major bill

Very sad, RIP to all

TerrorFirmer

Authorities say no survivors, all 224 onboard have died.

Tarzana2

bear1 wrote: »

Thats a bit assumption to make.

Exactly, a stall could be down to a technical problem, it's not necessarily pilot error.

Underground

Reading on the journal that IS have claimed responsibility for this...

hedzball

Underground wrote: »

Reading on the journal that IS have claimed responsibility for this...

Sure if Obama lost his fecking wallet they'd claim that too...





'hdz

asherbassad

seamus wrote: »

Doesn't initially look like anything nefarious here. Aircraft stalled and dropped out the sky. Probably pilot error.

RIP.

Right....because nothing ever malfunctions

JustTheOne

14 posts on this.

We are a strange bunch.

Kermit.de.frog

JustTheOne wrote: »

14 posts on this.

We are a strange bunch.

It's natural. If you are far removed from an incident it's always harder to show empathy.

fedor.2.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's natural. If you are far removed from an incident it's always harder to show empathy.

Its selective empathy that thrives here

Penny Tration

Horrific incident. RIP to all of the poor victims.

Seeing photos stolen from victims' Facebook pages is very sad, makes it more real. 17 children among the dead.

Son Of A Vidic

fedor.2. wrote: »

Its selective empathy that thrives here

Personally, I only notice the sweeping generalisations.



RIP to those who lost their lives.

seamus

Looks now like mid-air mechanical failure caused the aircraft to break up, which makes me glad to say I was wrong.

Although IS got roundly mocked for claiming responsibility for this, there are some rumblings that it could have been an explosive device that caused it to break up.

Fr_Dougal

seamus wrote: »

Looks now like mid-air mechanical failure caused the aircraft to break up, which makes me glad to say I was wrong.

Although IS got roundly mocked for claiming responsibility for this, there are some rumblings that it could have been an explosive device that caused it to break up.

BBC and Sky News are saying that it was an impact from an 'external factor '. Sounds very much like that they're starting to lean towards a missile of some sort.

fits

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

BBC and Sky News are saying that it was an impact from an 'external factor '. Sounds very much like that they're starting to lean towards a missile of some sort.

No. The airline are claiming it as an external factor. Very vague and hard to give it any credence.

murpho999

seamus wrote: »

Looks now like mid-air mechanical failure caused the aircraft to break up, which makes me glad to say I was wrong.

Although IS got roundly mocked for claiming responsibility for this, there are some rumblings that it could have been an explosive device that caused it to break up.

Sorry but planes generally don't tend to break up in mid air.

I have a feeling that something else happened to it.

seamus

murpho999 wrote: »

Sorry but planes generally don't tend to break up in mid air.

I have a feeling that something else happened to it.

No you're right, they don't. Aircraft have even lost big chunks of their fuselage mid-flight and still landed safely.
Allegedly the pilot had expressed concerns about the state of the aircraft (according to his wife), so a very poorly maintained aircraft could potentially break up like this. The wind forces at hand are pretty huge, so loss of integrity in one part of an aircraft can lead to the whole thing being ripped apart by the stress. Very rare though.

fits wrote: »

No. The airline are claiming it as an external factor. Very vague and hard to give it any credence.

A Russian authority trying to distance itself from culpability is what it sounds like. "We couldn't possibly be liable here, it must be something else".

I would treat any statements from the Russians about this with extreme suspicion.

An external collision means it either collided with another aircraft (at 10,000m, could only be military), or was hit by a missile. The lack of any debris from another craft would require the second scenario, which limits the culprits pretty much either to the Egyptians, or an ISIL group operating a SAM.*

Neither of which sound very plausible. If it had been Egypt, they probably would have owned up to it. If it was ISIL, the web would be flooded with videos of the weapon firing its missile.

A breakup from within sounds most likely, whether that's a mechanical issue or an explosive device.

* Or off-the-wall scenario three where a jet fighter engaged and downed it

fits

seamus wrote: »

A Russian authority trying to distance itself from culpability is what it sounds like. "We couldn't possibly be liable here, it must be something else".

I would treat any statements from the Russians about this with extreme suspicion.

.

It was an exec of metrojet who made the statement. Its a very small airline, only operating five planes. The business is probably on the line. Hardly an authority though.

Plane was registered in Ireland, some regulatory reason for that I wonder? Less oversight? Either way it's gonna be a headache for some Irish workers til this gets sorted out, think there's already a group gone over to assist in the investigation.

fits

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Plane was registered in Ireland, some regulatory reason for that I wonder? Less oversight? Either way it's gonna be a headache for some Irish workers til this gets sorted out, think there's already a group gone over to assist in the investigation.

Lots of aircraft leasing companies operate out of ireland. Probably because of our young skilled workforce....

murpho999

Deleted User wrote: »

Plane was registered in Ireland, some regulatory reason for that I wonder? Less oversight? Either way it's gonna be a headache for some Irish workers til this gets sorted out, think there's already a group gone over to assist in the investigation.

Ireland is a very important centre for plane leasing so a lot of planes are registered here.

Autonomous Cowherd

seamus wrote: »

I would treat any statements from the Russians about this with extreme suspicion.

Why?

homerjay2005

fits wrote: »

Lots of aircraft leasing companies operate out of ireland. Probably because of our young skilled workforce....

more to do with our taxation laws than anything else. i doubt many young Irish people are even employed in those companies, considering most of them are actually based abroad.

fits

homerjay2005 wrote: »

more to do with our taxation laws than anything else. i doubt many young Irish people are even employed in those companies, considering most of them are actually based abroad.

I was being sarcastic. Of course its about tax.

Fr_Dougal

BBC and Sky reporting that there may have been an explosive onboard the flight.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34724604

http://news.sky.com/story/1581778/no-10-explosive-device-may-have-downed-plane

The Russian jet that crashed in Egypt "may well have been brought down by an explosive device", Downing Street has said.

So is it possible that it really was ISIS? Or at least a group associated with them.

The_Valeyard

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So is it possible that it really was ISIS? Or at least a group associated with them.

All speculation, but yeah, suppose it is possible.

Well, they did claim responsibility quite soon after the attack, I believe?

Amirani

Flights to UK from Sharm el Sheikh all stopped pending investigation.

Saipanne

I wonder which Abrahamic religion caused this...

Autonomous Cowherd

Still following this closely. I suppose it is quite possible that the explosion that is bing talked of may have originated in a technical fault. From most sources I have seen till now there is mention often that none of the wreckage has explosive residue...I suppose they mean the bad sort of intentional explosive? It still may have been a mechanical failure of airplane not related to terrorism. I will wait to see what the investigators say, as terrorism really is a dangerous outcome. I note also that the Russian investigators and media are being reserved and professional and not speculating overly much.

The_Valeyard

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, they did claim responsibility quite soon after the attack, I believe?

And everyone dismissed it very quickly. May have jumped the gun early there?

JohnDee

The Egyptian authorities dismissed ISIS claim/terrorism very quickly......but then again with their reliance on tourist revenue they would wouldn't they.

RobertKK

US believe a worker at the airport is responsible for the bombing of the plane.

Talking about it on CNN, they said the holy grail is to have a person working at an airport with access to sensitive areas for the security of the plane.
Speculated there could be more of these type of people working at other middle eastern airports.

BoJack Horseman

Always wondered, why the hell do airports spend so much time searching passengers when the guy deliverng cans of cola for the planes use can be delivering anything really.

asherbassad

JohnDee wrote: »

The Egyptian authorities dismissed ISIS claim/terrorism very quickly......but then again with their reliance on tourist revenue they would wouldn't they.

So massacres at Luxor, or a coup that saw the deaths and maimings of thousands, the ongoing tortures and killing of activists and opposition political figures over the course of the last 10 years, they just took in their stride, that never put off a tourist... but they feared losing a load of holiday dollars over this even though their tourist industry is a fart in the pot compared to the cash they receive from the pentagon?

Great analysis there.

Let me guess...they crack down on local lads whistling at blondes from Denmark because it could crush their economy.

:pac:

asherbassad

Amazing isn't it? For 14 years we are taking our fcuking shoes, belts, knickers, baby food and what not off at airports according to american protocol and still the idiots can't prevent this yet they know immediately what happened.

Can we start carrying a bottle of water back onto a plane now and have our toothpaste back because your measures to keep everyone 'safe' are so effective?

asherbassad

seamus wrote: »

Looks now like mid-air mechanical failure caused the aircraft to break up, which makes me glad to say I was wrong.

Although IS got roundly mocked for claiming responsibility for this, there are some rumblings that it could have been an explosive device that caused it to break up.

I'd say you're wrong again.

asherbassad

seamus wrote: »

No you're right, they don't. Aircraft have even lost big chunks of their fuselage mid-flight and still landed safely.
Allegedly the pilot had expressed concerns about the state of the aircraft (according to his wife), so a very poorly maintained aircraft could potentially break up like this. The wind forces at hand are pretty huge, so loss of integrity in one part of an aircraft can lead to the whole thing being ripped apart by the stress. Very rare though.
A Russian authority trying to distance itself from culpability is what it sounds like. "We couldn't possibly be liable here, it must be something else".

I would treat any statements from the Russians about this with extreme suspicion.

An external collision means it either collided with another aircraft (at 10,000m, could only be military), or was hit by a missile. The lack of any debris from another craft would require the second scenario, which limits the culprits pretty much either to the Egyptians, or an ISIL group operating a SAM.*

Neither of which sound very plausible. If it had been Egypt, they probably would have owned up to it. If it was ISIL, the web would be flooded with videos of the weapon firing its missile.

A breakup from within sounds most likely, whether that's a mechanical issue or an explosive device.

* Or off-the-wall scenario three where a jet fighter engaged and downed it

BULLSH!T

asherbassad

seamus wrote: »

No you're right, they don't. Aircraft have even lost big chunks of their fuselage mid-flight and still landed safely.
Allegedly the pilot had expressed concerns about the state of the aircraft (according to his wife), so a very poorly maintained aircraft could potentially break up like this. The wind forces at hand are pretty huge, so loss of integrity in one part of an aircraft can lead to the whole thing being ripped apart by the stress. Very rare though.
A Russian authority trying to distance itself from culpability is what it sounds like. "We couldn't possibly be liable here, it must be something else".

I would treat any statements from the Russians about this with extreme suspicion.

An external collision means it either collided with another aircraft (at 10,000m, could only be military), or was hit by a missile. The lack of any debris from another craft would require the second scenario, which limits the culprits pretty much either to the Egyptians, or an ISIL group operating a SAM.*

Neither of which sound very plausible. If it had been Egypt, they probably would have owned up to it. If it was ISIL, the web would be flooded with videos of the weapon firing its missile.

A breakup from within sounds most likely, whether that's a mechanical issue or an explosive device.

* Or off-the-wall scenario three where a jet fighter engaged and downed it

End of any credibility any post you ever make again might have.

asherbassad

I suppose it only stands to reason now that if ISIS knocked this plane out of the sky and murdered 200+ Russian civilians including women and children then Russia should go all out and incinerate every single IS camp, depot, training site, the lot.

Bomb everything that even looks like a kid with a black flag. Arrest and torture and kill everyone and everything that even looks like an ISIS person.

That would be the American response if a US passenger airliner was blown up so I would imagine it ought to be acceptable for the Russians to blow a hole in the world when their citizens get offed too.

Yes?

darkpagandeath

asherbassad wrote: »

I suppose it only stands to reason now that if ISIS knocked this plane out of the sky and murdered 200+ Russian civilians including women and children then Russia should go all out and incinerate every single IS camp, depot, training site, the lot.

Bomb everything that even looks like a kid with a black flag. Arrest and torture and kill everyone and everything that even looks like an ISIS person.

That would be the American response if a US passenger airliner was blown up so I would imagine it ought to be acceptable for the Russians to blow a hole in the world when their citizens get offed too.

Yes?

Great fairytale when exactly has that ever happened ?

Autonomous Cowherd

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Great fairytale when exactly has that ever happened ?

After 9/11. No?