224 feared dead in plane crash in Eygpt

gandalf

The first thing I thought of when this story broke was a bomb was the most likely cause. It's the most plausible explanation. Given the number of ground personnel who would have had access to the airplane it is not beyond the realm of possibility that terrorists either had someone on the inside or coerced an existing worker with threats.

seamus

asherbassad wrote: »

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

I won't lose any sleep over it. It's not like you ever read anyone else's posts anyway.

darkpagandeath

Could it be a bomb Yes, Could it be a scenario of catastrophic fuselage failure due to stress on the tail section explosive decompression resulting in intimidate loss of control, catastrophic stress resulting in fuel tanks rupturing and resulting in an explosion. It's to early to say but at least thus far the area of wreckage should give them some idea at what altitude the plane broke up at. As for he heat flash that could be jet fuel ignition.

This is exactly what happened in the Mh-320, pilot blamed for having a flight sim terror immediately announced. It's not like Mh-17 where we knew planes where downed before.

Dohnjoe

kneemos wrote: »

The Americans have detected a heat flash from their military radar apparently.
Dunno if that signifies a bomb on the aircraft or a missile.

The plane was almost 10km up, bit high for AA missile, especially anything ISIS in the region is known to have

Evidence is pointing strongly toward some sort of on board explosive device at the mo

seamus

donegaLroad wrote: »

How was a device planted on the plane? That is the biggest worry for airline companies at the minute.

Could it have been that the bagage handlers were involved while loading the plane?

Relevant timing: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/tsa-airport-screeners-ability-to-detect-weapons-declared-pitiful/

Short answer: Airport security is a sham, it's all theatre. Smuggling weapons and drugs onto aircraft is easy for anyone with a few small connections. Even more so when you're dealing with smaller aircraft and smaller airports.

darkpagandeath

seamus wrote: »

Relevant timing: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/tsa-airport-screeners-ability-to-detect-weapons-declared-pitiful/

Short answer: Airport security is a sham, it's all theatre. Smuggling weapons and drugs onto aircraft is easy for anyone with a few small connections. Even more so when you're dealing with smaller aircraft and smaller airports.

Don't get me started on the old illusion of security like they have in the USA all it does is slow down travel for normal people. It's been proven any kind of internal weapon/device smuggling onto a plane gets through 95% of the time. Terrorists can see monitor and figure out how to get around the security quite effectively unfortunately.

Duggy747

I traveled from Ireland and across America, east to west, on numerous changeover flights last year with a normal BIC lighter in my pocket.

I'd forgotten to get rid of it and only realised before I boarded my last flight that day. :pac:

asherbassad

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Thousands of dead multiple plane strikes on a world renowned land mark in America. is slightly different. All a direct Terrorist organised plot and action.

What's so slightly different? Just the numbers? 9/11 was organised but this airplane attack was NOT organised? What the hell are you talking about?
If there is a threshold of civilian casualties killed in a terrorist strike before you are allowed go invading countries and slaughtering millions in revenge then tell us what is is

So 3000 civilians die in a single day from a terrorist attack....the response is to kill 2 million Afghans and Iraqis.

200 Russians die from a terrorist attack....the response should not be to bomb thousands in related or unrelated locations.

that what you're saying?

asherbassad

darkpagandeath wrote: »

No, the point was in relation to a bomb on one plane then the goal post got moved. This is a tragic event if a bomb still could be mechanical. But comparing 9/11 to this is ridiculous beyond belief.

Both are mass murders of civilians in a terrorist attack. I'm asking can the response be the same? Would Russia be justified in finding out where the perpetrators trained and then bomb that country to powder killing hundreds of thousands?

Zillah

kneemos wrote: »

The Americans have detected a heat flash from their military radar apparently.
Dunno if that signifies a bomb on the aircraft or a missile.

Military satellite. Radar doesn't deal with heat. I imagine the satellite can detect infrared blooms, which would signify heat.

DarkyHughes

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

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

Were very far away from Israel & look how much pages they get each thread about them. People feel empathy for the almighty $

seamus

Zillah wrote: »

Military satellite. Radar doesn't deal with heat. I imagine the satellite can detect infrared blooms, which would signify heat.

Also jet fuel isn't all that prone to spontaneously combusting when a plane breaks up. It remains liquid (and therefore non-combustible) below roughly 40 degrees.
In short, it would be quite unlikely that an aircraft break-up at 400kt would cause a large fireball, as the speed of the aircraft would cause any released fuel to disperse faster than it may vaporise. There may some fire or explosive force with whatever heated fuel is already present, but I'd be surprised if radar could pick that up.

I could be wrong though.

asherbassad

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The plane was almost 10km up, bit high for AA missile, especially anything ISIS in the region is known to have

Evidence is pointing strongly toward some sort of on board explosive device at the mo

Maybe some fanatic got past security with more than 200 ml of Gatorade, then mixed it in with some baby food and Brylcreme in the toilet and hey presto...bomb!

Zillah

seamus wrote: »

Also jet fuel isn't all that prone to spontaneously combusting when a plane breaks up. It remains liquid (and therefore non-combustible) below roughly 40 degrees.
In short, it would be quite unlikely that an aircraft break-up at 400kt would cause a large fireball, as the speed of the aircraft would cause any released fuel to disperse faster than it may vaporise. There may some fire or explosive force with whatever heated fuel is already present, but I'd be surprised if radar could pick that up.

I could be wrong though.

Radar could detect one signature diverging into multiple signatures, thereby showing that it broke up. The reference to US intel was definitely a military satellite detecting a heat bloom, which signifies a midair explosion.

darkpagandeath

seamus wrote: »

Also jet fuel isn't all that prone to spontaneously combusting when a plane breaks up. It remains liquid (and therefore non-combustible) below roughly 40 degrees.
In short, it would be quite unlikely that an aircraft break-up at 400kt would cause a large fireball, as the speed of the aircraft would cause any released fuel to disperse faster than it may vaporise. There may some fire or explosive force with whatever heated fuel is already present, but I'd be surprised if radar could pick that up.

I could be wrong though.

TWA Flight 800

asherbassad

The US are claiming that ISIS planted a bomb on the plane. What fcuking hidden agenda do these assholes have now? They know it was a bomb without so much as talking to a single forensics scientist who as of yet hasn't conducted an investigation.

You can always tell when these dicks try to benefit from any kind of disaster or atrocity, so predictable have their responses become.

Must be some way to profit from this atrocity....more scanners at the airports? Turn Russian public opinion against Putin for putting civilians in harm's way over his bombing of ISIS and American funded mercenaries in Syria? Must be some way the US can turn this to their advantage financially or politically.

darkpagandeath

asherbassad wrote: »

The US are claiming that ISIS planted a bomb on the plane. What fcuking hidden agenda do these assholes have now? They know it was a bomb without so much as talking to a single forensics scientist who as of yet hasn't conducted an investigation.

You can always tell when these dicks try to benefit from any kind of disaster or atrocity, so predictable have their responses become.

Must be some way to profit from this atrocity....more scanners at the airports? Turn Russian public opinion against Putin for putting civilians in harm's way over his bombing of ISIS and American funded mercenaries in Syria? Must be some way the US can turn this to their advantage financially or politically.

You mean like Russia Immediately pointing to external factors and playing down disrepair of the aircraft ?

kneemos

asherbassad wrote: »

The US are claiming that ISIS planted a bomb on the plane. What fcuking hidden agenda do these assholes have now? They know it was a bomb without so much as talking to a single forensics scientist who as of yet hasn't conducted an investigation.

You can always tell when these dicks try to benefit from any kind of disaster or atrocity, so predictable have their responses become.

Must be some way to profit from this atrocity....more scanners at the airports? Turn Russian public opinion against Putin for putting civilians in harm's way over his bombing of ISIS and American funded mercenaries in Syria? Must be some way the US can turn this to their advantage financially or politically.

They may have inside knowledge.
They do keep an eye on these people.

Dr.Internet

I hope the russians totally flatten the ****hole

Zillah

Dr.Internet wrote: »

I hope the russians totally flatten the ****hole

Egypt?

Dr.Internet

Zillah wrote: »

Egypt?

Yep and their neighbours

BoJack Horseman

Dr.Internet wrote: »

Yep and their neighbours

Okey-dokey

seamus

darkpagandeath wrote: »

TWA Flight 800

Thanks, interesting read, and certainly a possibility. Slightly different scenario though, where the fuel tank fire caused the break-up. I was specifically referring to the possibility of tanks igniting after the break-up.

jam_mac_jam

Dr.Internet wrote: »

Yep and their neighbours

You need help

Dr.Internet

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

You need help

Of course I Need help. I don't own any bomber planes or warships. I wasn't suggesting I do it all myself singlehandly

asherbassad

kneemos wrote: »

They may have inside knowledge.
They do keep an eye on these people.

Just a few days ago that lunatic John McCain was alluding to giving the FSA missile capabilities to shoot down aircraft at this height. It's also no secret that the FSA is a farce of an organisation concocted in London and they have a histroy of handing over all their toys to nutjobs in various ISIS spinoffs.

And a girl who has her head screwed on:

Zillah

Dr.Internet wrote: »

Yep and their neighbours

But, there are brown people all over the place. We should get Pakistan while we're at it too. And I know India haven't been up to much lately but we better flatten them just in case - I saw a few of them wearing turbans.

Parts of France, too.

donegaLroad

Duggy747 wrote: »

I traveled from Ireland and across America, east to west, on numerous changeover flights last year with a normal BIC lighter in my pocket.

I'd forgotten to get rid of it and only realised before I boarded my last flight that day. :pac:

I flew from london to toronto in october 2001 with a large screwdriver in my jacket pocket. I didnt know it was there until I went looking for a pen to fill out the customs forms.

kneemos

donegaLroad wrote: »

I flew from london to toronto in october 2001 with a large screwdriver in my jacket pocket. I didnt know it was there until I went looking for a pen to fill out the customs forms.

Could have taken the plane apart.

nullzero

threeball wrote: »

How can you compare it to anything when you don't know what brought it down?

Its a basic comparison. I never claimed to know what caused the crash.
I love how people jump on you on this site sometimes.