Posted on 11/01/2015 7:08:41 AM PST by tcrlaf
Viktor Sorochenko, an official with the Intergovernmental Aviation Committee, made the comments after inspecting the crash site on Egypt's Sinai peninsula.
The Russian Airbus A321 which crashed in Egypt Saturday killing 224 broke into pieces midair, but it is still too early to determine the cause, Interstate Aviation Committee (MAK) said Sunday."It is too early to draw conclusions," MAK executive director Viktor Sorochenko said. "Disintegration of the fuselage took place in the air, and the fragments are scattered around a large area [about 20 square kilometers]", the official added.
(Excerpt) Read more at sputniknews.com ...
Metal fatigue?
Right now, smart money is on the tail blowing off.
Whether from mechanical failure due to a poorly repaired tail strike and metal fatigue, or a bomb remains an open question.
Too many cycles (a cycle is one take off and one landing)? Weak air frame gave in from too many pressurization’s? Most airlines retire planes that have above 90,000 cycles or more.
Probably a little bomb on board.
It was a bomb. 10 to 1.
So maybe there are now only 399 surface-to-air missiles missing from Benghazi?
I think Sandy Burger has already concluded that it was a spark in a fully loaded fuel tank.
MANPADs and Stingers can’t reach that altitude of 33K.
How old was this plane?
We shall see where the data leads.
We know the plane had a tail strike.
We know that at least two other commercial airlines had a rear bulkhead failure following a tail strike and inadequate repair.
We know the Russians utterly suck at maintenance.
Still, I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised were it a bomb. 10:1? I give it 50:50.
With a sidebar that if it serves Russia’s proaganda goals, it will be reported as a bomb.
Remember the Maine!
Probably the dreaded “center fuel tank” scenario...just sayin’.
Me too.
After all, it was a Russian aircraft.
You couldn't get me on one.
MANPADs and Stingers can't reach that altitude of 33K FROM THE GROUND.
From an ultralight or mounted on a Piper Cub? Maybe.
Also, some of the data indicates it was still climbing to it's cruise altitude, not yet at 33,000 ft.
I wouldn't totally rule out a MANPAD just yet.
I thought the Airbus A-321 was of recent vintage.
You couldn't get me on one.
Heck, it's hard enough to get me to subject myself to the TSA to get onto an American carrier!
It could be a brand new Boeing, but if it was operated by Russians, you couldn’t get me on it.
I hear ya.
Fact is, I haven’t been on any aircraft for years now, and have no intention of starting any time soon.
lol...
We never know until we see what was in Sandy Berger’s socks.
His feet?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.