10 months to 77 years.

[fallen-archie]

That was the age range of the people who lost their lives on a Russian plane in Egypt. It's a week since the tragedy took place as we await confirmation, if it is possible, of what caused the Crash. 

I cannot help reflecting as we approach remembrance day, those who we honour, those who gave their lives for our freedom. Those who suffered horrendous torture in the far east on the Burma railway, in Malaya and the depraved actions of men on men which we vowed to stop in the new world order that followed WW2. When the Lusitania was sunk by a German U-Boat the Germans sought to justify their action by suggesting the ship was carrying munitions yet public opinion swung firmly against them. Sadly today there are still those who target the innocent in pursuit of their own political or religious ends. It has emerged that just two months ago a British Thomson airliner came within 1000ft of a missile in Egypt. So whether it was a bomb in the hold or possibly a missile that downed the Russian plane the fact remains that some see a value or political gain to be made from such attrocity. Surely that's wrong, why do we allow social media to distract us through smoke and mirrors? There are those who support action suggesting it is our fault for getting involved in the first place and to me that is entirely irresponsible. Even Pacifists jump on the bandwagon yet it is not our military or nuclear submarines that are under attack but an airbus full of Russian Holidaymakers celebrating for them the relatively new experience of freedom to travel. To me it is no different to the use of concentration camps or ethnic cleansing in Serbia, Africa etc.

Time to stop acts of terror which target the innocent, it is no longer acceptable as a tool of war so many fought to prevent.

[cee-dee]

Although your sentiments are commendable, it's those unprincipled people who think that whatever they say is the "correct" way that cowardly target "soft" targets who'll take absolutely no notice.

You won't see them in uniform bravely facing or advancing upon a similarly uniformed opponent. They'd rather sneak around targeting civilians who're mostly unarmed and defenceless.

As to what brought down the Russian Airbus, surely as soon as the wreckage was viewed it'd be pretty obvious if it was a bomb on board? Surely there would be metal which showed "bending" or deformation from the inside?

Similarly, if it was a missile, the deformation (or perforation) would be from the outside "going in"?

Usually with a plane crash, investigators look for the "four corners" but the plane in question didn't crash in one piece (it broke up in mid-air) so the four corners will be a "bit mixed up"?

The aircraft suffered a tail strike on take-off in 2001 which took 3 months to repair. There have been two previous crashes with airliners that had had a previous tail strike so surely it would be the rear fuselage which should come in for close inspection?

There are vested interests at play........... neither Airbus, the airline or the Russians want it to be structural failure and the Egyptians don't want it to be a bomb. Will the truth get out, either any time soon or ever?

[fallen-archie]

Latest news suggests that the black box analysis indicates an explosion on board probably in the hold and that even the Russians are resigned to that fact. This becomes the worst aviation disaster since 9/11. We can therefore discount the various vested interests and hopefully concentrate on the worst aspect ie the continued use of innocent people to further a cause. We have enough home grown sceptics prepared to justify these actions each given a voice on social media, it is time they were called to account. 

[cee-dee]

The latest reports say that "the sound of an explosion" was heard on the black box recording but the information from the cockpit voice recorder wasn't readable due to severe damage. If (if) that's so, how was a "sound of an explosion" heard? The flight data recorder records data??

OK, so if some sort of loud noise was actually heard (by what means?), how could it be differentiated from the sound of the plane breaking up?

The US, UK and France say that at the moment, there's "no convincing evidence" of a bomb.

I think there's far too much speculation at the moment because history shows lots of investigations of plane crashes take ages to reach a firm conclusion and many of them have several convincing theories early on and it's only after a painstaking investgation that the real cause is identified.

As the wreckage is lying on land and on ground without vegetation, a meticulous investigation will surely clearly identify whether it was a bomb or not?

[artful_dodgings]

Tp be honest I'm sick of turning the news on, and hearing about the 'poor souls' in Sharm el Sheikh who are / were unable to get home on the day they thought they would. My heart bleeds for them. Never a mention of the 224 people - including 17 children - who lost their lives. I wish both BBC and ITV would get their priorities right.

[suzieseaside]

Security is lax at Sharm airport.  It seems that some security officials will take people past queues and baggage checks for a £20 note.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/airport-security-brits-paid-%c2%a320-to-skip-checks/ar-BBmTiEl?o...

[fallen-archie]

I agree with you on the TV coverage Dodge, I do have some sympathy for those who remain due to the flight ban. Sharm is not the destination of millionaires it is far more like Benidorm, many save hard to afford it and may be worried about the consequences they might encounter when they do get home. It is also a hopeless task when Diplomats are made responsible for repatriation, tour operators are far better placed and should be fully involved.

As for speculation CD We better wait for the official line but your post adequately demonstrates how these day's we are able and willing to question almost any explanation, our desire for full forensic detail is an excuse when not forthcoming to propogate the kind of conspiacy theories like the Israelis involvement in the twin towers.

[cee-dee]

When the black boxes were first recovered news reports said that the cockpit voice recorder was damaged and that nothing could be recovered from it but the flight data recorder was OK and data had been recovered from it.

It seems later reports said the cockpit voice recorder was "partially damaged" and now they've heard "a noise" just before the recording ended:- "

Egyptian officials investigating the Metrojet crash have revealed a noise was heard in the last second of the black box recording.

However, the head of the air accident investigation has said this is not enough to draw conclusions about what took place over the Sinai peninsula last Saturday."

The report goes on to say "During the conference, one official suggested a passenger's lithium batteries or an explosion in the fuel compartment might be responsible - and warned nothing could be excluded."

They've not said that an explosive decompression could have been the source of the noise but what might have been the true cause of the crash will only come out after a full and proper investigation and as I said earlier, some investigations take a long time. The only benefit the investigators have is that the wreckage is on land which isn't covered by vegetation so they ought to be able to find every bit of the plane.

All these "leaks" of bits of info are not helpful are they?

[2017clearout]

There are also a lot of contradicting reports.  What I don't understand, though, if it was the ISIS-affiliated Sinai terrorists, why a) didn't they claim it right away as a bomb and b) why haven't they done so now?  As soon as news came out, they said they had shot it down - which is pretty standard operating behavious: the Taliban, for example, used to do that all the time, even when they patently hadn't.  ISIS are really quick to gloat about their evil deeds: if they really had got a bomb into the plane somehow (and if so, I really doubt it was anything to do with poor screening of passengers at Sharm - more likely, a dodgy person slipping explosives into the hold separately) why on earth didn't they scream it from the rooftops from the off?  

I'm by no means a conspiracy theorist, but this whole process doesn't chime with what we know about terrorists in general, or, indeed, what we know about the Sinai group.  (They've previously claimed responsibility for eg road accidents involving Egyptian soldiers in North Sinai - that truly were just road accidents...)

It doesn't change that it's a tragedy - but as yet, I am not convinced it was a bomb or any kind of enemy action: first off, there were claims that the pilot had requested permission for an emergency landing, at al Arish (on the coast in the North, where there's an airport) having reported technical trouble: but that doesn't seem to have been mentioned.

And what about the possibility of, say, lithium batteries catching fire and exploding: it's been known on cargo planes before, hence the heavy restrictions now for shpping them, even within the UK - no-one seems to have considered the fact that it could have been something within the luggage that was there "legitimately" in someone's bag.

[cee-dee]

It's all gone quiet on this front? Wonder why?

What I can't understand is why there's been no definitive and absolutely convincing reports as to whether or not a bomb was involved.

The bits of the plane are on relatively open land and easier to find than if the plane had crashed in to a built up area, in vegetation or water so the area around the cargo hold should be identifiable. That being so, once found how hard is it to "swab" the relevant parts for any trace of an explosive?

Other plane crashes have quickly had a bomb eliminated from the possible causes so why not this one?