Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SEVERAL SCENARIOS COULD explain the mysterious disappearance of the Egyptair flight between Paris to Cairo early this morning, but experts say a terrorist attack is the most likely.
Both France and Egypt have been leading targets for Islamist extremists in recent months.
In October, the Islamic State group claimed responsibility for bombing an A321 plane belonging to Russian charter company Metrojet that crashed into the Sinai desert on its way from the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh to St Petersburg, killing 224 passengers and crew.
Safety record
Experts say the chances of a mechanical malfunction in the case of today’s Egyptair disappearance are slim.
“A major technical fault – the explosion of a motor, for instance – seems improbable,” said aeronautics expert Gerard Feldzer, underlining that the A320 in question was “relatively new”, having entered service in 2003.
In addition, the A320 has an excellent safety record as the best-selling, medium-range airliner in the world. An A320 takes off or lands every 30 seconds around the world, Feldzer said.
“It’s a modern plane, the incident happened in mid-flight in extremely stable conditions. The quality of the maintenance and the quality of the plane are not in question in this incident,” Jean-Paul Troadec, former director of France’s aviation Bureau of Investigation and Analysis, told Europe 1 radio.
Egyptair “is a company with authorisation to operate in Europe, so it is not on any blacklist,” he added.
Experts also say it is unlikely that the plane was shot down from the ground, as was the case with the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 that went down over Ukraine in July 2014, or from the sea as occurred in July 1988 when the US Navy blew up an Iran Air passenger flight by mistake.
The Egyptair plane was flying at 37,000 feet (11,000 metres) and disappeared about 130 nautical miles off the Greek island of Karpathos.
That would put it out of reach of portable rocket launchers used by several militant groups in the Middle East.
“We cannot exclude the possibility that it was shot down by another aircraft by mistake, but it is likely we would already know,” said Feldzer.
The region around northern Egypt, including the Israeli and Gazan coastlines, is “one of the most monitored regions in the world, including by satellite. It would be very difficult to hide this kind of information,” he added.
No distress signal
That leaves a terrorist attack as the most likely possibility, not least because it appears that no distress signal was sent from the aircraft.
“A technical problem, a fire or a motor malfunction, doesn’t cause an instantaneous accident and the crew has time to react,” said Troadec.
“Here, the crew didn’t say anything.”
If a bombing is established, the question for investigators will be how a device was smuggled aboard a flight taking off from France’s busiest airport, Paris Charles de Gaulle, where security has been on high alert since last year’s jihadist attacks in the French capital.
“A bomb placed on board at Roissy or in Cairo is always possible because it’s difficult to make your airport 100 percent watertight, even in an airport with such tight surveillance as Roissy (Charles de Gaulle),” said Feldzer.
“The first thing to do is to recover debris that will give us some indications on the accident… to see if there are any traces of explosives.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Article Title: “Terrorism most likely explanation for flight shot down over Egypt”.
Article : “Experts also say it is unlikely that the plane was shot down and was likely a terrorism attack”.
Right…
So it wasn’t shot down or it was? Some reviewing needed here before pressing the publish button.
Minor stuff compared to the severity of the article, and the wave of terrorism that the world is currently experiencing.
But journalistic accuracy important none the less!
This is an article that deserves a comment along the lines of “duh!”. Remember the Paris bombings, 70 airport workers were found to be extremists and had their security clearance revolved. Tip of the iceberg. There is no safety in Europe as long as there are open borders and Muslim apologist useful idiots who condemn as leg image concerns as racism, no matter how many atrocities are committed on European soil they will always be blamed on the “tiny” minority which is in fact not tiny at all.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12048335/Seventy-Paris-airport-workers-have-security-passes-revoked-over-extremism-fears.html
So just to be clear. They issue 85,000 security clearances (as per the article). 70 are revoked. Therefore your suggestion is to close the borders and remove all Muslims is it? Disclaimer: Not a radicalised Muslim. Disclaimer 2: Not a Muslim apologist idiot
I find the following an easy – read, accessible guide that may help you in forming more solid arguments in the future: http://www.logicalfallacies.info
70 revolked. I also said Tip of the iceberg as time will tell.
…..and it only takes one with “security clearance” to put a bomb on board. And how did the 70 get security clearance in the first place. And how many more are there that haven’t been identified. Opening Europe’s borders is a risk not worth taking. Too many radicalised loopers who seek nothing but destruction living among so called moderates who know but will never tell.
If you’ve had the misfortune to fly to Paris recently, you’ll know that “open borders” means waiting for over an hour in passport control (there’s your security threat, right there). Even if you let nobody in at all, there are over six million French born Muslims.
“The tip of the iceberg”… what iceberg? That’s exactly what I’m banging on about. Scaremongering. Similarly “as time will tell” adds no force to your argument as I am unsure what exactly it will tell.
Rory apart from sounding and looking like a Condescending short arse let me know when you are rushing out to fly to the Egypt I doubt your smug delivery of stats in favour of Muslims, will do much to calm the nerves of the beauty on your arm, who i would imagine would have to be drag onto a flight screaming to the ME, no doubt you can find her an easy – read, accessible in flight-guide that may help her in forming more solid arguments on why she is terrified to fly in the future:
I read the article you embedded in your initial comment. They had all received police clearance prior to security clearance. Your comment is a wonderful opinion piece but there is nothing factual or useful contained in it. It’s emotive and persuasive initially, but there’s no substance to it.
Eddie great work. Love it. Nice few digs in there. Some outlandish suggestions too. When people try to become personal it’s clear they haven’t anything rational to provide as a response. I see nothing in your comment that you can substantiate.
Rory, Marge’s solution to any problem is close the borders and remove all Muslims.
@Rory. You seem to set the bar on this thread very high except for yourself. In your first post you say nothing at all in response to my post except attack and then attribute to me comments which I did not say. Straw man arguments, the stuff of a debater with nothing of substance at all. And yes you are a condescending tw@t but so what. Useful idiot types are brainwashed and cannot reason. Their smugness and self righteousness are the only weapons in their arsenal because the indefensible can’t be defended except by attack.
What comments did you not say
Show me where I said “Deport all Muslims”.
Oh I’m sorry I picked you up wrong. So you would stop letting new ones in but keep the current ones.
Useful idiot perhaps?
Ben
“Open borders means an hour queue at passport” if the borders where open why would there be passport control?
Lotta Donald Trump types around these comment sections these days
OK Rory apologies for any personal digs – you sound like a decent guy – i am normally only 50% an assh0le, i have being over achieving lately.
Joe
whats your problem with wig wearers
You got in one….this time.
It took just 13 to kill 3,000 on 9/11.
The fact that there were 70 in Paris is terrifying. Considering I’m heading to the Euros for three weeks
When will it end
Banana, Never! Unless you ship the jihadis out.
When will what end?
good man, bingo… a shining beacon of intelligence(!)
or raise our IQ levels up out of the negative and stop immediately jumping to “we have everything figured out: it was the muslims and/or the unemployed what dunnit”
Joe, Firstly, I’m a woman. Secondly, only an idiot would want jihadis in their country. If you’d be happy to have a jihadi living next door to you – I reckon you’re the one who’s not that bright! Thirdly, NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE JIHADIS JOE and I never said they were.
Whatever, bingo… your comment was about as clever as “we need to punish criminals” only you took aim at Muslims by replacing ‘criminals’ with ‘jihadis’ so your clarification there is pointless.
Person1: “When will the violence stop?”
Person2: “Just as soon as we get rid of the last violent person”
With that, Person2 walks off with a smug grin as they dust their hands off and proclaim proudly to themselves “My work here is done”
Why did i think you were a man….
Why did I think you were a man too.
Joe, Should we not lock up criminals!? Lets be clear – I do think we should deport foreign criminals…and…if we could deport Irish criminals (serious criminals) to an island somewhere – I’d do that as well. As for this lazy assumption that when I say jihadis I actually mean all Muslims – I absolutely don’t. But, let me ask you a question Joe. If this was a terrorist attack – who do ‘you’ think the likely culprits are?
Peter/Marg, I have no idea why people assume I’m a man and I find it really weird!
Patrick, Yes it’s an enlightening book – I’ve read good portions of it – must go back and read the Zakat portion which I haven’t read! I’ve tried to find others law books in full in english but haven’t had any luck – if you come across any – you might let me know.
@Bingo, I suppose it’s because Bingo sounds masculine (having the O instead of the feminine A). In the absence of any other clue, the default assumption is male. Anyway, good to know!
@bingo……will do bingo.
Bingo…i think its because you give the impression that you are knowledgeable……
Ah Peter! Women can be knowledgeable – and not only by impression – they can actually be knowledgeable.
Bingo…just teasing you!!!!!!!
TBH Bingo, I think that was a back handed compliment.
bingo…
Yes, absolutely, we should lock up criminals. We should also nurse the sick and help the elderly.
Can I ask ‘you’ a question or two now? Who exactly are these jihadis we need to ship out? Do we know who they all are? Do we have a list of particular people to ship out or should we build one based on ‘who is more likely to be one’ and and pick deportees according to this likelihood? What do we look at to inform our opinions? Hair colour? Country of origin? Numbers of likely jihadists in countries of origin? We already know which countries we see plastered all over the news every day so should we just start shipping out everyone from those countries or what?
If you mean ship out any found guilty of such crimes, then yes I fully agree with you; but I don’t think you meant that.
Also… you call it a “lazy assumption” and then go on to prove it exactly correct with your next line.
Your whole point is basically “I’m not sayin’ all Muslims are bad… but it was most likely Muslims that did this and we need to ship out the jihadis to stop this”.
So maybe you “absolutely don’t” mean all Muslims… but you still think the first thing we need to do is ship out some Muslims. (Sorry… just “the jihadis”).
Women can absolutely be very knowledgeable. As can men. In both cases, though, it wouldn’t be a fair generalisation to say that they all are.
Planning a holiday in Egypt after summer, cheap as chips at the minute.
Wow, there’s black humour, then there is just plain insensitivity.
So if somebody makes it lnown that they are intent on carrying on life as normal instead of letting the terrorists win, that’s black humour now?
So long as an inflatable bomb disposal suit doesn’t chafe the margin!
@Will
Have a fs
@Will
Have a fairly black sense of humour myself to be fair, but that’s not what was intended with the comment.
You should amend the headline journal.ie
You should amend your forehead..
They have a wreckage, just being reported.
Until the evidence is found there is only going to be speculation. What I find strange, if it is a bomb, was why wait so long to detonate.
Was it symbolic upon entering Egyptian airspace? Was it premature, and meant to simulate a ground to air missile strike? Why not detonate over France and cause possible ground casualties?
As someone who flies regularly to Africa I can only imagine the pain and grief of relatives, my thoughts go out to them. I hope there are answers soon, to begin the process of healing for them.
What a shame, the Jerusalem Post only reported a couple of days ago how Egyptian president Abdel Fatah al-Sisi made an impromptu appeal to kick start the peace proce between Israel and the Palestinians.
“If by our combined efforts and real desire, we can all achieve a solution to this problem and find hope for the Palestinians and security for the Israelis, history will write a new page that will be no less and might even be more of an achievement than the signing of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel forty years ago,” Sisi said during a speech in the southern city of Assiut.
A terrible and unfortunate coincidence for Israeli prime minister Nuttyahoo who will in all likelihood not have to go now. Seems this proposal will be shelved indefinitely.
And yet Sisi goes on blockading Gaza, there would be no blockade without him.
But he really does care about the Palestinians, he even said so himself!
The plane which entered service in 2003 is described as ‘relatively new’.
Hate to know how old the other planes are.
There are Boeing B707s built in 1957 still flying. That’s old!
Too old for Irish insurance companies anyway.
There are still DC3′s built during WW2 that are flying commercially. Funnily enough, they’re often used in rough environments where the ruggedness of the 75 year old design is still in demand.
@jason. Like where? And what commercial purpose? Serious question.
Buffalo Airways flies 9 DC3 in Northern Canada where their design is particularly suited to passenger and cargo flights in the cold and rough environment. There’s also a number of other operators running one or two for skydiving, cargo and passenger services.
Daniel
European fleets are up to about 25 years with a lot of aircraft older. Outside of Europe typical about 40 years
Thanks!
Ye thanks for those lovely red thumbs! But I’m glad I learned something new.
The B-52 Stratofortress bombers which were built in 1952 and entered active service with the USAF in 1955 are still in active service and are expected to serve into the 2040′s.
Al…A B-52 burned out in Guam today….
Islamic terrorists
@Rowe@bingo ….. Terrorists fueled by ZAKAT cotributions! Will this comment be deleted as well or hacked out? The truth hurts too deep for whoever……..
It suits all connected with the airline industry to blame a bomb otherwise
Mollrnbeek…
Egypt,Russia and France say terrorism….
It suits all connected with the airline industry to blame a bomb otherwise this type of aircraft would be grounded world wide that’s why they jump to conclusions
It’s an A320 from 2003, they wouldn’t ground an entire type that has been in service for years due to a 13 year old aircraft crashing. They mainly only do this with brand new aircraft designs like the Boeing 787 when there’s a chance that it could be a design-wide fault.
Unless it turned out to be a massive fault which all A320′s are prone to but this is highly unlikely given the age and sheer number of A320′s that are in service.
Burke
The A320 is one of the most flown aircraft in the world. It’s not going to be grounded
Planes have crashed before without blame being put on terrorism. They didn’t ground all those types of aircraft.
have your say