Egypt Air Flight 804 missing

[Derec]

Destabilize Egypt? It is still under military rule, pretty much since Mubarak stepped aside.

Well there was the relatively brief period (one year) where it was ruled by Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood.

 

[barbos]

Depends on their goals. If terrorists want to finish Egyptian tourism industry in order to destabilize Egypt then that particular plane is logical target.

Not really; The plane was half empty, and most of the passengers were Egyptians, not tourists. There are much better targets if you want to hit Egyptian tourism.

Why do you think it was half empty? because tourism industry is half dead in Egypt already. And terrorists have no way of knowing of how full plane would be anyway.

 

[bilby]

Not really; The plane was half empty, and most of the passengers were Egyptians, not tourists. There are much better targets if you want to hit Egyptian tourism.

Why do you think it was half empty? because tourism industry is half dead in Egypt already.

So there's not much point in attacking it, is there?

And terrorists have no way of knowing of how full plane would be anyway.

Sure they do; they can just catch the same flight a week earlier. Or even just watch how many people got on or off the same flight a week earlier.

MS804 was scheduled to arrive in Cairo at about 3am local time; It's probably amongst the least popular flights on the CDG-CAI route. Wednesday departures are the least popular day of the week. Most of the people who fly that service are business people, and people visiting relatives. Tourists more commonly fly to Alexandria rather than Cairo, they usually fly on a Friday or a weekend, and they typically choose arrival times during the day time. If you were targeting tourists, this flight would be a very poor choice.

 

[Derec]

Only if these two are the only two possible causes (they are not); and only if there is no other evidence than the raw statistics (there is)

All the other possible causes would have an even lesser probability.

Yeah, it COULD have. But the probability of an explosion in a pressurized aircraft at FL370 not being immediately catastrophic is very small.

(Much) smaller than a mechanical or electrical fault developing rapidly? I don't know ...

I am not trying to exclude terrorism. Indeed, I have been VERY careful not to exclude anything. But I assess the probability of terrorism as very small; and so it seems irrational to me that people are making the kinds of political statements that assume that terrorism is to blame - something that both of the two front-runners in the US presidential election campaign have done.

Given that a plane departing from Egypt (MetroJet 9268) was hit by terrorists recently that is not at all a ridiculous assumption.

A terrorist with the ability to get a bomb onto a plane in Paris would have a selection of far more impressive targets than a half full Egypt Air flight to Cairo, most of whose passengers are Egyptian nationals.

Perhaps.

Even a very small bomb would likely cause the immediate loss of telemetry from an aircraft at FL370 - the Lockerbie device was very small, and it cause the almost immediate disintegration of a 747 (a much larger aircraft than an A320). But we see four minutes of ACARS messages.

The Lockerbie device was very small, and if that Samsonite hadn't ended up (by happenstance) only 25" from the skin of the fuselage it would not have blown that big a hole in it. Had it been in a more centrally located baggage container it would not have blown a hole at all.

The ACARS reports smoke, but no depressurization; that's not really consistent with a bomb - and the first ACARS report is a cockpit window heater failure, which is consistent with a cockpit or avionics bay issue (including an ACARS failure), but not with a cargo or passenger cabin event.

According to somebody they interviewed on TV, the sensors can misreport a depressurization as smoke. Again, they have not excluded a bomb and thus I do not see why we should either.

The CVR/DFDR will probably tell the full story; but it will be a while before those are recovered, and longer still before they are examined and the contents made public. Nothing can be ruled out at this early stage, but if I was a gambling man, I would have my money on a wiring fault leading to a fire in an inaccessible location.

I think it's up in the air. I would not want to put any money on it either way right now.

 

[bilby]

All the other possible causes would have an even lesser probability.

Nope. Pilot error is responsible for over 50% of fatal crashes. As I posted earlier in the thread:

For fatal crashes worldwide in aircraft with 19 or more passengers, in the period 2000 - 2010, where the cause is known, the broad causes and their frequency were:

Pilot Error - 57%
Mechanical Failure - 22%
Sabotage/Terrorism - 9%
Human error, non-pilot - 6%
Weather - 6%
(source)

Your guess was that terrorism has a 33% chance of being the cause based on your mangling of the raw statistics I presented; the real number is 9%. 33% is a VERY significant overestimate. In short, when you said

"Half as common" would mean terrorism would still have 1/3 probability.

you were quite simply wrong.

Yeah, it COULD have. But the probability of an explosion in a pressurized aircraft at FL370 not being immediately catastrophic is very small.

(Much) smaller than a mechanical or electrical fault developing rapidly? I don't know ...

I know you don't. I am not sure why your admitted ignorance is supposed to bolster your position though.

I am not trying to exclude terrorism. Indeed, I have been VERY careful not to exclude anything. But I assess the probability of terrorism as very small; and so it seems irrational to me that people are making the kinds of political statements that assume that terrorism is to blame - something that both of the two front-runners in the US presidential election campaign have done.

Given that a plane departing from Egypt (MetroJet 9268) was hit by terrorists recently that is not at all a ridiculous assumption.

No, it's not ridiculous. Just highly irresponsible, particularly given the significant differences between the two incidents. For one thing, the MetroJet bombing was quickly claimed by ISIS as their responsibility; if the same group attacked MS804, why are they keeping so quiet this time around?

A terrorist with the ability to get a bomb onto a plane in Paris would have a selection of far more impressive targets than a half full Egypt Air flight to Cairo, most of whose passengers are Egyptian nationals.

Perhaps.

Even a very small bomb would likely cause the immediate loss of telemetry from an aircraft at FL370 - the Lockerbie device was very small, and it cause the almost immediate disintegration of a 747 (a much larger aircraft than an A320). But we see four minutes of ACARS messages.

The Lockerbie device was very small, and if that Samsonite hadn't ended up (by happenstance) only 25" from the skin of the fuselage it would not have blown that big a hole in it. Had it been in a more centrally located baggage container it would not have blown a hole at all.

How do you know this? Citation Needed.

The ACARS reports smoke, but no depressurization; that's not really consistent with a bomb - and the first ACARS report is a cockpit window heater failure, which is consistent with a cockpit or avionics bay issue (including an ACARS failure), but not with a cargo or passenger cabin event.

According to somebody they interviewed on TV, the sensors can misreport a depressurization as smoke. Again, they have not excluded a bomb and thus I do not see why we should either.

"Somebody they interviewed on TV" is only slightly more reliable as a source than "a guy I met in the pub".

Some smoke detectors can be triggered by depressurization events, particularly in cargo holds, where the dust gets stirred up; or at early flight stages when cabin humidity is still high (not the case here). This fact actually weakens your position - only two detectors reported via ACARS, and their reports were not simultaneous. A depressurization event would likely have triggered other smoke detectors, and would also have triggered the systems designed to detect low cabin pressure, plus a whole battery of other systems. That ACARS report should be far busier if there was a sudden depressurization at the start of the incident. What it says is suggestive; but what it does NOT say is quite telling.

The CVR/DFDR will probably tell the full story; but it will be a while before those are recovered, and longer still before they are examined and the contents made public. Nothing can be ruled out at this early stage, but if I was a gambling man, I would have my money on a wiring fault leading to a fire in an inaccessible location.

I think it's up in the air. I would not want to put any money on it either way right now.

Well it is certainly far more complex than 'Aircraft + Muslims = Terrorism', which seems to be the prevailing (and rather stupid) attitude, particularly amongst US commentators and politicians. Americans really need to grow a pair - it's been 15 years since 9/11, and yet you guys are still disproportionately terrified of jihadists; It's been 25 years since the end of the cold war, and yet you are still so terrified of communism that a moderate like Bernie Sanders has you all quaking in your boots; And many of you dare not even go to a school play, or to see a movie, without hiding a gun in your sock for the purpose of 'self defense'. What the fuck happened to the 'Home of the Brave' thing you used to have going? Is that even still a thing? It seems to me that the people who most lament how 'soft' America is getting, are the ones who are in fact shit-scared of trivial threats. You have nothing to fear, save fear itself.

 

[barbos]

Why do you think it was half empty? because tourism industry is half dead in Egypt already.

So there's not much point in attacking it, is there?

It was half-full and flying. So there is a lot of point in attacking it.

And terrorists have no way of knowing of how full plane would be anyway.

Sure they do; they can just catch the same flight a week earlier. Or even just watch how many people got on or off the same flight a week earlier.

MS804 was scheduled to arrive in Cairo at about 3am local time; It's probably amongst the least popular flights on the CDG-CAI route. Wednesday departures are the least popular day of the week.

It does not matter, their goal is not to kill as much people as possible, their goal is to shut down tourism.

Most of the people who fly that service are business people, and people visiting relatives. Tourists more commonly fly to Alexandria rather than Cairo, they usually fly on a Friday or a weekend, and they typically choose arrival times during the day time. If you were targeting tourists, this flight would be a very poor choice.

Does not matter, as long as tourists are scared (and they are) terrorists are happy.

 

[bilby]

The ACARS messages remind me of this:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2500360/ao-2009-027%20final.doc

HISTORY OF THE FLIGHT
On 10 June 2009 at 1205 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), an Australian registered Airbus 330-202 aircraft, VH-EBF, operated by Jetstar Airways, departed Kansai International Airport, Osaka, Japan on a scheduled passenger transport service to Gold Coast Airport, Queensland. On board the aircraft were 185 passengers, 13 cabin crew and two flight crew (captain and copilot). Two other pilots were also onboard as observers and were seated behind the flight crew.
The flight crew reported to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) that the departure, climb-out and initial cruise from Osaka was normal, with the aircraft established at the assigned flight level of FL390 (39,000 ft) by 1235.
At 1523, approximately 3 hours and 17 minutes into the flight, the flight crew noticed a burning odour on the flight deck. The captain called the cabin service manager by intercom to establish whether the smell was coming from the passenger cabin. The report from the cabin manager indicated there was a burning smell evident, but neither smoke nor a detectable source was able to be identified. When the aircraft was approximately 427 km to the south-west of Guam, an ECAM message was displayed to the flight crew, indicating cautions regarding the right windshield heating system. The captain assumed control of the aircraft from the copilot, and instructed the copilot to commence the ECAM actions.
At 1524, immediately following the conversation with the cabin manager, there was a loud bang and a bright flash of light in the flight deck, followed by a small amount of smoke. The crew then observed a small fire in the bottom right corner of the right windshield (Figure 1). The flight crew and the observing pilots immediately donned their oxygen masks and conducted the ‘windshield heat abnormal’ procedure.
Despite these actions the fire continued. The copilot initially attempted to smother the fire by using heat resistant gloves that were located on the flight deck. This attempt was unsuccessful. The copilot then used a portable fire extinguisher by applying several short bursts to the area of the fire. This action extinguished the fire.

OTHER WINDSHIELD EVENTS
Following the occurrence involving VH-EBF, the ATSB was alerted to several other incidents also associated with electrical arcing and burning from the vicinity of the windshield connectors on Airbus A320 and A330 aircraft. Three of the failures are summarised below.

All Nippon Airways: On 19 May 2009, during cruise at 37,000 ft, the flight crew of a Japanese-registered A320 aircraft reported that a loud ‘bang’ was heard followed by the immediate observation of sparks and smoke from the left windshield. In response, the pilots put on oxygen masks per the ‘Smoke/Fumes/Avionics Smoke’ checklist and continued the flight.

Asiana Airlines: On 2 July 2009, the flight crew of a South Korean-registered Airbus A330 aircraft reported a burning smell and electrical arcing around the right windshield heating connector. The aircraft manufacturer reported that ‘power to the windshield heater was cut by the WHC’. The aircraft operator reported that the post-flight report recorded a ‘R WSHLD/WHC 2 fault, with the corresponding ECAM message ‘A.ICE R WSHLD HEAT’. After landing, that windshield was also sent to the component manufacturer (see section titled Additional testing).

Sichuan Airlines: On 9 August 2009, 21 minutes after takeoff, the flight crew of a Chinese-registered Airbus A320 aircraft reported a burning smell and electrical arcing near the left windshield heating connector. The A.ICE L WINDOW HEAT ECAM message was triggered and a portable fire extinguisher was used in the vicinity of the windshield connector. That windshield was subsequently removed from the aircraft and sent to the component manufacturer for examination (see section titled Additional testing).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Destabilize Egypt? It is still under military rule, pretty much since Mubarak stepped aside.

Well there was the relatively brief period (one year) where it was ruled by Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood.

No there wasn't. The military was always in control. You folk seemed to have thought MB was, but that was never the case.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Say a plane leaving from Egypt wouldn't be surprising. A plane leaving London, Paris, Berlin would be surprising.

Should not be. You can bring a bomb through some Egypt airport and then board some plane transit through Berlin and give it to your accomplice in Berlin airport transit zone.

A terrorist with the ability to get a bomb onto a plane in Paris would have a selection of far more impressive targets than a half full Egypt Air flight to Cairo, most of whose passengers are Egyptian nationals.

Depends on their goals. If terrorists want to finish Egyptian tourism industry in order to destabilize Egypt then that particular plane is logical target.

Destabilize Egypt? It is still under military rule, pretty much since Mubarak stepped aside.

Egypt is economically dependent on tourists from Europe and Russia. Russia had been out before this last crash but they were talking about resuming. If it turn out this is terrorism then tourism would not get resumed.

Occam's Razor?

 

[barbos]

Occam's Razor?

Occam just called and said terrorists

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Occam's Razor?

Occam just called and said terrorists

Wow... yes, terrorists who are trying to stop economic benefits from tourism, by blowing up a plane with mainly Muslim passengers flying back to Cairo.

Yes, Occam's Razor states that radical terrorists would expose their ability to plant a bomb on a plane in a Paris airport, by targeting a half empty flight of mainly Muslims to Cairo.

Yeah, that makes so much sense.

You know why I'm afraid to fly? It isn't terrorists. It is the 30,000 feet of potential energy between me and oblivion. And the only thing keeping me from dying is a thin shell of aluminum, faith in the proper maintenance of the plane, and the pilot.

 

[barbos]

Occam just called and said terrorists

Wow... yes, terrorists who are trying to stop economic benefits from tourism, by blowing up a plane with mainly Muslim passengers flying back to Cairo.

Why is it bothering you? it never bothered islamic terrorists.

Yes, Occam's Razor states that radical terrorists would expose their ability to plant a bomb on a plane in a Paris airport, by targeting a half empty flight of mainly Muslims to Cairo.

Yeah, that makes so much sense.

it's a good time to expose as any

You know why I'm afraid to fly? It isn't terrorists. It is the 30,000 feet of potential energy between me and oblivion. And the only thing keeping me from dying is a thin shell of aluminum, faith in the proper maintenance of the plane, and the pilot.

Flew to Egypt lately?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Wow... yes, terrorists who are trying to stop economic benefits from tourism, by blowing up a plane with mainly Muslim passengers flying back to Cairo.

Why is it bothering you? it never bothered islamic terrorists.

Because presumption isn't helpful.

Yes, Occam's Razor states that radical terrorists would expose their ability to plant a bomb on a plane in a Paris airport, by targeting a half empty flight of mainly Muslims to Cairo.

Yeah, that makes so much sense.

it's a good time to expose as any

You are seriously suggesting the terror cell would waste such a bold opportunity as such?

You know why I'm afraid to fly? It isn't terrorists. It is the 30,000 feet of potential energy between me and oblivion. And the only thing keeping me from dying is a thin shell of aluminum, faith in the proper maintenance of the plane, and the pilot.

Flew to Egypt lately?

Wow. I'm just glad Putin recognized the plane crashed, so that you could be having this fruitful conversation, otherwise, you'd be railing about how the Americans are lying about the plane crashing.

 

[barbos]

Why is it bothering you? it never bothered islamic terrorists.

Because presumption isn't helpful.

Yes, Occam's Razor states that radical terrorists would expose their ability to plant a bomb on a plane in a Paris airport, by targeting a half empty flight of mainly Muslims to Cairo.

Yeah, that makes so much sense.

it's a good time to expose as any

You are seriously suggesting the terror cell would waste such a bold opportunity as such?

You know why I'm afraid to fly? It isn't terrorists. It is the 30,000 feet of potential energy between me and oblivion. And the only thing keeping me from dying is a thin shell of aluminum, faith in the proper maintenance of the plane, and the pilot.

Flew to Egypt lately?

Wow. I'm just glad Putin recognized the plane crashed, so that you could be having this fruitful conversation, otherwise, you'd be railing about how the Americans are lying about the plane crashing.

What does that have to do with Putin?

 

[ronburgundy]

Occam's Razor?

Occam just called and said terrorists

Terrorists is definitely not the simplest explanation.

 

[iolo]

We pay for education to suit the bosses, who don't, obviously.

 

[Artemus]

Unfortunately, with the rampant speculation from the press and the need for people have an instantaneous answer, most Americans are going to believe this was terrorism no matter what the real cause is ultimately found to be. The attention span of the public is way too short to even the notice the actual report when it comes out.

 

[Elixir]

Occam just called and said terrorists

Terrorists is definitely not the simplest explanation.

Occam is an ignorant neo-con redneck.

 

[RavenSky]

Why hasn't this alleged terrorist group claimed responsibility?

In the past week, over 200 people have been killed in multiple small terrorist attacks in Iraq alone... and Isis cells immediately claimed responsibility in all of those attacks.

That is part of the point of 'terror attacks'... to terrorize people about the power of XYZ group to make random innocents very very dead.

So what terror group is it that bombed this plane but is keeping their accomplishment a big secret?

 

[TSwizzle]

Unfortunately, with the rampant speculation from the press and the need for people have an instantaneous answer, most Americans are going to believe this was terrorism no matter what the real cause is ultimately found to be. The attention span of the public is way too short to even the notice the actual report when it comes out.

Agreed. Most Americans are baseball watching, gun toting, inbred, ignorant dumb fuckers so that is is the natural conclusion most of them will come to after watching Faux News all day.