Metrojet crash Eygpt

[Kulverstukas]

there was also a pre-order duty free service so i hope that has been looked into if any such orders were on-loaded at SSH

AFAIK duty-free uplifted in DME

Kulverstukas maybe knows more on the type of catering actually on board?

I have no reason to doubt link you provided to Metrojet own site, but last year traveler reports shows hot meals on SSH-LED leg. Also it was Egyptian catering IIRC.

[gcal]

A great many airlines have cut back on security of late and many rely heavily on their own or the destinations governments security requirements.
In this day and age you cannot do that and if that means a few extra pounds/euro or whatever on the price of a ticket then so be it.
There should be strong systems in place to ensure that the money is in fact spent on security - no return to the faux security of the pre PA103 days.

[Ian W]

Originally Posted by Kulverstukas

Besides that Russian police investigates such possibility, it's greatly unlikely as it was return charter with mostly families aboard. Crew is highly unlikely too as it's small airline and staff is well paid in industry so rotation is quite small.

As was said earlier, a member of the cleaning crew would have found it easiest to plant the can, if the can was under a seat in the cabin and say up against the cabin wall. All the passenger searching is useless if the airside staff are compromised.

[gcal]

The security that the pax see, the basic screening at the an airport, should and in some locations is, the tip of the security iceberg.
Most screening the pax see is there, pretty much always, to satisfy the politicians and press. It looks as if something is being done.

The behind the scenes security is, in some places, and should be in all the most important part. Or, at very least co-exist with the more obvious.

[FDMII]

Originally Posted by gcal

A great many airlines have cut back on security of late . . ..

What, and where is the evidence for such a statement? Are you a security expert currently involved and knowledgeable and can support such a statement?

[bud leon]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcal View Post
A great many airlines have cut back on security of late . . ..
What, and where is the evidence for such a statement? Are you a security expert currently involved and knowledgeable and can support such a statement?
22nd Nov 2015 01:04

Yes, I don't think this is the case, nor do I think there is an argument that the statistical risk of dying in an aircraft terrorist event is significantly different to what it ever has been in the last 50 years. Actually the risk of dying in a terrorist event anywhere is incredibly small. The industry should continue to invest resources in technological safety systems and ensure that pilot training and support is maintained. Any redirection of resources would be misplaced.

[FDMII]

Originally Posted by bud leon

Yes, I don't think this is the case, nor do I think there is an argument that the statistical risk of dying in an aircraft terrorist event is significantly different to what it ever has been in the last 50 years. Actually the risk of dying in a terrorist event anywhere is incredibly small. The industry should continue to invest resources in technological safety systems and ensure that pilot training and support is maintained. Any redirection of resources would be misplaced.

Even as constituents of an explosive device are discussed, in the larger picture (as introduced above), Kahneman is relevant here.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by Sober Lark

My main concern is the method of delivery of the bomb and what can be done to reduce risk of recurrence.

In support of your point, completely. The unknown may have an impact on the industry.

I reduced my travel not long after 9-11 because the industry became insufferable and I remember so well when air travel was something I looked forward to. (Not to mention the government add on farces that they call "security" at airports). It wasn't because I was afraid the plane carrying me would blow up. (Most recent trip was to Canada last year and to SF this spring, family trips I could not get out of, and I will say in defense of Northwest and Southwest respectively that they did a good job and were basically good to us).

Since the Metrojet incident, and the reports of some planes turning back in the past few days seemingly related (were they? hard to say) to what's going on in Syria and France at the moment, four people I know have cancelled business trips and one a personal travel via air. While IMO that is an overreaction, given odds and probabilities, once the what and how Metrojet was lost becomes more clear to the public, I suspect that the worries and fears will reduce.

The unknown bothers people in a lot of different ways.

[bud leon]

FDMII: Even as constituents of an explosive device are discussed, in the larger picture (as introduced above), Kahneman is relevant here.

Couldn't agree more.

[anartificialhorizon]

Original post by Lonewolf

You need to understand and tell your friends that this sort of over reaction ( not travelling by air) is what groups like ISIL want.

A parent at my daughters school recently told the school (very publically) that she was pulling her daughter out of a school trip to a show in London, because of fears over terrorism.

To put risks into perspective, in 2013, 1713 people died on Britains roads. I don't see many people refusing to get in cars, cross the road or take the bus.

The risks of being caught up in the ground or the air are almost negligible.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by anartificialhorizon

You need to understand and tell your friends that this sort of over reaction ( not travelling by air) is what groups like ISIL want.

I understand just fine, thanks, and if you note from my post my decisions on flying have zero to do with the chance of blowing up. I do not choose to carry the industry's water for them, in re my friends and business associates. They are free to choose based on their own analysis.

A parent at my daughters school recently told the school (very publically) that she was pulling her daughter out of a school trip to a show in London, because of fears over terrorism.

I see stuff like that all the time, in a variety of venues. To be fair, I chose to NOT take the wife to Egypt in the late 90's thanks to the shoot up of the German tourist group. So maybe I fell for it in that case.

[oldoberon]

the comparison to annual road deaths is not valid.

If you were told a mentally disturbed homicidal maniac had stolen a 40 ton truck and was believed to be on the lower M1 or M25 would you go on the motorway in that area until situation was resolved.

It all depends on your perception of the NOW!

[anartificialhorizon]

Oldberon - "the comparison to annual road deaths is not valid".


Of course it is valid as it allows you assess risk and decide your actions.

From your example, if such an event happened you wouldnt venture onto said motorway until is was over. But would I go on that particular motorway the next day? YES, of course I would!!!!

I have to fly to accident sites, sometimes on a sister aircraft of the unfortunate aircraft that has come to grief. Do I hesitate? No. I think about it of course, but generally in life lightning does not strike twice... That's my assessment of the risk of getting on that sister aircraft.

Therefore not going to the theatre in London because of what happened at the Paris concert, or not getting on a plane because of Metrojet, is an over (albeit human) reaction.

[oldoberon]

being a sister ship may make no difference unless you already know the cause of said accident ie it is valid if mech/tech not valid if pilot, weather, however if you knew the cause be no point in going.

we will have to agree to differ.

[JamaicaJoe]

Assuming for the moment that it was not a terrorist explosive.

The A321 was subject of an AD pertaining to an APU explosion that removed the tail-cone and damaged the control surfaces of a plane parked at an airport. This was mentioned briefly by another poster. I think the AD is quite interesting in that this aircraft is of the vintage that would be affected.

[deanm]

APU?

JJ:

[1] APU normally not used in flight (so no reason it would take the tail off near TOC).

[2] The AD you refer to was issued in 2005, so 10 years have elapsed for the directive to have been complied with.

[3] Russia now acknowledging explosive residue - quite distinct signature from fuel-fed detonation.



Dean

[Kulverstukas]

The only piece that not fit in puzzle will be rupture of FDR recording. Cables are at the right side, and any evolution you described are well into time frame of discretization on FDR.

Except if, however, information about FDR was correct.

PS: source of bomb placement is LifeNews but it was not reprinted by any major media yesterday.

PPS: Even "yellow" LifeNews has enough heart to not disclose name of 30A occupant, even less to post photo with "Too young to die ... Maria Ivleva.Source:Supplied" caption...

[Prada]

power cables

The only piece that not fit in puzzle will be rupture of FDR recording. Cables are at the right side, and any evolution you described are well into time frame of discretization on FDR.

I wonder where exactly power cables to FDR run? Left side?

[Kulverstukas]

Both recorders placed right side in the HS compartment.

[Machinbird]

The only piece that not fit in puzzle will be rupture of FDR recording. Cables are at the right side, and any evolution you described are well into time frame of discretization on FDR.

Just a reminder of how the tail came off, the blast appears to have caused an instantaneous transverse failure across the crown of the fuselage at a frame forward of the aft doors.
If the wires transited that area, and were not already destroyed by blast debris further forward, the separation of the fuselage would have parted the wires. Wires just do not stretch.