metro jet. that has not been since 1819, many aircraft fly around the united states, so that shouldn t be a concern. those are the two aspects that will be crucial. i have no doubt. those will be crucial. was the aircraft properly maintained? and that is talk about high russianallyvation. russia has had a safety problem
were called by one of the pilots to the grounds. there were technical issues. first, let s talk about the reporting. is it credible to believe that that reporting would be accurate so soon after the crash to say that that would be public so soon after this crash? it is credible. whether it s confirmed or fought, that is something we can find out when the black box is released or we actually get the conversation between the pilots and ground control, air traffic control. so if he had actually requested the landing. that might rule out it being attacked by a missile. because it sounds so something might have gone technical. this is a rapidly changing story. now, the actual aircraft st. a work horse. many airlines have them and as we heard, this one was actually owned by other people and at the
through. for instance, the actual acre, itself, initial reports say it s an a-321, now egyptians say it was an airbus 380. i find that less likely with that number of passengers. so we have that level of confusion we have to be careful about. there there is this report of potential survivors, it came out at 31,000 feet. if you look at the rate of dissent of the aircraft, it s vertical rate of dissent, it seems highly unlikely there were survivors. again, that s the l. of confusion, then have you the effort of did the pilot make some calls saying that he was, there were technical problems or he had radio difficulties. that is not confirm. that is confusion this morning as well.
on radar, 31,000 and then gone? no, there is evidence of a precipitous dissent and you start in this case according to flight. the plane took off about 50 minutes not 58 past the hour. so it s about 18 to 20 minutes into the flight i believe when this incident took place. it s at 31,000 feet. it s in its initial crew s phase, which is an extremely safe phase of flight most incidents happen on takeoff and lanr landing. so for something to happen which brings down and fatally destroys aircraft is unusual. looking at the incomess as i see at the moment the plane gets to 33,000 feet.
end of the lease is they give up the leads and another aircraft operator will take it over. but all the time, these acre maintained to the highest standards because it s over, the owner demands it. i don t think it s a maintenance issue although i hear that again speculation, some of the crew are complaining about the condition of the architect. at the end of the day the captain has a rate to reject an aircraft, if he doesn t think it s fit to fly. so beyond the concerns about the maintenance of the aircraft are you seeing anything here, any other variables that would would point to or ask is that a red flag that the investigation should be concerned about? well, let us put it this way. it is a very, very difficult area. there is local insurgency there.