|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Many questions raised by Egyptair Flight 990 crash
By Martin McLaughlin
2 November 1999
Use
this version to print
The crash of an Egyptair passenger jet early Sunday morning,
apparently killing all 217 people on board, raises troubling issues,
both in relation to the safety of airplane manufacturing and airline
operations, and to the possibility of a cover-up of aspects of
the disaster by the US and Egyptian governments.
The crash of Egyptair Flight 990 was the third such tragedy
in three years for a passenger jet taking off from John F. Kennedy
Airport in New York City for a transatlantic flight. It follows
the June 1996 explosion which destroyed TWA Flight 800, in which
230 died, and Swissair Flight 111, which crashed into the Atlantic
in September 1998, while trying to make an emergency landing in
Halifax, Nova Scotia, killing 229 people.
All three jets were built by Boeing, although they were different
models. TWA Flight 800 was a Boeing 747 and the Swissair jet was
an MD-11, built by McDonnell-Douglas before it was taken over
by Boeing. The Egyptair jet was a Boeing 767.
While more than 1,000 flights a day originate at Kennedy, many
of them taking the transatlantic route, the loss of three flights
in three years with a combined death toll of 676 inevitably suggests
that there are unexamined problems with airline operations there.
No other airport in the world has had such a series of disasters.
While in most air crashes there is some indication beforehand
of mechanical difficulty or human error, suggesting a probable
cause, both the TWA and Egyptair flights crashed suddenly in nearly
the same location, without any communication from the pilots indicating
anything was amiss. The TWA flight exploded in mid-air. The Egyptair
flight apparently did not explode, but went into a sudden and
catastrophic dive. During the 36 seconds in which the plane plunged
20,000 feet, the pilots said nothing to ground control.
While the American media has been relatively restrained about
the disastertaking its cue from the Clinton administration
and the FBIthe Egyptian and European press carried numerous
reports suggesting possible causes for the crash.
Egyptian press suggested peculiar weather conditions in the
region, noting that the Egyptair jet crashed very close to the
site of the crashes of TWA Flight 800 and the private plane piloted
by John F. Kennedy Jr. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a close
ally of the US government, said that the two accidents in the
same area make him question whether or not the air routes should
be changed.
"There may be something in the atmosphere or weather conditions
may be sometimes very tough there," he said. "So I think
it should be investigated by the United States and if it is needed
to change the routes, the airways, depending on the discussions
and the assessment of the situation in this part of the world."
The editor-in-chief of Al-Gomhuriya newspaper, Samir
Ragab, a confidant of Mubarak, wrote that Washington should investigate
suggestions that a US missile test may have caused the TWA disaster.
The US authorities should "wake up and reveal the secret
of these two disasters which happened in the same place,"
he said. "There have been persistent reports that the TWA
plane exploded because of a missile mistakenly fired from a land
base."
Reuters news agency reported that 30 Egyptian military officers
who had been receiving training in the United States were on board
the flight, including several as high-ranking as brigadier general.
Several were pilots training on US-supplied Apache attack helicopters.
The Egyptian government has forbidden the country's newspapers
to report the presence of the officers on the doomed plane, suggesting
that it has something to hide.
Reuters added, citing "aviation sources," that three
of the Egyptian officers had not been checked in on the passenger
manifest. This explains the discrepancy in the number of victims,
which press reports have given variously as 214 and 217. Television
reports Sunday morning, later denied by US officials, said that
the Egyptair flight, which began in Los Angeles, had made an unscheduled
stop at Edwards Air Force Base, in the Mojave Desert outside the
city, before proceeding on to New York.
This report, and the Egyptian censorship, raises a number of
possibilitiesthat the plane was targeted for attack because
of the large number of military officers on board, or that military
equipment or supplies may have been brought on board with them
and played a role in the disaster. The 767 jet had stopped at
Cairo, Newark, Los Angeles and Kennedy Airport during the 48 hours
prior to its destruction.
Another curious aspect of the tragedy is that the 767 which
crashed Sunday came off the assembly line at the Everett, Washington
plant in the fall of 1989 just before another 767, built for the
Austrian airline Lauda, which crashed in 1991 in Thailand. The
Lauda jet plummeted to earth catastrophically when its reverse
thrusters, used to slow the plane for landing, suddenly and unexpectedly
became activated. Some 223 people died in that crash. The two
jets are the only 767s to suffer catastrophic mechanical failure,
out of more than 750 in service.
The Everett plant was working such heavy overtime during 1989
that it produced widespread complaints from rank-and-file machinists,
ultimately sparking a 48-day strike which began October 4, 1989.
The Egyptair jet was delivered September 26, 1989, the 282nd to
be built, and the Lauda jet followed on October 16, 1989, the
283rd, with work completed by nonunion personnel after the strike
began.
Bill Johnson, president of the International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers local at the Everett plant, defended
the company against the suggestion that heavy overtime had contributed
to the disasters. He said it was ''highly improbable'' that stress
on workers had led to faulty construction. "You can be assured
that when that plane goes out the door it is of the utmost quality
that the flying public expects,'' Johnson told the press.
In a grisly irony, the Egyptair tragedy came less than two
days after it was revealed that Boeing had concealed from NTSB
officials investigating the TWA Flight 800 crash a report which
shows that the aircraft manufacturer was well aware of the dangers
of a fuel tank explosion in its 747 jets.
NTSB officials revealed October 29 that Boeing had failed to
turn over a four-volume report on the dangers of fuel-tank vapors
exploding in the military equivalent of the 747, the E-4B. They
said that if the report, drafted in 1980, had been provided to
them, the information would have directed them immediately to
the center fuel tank as the likely cause of the explosion.
As it was, NTSB and FBI investigators clashed repeatedly over
16 months, with the FBI insisting that the explosion was the result
of terrorism, before the preliminary conclusion was drawn that
a fuel tank explosion was the likely cause. Federal officials
learned of the report's existence in March 1999, and the four
volumes were not turned over to the NTSB until June.
In the TWA investigation, Boeing officials sided with the FBI
suspicions of sabotage, saying that there was no way that the
central fuel tank could get hot enough to create the conditions
for an explosion. But the 1980 report focused on the danger that
excess heat from air conditioners located next to the center fuel
tank could create highly flammable fuel vapors inside it. The
company recommended that the Air Force add insulation between
the air conditioning bay and the fuel tank, the same recommendation
made by the NTSB19 years later!as part of its investigation
into the TWA disaster.
Senator Charles Grassley, a conservative Republican from Iowa
who heads the subcommittee reviewing the TWA investigation, said
the report should had been released in 1990, after a Philippines
Airline Boeing 737 suffered a fuel-tank explosion in Manila. If
Boeing had done so, he said, the Flight 800 tragedy could have
been averted. "If the NTSB had been given the 1980 report
and others, it could have pressed the FAA to set the very standards
finally proposed this week for airplane fuel tanks."
See Also:
North America:
Airline Issues
[WSWS Full Coverage]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |