On alert

Initially reports from Egyptian officials stated the A321 had gone down in a mountainous region which was hard to get to whereas the reality was the crash site was dead flat.

Next there were comprehensive reports – again from Egyptian officials – saying that the pilot reported technical difficulties and wanted to make an emergency landing before losing contact with air traffic control.

Then that was denied.

Those errors were then followed by the sight of Egyptian politicians turning the tragedy into a photo opportunity while trampling over what might be critical evidence.

Within two days Alexander Smirnov, the deputy general director of Metrojet, said that he “ruled out a technical fault of the plane or a pilot error. The only explainable cause is physical impact on the aircraft,” he said.

That assertion was quickly contradicted by Alexander Neradko, the head of the Russian aviation agency who was in Cairo, according to The Guardian newspaper. Neradko told the Rossiya-24 news channel that it was premature to comment on the possible cause since investigators did not have enough data to reach any conclusions.

“The Egyptian commission is conducting the investigation and is giving no records and transcripts, be it of the flight recorders or on-ground recorders or radar data, to anyone,” Neradko said.

Subsequently it appears that Smirnov may be correct in that a bomb is the prime suspect in the disaster and that an airport insider could be the culprit.

And ISIS quickly claimed responsibility for the crash but at the date of publication provided no explanation of how that was achieved.

The crash investigators were the only people not commenting on the crash and they would be the ones in the best position to give an accurate assessment.

If terrorist activity is found to be the cause there were warnings.

A US Federal Aviation Administration Notice to Airmen, or NOTAM, told pilots in the region to “exercise extreme caution [when flying below a certain altitude]. . . due to ongoing violence, unrest, security operations and the risk to safety from small arms, rocket-propelled grenades, mortars, anti-aircraft fire and shoulder-fired, man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS). ”

It again would raise serious questions about airport security across the globe.

The British Foreign Office warned travellers in July of terrorist activity in the region but that warning like so many go unheaded by most travellers.

If a bomb is involved and an airport insider placed it on board the A321 this again would raise serious questions about airport security across the globe and even in Australia.

Currently the Australian Senate is conducting an inquiry into the scanning of passengers and their bags after a 2014 Seven West Media FOI investigation found that there had been almost 300 major security breaches at Australian airports since 2012.

Despite Australian airports using some of the most sophisticated scanning equipment in the world, the Office of Transport Security data showed that 282 breaches occurred between January 1 2012, and April 10 2014.

These included 62 counts of a breakdown in the scanning of passengers, 48 cases of prohibited items being found after screening and 38 relating to weapons found on planes or after screening.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the investigation was the revelation that a former airport employee had used an aviation security identification card to access the tarmac 50 times before being caught.

There was, however, a lighter side to the breaches involving frustrated passengers waiting for baggage.

In one incident, four passengers went on the tarmac through the baggage carousel, retrieved their bags and then loaded all the other bags on to the baggage belt.

But airport security is no laughing matter and if an insider proves to be the culprit in the Metrojet crash, agencies will have to rethink strategies.