I could not stop thinking about the crash of Malaysian flight MH17 in Ukraine. I was watching CNN when, at about 4pm, the news of an aircraft disappearing off the radar screen in Ukraine started filtering in. My immediate reaction was that it had been shot down by mistake, perhaps by an errant missile.

It was so surreal, another lost Malaysian Airlines aircraft and the same model with just about the same number of souls. This time, the majority of passengers where Europeans as distinct to Asians on flight MH370. The only consolation, if it could be considered so, was that we knew just about where it went down and it would eventually be located.

The investigations leading to this crash are still ongoing, from a distance and at a snail’s pace due to the area being a highly volatile dangerous war zone and also because access to the crash site is being hampered or curtailed.

Data extracted from the flight’s black boxes and shrapnel marks on the crashed fuselage all point towards a possible surface-to-air missile hit. To mind come a number of air crash investigation documentaries I have seen on Discovery channel and I can recollect a couple of instances when an aircraft had been downed by a missile.

One of them was an Iranian civilian aircraft shot at by a US destroyer which felt threatened after its radar systems mistakenly locked the aircraft’s flight transponder code onto that of an Iranian fighter jet flying nearby. The other was when a Korean aircraft was deemed to be spying while flying into Russian air space and was shot down.

The first one was deemed an error of judgement but the other was a deliberate act.

After thorough investigation, all other crashes were attributable to either a defect in aircraft design, human error or, unfortunately, bad repairs/maintenance.

The lessons gained from the investigation of these accidents constantly and incrementally led to improving the safety of flying through aircraft structure redesign, revised procedures or the implementation of new air traffic monitoring systems, notably TCAS (traffic collision avoidance system).

Therefore, the natural question that needs answering is this: how is it possible, after so many conflicts and just as many civilian aircraft crashes, that no one envisaged the terrible fate that awaited the poor passengers on flight MH17. Could it have been avoided?

Statistically it is stated that one stands a better chance of surviving flying than simply crossing a road. However, flight MH17 was overflying a war zone. I am not that convinced that flying over a war zone where readily available surface-to-air missiles are present was ever factored in the statisticians’ model. If it were, they reached a warped conclusion.

How many of us view the flight path before boarding a plane?

Numerous satellite systems encircle our globe and scan the earth’s surface for a multitude of reasons, some legitimate or beneficial and some not. Some assist weather forecasting, others map sea currents and there are those that eavesdrop and spy on us. It is a fact that countries maintain constant surveillance over each other’s affairs. Some of this is done for economic reasons but spying is also resorted to as a means of ensuring military superiority.

So, given all the advanced spying equipment available, how could the fact that a missile with the potential of downing a civilian aircraft was in the hands of the Ukrainian separatists or terrorists go unnoticed?

I would like to know whether any of the surface-to-air missiles fired earlier over the region would have been detected by Big Brother and spying satellites.

Could this tragedy have been avoided?

Before this incident, the Ukrainian authorities reported having a number of their aircraft shot down by surface-to-air missiles.

They had designated the area as being safe to fly through above 32,000 feet. Did they know the type and capabilities of the missiles that were used and the altitude at which their aircraft were when shot down? If so, was the information at hand trustworthy enough to legally bind them to notify the international civilian flying community of the danger of overflying the war zone or, as a safety precaution, to close that corridor in their airspace altogether? Did their commercial interests take precedence over safety?

If it turns out, and it looks so, that the aircraft was downed by a missile, an errant one or, worse, deliberately fired, where does this incident place Ukraine in adhering to its legal responsibilities and obligations towards the international community?

It worries me stiff to think that a country with a conflict within its boundaries was not capable of gauging the impact this would have on innocent citizens.

In Libya, the authorities immediately closed the airspace to all civilian flights as a precautionary measure.

Airplanes fly through designated flight path corridors. They are directed by flight controllers from one airspace to another. At the time of the incident, the plane was being handled by Ukraine controllers.

Studies have shown that air traffic controllers have a significantly higher than average situational alertness than ordinary individuals. Whether this was the case in this case is not clear. I wonder whether these controllers were aware of and, possibly, also alerted higher authority, about potential missile strike threats to commercial/civilian air traffic.

We have been told that this is a commonly used air route and that there were a number of carriers using the same flight path as MH17. That is no longer the case. When preparing a flight plan, both safety and commercial considerations are taken into account because, at the end of the day, an airline has to make a profit. I wonder whether in this case commercial considerations outweighed the safety aspect. Is it true that the pilots opted for a slight deviation to avoid inclement weather?

Ukraine is a member of the European Civil Aviation Conference, which falls under the jurisdiction of Eurocontrol whose primary objective is to coordinate and plan air traffic control throughout Europe. As a member, Ukraine undertook to uphold strategic priorities where safety, security and the environment are the main considerations. If, as I suspect, Ukraine knew that part of its civilian traffic air territory was susceptible to surface-to-air missiles than it shoulders a hefty responsibility for the tragedy.

An accusing finger is being pointed at Russia for having supplied surface-to-air missiles that could be used to down aircraft flying at very high altitudes. If this is indeed the case, it is nothing new but a game changer and an eye-opener.

It is not unusual for a country to supply weapons to rebels or insurgents to exercise influence in one form or another.

Thus, we may consider ourselves lucky that such a tragic incident did not happen before.

On a personal level, I must admit this incident makes me a bit more wary about flying. How many of us view the flight path before boarding a plane? We never do because we rightly trust the airlines and those running the industry.

But will things remain the same? I do not feel safe anymore. What happened to flight MH17 is very unfair on the community at large and on the travel industry.

We now wait to see what precautionary measures are taken to avoid a similar disaster and how adequate these will turn out to be.

Carmel Vassallo works in banking and IT and is an aircraft enthusiast.