Malaysian passenger airliner shot down over Ukraine near Russian border
1,595 replies, posted
[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;45457894]I do have to mention that luhansk reported that they had captured their own su-25 so even if there still is a level of uncertainity
[URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/13/ukrainian-shell-russian-border-town-donetsk"]the guardian[/URL]
other than that, since i'm not a radar operator, and there is no third party (except for maybe belarus or poland) with radar range on it its hearsay until more concrete evidence.[/QUOTE]
But if US will present "their own" version with their own images is it going to be more believable?
Also, even if they had jet they never had safe runway to lift it up, not to mention that you need some qualified pilot and fuel.
And thinking that one jet could survive soo long in airspase scanned by Ukranian radars... just nope.
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45457925]But if US will present "their own" version with their own images is it going to be more believable?
Also, even if they had jet they never had safe runway to lift it up, not to mention that you need some qualified pilot and fuel.
And thinking that one jet could survive soo long in airspase scanned by Ukranian radars... just nope.[/QUOTE]
good point, but then again there's also the question of why the Ukrainian air force would dispatch a SU-25 to attack the civilian plane in an area where it itself risks being shot down By rebel forces.
[editline] 21 july 2014[/editline]
personally i'd rather if the UN would present evidence, U.S. an europe do technically have a vested interest, and so does russia so both sides are just playing the blame game
[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;45458059]good point, but then again there's also the question of why the Ukrainian air force would dispatch a SU-25 to attack the civilian plane in an area where it itself risks being shot down By rebel forces.
[editline] 21 july 2014[/editline]
personally i'd rather if the UN would present evidence, U.S. an europe do technically have a vested interest, and so does russia so both sides are just playing the blame game[/QUOTE]
I think the only reason for that would be actual attempt of framing rebels in order to gain stronger responce agains them or Russia. But again, this is something to think of incase IF jet thing get confirmed further, althought i'd say it's not UN's report, but ICAO's assigned investigation team that needs to be considered final judge.
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45459017][URL="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/1d6a9ac2-10e3-11e4-b116-00144feabdc0.html#axzz388QQjCsK"]MH17 crash: FT photo shows signs of damage from missile strike[/URL]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/EjdUnUu.jpg[/IMG]
Sites a bit bitchy about copy and paste so go there yourself.[/QUOTE]
Well, just like the article said, three portions might be not enough for solid statement but noneless good read from some experts. Although there are aswell experts who support the air to air missle, but ofcourse they're russian ones.
Did they test for residue of explosives on the debris yet?
[QUOTE=Buck.;45459285]Did they test for residue of explosives on the debris yet?[/QUOTE]
There was literally no one except for OSCE on crashsite, and they were merely "observing situation". Where are all the ICAO and other flight experts?
[editline]22nd July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45459308]They barely got most of the bodys on a train that they don't know where it goes or if it will even make to its final destination because of bombed tracks. So I think its a bit to early before anything else than examining photos will happen.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.euronews.com/2014/07/20/ukraine-mh17-victims-transported-by-train-from-crash-site/[/url]
They moving them to either Donetsk or Harkov. But since Ukranian military continues bombing surrounding to crashsite areas i'd say it's going to be Donetsk, wich makes sence since black boxes are supposed to be passed there to ICAO and Malaysian Representatives aswell.
[QUOTE=Heisenburger;45457800]Just like how the US claimed Saddam had 'weapons of mass distruction'?
I'm just using that as an example. The evidence presented in the conference were factual and backed up with videos and picture; it raises some alarming questions that need to be answered.[/QUOTE]
He did. He had large stockpiles that UN inspectors were actively getting rid of since Saddam was slowly cooperating. The issue was not that Saddam didn't have WMD's (chemical weapons) but that Bush and the CIA claimed Saddam was actively trying to use those chemical weapons, when in reality he had abandoned that idea and simply was slow in cooperating with the UN in getting rid of his stockpiles of materials.
The lie was that he was going to use them and was uncooperative, not that he had them (which he certainly did).
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45465414][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Chrrnos.jpg[/IMG]
[url]https://twitter.com/barbarastarrcnn/status/491559153559932928/photo/1[/url][/QUOTE]
I hope this is not the ''recon info'' white house promised to publish, cause I can edit map with colored lines alor better then that.
An Italian newspaper got an interview thing with a pro-Russian rebel.
I'm quoting a Dutch newspaper:
[QUOTE]'We heard a loud bang in the sky. They told us: we just hit a fascist plane from Kiev', a member of the pro-Russian militia Oplot says in the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. The 31-year old man from Torez wanted to remain anonymous.
There were reports that the crew of the 'Ukrainian' plane used their parachutes. 'Our commanders told us that we had to go there with a lot of weapons and ammunition. We thought we had to fight Ukrainian pilots. And we found the bodies of civilians.'
'I found the body of a girl who was no older than 5 years. She was facing the ground. It was horrible. I then knew that it was a civilian plane. Not military. And those were all dead civilians.'
He contradicts the report of the militia commanders. 'It's obvious that we weren't the ones who shot down the plane. We don't have missiles that can go that high. This is a crime committed by the bandits who follow the government in Kiev.'
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45465414][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Chrrnos.jpg[/IMG]
[url]https://twitter.com/barbarastarrcnn/status/491559153559932928/photo/1[/url][/QUOTE]
I wonder if the pilots could see the missile flying towards them.
[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28429161"]According to the BBC[/URL], the train only has 200 bodies on it (far less than the Rebels suggested), and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe has said that major pieces of the plane have been cut into, and several pieces look significantly different to when they first arrived at the site, which is under Rebel control, which will make the investigation much more difficult.
This guy, a former Russian/Soviet S-200 operator:
[quote]Somebody screwed up, this is common. We screwed up before in the 80s, Ukrainians screwed up in the early 2000 - so I would not put it beyond them to hit the plane thinking it was Russian, since their military seems to be very disorganized now. Rebels obviously could do it, not intentionally though as they do not stand to benefit. The maximum extent of Russian involvment on this could be Russia highlighting the plane on the radar for the rebels (since their Buk only had the launcher with primitive radar, it was not a full system which is 3 vehicles - commad, radar and launcher), which would be a major screw up on their part.
Honestly right now noone knows what really happened there and noone ever will.
I also don't like the fact that its seems like the guilty party has been "appointed" before the investigators ever got to the crash site, and that Obama and Poroshenko keep rambling on about "evidence" that they possess without showing any. So far the only pictures and radar information released come from Russia - and I find it odd that it gets dismissed as "Russia trying to cover up" and its not bigger news.
You see this type of evidence is very, very hard to falsify. What was on Russian radars, was on NATO radars. If they say they saw a Su-25 next to the airplane, and two hours later NATO releases their radar info and there is no Su-25 - they are in deep shit. They also released radar information and sattelite pictures of Ukrainian Buks deployed in the area - if NATO comes up with the same pictures on same day but this stuff is not there, Russia is again in deep shit. But no, Russia actually asked US to release their pictures and radar data, stating that they never detected a launch by either of the parties - only Ukrainian SAM tracking the plane, and that they know that US spy sattelite was directly over the area when this happened. This means Russia is 100% confident in their information.
Again, this is the first solid evidence I see - a cell phone video of a Buk SAM driving somewhere as "evidence" of it being taken across the border back to Russia is ridiculous - it could belong to anyone and be driven anywhere. Phone conversation intercepted does not conclude anything, these things can be doctored by anyone with a laptop, plus its not the same people talking - so it could easily be rebels talking about shooting down a Su-25 and looking for pilots in first half and the second half could be a cut from a different group at a different time finding the rubble of MH17. Again, I am not saying that it has been or that's what happened - but Ukraine has a Secret Service of its own, and if I was running it and some idiots in my military shot down that plane, that's what I would do - come up with a bunch of evidence blaming the other side, no matter how weak, knowing full well that since I am seen as a "the good guy" already noone will look into it too much, and the US will probably back me up and keep their mouth shut even if they know I did it.
United States and NATO just need to release their radar information and sattelite pictures to international investigators, that's it. Russia has just done so.
Of course, you can see that I am biased. But I am used to treating everything with a grain of salt. Russia (USSR) covered up Korean Airlines tragedy, so they cannot be trusted. Ukraine shot down Israeli Boeing before and denied involvement until Israel presented them pieces of plane with shrapnel holes, parts of the missile and radar data - so they cannot be trusted. I do not even speak of separatists. US and NATO cannot be trusted - they have their interests at stake in the region, plus after Iraq and the "evidence" there, with Collin Powel shaking a bottle with salt and calling it evidence of chemicale weapons, any evidence produced by US cannot be taken seriously.
That is why I think we will never trully know what happened. The West will think Russia did, and Russia will think Ukraine did it, and everyone will be right and everyone will be wrong.
EDIT: one point: Air to air missile hit is very easy to tell from a SAM hit, you do not need any expertise. Here is what airplane pieces sort of look like after S-200 hit them (I saw a bunch of practice targets and what happened to them):
[url]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_59GYpEVAu0U/TTU7U_NsITI/AAAAAAAAAwM/CUAbXKs98_k/s400/pattern.JPG[/url]
I have not seen air-to-air damage and don't really know how they work, but I venture to say its much smaller and less holes, relying more on the explosive part. So we will know that part soon enough.
EDIT 2: Since this is getting a bit more attention, this is how I think investigation should be handled. Rather than immidiately state "We know the separatists are guilty, and we will not investigate the possibility of Ukrainian military being at fault" (which is what US state department did, hours after the plane crashed), all version should be taken into account, and they all should be checked and ruled out - even the implausible conspiracy ones. This is the only way to prevent conspiracy theories going on and on about it for the next 50 years. Also, the investigation should be done jointly by ICAO, Russia, Ukraine, Malaysia, Netherlands, NATO and the US. Based on what could possibly happen to the plane, the following versions need to be checked - in no particular order of importance. Again, I do not care if they sound crazy or unlikely:
1) Terrorist act. Mohammad al Jihad decided to blow himself up inside the plane while flying over Eastern Ukraine.
2) Malfunction/incident. Bird flew into engine, lighting bolt. Who knows.
3) NATO missile cruiser from the Black Sea (anything currently there that has the range?)
4) Separatist's Buk took it down.
5) Russian Black Sea fleet, in particular its flagship, Moskva - it can hit airplanes 200-250 km away. Was it in range?
6) Ukrainian Buk took it down.
7) Ukrainian S-300 took it down from far away.
8) Russian S-300 or S-400 took it down from around Rostov-on-Don region.
9) Ukrainian Air to Air missile from a military jet.
10) Russian Air to Air missile from a mlitary jet.
That's about all I can think of. If you do not check them all you will have conspiracy nuts all over this for years. Again, I do not believe most of these are even remotely likely, but if it could possibly happen it must be investigated, no matter how unlikely or studpid it sounds.
EDIT 3: Thanks for the gold! In a disappointing update, US State Dept. released a statement, basically saying that since Russia is known to spread misinformation and propaganda, and US is known to be honest, there is no need for US to respond to Russian request and reveal their evidence. It is enough for the world to know that US has the evidence that points at the separatists and Russians, and have trust in US intelligence agencies since they don't lie about things like this.
I cannot believe the person saying it didn't burst out laughing in the middle. They can't seriously believe this shit.
EDIT 4: Addressing the comment that US and NATO will not release information because this exposes their capabilities. Russia is very well aware of them. They even called out which spy satellite was over the area, and which NATO radars would have the info. Plus, somehow US was not too concerned about this during the past 20 years, when during every US conflict - Desert Storm, Kosovo, Iraq - we basically see "war on TV, now coming to you in HD!". This is a weak argument.
EDIT 5: As a way to put out the conspiracy fire with gasoline (haha), I am now pondering on this:
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDXScnEKaP0[/url]
Buk missile leaves a 10 m wide smoke trail. A 10 m wide smoke trail, going up 10 km - and not vertically since it was chasing the plane, but also covering a few km horizontally. In a densely populated area. And noone saw a thing. Please let me know if I am oblivious of some locals reporting they saw the launch, but you simply cannot miss this thing going up.
Again, sorry I sound like I am biased or spewing conspiracy/propaganda. I am not trying to. But this is a legitimate question to ask, is it not? Did everyone go blind all at once? If they saw the launch, where was it from? Are they too scared to talk? This is another question that investigators need to address.[/quote]
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45465843]I hope this is not the ''recon info'' white house promised to publish, cause I can edit map with colored lines alor better then that.[/QUOTE]
That's just presentation. Actual data probably is a lot of numbers and coordinates that wouldn't tell anything to a non-specialist.
[QUOTE=LVL FACTORY;45467973]This guy, a former Russian/Soviet S-200 operator:[/QUOTE]
This is extremely informative(i never thought about buk trail thing myself) but could you please provide link to original text
Yeah that trail part seems interesting. I've heard a lot of "witnesses" on media here and there, claiming that they either saw "a plane going down", or "two planes, bigger one and smaller one near it"... but no one ever mentioned the smoke trail. Given that they "saw" planes 10km above them in rather cloudy skies, they should've definitely seen huge long smoke trails zipping up in broken trajectories.
Liars.
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45468018]This is extremely informative(i never thought about buk trail thing myself) but could you please provide link to original text[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2bapzk/russias_military_tells_a_very_different_story/cj3lh39"]here's the link to his reddit comment[/URL], the guy is pretty informative and does raise a valid point that if we had any concrete evidence to disprove claims we could have. then again the whitehouse is probably going with the stupid concept we have in courts here that only the person presenting the claim has the burden of proof
[QUOTE=LVL FACTORY;45467973]This guy, a former Russian/Soviet S-200 operator:[/QUOTE]
From the demeanor of the guy; it's kind of hard to take what he's saying seriously from the bias he is already aware he has. But atleast it provides some interesting insight, thanks for it!
Would be something if the U.S. did actually release their info and it was found that there wasn't a Su-25 like what he wrote;
[editline]22nd July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=gudman;45468251]Yeah that trail part seems interesting. I've heard a lot of "witnesses" on media here and there, claiming that they either saw "a plane going down", or "two planes, bigger one and smaller one near it"... but no one ever mentioned the smoke trail. Given that they "saw" planes 10km above them in rather cloudy skies, they should've definitely seen huge long smoke trails zipping up in broken trajectories.
Liars.[/QUOTE]
Is it true the Russian media is completely controlled by the Kremlin? I honestly don't know
[QUOTE=gudman;45468251]Yeah that trail part seems interesting. I've heard a lot of "witnesses" on media here and there, claiming that they either saw "a plane going down", or "two planes, bigger one and smaller one near it"... but no one ever mentioned the smoke trail. Given that they "saw" planes 10km above them in rather cloudy skies, they should've definitely seen huge long smoke trails zipping up in broken trajectories.
Liars.[/QUOTE]
Ummm I just gotta say dude, spotting a plane in sky is not really impossible when you think of it. Well, atleast i notice them all the damn time on South of Moscow since there are three aiport routes here.
[QUOTE=Kite_shugo;45468265]
Is it true the Russian media is completely controlled by the Kremlin? I honestly don't know[/QUOTE]
Well, not completely, but most of the stuff that matters - yeah, you could say that. Russia24 in my opinion is the more trustworthy source of official ones, because it doesn't release outright lies. It can avoid showing something that's there, or give a commentary that would cloud the truth, but that's the extent of it. Everything that goes under 1st Channel or RT, however...
[editline]22nd July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45468329]Ummm I just gotta say dude, spotting a plane in sky is not really impossible when you think of it. Well, atleast i notice them all the damn time on South of Moscow since there are three aiport routes here.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but spotting a plane and not seeing a huge rocket trail that can be compared to said plane is out of the question. Either you saw both, or you didn't see "plane going down".
[QUOTE=gudman;45468365]Well, not completely, but most of the stuff that matters - yeah, you could say that. Russia24 in my opinion is the more trustworthy source of official ones, because it doesn't release outright lies. It can avoid showing something that's there, or give a commentary that would cloud the truth, but that's the extent of it. Everything that goes under 1st Channel or RT, however...
[editline]22nd July 2014[/editline]
Yeah, but spotting a plane and not seeing a huge rocket trail that can be compared to said plane is out of the question. Either you saw both, or you didn't see "plane going down".[/QUOTE]
Gotta agree here. Soo this means that everybody who saw only one plane going down is quesitonable?
Wonder what that means for those who claim they saw two.
[QUOTE=download;45466889]I wonder if the pilots could see the missile flying towards them.[/QUOTE]
I've had nightmares since the event that weren't dissimilar to this. Fucking terrifying.
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45468410]Gotta agree here. Soo this means that everybody who saw only one plane going down is quesitonable?
Wonder what that means for those who claim they saw two.[/QUOTE]
They could've seen the plane, just [b]before[/b] it was hit or even chased by the missile. That's really interesting indeed how no one claimed to see smoke trail from a missile fired near at least two densely populated urban areas, Donetsk itself and multiple smaller villages and towns nearing it.
Anyone knows how to check what weather was in the region during the event?
It seems weird that the Russians would claim that the plane supposedly shot MH17 was a Su-25. As far as I know it's primarily a CAS or reconnaissance aircraft, with a service ceiling of 23,000ft unloaded, with that figure dropping to 16,000ft if it's fully armed, which would make it very odd for one to be flying at 30,000 ft 'alongside MH17' as that Russian defence representative claimed.
Surely if Ukraine wanted to shoot down an aircraft they would use one of the Su-27s they possess, which is a dedicated air-superiority aircraft capable of flying at nearly 70,000ft, carries a full complement of AA missiles and is far faster than a jetliner. Even if they wanted to pass it off as Russian jet, Russia still uses both aircraft
[QUOTE=Camundongo;45468498]It seems weird that the Russians would claim that the plane supposedly shot MH17 was a Su-25. As far as I know it's primarily a CAS or reconnaissance aircraft, with a service ceiling of 23,000ft unloaded, with that figure dropping to 16,000ft if it's fully armed, which would make it very odd for one to be flying at 30,000 ft 'alongside MH17' as that Russian defence representative claimed.
[/QUOTE]
They didn't actually claim it was flying "alongside" MH17, just that it was roughly on the same corridor and flight echelon, it only showed up on the radar when it was rapidly climbing (which means this UFO was well below MH17 before that, or - above, seeing how it appeared [b]after[/b] MH17 dropped out of the sky and bled the speed), exact altitude impossible to tell as military aircraft generally don't have the equipment that would allow civilian radar tech to "scan" them.
Turns out you can learn how to use those missiles in just a few days:
[URL="http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-m...s-easy-to-use/"] [url]http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-m...s-easy-to-use/[/url] [/URL]
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45468557]Nothing really local :\ and no cloud maps.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/okApSwJ.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Yeah, figured as well. Thought that maybe there's something out there that would tell more, guess that's unlikely.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;45468548]Turns out you can learn how to use those missiles in just a few days:
[URL="http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-m...s-easy-to-use/"] [url]http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-m...s-easy-to-use/[/url] [/URL][/QUOTE]
not sure why your link didn't work but here's a working version to the article [URL="http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-missiles-easy-to-use/"]http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-missiles-easy-to-use/[/URL]
[QUOTE=gudman;45468569]Yeah, figured as well. Thought that maybe there's something out there that would tell more, guess that's unlikely.[/QUOTE]
Google Earth had cloud mapping but i am really not sure if you can trust those
[QUOTE=gudman;45468542]They didn't actually claim it was flying "alongside" MH17, just that it was roughly on the same corridor and flight echelon, it only showed up on the radar when it was rapidly climbing (which means this UFO was well below MH17 before that, or - above, seeing how it appeared [b]after[b] MH17 dropped out of the sky and bled the speed), exact altitude impossible to tell as military aircraft generally don't have the equipment that would allow civilian radar tech to "scan" them.[/QUOTE]
Which if it was an Su-25 sounds like one engaging forces on the ground, then detecting a radar signal on the ground and attempting to perform evasive maneuvers (seeing as a rapid ascent would still bring it far below MH17). Which might even explain why MH17 was hit - the BUK was evaded by the Su-25, carried on flying and then accidently locked on to MH17 and engaged it. Which would make it a case of unfortunate positioning and timing.
[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;45468574]not sure why your link didn't work but here's a working version to the article [URL="http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-missiles-easy-to-use/"]http://www.wired.com/2014/07/sa-11-missiles-easy-to-use/[/URL][/QUOTE]
That article is a bit bullshit. you can't simply set up radar for buk, you need to keep your target "lighted up" by radar for missle to follow in that direction, (basically like launcher in HL2), soo alot of precision and changing radar positioning is required EVEN after the missle deploys.
[editline]22nd July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Camundongo;45468630]Which if it was an Su-25 sounds like one engaging forces on the ground, then detecting a radar signal on the ground and attempting to perform evasive maneuvers (seeing as a rapid ascent would still bring it far below MH17). Which might even explain why MH17 was hit - the BUK was evaded by the Su-25, carried on flying and then accidently locked on to MH17 and engaged it. Which would make it a case of unfortunate positioning and timing.[/QUOTE]
yet would not explain why Ukranian military denies this. I'd say if they would speak of this right on spot they would be in far more trustworthy sight. But instead we get them bombing areas surrounding crashsite and msot importanly keeping attached to flight dispatchers silent shut. I mean, literally, was there ever a word or statement from ukrainian air space agency that was tracking flight? Aren't such reports vital to the investigation?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.