• Malaysian passenger airliner shot down over Ukraine near Russian border
    1,595 replies, posted
I'm fully aware of this video, but I have a few doubts about the quality of the briefing and of the relevance of those questions. Very little of that briefing is actual evidence that the Ukrainians are responsible. Question 1 is completely irrelevant. With or without the redirect or not it would have still been in range of both Ukrainians and separatists. Also, redirecting air traffic is extremely common in the case of poor weather. Question 2 is meaningless as well, for the same reasons that question 1 doesn't matter. Regarding those satellite images, I honestly can't say if they are legit or if they matter. First, the image resolution is incredibly low. I'm not exactly an expert on SAMs but I sure as fuck can't tell if I'm looking at a SA-11 or a truck from those images. I'd rather wait for an expert to pass judgment on those. Question 5 is basically serving only to muddy the waters. For one, if the Ukrainians wanted to shoot down a plane, they wouldn't need the Kupol radar unit. The SA-11 TEL is completely sufficient to find a large, high flying commercial jet, especially when its flight path is already submitted beforehand. I have my doubts about question 6. Basically no other sources agree that the Su-25 can reach a flight ceiling of 10,000 km, especially if armed. Most claim something more like 23,000 ft unloaded, with 16,000 being the flight ceiling with a combat load. I have a few questions of my own about question 7. Why is it that they claim this unknown aircraft was a jet? Describing it as hovering seems to imply that it isn't one. Question 8 is worth asking but is hardly conclusive evidence. I sure as hell can't tell that that's in Krasnoarmeisk from that tiny visible portion of that billboard. Question 9 is a moot point if the launcher in question was under separatist control. Question 10 has already been answered. Also regarding the smoke trail thing from your former missile defense soldier on reddit, NY Times has an article in which a resident of Gravobo claimed to have seen a missile trail from the ground. It's hardly verifiable as is, but so far nobody really has put out incontrovertible evidence.
[QUOTE=iFail;45475082]I'm fully aware of this video, but I have a few doubts about the quality of the briefing and of the relevance of those questions. Very little of that briefing is actual evidence that the Ukrainians are responsible. [/quote] Soo by this logic you'd rather beileve US report that presented tweets and audio as single sources rather then depth in detailed briefing? Alright, let's go quesiton after question here. [quote]Question 1 is completely irrelevant. With or without the redirect or not it would have still been in range of both Ukrainians and separatists. Also, redirecting air traffic is extremely common in the case of poor weather. Question 2 is meaningless as well, for the same reasons that question 1 doesn't matter. [/quote] First of all, there was not a single statement from Ukraininan dispatchers attached to flight wich already raises suspicion. I mean, why cover change of course if it was simply due to weather? Second - it was changed quite dramatically. [img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/07/18/article-2696975-1FC221C400000578-6_964x487.jpg[/img] [quote] Regarding those satellite images, I honestly can't say if they are legit or if they matter. First, the image resolution is incredibly low. I'm not exactly an expert on SAMs but I sure as fuck can't tell if I'm looking at a SA-11 or a truck from those images. I'd rather wait for an expert to pass judgment on those. [/quote] Again, this did not stopped you when you named US report based on pictures over web as credible source. Here are those tweeted pics, but with all labeling removed, i urge to try analyse where and how those pictures when taken if you find info from military satelite doubtful. [IMG]http://i61.tinypic.com/10shfl2.jpg[/IMG] [quote] Question 5 is basically serving only to muddy the waters. For one, if the Ukrainians wanted to shoot down a plane, they wouldn't need the Kupol radar unit. The SA-11 TEL is completely sufficient to find a large, high flying commercial jet, especially when its flight path is already submitted beforehand. [/quote] Actually i think this is really important question since if such activity was and was increasing during incident and decreased after this means Ukranina military atleast[B] tried[/B] to observe situation by radar means, indicating that they probably could've provided similar to Russian Defence Ministry's coverage of event to clear things up. But they did not. [quote]I have my doubts about question 6. Basically no other sources agree that the Su-25 can reach a flight ceiling of 10,000 km, especially if armed. Most claim something more like 23,000 ft unloaded, with 16,000 being the flight ceiling with a combat load. [/quote] Here is is screenshot from site of Ukraininan Defence "Ukrooboronservis" company with jet's parameters [img]http://cs616227.vk.me/v616227255/156b3/PFGVNnQeyTs.jpg[/img] And here is link to site itself, soo, nope. [url]http://uos.ua/produktsiya/aviakosmicheskaya-tehnika/84-cy-25[/url] [quote] I have a few questions of my own about question 7. Why is it that they claim this unknown aircraft was a jet? Describing it as hovering seems to imply that it isn't one. [/quote] As said on brefing they could merely assume it was jet by speed it was gathering on climb and current outfit of ukraninan Air Force. [quote] Question 8 is worth asking but is hardly conclusive evidence. I sure as hell can't tell that that's in Krasnoarmeisk from that tiny visible portion of that billboard. [/quote] Perhabs, but the video online was many times marked fake soo probably i can find evidence to support this. [quote] Question 9 is a moot point if the launcher in question was under separatist control. [/quote] Basically what above [quote] Question 10 has already been answered. [/quote] Really? I think here we have establsihed that after Russian Ministry Defence pointed out NATO Satelite coverage of area they could've simply present their images in lower quality just like chinesse did regading other plane. [quote] Also regarding the smoke trail thing from your former missile defense soldier on reddit, NY Times has an article in which a resident of Gravobo claimed to have seen a missile trail from the ground. It's hardly verifiable as is, but so far nobody really has put out incontrovertible evidence.[/QUOTE] Pretty much what gudman said, Some claim plane, others two planes and now we have report from you about someone's spotting trail somewhere.
[QUOTE=karimatrix;45475313]Soo by this logic you'd rather beileve US report that presented tweets and audio as single sources rather then depth in detailed briefing? Alright, let's go quesiton after question here. First of all, there was not a single statement from Ukraininan dispatchers attached to flight wich already raises suspicion. I mean, why cover change of course if it was simply due to weather? Second - it was changed quite dramatically. [img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/07/18/article-2696975-1FC221C400000578-6_964x487.jpg[/img] Again, this did not stopped you when you named US report based on pictures over web as credible source. Here are those tweeted pics, but with all labeling removed, i urge to try analyse where and how those pictures when taken if you find info from military satelite doubtful. [IMG]http://i61.tinypic.com/10shfl2.jpg[/IMG] Actually i think this is really important question since if such activity was and was increasing during incident and decreased after this means Ukranina military atleast[B] tried[/B] to observe situation by radar means, indicating that they probably could've provided similar to Russian Defence Ministry's coverage of event to clear things up. But they did not. Here is is screenshot from site of Ukraininan Defence "Ukrooboronservis" company with jet's parameters [img]http://cs616227.vk.me/v616227255/156b3/PFGVNnQeyTs.jpg[/img] And here is link to site itself, soo, nope. [url]http://uos.ua/produktsiya/aviakosmicheskaya-tehnika/84-cy-25[/url] As said on brefing they could merely assume it was jet by speed it was gathering on climb and current outfit of ukraninan Air Force. Perhabs, but the video online was many times marked fake soo probably i can find evidence to support this. Basically what above Really? I think here we have establsihed that after Russian Ministry Defence pointed out NATO Satelite coverage of area they could've simply present their images in lower quality just like chinesse did regading other plane. Pretty much what gudman said, Some claim plane, others two planes and now we have report from you about someone's spotting trail somewhere.[/QUOTE] First, I'd like to point out that I don't take the US claims as fact. I don't think their "evidence" is any good either. However, I do think the basic premise they have suggested is more plausible than what the Russian media seems to be claiming. A few other points. I do believe that separatists have some kind of SAM TEL unit. Whether it is Russian provided I have no idea. Some Russia based news sites reported that separatists had seized Buk TELs back in June. They made shoot-downs against An-26s out of typical MANPAD ranges only a few days before the MH17 shoot-down. I would like to see a source on your flight map. Flightradar24's history has numerous previous flights passing directly between the towns of Donetsk and Luhansk, contradicting your map, which I can only find on staunchly pro-russian sites and conspiracy theorist sites. NATO presenting footage in lower quality leads to other problems, as it's easy for people to claim the images have been doctored or otherwise falsified. Also I dunno about these claims of seeing planes. If the people of Donetsk can see small jets at fucking 30000 feet I want whatever they're on, cause that's some amazing eyesight.
[quote]LIVE: Flights carrying the remains of those on board MH17 have arrived in the Netherlands Two planes carrying bodies from crashed flight MH17 have landed in the Netherlands where a day of mourning for the 298 victims has been declared. Experts there will begin to identify the dead, most of whom were Dutch.[/quote] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28431943[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.