Boeing 777 shot down

deuse said:
No one will ever know who did it. Shame really.
Click to expand...

Anyone who took part in the act of shooting down, operators, lower level commanders or direct witnesses whichever side they belong to will probably be sporting holes they were not born with in shallow graves. It's too big a screw-up for either Ukraine, the rebels or Russia to have pinned on them. People can disappear in combat zones, no questions asked.
 
ubersonic said:
Well in the run up to MH-17 they were actively claiming that Russia itself was shooting down their planes, possibly with fighters, so they did have reason and they were known to have Buks in the area, but still it's pretty unlikely as it was them as their ATC was routing the plane at the time
Click to expand...

I think the biggest counter argument is that Ukraine was doing pretty much everything it could not to provoke Russia to get further involved. Shooting down their aircraft would have been a sure-fire way to escalate things.

areksnumbr1sxylady said:
This incident had no benefits to Putin or Rebels what so over
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure it was just a terrible accident.
 
deuse said:
No one will ever know who did it. Shame really.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you've got to admit it's well dodgy that Ukrainian air traffic control requested it to reduce altitude and fly dangerously low over a war zone. It's like dangling a mouse in front of a cat and then blaming the cat, assuming the east shot it down I'm sure Ukraine have lots of Russian hardware.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
Technically speaking, it's not Russian hardware, it's Soviet hardware, produced in numerous factories in Soviet republics like Russia and Ukraine. The media just seem to refer to anything Soviet as Russian these days.
Click to expand...

Russia was, of course, the largest of the Soviet Republics and probably where the hardware was built.
 
Tuppy_Glossop said:
Russia was, of course, the largest of the Soviet Republics and probably where the hardware was built.
Click to expand...

Ukraine was the second largest and the place where stuff like the T-64 tank, T-80 tank, all Antonov planes, many AK's, etc got built. I'm not trying to claim where the specific Buk that fired the missile was built as that would be silly, just pointing out that it's just as likely to have been built in Ukraine as in Russia and so by repeatedly referring to USSR built/made as Russian built/made the media are causing a lot of misinformation.
 
Last edited:
Ukraine's foreign minister goes full retard XD

Ukraine's foreign minister has defended the country's decision not to close its airspace on the day that Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was brought down, saying no one in Kiev knew that Russia had brought highly sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles into Ukraine.

Pavlo Klimkin told a news conference Tuesday at U.N. headquarters in New York that the government had consulted all Ukrainian authorities involved in risk assessments and found "no clue" that anyone even imagined this possibility before the July 17, 2014, attack.
Click to expand...

So "no one in Kiev" knew that the rebels had possession of Buks, even though they captured a bunch from them, over a week earlier. And they conducted risk assessments and found "no clue" that this was even a possibility, despite having one of their own An-26 transporters shot down with a Buk three days prior to MH-17.

Really? >.>
 
One of the photographs (above) shows a Buk system with the identifying number 232. The same Buk bearing the same number was photographed in the Russian town of Stary Oskol, not far from the Ukrainian border. In an Instagram post from June 2014, a user identified as "rokersson" said the Buk was part of a convoy of 80 to 100 vehicles moving toward Ukraine.

Other photos show the convoy as it crosses Russia and the soldiers who were traveling with it. An additional photo shows Zubov on a train returning to his unit in Russia, where he was demobilized a few days later.
Click to expand...

but they definitely didn't do it I suppose....
 
ubersonic said:
Ukraine's foreign minister goes full retard XD



So "no one in Kiev" knew that the rebels had possession of Buks, even though they captured a bunch from them, over a week earlier. And they conducted risk assessments and found "no clue" that this was even a possibility, despite having one of their own An-26 transporters shot down with a Buk three days prior to MH-17.

Really? >.>
Click to expand...

The rebels and/or Russians had been shooting down Ukranian planes and helicopters for about two months before MH17! Some at high altitude (20,000ft).

What an idiot.
 
Last edited:
bloodiedathame said:
The rebels and/or Russians had been shooting down Ukranian planes and helicopters for about two months before MH17! Some at high altitude.

What an idiot.
Click to expand...

Yeah but to be fair most of those were shot down by manpads not Buks. They should have closed the airspace though, the report is clear about that.
 
bloodiedathame said:
The rebels and/or Russians had been shooting down Ukranian planes and helicopters for about two months before MH17! Some at high altitude (20,000ft).

What an idiot.
Click to expand...

Yeah something like 60% of Ukraine's active air stock had been depleted to combat action and accidents by that point.

One thing I'd say though in a country destabalised like that systems can break down, etc. without the appropriate information reaching everyone that needs it (fog of war and all that).
 
Yeah I think up till that point everything that had been shot down had been within range of other systems (which was why above 30k was considered safe).
 
Longbow said:
They were low altitude up until 3 days before MH17 was shot down.
Click to expand...

Aye, I'm not sure there are many helicopters that can reach the normal cruising altitudes of modern jet liners.
I think the record for a helicopter was something 11,000 meters and that was a lightweight high performance one that had been modified to work on Everest and higher (pretty much everything stripped out), not a military model that was designed to give some level of protection from small arms, carry weapons/sensor systems and offer the crew some chance of surviving if shot down in it.
IIRC military helicoptors tend to be tailored towards low level performance as they're typically safer lower to the ground (less time to be spotted and shot at).

MH17 on the other hand was flying at something like 10,000 meters.
 
Jokester said:
Yeah I think up till that point everything that had been shot down had been within range of other systems (which was why above 30k was considered safe).
Click to expand...

Nope, three days before MH-17 went down an AN-26 transport was shot down at just over 22k, and anything that can shoot you down at 22k can also shoot you down at 30k. Even if they weren't sure if it was a Buk or a fighter jet that shot it down they would have known that either would pose a danger to flights like MH-17, and they kept the airspace open for the money :(
 
ubersonic said:
Nope, three days before MH-17 went down an AN-26 transport was shot down at just over 22k, and anything that can shoot you down at 22k can also shoot you down at 30k. Even if they weren't sure if it was a Buk or a fighter jet that shot it down they would have known that either would pose a danger to flights like MH-17, and they kept the airspace open for the money :(
Click to expand...

Have you got a link to the confirmation that closing the airspace above FL300 was discussed, the risk was acknowledged but that the decision was made not to purely on financial grounds?

You're not just speculating, right?
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;28683735 said:
Have you got a link to the confirmation that closing the airspace above FL30 was discussed, the risk was acknowledged but that the decision was made not to purely on financial grounds?

You're not just speculating, right?
Click to expand...

Afaik a country doesnt profit from transiting airspace either does it??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom