MH17 downed by Russian military missile system, say investigators

[A.P. Richelieu]

The Western world and its allies can cry foul all day long. It will make zero difference. The outcome is all that matters.

Russia will obviously do the necessary. From Crimea to Syria. The whole world is witness to how Russia is reemerging from the defeat of the Cold War. It is sour grapes for most Western capitals at this prospect.

The whole world has seen Russian GDP drop like a stone.
The result of MH17 will probably be a lawsuit for billions of dollars.
That is of course pocket money for Putin, ”Mr 10%”.

 

[500]

If you look at their statement, it just didn't make sense at all.

The aircraft is ALMOST crossed into Russia Air Traffic Control zone, which mean if any Ukrainian missile have to strike the aircraft, it will come with a West to East direction, and that would hit the aircraft in the tail or fuselage instead of its cockpit.

The only way Ukrainian could have done this is to tow/drive a BUK launcher to either inside rebel held zone or within Russia to shoot it down. Which simply does not make sense.

That's simply not true:

MH-17 crashed deep in ukrainian territory. According to Dutch report Bur was fired from Snejnoe (confirmed by many footages and satellite pics). Accoring to Russia Buk fired from Zaroshenskoye (not confirmed by anything). But both were under pro-Russian separatist control.

 

[jhungary]

That's simply not true:

MH-17 crashed deep in ukrainian territory. According to Dutch report Bur was fired from Snejnoe (confirmed by many footages and satellite pics). Accoring to Russia Buk fired from Zaroshenskoye (not confirmed by anything). But both were under pro-Russian separatist control.

Which part of my statement were wrong?

MH-17 crashed <50 km away from Russian border, I can drive 50km in about 45 minutes, at 60km/h, which means it's 1 or 2 minutes flight time for MH117 to cover the remaining distant to Russia ATCZ, I would consider 1 to 2 minutes to transfer to ATCZ "Almost" I am a Private Pilot, if I am 1 to 2 minutes from my next ATCZ, I would already be prepping (started changing the frequency) or already have tuned into the radio traffic of that ATCZ.

Snejnoe is due East of MH-17 (it's Northeast in compass bearing about 030 at MH-17, or Southeast with true bearing 120 with respect to North at MH-17), which MH-17 is travelling at a 100 bearing course. and I think Dutch never explicitly said the missile was fired from Snejnoe, the statement Dutch Safety broad claim several witness saw a Buk launcher at or round Snejnoe that day. It's most likely it was fired from Snejnoe. And Snejnoe is rebel controlled zone. For which I said is true, because I said it's either coming from Pro-Russian rebel controlled zone, or Russia itself.

And finally, a missile fired from Snejnoe would still be in intercepting course rather than chasing course as Snejnoe is considered almost head on from where MH-17 crashed. Since MH--17 was in an almost constant bearing before it crashed, so the course of missile would remain unchanged.

 

[500]

Which part of my statement were wrong?

MH-17 crashed <50 km away from Russian border, I can drive 50km in about 45 minutes, at 60km/h, which means it's 1 or 2 minutes flight time for MH117 to cover the remaining distant to Russia ATCZ, I would consider 1 to 2 minutes to transfer to ATCZ "Almost" I am a Private Pilot, if I am 1 to 2 minutes from my next ATCZ, I would already be prepping (started changing the frequency) or already have tuned into the radio traffic of that ATCZ.

Snejnoe is due East of MH-17 (it's Northeast in compass bearing about 030 at MH-17, or Southeast with true bearing 120 with respect to North at MH-17), which MH-17 is travelling at a 100 bearing course. and I think Dutch never explicitly said the missile was fired from Snejnoe, the statement Dutch Safety broad claim several witness saw a Buk launcher at or round Snejnoe that day. It's most likely it was fired from Snejnoe. And Snejnoe is rebel controlled zone. For which I said is true, because I said it's either coming from Pro-Russian rebel controlled zone, or Russia itself.

And finally, a missile fired from Snejnoe would still be in intercepting course rather than chasing course as Snejnoe is considered almost head on from where MH-17 crashed. Since MH--17 was in an almost constant bearing before it crashed, so the course of missile would remain unchanged.

I'm very sorry. I misunderstood ur post, I thought u are arguing with Natan.

 

[jhungary]

I'm very sorry. I misunderstood ur post, I thought u are arguing with Natan.

no problem

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

The plane was flying in a northwest direction. Ukrainian military aircraft did not fly in such a direction. Probably Ukrainian army Buk shot it down to frame Russia. A Buk in 1986 is anyone's guess. Could be Ukrainian army. Could be Russian army. The latter seems unlikely because Russian army was already using newer Buks from the 1990s or 2000s by then. Only Ukrainian army was using missiles built in the 1980s because Ukraine cannot make air defense missiles. Even today Ukrainian army still uses 1970s and 1980s AK-74 while Russian army completely transitioned to 1990s AK-74M by the 2000s. Which suggests the missile which was made in 1986 was not from the Russian army but from the Ukrainian army. By 2014 Russian army no longer had any AK-74 left, only had AK-74M from the 1990s, so it makes sense by 2014 Russian army no longer had any missiles from the 1980s left, which suggests the missile built in 1986 was not from the Russian army but from the Ukrainian army.

 

[500]

Old 9M38 Buk missile during Russian parade in 2015:

 

[jhungary]

The plane was flying in a northwest direction. Ukrainian military aircraft did not fly in such a direction. Probably Ukrainian army Buk shot it down to frame Russia. A Buk in 1986 is anyone's guess. Could be Ukrainian army. Could be Russian army. The latter seems unlikely because Russian army was already using newer Buks from the 1990s or 2000s by then. Only Ukrainian army was using missiles built in the 1980s because Ukraine cannot make air defense missiles. Even today Ukrainian army still uses 1970s and 1980s AK-74 while Russian army completely transitioned to 1990s AK-74M by the 2000s. Which suggests the missile which was made in 1986 was not from the Russian army but from the Ukrainian army. By 2014 Russian army no longer had any AK-74 left, only had AK-74M from the 1990s, so it makes sense by 2014 Russian army no longer had any missiles from the 1980s left, which suggests the missile built in 1986 was not from the Russian army but from the Ukrainian army.

The plane is flying in a South East direction, not North East. it's common knowledge and it was plotted by public radar data. You can go to Radar website (such as Flight Global) and obtain the flight data.

The plane is flying from Amsterdam toward Malaysia, it not logical to fly in a North East Heading over Ukraine.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Nop. I don't believe a Russia made missile shot down MH17. By 2014 Russia army didn't have any 1980s weapons left. They transitioned to 1990s and 2000s weapons like AK-74M, T-72B3, Buk M1, S-300PMU2 / S400. The missile was built in 1986 in USSR. It would have came from Ukraine army stock captured by rebels.

Old 9M38 Buk missile during Russian parade in 2015:

Buk M1 from the 1990s, not Buk from the 1980s. By 2014 Russia army didn't have anymore weapons from the 1980s. AK-74M, T-72B3, Buk M1, S-300PMU2 / S-400. Only Ukraine army had 1980s weapons in 2014. So the Buk built in 1986 was not from Russia army stock but from Ukraine army stock captured by rebels.

 

[500]

Nop. I don't believe a Russia made missile shot down MH17. By 2014 Russia army didn't have any 1980s weapons left. They transitioned to 1990s and 2000s weapons like AK-74M, T-72B3, Buk M1, S-300PMU2 / S400. The missile was built in 1986 in USSR. It would have came from Ukraine army stock captured by rebels.



Buk M1 from the 1990s, not Buk from the 1980s. By 2014 Russia army didn't have anymore weapons from the 1980s. AK-74M, T-72B3, Buk M1, S-300PMU2 / S-400. Only Ukraine army had 1980s weapons in 2014. So the Buk built in 1986 was not from Russia army stock but from Ukraine army stock captured by rebels.

This is 9M38 missile which shot down MH17. U can see it by long stabilizers. Stop talking about things u have no clue about.

Thats why Russia lies all the time. First they claimed rebels shot down Ukrainian An-26, then they claimed that Ukrainian S-25 shot down it then Ukrainian MiG-29 and so on

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

This is 9M38 missile which shot down MH17. U can see it by long stabilizers. Stop talking about things u have no clue about.

Thats why Russia lies all the time. First they claimed rebels shot down Ukrainian An-26, then they claimed that Ukrainian S-25 shot down it then Ukrainian MiG-29 and so on

So what? The ones responsible are the Euro Maidaners. If they didn't do revolution, there would have been no war. No airliner would have been shot down.

 

[jhungary]

So what? The ones responsible are the Euro Maidaners. If they didn't do revolution, there would have been no war. No airliner would have been shot down.

So, by your logic.

MH-17 was shot down because there is a war, and if there are no Euromaiden, then there will be no war, which mean it's Euro Maiden fault that MH-17 is shot down, even if it's by Russian.

then

I crash my car into a barricade because there is a barricade, and if there are no government decision to build a barricade in the middle of the road to separate the traffic, then there will be no barricade, which means it's the government fault that I crash my car, even if I am drunk of my arse.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

So, by your logic.

MH-17 was shot down because there is a war, and if there are no Euromaiden, then there will be no war, which mean it's Euro Maiden fault that MH-17 is shot down, even if it's by Russian.

then

I crash my car into a barricade because there is a barricade, and if there are no government decision to build a barricade in the middle of the road to separate the traffic, then there will be no barricade, which means it's the government fault that I crash my car, even if I am drunk of my arse.

Nothing is caused by a single thing. Everything is caused by a chain of events. Even if Russians shot it down, they didn't do it on purpose. Airliners flying over a war zone where missiles are flying everywhere is called being STUPID. No other airline was flying over war zone, only the stupid Malaysia airline was. Tough luck on them, losing 2 planes and 600 people in a single year.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Nothing is caused by a single thing. Everything is caused by a chain of events. Even if Russians shot it down, they didn't do it on purpose. Airliners flying over a war zone where missiles are flying everywhere is called being STUPID. No other airline was flying over war zone, only the stupid Malaysia airline was. Tough luck on them, losing 2 planes and 600 people in a single year.

The Russian tried a cover up on purpose.
You are obviously part of the Troll Army employed for the cover up.

”No other airline”, but the airlines scheduled to send the other 300 airline flights over Eastern Ukraine that day.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/t...s-scheduled-fly-Ukraine-day-MH17-tragedy.html

Airlines do not decide on their own what is safe and what is not.
This is centralized, and Ukraine was not deemed dangerous above a certain altitude.

Your shameless lies are embarrassing.

 

[jhungary]

Nothing is caused by a single thing. Everything is caused by a chain of events. Even if Russians shot it down, they didn't do it on purpose. Airliners flying over a war zone where missiles are flying everywhere is called being STUPID. No other airline was flying over war zone, only the stupid Malaysia airline was. Tough luck on them, losing 2 planes and 600 people in a single year.

While I do agree on the basis that nothing is caused by a single factor. I do not agree airline flying over warzone is stupid.

Being in a conflict does not necessarily mean the closure of the airspace. Civilian Aircraft routinely fly over conflict zone, whether it be over Iran during 1980s, Georgia during 2008 or over Libya in 2012. There are specifically designed air-corridor for safe passage of any aircraft have to pass thru, in this case, it was FL350 over Ukrainian airspace.

Changing an air corridor is actually more hazardous than the risk of being shot down, you may get lost during the transit or you may ended up crashing into a mountain if the air corridor is established of haste. In fact during the shot down, 4 other planes is flying over Ukrainian, and 1, Singapore Airline Flight 351 was about 6.7 km away form MH-17 when it was shot down, an Air India flight was approximately 50KM over the shot down site going to the other direction. As a matter of fact, during the period the airline being shot down, only 17% of airline diverted their flight outside Ukrainian Air Space.