What's new

What Sort Of Weapon Shot Down Malaysian Flight MH-17?

Levina

BANNED
Joined
Sep 16, 2013
Messages
15,278
Reaction score
59
Country
India
Location
United Arab Emirates
What Sort Of Weapon Shot Down Flight MH-17?
It's unlikely it was a portable missile launcher.

By
Kelsey D. Atherton


manpads.jpg

Slovenian Soldiers With MANPADS
These are SA-18 Igla Man Portable Air Defense Systems.
MORS, via Wikimedia Commons
Earlier today, Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17, flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, wasshot down over Eastern Ukraine, killing all 295 people on board. Following Ukraine's ouster of Russian-backed President Viktor Yanukovich, and the subsequent seizure of Crimea from Ukraine by Russia, a violent and armed separatist movement emerged in Eastern Ukraine, centered around the city of Donetsk. These Donetsk rebels, with help from a certain foreign backer, have successfully shot down several Ukrainian military aircraft. Now, it looks like intentionally or not, they destroyed a civilian aircraft.

Previously, the Donetsk rebels used Man Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS) to shoot down Ukrainian military attack helicopters, surveillance aircraft, military cargo planes, and other aircraft. But in this case, instead of a MANPADS, it's likely a larger anti-air missile shot down the airliner. The cargo plane was shot down near an airport. The Hind helicopters shot down can't fly above 15,000 feet, and typically operate at less than half that altitude. The An-30 surveillance plane can fly higher than both, but at the time it was hit still flying low enough for the small anti-air missile to get it.

Infantry firing at airplanes is as old as using airplanes in war, but anti-air missiles for infantry really got their start in the 1950s, with the United States' Red Eye missile. The Red Eye could hit targets almost 3 miles away, but only if they were below 9000 feet in elevation. Since then, countries developed many newer and better MANPADS systems, but the fundamental constraint remained: there is only so high a shoulder-fired missile can go. TheSA-18 Igla, one of the more advanced MANPADS in existence and one the Donetsk separatists likely have, can only hit targets at an altitude of 11,500 feet.

MANPADS are still a deadly small weapon. The Federation of American Scientists estimates there are over 500,000 in the world today, and if fired near an airport they can cause tremendous damage and loss of life. But there are limits to MANPADS, and one of them is limited altitude. When shot down, MH-17 was flying at 33,000 feet, well beyond the reach of a man-carried missile.

Early information comes from an advisor to the Ukrainian interior minister, Anton Gerashenko. In a Facebook post he says the plane was "hit by a missile fired from a Buk launcher."

The Buk missile and launcher (these things tend to be paired) entered Soviet service in 1979. It's 18 feet long, carried on the back of an armored, tracked vehicle, and can hit targets at almost 50,000 feet in the air. The Buk missile could certainly shoot down an airliner, though there is no confirmation yet of any Buk missile systems in Donetsk. That said, in late June Russian state-owned radio news service Voice of Russia claimed Donetsk rebels captured a Ukrainian base containing many Buk missile launchers. If it was a ground missile that shot down flight MH-17, it's likely it was a Buk or something similar.

Ground-to-air missiles aren't the only way to shoot down an airliner. In 1983, when Korean Airlines Flight 007 from New York to Seoul by way of Anchorage drifted a little from its flight path into possible Russian airspace, Soviet jets shot it down. While the Donetsk separatists are unlikely to have any aircraft of their own, a Russian fighter could easily shoot down an airplane. Without Cold War tensions behind it, though, it's unlikely this is the case.



1024px-BUK_file2.jpg
 
. . .
Expected that NATO controlled media always start of with the manpad stories to frame the separatists as people shooting down planes all day. Then they make a quick skip over the fact there is no proof the seperatist where even at fault because none of the seperatists could shoot down the airplane with just manpads and the manpad stories are just irrelevant. They immediately jump to conclusion how the seperatist could have shot it down only with a bigger weapon obvsiouly provided by Russia, before they even have any proof it was the seperatists.

They twist the entire story. The fact that the rebels are in fact very unlikely to have shot down the plane because the lack the weapons for it is spun into conspiracies of heavy weapons provided to them by Russia which of course is to blame Russia. The fact that the faction who could have shot down the plane the easiest over Ukraine with the weapons at hand, the Kiev junta, is not even considered.
 
.
Are you guys going to defend looting of the aircraft by separatists too?
 
.
From what I heard on CNN-US (i'll save you all the counterproductive he-said-she-said article_counter-article_postings that you might think i'm about to post on this forum) :

The russian seperatists were apparently trained by Moscow in the use of the BUK missile system, and the BUK launchers have since the MH17 event been shipped back into Russia..

@Hasbara Buster I'd love to hear your comments on this, although i know your primary job on this forum is to forward presstv articles with little engagement of ur own..

@All : My intention on this forum is to have reasonable and intelligent discussions that foster peace. Not to start flamewars, nor useless discussions that are in effect nothing more but speculation fueled by fantasy, etc.
 
.
A little infanterist in this forum abused me for my absolute correct statement that Russian separatists shot down the plane. He never apologized. He is a low creature.
 
.
They twist the entire story. The fact that the rebels are in fact very unlikely to have shot down the plane because the lack the weapons for it is spun into conspiracies of heavy weapons provided to them by Russia which of course is to blame Russia. The fact that the faction who could have shot down the plane the easiest over Ukraine with the weapons at hand, the Kiev junta, is not even considered.

Problem with your theory is they dont lack the weapons.

On June 6, Ukrainian Air Force Antonov AN-30 surveillance plane — a medium-size, two-propeller military craft that's typically Russian-made. This was near Slavyansk, in eastern Ukraine.

June 16, rebels shot down a big Ukrainian Air Force transport plane, an Il-76, killing all 49 people on board.

July 14, an Antonov AN-26 Ukrainian military transport plane was hit by a missile while flying over eastern Ukraine — at 21,000 feet altitude.

First two suspected MANPADS the third at 21000 is beyond their range, some one has the weapons in the eastern Ukraine to bring down aircraft at altitude and has used them prior to MH17
 
.
Global media keeps saying it's a BUK.

But who knows. Let's see what the investigation shows.
 
.
Global media keeps saying it's a BUK.

But who knows. Let's see what the investigation shows.

Buk/SA-11/Gadfly call it what you will, no doubt about what only why and who and even those are prety nailed down.

You have to remember even in "peace" times the US has eyes on missile launches any where in the old SU, there is video of the missile in flight and supposedly recordings of an SA11 minus two missiles crossing back into Russian 2330 that night.
 
.
You have to remember even in "peace" times the US has eyes on missile launches any where in the old SU, there is video of the missile in flight and supposedly recordings of an SA11 minus two missiles crossing back into Russian 2330 that night.

Well if there is definitive proof, then it will be on the news soon and then there won't be much left to discuss.
 
.
From what I heard on CNN-US (i'll save you all the counterproductive he-said-she-said article_counter-article_postings that you might think i'm about to post on this forum) :

The russian seperatists were apparently trained by Moscow in the use of the BUK missile system, and the BUK launchers have since the MH17 event been shipped back into Russia..

@Hasbara Buster I'd love to hear your comments on this, although i know your primary job on this forum is to forward presstv articles with little engagement of ur own..

@All : My intention on this forum is to have reasonable and intelligent discussions that foster peace. Not to start flamewars, nor useless discussions that are in effect nothing more but speculation fueled by fantasy, etc.
The Buk launcher is useless without the radar and rebels don't have that critical component .
 
.
radar guided missiles would shoot down something at that altitude not any man portable system out there....

obviously it was the Russians/pro-Russian-rebels

pretty cowardly act if i may add, shooting down an aircraft with 300 civilians aboard

Problem with your theory is they dont lack the weapons.

On June 6, Ukrainian Air Force Antonov AN-30 surveillance plane — a medium-size, two-propeller military craft that's typically Russian-made. This was near Slavyansk, in eastern Ukraine.

June 16, rebels shot down a big Ukrainian Air Force transport plane, an Il-76, killing all 49 people on board.

July 14, an Antonov AN-26 Ukrainian military transport plane was hit by a missile while flying over eastern Ukraine — at 21,000 feet altitude.

First two suspected MANPADS the third at 21000 is beyond their range, some one has the weapons in the eastern Ukraine to bring down aircraft at altitude and has used them prior to MH17

Ukrainians are having officers shot from the sky and having swathes of territory lost to some hooligans and they cant defend their territory....if i were Ukrainian - in civvy or military garb i'd be livid
 
.
The Buk launcher is useless without the radar and rebels don't have that critical component .
there's a less-advanced radar on each of the mobile buk missile launchers. dunno details beyond that.
 
.
there's a less-advanced radar on each of the mobile buk missile launchers. dunno details beyond that.
I guess that is a tracking radar not a search radar .If you want to use it for attacking a plane you must before hand knew about it and it's altitude and it's path .
now how the separatist knew about those and even if they knew that what was the use of such attack for them .
 
.
Back
Top Bottom