PPRuNe Forums


Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th Jul 2014, 08:02   #921 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,071
I think we can rule out any objectivity in the Russian press. A few journos from Russia Today have resigned due to their inability to report facts detrimental to the Russian government.

The US know the location of Ukrainian resources, and they were not in range of a missile strike on MH17.
no sponsor is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 08:17   #922 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 59
Posts: 330
2 no sponsor

Objectivity of the Russian press is in big question, yes. I did not say that I took that article as a complete true. But the same for UK and US press, for sure. BBC recently erased the footage of their correspondent in the "MH17 area" just because it contradicted with the baseline. That's the common problem of all the media.

Mentioning that US new the location of all the Ukrainian resources does not rule out the fact the Russians new them too. And with better resolution, technically speaking. Just because they are closer. And with better knowledge of their own missile and radar capabilities.
When high officials of the Russian DoD were saying (during the open briefing) that some BUKs of the Ukrainian army could reach MH17, I see no reason not to trust them. Because these data are verifiable.
Here is the map they showed:
http://www.mid.ru/bdomp/brp_4.nsf/9f...ElemFormat=jpg

And they were very careful during that briefing, did not blaming anybody directly.

Last edited by A_Van; 25th Jul 2014 at 08:43. Reason: typos, adding URL with BUK locations
A_Van is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 08:18   #923 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Hornby Island, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 92
Wantion, that is an excellent Photoshop job in post # 926.

I know it will be really hard, but can you try and Photoshop the port central windshield frame shown at the bottom of the following picture, plus the blackened wiper lower part of that windshield frame shown in the middle of that picture onto that same overall picture that you show in your post?

I know it will take a lot of editing and turning and reduction of size, but I suspect that the eventual result might be horrifically dramatic.

Here is the relevant picture.

https://secure.flickr.com/photos/jer...s/14717505025/
McGinty is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 08:40   #924 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 813
Quote:
OSCE says this is the biggest piece of #MH17 found so far.
Nonsense. This piece is barely 10 frames wide, less than half the size of the lower forward fuselage found so far.
However, size does not matter. The piece which gives the biggest clue so far, is quite a small one. It the new piece tells a story, it is important, no matter how large.
The whole upper forward fuselage is still missing, and given the fact that the lower forward fuselage was found in one piece and away from the main crash site, that part should have survived as well. Maybe in small pieces?
If I see that correctly, the fuselage crown beacon is located a little aft of door two, around the wing root leading edge position, and well visible in one of the Akkermanns pictures attached to a larger piece of skin. So it looks like the upper fuselage skin was torn away at least up to the strong frames attaching the wing.
I have seen nothing from the cockpit crown so far, that is probably a very important piece, too.
Volume is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 08:46   #925 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volume
I have seen nothing from the cockpit crown so far, that is probably a very important piece, too.
Probably because that was carted off by the rebels seen cutting the cockpit up with petrol powered circular saws.

Why else would they have been cutting the wreckage up?
LiveryMan is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 09:01   #926 (permalink)
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 594
Why else ?

As has already been mentioned,it's possible they were looking for bodies and cutting some wreckage might have been necessary
TWT is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 09:09   #927 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 813
Or even because they had already found bodies and wanted to recover them. It is like the monkey toy picture, a rebel seen with a saw cutting debris does mean nothing.
Volume is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 09:24   #928 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Frankfurt
Age: 67
Posts: 36
Why else ?

Possibly so as to be able to cart off electronics boxes like the guy in some BBC footage taken of the cockpit. But then, maybe he believed there was a body in it? Why assume conspiracy when looting has the same effect.
DrPhillipa is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 09:53   #929 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Van View Post
Mentioning that US new the location of all the Ukrainian resources does not rule out the fact the Russians new them too. And with better resolution, technically speaking. Just because they are closer. And with better knowledge of their own missile and radar capabilities.
When high officials of the Russian DoD were saying (during the open briefing) that some BUKs of the Ukrainian army could reach MH17, I see no reason not to trust them. Because these data are verifiable.
Here is the map they showed:
http://www.mid.ru/bdomp/brp_4.nsf/9f...ElemFormat=jpg

And they were very careful during that briefing, did not blaming anybody directly.
After the DoD briefing claimed that the video showing the Buk allegedly driven in the direction of Russia was shot in Krasnoarmeysk (Ukrainian controlled territory), and that was subsequently thoroughly debunked when Ukrainians released the actual location where it was shot (Luhansk), credibility of the rest of the information in that briefing was seriously shaken.

As to the linked map, it is showing three Buk batteries within range of the assumed hit location. All of them were inside separatist-controlled territory (the one near Donetsk was near the front lines, the other two were deep inside).

In addition, we know that the shrapnel damage to the fuselage is concentrated in front, with particularly heavy density in front of the cockpit on the left side, so we can pretty safely rule out the westernmost two batteries (they would have left damage to the rear and to the right wing), and even the eastern battery would be stretching it. A launch from straight ahead or slightly to the left of the route would be more likely. If you look at any recent map of combat activities in the area, you can see that front left quadrant from the assumed hit location is all separatist-controlled territory at least for 40 km in all directions (and, except for the pocket straight ahead along the Russian border, there's no Ukrainian territory closer than ~70 km.)

And, of course, there's still the question "why would those Ukrainian Buks, if they were in fact there, possibly be shooting at MH17?" We have a reasonable explanation why separatists could have shot it down (they thought it was a Ukrainian transport plane). It's extremely hard to find an explanation for this action if it were committed by Ukrainians. This is not an active homing missile like S-200 that you can "lose" (like Ukrainians themselves did with Siberia Airlines 1812 in 2001). Separatists have no air force. MH17 was approaching from the heart of Ukraine and could not have been mistaken for a Russian military plane.

Last edited by hamster3null; 25th Jul 2014 at 10:07.
hamster3null is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 10:32   #930 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 476
@ A_Van, re: Russian theory of a gross error during training by UKR forces.

Notwithstanding the serious indications tending to show that the Russian side is trying to mud waters on the whole MH17 story, it is interesting to examine the logic of the scenario described.

So, you're a (young?) UKR soldier, doing training, and you shouldn't launch any missile (and you know it).
But, you make a mistake, and a missile is launched. And in addition, bound to the wrong target (perhaps you didn't notice that).
The BUK is a semi-active radar system. That means that the radar emitter is on the ground, and the missile seeker only has a passive radar receipter.
If you cut your radar illumination (from the ground) the missile cannot steer itself anymore. I think it auto-destructs in such a case (anyone more knowledgeable on that matter?).
In the control shelter, you also may have the ability to initiale missile self-destruction by other means (i.e. specific function to send such a command to the missile, notwithstanding your ground radar status).

I guess you would do anything to stop a missile, even if you're not sure towards who it's bound, if you know you shouldn't have launched one in the first place.
And if you've one or two simple means to do that, I think there is a good chance you would have succeeded.

Conclusion: this Russian theory is unlikely, and far less likely than the target identification error by a separatist team.

Last edited by AlphaZuluRomeo; 25th Jul 2014 at 14:32.
AlphaZuluRomeo is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 10:38   #931 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Upper or lower fuselage?

OleOle is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 10:57   #932 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 52
Posts: 797
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Van View Post
Objectivity of the Russian press is in big question, yes. I did not say that I took that article as a complete true. But the same for UK and US press, for sure. BBC recently erased the footage of their correspondent in the "MH17 area" just because it contradicted with the baseline.
A truly free press simply does not exist in Russia; any media organization with any objectivity or independence of thought has been brought under control of the Kremlin or snuffed out. When the Kremlin has a particular party line, no-one dares publish anything that contradicts that view. As has been reported recently, the Russia Today journalist Sara Firth resigned in protest citing editorial interference and use of misinformation in the presentation of the MH017 story.

Personally, I would simply disregard anything broadcast or published by any russian media organization, because it cannot be trusted to be independent or impartial.

The BBC are a far from a perfect organization, but they are at least editorially independent of the British Government.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 11:04   #933 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 813
Quote:
Upper or lower fuselage?
Center luggage bins? So I would assume upper.
Volume is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 11:14   #934 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 40 North 75 West
Posts: 16
Quote:
A Van

And they were very careful during that briefing, did not blaming anybody directly.
They (the Russians) were 'very careful' to claim that the video of the BUK battery with a missing rocket heading back to Russia being transported by a tractor-trailer was filmed in Krasnoarmeysk (Kiev controlled area). The evidence is now incontrovertible that the video was shot in Lughansk as initially claimed by the Ukrainians.
SLF305 is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 12:48   #935 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Age: 49
Posts: 54
Cockpit Window Parts

Not 100% sure but I think the window frame at the bottom of Jeroen Akkermans photo here is the Starboard centre window.










The image of the 777 cockpit comes from here

Last edited by Mudman; 25th Jul 2014 at 13:02. Reason: attribution of source photo
Mudman is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 13:04   #936 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Right Here
Posts: 30
Cockpit Centre Window - Closeup

Wantion is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 13:16   #937 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cape Town
Age: 53
Posts: 16
To get an illustration of the cynical manipulation by Russian TV have a look at this compilation where the same person (apparently an actor) is seen to portray different people: a crying political refugee, an election observer and as a capm organiser. If it wasn't so sad it would be funny...

Zo worden Russen voorgelogen | Opmerkelijk | Telegraaf.nl
Tallman is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 13:32   #938 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Cockpit Window - Closer Closeup

http://cdn-new-europe1.ladmedia.fr/v...red/P5_038.jpg
http://cdn-new-europe1.ladmedia.fr/v...red/P5_039.jpg

They have something like "ballistic channels". I'm not yet totally convinced it's the center window.

@Mudman: good job
OleOle is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 13:39   #939 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: St. Petersbourg
Age: 33
Posts: 25
fragment paths

If i am not misled this frame shows

1) 2 green circles. Probably places of penetration for 1 fragment. Seems that explosion was at same level as plane. Not above

2) 2 red circles. Presumably places where fragments failed to penetrate frame. Shows size and shape.

PashaF is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 13:40   #940 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Right Here
Posts: 30
Centre Window ?

@OleOle Excellent Find ....I have my doubts as well - Centre Window ?

@MudMan yes Excellent work
Wantion is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:57.


© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1