Can someone explain why some airlines were flying through the area and others not i.e. based on which criteria, and what's the meaning of closing an airspace up to FL320? If a SAM able to get to, say FL300 wouldn't it be able to get to FL330 or higher? Either the FL320 cap was intended to provide some margin over a SAM operating altitude of say 20000/25000 ft. But not being an expert, how many missile systems reaching 20000 ft wouldn't be able to get much higher? It seems to me either the decision not to close the entire airspace earlier was very irresponsible or the airlines flying through eastern Ukraine hadn't done a proper risk assessment or both. Obviously I would expect the uncertainty over an airspace closing boundaries to be higher in cases of war/conflict like this than, say , of a volcanic ash cloud where there would be measurements, models to extrapolate the concentration of ash. Here, as soon as authorities have reason to believe there is a use of advanced weapons (not short range, not near surface) then shouldn't they factor uncertainty much more hence closing airspace? And knowing this may be not the case with some governments, shouldn't airlines factor it by taking over the risk and hence avoiding completely the area (as apparently some have done?)