MH17 down near Donetsk
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
From: Eastern Europe
A screenshot (taken not by me) of a witness' confession:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bs5C9rVCcAALAz8.png
Translation: at a Snezhnoe town local web-community, on July 17:
- Yesterday that Buk was towed through the center of our town. (invective), we forgot ourselves in playing war games. I hate myself.
- I'm not sure that it was that same Buk.
- I saw the rocket launch myself, then I rejoiced at knocking out the Ukrainians. I repent before God.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bs5C9rVCcAALAz8.png
Translation: at a Snezhnoe town local web-community, on July 17:
- Yesterday that Buk was towed through the center of our town. (invective), we forgot ourselves in playing war games. I hate myself.
- I'm not sure that it was that same Buk.
- I saw the rocket launch myself, then I rejoiced at knocking out the Ukrainians. I repent before God.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
From: Antipodes Islands
Lightning in region
This archive shows lightning present in Central Ukraine, and in Eastern Ukraine shortly before MH17 passed over.
http://www.lightningmaps.org/blitzortung/europe/index.php?bo_page=archive&bo_hour_range=24&bo_oldmap=0&bo_ol dani=0&bo_map=0&bo_year=2014&bo_month=7&bo_day=17&bo_hour_fr om=13&bo_animation=1&lang=en#bo_arch_strikes_maps_form
http://www.lightningmaps.org/blitzortung/europe/index.php?bo_page=archive&bo_hour_range=24&bo_oldmap=0&bo_ol dani=0&bo_map=0&bo_year=2014&bo_month=7&bo_day=17&bo_hour_fr om=13&bo_animation=1&lang=en#bo_arch_strikes_maps_form
Last edited by Mahatma Kote; 1st August 2014 at 01:48. Reason: spelling
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: Washstate
PUUHHHLEESE
There are many previous posts in this thread re the missile vs fighter theories
Most all re fighter have been debunked.
There have also been posts re the typical buk missile flight profile which seem to summarize as follows
a) very high speed M= 3 plus
b) very high altitude capability 70 to 80 K feet
c) flight profile via radar and proximity mention the missile typically leads the aircraft, dives on it from a higher altitude and explodes via proximity and/or contact
d) left side Cockpit damage AND shrapnel " skid' marks on left wing UPPER surface indicate that missile was at at wing level or slightly above when detonated
e) not so obvious is that almost any kind of ' corner' angle of aluminum makes a good reflector- consider the wing to body junction for instance
f) U.S tracking claims it was a missile
ALL of which support a missile from a general head on position.
g) what remains to be proven is WHO and WHY fired.
Most all re fighter have been debunked.
There have also been posts re the typical buk missile flight profile which seem to summarize as follows
a) very high speed M= 3 plus
b) very high altitude capability 70 to 80 K feet
c) flight profile via radar and proximity mention the missile typically leads the aircraft, dives on it from a higher altitude and explodes via proximity and/or contact
d) left side Cockpit damage AND shrapnel " skid' marks on left wing UPPER surface indicate that missile was at at wing level or slightly above when detonated
e) not so obvious is that almost any kind of ' corner' angle of aluminum makes a good reflector- consider the wing to body junction for instance
f) U.S tracking claims it was a missile
ALL of which support a missile from a general head on position.
g) what remains to be proven is WHO and WHY fired.
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Seattle
Speaking of AN-26 shot down a day or two before MH17. It was widely reported that it was flying at 6000 m or higher, above the range of most portables SAMs, so a BUK may have had something to do with it. In the videos of the BUK on the trailer being moved around, we see only one missile missing. Did the rebels have more than one BUK? Where is the wreckage of the AN-26? Who controls that area? Is there an investigation of what downed the AN-26 by the Ukraine authorities?
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: Moscow region
2 Speedstra
Yes, that's the key point, agree. But until the fragments are found physically and thoroughly analysed, we can't say for sure. Pictures with traces are not enough to serve as a 100% evidence...
Yes, that's the key point, agree. But until the fragments are found physically and thoroughly analysed, we can't say for sure. Pictures with traces are not enough to serve as a 100% evidence...
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
Yes they are!
If the debris shows a certain distribution pattern of shrapnel. That is bona fide, hard, physical evidence. And if that pattern points to something other than the typical pattern of an R-27, then that rules out the R-27 with enough certainty to move on to the next likely suspect. Yup, the SA-11.
Far more convincing than your suppositions.
Seriously, you're grasping at straws. Your conspiracy has been debunked. Suck it up and go find a new method of blaming someone else.
If the debris shows a certain distribution pattern of shrapnel. That is bona fide, hard, physical evidence. And if that pattern points to something other than the typical pattern of an R-27, then that rules out the R-27 with enough certainty to move on to the next likely suspect. Yup, the SA-11.
Far more convincing than your suppositions.
Originally Posted by A_Van
But until the fragments are found physically and thoroughly analysed, we can't say for sure
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 201
Likes: 34
From: Germany
http://graphics.wsj.com/mh17-crash-m...l/IMG_0688.jpg
and here:
http://s18.postimg.org/4r8wbeybt/shrap.jpg
Can anybody identify if this part is from ahead or aft of the entry door?
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 220
Likes: 45
From: EGMH
There are images from EOSDIS which show cloud cover at around 11:35 UTC but this is obviously not ideal. There may be other sources with a better time match.
https://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worl...5742,53.334961
This image was captured at approx 11:35 to the left of the central line and approx 9:55 UTC to the right.
https://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worl...5742,53.334961
This image was captured at approx 11:35 to the left of the central line and approx 9:55 UTC to the right.
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
From: NV USA
Consider the ramifications if the Ukraine had indeed shot down Pres. Putin? This would have triggered a full on immediate invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces. I just don't see that as a valid strategy of the Ukrainian gov. Also even though the two jets looked remarkably similar in finish details any pilot can identify a 777 from miles away without seeing the detailed paint colors,
There may well have been fighter/bombers in the area considering the campaign
and the blast patterns are puzzling for sure, but I don't believe the fighter jet shoot down theory has much credence.
There may well have been fighter/bombers in the area considering the campaign
and the blast patterns are puzzling for sure, but I don't believe the fighter jet shoot down theory has much credence.
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: Moscow region
2 Olasek
You may not believe that but "Moscow TV" (even some chauvinistic channels which I hate) never elaborated on this idiotic conspiracy addressing the "attempt to shoot down the Putin's plane".
Regarding the "Russian invasion": The time for that option has gone long ago. Putin had already announced some 2 months ago he would not give such an order. Also the Russian parliament withdrew its formal permission to the president to use the military force abroad (read, in Ukraine). If they really needed that, it would be done in spring and took a couple of days.
I am not a fan of the current policy being carried out in Russia, but there is understanding here that "the stakes we are gambling are frighteningly high".
IMHO, now those rebels are a problem for Putin and actually he never liked them much. Recall that when they announced a referendum to separate from Ukraine (in March) Putin said "do not do that". They ignored his advice and arranged some chaotic voting. I am sure he was angry. Especially as the Ukrainian pres. candidate promised at that time he would not ban the Russian language in that part of the country (the point that actually started the fire) and that seemed enough for Kremlin. Then the rebels were asking for a military invasion in south-east and the answer was again "no". After that some voices were heard from there that the "rebels condemned Kremlin " who "let them down" and obviously it was not appreciated.
You may not believe that but "Moscow TV" (even some chauvinistic channels which I hate) never elaborated on this idiotic conspiracy addressing the "attempt to shoot down the Putin's plane".
Regarding the "Russian invasion": The time for that option has gone long ago. Putin had already announced some 2 months ago he would not give such an order. Also the Russian parliament withdrew its formal permission to the president to use the military force abroad (read, in Ukraine). If they really needed that, it would be done in spring and took a couple of days.
I am not a fan of the current policy being carried out in Russia, but there is understanding here that "the stakes we are gambling are frighteningly high".
IMHO, now those rebels are a problem for Putin and actually he never liked them much. Recall that when they announced a referendum to separate from Ukraine (in March) Putin said "do not do that". They ignored his advice and arranged some chaotic voting. I am sure he was angry. Especially as the Ukrainian pres. candidate promised at that time he would not ban the Russian language in that part of the country (the point that actually started the fire) and that seemed enough for Kremlin. Then the rebels were asking for a military invasion in south-east and the answer was again "no". After that some voices were heard from there that the "rebels condemned Kremlin " who "let them down" and obviously it was not appreciated.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,609
Likes: 0
From: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 201
Likes: 34
From: Germany
Vector of the missile ?
These two Akkermanns Images how the same item from different angles.
I think I identified the front skin above the starboard windshield. It has shrapnel and soot from the inside.
I added an image of the forward bulkhead with soot from here:
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/drugo...7_original.jpg
Click on image for larger version:
The cockpit assembly image is from here:
http://www.patrasevents.gr/imgsrv/f/full/889451.jpg
I think I identified the front skin above the starboard windshield. It has shrapnel and soot from the inside.
I added an image of the forward bulkhead with soot from here:
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/drugo...7_original.jpg
Click on image for larger version:
The cockpit assembly image is from here:
http://www.patrasevents.gr/imgsrv/f/full/889451.jpg
Last edited by OleOle; 2nd August 2014 at 02:03.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 2
From: Hampshire, UK
Yep, I think you have got it right. It looks like a large amount of structure was deformed or opened up by the pressure wave (the crown skin in other pictures is pressed in between frames), and the impact with the ground has caused it to splay out.
From the account of the B-52 flier here and some other pictures around of SAM damage it does appear that the missile was extraordinarily close when it fused.
The front of the cockpit looks like such a strong structure, too.
From the account of the B-52 flier here and some other pictures around of SAM damage it does appear that the missile was extraordinarily close when it fused.
The front of the cockpit looks like such a strong structure, too.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
From: Midpoint between equator and North Pole
You may not believe that but "Moscow TV" (even some chauvinistic channels which I hate) never elaborated on this idiotic conspiracy addressing the "attempt to shoot down the Putin's plane".
You are not truthful.
Russian media launched this theory with the reference to a source in the Russian state authority, RosAviation.
TV included. E.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2lgMGzn498
You can see that this theory actually was elaborated by the Russian state TV.
Please, stop spreading propaganda, it's a professional forum here.
You are not truthful.
Russian media launched this theory with the reference to a source in the Russian state authority, RosAviation.
TV included. E.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2lgMGzn498
You can see that this theory actually was elaborated by the Russian state TV.
Please, stop spreading propaganda, it's a professional forum here.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
From: Midpoint between equator and North Pole
Speaking of AN-26 shot down a day or two before MH17. It was widely reported that it was flying at 6000 m or higher, above the range of most portables SAMs, so a BUK may have had something to do with it. In the videos of the BUK on the trailer being moved around, we see only one missile missing. Did the rebels have more than one BUK? Where is the wreckage of the AN-26? Who controls that area? Is there an investigation of what downed the AN-26 by the Ukraine authorities?
1. The official Ukrainian version from the very beginning (at least from July 15) was that the An-26 was shot down from Russian territory, not by the separatists. Buk was not mentioned in the official statement. Strong suspicion was on a Russian fighter jet.
2. Rebels did not and do not have a Buk launcher. The one that shot down the MH17 was brought to Ukraine and returned back to Russia within one day, July 17. The only missile spent was on the MH17.
Rebels are in possession of two or three disabled (scrapped) Buk launchers. No missiles though.
3. The An-26 wreckage is in a field near Lugansk.
4. Rebels control the area.
5. There was no any information about such an investigation. Definitely, some military investigation has to be conducted, I mean an operational aspect.
1. The official Ukrainian version from the very beginning (at least from July 15) was that the An-26 was shot down from Russian territory, not by the separatists. Buk was not mentioned in the official statement. Strong suspicion was on a Russian fighter jet.
2. Rebels did not and do not have a Buk launcher. The one that shot down the MH17 was brought to Ukraine and returned back to Russia within one day, July 17. The only missile spent was on the MH17.
Rebels are in possession of two or three disabled (scrapped) Buk launchers. No missiles though.
3. The An-26 wreckage is in a field near Lugansk.
4. Rebels control the area.
5. There was no any information about such an investigation. Definitely, some military investigation has to be conducted, I mean an operational aspect.
Last edited by ASIP; 2nd August 2014 at 12:05.
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Mos Espa