Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

MH17 down near Donetsk

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

MH17 down near Donetsk

Old 16th Sep 2014, 21:25
  #1321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
keeping it very simple.

MH17 heading approx 100deg
Missile fired from ahead of it

Now going to the missile site

if manned by rebels they could erroneously think the target was a threat to them coming from that direction.

If manned by Ukraine forces why would they image anything from that direction (basically Kiev) would/could be a threat to them and therefore fire at it.

Sorry for all the technical details and fog on here, it was fired by rebel forces (BTW russians aren't that dull to have made that mistake)
oldoberon is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2014, 21:35
  #1322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 13
Received 5 Likes on 1 Post
Hello,

I dont know why my (first ) post was not published. So here is a second try. Very briefly:

Have the crew of the Air India and Air Singapore been interviewed. Especially the Singapore was quite close (some 25km) behind the MH17 according to the radar replay (by the Russians).

To my experience the event would be well observable from both flights if someone looked out of the front window. Especially the uprising missle contrail, the exploding and the debris. I think some 60 seconds later the Singapore passed very close to the falling MH.

No one seen anything? Or not published so far?

Last edited by 51bravo; 17th Sep 2014 at 11:22.
51bravo is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 15:19
  #1323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 61
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At acquisition distance, for accurate altitude calculation the radar+launcher Buk vehicle must be adjusted precisely level. The launch site was in plough-land.
Lena.Kiev is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 17:19
  #1324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@anonymousdefender

You constantly claim that the TELAR was in the autonomous mode pointing to the lack of mentions about the acquisition radar 9S18 in the Russian MoD's briefing. And that briefing is anything but convincing. It's purpose is to show we know something unpleasant for you. That is why all that 'hoolabulling' in the western media subsided. It is a political thing so any conclusions inferring from that briefing are fragile.

FYI Russia since Soviet times has at area ATC centers 2(two) parts called sectors. The civilian one and the military one. What the military sector can see the civilian one may not. The video was from the screen of civilian sector of Rostov center. And it was clearly stated on the briefing (in Russian... i didn't follow for the English translator) 'Rostov area center of United System of Air Traffic Control'. This 'United System' is NOT the air defense (though they are integrated).

Quote:
the crew are accustomed to track civilian planes as a routine exercise.

SA-11 cannot track civilian planes as routine since 9S35M1 have 120 degree segment in search mode
But it can acquire and track military ones. Something contradictory in you view about TELAR. I think you missed the word 'exercise' in my statement you answered to.

Il-76 have 750-850 cruise speed, very close to Boeing 900 km/h.
The Buk's operator sees the speed in exact numbers not as a bar in some computer games.

Why SA-11 must wait descending Il-76?
The trained crew would wait because they must have a notion about civilian air traffic.

Last edited by GSOB; 17th Sep 2014 at 17:30.
GSOB is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 17:37
  #1325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GSOB is correct - a TRAINED crew would wait - hand this sort of thing over to a bunch of red-necks and what do you expect??

so excited at having REAL kit they just couldn't wait to use it

would have been the same in the UK, the USA and just about anywhere else
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 17:48
  #1326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Mos Espa
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You constantly claim that the TELAR was in the autonomous mode pointing to the lack of mentions about the acquisition radar 9S18 in the Russian MoD's briefing.
on July 17 we detected increased activity of Ukrainian radars 9S18 Kupol-M1 of the Buk missile system - briefing of MoD
Do you see on this map 9S18 radar which detected near launch site?
Then TELAR used autonomous mode, if MoD dont detected ukrainian 9S18.
Also MoD can prefer dont show separatists 9S18 working radar.
Choose one of variant.
FYI Russia since Soviet times has at area ATC centers 2(two) parts called sectors. The civilian one and the military one. What the military sector can see the civilian one may not. The video was from the screen of civilian sector of Rostov center. And it was clearly stated on the briefing (in Russian... i didn't follow for the English translator) 'Rostov area center of United System of Air Traffic Control'. This 'United System' is NOT the air defense (though they are integrated).
FYI in 1998 General Staff ordered to Air Defense troops accept information Air Traffic radar posts.
But it can acquire and track military ones. Something contradictory in you view about TELAR. I think you missed the word 'exercise' in my statement you answered to.
Please provide SHEDULE OF EXERCISE for SA-11! I wanna see how good you know about it and what parts and how used during exercises.
If you REALLY know SA-11 then you can do it. Common!
The Buk's operator sees the speed in exact numbers not as a bar in some computer games.
FYI BUK operator see RADIAL SPEED of target which differ from TRUE AIRSPEED. Another point against your knowledge in radars.
The trained crew would wait because they must have the notion about civilian air traffic.
FYI trained crew dont open fire without CONFIRMATION from Command Vehicle (which connected to 9S18 radar). Can you provide information how SA-11 record all operations manned by personnel?
P.S. Im still wait how operator can change target during missile flight - button on panel pls or whatever! Your friends on forum which used SA-11 easy can show it for you. And i have much more question about plane crossing MH17. I will fired it after button lol.
anonymousdefender is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 18:17
  #1327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 12
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@GSOB

one thing which is so far a total mystery to most of people accustomed to using own brain, instead of taking for granted anything what the talking heads on tellie (or its modern day equivalent of RT channel in Youtube) care to say -

if Russia was indeed no party to this tragic incident specifically (to the extent that MAK, which nominally had the jurisdiction for this accident investigation, refused to do so (ICAO at least at the time did not list Ukraine as having own 'accredited accident investigation body')), or to all the turmoil in Eastern Ukraine in general, why was that hastily arranged 'MoD briefing' staged at all?

All it seems to have achieved is the direct opposite of its apparent intent - an implicit admission of own guilt, in fact..
And why so - a true 'no party' (with a clear conscience) would not have seen any need for such a briefing.
Normunds_k is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 18:37
  #1328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: ME
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Russia is until now denying it's involment in Ukraine, let alone in July...
Romasik is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 18:43
  #1329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
You constantly claim that the TELAR was in the autonomous mode pointing to the lack of mentions about the acquisition radar 9S18 in the Russian MoD's briefing.
on July 17 we detected increased activity of Ukrainian radars 9S18 Kupol-M1 of the Buk missile system - briefing of MoD
Do you see on this map 9S18 radar which detected near launch site?
Then TELAR used autonomous mode, if MoD dont detected ukrainian 9S18.
Also MoD can prefer dont show separatists 9S18 working radar.
Choose one of variant.
Possibly I misunderstand you and I'm lost in your edited messages. Please can you repeat why do you believe in the autonomous mode of the Russian Buk? What the part in the Russian MoD's briefing is essential for that?

Quote:
This 'United System' is NOT the air defense (though they are integrated).

FYI in 1998 General Staff ordered to Air Defense troops accept information Air Traffic radar posts.
How my sentence contradicts with your one?

Please provide SHEDULE OF EXERCISE for SA-11! I wanna see how good you know about it and what parts and how used during exercises.
If you REALLY know SA-11 then you can do it. Common!
I'm not REALLY know and never pretended. I leave the true knowledge to the one drawing 2D pictures for actually 3D process.

FYI BUK operator see RADIAL SPEED
sitting in the missile seeker?
GSOB is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 20:44
  #1330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,307
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mysterious $30m reward offered for MH17 evidence

An anonymous investigator offers $30m for indisputable evidence on who shot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 as it flew over the Ukraine-Russia border
Mysterious $30m reward offered for MH17 evidence - Telegraph
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2014, 22:34
  #1331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 54
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mysterious $30m reward offered for MH17 evidence

In the Netherlands we think this is a hoax. The guy that is supposed to be the spokesman has not a very credible background. Sorry no link
blackbird69 is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 06:18
  #1332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Normunds_k

Putin yielding to the mounting press asked his MoD to 'say something'.
This something can have any meaning or even can have no meaning at all (just to report to Putin 'done'). The part relating to Ukrainian air defense looks pretty solid. The other parts don't convince. There is the failed attempt of video geolocating which looks like they introduced social networks's version into the briefing intact at the moment when it is not yet completed(verified). The part about the deviation from the planned route is true in general despite the strange picture. All that can be just an instinctive reply to the western media narrative 'there-was-the-one-with-a-thing-he-is-guilty-in-the-rape' with 'there-was-another-guy-with-a-thing'.

The most crucial part is about Su-25 in which i'm not sure because they possibly tried to reflect the known as existed at that moment ground observers's accounts and nothing more (as in the geolocating part). But if it was a meaningful message based on known but yet not unveiled facts then the question arises. What do they mean?
If it is an air-to-air attack then why they selected the least fitted type of Ukrainian Air forces? If they hint on something else then what can it be?
I see only one fitting scenario which implies that the Russian Buk fires at a military aircraft and missile retargets of which Buk is known as able. There were accounts from rebels that Ukraine adopted this tactic to fly below civilian planes. This case implicates BOTH parties as guilty.

I have nothing to say about ICAO instead MAK. May be they are already sure that it will give nothing decisive.
GSOB is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 07:39
  #1333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A simple statement of condolences and the customary offer of help would be what everybody expects from a non-party to a tragic accident.
Not releasing on public some info would be perceived as hiding. There are accusations against Ukraine for not releasing their data though they aren't bound to do so formally.
GSOB is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 11:09
  #1334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 12
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There are accusations against Ukraine for not releasing their data
any reference to a credible/reputable source (outside the 'BATA' domain) would be most appreciated
Normunds_k is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 14:33
  #1335 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Mos Espa
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it is an air-to-air attack then why they selected the least fitted type of Ukrainian Air forces?
Falling speeed for Su25 is 170 km/h. Much easier show falling debris as barraging Su-25.
MoD now full of loyal but stupid officers which must agree with bloody politic, it all. That started fron 2nd Checnya and continue in 08.08.08.
I see only one fitting scenario which implies that the Russian Buk fires at a military aircraft and missile retargets of which Buk is known as able.
SA-11 cannot retarget from Su-25 to Boeing.
1. Signal (shape, length, reverbations, envelope and videosignal) from both is very different and selection of targets very easy for Argon-15.
2. 9S35M1 very accurate radar so Su-25 must follow Boeing close to 180m and speed varies on 30m/s. Su-25 cannot have so much speed on alt=10000m.
3. Argon-15 dont give to crew ability for change target, commander must choose target on stage Search, then Argon-15 calculate algorithm Meet Zone, then indicate Target in zone, commander open fire it all. Please show me BUTTON on commander place which can change target.
4. If you know SA-11 then you know what to do 2 soldiers - first and second. They sit on right from commander and both tune frequency (if enemy use ECM) and control alt/range of target and missile. It impossible for Su-25 or Boeing invade on both screen at same time and on same level.
5. Missile seeker after first 2.6 seconds of flight look only on target - it how proportional navigation work, and on-board computer of 9E50M1 receive commands from TELAR but compare data from 9S35M1 (relative position of target and firing radar) and data from seeker (relative position of target and missile) for calculate correction signals to missile. If angle of view TELAR on Boeing on range 30km change with time on a few degree, at same time missile have NO CHANGE angle of view. So impossible for another target take a place of Su-25 by Boeing in both systems of measure - TELAR and seeker.
All who whine about "targeting Su-25 but hit Boeing" are idiots and liers.

Last edited by anonymousdefender; 18th Sep 2014 at 16:26.
anonymousdefender is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 20:49
  #1336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On Russian radar video the alleged Su25 appears a minute and a half after Boeing was hit, when it already dropped its speed to 200km/h. Before the hit, during the targeting and first stages of missile flight, this Su must have been miles and miles away and below 5000m. I just don't see how the missile could have been accidentally retargeted from that alleged Su to the Boeing, they were never close.
BATHIK is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2014, 22:47
  #1337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@anonymousdefender

Thankyou very much for sharing your knowledge. Your posts are much appreciated!
MrSnuggles is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2014, 11:04
  #1338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@BATHIK
"then there was a huge drop to 563 or something"

Until the speed 893 or so the flight was normal.
Then the destruction happened between radar display frame refresh.
Missile explosion did it's damage in 0.01s, after that the broken front of the plane twisted to right and I assume the nose broke off in less than one second. For a small periode of time the plane was banana shaped, therefore it made the 20g turn to east/north and broke down more.
The turn took away big part of the kinetic energy of the plane and as it's speed decreases, also the slowing force from air friction become smaller, slowing slows down and the speed angle starts to be more towards ground and radar does not show that.

To me the radar jumping is caused by the plane body and nose separating from each other.
sotilaspassi is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2014, 02:01
  #1339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Montenegro
Age: 41
Posts: 340
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Germany: "Kiev should have closed their airspace" says lawyer of German MH17 victims' families

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLUj9V46aUg
AreOut is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2014, 03:25
  #1340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With hindsight that is very obviously true
Cool Guys is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.