MH17 Update
There is no credibility to this investigation imho.
The various parties involved in the Ukrainian civil war all have large axes to grind, as do the various intelligence agencies monitoring or manipulating events. That makes a judicial inquiry impracticable, because national security and foreign policy considerations prevent full disclosure.
The various parties involved in the Ukrainian civil war all have large axes to grind, as do the various intelligence agencies monitoring or manipulating events. That makes a judicial inquiry impracticable, because national security and foreign policy considerations prevent full disclosure.
There is no credibility to this investigation imho.
The various parties involved in the Ukrainian civil war all have large axes to grind, as do the various intelligence agencies monitoring or manipulating events. That makes a judicial inquiry impracticable, because national security and foreign policy considerations prevent full disclosure.
The various parties involved in the Ukrainian civil war all have large axes to grind, as do the various intelligence agencies monitoring or manipulating events. That makes a judicial inquiry impracticable, because national security and foreign policy considerations prevent full disclosure.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This version makes sense. Russia needed that reason to start an open war with Ukraine. Its own plane that would have been shot down by "bloody Ukraines" would have given that reason...
Isn't that similar to Hitler concocting the reason to invade Poland?
Isn't that similar to Hitler concocting the reason to invade Poland?
Am I on Jet Blast or R&N? The investigation report, and its value (or lack thereof) are of interest and on topic, but the launch into politics is bound to take a potentially useful discussion about this tragedy and turn it into noise and rubbish.
I take the efforts of the Netherlands investigators seriously, and I believe they do as well. That doesn't overlook that political pressure may have had an influence on both the investigation and on findings. As professionals, contaminating an investigation is bad for the whole industry, see the Egyptian government's take on flight 990 and the Malaysia governments obfuscation on MH 370.
It is in the industry's interest that solid investigations with well grounded methods are undertaken. It is also in the passengers' interests, in the long term, if such investigations improve the safety of air travel.
If we can confine our observations to the latest report and the substance of the investigation, we'll be better off and this thread will not degenerate into noise.
I realize that an event like this will evoke strong feelings in the industry. Having an airliner shot down by a missile by an armed force when it is simply going about its business (KAL 007, Airbus over Persian Gulf/USS Vincennes) shatters our belief that international travel is safe and reliable. It's enough effort to get the operations and safety right without third parties firing live ordnance at passenger liners.
I take the efforts of the Netherlands investigators seriously, and I believe they do as well. That doesn't overlook that political pressure may have had an influence on both the investigation and on findings. As professionals, contaminating an investigation is bad for the whole industry, see the Egyptian government's take on flight 990 and the Malaysia governments obfuscation on MH 370.
It is in the industry's interest that solid investigations with well grounded methods are undertaken. It is also in the passengers' interests, in the long term, if such investigations improve the safety of air travel.
If we can confine our observations to the latest report and the substance of the investigation, we'll be better off and this thread will not degenerate into noise.
I realize that an event like this will evoke strong feelings in the industry. Having an airliner shot down by a missile by an armed force when it is simply going about its business (KAL 007, Airbus over Persian Gulf/USS Vincennes) shatters our belief that international travel is safe and reliable. It's enough effort to get the operations and safety right without third parties firing live ordnance at passenger liners.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Age: 74
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Historically speaking the whole Buk story just confirms that getting gunned down by some idiot in a uniform with an itchy finger and a missile is one of the risks of civil aviation.
However, maybe just maybe, after the Ukraine fiasco, airlines will be a bit less eager to fly over "hot" conflict zones in the future. That plane was -in common parlance- jaywalking a red light.
However, maybe just maybe, after the Ukraine fiasco, airlines will be a bit less eager to fly over "hot" conflict zones in the future. That plane was -in common parlance- jaywalking a red light.
Last edited by T28B; 1st Oct 2016 at 17:03. Reason: Political content removed
The fact is ignored that it was a missile of an old Buk that was retired from the Russian army long ago but is still in wide use in Ukraine, etc. etc.
The Dutch Safety Board has the warhead down as the 9N314M. (Cubic, Irregular and Bow-Tie fragments)
The Russians are suggesting that the warhead must have been the 9N314. (Cubic and Irregular fragments)
The Russians can't work out why Bow-tie warhead fragments have been found in the wreckage and in human remains.
Bow-tie fragments were recovered from the body of the Captain of MH17 and other human remains.
Almaz-Antey back in June 2015 claimed during their detailed presentation that it was a 9M38M1. They also suggested at the time that the M1 was no longer used by Russian Forces which was a bit of a white lie.
Now they have changed their tune and claim that it was a 9M38 with the caveat of they can't understand why M1 fragments are amongst the evidence.
"The only thing that we do not yet understand are why fragments of 9M38M1 are amongst the evidence."
As someone has pointed out on PPRuNe. "Sounds like they have been told what to, "understand"!"
http://www.pprune.org/9146195-post31.html
The question is who is pulling Almaz-Antey's strings here?
The white lie on the M1s and now they are throwing in the red herring of they don't understand why 9M38M1 warhead fragments were found?
9M38M1 was still regularly available to the Russian Military. The early variant missiles are regularly expended during test and exercises. Only natural that they will use up older stocks as these missiles reach their shelf life.
It simply smacks of deflection by the Russians. They need to make the bow-tie fragments go away. No different to the ridiculous non-sense that the Russian Ministry of Defence were peddling during their MH17 press conference. Everything had to be made to go away. Video footage of the Buk claimed in rebel hands had to be geo-located to Ukrainian territory. The video footage was geo-located to Luhansk within days of this lie from the Russians.
The good example of such fact is that some mass media showed transportation of the Buk-M1 missile system from Ukrainian to Russian territory.We can clearly see that its frame-up. These pictures were made in the city of Krasnoarmeisk that is confirmed by a banner situated close to the road. This banner has an address of the car shop situated at the Dnepropetrovskaya, 34. Since May 11 the Krasnoarmeysk city is under control of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
Special Briefing by the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the crash of the Malaysian Boeing 777 in the Ukrainian air space, July 21, 2014
The JIT have released new video of the Buk claimed to be in rebel hands.
It is edited in order to protect the eyewitness/filmer.
https://static.politie.nl/binaries/c...rred_sound.mp4
It does provide further proof to the theory that one specific Buk TELAR previously seen in Russia crossed the border into Eastern Ukraine. The Russian Army Buk units in the deployed convoy messed up badly with their operational security and postings on social media. All that was hoovered up by the likes of Bellingcat and team and supplied to the JIT.
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-a...ss-conference/
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium
Age: 43
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only party who might win in this dirty game
Whether it's the nutty "the Russians tried to shoot down their own plane to invade" or the nutty "the Americans told the Ukrainians to shoot it down so everybody could blame Russia" conspiracy theory, it is illogical to assume malice when the same result can be explained by stupidity. As Hanlon's razor goes.
The least you can say is that, if we assume the more plausible scenario of a cock-up, the "rebels" were the only party which was actively shooting down planes at the time. The evidence that the missile launched from an area they controlled is pretty strong. Likewise the evidence for the type of missile.
Also, I'd like to point out that if we compare the Western story of what likely happened with the Russian one, at least the West has been consistent. Russia has changed from phantom Ukrainian SU-25s and SU-27s to Ukrainian BUKs and conspiracies. Shortly after the crash Russian officials came on TV showing "radar images" that showed this and that...two years later they are showing entirely different radar images that tell a different story which actually contradicts the first entirely.
The only thing consistent in the Russian position thus far is that "we nor the rebels could possibly be responsible" but they've invented loads of clearly bogus stories in the process which does not help them look any more believable now. Russian propagandists have paraded "experts" from organizations that do not exist on Russian state TV, used obviously faked "satellite imagery" etc. They do not behave like a country that has the facts on its side, to say the least. Their BS revelations are also nicely timed to coincide with planned releases of the Dutch investigation board.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those of us old enough to remember , this sounds and looks very much like the damage control media show put up by the Soviets in 1983 after the shoot down of KAL007 .
There it t took 10 years and a change of Regime in Moscow to get the truth.(or closer to the truth). Old habbits are hard to die it seems .
Back on MH17, I have read that the Dutch prosecutors have collected about 100 names of persons possibly involved in the missile launch. If and when those names will be released, the game will change .People did not carry iPhones with them in 1983..
There it t took 10 years and a change of Regime in Moscow to get the truth.(or closer to the truth). Old habbits are hard to die it seems .
Back on MH17, I have read that the Dutch prosecutors have collected about 100 names of persons possibly involved in the missile launch. If and when those names will be released, the game will change .People did not carry iPhones with them in 1983..
FX Guru
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 67
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the BUK launchers FFS, AP published a photo of it the day MH17 was downed. The next day there were pictures/mobile phone footage of it slinking back across the border minus a missile.
I keep saying this, but go back to my original post on this affair which was made less than 24 hours after the poor souls perished on that flight. Everything I said in that post has been confirmed. As I said later, the evidence that emerged on the day is almost certainly not made up as it came from many sources who had not been got at.
The wheels of justice are turning incredibly slowly on this one.
I have been censored. I think a comment that Putin is a KGB hood is entirely ON topic. It helps explain why so many perished on that day.
I keep saying this, but go back to my original post on this affair which was made less than 24 hours after the poor souls perished on that flight. Everything I said in that post has been confirmed. As I said later, the evidence that emerged on the day is almost certainly not made up as it came from many sources who had not been got at.
The wheels of justice are turning incredibly slowly on this one.
I have been censored. I think a comment that Putin is a KGB hood is entirely ON topic. It helps explain why so many perished on that day.
Last edited by angels; 5th Oct 2016 at 20:30. Reason: Off Topic Political Content Removed
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that the missile launcher was shipped in one day and shipped back out the next day. Sort of an overnight hire deal from the nearest tool rental station. This suggests that it was required for a one off special job with the most convenient store branch to the job just across the border. To my way of thinking therefore this leaves just the one question, and that is what was the job.
Actually, it suggests that someone needed to remove the evidence from the scene very quickly.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole question was about motive. To put it another way, was the target the intended victim.
As I recall from earlier discussions, some of which appeared most authoritative, the aircraft was very close to the limits of effective range of the missile.
It was far worse than incompetence, there was a callous and knowing disregard for the safety of civilians. A well known shortcoming of the Fire Dome radar on the BUK transporter/erector/launcher and radar (TELAR) vehicles is that it lacks both transponder interrogation and non-cooperative target recognition (NCTR) capabilities. NCTR is a system that can discriminate between target types even if there is no "cooperative" transponder response. The Fire Dome has a rudimentary military IFF capability that might have been able to identify the Antonov that they were meant to be after but everything in range of the TELAR would have appeared on the radar display as a target.
They basically fired blindly into a known civilian airway against a target that could have been identified as a civilian flight with a smart-phone with a free app.
They basically fired blindly into a known civilian airway against a target that could have been identified as a civilian flight with a smart-phone with a free app.
Mick that's an excellent technical point about that missile system, the lack of the kind of IFF integration that would allow for seeing more than just targets.
I strongly question your last sentence's validity. I am not convinced that these people are/were professional enough to have the kind of C2 and airspace volume control measure, nor charts and depictions, to either know or care if an airway or jet route was near where they were fighting. They are/were ground minded people, not air minded people.
The "fire blindly into a known civilian airway" is the way you or I, who have a pilot's point of view, would look at it. I strongly doubt that, these people being on the ground, not professional, and concerned about their local war, would even come close to looking at it that way.
Where you sit determines what you see, and may also determine what you are even looking for.
I completely agree, however, with your general charge of carelessness, in that they seem to have been of the mental mode of "I am looking for targets" with little other consideration given. From their side's point of view, that kind of attitude is what results in blue on blue. Sadly, a "neutral" is who paid the price.
I strongly question your last sentence's validity. I am not convinced that these people are/were professional enough to have the kind of C2 and airspace volume control measure, nor charts and depictions, to either know or care if an airway or jet route was near where they were fighting. They are/were ground minded people, not air minded people.
The "fire blindly into a known civilian airway" is the way you or I, who have a pilot's point of view, would look at it. I strongly doubt that, these people being on the ground, not professional, and concerned about their local war, would even come close to looking at it that way.
Where you sit determines what you see, and may also determine what you are even looking for.
I completely agree, however, with your general charge of carelessness, in that they seem to have been of the mental mode of "I am looking for targets" with little other consideration given. From their side's point of view, that kind of attitude is what results in blue on blue. Sadly, a "neutral" is who paid the price.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonewolf, you seem to be making assumptions about the identity/"professionalsim" of those responsible that could very well be wrong. In either case it doesn't make the crime any less since you are always responsible when using potentially lethal weapons, even when driving a car. In the previous days there had already been concerns and talks about the safety of civil aviation in the area so those responsible should have been even more aware of this, no excuse.
@1978
I am not offering an excuse for anyone, I am pointing out that assuming that ground folks are as air minded as pilots is a poor assumption. And it is. (If you are making a veiled allusion to a Russian missile crew deliberately doing this, I can't sign up to that conspiracy theory).
Speaking of "those responsible," there was some discussion in the MH-17 original thread about ops departments of various airlines, and various national authorities, assessing the risk of overflying a war zone (or something like a war zone, it's all muddy these days which makes risk assessment even harder) Some took risk mitigation, some did not. MH-17, tragically, flew for a company that did not. In the accidents I investigated, years ago, we classified some contributing factors as "supervisory error" even if they are not causal factors. (Causal factor here is simple: someone shot a missile and it hit, with a key hole in the cheese being that they shot at the wrong target).
None of the above relieves the missile crew who shot at an unidentified target of any responsibility for being careless and unprofessional, and as you characterize it, criminal (at the least you could make a charge of criminal negligence stick).
To make an assumption that the C2 (command and control) of the "Ukraine separatists" and their general discipline is like that of a professional force (German armed forces, Dutch, etc) is to my mind and experience erroneous.
I am not offering an excuse for anyone, I am pointing out that assuming that ground folks are as air minded as pilots is a poor assumption. And it is. (If you are making a veiled allusion to a Russian missile crew deliberately doing this, I can't sign up to that conspiracy theory).
Speaking of "those responsible," there was some discussion in the MH-17 original thread about ops departments of various airlines, and various national authorities, assessing the risk of overflying a war zone (or something like a war zone, it's all muddy these days which makes risk assessment even harder) Some took risk mitigation, some did not. MH-17, tragically, flew for a company that did not. In the accidents I investigated, years ago, we classified some contributing factors as "supervisory error" even if they are not causal factors. (Causal factor here is simple: someone shot a missile and it hit, with a key hole in the cheese being that they shot at the wrong target).
None of the above relieves the missile crew who shot at an unidentified target of any responsibility for being careless and unprofessional, and as you characterize it, criminal (at the least you could make a charge of criminal negligence stick).
To make an assumption that the C2 (command and control) of the "Ukraine separatists" and their general discipline is like that of a professional force (German armed forces, Dutch, etc) is to my mind and experience erroneous.
