Malaysia Airlines MH17 Lost Over Ukraine - Shot Down?

[CAM]

Reports from FlightRadar24 that Malaysia Airlines are still skirting fate and flew flight MH4 directly over Homs in Syria yesterday, the only flight recorded doing so.

[seawolf]

As outrages go, shooting down a plane doesn't rate very highly anyway. The Captain of the USS, William Rogers III was awarded the Legion of Merit for "exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer from April 1987 to May 1989". Iran Air Flight 655 was shot down on 3rd July 1988, killing 290 people, including 66 children.

 

Quite a different situation really, and one that I had privy to the source information used in the investigation as well as information that was not and could not be disclosed then or now. If you want to discuss that though, best to fork the thread,

[Grey-gear]

Proberly best to wait until an official inquiry is finished but given what is happen in Ukraine at the moment we could be waiting for a long time

[pcstru]

The split isn't as clear cut as you make out either. Many of the journalists and international observers have spoken to normal people in the East, and before it became more of a military issue, the prevailing opinion was that the people wanted a bit more independence but wanted to remain part of Ukraine.

I'd say that was simplistic too. The IFES poll in 2013 indicated significant differences in opinion geographically within the Ukraine, tro a number of issues from corruption to links with the EU or Russia.

 

"Respondents were also asked about Ukraine possibly taking steps to join the European Union (EU) or the Customs Union. Opinions are divided, with 37 percent of Ukrainians indicating support for the country to join the EU and 33 percent indicating preference for the Customs Union. There are significant regional differences on this issue as there is greater support for Ukraine taking steps to join the EU rather than the Customs Union in the West (73 percent versus 5 percent) and in Kyiv (64 percent versus 10 percent), while there is greater support for joining the Customs Unions rather than taking steps to join the EU in the South (62 percent versus 14 percent) and the East (46 percent versus 20 percent). "

 

Part of this is a legacy from the days of the USSR, when tens of thousands of Russians were 'planted' in soviet block countries as a means of strengthening the hold of the Kremlin over the satellite states. Now it is those ethnic Russians who form the core of the separatist movements. Could any Russian government just leave them to their fate? If they don't support them they risk an influx of refugees as ex soviet puppet states look to reclaim their independence and 'right the wrongs' of the Soviet era.

[localzuk]

Sorry Galway, but that is mostly nonsense. The Crimean people are happy with the move? Not according to international observers who went there and talked to people. The Tatars certainly aren't happy!

 

The fact the vote was unfair is very relevant when talking about Crimea! You have to take into account that there were hundreds/thousands of Russian soldiers on the streets and being pro-Ukraine was treated badly, with outspoken pro-Ukraine individuals receiving beatings etc...

 

Regarding the issues with EU ties - the ties were the result of election promises. The people voted for those ties. They pushed for those increased EU ties democratically. It was approved by their parliament (or whatever they call it). It was only cancelled and ignored by the leader after a visit from Putin.

 

It is entirely possible to have treaties with 2 areas. Having greater ties with the EU doesn't instantly exclude ties with Russia.

 

Being Russian speaking is neither here nor there. We have a load of Polish speaking people in the UK now, does that give Poland the right to interfere? No, it doesn't. How about the high population of Pakistanis in Luton or Bolton? Could those areas randomly decide they're part of Pakistan now?

 

There is a geographic split, but it isn't as clean cut as you say. There's a higher percentage of supporters of Russia in the east, but it is by no means all of them.

Edited July 21, 2014 by localzuk

[CAM]

Reports coming out that an SU-25 Ukrainian fighter flew close to the airliner just before the crash.

 

MH17: Warplane 'Flew Near Doomed Airliner'

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/

 

East-West sources

 

 

Now if this is true, I'd say it is reasonable that the jet fighter was the target. Evidence shows a SAM was responsible for hitting the jet, the militants were at one point in control of a SAM and given the anti-air activity in the area could they have been targeting the fighter and accidentally hitting the airliner instead?

 

Seems a reasonable scenario to me. The fighter's warning systems may not trigger if the airliner is being locked on to instead and the militants controlling it (assuming it isn't automated) may have been confused as to who is being locked on to due to improper operation or lack of proper training. Political escalation follows and now Russia or the militants want to cover up the situation for fear of further escalation in the fighting. I'd split blame between three parties, Malaysia Airlines for flying over a warzone, Ukraine for shadowing the airliner knowing they are a target for anti-air and the militants for incompetent operation of military kit. Russia could be blamed politically for supplying the kit and escalating the situation but I doubt shooting civilian airliners was on their mind when doing it, like blaming an arms dealer for what his customers do with his guns.

 

Overall verdict: Military accident through incompetence.

Edited July 21, 2014 by CAM

[FN-GM]

Reports coming out that an SU-25 Ukrainian fighter flew close to the airliner just before the crash.

 

MH17: Warplane 'Flew Near Doomed Airliner'

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/

 

East-West sources

 

 

Now if this is true, I'd say it is reasonable that the jet fighter was the target. Evidence shows a SAM was responsible for hitting the jet, the militants were at one point in control of a SAM and given the anti-air activity in the area could they have been targeting the fighter and accidentally hitting the airliner instead?

 

Seems a reasonable scenario to me. The fighter's warning systems may not trigger if the airliner is being locked on to instead and the militants controlling it (assuming it isn't automated) may have been confused as to who is being locked on to due to improper operation or lack of proper training. Political escalation follows and now Russia or the militants want to cover up the situation for fear of further escalation in the fighting. I'd split blame between three parties, Malaysia Airlines for flying over a warzone, Ukraine for shadowing the airliner knowing they are a target for anti-air and the militants for incompetent operation of military kit. Russia could be blamed politically for supplying the kit and escalating the situation but I doubt shooting civilian airliners was on their mind when doing it, like blaming an arms dealer for what his customers do with his guns.

 

Overall verdict: Military accident through incompetence.

 

Malaysia Airlines where told by the International Civil Aviation Organisation it was safe the fly over that area. It was an approved route by the ICAO. I can't see how they can be to blame.

Edited July 21, 2014 by FN-GM

[CAM]

It's a warzone with anti-air activity, it's never safe! The crash alone proves it wasn't safe!

[FN-GM]

It's a warzone with anti-air activity, it's never safe! The crash alone proves it wasn't safe!

 

Your assuming the airline had this information. Do you think the airline would want one of its aircraft blowing out of the sky? Especially since MH370.

 

If airlines avoided places where there is a war we would never get to the destination!

Edited July 21, 2014 by FN-GM

[CAM]

All you had to do was look at the news in the run up to the incident. Aircraft were being shot down, other airlines like British Airways were already avoiding the area. Places like Syria are also being avoided because they are warzones and dangerous (ironically MH4 went over there yesterday, they never learn!). It was only a matter of time before something like this happened and airliners never should have been allowed over Ukraine, especially straying from the normal aviation corridor.

 

Malaysia Airlines can try to shift their part of the blame as much as they want, they took the risk flying over an ever changing warzone and ~300 people paid for it.

[FN-GM]

All you had to do was look at the news in the run up to the incident. Aircraft were being shot down, other airlines like British Airways were already avoiding the area. Places like Syria are also being avoided because they are warzones and dangerous (ironically MH4 went over there yesterday, they never learn!). It was only a matter of time before something like this happened and airliners never should have been allowed over Ukraine, especially straying from the normal aviation corridor.

 

Malaysia Airlines can try to shift their part of the blame as much as they want, they took the risk flying over an ever changing warzone and ~300 people paid for it.

 

The International Civil Aviation Organisation shouldn't had advised it was safe.

[CAM]

Then I hope the airline and the ICAA take a big learning point from this investigation, don't fly over warzones!

 

Plus you still have to question if other airlines were avoiding the route believing it poses a risk, why did Malaysian Airlines still fly over it?

[FN-GM]

Then I hope the airline and the ICAA take a big learning point from this investigation, don't fly over warzones!

 

Plus you still have to question if other airlines were avoiding the route believing it poses a risk, why did Malaysian Airlines still fly over it?

 

A lot of the airlines that the media claim avoided the air space don't actually have routes over it. For example they where going on about Qantas not flying over the Ukraine. They didn't do anyway.

[pcstru]

Reports coming out that an SU-25 Ukrainian fighter flew close to the airliner just before the crash.

 

MH17: Warplane 'Flew Near Doomed Airliner'

The first 4 paragraphs of that are hilarious.

 

"A Ukrainian military plane flew within 3-5km of flight MH17 just before the Malaysian aircraft crashed, the Russian Defence Ministry has claimed."

 

Translation : People shoot at military planes in a war zone. It's Ukraines fault for causing a provocation.

 

"Moscow has also denied supplying pro-Russian rebels with BUK missile systems - the weapon that is suspected of bringing down the passenger plane - or any other military hardware."

 

Translation : The rebels don't have any missiles that could shoot it down.

 

"It said it detected the Ukrainian SU-25 combat jet on radar and noticed an increase in radar activity just before the Malaysian Airlines jet carrying 298 people was destroyed."

 

Translation : If we only just noticed something then it wasn't us! Honest guvn'r.

 

"It also said Ukrainian air defence forces had three or four battalions of BUK-M1 systems on combat duty on the day of the crash."

 

Translation : The Ukrainians did it. Shot down a civilian airliner having provoked themselves by flying their own fighter next to it.

 

It's the very latest in "war on"; war on information.

 

Unless MH17 was in some trouble, then it would have been identifying itself as a civilian airliner when asked - part of the IFF system. Anyone at the business end of the missile system should know the airliner is there.

Edited July 21, 2014 by pcstru

[truebluesteve]

Reports coming out that an SU-25 Ukrainian fighter flew close to the airliner just before the crash.

 

MH17: Warplane 'Flew Near Doomed Airliner'

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/

 

East-West sources

 

 

Now if this is true, I'd say it is reasonable that the jet fighter was the target. Evidence shows a SAM was responsible for hitting the jet, the militants were at one point in control of a SAM and given the anti-air activity in the area could they have been targeting the fighter and accidentally hitting the airliner instead?

 

Seems a reasonable scenario to me. The fighter's warning systems may not trigger if the airliner is being locked on to instead and the militants controlling it (assuming it isn't automated) may have been confused as to who is being locked on to due to improper operation or lack of proper training. Political escalation follows and now Russia or the militants want to cover up the situation for fear of further escalation in the fighting. I'd split blame between three parties, Malaysia Airlines for flying over a warzone, Ukraine for shadowing the airliner knowing they are a target for anti-air and the militants for incompetent operation of military kit. Russia could be blamed politically for supplying the kit and escalating the situation but I doubt shooting civilian airliners was on their mind when doing it, like blaming an arms dealer for what his customers do with his guns.

 

Overall verdict: Military accident through incompetence.

 

Well I'm sure the families of those who died will sleep well tonight knowing that - even if it is the case.

 

I couldn't get your 2nd link to work, but the first is just quoting the Russian Defence Ministry - hardly a reliable, unbiased source of information! I suspect that it was an accidental shooting down (IFF isn't infallible and may not be used by that equipment or even get a reply if it did) but I also suspect that it was done by separatists using Russian supplied hardware.

 

What hasn't helped their cause is the apparent reluctance to let outside experts examine the wreckage and that some of it has been taken away. If you have nothing to hide, why make things so difficult?

[CAM]

Erm, that's pretty much the same conclusion I came to. Seperatists shot it down due to a screw up.

[truebluesteve]

You have to remember, this is Ukraine Odessa: Western media protect the puppeteers of a massmurder - Englisch | Medien-Klagemauer.TV

 

Watch at home, works in IE.

 

What a load of unsubstantiated nonsense. Making a video of random clips with no source information does not constitute the truth. Still I liked the expression "football rowdies" - seems almost civilised!

[Arthur]

This man sure is lucky!

 

The man who escaped both doomed Malaysian Airlines flights « Vox

[truebluesteve]

Erm, that's pretty much the same conclusion I came to. Seperatists shot it down due to a screw up.

 

Yep, but I don't buy the whole "there were a load of Ukrainian fighters nearby" story. They (the separatists) saw a plane on their radar and shot it down. Trigger happy soldier? Probably.

[superatticman]

Interesting that the Ukrainian SU-25 is coming into play now and was apparently 'near' the Malaysian 777 when it was shot down. I Don't think for one minute that this aircraft is responsible for bringing down the jetliner. Its a ground attack aircraft and is probably barely capable of getting above 10,000ft with a warload. In fact service ceiling is listed at around 20,000ft clean. It does have a very basic air to air system.

 

More likely the SAM operator went for the Su25 and got the 777 instead.

[localzuk]

Erm, that's pretty much the same conclusion I came to. Seperatists shot it down due to a screw up.

 

Yup. My thoughts too. One analyst the other day said that it was likely that the Buk system wasn't provided with a secondary radar system with IFF decoding, so whoever was operating it had no secondary system to use to confirm what they were shooting at. So, to them, they just saw "big plane at low altitude compared to normal commercial flights" and pressed the button. If that scenario turns out to be true, then the blame does lie pretty much on Russia's shoulders for supply the equipment with inadequate training or supplementary systems for identification of commercial air traffic.

 

That said, there doesn't appear to be much impetus for further sanctions against Russia over this, with today seeing quite a drop in rhetoric since yesterday even, with wording being softened in the demands of the West.

[Bananas]

Which lends credence to the thought that western leaders are too scared, re gas supplies to do anything

[seawolf]

Yup. My thoughts too. One analyst the other day said that it was likely that the Buk system wasn't provided with a secondary radar system with IFF decoding, so whoever was operating it had no secondary system to use to confirm what they were shooting at. So, to them, they just saw "big plane at low altitude compared to normal commercial flights" and pressed the button. If that scenario turns out to be true, then the blame does lie pretty much on Russia's shoulders for supply the equipment with inadequate training or supplementary systems for identification of commercial air traffic.

 

33,000 feet is a completely acceptable and standard altitude for commercial aircraft to fly. I've been on many long-haul flights where the altitude was lower due to other flights in the vicinity or adverse weather conditions.

 

My recommendation for action by the western world would be for the FAA and European equivalents to ban all airline flights in Russian airspace due to safety concerns until full compliance is provided by Russia in the investigation, and all SAM batteries and Russian military personnel (we know they are there and they know that we know they are there) are withdrawn from Ukraine and the border. This would essentially stop most all commercial traffic including delivery of mail and goods to Russia or out of Russia if they did not comply. No UN sanctions would be required to put this in place, but it would cripple Russia.

[localzuk]

It is a normal height yes, but not for that flight. As I said, it was on that flight path because it had diverted to avoid a storm. It wasn't "normal" for that plane to be where it was.

[SiliconAlley_Sam]

Flew home from Schipol last night and saw all the flowers people have left there.