In order to maintain some kind of respectable thread quality and to show some respect for those who lost friends in this tragedy, we're forced to enact a hard line policy for this thread. Any posts holding an opinion on who is responsible or making an accusation that is not held by neutral media will be banned. Policy is in effect from page 27 onwards.
Specifically, citing a Ukrainian or Russian source for your claims is going to get you banned. Opinions/facts/accusations arising from neutral media sources (i.e. media whose country of origin is not Ukraine, Russia or one of its puppet states) will be permitted. This policy extends to all forms of media; if a youtube video or picture has not come through a neutral media source then don't post it or you'll be banned. If you wish to discuss this policy please use this website feedback thread.
Just saying why would the separatists or Russian shot down a commercial plane?
The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Because they thought it was a Ukrainian army transport or because as zeo articulated it would justify a pro-russian no fly zone that would make it difficult for the Ukrainian army to conduct operations.
On July 18 2014 02:39 iFU.pauline wrote: The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Yes. I believe the surface-to-air missiles used in this case can be used against targets with an altitude of 20km, often more. Shooting down a commercial airliner with a cruising altitude of ~11km, with that kind of hardware, is not very difficult.
If anyone hears how many German or French citzens were on board, please reply. Germany and France have been the most reluctant to impose tougher RU sanctions on energy/arms sectors (Germany gets 30% of its gas from Russia). It's hugely important going forward in the crisis.
Whatever the case, this will probably be the defining moment of the entire conflict.
On July 18 2014 02:39 iFU.pauline wrote: The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Yes. I believe the surface-to-air missiles used in this case can be used against targets with an altitude of 20km, often more. Shooting down a commercial airliner with a cruising altitude of ~11km, with that kind of hardware, is not very difficult.
On July 18 2014 02:24 Cheerio wrote: Ukrainian 1+1 news reported that on the official account of Girkin/Strelkov (the DNR military leader) shortly after the time the airliner got shot down, the following news was posted
at 0:16
It was posted at 17:50 Moscow time today and says:
In the region of Torez [we] shot down an airplane AN-26, it fell down somewhere near "Progress" mine We warned not to fly over "our sky". Here is a video of the "birdfall". The bird fell down over the terricon, the living quarters [of the town] were not damaged. Civilians didn't get hurt.
We also have information about another airplane shot down
Ukrainian officials didn't confirm any AN-26 shot down today as of now.
My colleague also works as steward and got the message to come work to help with families that will be helped at Schiphol airport. From the information he has got it seems like at least 60% were passengers from The Netherlands. It's also a populair flight for passengers that go to Australia.
If there are multiple boxes, I don't see why one couldn't be handed over to Malaysian Airlines.
EDIT: It is also highly unlikely that the Ukrainian military is responsible. I mean, why would they be using anti-aircraft missiles if there haven't been any aircraft to shoot down in the first place?
Look, Russia has the most advanced anti-air weapon systems in the world. It is the pride of their military and a nice chunk of their defense budget goes into anti-air. Even if you discard all that, with the hardware and knowledge you need to have to be able to hit a moving object at 10km there is no way you don't know what the plane is.
You can't just go into Walmart and get something that can take down passenger planes, but something that can take one down is going to know if its military or civilian.
Whoever shot that plane down knew exactly what it was. Without a doubt.
If it is indeed an SAM SA-11 that fired upon the aircraft then they either KNEW it was a civilian aircraft or they omitted checking the IFF tracker of the target. in both cases its fucking terrible. This is exactly why you do not let these "modern" weapons to fall into the hands of poorly trained and organized militia.
Further new additions to the SA-11 include an optical sight for use when under jamming, as well as a digital sensor suite including an IFF interrogator (for a target identification ability),
On July 18 2014 02:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: What makes anyone think Merkel will do anything other than say "You should stop that."
i mean really?
This is a different magnitude entirely. Until now EU/nato citizens have not been affected by this conflict directly, now dozens of them are dead. If it turns out that pro Russian separatists have done this they can't just do nothing.
On July 18 2014 02:24 Cheerio wrote: Ukrainian 1+1 news reported that on the official account of Girkin/Strelkov (the DNR military leader) shortly after the time the airliner got shot down, the following news was posted
It was posted at 17:50 Moscow time today and says:
In the region of Torez [we] shot down an airplane AN-26, it fell down somewhere near "Progress" mine We warned not to fly over "our sky". Here is a video of the "birdfall". The bird fell down over the terricon, the living quarters [of the town] were not damaged. Civilians didn't get hurt.
We also have information about another airplane shot down
Ukrainian officials didn't confirm any AN-26 shot down today as of now.
Update: the screanshot of the post
This is likely going to be the most damning evidence out there that the rebels shot down the plane. Its not 100% proof, but its hard to deny with that date stamp on it.
On July 18 2014 02:39 iFU.pauline wrote: The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Yes. I believe the surface-to-air missiles used in this case can be used against targets with an altitude of 20km, often more. Shooting down a commercial airliner with a cruising altitude of ~11km, with that kind of hardware, is not very difficult.
To elaborate, the most likely system was a mobile SAM system. You can't hit something that high up with shoulder mounted SAMs, the missiles simply aren't big enough.
That leads to more interesting questions though, because there is no doubt in my mind that while a system like that would be able to identify that that plane was broadcasting a civilian transponder.
On July 18 2014 02:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: What makes anyone think Merkel will do anything other than say "You should stop that."
i mean really?
A bunch of Germans getting killed would do it. Enough German and French blood on the hands of VVP is a pretty good political motivator in nations where rival political parties and citizens can apply pressure. Reports currently that no Germans on board, but at least 25 dutch. I'm not good enough at EU yet to know how much Dutch pressure can be applied.
If there are multiple boxes, I don't see why one couldn't be handed over to Malaysian Airlines.
EDIT: It is also highly unlikely that the Ukrainian military is responsible. I mean, why would they be using anti-aircraft missiles if there haven't been any aircraft to shoot down in the first place?
Look, Russia has the most advanced anti-air weapon systems in the world. It is the pride of their military and a nice chunk of their defense budget goes into anti-air. Even if you discard all that, with the hardware and knowledge you need to have to be able to hit a moving object at 10km there is no way you don't know what the plane is.
You can't just go into Walmart and get something that can take down passenger planes, but something that can take one down is going to know if its military or civilian.
Whoever shot that plane down knew exactly what it was. Without a doubt.
If it is indeed an SAM SA-11 that fired upon the aircraft then they either KNEW it was a civilian aircraft or they omitted checking the IFF tracker of the target. in both cases its fucking terrible. This is exactly why you do not let these "modern" weapons to fall into the hands of poorly trained and organized militia.
Further new additions to the SA-11 include an optical sight for use when under jamming, as well as a digital sensor suite including an IFF interrogator (for a target identification ability),
That's not how IFF works. It checks for a signal from friendly aircraft, which a malaysian airplane obviously won't have.
On July 18 2014 02:55 Soap wrote: That's not how IFF works. It checks for a signal from friendly aircraft, which a malaysian airplane obviously won't have.
I would imagine that an advanced military radar would be able to read transponder signals though.
On July 18 2014 02:39 iFU.pauline wrote: The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Yes. I believe the surface-to-air missiles used in this case can be used against targets with an altitude of 20km, often more. Shooting down a commercial airliner with a cruising altitude of ~11km, with that kind of hardware, is not very difficult.
To elaborate, the most likely system was a mobile SAM system. You can't hit something that high up with shoulder mounted SAMs, the missiles simply aren't big enough.
That leads to more interesting questions though, because there is no doubt in my mind that while a system like that would be able to identify that that plane was broadcasting a civilian transponder.
Yes, but would the person using it be familiar enough with the equipment to determine that the transponder was civilian. If it can even do that, because my understanding these systems only work if the transponder is coded to show a "friendly" aircraft.
On July 18 2014 02:39 iFU.pauline wrote: The normal altitude for a commercial flight is 11km // 33k feets, I know nothing about military weapon, but is that possible to shot down a plane that high with ground anti aircraft missile?
Yes. I believe the surface-to-air missiles used in this case can be used against targets with an altitude of 20km, often more. Shooting down a commercial airliner with a cruising altitude of ~11km, with that kind of hardware, is not very difficult.
To elaborate, the most likely system was a mobile SAM system. You can't hit something that high up with shoulder mounted SAMs, the missiles simply aren't big enough.
That leads to more interesting questions though, because there is no doubt in my mind that while a system like that would be able to identify that that plane was broadcasting a civilian transponder.
Yes, but would the person using it be familiar enough with the equipment to determine that the transponder was civilian.
or maybe they just said fuck it, i just wanna shoot something down today, who cares what it is.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://news.liga.net/upload/medialibrary/6c1/6c1c2ab02f45f142baf15ba914269945.jpg)
