MH17 flight down in Ukraine - Page 11 - The Student Room
Reuters were reporting 23 Americans a couple of hours back, this was before the list was released however.
Pro-Russians only started gunning presumed Ukraine planes recently.
Flying over conflict zones will change after this.
They "claim" the BUK was captured from a ukrainian base.... however that's highly unlikely... for 1979 tech not even the Russians who made the damn thing can create countermeasures.
Fact is it's the kind of tech you don't put in a outpost of your ally (as it was prior to the revolution in kiev). Even after this it's hardly the kind of kit you would put under troops with questionable loyalty in eastern Ukraine after the rising in kiev.
It's most likely been shipped over from Russia, especially seeing all of Ukraine's BUK's are still accounted for.
WW3 inbound.
so obvious that it was done by a USA stealth drone to give them an excuse to sanction Russia more.
Ukrainian government are fascists.
Last edited by PassingAlways; 18-07-2014 at 00:05.
I reckon it was an assassination attempt on Putin. The Malaysian Airlines plane looks a lot like the Presidential plane he flies in.
I don't know why they were flying so damn low, they should have been well above the clouds and they couldn't have got a lock-on, you don't see American Gunships/AC130s being shot down.
I am never ever flying Malaysian Airlines though, first losing a plane, then a few months later getting one shot down over a warzone...
It was reported last week by both pro-Russian and Ukrainian sources that it was captured from a military base, a Ukrainian spokesperson just said the same thing on Newsnight as well.
If it was it's highly unlikely that the pro-russians did it.
It was flying at what was assumed to be a safe altitude and pretty much at the maximum altitude for a 777. The weapons system that shot it down has a range of around 70,000 feet, around twice the altitude a 777 can fly at.
If so a massive "d'oh" moment for the ukraine military....
no chance, you can tell with the naked eye from ground level the difference between a 4 engine and a 2 engine plane at cruising altitude... the 777 shot down is 2 engines, the president plane, i believe is 4.
It was at 33,000ft, not low at all. They were well above the clouds. Clouds have no effect whatsoever on a radar-guided missile. You don't see AC-130s being shot down because A-the US uses them rarely and B-they only use them in areas with next-to-no SAM threat.
I think it unlikely that Russia ordered this. However I do still feel that Russia shoulders some responsibility. Since the start of this situation, Russia has been complicit in destabilising the region and providing the means and opportunity for conflict. Whilst doing so, they have been playing a game with the likes of the EU and US - "Russian troops are not in Crimea..." "Those aren't russian weapons..."
This, I believe, is a case of a Country quite happy to stir up trouble and then sit back whilst other people do its dirty work. When those people happen to be ramshackle groups, then something quite bad is bound to happen.
Really now -_- do you reckon Ukraine would risk the entire Russian population being behind an invasion of Ukraine?
Not like they need much more than the current climate provides?
They've had quite a few of them so far in this conflict.
Not always you can't, especially not if the conditions aren't creating contrails.. Additionally, if they are reacting solely to radar information, the two aircraft will appear similar.
Tbh I'd say most of what has happened has been out of their control. Putting a BUK on the front-line against armed insurgents (which is what they are basically), is a pretty stupid, on the highest level, move.
Firstly there's no need for it to be there and second all your doing is risking it's capture and use against your own forces.
MH17 flight down in Ukraine - Page 11 - The Student Room
Reuters were reporting 23 Americans a couple of hours back, this was before the list was released however.
Pro-Russians only started gunning presumed Ukraine planes recently.
Flying over conflict zones will change after this.
They "claim" the BUK was captured from a ukrainian base.... however that's highly unlikely... for 1979 tech not even the Russians who made the damn thing can create countermeasures.
Fact is it's the kind of tech you don't put in a outpost of your ally (as it was prior to the revolution in kiev). Even after this it's hardly the kind of kit you would put under troops with questionable loyalty in eastern Ukraine after the rising in kiev.
It's most likely been shipped over from Russia, especially seeing all of Ukraine's BUK's are still accounted for.
WW3 inbound.
so obvious that it was done by a USA stealth drone to give them an excuse to sanction Russia more.
Ukrainian government are fascists.
Last edited by PassingAlways; 18-07-2014 at 00:05.
I reckon it was an assassination attempt on Putin. The Malaysian Airlines plane looks a lot like the Presidential plane he flies in.
I don't know why they were flying so damn low, they should have been well above the clouds and they couldn't have got a lock-on, you don't see American Gunships/AC130s being shot down.
I am never ever flying Malaysian Airlines though, first losing a plane, then a few months later getting one shot down over a warzone...
It was reported last week by both pro-Russian and Ukrainian sources that it was captured from a military base, a Ukrainian spokesperson just said the same thing on Newsnight as well.
If it was it's highly unlikely that the pro-russians did it.
It was flying at what was assumed to be a safe altitude and pretty much at the maximum altitude for a 777. The weapons system that shot it down has a range of around 70,000 feet, around twice the altitude 
a 777 can fly at.
If so a massive "d'oh" moment for the ukraine military....
no chance, you can tell with the naked eye from ground level the difference between a 4 engine and a 2 engine plane at cruising altitude... the 777 shot down is 2 engines, the president plane, i believe is 4.
It was at 33,000ft, not low at all. They were well above the clouds. Clouds have no effect whatsoever on a radar-guided missile. You don't see AC-130s being shot down because A-the US uses them rarely and B-they only use them in areas with next-to-no SAM threat.
I think it unlikely that Russia ordered this. However I do still feel that Russia shoulders some responsibility. Since the start of this situation, Russia has been complicit in destabilising the region and providing the means and opportunity for conflict. Whilst doing so, they have been playing a game with the likes of the EU and US - "Russian troops are not in Crimea..." "Those aren't russian weapons..."
This, I believe, is a case of a Country quite happy to stir up trouble and then sit back whilst other people do its dirty work. When those people happen to be ramshackle groups, then something quite bad is bound to happen.
Really now -_- do you reckon Ukraine would risk the entire Russian population being behind an invasion of Ukraine?
Not like they need much more than the current climate provides?
They've had quite a few of them so far in this conflict.
Not always you can't, especially not if the conditions aren't creating contrails.. Additionally, if they are reacting solely to radar information, the two aircraft will appear similar.
Tbh I'd say most of what has happened has been out of their control. Putting a BUK on the front-line against armed insurgents (which is what they are basically), is a pretty stupid, on the highest level, move.
Firstly there's no need for it to be there and second all your doing is risking it's capture and use against your own forces.