It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Flight MH-17 Diverted Over Restricted Airspace?

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Is it possible this plane, like the other one, had their transponders turned off?



Perhaps it was shot down because the radar couldn't pick up whether it was a civilian or military craft? Or maybe they thought it was hijacked and just shot it down but don't want the public to know?




posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Just checked and CBC in Canada is on cable .. a reply to: Psynic



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
The IATA has said that they were operating in unrestricted airspace at the time. They've closed that route now, although a little late.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I've read in one of these threads that the airspace was restricted from the ground up to flight level 320 (3,200 ft32,000) and MH17 was operating at flight level 330 just 1,000 ft above the closed airspace.

- Was the airspace below actually off limits?
- Is it wise/normal to be that close to the line in the sand?
- How in heck did they mistake a 777 for an AN26??? AN26 cruise speed 273mph and 777 cruise speed 560mph, AN26 operating ceiling 24,600!!!!!! 777 (apparently) operating at 33,000

edit: typo pointed out by those below, yep I meant 32,000
edit on 18/7/2014 by Now_Then because: typing to quick



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Now_Then
a reply to: Zaphod58

I've read in one of these threads that the airspace was restricted from the ground up to flight level 320 (3,200 ft) and MH17 was operating at flight level 330 just 1,000 ft above the closed airspace.

- Was the airspace below actually off limits?
- Is it wise/normal to be that close to the line in the sand?
- How in heck did they mistake a 777 for an AN26??? AN26 cruise speed 273mph and 777 cruise speed 560mph, AN26 operating ceiling 24,600!!!!!! 777 (apparently) operating at 33,000


That's 32,000', not 3,200'.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Now_Then

It was 32,000 not 3,200. There we scheduled to put them at 35,000 feet, but they stayed at 32,000 instead.

As long as they were above that altitude then they should have been ok.

It's very difficult to tell airspeed and altitude by primary return, especially with minimal training.
edit on 7/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Now_Then
As long as they were above that altitude then they should have been ok.

It's very difficult to tell airspeed and altitude by primary return, especially with minimal training.


So they were very close to the line then? This seems reckless to say the least.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Now_Then

Not at all. It's not like there is a limit where if you're at it you're safe, and if you're below it you aren't. That altitude was set because it's a good bit higher than any MANPADS can reach. They could have been flying right at the altitude limit and still been ok.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Right, so the threat analysis was probably based on what kit they thought was down there and not what might be down there or what might be down there in the hands of people willing to use it.

Have you expressed an opinion yet as to whether you think this was a deliberate attack on the airliner or a genuine mistake?

edit: also a guy on the radio today said he was aware of a Chinese 'MANPAD' that could reach almost that high, rumours from rumours though, and that was supposed to be it's absolute limit.
edit on 18/7/2014 by Now_Then because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Now_Then

I think that most likely they thought it was the AN-26, and popped off a missile at it, before realizing it wasn't.

There are a few MANPADS that can reach into the 20,000 area, and I think there's one that can reach around 28,000 or so, but that's going from memory.
edit on 7/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Adaluncatif
They got real sloppy with this one when they posted the intercept before the plane was shot down.



No they didn't. Is it any wonder that the guy that created that YT non-sense disabled comments?
I bet if you sent him the following video he would be claiming that Obama faked and recorded it before the MH17 tragedy based purely on the time stamp being for the previous day?



He is simply using the well known time stamp issues and he knows very well the issues. It is done to suck in the gullible.

The time stamp error is due to the YouTube encoding servers being behind by 1 day at that time.

See analysis on the videos and tests proving that the time stamps are NOT proof.

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

I bet it won't be long before someone picks up on the Obama video being the 'day before'.

edit on 20/7/2014 by tommyjo because: malformed link corrected



posted on Aug, 10 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: learnatic

Though not familar with the source here,this is the most comprehensive article I have read yet on what all was going on. Take a look all and see what you think.

21stcenturywire.com...



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Dimithae

Hell, I saw a couple of huge flaws right off the bat. Ukrainian ATC is giving orders in Polish airspace? Really? I bet the Poles loved that. The previous flight path they used is based on bad data from FlightAware. FlightAware doesn't have a lot of receivers in Europe, so their data isn't as good as FlightRadar. I'd love to see them point out the exact point that it turned 200 miles North though, because I still haven't seen it.

The flight was never at 35,000 feet. It never went higher than 33,000. They requested 35,000 but were told to remain at 33,000 feet. Why would the rebels require visual sightings of it? They had a SAM system in the area, that would see it on radar. And how would a mere 2,000 feet make such a huge difference in being able to see it or not?

The system was already set up. A missile system doesn't do any good if it's not set up and operating so it can SEE something to shoot at. The closest system would be at best, be at very long range for that altitude. The range of the missile is 30 km. It's 25.8 km between the launcher, and where the plane came down. And that's not accounting for the additional distance in height between the ground and the plane.

What the heck is a Boeing 778? The code 772 shows a Boeing 777-200. Unless Boeing is WAY ahead of schedule, the 777-8X won't fly for at least another 3-4 years, and that's just to start testing.

It's amazing that the "Ukrainian fighter" was hovering over the area for almost exactly the amount of time that some of the debris would take to fall to the ground from 33,000 feet.

What left turn? And what evidence of the uninterruptible auto pilot? There is no evidence of a turn, just as there is no evidence of BUAP on any plane.

As for the Spanish controller, if he even exists, he's full of crap and has been torn apart several times.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join