Ukrainian Su-25 warplane detected heading toward Malaysian Boeing

a reply to: rustyclutch

As the article states:

If there is no reply, all you know is that it is not one of your own side's combat aircraft. It would not give you a warning that you were tracking an airliner.

So, no, a commercial airliner would not ping back.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: rustyclutch

As the article states:

If there is no reply, all you know is that it is not one of your own side's combat aircraft. It would not give you a warning that you were tracking an airliner.

So, no, a commercial airliner would not ping back.

Indeed. One of the things I have been wondering about....If BUK's are designed to work as a group, and all they stole was one platform....wouldn't the Ukrainians still be able to fire it if they were close enough? The article says the russians detected 9 BUK systems operational in the area....maybe someone switched it to stand alone mode remotely?

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

originally posted by: buddah6

originally posted by: rustyclutch

“Records show that the Ukrainian Air Force plane ascended to the distance of 3-5 km from the Malaysian Boeing,” he said. “The Su-25 can fly at altitudes of up to 10 km. It is armed with P-60 air-to-air missiles that can hit targets at a distance of up to 12 km and reliably within 5 km.”

source

Наличие американского спутника в районе катастрофы

Картаполов также сообщил о том, что 17 июля с 17.06 мск по 17.21 мск над юго-восточными районами Украины пролетал американский экспериментальный аппарат, предназначенный для обнаружения ракетных пусков.

Время катастрофы Boeing и время наблюдения спутником США за территорией Украины совпадают, указал генерал-лейтенант.

source

Translation

An American satellite in the accident


Kartapolov also reported that 17 July with ICN ICN 17.21 17.06 on the South-Eastern regions of Ukraine flew American experimental apparatus designed to detect missile launches.


The time of the accident, Boeing and United States satellite observations over the territory of Ukraine are the same, said Lieutenant General.

I know for some of the Russian Haters this is nothing more than propaganda and you will argue to your last breath that Russia or the Rebels are responsible. For the objective others....Russia's evidence looks a lot better than our evidence. Or should I say Russia actually has evidence. It could be fake....I doubt it is. If it is fake they did a better job than that phone conversation. Either way...I didn't see this up yet so thought I'd post it.

Well, where should I start? A Su 25 has a ceiling of 22000 ft and a top speed of 600 mph, OK. Explain to me how it could catch an airplane flying at 33000ft and flying at about the same speed as the Su 25 top speed. The Su 25 would have to take off and climb to it's ceiling altitude and accellerate to it's top speed. After this happens the 777 would be to far gone for an intercept but remember the Su25 is a ground attack airplane not an interceptor. No politics just physics.

I'm afraid this takes the cake on dispelling the Su-25 rumor. I agree with these basic facts, and I can't see how it would be possible for an Su-25 to shoot down a 777 at 33000 ft. They don't even have Beyond Visual Range (BVR - Radar) capabilities or long range missiles for that fact on Su-25 - let alone the more modern variants. They are strictly ground attack aircraft. Much like the US A-10 Thunderbolt II.

Why would the SU have to Catch up to the Mh17?

It is a lot faster if the SU meets the Mh17 on its flight parth. If the Su is flying towards the Mh17 which is flying towards the SU they are going to meet up prity fast.

If you shoot a Air to Air missile at a target that is moving towards the missile the range will not be that far at impact.

Good call. For some reason I had it in my head that the Frogfoot would be on MH17's six. Indeed a head to head hit would be devastating. However, I don't think even the Su25M1 can even get to 33000 ft loaded.

Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot

basically the only changes the Su25M1 has are avionics and weapon delivery systems. They don't change the power-plant or the fuselage from the original Su25. So how could it fly upwards of 33000 ft when the Su25's ceiling is much lower based on the engines it has?

I suppose you could just keep the conspiracy alive and say it wasn't an Su25 at all. Who reportedly saw the "Su25"? How did they observe it? Could it have been mistaken for one of these aircraft which easily could reach 33000 ft?

Aermacchi M-346 Master

Or this one.

Yakovlev Yak-130

a reply to: Sparkymedic

In my humble opinion, I don't think it was 'downed' by an a-2-a missile.

BUK seems likely as the culprit (or within that family). Then again it's my .02cents lol.

If you have more info, I would be more than willing to lend an ear

Things can change

originally posted by: CALGARIAN


Yep!

Even this lady said, I think the day of the plane crash, that Ukrainian military craft were hiding behind commerical aircraft.

LISTEN @ 1:05

(place on Closed Caption English)

Eye candy to sell a story... The fact that she has a nice rack, is what will bring 80% of the numb nuts on here to totally and loyally, sell her story as fact and truth...

originally posted by: ressiv
There was an KLM flight behind the MH17... they pulled away after the shot douwn...
still no mention wat those pilots have seen ...weird !

At night time, any air explosion would be seen for dozens of miles. During day time, other pilots would be lucky to see a flash.

If you look at some of the videos of the crash, the explosion was at ground level (that large black mushroom cloud with purple flames). There wasn't any smoke trail, so the plane must have been fairly intact. But another video shows white smoke trails falling down to earth (fire suppression flasks venting?)

It seems strange that no-one seems to have found the front of the plane, though they did find the avionics bay (satellite navigation and flight recorders). Given the Aluminum frame of the 777, that would probably melt in the heat. The center of the plane next to the wings would also be fried along with a good numbers of rows of chairs.

Is it possible to copy the data from a black box?

I'm wondering if the rebels had an idea to make a copy, in case the investigation is suspicious, to compare the results by different experts.

a reply to: Ironclad2000

Eye candy to sell a story... The fact that she has a nice rack, is what will bring 80% of the numb nuts on here to totally and loyally, sell her story as fact and truth...

Not to mention she just got married to one of the separatists leaders so he has a stake in the game, so of course she is not going to be truthful about the events that happened.

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

originally posted by: buddah6

originally posted by: rustyclutch

“Records show that the Ukrainian Air Force plane ascended to the distance of 3-5 km from the Malaysian Boeing,” he said. “The Su-25 can fly at altitudes of up to 10 km. It is armed with P-60 air-to-air missiles that can hit targets at a distance of up to 12 km and reliably within 5 km.”

source

Наличие американского спутника в районе катастрофы

Картаполов также сообщил о том, что 17 июля с 17.06 мск по 17.21 мск над юго-восточными районами Украины пролетал американский экспериментальный аппарат, предназначенный для обнаружения ракетных пусков.

Время катастрофы Boeing и время наблюдения спутником США за территорией Украины совпадают, указал генерал-лейтенант.

source

Translation

An American satellite in the accident


Kartapolov also reported that 17 July with ICN ICN 17.21 17.06 on the South-Eastern regions of Ukraine flew American experimental apparatus designed to detect missile launches.


The time of the accident, Boeing and United States satellite observations over the territory of Ukraine are the same, said Lieutenant General.

I know for some of the Russian Haters this is nothing more than propaganda and you will argue to your last breath that Russia or the Rebels are responsible. For the objective others....Russia's evidence looks a lot better than our evidence. Or should I say Russia actually has evidence. It could be fake....I doubt it is. If it is fake they did a better job than that phone conversation. Either way...I didn't see this up yet so thought I'd post it.

Well, where should I start? A Su 25 has a ceiling of 22000 ft and a top speed of 600 mph, OK. Explain to me how it could catch an airplane flying at 33000ft and flying at about the same speed as the Su 25 top speed. The Su 25 would have to take off and climb to it's ceiling altitude and accellerate to it's top speed. After this happens the 777 would be to far gone for an intercept but remember the Su25 is a ground attack airplane not an interceptor. No politics just physics.

I'm afraid this takes the cake on dispelling the Su-25 rumor. I agree with these basic facts, and I can't see how it would be possible for an Su-25 to shoot down a 777 at 33000 ft. They don't even have Beyond Visual Range (BVR - Radar) capabilities or long range missiles for that fact on Su-25 - let alone the more modern variants. They are strictly ground attack aircraft. Much like the US A-10 Thunderbolt II.

Why would the SU have to Catch up to the Mh17?

It is a lot faster if the SU meets the Mh17 on its flight parth. If the Su is flying towards the Mh17 which is flying towards the SU they are going to meet up prity fast.

If you shoot a Air to Air missile at a target that is moving towards the missile the range will not be that far at impact.

Good call. For some reason I had it in my head that the Frogfoot would be on MH17's six. Indeed a head to head hit would be devastating. However, I don't think even the Su25M1 can even get to 33000 ft loaded.

Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot

basically the only changes the Su25M1 has are avionics and weapon delivery systems. They don't change the power-plant or the fuselage from the original Su25. So how could it fly upwards of 33000 ft when the Su25's ceiling is much lower based on the engines it has?

I suppose you could just keep the conspiracy alive and say it wasn't an Su25 at all. Who reportedly saw the "Su25"? How did they observe it? Could it have been mistaken for one of these aircraft which easily could reach 33000 ft?

Aermacchi M-346 Master

Or this one.

Yakovlev Yak-130

The radar images dont imply that the SU if it was a SU flew at 33000ft. The new mark (SU) appeard on radar very Close to the mark of Mh17 when the SU broke 16404ft. At that point MH17 was freefalling from its orginal flight altitude at 200km/h.

The radar that tracked the flights were on stand by mode. And only tracked flight above 16404ft. That means that the New mark had to be above 16404ft for it to be detected by the radar. The New mark (SU) was above 16404ft for 4 min after MH17 disappeared from radar "16404ft"

This means that the New mark could not have been a broken of section from Mh17. because it would also freefall towards the ground at Close to 200km/h. There would also be two different crash sites if a large section of Mh17 broke of above 16404ft.


If the SU is capable of shooting Down Mh17 from a altitude bellow 16404ft (out of range of radar detection) With a R-60 is not my Call.

But if it is possible and that is what happened. The US claime of a pro-russian BUK being used would have made one hell of a good argument. But the SU made a mistake and broke the 16404 ft mark and was detected by radar. Because of this the US could not display their evidence of a pro-russian BUK being used. Because the US probably had fabricated their evidence. It it wouldnt have been the first time the US have done that.

This looks like fabricated evidence by the US:

This is one of the 'proof' Security Service of Ukraine provides in their website.




They don's say though that the 'dark' photo was from the video dated to March, and was made at the Road Police station. at 17.03.2014. Note the people in warm coats - does it look like July to you?

www.youtube.com...

How much credibility does Ukrainian intel and media have to lose until people stop believing them?

OR is it "the more you lie, the more people start believing"?

I guess i need to send it to the US Gov. department? They are eager to believe YT videos as proof

originally posted by: whitepanther999
This is one of the 'proof' Security Service of Ukraine provides in their website.

They don's say though that the 'dark' photo was from the video dated to March, and was made at the Road Police station. at 17.03.2014. Note the people in warm coats - does it look like July to you?

www.youtube.com...

How much credibility does Ukrainian intel and media have to lose until people stop believing them?

OR is it "the more you lie, the more people start believing"?

There are no doubts that there were BUK active. Russia even stated that 9 BUK systems were active at the time MH17 was shot Down. But the thing is they never picked up any of them shoting a single missile towards MH17.

The US never picked up a missile being fired either. If they did the evidence would have been presented With credible details.

If there are no missiles detected it dosent matter where the BUKs were located, or who owns the BUKs. Because they were not used against MH17.

Both Russia and the US have missile detection systems capable of seing this. Both russia and the US have early warning missile detection systems. Why didnt any of them pick up a BUK missile?

a reply to: spy66

I am still wondering what was that call to Obama from Putin was about...

"I know you know that i know" ?

originally posted by: whitepanther999
a reply to: spy66

I am still wondering what was that call to Obama from Putin was about...

"I know you know that i know" ?

Yeah maybe Putin called him out. Putin said: I have showed you mine, now show me Yours

a reply to: spy66 I just found this on LiveLeak.com:
www.liveleak.com...
If it's for real, it looks like game-set-match. Perhaps social media has triumphed in the end...

a reply to: ozwest

Yeap, that's what i have posted, but in the video i showed it is stated to be March.
People seem to wear warm clothes. And there seems to be snow.

a reply to: whitepanther999 Yeah, good point. It's Winter in Australia now and I forgot that it's Summer in Europe. Checked their average July evening temperatures and it's 17 Celsius (about 60 Fahrenheit). I'll have to look closer for the snow but you may very well be right. So much false info coming from all sides, gotta be careful. Couldn't track down the temp and weather conditions for 18-19th of July so don't know if it was unseasonable at the time.

The Su-25 is the Russian equivalent to the USAF A-10. It is a close air support and attack aircraft meant to destroy GROUND targets. The A2A missiles it carries are like the US AIM-9 sidewinder missile used for defense rather than offence. Even though the Su-25 Frogfoot can reach said altitude its performance would be greatly diminished and could more than likely not be able to keep up with that aircraft.

At that altitude and speed I doubt the Su-25s radar could even pick it up as its a ground based attack system.

a reply to: StratosFear

Even though the Su-25 Frogfoot can reach said altitude its performance would be greatly diminished and could more than likely not be able to keep up with that aircraft.

What if the SU flew head on With MH17 form just bellow 16404 ft. would it be able to Catch up?

The Air to Air missile that the SU carry was said to be a R-60. Its Maximum range is 8km = 8000m = 26246ft.

If the SU flew head on With MH17 just bellow 16400 ft. The R-60 would be able to Reach MH17 at 33 000 ft. And the SU would not be detected by radar, Because the radar was on stand by mode and only tracked flight above 16404 ft.

Personaly this is what i think the Ukraine tried to acomplish, but they failed since the SU showed up on radar right where MH17 was freefalling towards the ground.

There are no solid evidence that a single BUK missile was fired, There are radar evidence that a possible SU-25 was at the loctaion where MH17 was shot Down.

There are no evidence that the possible SU shot Down MH17.

a reply to: spy66

The R-60 is a heat seeker so it would've targeted the engines. Instead what see is an impact point near the cockpit. It's warhead is also only 3kg. Far too small to produce the damage seen on MH17.