Ukrainian Su-25 warplane detected heading toward Malaysian Boeing

a reply to: ScrutonEyez

You know, you're right. Since everyone is suddenly an expert I think I will so talking. You guys have fun.

a reply to: JimTSpock

I'm not exactly sure why they are saying an Su-25 was in the area unless they have evidence of this and know for sure.

Well the Russians are saying this, and since what they say is nothing but the truth then that alone proves it.

Although the capabilities of that plane say it can't reach that height nor can it reach the speed to catch the 777 it had to be that plane...why you ask?

Russia said so.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You don't need to be an expert to just read what was in the source and then apply it using logic.

They said a jet was at 3-5 km distance of MH17. The particular jet can reach an altitude that would fall within the parameters.

End of story.

HOAX
/

originally posted by: JimTSpock
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

That sounds about right.

www.globalsecurity.org...

www.globalsecurity.org...

The Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot can carry the AA-8 Aphid or R-60 IR guided air to air missile with a range of 10km. It could shoot from a lower altitude.

When a missile is fire above or below you have to consider the slant range to target which makes the effective range farther. If a R60 is used the probability of kill (PK) is close to 100% at 5km, as you say, but if you are 1km lower then your actual range to target becomes approx 7.5 km due to the slant range which greatly reduces your probability of kill (PK). At 6.5 km behind and at 1km below you may not hit it at all. Like I said before the physics are not there if the Su 25 could get close enough.

The one thing that is sad is we haven't even condemned this event regardless of the facts.

a reply to: ScrutonEyez

They said?

Who is they and why do you take what they say as proof?

Arent you assuming, for some reason, that both planes started from the same starting line? Like you are implying it is a race of sorts? Doesnt the radar show the su in front of mh17?a reply to: buddah6

Methinks you guys are reading too much into the jet. Maybe it just tailed the aircraft trying to draw fire and when it didn't succeed they shot it down themselves. I suggested this theory days ago. That could be why they just KNEW it was a BUK missile. I still believe that's what took it down. They had to be relying on some sort of evidence they THOUGHT would prove the rebels did it. It was going to be investigated obviously and with that many countries involved it had better damn well at least have been a BUK missile right?

a reply to: thesaneone

They said? Who is they and why do you take what they say as proof?

The people who released the evidence that we are reviewing right now, you know, the topic of this thread. If it isn't clear to you for some odd reason you can always go back and read it again. Maybe this time it will stick.

a reply to: ScrutonEyez
Who are the people that released the evidence?

If you are going to try to get me mad with snarky comments you have to try a bit harder than that.

Not related, but relevant when trying to decypher the inconsistencies of the official Western story...

Ukrainian BUK system, 14th July...


Removed BUK system, 3days later...



Peace everybody!!!

a reply to: thesaneone

I think I'm going to just ignore you like I should.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Totally related. Those are the pictures I spoke of but didn't post because I wasn't sure if they were authentic or not at the time I posted the thread. Then I saw the RT video and they are.

I've seen people here at ATS backing the separatists claiming that Mig-29 Fulcrum and Su-27 Flanker fighters, and now they are claiming SU-25 Frogfoots, were following or actively attacking MH17?

To be even a smidgen credible, you have to stick to the same story.

Putins cronies are failing him. Even if Russia had nothing to do with it, other than providing training. Just like the Wests cronies are failing them due to training IS in the past.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Yes it can, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces, Lieutenant-General Andrey Kartopolov said clearly “The SU-25 fighter jet can gain an altitude of 10km, according to its specification” he added. “It’s equipped with air-to-air R-60 missiles that can hit a target at a distance up to 12km, up to 5km for sure.”

Interesting because there are some that say different that aren't Russian and needing a patsy.

www.globalsecurity.org...

fas.org...

Are you sure he isn't talking about the SU 39?

a reply to: buddah6

PK or hit on a 777 would be high. And range means range. Line of sight to target. Unless they are both at exactly the same altitude there is always slant range. In air to air combat missiles are shot up down wherever the target is, it's not a big deal. Shooting up will decrease the range of the missile a bit. But 10km is still more than enough for an Su-25 to shoot a 777 at 34,000.

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ScrutonEyez
Who are the people that released the evidence?

If you are going to try to get me mad with snarky comments you have to try a bit harder than that.

The Russian Intelligence and Military released the evidence. You know....the people you would expect. Everyone talks about the backwards Russians, but in 3 days they produced all the evidence they needed to prove it wasn't them OR the rebels. All Washington has done is accuse. It's been obvious since the plane went down that the only people who stood to gain were Kiev and Washington. Is their information they are willing to share with the WORLD less credible than American bluster?

a reply to: rigel4

HOAX

Just a matter of time.

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

ETA

Russian monitoring systems recorded up to 4 Ukrainian Buk M1 air defense systems in the crash area on the day of the accident. The point where the plane was at the time of the accident was within the Buk system’s coverage sector.

source


pick one a stay with it, was it shot down by the Su-25 or the BUK air defense system.

But the problem with the the BUK air defense system being Ukrainian is the crash site is in rebel controlled and well out of the 25 mile max missile range of ANY Ukrainian controlled areas.
Yes the Ukrainian radars (Buk system’s coverage sector)can see aircraft and paint aircraft from Ukrainian controlled areas but the missiles would not have the range to hit the jet.

the missile have a 25 mile range and the radar system has a 200+mile range.

The BUK missile system is designed so it could be set up along a line 400 miles long using a Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9S18M1-1 Tube Arm target acquisition radar in the middle controlling a number of A Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9A310M1-2 TELAR launchers.
These would be set up about every 12.5 miles (200% missile coverage)along the line and would take targeting data from the master radar to track the target.
The Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9A310M1-2 TELAR launchers can also feed there radar data back to the Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9S18M1-1 Tube Arm target acquisition radar allowing cross radar feeds against stealth aircraft.

One of the radars feed out a signal and the bounce is picked up by the other radars.
Since stealth aircraft are designed to block the radar return to the radar sending the "PING" this ping is redirected and sometime can be picked up by other radars linked to the master radar that did the ping.

This is also a defense against the US HARM anti radar missile as if the Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9S18M1-1 Tube Arm target acquisition master radar
is taken out by the HARM missile the system can still track and fire by local control.

en.wikipedia.org...

and yes the Russians could have used a Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9S18M1-1 Tube Arm target acquisition radar in Russia to control a number of Buk-M1-2 SAM system 9A310M1-2 TELAR launchers in the rebel controlled area.
This would mean the launcher crews would not need the normal long training course for local operation.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

The Sukhoi Su-25 (NATO reporting name: "Frogfoot") was designed to provide close air support for the Soviet Ground Forces.

Maximum speed: Mach 0.8 (975 km/h, 526 knots, 606 mph) at sea level
Combat range: 750 km (405 nmi, 466 mi) at sea level, 4,400 kg (9,700 lb) weapons and two external tanks
Service ceiling: 7,000 m (22,965 ft) clean, 5,000 m (16,000 ft) with max weapons
Rate of climb: 58 m/s (11,400 ft/min)
source: Su-25 Wikipedia

However, Su-25 are equipped with R-60:
The Molniya (now Vympel) R-60 (NATO reporting name: AA-8 'Aphid') is a lightweight air-to-air missile designed for use by Soviet fighter aircraft.
According to Russian sources,[which?] practical engagement range is about 4,000 m (4,400 yd), although "brochure range" is 8 km (5.0 mi) at high altitude. The weapon was up until recently[when?][clarification needed] one of the most agile air to air missiles

source: R-60 Wiki