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.

 

Ukrainian Su-25 fighter detected in close approach to MH17 before crash - Moscow

page: 7
20
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul




Edit: And it seems the Russian Govt has been caught editing the Russian Wiki since the shooting to read that the M1 can reach 10,000m........oops! Is that your source???


Lol, you started this idiotic story? The specs are all over the internet. It reaches 33.000 ft.

Russia edited the WIKI.......LOL!

Really guys? Did they forget to edit the entire internet?

I would find it hard to describe your actions as anything other than lying.

Or grave stupidity. Pick one.




posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: ScrutonEyez

If you go to Sukhoi's website the official specs list the service ceiling as 7km or 22,000 ft. And that without armaments or anything else. I think I'll take their word over anyone else's since they built the thing.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScrutonEyez
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul




Edit: And it seems the Russian Govt has been caught editing the Russian Wiki since the shooting to read that the M1 can reach 10,000m........oops! Is that your source???


Lol, you started this idiotic story? The specs are all over the internet. It reaches 33.000 ft.

Russia edited the WIKI.......LOL!

Really guys? Did they forget to edit the entire internet?

I would find it hard to describe your actions as anything other than lying.

Or grave stupidity. Pick one.



When the manufacturer contradicts all your data you resort to attacking another poster.bad form. I should alert the mods to that post you made. ALSO he provided PROOF of the meddling in his post which i see you left out on purpose it would seem.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I see this thread has devolved into a pissing contest, instead of focusing on the whole point of the thread - What was the aircraft doing there in the first place? Especially after Kiev said it had no military aircraft in the vicinity.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
This is currently being ignored by Western Media...
Before you claim "pro Russian propaganda" remember that Media is meant to be impartial...
RT are quite clearly showing all angles including calls for sanctions from David Cameron, as well as Obama's latest press release...

So let's just agree the agenda is coming mainly from Western outlets!!!

Let the RT bashing begin!!!

lol hahahah

RT...showing all the angles...ahahahah

"pro russian propaganda"....in quotations hahahaha



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
I see this thread has devolved into a pissing contest, instead of focusing on the whole point of the thread - What was the aircraft doing there in the first place? Especially after Kiev said it had no military aircraft in the vicinity.


the thread examines the claim that there was an aircraft there - and IMO the evidence supplied by Russia is nonsense.

IMO their radar plot does not show another aircraft - it shows MH17 disintegrating.

I suspect the "new" radar plot was the cockpit, which fell several miles away from the major wrerckage.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScrutonEyez
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul
I would find it hard to describe your actions as anything other than lying.
Or grave stupidity. Pick one.


What have I posted that is untrue?



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul




the thread examines the claim that there was an aircraft there - and IMO the evidence supplied by Russia is nonsense.


Well then, maybe the Russians should have tweeted it. That seems to be the new global standard for judging the veracity of information.
edit on 23-7-2014 by Flatcoat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
I see this thread has devolved into a pissing contest, instead of focusing on the whole point of the thread - What was the aircraft doing there in the first place? Especially after Kiev said it had no military aircraft in the vicinity.


Again, this is what I was hoping would be discussed!!!


I never claimed that Russia aren't involved...
I never claimed that America/The West was involved...
I never claimed this Plane shot down MH17...

Now feel free to discuss these things, but share links and evidence please...


Ukraine said they didn't have any military Aircraft in the vicinity, but they did...
At least keep this in your discussion!!!

Peace Flatcoat!!!
Peace everybody!!!
edit on 23-7-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: yourmaker

Your input was fantastic!!!

Great addition to the thread, because I don't think any of us have ever heard this argument before you just did it!!!


Peace!!!
edit on 23-7-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul


the thread examines the claim that there was an aircraft there - and IMO the evidence supplied by Russia is nonsense.

Well then, maybe the Russians should have tweeted it. That seems to be the new global standard for judging the veracity of information.


Pointless post much?

It has nothing to do with how they convey it - tweet, news conference, papyrus or rock carvings - it is the CONTENT that matters - something you are apparently unfamiliar with.

Have you actually looked at the evidence they produced to support their claim there was a Ukrainian a/c shadowing MH17 - or are you just pissed because I did and actually found the obvious problems with it?



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul




Have you actually looked at the evidence they produced to support their claim there was a Ukrainian a/c shadowing MH17 - or are you just pissed because I did and actually found the obvious problems with it?


Ok then, Since when does debris from a disintegrating aircraft ascend and remain there for 4 minutes?



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat

I seem to recall that TWA ascended quite a long way.

I don't recall anything in the radar showing something ascending for 4 minutes that might be debris. The more-or-less-stationary contact is descending according to the Russian commentary IIRC, and the transponder signal for MH17 is also descending once it is past the presumed point of impact.

Can you provide the time in the video for this 4 minutes, and identify which signal you are referring to?

Edit: I've just had a look at the Russian Ministry of defence briefing again - they say that the 2nd radar plot starts at a particular time "with the aircraft speed at 200km/hr" and the Russians say they monitored that 2nd plot for 4 minutes "as the aircraft descended" - nothing about it ascending. (at about 12 minute point)

A 4 minute descent from 33,000 ft would be about 8250 feet per minute - which does not seem unreasonable for a relatively lightweight no-longer-aerodynamic structure to "flutter down" IMO.


edit on 24-7-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Flatcoat
How does a fighter jet stay in the same place for that time. The lateral movement of the target was basically zero.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Flatcoat
How does a fighter jet stay in the same place for that time. The lateral movement of the target was basically zero.



Sharp 365 degree turn to observe the freefalling MH17.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

Bs witness accounts more likely. fighter didnt shoot it down. sepratist witnesses are not credible unless given lie detector test. same for kiev members.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: spy66

Bs witness accounts more likely. fighter didnt shoot it down. sepratist witnesses are not credible unless given lie detector test. same for kiev members.


I am starting to think that it just crashed on its own.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

It just crashed on its own with large shrapnel holes in it?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 04:39 AM
link   
More details are emerging about what the Russian radar plot actually shows - this guy has provided a history of ATC systems and a point by point analysis of exactly what the symbols on the Russian radar plot mean::



TSo, in dot point format;

-The video RU MOD provided was of the unified (ie civilian) traffic control system.
-That system conforms to most current computerised ATM systems found in EU, US, AU and many Asian countries.
-The display of MH17 (and others ) on the video is that of PSR and SSR data coupled with Flight Plan (FPL) data
-The coupling process fails at the time of the missile strike, as evidenced by the appearance of a square. Logically, the result of catastrophic system failure on the aircraft is that the transponder fails to squawk the required code anymore, forcing a decouple.
-what is left once the FPL decouples and the SSR data is gone due to transponder failure is the Primary Surveillance radar paint of MH17. This paint is co-located with the square from the Flight Plan, they diverge as the projected FPL position of MH17 moves away based on expected normal speed of a B777, from its actual (damage and falling wreckage) location as per the PSR
-The radar paint that the RU MOD tries to describe as the phantom SU25 is in fact the MH17 primary paint of what is now falling wreckage


-source

Or, in plain language.....The Russians are lying (yet again).



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 04:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScrutonEyez
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul


Lol, you started this idiotic story? The specs are all over the internet. It reaches 33.000 ft.


Yep - ever since Russia changed them after the crash!




top topics



 
20
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join