MH17 Black Box Data Shows Evidence Of Missile Strike

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Indigo5

That's pretty much what I figured happened honestly. With the clouds, and an AN-26 supposed to be in the area, a system that can't identify one plane from another would have a hard time telling them apart, and it would be easy to make a mistake.

Right. And the Russians that are "volunteering" in the rebel leadership are Spec-Ops and intelligence. They understand that even in the face of overwhelming evidence all you need to do is provide enough misinformation, propaganda and denials to muddy the waters and impede any investigation that might provide further facts. The public at large doesn't have the time, energy or intellectual endurance to sort through the mass of contradictory information. That said, anyone educated on the specifics or that takes the time to sift BS from actual evidence knows with very strong probability what occurred and what did not.

Hi everybody ! I'm totally new to this forum so first of all I send you my greetings, then I'd like to submit to your attention the following facts and evidences:

The airplane cockpit was hit from the right or bottom-right side as can be seen from these pictures
Cockpit portion

especially this picture.....
Punture marks orientation

but unfortunately nobody knows if the MH17 was or not on route when was hit so it can be hit from north or from south....

The SA-11 is a radar-guided missile and thus is it possible that instead of aiming the main "body" of the airplane aimed the cockpit running very close to the possibility to miss the "target" ? (Only few meters and the pilots were safe...)
Or is more likely that the missile was a air-to-air missile with "radar homing" capabilities thus justifying the fact that the missile "target" was the MH17 navigation radar ?

If you agree with me that there is a concrete possibility of a air-to-air missile fired very likely from a fighter, I would like to hear your "tactical" opinion taking into consideration that, for what I know, the "militia" has 1 fighter and Ukraine army has many tens....
Does anybody know which kind of air-to-air "radar homing" missile can be fired from a SU-25 ? ?

If you like I can post also a picture sequence that shows "MHC Militia personnel" searching "something" in the MH17 cockpit remains and consequently dismantling all the remaining cockpit devices... searching evidences against Ukrainian army or trying to hide "critical" proofs.... ?

Hoping to be of some help I send you all my best greetings...

a reply to: thinkmode

There are very very few air to air missiles that can home on other aircraft radar. They're designed to home on the radar signature from an AWACS, and none of them can be carried by an Su-25.

The only air to air missiles the Su-25 can carry are the K-13 (AA-2) and the R-60 (AA-8). Neither of which would have done this to a 777.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Hi Zaphod, thanks for replying, I've done a rapid search on your suggestions but....

Vikipedia states....:
The K-13 (NATO reporting name AA-2 Atoll) is a short-range, infrared homing air-to-air missile developed by the Soviet Union

The R-60 was one of the world's lightest air-to-air missiles, with a launch weight of 44 kg (97 lb). It has infrared guidance, with an uncooled Komar (Mosquito) seeker head

I still believe in a radar homing missile but no way to identify the weapon....

Anyway doesn't sound odd also to you the fact that the MH17 was hit by a radar guided missile and was hit right on the "nose" of the cockpit ?

a reply to: thinkmode

Just to be clear.... in the previous post I wrote:

"Anyway doesn't sound odd also to you the fact that the MH17 was hit by a radar guided missile and was hit right on the "nose" of the cockpit ?"

The mentioned "radar guided missile" is guided through the terrestrial launcher radar, different is a "radar homing missile" that locks on a aircraft radar emission....

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: thinkmode

There are very very few air to air missiles that can home on other aircraft radar. They're designed to home on the radar signature from an AWACS, and none of them can be carried by an Su-25.

The only air to air missiles the Su-25 can carry are the K-13 (AA-2) and the R-60 (AA-8). Neither of which would have done this to a 777.

Planes can be modified with new radar and new weapons.

Ukraine is a country at war. Let us not have fancy assumptions about what a Su-25 can do.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Indigo5

That's pretty much what I figured happened honestly. With the clouds, and an AN-26 supposed to be in the area, a system that can't identify one plane from another would have a hard time telling them apart, and it would be easy to make a mistake.

Right. And the Russians that are "volunteering" in the rebel leadership are Spec-Ops and intelligence. They understand that even in the face of overwhelming evidence all you need to do is provide enough misinformation, propaganda and denials to muddy the waters and impede any investigation that might provide further facts. The public at large doesn't have the time, energy or intellectual endurance to sort through the mass of contradictory information. That said, anyone educated on the specifics or that takes the time to sift BS from actual evidence knows with very strong probability what occurred and what did not.

West has all the time and money (these are governments, not public) to carry a most expansive investigation. What is 60 inspectors doing there?

Russians are not doing anything. Send 600 more inspectors. It is your choice.

a reply to: GargIndia

i was under the impression that the west was bankrupt?

Was that not your argument in several threads on this topic now?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yes. This is the reason West is waging wars to keep its currency acceptable to rest of the world.

The empires can seem very powerful even in waning period.

a reply to: GargIndia

An Su-25 is a ground attack aircraft. You don't put the latest and greatest air to air missiles on a ground attack aircraft, because it is never going to be a fighter. It would be slaughtered before it could ever get a shot off. You can modify it all you want, but you're not going to turn a frog into a race horse.

originally posted by: GargIndia

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Indigo5

That's pretty much what I figured happened honestly. With the clouds, and an AN-26 supposed to be in the area, a system that can't identify one plane from another would have a hard time telling them apart, and it would be easy to make a mistake.

Right. And the Russians that are "volunteering" in the rebel leadership are Spec-Ops and intelligence. They understand that even in the face of overwhelming evidence all you need to do is provide enough misinformation, propaganda and denials to muddy the waters and impede any investigation that might provide further facts. The public at large doesn't have the time, energy or intellectual endurance to sort through the mass of contradictory information. That said, anyone educated on the specifics or that takes the time to sift BS from actual evidence knows with very strong probability what occurred and what did not.

West has all the time and money (these are governments, not public) to carry a most expansive investigation. What is 60 inspectors doing there?

Russians are not doing anything. Send 600 more inspectors. It is your choice.

That is a strange response?

What is the difference between 6 neutral, unarmed investigators having a gun shoved in their face and told to turn around and 600?

Very strange thinking...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Yes, if you look it's a lot of implications, without any supporting evidence, implying maybe the Ukraine sent a fighter to shoot it down, but they never explicitly stated it. Because they knew from the start it was the Ukraine rebels and not a jet.

Its been their mantra since they started this mess.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
They just wanted to deflect blame as long as possible and muddy the waters.

Russia or posters in the forums?

Russia, posters on this forum are not trying to muddy the waters they are just flat out lying and spewing anti-West hate filled rhetoric with no facts to back it up. They don't need facts though, they have feelings and opinions, the kind of stuff that shrugs off actual factual posts.

So Xcathdra is allowed to continuously spew lies about Russia "invading" Ukraine because he is pro-American? There is no evidence that Russia has ever invaded Ukraine, and if we want to go by his definition of invasion, then the USA is currently invading almost the entirety of Africa where it has special forces operating on the ground to achieve pro-USA objectives. If Xcathdra is not willing to drop his double standards of Americentrism vs other countries' foreign policies, then he is nothing short of a hypocrite and should be treated as such.

A great example of this hypocrisy is in posting a thread claiming evidence that the separatists shot down the plane with a theatre SAM, while completely ignoring the reality that in order for the Buk system to operate, it needs several different functioning components instead of just a single launcher that the separatists confiscated.

He also ignores the fact that the Ukrainian Army had all these Buk components established and running in four sites around Donetsk just days before the plane was taken down. In other words, his evidence further incriminates the complicit Ukrainian regime, which has been withholding and falsifying evidence to hide its complicity. The Ukrainian regime has also been attacking the area around the crash site with artillery and intimidating international observers from analyzing the site.

originally posted by: Vovin
There is no evidence that Russia has ever invaded Ukraine,

Indeed, apart from the deployment of 30,000 + Russian Soldiers in the Crimea and the subsequent annexation of said territory, they've never invaded the Ukraine at all.....

C'mon, really? Even Putin himself owned up to Russian forces being deployed in the end yet you're still claiming they didn't? And you're whining about others "spewing lies" when you seem to be take the lead in all the "spewing"

a reply to: stumason

Crimea voted to accede to Russia. What is your problem?

The West has always divided nations and put entire populations in misery. What Russia did in Crimea is correct.

Russia must invade Ukraine to set the record straight. This is the logical thing to do. Not invading is a problem.

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Vovin
There is no evidence that Russia has ever invaded Ukraine,

Indeed, apart from the deployment of 30,000 + Russian Soldiers in the Crimea and the subsequent annexation of said territory, they've never invaded the Ukraine at all.....

C'mon, really? Even Putin himself owned up to Russian forces being deployed in the end yet you're still claiming they didn't? And you're whining about others "spewing lies" when you seem to be take the lead in all the "spewing"

Yup, Americans spewing the same lies.

Funny how I'm Canadian and I don't believe that Russia invaded Ukraine. Maybe it's because my government was promoting that narrative, and 90% of my country distrusts those liars.

I still don't understand why Americans fall for the same lies every time. Maybe you just need to get your ass kicked in a major war to finally stop rallying for more.

Seriously though, 30,000 Russians invaded Ukraine? What are you smoking? It was your State Department officials handing out cookies to neo-Nazis. There's proof of that.

Where's the proof of this fantasy Russian invasion? There is none. If Russia invaded Ukraine it would have been a decisive victory with a lot of dead neo-Nazi wannabes and crocodile tears from American state officials.

But it never happened. There was no invasion.

a reply to: GargIndia

Crimea voted to accede to Russia. What is your problem?

You mean the farce of a vote that was even shown to be just that by Russia's own government?

Russia must invade Ukraine to set the record straight. This is the logical thing to do. Not invading is a problem.

Why because Putin doesn't like who Ukraine wants to become trade partners with?

Do you understand Ukraine is a sovereign country and he has no say in what they do?

And he already invaded...Crimea.

a reply to: Vovin

Yup, Americans spewing the same lies.

What lies, Putin admitted himself he sent troops into Crimea?

Are we going to keep having to go into this in every thread on Ukraine?

www.businessinsider.com...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

news.nationalpost.com... donetsk/

www.stuff.co.nz...

www.deccanchronicle.com...

And he admits it on your favorite source from Russia...



I just proved your whole post as being wrong so how can you say no invasion happened when Putin says he did send troops to Crimea and not deployed troops already in Crimea.

Big difference.

originally posted by: GargIndia
a reply to: stumason

Crimea voted to accede to Russia. What is your problem?

The West has always divided nations and put entire populations in misery. What Russia did in Crimea is correct.

Russia must invade Ukraine to set the record straight. This is the logical thing to do. Not invading is a problem.

It seems you not only fell for that farce of a vote - widely discredited around the world as such - but also seem to have you chronology of events mixed up also.

The "vote" took place after 30,000 Russian troops poured out of Sevastopol (in breach of their treaty with the Ukraine). I'd love to see you adequately explain what you think it was those soldiers were doing if not invading a Sovereign country?

a reply to: Vovin

First of all, I'm not an American - that much is obvious from even a cursory glance at my avatar, signature or profile.. Based on your obvious lack of observational skills, that does call into question your views on anything else, much less the invasion of the Crimea.

How can you honestly sit their and deny it took place, when even Russia has admitted as much themselves? They even got Duma approval for it!!!!

a reply to: Vovin

Funny how I'm Canadian and I don't believe that Russia invaded Ukraine. Maybe it's because my government was promoting that narrative, and 90% of my country distrusts those liars.

You can be from Mars that still doesn't change the fact that it happened and Putin admitted to it.

So now you speak for 90% of Canada, so now we can come to you for anything we want to know about what most of Canada has to say...Good to know.