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.

 

MH17 Black Box Data Shows Evidence Of Missile Strike

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

No -

You guys really need to read the treaty between Russia and Ukraine over the black sea base. The treaty limited what Russia could have there. That includes the fact Russian military units are NOT allowed outside of their bases unless coming from russia to the base or from the base to russia.

In order for Russia to increase / decrease / add items they must submit the request to Ukraine, who must sign off on it before Russia does antything. If Russia fails to notify or Ukraine says no, then Russia cannot deploy the items.

The no insignia troops were Russia per Putins own admission on RT. They were armed and supported the rebels. The votes in crimea were illegal under the Ukraine constitution. This fact has been supported by various organizations, including the UN and the OSCE, not to mention a large chunk of countries on the planet.

Since Russian troops were in Crimea outside their bases assisting rebels before any illegal vote occurred, means armed Russian military units were inside sovereign ukraine territory. Russia invaded ukraine and is currently occupying Crimea.

Thats not an opinion - thats a fact.




posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

With respect, our entire shrapnel pattern data is from only a few photographic images of the wreckage.

Until a proper and thorough professional investigation is carried out and completed, as per repeated request by the Ukrainian patriots and indeed the Russian Federation, we won't know any of these issues for certain. We can and will speculate of course, but at this point in time, that's all it will be.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

And if the aircraft does have an inerting system, as all modern aircraft are getting, then it wouldn't matter if the shrapnel hit a fuel tank or not, whether it was empty or not.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




The votes in crimea were illegal under the Ukraine constitution.


And burning government buildings, holding Ak's to the heads of elected officials and violently taking control of the Ukrainian political landscape by force was perfectly legal?

As is bombing and shelling the hell out of people in villages who don't happen to agree with all of the above being carried out to their fellows and elected politicians i suppose?

If it were Britain or the US in place of Russia, we would have sent in our forces in a heartbeat, insignia and all full force to protect our ex-pats living there, you know full well we would have...but Putin is some kind of warmonger for protecting ethnic Russians from murderous extreme right wing thugs?

What a joke, Putin showed extraordinary restraint by not going off kilter and slaughtering the lot of the Nazis.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
What a joke, Putin showed extraordinary restraint by not going off kilter and slaughtering the lot of the Nazis.



Cant refute the facts so you call them all nazis?

I dont know how many other ways that mindset can be corrected since its been show its not true.

Besides Putin is busy killing people in the South and East of Ukraine.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MysterX

And if the aircraft does have an inerting system, as all modern aircraft are getting, then it wouldn't matter if the shrapnel hit a fuel tank or not, whether it was empty or not.


An interting system, from what i can immediately gather, while doing much to prevent a vapour explosion, does not guarantee the fuel will not explode when struck with hot shards of metal from frag, only that it decreases the probability that it will.

I suppose the question is then one of did MH17 have such an inerting system to replace the oxygen with an inert gas or not?

If it didn't, it is still likely that shrapnel pierced the tanks, ignited the Oxygen rich vapour and caused the explosion and explosive decompression at altitude.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

Seems like the pro-separatists are throwing out a lot of "What ifs." What if the US or UK were involved? What if an Su-25 managed exceed its specs and keep up with a 777? What if an R-60 managed to do what two K-8's couldn't?

The facts are clear. Was an Su-25 in the area? It's possible but could nowhere deal the damage we've seen. The attack occurred over separatist held territory and according to Russian intel Kiev didn't fire anything from their BUKs nor were they in range. We can keep going but even from that I think it's clear as to who is the perpetrator.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
...does not guarantee the fuel will not explode when struck with hot shards of metal from frag, only that it decreases the probability that it will.


Jet fuel is not explosive, it does not violently combust when hit with hot metal. The vapors released from the fuel are dangerous and hence the reason for the inerting system.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

The R-60 is an IR missile, which means it would have tracked out near the wings, towards the engines, and would have detonated out near the wings close to the engines, not near the cockpit. Even from the front it would have gone towards the hottest portion of the aircraft, which in this case would be the engines, so it wouldn't have detonated near the cockpit, it would have detonated near the engine, and wing. And the wing tanks would have still been pretty full of fuel, as they still had quite a ways to go.

Looking at this flight in more detail, the chances are that none of the tanks were empty yet at this point, and if they were they would have been the outer wing tanks, not the fuselage tanks. They would have had to use all the tanks, because this flight was really close to max range for the plane. They'd start from the outer tanks and work their way in on the fuel, so the fuselage tanks should have still had quite a bit of fuel in them.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: MysterX

Seems like the pro-separatists are throwing out a lot of "What ifs." What if the US or UK were involved? What if an Su-25 managed exceed its specs and keep up with a 777? What if an R-60 managed to do what two K-8's couldn't?

The facts are clear. Was an Su-25 in the area? It's possible but could nowhere deal the damage we've seen. The attack occurred over separatist held territory and according to Russian intel Kiev didn't fire anything from their BUKs nor were they in range. We can keep going but even from that I think it's clear as to who is the perpetrator.


It's more surprising that two K-8's didn't do what an R-60 or similar missile could, if you ask me it's a bloody miracle.

We don't have any facts, despite the US and Obama throwing out accusations against Russia, then patriots, no Russia, no - no the patriots, like it was going out of fashion...of course there's going to be a lot of what ifs, maybes and the rest of it...someone knows what happened obviously, but most do not. So we have the what ifs, and lots of them.

We're doing a lot of that here on ATS too.

Nobody knows who the perps are..i don't know how you can be so apparently sure it's clear who they are when the entire world and his dog see anything but clarity, but if that's your opinion, more power to you.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
And burning government buildings, holding Ak's to the heads of elected officials and violently taking control of the Ukrainian political landscape by force was perfectly legal?


It was the elected officials who impeached the former President causing him to flee to "mother Russia" and also who form the current Government now.


originally posted by: MysterX
As is bombing and shelling the hell out of people in villages who don't happen to agree with all of the above being carried out to their fellows and elected politicians i suppose?


When did that happen? Ukrainian forces made no aggressive moves until after the Crimea had been taken from them and armed men declared these "people's Republics" in the East.


originally posted by: MysterX
If it were Britain or the US in place of Russia, we would have sent in our forces in a heartbeat, insignia and all full force to protect our ex-pats living there, you know full well we would have...


No, they wouldn't. Previous examples where Western civilians have been caught in a war zone have shown us just evacuating our people, see Lebanon 2006 for example. The UK allowed everyone to base from Cyprus and all Western nations simply pulled their people out using charter aircraft and warships, then left the region to it.


originally posted by: MysterX
but Putin is some kind of warmonger for protecting ethnic Russians from murderous extreme right wing thugs?


Who are these "murderous extreme right wing thugs" - only 4 members of the interim cabinet (out of 20) were of the right-wing group, the rest being sitting MP's elected in the 2012 Parliamentary vote.

it is ironic you should call those in Kiev "right wing thugs", but those in the East who have taken up arms, shouting the cause of Russian nationalism aren't?



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   
It was obviously one of those missiles supplied by Russia. A shoulder fired projectile could not reach such heights. But an SA-11 miissile launched from a BUK system could.
I fly a lot for work and vacation and exploring new places. Flying to your destination in a commercial plane is one of the safest modes of transportation. I feel so bad for those victims (and their families), who were lost in that tragedy.
As bodies were falling to the ground, this reminds me of the 9/11 jumpers from the twin towers. But this was on a higher level. I hope that their brains shut down from the sheer fear of falling from that altidude, or the missle killed everyone on impact.
Godspeed to those who perished.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I said 'or similar missile'.

The poster i responded to keeps mentioning an R-60, so i went with that. I could have repeatedly typed S-5, S-8, S-13, but didn't. As these do have the required range, taking into account the max cruising altitude and distance that MH17 was from that rated ceiling, and do come in fragmentation variants possibly accounting for the frag damage to MH17.

The point is, not all missile and rocket weaponry, commonly carried on SU-25s and many other similar aircraft are guided as you will know, but a lot won't.

So an unguided AAM or rocket would be fired towards it's target and be unable to lock onto the engines.

Because of the lack of guidance these munitions are fused with a proximity detector and will explode nearby it's target it of doesn't hit it directly...causing shrapnel damage, which would rip into the aircraft, fuel tanks, engines, cockpit or any part for the aircraft if it was close enough.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

The problem with unguided munitions is that they're extremely hard to target. Look at the rocket pod that the US used in Vietnam. They used to call them Zoomies because they'd go screaming off in all directions when fired. Even the more advanced ones of today are designed to hit stationary targets, not targets moving at 500+ mph, above them.
edit on 7/27/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

So now, because your SU-25/missile theory has been shown to be full of holes, we're now going down the road of an "unguided" rocket just so you can have the SU-25 hitting just aft of the cockpit and not the engines as it's standard A2A armament would?

But didn't you say the theorised distance between the SU-25 (at max ceiling) and MH17 was between 8,000-10,000 ft?


posted by MysterX
Assuming the SU-25 was at its max altitude, a missile fired at MH17 would strike or detonate near to the jet within 2 - 3 seconds, having traversed the 8,000 - 10,000 feet separating the two aircraft.


Hang on - so now you want us to believe that a poorly experience Ukrainian pilot (by your own admission their Air Force is in disarray), in an aged ground attack aircraft, fired an unguided rocket at another aircraft travelling higher and faster at some 8-10,000 ft (2,500 - 3000 metres) distance and scored a hit big enough to down it?

Grasping, much?



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: stumason




It was the elected officials who impeached the former President causing him to flee to "mother Russia" and also who form the current Government now.


Eh? And who were these elected officials you're on about then..names?

Could it be the same elected official that was filmed with a sniper rifle and ammo in the boot of his car heading for Kiev on the day of the snipers firing into the crowds..that one of then was it Stu?

Or was it a different set of elected officials..perhaps those were among the hoards throwing fire-bombs, firing arrows and finally firing rifle and handgun rounds at the police..was it those officials?

All totally above board and hunky dory. The majority of people voted for their legally elected Government, it was removed illegally by force, aided in great part by Euro aligned right wingers, which, although later reversed, decreed as their first act in power to immediately outlaw the Russian language, both oral and written among the population...not right wingers? Book burning not NAZI enough for you mate?

Whatever they were, they certainly were and still are not the paragon of liberal or moderate virtue and were on the rampage. If i were Putin during all of that going on, i wold have brought the army into Ukraine and properly invaded and reinstated the rightfully elected Government...which is why Putin is a statesman and accomplished and respected Politician and i am not, because he kept his head and his cool, opting to heed the call of desperate ethnic Russians in Ukraine to protect them from what was coming from Kiev.

But that is moving too far from the topic, and so i'll say no more on it.

In fact, i'll call it a night. Goodnight folks and cheers for...an interesting exchange.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

The Parliament in Ukraine at the time Yanukovych was there were elected in 2012. Russia accepted the results of those elections.

Those same members of parliament are the ones who impeached Yanukovych in compliance with Ukraine's Constitution.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Stu, Stu, Stu...you really ought to at least try to read the preceding posts i've written on this thread...you'll save yourself a lot of wasted time in the long run.

Already mentioned as i always have been in this thread..the weapon that could have taken out MH17 may have been 'unguided'...DUMB in other words.

The SU-25 carried a number of variants of unguided munitions.

Anyway...enough's enough for tonight i think.

Goodnight.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX

Already mentioned as i always have been in this thread..the weapon that could have taken out MH17 may have been 'unguided'...DUMB in other words.

The SU-25 carried a number of variants of unguided munitions.

Anyway...enough's enough for tonight i think.

Goodnight.


???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

really?
edit on 27-7-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, and the Russians called the S-05 in Afghanistan a 'tail tickler' because it was so underpowered and not particularly good at doing what it did.

But, as any marksman or hunter will know, there's a lot to be said for dead reckoning. If your quarry happens to be a big, bloated airliner not performing aerobatics or manoeuvring all over the place..there's even more to be said for it, especially if aiming from below and taking your time to line up properly.

But i'm off, thanks for the chat.




top topics



 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join