Flightaware Changed the Flight History Data of MH17.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, I am glad you chose to spend it with me.

What this thread needs are the specific sources of the initial data and the sources of the newer, 'more accurate' data and the reasoning why the updated data is more weighted or accurate than the initial data. It's seriously discrediting to the flight tracking sites that their data is only accurate when it takes a revision. The countries of Georgia, Azerbaijan, maybe Iran and others went from either having or not having MH17 in their airspace. It is more than a small discrepancy in the different flight paths.

a reply to: SouthernForkway26

It's a tracking site designed to tell you what planes are flying overhead, and when a flight you might be waiting for is going to land. It's not designed to be hyperaccurate, or for any other purpose.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Can we trust the flightradar24?

ADS-B
[How ADS-B works]

The primary technology that we use to receive flight information is called automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B). The ADS-B technology itself is best explained by the image to the right.

Aircraft gets its location from a GPS navigation source (satellite)
The ADS-B transponder on aircraft transmits signal containing the location (and much more)
ADS-B signal is picked up by a receiver connected to Flightradar24
Receiver feeds data to Flightradar24
Data is shown on www.flightradar24.com and in Flightradar24 apps

How it works

Please feel free to check the last flight of MH17 from another planes (SIA351) view, hope it is detailed enough...

SIA351

The flightradar changed the flight path too, but in interesting way:



Is it flies backward?

a reply to: maghun

OFC we can trust FR24.

But using FR24 data for evidence for 'this and that', thats whole other subject.

Its totally possible, as a owner of site, to change anything on the site. You just need access to the database. The ADS-B receivers are just a initial way to gather the data, automagically.

if, just a big IF, the big guys, ie. CIA/NSA/WHATEVER, had a way to hack into FR24 database, "they" could change the data without FR24's knowledge.

If this aircrafts flightpath was mucked around with by Ukrainian ATC, don't you think the Russians would have released tapes of the flightpath being mucked around with?

I just want to bump this thread and say that ATS should be proud to have such a tenacious and dedicated member,who has a passion for truth..props to you OP.

There is no doubt in my mind that this is fishy as anything..i can well except what your pointing at OP.From following all these threads, i do think the Ukranians were the most likely culprits,just follow the history of its backers the US and all the horror they have inflicted on the world,you know when the world is in fk-erries when Russia is the good guy.

:

a reply to: Zaphod58

Investigators refine data all the time as the investigation goes on. Why wouldn't FlightAware and other tracking sites?

Well, why would they, I thought that,

It's a tracking site designed to tell you what planes are flying overhead, and when a flight you might be waiting for is going to land. It's not designed to be hyperaccurate, or for any other purpose.

So why did they have to "refine" it then, and for whom? Why "refine" the data off flights that were flying overhead and landed over a week ago?

If not for investigators or investigative purposes, why was the data "refined" on a website that is being used by the public?

a reply to: AlCapuccino

Because people that aren't part of the investigation like to investigate too. That doesn't mean it's official, but it's interesting to do. And who knows, maybe they'll find something unexpected.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Because people that aren't part of the investigation like to investigate too. That doesn't mean it's official, but it's interesting to do.

So this website that was intended for, in your words,

It's a tracking site designed to tell you what planes are flying overhead, and when a flight you might be waiting for is going to land. It's not designed to be hyperaccurate, or for any other purpose.

Is going out of its way to provide members of the public with more accurate MH17 flight history data so they can investigate better?

This is in contradiction to stuff you have been saying earlier. like this for instance,

Since when does the public investigate plane crashes? This IS a non-story, which is what I have said from the beginning. The public doesn't investigate planes being shot down, just as they don't investigate accidents that happen.

You are all over the place.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And who knows, maybe they'll find something unexpected.

I am not impressed by veiled threats, or any threats. Put out that hit, get it over with.

a reply to: AlCapuccino

Not at all. The public has no official role in any investigation. That doesn't mean that they don't like to look into things like this.

Data from this and other websites like it have no part in an official investigation. But the public people looking into it through them isn't an official investigation.

a reply to: Zaphod58


So Flightaware is going out of its way to provide members of the public with more accurate MH17 flight history data so they can investigate better?

a reply to: AlCapuccino

And so that they have an accurate record. Who knows, maybe one day there is an accident and their data turns up something interesting.

But investigators in the official investigation already have data from the recorders and the radar tapes that is going to be far more accurate than anything these websites will see.

a reply to: Zaphod58

investigators in the official investigation

Who are this investigators??? International "experts"? Trustworthy?

British air accident investigators will retrieve data from the black boxes of crashed flight MH17, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has said.
...
The experts, based at Farnborough, will download data from the recorders for analysis by Dutch and Ukrainian teams.

MH17 plane crash: UK experts to retrieve flight data

This means that the Ukrainian Government, which is itself suspected of having brought the airliner down, is participating in the decoding of the information to determine who brought this plane down. Is it supposed to be acceptable legal practice, anywhere in the world, to have a major suspect in a possible criminal investigation participate in the investigation to determine whom, if anyone, to charge (i.e., whether the event wasn't merely a tragic error on the part of whomever fired the shot or shots that brought this plane down)?

Off icial 'Investigation' into Downing of the Malaysian Plane Is Now Clearly a Hoax.

a reply to: maghun

Off icial 'Investigation' into Downing of the Malaysian Plane Is Now Clearly a Hoax.

Well I found something interesting at your link...

Already, "First Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows Ukrainian Government Shot that Plane Down." A credible pilot and investigative journalist had managed to screen-save key pictures of the crash-site before those pictures were removed from the Internet, and has now concluded definitely that the two Ukrainian Government SU-25 fighter jets that were "accompanying" the Malaysian airliner into and through the conflict zone had virtually simultaneously shot "double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302,” carrying “a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum),” which are “designed to penetrate the solid armor of a tank." The cockpit on one side of the plane was clearly shown in one of those photos, and it had not only entrance bullet-holes but exit bullet-holes, holes from firing from both sides of the airliner, and this can only result from both of the SU-25 jets firing into the cockpit, firing at it from both sides.

and this...

: this photo taken moments after the crash show it was downed by those two Ukrainian Government planes. There was no ground-based firing that brought it down, because no ground-based firing could possibly have produced the bullet-holes from both sides of that fragment of the cockpit.

Did you even read through this so called evidence?

So this german pilot saw pictures on the internet and is sure that Ukraine SU 25's shot this plane down at 33,000 ft when they can't fly that high, and the shot this cockpit from both sides while hovering and brought this jet down.

Now I know they weren't hovering, but do you not see how absurd this article is that you think is the truth?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Did you even read through this so called evidence?

Two pics of coordinates, zerohedge source and flightradar24 are quite similar, the plane reached 48.0887, 38.6359 according to both sources.

How and when it fallen apart here: 48.138027,38.639127?

Боинг777 МН17, Грабове, Донецька область,

a reply to: maghun

The last reported position by the aircraft, as 13:21:28 was 48.0843 38.7728. The top of that list is the most recent reported position. I'd trust the FlightRadar24 coordinates than the ones on Zerohedge, which used FlightAware. FR24 has more receivers in Europe than FlightAware does, which means their coverage is more accurate.

Maybe you'd care to point out where FR24 shows it at 48.0887, 38.6359.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Hey, Zaph:

Can you comment on this video? I don't know enough about this kind of stuff to know, but I'd like to hear your opinion.

a reply to: loam

Ugh, what an idiot. Planes pass over each other all the time, that doesn't mean anything. Singapore turned because he was lining up to his next waypoint.

As for the radar image that is debris from Malaysian as it came apart. Radar will pick up the pieces after an inflight breakup.