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.

 

THIS JUST IN : New radar data indicates other jets on MH17 course before crash

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Just a thought!

Could the U.S have anything to do with the downing of MH17 ??




posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 06:30 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo



the seemingly complexity of the equipment


Ok, now I understand. Task is easy: find a TELAR from SAM system, get in, turn on the radar and push the "red" button. The radar range is about 35 km, the 777's speed is 1 km every 4 seconds, so you have enough time...


The basic steps are surprisingly easy. The KRUG’s control panels — animated versions of the system’s real-life panels — are a series of utilitarian, monochrome screens next to rows of switches. Flip a few, and a gas-fed engine will accelerate enough to signal when it’s time to turn on the radar. The signals are simply lights embedded around the various switches, knobs and dials.
But using the radar to locate and track aircraft is far harder — and that’s in a controlled, simulated computer program. Learning how to reset the weapon’s electronic systems is also tricky, and the simulator leaves this part out.


Need to learn to launch a BUK missile quick? Look online.

I have been told that the BUK system also has launch code protections ....
edit on 11am60600000011 by maghun because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 06:38 AM
link   
a reply to: AvoidBadCompany


Could the U.S have anything to do with the downing of MH17 ??


Do not even think about it!


The 10-day NATO exercise code named «BREEZE 2014» has ended in Black Sea. The exercise, which included the use of electronic warfare and electronic intelligence aircraft such as the Boeing EA-18G Growler and the Boeing E3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS), coincided with the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 in eastern Ukraine, some 40 miles from the Russian border. NATO ships and aircraft had the Donetsk and Luhansk regions under total radar and electronic surveillance.

The U.S. Army has revealed that the 10-day exercise involved «commercial traffic monitoring». Because of the sophistication of the electronic warfare and intelligence used during SEA BREEZE, it can be assumed that commercial traffic monitoring included monitoring the track of MH-17



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo

I just saw a very good Dutch documentary from 30 oct with a Ukrainian operator in it who says it`s absolutely not possible for someone who isn`t well trained to operate it.

At 17:43 min :

Link

Some other really interesting stuff in it :

- At 23:32 min damage on the roof of the cockpit from outside to inside, which means the explosion came from above and not as it should be with a BUK missile. A BUK missile explodes from under to up, so the metal should be bend from inside to outside

- Proof by videos and photos Separatists had BUK at Snizhne, and anyone who has read the PDF sees the BUK should have come from straight ahead (damage indicates from the side) and it couldn`t reach it from there

- The Dutch journalists try to talk to the Director General from the Ukrainian Air Traffic Control but he`s suspended for a while according to the Minister of Transport. So they ask others for information but no response. After that they decide to go to the headquarter in Kiev and ask about The Head of International Affairs, but that guy is also not available, they say he`s retired but he`s still on the website as the one they need to talk. They get send away after that with no comment

- The president of the DPR ask why the Dutch haven`t come to pick up the MH17 parts

- And of course Ukrainian military guy makes BS claims about the Separatist right after the crash taking away 60 bodies and after that removed shrapnel from the bodies. The Dutch who have examined the corpses say that`s rubbish




edit on 14 11 2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 08:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: tommyjo

I just saw a very good Dutch documentary from 30 oct with a Ukrainian operator in it who says it`s absolutely not possible for someone who isn`t well trained to operate it.


Who says the crew of a possible Buk TELAR wasn't well trained? Think about how many volunteers (and that includes serving Russian mil personnel on leave) that have offered their services to those separatist areas? The separatists required a more potent counter to higher flying Ukrainian recce and tactical air power hence the likely deployment of Buk even in its limited form (TELAR).



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo

He`s an Ukrainian BUK instructor, and says you really need to be a specialist, and an engineer and someone with knowledge of radio-locations (his exact words) to get it to work.

If they need to be that well trained to even operate it, the change of it being just a dumb mistake makes it all of sudden a whole lot less likely.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: maghun

Ok, now I understand. Task is easy: find a TELAR from SAM system, get in, turn on the radar and push the "red" button. The radar range is about 35 km, the 777's speed is 1 km every 4 seconds, so you have enough time...



Consider the possibility that a separatist Buk was deployed for a specific target? Did the local separatist leaders have intelligence on a specific reconnaissance or re-supply mission? The Ukrainians were noted using IL-76 Candids to air drop supplies to troops that were cut off. Now consider that they had specific intelligence of such a flight and deployed the Buk to target the flight. So yes under those circumstances of a sam bush it is perfectly feasible.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo

Have you taken the time to read the PDF ?



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: tommyjo

He`s an Ukrainian BUK instructor, and says you really need to be a specialist, and an engineer and someone with knowledge of radio-locations (his exact words) to get it to work.

If they need to be that well trained to even operate it, the change of it being just a dumb mistake makes it all of sudden a whole lot less likely.


Why? Think outside the box. The system is obviously limited in it's TELAR form but it still has the capability to function and destroy targets. That is why the Soviets originally designed it in order to have that redundancy outside the full-up system. Think about such a Buk crew being deployed in a SAM bush capacity in a TELAR. Obviously they are operating a limited system but have full confidence that the intelligence they were supplied with is correct and that what they light up and fire against is a Ukrainian military target? Why couldn't it have been such a tragic mistake under those circumstances?



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo

I want to discuss it with you, but first please take the time to read the PDF.

With the video/photo evidence from the location and the explaining you all of a sudden realize it much less likely it was actual the Separatist who did it.

- The MH17 wreckage damage shows the BUK had to come from the side, but the Separatists where dead ahead

- They even seem to be not in range with their BUK (if it was theirs)

- The damage on the wreckage I showed makes even it being a BUK much less likely

- I now have seen a handful of non Russian experts saying there a serious possibility it could have been done by a jet fighter



Why couldn't it have been such a tragic mistake under those circumstances?


It still could be, but as I just showed you, there`s good change it didn`t happen that way.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

And yet, there's proof that the Separatists were using a SAM system, unless the Ukrainians were shooting down their own aircraft.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Maybe military jets were using commercial airlines as a way to hide there radar singatures. They would have to fly very very close though. I can picture a military jet just piggy backing with a commercial jet right above or below. Although I dont think this is what happened, and believe that it was shot down by a SAM. It would be a pretty easy way to fly military assets into airspace that would be considered a hostile act if done just by themselves.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes, but is it still that likely after seeing all the other evidence it actual were the Separatist and not the Ukrainians?

I think it`s telling there are Dutch 6 experts who all say we can`t rule out the possibility it was a fighter who brought it down.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Yes, it is. There was an Antonov transport that was expected in the area near the time that the Malaysian flight was supposed to be there. They had shot down other aircraft in the area, using that missile system that they supposedly weren't trained to use.

As I said, they are trained to not rule anything out until all the evidence says otherwise. I have yet to see solid evidence that a fighter was involved.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: tommyjo?

When I see official evidence which has some mistakes, what to think?




It is also extremely strange that this BUK, allegedly after shooting down MH17, is supposedly filmed by a Ukrainian surveillance team (in ostensibly rebel territory?), with its covering missing, as if to show the world a missile is missing.

The place where the video was filmed is marked as pro-Kiev territory on UA maps on the 17th and 18th July.


MH17: The Lugansk BUK video

Not to mention the instant and poorly fabricated "intercepted call" by the ukrainian secret service, which placed the crash site near a nonexistent mine.


In the area of Petropavlovskaya mine.


MH17 Crash: Full Transcript Of Alleged Phone Intercepts Between Russian Intelligence Officers (VIDEO)



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




He`s an Ukrainian BUK instructor, and says you really need to be a specialist, and an engineer and someone with knowledge of radio-locations (his exact words) to get it to work.


And yet that would be for a system and it's safeguards, but when you disable the safeguards minimal training is needed.


The Buk-M1 (SA-11 Gadfly to NATO) can be used by minimally trained operators to deliver a lethal attack, without the safeguards built into other comparable GBADS, an Aviation Week analysis shows.


aviationweek.com...



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58



there's proof that the Separatists were using a SAM system


Please show it!



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: maghun

Unless the Ukrainians shot their own plane down, the AN-26 that was shot down a couple of days prior to MH17 could only have been shot down by a SAM system. The aircraft was at almost 22,000 feet which is above the ceiling of a MANPADS system, so either the Russians fired the missile, the Ukrainians shot down their own plane, or the rebels had a working SAM launcher and used it.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58



almost 22,000 feet


Source?

...and it was a MiG-29.?




In accordance with the coordinates specified in the picture, we can assume that the picture was taken by a UKUSA satellite. We undertook a detailed analysis of this picture and no signs of tampering were found.



posted on Nov, 14 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: maghun


A Ukrainian military transport aircraft has been shot down in the east, amid fighting with pro-Russian separatist rebels, Ukrainian officials say.

They say the An-26 plane was hit at an altitude of 6,500m (21,325ft).

The plane was targeted with "a more powerful missile" than a shoulder-carried missile, "probably fired" from Russia. The crew survived, reports say.

www.bbc.com...

As for that picture, it's fake. The odds of a satellite happening to be in exactly the right spot, at exactly the right time are so high that it's not funny. And the resolution is a bit too good.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join