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: 'Russian missile parts' at Ukraine crash site

page: 17
5
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
a reply to: Zaphod58




There's enough of a thrust difference to allow the Su-39 to carry an additional 2,000 kg of weapons.


In the source I used earlier the difference in thrust was a mere 2%, but there was 2000-3000 kg increase in take off loads Is this not because the Su39 has more attachment points to carry extra weight, and a larger default take off load because of added options?




It's the major structural damage caused combined with the force is the air around the aircraft tearing it apart. An air to air missile or gun can't cause that kind of instantaneous damage.


So it is not the actual explosion but the damage caused by it. Cannon fire can easily create the same level of structural damage in a short timeframe.


The more efficient the engine the better it operates at all ranges. And in physics and thrust a 2 percent difference isn't minor. As we can see with tha ability to take off with more weight. A more efficient engine will provide uninterrupted force. To engines could have the same thrust at max. Yet one be more efficient and provide better thrust. In order to get to higher altitudes with thinner air efficiancy is the key. You have less air traveling through the engine to maintain thrust you need to guarantee the air doesn't escape meaning very tight tolerances.

This is a problem Russia has always had with aircraft to this day though it might have the same thrust as say a Western craft it is highly inefficient. This is why Russia doesn't or should I say didn't make the engines and relied on Ukraine.

Now if you bothered to actually do some research instead of making stupid guesses like the cockpit being pressurized. Or more pylons a on the wings ( It doesn't you would know this if you bothered to learn) you show over and over you know nothing of aircraft but yet wish to argue. Tell you what go do some research then come back and explain how an so 25 could possibly attach mh17.

You have produced no evidence and the only thing you have shown is useless videos on you tube made by Russian trolls. I showed you were the guy that designed the plane told you it's impossible. But you seem to think you know more about the craft then him even though you thinksso 25 cabin is pressurized.

Again back to the thread your so desperately trying to derail. Why don't you explain how burn patterns appeared on the outside of the craft from a cannon. Or how the pilots died those aren't 20 mm holes in them that would be very noticeable.
edit on 8/24/15 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 03:37 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

My guess is that there is to much distraction.
We have bulletholes, what size is of no importance.
We have a scratchmark of a bullet on a wing, a long scratchmark.
Now we have forinsic proof where the bullets came from, namely the same hight.
The group of the bullets tells the distance.
So we have bullets shot from closeby the mh-17.
That proofs something that is capebable of shooting those bullets at the same hight as where mh-17 flew.
No other possibillety then an an other plane.
Most likely a fighter-plane.
The rebels have no fighterplanes so they are excluded as suspect.
The Russians would not dear, to fly so deep over the Ukraine, because they would have been shot down, by sam of the Ukraine. So the Russians are no suspect either.

Who's left?
Rogue forces? Nazi greetings giving politicians and their rich oligarch funded backed up forces?
It has to be the Ukraine, weather the airforce is loyal to the government or the base commander is in the pockets of a oligrach and got some good deal of money out of it, is distraction at this moment.

Important is that Nor the Rebels could have done it, nor Russia.
If there was a buk or a air to air lissile, we stil have canonfire from an other plane.
Forensics of the group bullets and the scratchmark on the wing of a bullet, places the fighter who shot those bullets at the cockpit at a certain distance. It looks very closeby, otherwise the group of bulletholes were spread more wider.

Now we have a fighter shooting at mh-17 above the Ukraine, for certain and certainly not a plane from the rebels (tey have no planes, no fighters, no bombers, nothing. Russia is not involved directly, so the fighter can not have been from Russia.

Important! Where was the plane of Putin? Right at the time when mh-17 was shot down?
Putins plane came from the south of Poland, and is known to spoof other planes their transponders.

We here flightcontrol directing MH-17 to a new route more south, the reason""Because we can see three of them"".

This is key.

Did Putin his plane pretend to be flightcontrol, gave MH-17 a new route?
It's likely that MH-17 continued the fightpath of the route of Putins his plane and that the plane of Putin continued on the route of MH-17.

On radar it seems a X, two planes crossing eachother paths, while a route like >< was made.
So we have the words ""we have three of them"" we have Putin his plane coming from the south of Poland.
Putin was returning from a foreign trip.

We see non disclose-contracts from the safety-board, the planeparts with the bulletholes removed.
Secrecy all over the place.

Very clear to me that we the west, by the very people we helped in power were to blame for shooting MH-17 down.
Thinking they shot Putin down.

But his plane spoofed to be mh-17.
Flightcontrol tells ""Because we have three of them"" when they gave the new route to MH-17.

Outfoxed by a smart Putin, in a state of the art plane that is famous for it;s spoofing.

So besides me shot 300 of our own people dead, we wanted to have Putin killed.
Now is a major mistake a most likely a hit on Putin.

Putin goes for 10 days in hiding.

Pale but determent, he shows it's muscles.

Shows to the US, who are the puppeteers behind the screens, with Khibiny at the Donald Crook, with a su-24 that every vessel, from aircraft-carrier to a corvette can not use anything electric, when the Russians use their Khibiny.

Every ship is just a sitting duck.
No radar, no guiding-systems for the rockets.
No way to reboot the computers.

The f-15 hacked, worthless.
The sam Patriot hacked, worthless and now being removed from the The Turkish border.

So Putin is angry!
Sends it's subs to the coast of the USA and the USA can not detect them.
In the Gulf of Mexico the Russian subs are bold enough to show their position, so they can been seen even with the naked eye.
Russian bombers fly at the very edge of international airspace along the coast of California.
Russian soldiers step in the local store on a small isle in the street of Bering in Alaska, paying nice and correctly for the goods they buy, but in their Russian uniform.
Locals say that they are arrogant and do as they please, like they own the place,

An other hit on Putin was derailed by info, a hit ordered from the Hawks in the Knesset or at least approved by them.
Not by professional criminal hitman, but by Mossad, the route diplomatique, that comes with immunity.

Russia has eyes and ears in the walls of the Knesset as anywhere else in the zionist country.
Known for the stealing of nukes, using their ambassy's as distributionpoints to spread the nukes at tactical points.

Anyway, the hit on Putin from Israel was doomed to fail.
A last resort from those who failed completely in killing Putin, shooting down MH-17.
Only the plane of Putin there and then.
The known spoofing of Putin's plane.
The X, two crossing lines of routes of planes was seen. but it was more like >< such a route.
MH-17 was send to a new route, more to the south and Putin folowed in the path of the old route of MH-17.

The Ukraine airforce was fooled by the spoofin of the transponder.
The west has a terrible position.
A bulletscratchmark on the wing, bulletholes in the cockpit.
Foresics tell you those bulletholes came from the same hight as MH-17 and the way those bulletholes are as a group tells the distance.
Proof of an other plane, what has to be a fighter-plane, a jet.
It has to fly as fast as the MH-17 and as quick.
The su-25 serviceheight was changed after mh-17 was shot down.
But before MH-17 was shot down, the pilot's lexicon , give a ""dienstgibthöhe"" of 14.600 meters.

What can we say or do?
Oh. we tried to kill Putin, but he outfoxed us and fooled us to shot 300 of our own people dead?
We never admit.
Putin is guilty and sanctions have been placed.

The mh-17 was downed by mistake.
In a panicmode was the Mossad used to take Putin out, what was compromised and stopped in in tracks.

So the west gave the nukerockets new coordinates at Russia and faked a attack with nukes on Russia.
Hoping that Russia would send some rockets back.

But Putin, once again kept his head cool and waited.
No explosions. no rockets, no nukes.

So we could not make Putin a bad guy. to blame him of sending rockets.

But Putin has enough of this nonsense.

He can uses every weapon at his disposal.
Anything with electronics can be put down by the russians, so basicly no peace of weaponry will work at the American side. No radar, no guiding-system so no rocket can be fired.

So now you now why the cockroaches are going underground in their fast network of tunnels.
Thousands of miles of tunnels have been cut out by new classified machines.

The evil forces that have hi-jacked the power in a silent coup de état, when Kennedy was murdered.

A Nero or Caligula like power-club.
Very scrupulous , sexual twisted, drug addicted murdering gang.
Lying every second word that comes out their mouth have been cornered.

And like a crazy cat in their corner they are making very strange jumps and moves.
Anything goes now.
With no way to defend themselves, the Americans know, that they can not use their weapons with electronics.
The Russians still can use their own weapons, so the American army is a sitting duck.

The mighty eagle seems like a featherless, naked chicken.
LOL !!!



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

And just like a tank it is impossible for it to reach the height with any type of armament that would bring that plane down.

So it can carry whatever ammo it want's...it still won't bring a commercial plane down at 33000 ft.

The buk is distraction, it can be discussed after the bullet-holes are researched.
We has bulletholes and see that the group of bullets is closely placed.
We now can determen the distance of where those bullets were fired from.
From far away the group of bullets should have been more spread widely.
The scratchmark on the wing is long. Again, simple forensics tells us the angle from where the bullets came.
Namely the same hight for the scratchmark of the bullet on the wing is horizontal.

So we have a plane that used it;s canon, a fighterplane.
Rebels don't have planes, no fighters, no bombers, nothing.
Russia is excluded, because they would have been shot down, by sam from the Ukraine.
Russia's fighterplanes do not enter Ukrainian airspace.
So who made the bulletholes if the rebels and Russians did not make them?

Only one solution, it has to be the Ukrainian airforce itself.
The takeover over flight-control, the non-disclose-agreement, the blackboxdata that stays a secret.
Everything points to the west and has to stay a secret.
Any lie without proof is blamed on Russia.
If the west could point their finger to Putin, they would.
They even try every now and then.
But we are to blame, we shot MH-17 down.
Our new friends we placed in power,

The reason why we shot MH-17 down is obvious.
Putin flew there too and his plane is famous for spoofing, when flightcontrol saw two planes crossing eachother routes like a X was not a crossing at all, but more like >< , because MH-17 was send down an other route a flypath to the south. The reason given was ""Because we have three of them"".
When a X was thought to have been made, was it a >< and the plane of Putin followed in the flying - routeplan of MH-17.
A fighter of the Ukrain tried to shoot Putin his plane and so killing putin, but MH-17 was shot instead.
We have bulletholes !

Again I am telling again and again, that an other fighterjet was resposable for bringing MH-17 down.
That fighter, probably a su-25, had to fly at the same altitude as MH-17 otherwise the bullet could not have scratched the wing first before entering the cockpit, The scratch,ark of the bullet is in such a long line, and goes from the wing richt to the seat of the captain pilot. The scratchmark of the bullet is about three feet in a strait line.
That is what tells me where the shot came from. From a gun at the same hight, so from an other plane that is capebable of making such horizontal (bullet) - scratchmark. Simple forensics. That's what you use to pinpoint where the shot came from.

Reuters is owned, bought by the Rothschild's. The very same Rothchild's who are responsible for the other Malaysian plane 370, that went down. No believe-worthy source, those sources from them.

The shape of the bulletholes tells you exactly where those sots came from. and the long scratchmark that a bullet made, points to the very same position.
To me there is one obvious explanation.
The entryholes and scratchmark from a bullet can only be made by a second plane, flying at the same altitude.
The angle of the bulletholes and the line of the scratchmark of the bullet on the wing, tells exacly where the fighter was when it used it's machinegun. The group of the bullethules are so close, that there has been shot from very close distance. If the minimum distance of 300 meters were followed, the bullets would have been more spread.
That plane that can make such bulletholes, has to be a fighter-jet.
Rebels don't have fighterjets, and the Russians are not going te be involved with their fighter-planes.
So If MH-17 can not have been shot down by a fighter from the russians, the rebels do not even have planes, not any plane, no planes at all.
So there was an other fighter and it was not a fighterplane belonging to Russia.

Those bulletholes are on internet and are never leaving again.
As the bulletscratchmark on the wing will.

So a buk or no buk is not important.
From who was that plane that made the scratcmark on the wing eand the bulletholes in the cockpit,

After the plane and owner is identified, we can speak about a buk, or shots from the ground, an air to air missile., but later.
Because the best evidence are those bulletholes and the schratchmark.

After that, we can speculate about the engine that felt of en the rest of the plane fell in a very close aerea.
If a air to air missile was used.

But the secrecy, not willing to chair the content of those black boxes tell it all, be we kow the MH-17 made evecive moves, but a great plane is not agile enough.
We tried with a a 310, with only pilots on board.
The last thing to be heard was like a shredmill, according to the Russians.
The Dutch made sure that everybody signed a non disclosure contrackt.

That fact alone tells me they are responsible and can not give the blame to Russia or the rebels.
And we are now such a police-state, that we are not going to apology, and admid our mistake.
# the citizens, they don't need to hear the truth.
The truth is what we tell them.
Weapons of mass destruction in Irak.
Could not find anything even after 7 years of surch.
Went to war over it and threatened the whole world to join or t face the same as Irak.

This just an other false flag.
Russia was blamed and punished before anything was clear.

It's clear to me, just more of the very same false flags.

Buk as distraction. Forensics points right to the place where was shot from,
The horizontal bulletscratchmark and way of ontry of the bullets in the cockpit.

No Russian plane , so from who was the plane that made those bulletholes in the cockpit from the MH-17.

I am Dutch, and would be glad to someone else, but the evidence points to the people we instalded.
To punnish Russia with sanctions for something they can not be responsable for is wrong.

We are punnishing innocent lives for much to long now.
The truth is nor revealed.
The non disclosieragreement is wrong.

The bad thing that we are seponsable as not a danger for our securirt, national or more global;
The truth is more important.
We are guilty, it was an accident.
Rogue forces had hooped that Putin was on that flight,

Nato does like bad ass friends and these we want to keep,
China is coming with it's army for drill's at the upper north-west of China.
As close as they can be to europe, the Ukraine and Russia,

The sanctions, the wrongfull punishment of Russia is fuel on a very dangerous situation.
We Germany was alowed to ubitede we, the west, Nato promiised, not to come closer to the boarders of Russia, we promissed not to come closer with Nato, and so we took Poland into Nato, Romania, Hungry, Bulgary, all 3 baltic states.

Russia has no buffer left. The Baltic states are against the Russian Borders. Ukrain is chairing it's borders with Russia.
Russia had no choice to take back the Krim. The Russian forces had a war with Enland over it, Tolstoi writes about it.
The same names now on the news were the same city;s who became famous in wo2, Russian died over those city's by their thousands.

A.P., Rueters is Rothchild.

They have a agenda and are not Independent, Rothchild took 370 down too



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta


The Russians would not dear, to fly so deep over the Ukraine, because they would have been shot down, by sam of the Ukraine. So the Russians are no suspect either.


Are you calling the Russians cowards? You are clearly a Russophobe. Russians are brave and willing to die for their Motherland. Your contempt for their courage sickens me.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

The Russians are indeed very brave people, willing to die for their country when needed.
You twist my words,
Russians and Putin is the hero, I am pro Russia, pro Putin !

Against Ukrainian forces that shoot katousja's at ordinary citizens, just working fathers, mothers and children.
And Porosjenko thinks he will be liked for that.
The local inhabitants will never forget what the Ukrainian army did to them.

I never called the Russians cowards, you twist my words.
The Russians do not come in Ukrainian airspace, because they are not that stupid.
It would be a very stupid thing to do, that's the reason, not the lack of courage.

I Have posted many commands on this MH-17 topic, all pro Russia and pro Putin !



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta


The Russians are indeed very brave people, willing to die for their country when needed.


Then why won't Putin admit that Russian conscripts are dying in Donbass? What is he afraid of?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta

Wow was Google translate having problems with russian? They really need to get that fixed. So can I ask what did the Tom clancy story have to do with what we were discustsing? Though I must admit I really do like the part about the Russians showing up In uniform and spending rubles. that's regally shocking since Russia has been having problems paying people and Of course we know that no Retailer would accept rubles since the currency is worthless. But it is a good story.
edit on 8/25/15 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
The big question remaining for me is whether it was a lightly loaded and modified 25, or a stock 27? And, of course, to whom the airplane belonged and by whom it was crewed?

We will never know the answer to those questions.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta


The Russians do not come in Ukrainian airspace, because they are not that stupid.
It would be a very stupid thing to do, that's the reason, not the lack of courage.


Why would it be stupid? The Russian air force is better equipped and better trained than the Ukrainian one. A single Russian fighter jet could blow three Ukrainian planes out of the sky in a dogfight. Are you implying that the Russian air force is inferior to the Ukrainian one?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta

And why can't those "bullet holes" be damage from shrapnel from a SAM launched by a BUK?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Wasta


The Russians do not come in Ukrainian airspace, because they are not that stupid.
It would be a very stupid thing to do, that's the reason, not the lack of courage.


Why would it be stupid? The Russian air force is better equipped and better trained than the Ukrainian one. A single Russian fighter jet could blow three Ukrainian planes out of the sky in a dogfight. Are you implying that the Russian air force is inferior to the Ukrainian one?


No one have actually noticed that Ukraine dont fly their jets anymore, do to the Russian Electronic warefare capability. The Ukraine ariforce is deamed useless do to Russian electronic warefare.
No one have paied much attention to why the Ukraine artillery are deamed useless compare to the pro-russians accurancy..
NATO just noticed this summer why Ukraine Su.ck so much on their front lines, and it bafeled the US service menn how Russia are controlling the war electronically. This might not have been mentioned in US media. But we in Norway got the Whole story.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

By policy, Russia saw to it that its former Soviet Republics and client states were always provided inferior equipment. Since Russia designed the avionics, they know exactly how to interfere with them. If NATO were taking the situation seriously, they would start a lend-lease program to provide them with modern aircraft.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




A cannon isn't going to cause an instantaneous explosion of the aircraft like we saw here. It will take a few seconds if not longer.


What is the difference? Why does it matter wether the plane desintegrates a second after a BUK detonation, or 2 or 3 seconds after a large caliber gun started firing at the cockpit?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Great so we have besides the 14.600 meters from the pilot's lexicon from the ordinary su-25 even 18.000 meters for the su39/su-25.
In either case well above the altitude of the mh-17

Still distraction in my advantage this time.

The focus has to be on the bulletholes, that were fired from the same altitude.
The bulletscratchmark on the wing is long and horizontal.
Forensics points to the place where was fired from.

The same altitude means a second plane and no rebels have planes and Russia can be ruled out for political strategic reasons. Besides would any Russian fighter have been shot out of the sky with a sam from the Ukraine.

So if the bulletholes did not came from a Russian plane, from who was the fighter then, that made those bulletholes?
Rebels do not have planes, no fighter-jets.

Has to be some new kind of anti gravi-shoes/boots, that can make a soldier jump that high, sure...
Just kidding, only one option, a fighter of the Ukraine.
Rebels do not have fighter-jets

The only fighters that do fly above the Ukraine, are from the Ukraine

Russia has no motive, should have been shot out of the sky by a sam of the Ukraine.

The Ukraine has a motive a very obvious one.

Those holes are bulletholes and thus shot from a jet from the Ukraine, no other option is possible.


edit on 25-8-2015 by Wasta because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
a reply to: Zaphod58




A cannon isn't going to cause an instantaneous explosion of the aircraft like we saw here. It will take a few seconds if not longer.


What is the difference? Why does it matter wether the plane desintegrates a second after a BUK detonation, or 2 or 3 seconds after a large caliber gun started firing at the cockpit?



Then why are you so obsessed with minutae if it doesn't matter?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Wasta


Those holes are bulletholes and thus shot from a jet from the Ukraine, no other option is possible.


If they are bullet holes they can only be from a Russian jet.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr




Now if you bothered to actually do some research instead of making stupid guesses like the cockpit being pressurized. Or more pylons a on the wings ( It doesn't you would know this if you bothered to learn) you show over and over you know nothing of aircraft but yet wish to argue. Tell you what go do some research then come back and explain how an so 25 could possibly attach mh17.


That was not a guess, I said that I read several comments claiming that, and I provided a link.

Here is another one, a Russian aviation site,

(google translate)


In the pressurized cabin of the pilot is automatically maintained at a high altitude pressure 0,25 kg / cm. This allows you to improve the conditions of work and to raise the altitude of 10 km to increase ferry range, the combat range and detection range radio-purposes.


www.airwar.ru...

And here it is also claimed that the ceiling is raised because of the pressurised cabin. Like I said before it has nothing to do with the engines. Any Su25 can fly at that altitude the only thing holding it back is the lack of oxygen for the pilot. A relatively easy fix if needed.


Furthermore,

Su25.


Warload - 4.000 kg in 10 hardpoints, normal -1.340 kg


www.redstar.gr...


Su39


Warload-4.400 kg in 11 hardpoints


www.redstar.gr...


So, for starters it has one more hardpoint. I noticed this yesterday when I was doing my research, that's why I mentioned it in the first place.


How many times have I corrected you by now?







edit on 25-8-2015 by LesBrocknar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Wasta


The Russians do not come in Ukrainian airspace, because they are not that stupid.
It would be a very stupid thing to do, that's the reason, not the lack of courage.


Why would it be stupid? The Russian air force is better equipped and better trained than the Ukrainian one. A single Russian fighter jet could blow three Ukrainian planes out of the sky in a dogfight. Are you implying that the Russian air force is inferior to the Ukrainian one?


No one have actually noticed that Ukraine dont fly their jets anymore, do to the Russian Electronic warefare capability. The Ukraine ariforce is deamed useless do to Russian electronic warefare.
No one have paied much attention to why the Ukraine artillery are deamed useless compare to the pro-russians accurancy..
NATO just noticed this summer why Ukraine Su.ck so much on their front lines, and it bafeled the US service menn how Russia are controlling the war electronically. This might not have been mentioned in US media. But we in Norway got the Whole story.


Everyone knows that the Russian military has taken over the skies. Ukraine no longer makes ground attacks. Happened the same time mh17 was shot down. Ukraine lost 2 military aircraft the same week. Do to Russia shipping bucks into the area the Ukrainian airforce just doesn't have the capability to defeat it. The west can't afford to give the equipment that can do to the instability of Ukraine you might as well just hand anything given to Russia as well because they will get ahold of it.

So this just leaves Ukraine to pull there airforce close to Ukraine and intercept anything that enters their area. By far the separatists have better equipment from drains to fire control. The plan NATO has now is to teach them how to work around that by learning to be more mobile. Soviet doctrine was set up front lines and battle it out. However a force can be much more effective if highly mobile and not sit in trenches and shoot at each other. If Ukraine can change decades of Soviet doctrine they will give Russia a huge problem.

Now back to thread you guys are still arguing over an aircraft that didn't exist. The reason this was discounted is no radar returns showed a craft anywhere near there. Pilots in the air at the time again no aircraft. Ukraine just didn't have anything near their on the radar. Since they don't have stealth it's safe to say it wasn't a plane.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001




Then why are you so obsessed with minutae if it doesn't matter?


Can you take a comment any further out of context?

Sigh.....

Zaphod said this,




A cannon isn't going to cause an instantaneous explosion of the aircraft like we saw here. It will take a few seconds if not longer.


He is suggesting that cannon fire could not apply because the plane would desintegrate 1.5 seconds later. So I asked, why does that matter?

What is the difference? Why does that rule out cannon fire?

Do you understand what I was saying now, DJW001?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesBrocknar
a reply to: DJW001




Then why are you so obsessed with minutae if it doesn't matter?


Can you take a comment any further out of context?

Sigh.....

Zaphod said this,




A cannon isn't going to cause an instantaneous explosion of the aircraft like we saw here. It will take a few seconds if not longer.


He is suggesting that cannon fire could not apply because the plane would desintegrate 1.5 seconds later. So I asked, why does that matter?

What is the difference? Why does that rule out cannon fire?

Do you understand what I was saying now, DJW001?




Do you really think cannon fire is going to cause a 777 to come apart? Do you have any clue just how big they are? Cannon fire short of causing engine damage isn't going to cause it to crash. The pilot would have several minutes at that altitude. But I'm still waiting on how the pilot and co pilot died I said several times now look at their photos and explain how cannon fire did that. The shrapnel wounds are obvious. Next question I guess you believe those cannon rounds stopped inside their body? Since missile shrapnel was found on the body. That was the statement from the Russian general I have to you. He read the report also.
m.sputniknews.com...




top topics



 
5
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join