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.

 

Turkey shot down Russian Jet: reportedly by two F16's

page: 101
112
<< 98  99  100    102  103  104 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Tyrion79

Not without finding their radios and see what they were set to.




posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So I have to assume that it can't be confirmed unfortunately, seeing how the radio's wouldn't have survived the crash.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Tyrion79

Not conclusively, but I have no reason to doubt that they wouldn't monitor Guard. I've heard that before from pilots from Eastern Europe when we've been talking.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Ploutonas

It was sarcasm.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Did you see the link in that message? An a lmost 2 months ago article! Stated that NATO is under consideration to close the entrance of Bosporos. And today we have turkey to provoke russia and 1 step before they close the entrance.

It was not a success though, it didnt gave them the results they wanted.

I post the link again, for those who missed it. Its a piece of the puzzle, maybe thats why TURKS contacted NATO after they did what they did...

link

Today we have russia warning turkey for that : link
edit on 26-11-2015 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   
How about, "We sincerely regret the loss of life our defensive actions resulted in, and hope that this incident will not further damage relations with our Russian neighbors. However, we reserve the right to defend our airspace and territorial integrity."

That's not an apology but is a good example of tactful, nuanced diplomatic language rather than, "We're not the ones who need to apologize," and, "If it happens again, we'll shoot down another plane," (paraphrasing.) Which is provocative at best, and potentially suggestive to Russia of an irrational actor at worst.

Refusal to tack toward more diplomatic language in this instance is a miscalculation in my opinion. This whole Syrian scenario has brought out the most dangerous and reactive kinds of thinking and acting in everyone from leaders to citizens on all sides imho.

It's easy to assume this is all some sort of conspiracy designed to bring about WW3... but I fear an even more frightening reality personally: one in which there is no plan, no hand at the switch, no hidden agenda... just flawed, reacting humans and their states' populations responding emergently and chaotically to an unprecedented threat on their borders; one which is complicatedly tangled up with their own national interests because of oil and the sale thereof. Not because NATO or Russia or anyone else are "behind ISIS," but because governments are people and people are flawed, prone to corruption, and capable of enormous miscalculation and longstanding foreign policies which lead to unanticipated conundrums that eventually cause untold suffering when the chickens come home to roost.

In short... a CF to end all CFs. We want to assign blame and "pick a side," because we have this ingrained need for a mythic showdown between good and evil on some level. But I see no "good guys" in this scenario. Just myriad entangled, conflicted, multifaceted, internally contradictory interests. Too many hands in the kitchen, and too many dishes being cooked, with explosive consequences.

Peace.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
I have it on good authority that both sides are telling the truth. Air crews nearby clearly heard the Turkish warnings, and understood them with no problem.

But, they were issued on Guard, and pilots from Eastern European nations don't normally monitor that frequency, so the Russian pilots may never have heard them, if they didn't have it tuned in.


Thank you for posting this. I've been watching these events very closely and I believe the surviving Russian pilot's statements. I wondered if the Turkish warnings were never heard because the Russian pilots were not on their channel. They had no chance to adjust their course.

For me, because I've been mulling this over and over, that doesn't answer the other discrepancy about the surviving Russian pilot being absolutely sure he was not in Turkish air space for even one second (it was a clear day, he is very skilled, was in full control of the flight path, he knows the area extremely well, was only 6,000 m up) and Turkish military saying both planes briefly were. I wondered if it's a technical equipment miscalculation issue as far as plotting exact location of the planes' movements and whereabouts in relation to air space. I hope you know what I mean. I don't know the proper terms at the moment. So far, I haven't been able to come up with another explanation which makes both sides correct in what they state.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I'd wondered about that, and had intended to ask you about that, since you're my go to guy on this stuff.

That would certainly seem to explain why it went down like it did.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Do you know whether the Su-24 could determine that they were being tracked by the F-16's radar, or tell when the F-16 acquired a missile lock? When they say there was no visual warning that leads me to believe that the F-16 was using passive radar, or didn't turn it on until it was time for a missile lock?

I guess all of that information is probably classified.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: majesticgent

The Turkish F-16s allegedly used Sidewinder missiles. They're IR missiles so there wouldn't be any active emissions to warn the Su-24 crew.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: AceWombat04


How about, "We sincerely regret the loss of life our defensive actions resulted in, and hope that this incident will not further damage relations with our Russian neighbors. However, we reserve the right to defend our airspace and territorial integrity."


How about: "I'm sorry our bomber accidentally entered your airspace. It will never happen again?"



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: AceWombat04


How about: "I'm sorry our bomber accidentally entered your airspace. It will never happen again?"


Be my guest , we Greeks are waiting for 2000 of these apologies annually.

So far we heard none. And don't go finding excuses, by your logic and Ergodan logic, 1 second or 17 seconds a violation is a violation.
edit on 0amx00000030 by Laxus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Laxus

That's an absolutely absurd count. It means they pretty much violated your air space every four hours[ for a whole year.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I let it sink with you :


Data recorded by the Greek military has shown that Turkish aircraft violated its claimed airspace 2,244 times in 2014. By October of this year, Turkish aircraft had made 1,443 intrusions with the financially-weakened Greek military stuggling to respond.


Forbes



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Laxus

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: AceWombat04


How about: "I'm sorry our bomber accidentally entered your airspace. It will never happen again?"


Be my guest , we Greeks are waiting for 2000 of these apologies annually.

So far we heard none. And don't go finding excuses, by your logic and Ergodan logic, 1 second or 17 seconds a violation is a violation.


Your problem is that you don't agree where the border is. That's a completely different issue.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Laxus
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I let it sink with you :


Data recorded by the Greek military has shown that Turkish aircraft violated its claimed airspace 2,244 times in 2014. By October of this year, Turkish aircraft had made 1,443 intrusions with the financially-weakened Greek military stuggling to respond.


Forbes

More info you neglected.

One of the most violent encounters high above the Aegean occurred in 1996 when a Greek Mirage 2000 shot down a Turkish F-16.


This is due to a dispute over the sovereignty of islands in the Aegean, as well as other factors such as the delimitation of territorial waters and national airspace.

edit on 27-11-2015 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001


I do not see Turkey complaining that Greek violated Turkish airspace over 2000 times annually, following your logic of course. SO why does Turkey need to fly so close or violate Greek so called "disputed boarders"

Even if out of these 2000 only 10 or 100 is a real violation , it is still a violation.

So what is the difference when Turkey complains about Russians flying close to their boarders. NONE.

You constantly trying to find excuses for plain facts.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: majesticgent

The Turkish F-16s allegedly used Sidewinder missiles. They're IR missiles so there wouldn't be any active emissions to warn the Su-24 crew.


They had to get pretty moderately close to get a good tone then correct? I guess sidewinders have gotten way better than they used to be.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Laxus

Maybe you can find information regarding how many times Greece flies there.

I make no claim as to who is right or wrong, merely state it's a completely different set of circumstances.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Laxus


So what is the difference when Turkey complains about Russians flying close to their boarders.


The Turks are not bombing Greeks or Greek allies.The Russians are bombing ethnic Turks. I personally don't like the current Turkish government, by the way, so I'm not making excuses. I'm just pointing out why some of their policies make sense.



new topics

top topics



 
112
<< 98  99  100    102  103  104 >>

log in

join