Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Missiles fired at Russian plane with 159 passengers onboard flying over Syria

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by majesticgent
This is the only outlet I could find covering this story. No one has verified it yet so it could be a false report.


It is mentioned on the Interfax home page headlines - www.interfax.com...




posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by truthinfact
Shooting at an Airplane with that many people on board is an Act of War.

Could you imagine if USA and Russia teamed together to fight Syria?

It would be over in 2 weeks. Tops.


Do you have any idea of who supports who in Syria?

The US have been happily supporting the terrorists there... I mean, when its the US supporting them, we rather call them "freedom fighters" or "the resistance movement" or "rebels". Russia has the spetz there, but if russia has to officially support anyone they will support Assad, you know, the Government.

That would mean a tight lock for the US that wants to get into Syria since well, the terrorists havent been doing their homework right to say the least - the old saying goes "if you want something done, do it yourself", and the US is getting tired of their failed little proxy crap spending money and equipment on incompetent people specially when they're facing a well equipped army sponsored by russia and their spetz. So Russia will get in there before the US does, therefore becoming impossible for the US to get in there.

Regardless... The US is being careless... I think the other players are forcing the US to stretch, forcing it to be in a lot of places at the same time, and well... someone else is now playing the music and the US is the one dancing,... and stretching.

Well... who said the cold war was over anyway? Civilians believe what they are told to believe...

edit on 29-4-2013 by FraternitasSaturni because: (no reason given)

My thoughts exactly, you'd never see the US "team up" with Russia! China teaming up with Russia on the other hand... now that's a little more likely.

The cold war has never been over and the US and Russia have been flexing their power at each other for over half a century now.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by majesticgent
 
Maybe the president had a little conversation with Putin, 'Hey buddy,got a plan here. I don't have the guts to do anything bad to Syria, so,,,what do you think about,,,,,,,,,,,,,



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Just so you guys know...flares will not stop the missile if it is already locked on and coming towards its target. All flares do is stop the munition from locking on. Hollywood seems to have it in all their movies of flares stoping the actual missile which is complete BS.
edit on 29-4-2013 by Evanzsayz because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I bet it wasone or two of those

surface to air missiles that

Ambassador Chris Stevens

was supposed to be retrieving.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Def the FSA, ever seen the video of them shooting at a 747 with small arms as it tries to land?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Evanzsayz
 


No, flares WILL distract a missile. An IR missile locks onto the hottest source of IR energy Once it's locked on, if a hotter source appears within sight of the seeker, it will break lock and go for that source. They've gotten much smarter so it's harder to fool them, but it can still be done.

There is no way for a pilot to know if an IR missile is being locked on, as they have no active emissions to give them away, like a radar seeker does, so there's no way for a pilot to know if he needs to pop flares, unless he either sees the missile, or a wingman warns him. There is no such thing, yet, as a missile that can't be fooled with either a jammer, or a decoy.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Why, because Syrian/Russian missiles are so much better than the Stinger? The Stinger is a rather capable missile in its own right, and nothing to be scoffed at.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by majesticgent
 


El Al is currently the only airline I know of that employs countermeasures, although they don't use radar. They do have a threat warning receiver that will warn them if a radar seeking missile is fired at them, as well as flares and chaff, and other less well known countermeasures.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537
Hmmmm... Something doesn't smell right here... Russian airline dodges not 1 but 2 missiles?? Fighter jets have a tough time evading missiles, but a large passenger Jet??? A false flag so Russia can get involved with the Syria situation??? Maybe....


Most likely:

The missiles were launched by rebels who oppose Russia because Russia is supporting the Syrian government. They were not launched by experts, and they didn't know they wouldn't have the range/capacity to succeed in the attack.

After all, most SAM's are meant to defend against aircraft doing ground attacks. The larger (more expensive) missiles designed for strategic purposes (against bombers) would have the ability to attack an airliner at cruise speed at 40,000 ft. These missiles are obviously much larger and generally in stationary installations.

Or possibly it was just intended as a warning to Russia. But jihadists screwing around might be the best explanation.
edit on 29-4-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 


A SAM, whether it be a ground based fixed system, a mobile system, or MANPADS when it reaches the end of its fuel, it self destructs. You can sometimes get them pretty close to their target at the edge of their range, and the explosion might get a hit, and at least damage the target. If it doesn't, then it prevents the missile coming down on your own people with a fairly large intact warhead that's going to do a lot of damage. Don't forget that places like Baghdad, and during Vietnam Hanoi (which had an INSANE SAM defense) had fixed SAM sites right on the outskirts of the city, so there was a good chance that any that missed would come down in the city. You still may get shrapnel coming down, but that's a lot better than a warhead that could weigh a couple hundred pounds landing smack in the middle of your city.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Evanzsayz
 


No, flares WILL distract a missile. An IR missile locks onto the hottest source of IR energy Once it's locked on, if a hotter source appears within sight of the seeker, it will break lock and go for that source. They've gotten much smarter so it's harder to fool them, but it can still be done.

There is no way for a pilot to know if an IR missile is being locked on, as they have no active emissions to give them away,


You mean other than the rocket exhaust, and the frictional heat generated by travelling through dense atmosphere at mach 3 or 4 or 5?




like a radar seeker does, so there's no way for a pilot to know if he needs to pop flares, unless he either sees the missile, or a wingman warns him.

There is no such thing, yet, as a missile that can't be fooled with either a jammer, or a decoy.


True, but modern missiles have multi-spectral imaging sensors, not just the old IR ones with choppers.

These ones are probably not the fancy expensive ones.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by majesticgent

Originally posted by muse7
Don't see how a passenger airliner carrying 200 people could evade missiles shot at it.....unless it dropped some flares




Apparently some Israeli passenger liners are equipped with a system that launches flares if it detects a SAM coming at the airliner, but the thing is that would only work for heat seeking SAMs. Not a radar guided SAM. We need more information. How high was the airplane flying?

It could be a mistake by Syrian forces launching at what they thought was a bomber encroaching their airspace. Maybe the airliner went somewhere it shouldn't?

The RT story is getting updated as they get more information. If it's verified, I'm sure it'll be on the MSM outlets post haste.


Well, they could also have chaff as well as flares. Doesn't chaff mess with radar targeting systems, especially older surplus ones?



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
It would take an awful lot of proof for the Russians to buy this was Assad's forces. Factions within the FSA have openly threatened commercial flights and I recon they would sooner point the finger at these Western funded Jihadists than Assad.


Westerners are not arming the jihadists, it is wealthy Gulf states which are.

I read an interview with a rebel who said that he and others are joining up with the jihadists precisely because the west was only giving them non-lethal aid (food,medicine, supplies) and not the weapons they wanted. The jihadists are getting arms from religious co-believers.
edit on 29-4-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mbkennel
 


That's why I say that they're getting much harder to decoy, but they CAN still be decoyed. Current US military aircraft carry towed decoys that generate a much brighter IR signature than the plane, as well as a larger radar signature. And they're easy to replace if they get hit and destroyed.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


El Al carries chaff and flares, as well as a TEWS style system. They have a number of less discussed systems on board their aircraft as well. Other systems include mounting a small short range laser, capable of both detecting the IR missile (which you currently can't do without either seeing it, or getting a warning), and then firing into the seeker head and blinding it.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Look at history.

The USSR shot down a 747 which strayed into its territory. All passengers dead, including a US Congressman.

There was no war.

The USA shot down an Iranian airliner over the gulf because they labeled it an attacking fighter.

There was no war.

There was no war because cooler heads prevailed. There is no reason to think an automatic war would take place because a passenger jet was shot down.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Vasa Croe
 


'Put Syria in its place'

More like the rebels....



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by majesticgent
 


Scary stuff! Russia has one of their only warm water ports in Syria. This means Russia is just looking for a reason to come into Syria and put an end to the revolution. We cannot allow Moscow to get involved, it would be in the words of Dan Akroyd in Ghost Busters "very bad", " dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria"



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I presume we can be here in the presence of a pilot/navigational error..
It was the inugural flight for the new type of Airbus in the Nordwind Fleet...until now, Nordwind Airlines only operated with Boeing 757, 767, 777 and Airbus 321...it was her first Airbus 320 received just 3 nights ago, and maybe crew wasnt too much familiarized, besides the fact both 321/320 cockpits are similar. By the way, officialy and aeronautically speaking, the plane its not Russian but Bermuda, since almost 90% of the commercial aviation in Russia and CIS are registrated in Bermuda, Cayman, and Ireland or Aruba....in this case the reg: was VP-BJH, Bermuda Leasing Company and Owner. Only the operator its Russian.

www.planespotters.net...
edit on 29-4-2013 by AngelsDecay because: (no reason given)
edit on 29-4-2013 by AngelsDecay because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join