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

By the way...nothing uncommon for those latitudes...some days ago a 737 of Libyan Buraq Airliness was shot by a wedding party comemorations:

www.pprune.org...

reply to post by all2human


lol your stupid don't speak..Don't under estimate Russia. They're more powerful than you think..I'm tired of all these ignorant kids here riding America's D**k.. yea America has technology, but it doesn't always win a battle.. I.e WW2 with Hitler..

One thing Russia does have is tons and tons of men willing to fight. Just look at WW1 and WW2.

reply to post by majesticgent


i dont want to read all the post on here, i know lazy, but thought i would toss this out there.

could it be that some one got ahold of some random rockets and just took some pop shots at the plain?

reply to post by majesticgent


Interesting.. I don't know much about Syria and their escapades but I am forever seeing videos of the Syrian Rebels, or a group of people shooting down whatever they see in the sky..

A commercial plane would not be able to maneuver past two guided missiles of whatever kind. I have no clue what shot at them.

It puts the whole story into question.

reply to post by live2beknown


I think you and one more poster didn't get his advanced sarcasm

I personally loved the last sentence - and everybody knows it -

We all know Assad didn't attack no Russian airplane or any plane for that matter, there is only one group thriving on escalation and it is the rebel children of the middle east.

I have a hard time accepting RT reports as confirmed factual news.

Most news falls far short of that standard but in RT's case, BS flying at the speed of light is still BS.

reply to post by truthinfact

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

Are you aware that the Free Syrian Army are terrorists and nothing more then Islamists? Just look at McCain he wants to arm them.

Originally posted by ecoparity
I have a hard time accepting RT reports as confirmed factual news.

Most news falls far short of that standard but in RT's case, BS flying at the speed of light is still BS.

I have a hard time accepting anything from the western mainstream news outlets as confirmed factual news. That goes the same for AJ.

I would not think this charter aircraft would have been equipped with counter-measures, as there are very few civilian based aircraft that contain such things, but I know some do for certain...in volatile regions where terrorism is the norm. Anyway, the most likely scenario was that something like an RPG was used, or a dumb missile, which is just a missile that is not guided. It simply flies in the direction it is aimed when it is fired. This was seen during the Afghan war with Russia. Before the US gave the Mujahadeen the guided shoulder fired missiles to bring down attack helicopters, RPG's were commonly used.

This is because this is the most widespread and cheapest missile based weapons system available today. In the Middle East these weapons are what most groups use, just like the AK-47 is the most common assault rifle to be found there. So I would think this is probably what was used, and that is why the shot missed. Generally one would not shoot this type of weapon at a plane that was very high or very far away, because it is so easy to miss. But if the plane was at a relatively low altitude, a shot could have been taken. With the plane flying in a straight line it can somewhat easy to hit, at least I would think, and if you could calculate the flight time of the missile, and knew the altitude of the plane, a long shot could likely be made as well. Anyway, we will see when more information comes out.

Originally posted by mbkennel

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

No, Jihadists are using the money being sent to them by the UK and the US to buy weapons from wealthy Gulf states, along side the so called "non-lethal" aid like armored personnel carriers and bullet proof vests. Can't give em guns, so they just give them money to buy guns from someone else who will. Or are you seriously suggesting none of the tens of millions sent over there has been used to purchase arms? Don't make me laugh.

what people dont get is that if syria falls, it will destabilize the middle east even more...that puts the US in danger of going to war even more, not something we citizens really want, take my word for it...it will be bad news...

syria and saudi arabia, corrupt as they are, are the only two stabilizing factors left (besides iran who is pegged as our enemy) in the middle east...if everything surrounding israel becomes hostile to israel, then expect WW3...there is no way to dodge it at that point...

i think in syria, that the rebels should be beaten, and the population should use the opportunity to say to assad "look what happens when you dont listen to us" in other words, the denial of peaceful revolution (reforms) makes violent revolution inevitable...if assad dodges this bullet, he better take it as a warning so he can keep his nation unified and free from foreign bankers...but knowing dictators, it has the possibility of going the other way too, with even more paranoia and more crack downs on the population...

now if assad really wants to win, he could arm the people still loyal to the nation (maybe not his regime, but willing to work with him) and that would be a win win for him and his people...but this wont happen because he shares similar policy with russia...that is they dont like the population armed...

bottom line assad has to win for continued peace in the region, and hopefully the population can gain some leverage to get him to bend to some reforms to prevent another coup attempt...

as far as the missles? probably rebels, regardless of what type was used, it was definitely done by amateurs...the FSA knows how to play F@#% up by the numbers pretty well, and is getting more proficient at it by the day...ever see the video of them using a hostage to drive a truck bomb to a syrian checkpoint? they pushed the button and it went pfffft...didnt even go pop...just fizz, the hostage got away and they were acting like someone stole their birthday...poor little jihadists...

getting back to the tail :

the latest reportage , seems to be backing off from claiming actual missile launches - instead claiming :

" signs of combat activity .............which the crew thought may pose a threat ............. prompting evasive action "

^ paraphrased to capture the essence of this claim in one sentence

a key fact that has not been reported is the altitude at which this incident occurred - but as the flight was non-stop from sothern egypt to Tatarstan - one would expect the jet to be flying at about 10000m - and if significantly lower - one would ask why

but with a airbus A320 on a routine flight - and presubably flying level - what is its " blind spot " - ie how far away would " flashes on the ground " have to be to actually be in the crews FOV

and obviously - assuming they are at a routine crusing altitude - they would only see a flash

this could be practically anything , including - but not limited to :

tube artillery
rocket artillery
demolitions / sabotage of a site

there seems [ to me at least ] to be a big unevidenced leap to " SAM launch "

if the flashes were say - a battery of 155mm howitzers - then they might pose a very slight danger to an aircraft - all be it unintentional - but it still sucks to have a 35kg shell tear a hole in your fuselage - even if it was an accident

lastly - " taking evasive action " sounds cool and hip - but unless you actually know what trajectory the threat you are ATTEMPTING to avoid is on - you are just as likley to steer your aircraft into the threat than away from it - which is not cool

what we really need is witness reports from the ground or other aircraft in the vicinity who could see the big picture - thouigh i shall not hold my breath waiting

Originally posted by Mizzijr
A commercial plane would not be able to maneuver past two guided missiles of whatever kind. I have no clue what shot at them.

IF they were fired at it, and it was at cruising altitude, then they would have been at best at the extreme range of the missile. Which means it was far more likely that they would self destruct after running out of fuel, instead of the plane having to maneuver to keep from being hit. The Stinger, and the SA-24 (I think), have about the highest reach of the MANPADS systems, and they only reach out to about the 20,000 foot mark. The average cruising altitude of an airliner is 34,000. Add in the mountains, and you get a slightly higher reach for a missile, but it would still be a stretch for them to hit.

IA-controlled Al Qaeda operatives in Syria are reporting Israeli war planes have began bombing Syria to destroy targets claimed to be chemical weapons plants. The bombings occurred over the weekend as the corporate media has gone into full-spin propaganda push to drum up support for military intervention claiming Syria crossed a red-line by using chemical weapons. The tailspin of rhetoric comes as the CIA has admitted it is arming Al Qaeda and hackers recently reveal the US hired mercanaries to use chemical weapons in Syria so it could be blamed on the government.

______beforeitsnews/war-and-conflict/2013/04/israel-uses-wmds-as-excuse-to-bomb-syria-2446482.html

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) reports that Israeli fighter jets slipped into Damascus over the weekend and bombed a chemical weapons depot outside the city. Neither Damascus nor Jerusalem have yet confirmed the attack, according to UPI. According to The Jewish Press (JP) "many" reports came in over the weekend confirming the mission. Sources told the JP Israeli jets arrived over Damascus early Saturday morning and circled Assad's presidential compound before moving on to target the weapons site. Read more: www.businessinsider.com...

Haven't found much on this yet, maybe true may be not.

The flight is up on flight radar 24 in the twitter feeds.
It enters Syrian airspace at 34,000 feet doing 450 knots. As soon as it enters syria the flight data has been removed.

Update:

On Tuesday, Interfax’s source informed that the aircraft was attacked when it was flying at an altitude of 9,800 meters.

“The first missile detonated at 9,200 meters, the second one at 8,900 meters”, the source said.

Source: rt.com...

Finally, we have the pertinent information we've been looking for (if accurate.) Now all we need to know what's the average height of the mountain range they were flying over.

I would do some sleuthing, but I'm at work and only have time to provide minimal updates and research.

On another note, one would think that the Syrian Army would be like, yeah that was us firing some shells at an FSA stronghold if that were the source of the flashes.

If it was the FSA, do they lie in wait in the mountains waiting for a target of opportunity to fly pass and take a shot at it hoping Syria takes the blame causing foreign intervention?

None of this is really making sense to me.

Originally posted by majesticgent
Wouldn't they have to radio this increase in altitude to air traffic control?

After the crew reported the incident to Syrian ground control, the flight was allowed to gain altitude of nearly 1,000 meters more, according to the source.

Source: rt.com...

OK so that answers my question.

Their "evasive maneuver" was simply to punch the throttle and climb like I thought.

reply to post by NISMOALTI


That seems the most plausible scenario if they were actually fired upon, but I don't think it would have been rockets it would have had to have been a portable SAM (MANPAD) that had a high operating range.

I'm wondering now, it could have been muzzle flashes from anti aircraft artillery (AAA), but if so who shot it?

reply to post by majesticgent
It would seem that the Muslim Brotherhood and there new friends Al'-Qaeda have learned very well how to manipulate the world.

Where do you think "who ever" would get a missile that could reach an airliner at 30K feet................unless it had just taken off near by...............just a thought.