Malaysian 777 Passenger Airline Shot Down Over Eastern Ukraine

a reply to: Salander

They didn't release the ATC data because it didn't happen. There is nothing showing in the publicly available data that the aircraft changed heading, except to turn to the next waypoint, or altitude at any point after it crossed into Ukrainian controlled airspace.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: fatdeeman


And now the media is beginning to realize it too.

So what?

They ain't the cavalry.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I think we have passed the point of beating a dead horse.. We are knee deep in making glue now.

Ironic though they claim they want evidence released so there is no rush to judgement, yet here they are..

a reply to: Xcathdra

There is only one party that stood to gain in this situation, and that party is Kiev government. The speed with which pronouncements came from Kiev showed massive preparation for the event.

No sane person has even an iota of doubt about what is happening. People can believe what they want to believe but truth ultimately prevails.

It is a fact that Russia did not shoot down MH17. Who shot it down is an interesting question.

Whether Russia supplied Buk system to rebels or not is besides the point. Russia has no interest in shooting down a civilian plane.

The West is hell-bent on starting a new war. The reasons are not difficult to understand.

a reply to: GargIndia

And once again your entire premise ignores the concept that MH17 was accidentally shot down. Not to mention the rebels taking credit for the shoot down. The subsequent deletion of those claims further lends to the possibility the aircraft was accidentally targeted by rebels / russian forces.

originally posted by: GargIndia
a reply to: Xcathdra

There is only one party that stood to gain in this situation, and that party is Kiev government. The speed with which pronouncements came from Kiev showed massive preparation for the event.

No sane person has even an iota of doubt about what is happening. People can believe what they want to believe but truth ultimately prevails.

It is a fact that Russia did not shoot down MH17. Who shot it down is an interesting question.

Whether Russia supplied Buk system to rebels or not is besides the point. Russia has no interest in shooting down a civilian plane.

The West is hell-bent on starting a new war. The reasons are not difficult to understand.

It has nothing to do with who had something to gain it has to do with who made a mistake. See what your doing is called deflection bringing up an irrelevant argument to create doubt. No one has ever claimed it was shot down on purpose what was claimed is Russia gave missiles to a group that had no business having them. This led to alot of people dying and this makes Putin responsible. Had he chose not to give them surface to air missiles those people would be alive.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Salander

They didn't release the ATC data because it didn't happen. There is nothing showing in the publicly available data that the aircraft changed heading, except to turn to the next waypoint, or altitude at any point after it crossed into Ukrainian controlled airspace.

If it did not happen (I'm not sure what your 'it' refers to) then why don't they prove it by releasing the ATC records?

Somebody changed altitude from 350 to 330, and it was probably not the pilot's decision. Somebody changed the routing, according to the airline, and it was not the filed routing. Nor was it the filed altitude, according to the airline.

If Kiev is so damn certain of their story, why do they not prove it?

a reply to: Xcathdra

How do you know it was accidentally shot down?

That is, how do you know it was NOT shot down on purpose?

a reply to: Salander

They did NOT descend. They requested 350 but were told to stay at 330. They were at that altitude the entire flight. As for the course, they weren't far off what they filed. But they were off from the start which means weather changed it.

ATC records are never released until investigators are done with them. This is still an active investigation, and we don't have the right to all the data until the investigators do their job.

The altitude of MH17 was FL330 because another aircraft traveling from Moscow to Larnaca and crossed path with MH17, this aircraft (AFL2074 A320 Aeroflot) was traveling at FL350 when they crossed paths along the border of the Donetsk region.

The latest story is that it was this aircraft that was supposed to be shot down by the BUK.
Why, It's russian and it would have fallen on the ukrainian side, it would have given Russia a reason and thus the opportunity for a full invasion.
Than why was MH17 shot out of the sky and not AFL2074? because the BUK was in the wrong place, there are three places with the name Pervomaisk in the area.

Read more on this blog

a reply to: earthling42

Your post is wild speculation.

How shooting down a Russian plane gives a "reason" for Russians to invade?

Desist from creating stories.

It is American plan to force unwilling Europeans into Ukraine mess.

The Europeans have everything to lose from a war in Ukraine.

The Euro has already started showing off the impact.

Several European economies are very fragile.

While international economy has stabilized, international picture is littered with strife. Several of Europe's export markets are under stress.

MH17 is an American plan to force reluctant Europeans into a face-off with Russia.

There is nothing else to MH17. Ukraine has deployed several Buk batteries in the conflict zone despite non-existent aerial threat. The threat of "Russian invasion" is a red herring. That invasion has not happened before MH17 or after MH17 till now. However West continues to amass weapons on Ukrainian soil for a fight with Russia.

Anybody with a sane mind can clearly see the picture.

a reply to: GargIndia

So it's wild speculation to come up with any theory but the US being involved, but it's not to say its their fault. Nice logic.

a reply to: GargIndia

I can kind of see the logic - what is missing is the time factor. If this was false flag and an excuse action would already have been taken.

No point in creating a distraction then letting it wallow for weeks on end - that in itself defeats that premis i'm afraid.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: GargIndia

So it's wild speculation to come up with any theory but the US being involved, but it's not to say its their fault. Nice logic.

Glad im not the only one to notice. Its like saying trolls arent real because we all know fairies live in the woods. But ive noticed as a general rule Russian apologists dont seem to be bothered by the total lack of evidence for there crazy theories as long as they believe it. I guess rationality is lost whenever bias takes over.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You might be right that they did not descend, but I have read news accounts quoting the airline stating the opposite.

Just curious as to how you are so certain about that point? You are the first person ever to mention weather as being a factor. How do you know that?

As a pilot, I know that on longer trips like that one, 350 would be the preferred altitude for fuel burn, perhaps even higher depending upon winds.

a reply to: Salander

Because airlines always change their courses from their planned course at least slightly to get better winds, or to avoid storms. I don't think I've ever seen a commercial flight actually on their planned course. The day it happened there were storms reported in the region.

There were two flights near MH17. One of them was reported at 350, and the other had to be at least that high, because it appeared to pass over the Malaysian plane just after it was hit.

a reply to: Zaphod58

With all due respect sir, I fly for a living, including jets. Your post regarding routing and altitudes borders on the nonsensical.

My mind is still open, but here at the 3 weeks after point, everything so far has this looking like a false flag operation to make Putin and Russia look bad. Especially the way the western media has presented it since day one.

And I say again, you are the first person I've read mentioning storms. Maybe there were, and maybe there were not, but yours is the first mention of storms that I've read.

a reply to: Salander

I didn't say that they completely change their routing, but if you track any flight, you will routinely see them off their planned routing somewhat taking advantage of winds. I see it every day with almost every flight I've ever tracked. MH17 cane out of Amsterdam slightly south of the planned route and stayed there.

The initial claim was Ukraine ATC rerouted then over Donetsk because of thunderstorms, but there was no rerouting. Reports from the ground said extensive cloud cover in some areas, which may have helped lead to the shootdown, since they couldn't visually identify the aircraft.

a reply to: Salander

You might be right that they did not descend, but I have read news accounts quoting the airline stating the opposite.

Any chance you can find those reports and link to them, because the airlines themselves have said there were no deviations in their original flight plan that was set by Eurocontrol.

www.latimes.com...