Downed Russian SU-24 black box first information

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: sosobad

i clicked on the link in your post is the same as the one in the OP.
in that very same link it says they have not done any work on it.

Until now no work has been done with the black box. It is in the same condition as it was found at the crash site."

so tell me how, if they have not done any work on it can still say that they have proof from the black box?

Russia know that the black Box will reveal the same informations as their radar plots do. That is why they have made the statment.

But the black Box will probably reveal a much more accurate plot as to where the SU 24 actually was when the F-16 misile hit it, and if there were any warnings on the agreed radio channels prior to the Downing of the SU.

Russia and the US have agreed in Advanced which radio communication channels they shal use to avoid a confrontation in the air.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Ok hounddog, where did I post anything about the data? I posted stating that there is independent specialists there, are you trying to say there isn't any experts from China or Britain or are you just asking me irrelevant questions to try and make some semblance of an argument? If I had posted about the data I would comment on your post but I didn't. Do now do you deny there is independent experts working on this?

I have no opinion on the accuracy of the location of the Russian jet at the time of the shooting or in the entire sequence of events...

But if they are still claiming the Russians didn't get warned... yea... someones pants are on fire.

Here is another Hellenic website about the box, this source is very reliable, represents the industry of sailing/navy of my country (and we are number 1 or 2 in the cargo ships in a global scale)... They wouldnt dare to make any propagandas (pro russia or pro west)

link

the article is "live report" and that means the information changes every 20-30 minutes depending on developments.

This article states that many USA citizens are in Russia today, to review the matter in person - Interesting.

I think this is the channel will broadcast live the opening of the box. : www.vesti.ru...

a reply to: sosobad

Adding this before anyone tries to say that Russia is manipulating the data.

right here from your first post.

them saying they have proof, is them plain out lying or "manipulating the data."

Opening of the black box video , for those who are interested
Black box

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: angryhulk

I can't claim to be a supporter of Turkey's actions because there simply isn't enough data to tell me what Turkey's pilots were thinking in terms of the positions of the SU-24 vis-a-vis "claimed" Turkish air space. Logically speaking, it makes no sense that the Russian pilots would have intentionally over flown Turkish air space as internationally recognized. But it might be the case that the Russians refuse to recognize Turkey's claim of "Turkey Controlled" or "Turkey Claimed" Syrian air space.

One of the interesting issues in this case is actually where the Turkish F-16 were prior to the interception of the SU-24.

The two F-16s were not correctly plotted on the radar image posted by Turkey. The Turkish radar plot does not show where the two F-16 refuled. Which they must have done do to the distance (actual time in the air) they must have flowen.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: sosobad

Adding this before anyone tries to say that Russia is manipulating the data.

right here from your first post.

them saying they have proof, is them plain out lying or "manipulating the data."

So you think they are manipulating the data with the help of Britain? I already posted 3 of the 8 cards are damaged, hence why data is missing and they need specialist equipment to retrieve the data from those cards, that leaves 5 cards that are readable. No?

a reply to: sosobad

did you not read the BBC article saying the flight information appeared to be missing, or the IBT times saying it is damaged and no work done yet.
so how the hell can they say that they have proof? it plain and simple they are lying when they say they have proof.


the Chinese guy and the British guy have probably only witnessed the opening of the box.

a reply to: TonyS

If this piece is true then there would have been plenty of eyes in the sky that day and they have data to contribute .

Russia Insider reports that the ambush on the Russian U-24 bomber was guided by the US Airforce. In an interview with the Russian news agency Regnum, a Russian military expert said that “A US Air Force Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS plane took off on 24 November from the Preveza airbase in Greece. A second E-3A of the Saudi Arabian air force took off from the Riyadh airbase. Both planes were executing a common task—determining the precise location of Russian aircraft. It is they that picked the “victim.”

The American E-3A was supposed to determine the activity of the Su-24M2′s onboard targeting radar, to determine if it was in search mode or if it had already locked on to a target and was processing launch-data. It is known that the AWACS can direct the activity of aircraft in battle, conveying information to their avionics and flight computers.

The expert went on explaining the technical details of how the US and Saudi AF planes guided the Turkish F-16s to a sure missile launch in ‘target illumination’ mode, meaning that the radar was turned off as soon as the missile locket into its target.

www.globalresearch.ca...

I dont think anyone could imagine a war going on in the ME without Uncle Sams watching eye involved . Even if its a ship of some sorts like the Liberty

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: sosobad

did you not read the BBC article saying the flight information appeared to be missing, or the IBT times saying it is damaged and no work done yet.
so how the hell can they say that they have proof? it plain and simple they are lying when they say they have proof.


the Chinese guy and the British guy have probably only witnessed the opening of the box.

Where in the IB did it state that the proof came from the black box. Here is the quote,

Sergey Baynetov, the deputy head of flights safety service of Russia’s armed forces, said that investigators will begin the analysis of the black box Saturday and the results will be released on Monday, local news network Tass reported.

He said that they have proof never said it was from the black box. Read it again.

Sergei Dronov, the deputy head of Russian Aerospace Forces, reportedly said during a briefing that Russia has proof that the Su-24 jet did not violate Turkish airspace.

That's all he said in the briefing no where did he say it was from the black box.

a reply to: sosobad

just quit you know that it did, here is the title of the IBT article.

Russian Su-24 Jet Attack: Moscow Has Proof Downed Jet Posed No Threat To Turkey; Black Box Damaged[

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: sosobad

just quit you know that thatr it did here is the title of the IBT article.

[b]Russian Su-24 Jet Attack: Moscow Has Proof Downed Jet Posed No Threat To Turkey; Black Box Damaged[/b]

Yes his quote followed by a";". If you have a problem on how the Ibtimes headline their articles I suggest you write them an email. Where did he say the proof came from the black box? Which paragraph?

a reply to: sosobad
then why the hell did you keep going on about 5 of the 8 cards?
stop trying to proof your right, dollars to doughnuts that we never see flight information from russia.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie

so which statement is true?

You figure it out ... the box is damaged, does not mean the data is missing ... unless the box just happened to run into a magnet somewhere.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: sosobad
then why the hell did you keep going on about 5 of the 8 cards?
stop trying to proof your right, dollars to doughnuts that we never see flight information from russia.

And where did Sergei Dronov state that the evidence came from the black box like you said? Granted I was wrong in talking about the cards but you were totally wrong by starting the back and forth by stating they said something they didn't by reading a headline and jumping in with both feet. I was posting originally just to show there is independent specialists there I haven't a god damn clue as to what you were trying to achieve.

a reply to: sosobad

Derailing and marginalizing the information you brought up? This is a biggie, I can't understand why somebody would act this way here on ATS when there is no opposing information at hand. Looks kinda shilly, just saying...

Anyway. Had to giggle a few times, you're doing an awesome job explaining things.

And thanks for the thread, OP! I was waiting for this story to unfold.

Popcorn!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Credit for the thread goes to Ploutonas Was just adding relevant information to it but alas it seems you can't even do that nowadays. And I would like to apologize to Ploutonas and everyone else on the thread for the derailment, not my intention. Now that it's cleared up hopefully we can get back to the meat of the story.

a reply to: sosobad

first i said never independent specialists weren't there. in reading the OP's post and then the links,

from the OP

The "black box" reveals and demonstrates how the Su-24 that shot down by air-to-air missiles fired by the Turkish F-16 have not crossed the Turkish border. "In any case, the Russian bomber Su-24 did not constitute a threat for Turkey and its citizens," said Sergei Dronov. "

then your post,

Adding this before anyone tries to say that Russia is manipulating the data.

so now do you understand, no where did i say they were not present, in fact i said they probably just witnessed opening the box.

show me where i said they weren't there.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

My god if its in the OP why the hell you bothering me about it? Did I post the OP?