Russian radar data shows no missile attack on MH17 from rebel side, indicates Ukraine involvement

a reply to: VanDenEviL

Can we look at this data?

I'm sure you'll be able to look at the US' data once the JIT report gets released tomorrow.

I thought I just read that it couldn't detect the launch? I think they can calculate the location of the launch site going on the data from when and where they first picked it up on radar.

The radar this data came from couldn't detect a SAM period. This radar uses secondary radar. It requires an aircraft to have a transmitter in order for it to be detected. In this case it specifically requires an aircraft to be fitted with ADS-B out equipment. SAM's aren't meant to be detected. As such they are not fitted with transmitters. Considering Russia wants us to believe this SAM is an older model it definitely wouldn't be fitted with ADS-B. There is no easy this radar would have picked up any missile but Russia just assumed everyone is an idiot.

Not 100% sure if I remember correctly but I thought they presented radar images showing a Su25 in the vicinity of MH17 and that was all they claimed in relation to the radar images.

They presented radar data that they said showed an Su-25 within 5km of MH17. In this new radar data they claim there were only two other aircraft in the area. They were both commercial airliners and the closest one was 30km away. What happened to the Su-25?

So again, it is cool for the US to keep their information a secret, but the Russians can't. Off course they kept it a secret and announced it at this moment.

Once again the US has not kept their info secret. They gave it to the investigators. Also this isn't the actions of Russia playing their trump card. This is the actions of a desperate Russia trying one last Hail Mary. If Russia actually had damning evidence and they suspected they were about to get railroaded they would wait until after the JIT released their report so they could exist it as a sham. Also, they wouldn't claim it was data they had lost for two+ years. That just makes them look incompetent.

originally posted by: VanDenEviL
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Throughout this whole ordeal those defending Russia have claimed that any radar data released by the US is suspect because it took them so long to release it. Giving them plenty of time to fabricate anything they want. Will those same people call this radar data suspect?

What radar data did the US release again?

Why would the US be releasing radar data. There was not radar data available from either US or NATO sources. The NATO E-3s that were deployed and on exercise in Romania and Poland were out of range and didn't record MH17 at the point of shoot down.

According to this memorandum published on the website of the bundestag, 2 AWACS monitored the region and monitored MH-17 both by radar and transponder until out of range.

From

dip21.bundestag.de...

The data that the US has is from SBIRS (Space Based Infra Red Systems). SBIRS provides the launch indication from the missile plume.

The US graphic released showed the location of the SBRIS data. Have you ever seen SBIRS data? I have and it is just a pinpoint on a map of a recorded plume event. The graphic just tidies it up.

a reply to: tommyjo

Hence my comment, "What radar data did the US release again?".........

I didn't bring it up.


Btw, do you think the US will show us what happened with the satelite images they have?

a reply to: VanDenEviL

What's your opinion on the topic of this thread? Russia released data from a radar that can't even detect a SAM and tried to use that as evidence to implicate Ukraine as the guilty party. Can you think of any other reason they would do this other then trying to protect the guilty party?

originally posted by: VanDenEviL
a reply to: tommyjo

Btw, do you think the US will show us what happened with the satelite images they have?

What satellite images? Where does this come from in relation to satellite imagery? I blame the likes of Hollywood. Imagery satellites can't be everywhere. Why do you think that there should be sat imagery of the actual event?

originally posted by: tommyjo

originally posted by: VanDenEviL
a reply to: tommyjo

Btw, do you think the US will show us what happened with the satelite images they have?

What satellite images? Where does this come from in relation to satellite imagery? I blame the likes of Hollywood. Imagery satellites can't be everywhere. Why do you think that there should be sat imagery of the actual event?

It comes from people who never really seen sat images. No they can't read a news paper no you can't identify someone you can make out what color they are that's about it. And the odds of a satellite being over head is very low unless it's allready tasked for thr area and then it's only for about an hour. This is why they have droans they bring them in for visual confirmation. The US would have had no reason to task a satellite for the area. What the US does have is a global launch detection system. These satellites pick up heat signatures from rocket launches. They designed it to integrate into systems such as the F35. They can detect a launch even if it's out of range of the aircraft and relay ot to the pilot.

There is not a mismile launch on the planet that can't be detected and they have signatures of diffrent missiles to compare it to. So when they get a heat signature they can chk the data base and tell you what rocket it was that launched. This is what the US turned over to the investigation. The reason it wasn't released publicly is there isn't anything to release other than thermal detection at a specific spot. Ot will have the temprature spike reading during launch but quickly disapear it can't even track the missile it's only detects the launch of one. This comes in really handy to fighter pilots and the navy because it can avoid a surprise missile attack.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: VanDenEviL

Can we look at this data?

I'm sure you'll be able to look at the US' data once the JIT report gets released tomorrow.

Russia Today this morning are already doing a hit piece on Eliot Higgins before the report is released. It is only a couple of minutes long but they have been running it during the 30 minute News Headlines slots. Eliot and his team have compiled and passed on a lot of open source info onto the investigation team.

It would be interesting to see how many hacking attempts have been made on servers and people involved with the report and investigation team?

a reply to: VanDenEviL

You mean a government voted on by the people...because the candidate the US backed didn't win.

Or did you miss that part of the whole situation?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: VanDenEviL

You mean a government voted on by the people...because the candidate the US backed didn't win.

Or did you miss that part of the whole situation?

I was refering to this,



Full transcript here,

www.bbc.com...


Now tell me the US was not interfering with the formation of the Ukraine government.

MH-17 was brought down by a BUK that was brought into Ukraine from the Russian Federation. Now we can confirm why Russia was attempting yet another false explanation of what occurred.

MH17 downed by Buk missile moved from Russia to Ukraine, criminal investigation finds

Dutch-led criminal investigators said Wednesday they have solid evidence that a Malaysian jet was shot down by a Buk missile moved into eastern Ukraine from Russia.

Wilbert Paulissen, head of the Central Crime Investigation department of the Dutch National Police, said communications intercepts showed that pro-Moscow rebels had called for deployment of the mobile surface-to-air weapon, and reported its arrival in rebel-controlled areas of eastern Ukraine.

From that and other evidence collected by the Joint Investigation Team, "it may be concluded MH17 was shot down by a 9M38 missile launched by a Buk, brought in from the territory of the Russian Federation, and that after launch was subsequently returned to the Russian Federation," Paulissen told a news conference.

The conclusions were billed as results of a two-year Dutch-led criminal probe of the disaster that claimed 298 lives.

A separate investigation by Dutch safety officials last year concluded that the Amsterdam-to-Kuala Lumpur flight was downed by a Buk missile fired from territory held by pro-Russian rebels.

click link for article...

The investigation (criminal) was done to conform with legal standards so it can be used in a prosecution in a court of law. If any pro Russians need the term court of law explained just ask.

Here is The Guardian article goo.gl...
All this begs one question - WHY they did it?

a reply to: InsignificantOne

Easy. It was an accident. The separatists had already been using MANPADs to take down Ukrainian military aircraft. In this case they mistook MH17 for a military transport.

Yeah,think so. Awful collateral damage.

Russian radar data

Credibility died there.

originally posted by: InsignificantOne
Here is The Guardian article goo.gl...
All this begs one question - WHY they did it?

Because they thought they were attacking a Ukrainian armed forces aircraft.

My only other thought is Russia / Pro Russian rebels purposely / intentionally shot down the aircraft in order to blame Ukraine to justify further military aggression against them from Russia.

It wouldn't be the first time Russia has killed its own citizens to justify a war (as the russian fan boys like to claim about the US with 9/11). They bombed several apartment buildings to justify their invasion / occupation of Chechnya.

a reply to: MongolianPaellaFish

Russian and any other government credibility died long time ago. Same goes for MSM. Trust no one,heh.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I have believed all along it was a tragic mistake. All the circumstantial evidence we have had, right from the very start with Strelkovs "triumphant" tweets (quickly deleted) points to this.

And I also suspect Putin and other "higher ups" also knew nothing about it (plausible deniability - especially in the early days of the conflict when the outcome was by no means certain)

How much Putin may have known about the subsequent cover up and production of fake evidence I couldnt say.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

To be honest the part that gets me is if it was an accident it would have been a lot more "beneficial" to own up to it than deny and allow it to get to this point.

Given Putins background and the way he rules Russia I dont believe he knew nothing about it. I think he has had to approve sending military equipment and troops into Ukraine. As for the shootdown its not relevant if he gave the order or knew anything about it. He is the commander in chief and he authorized the invasion and military equipment / troops.

a reply to: VanDenEviL

Yes they discussed who they thought would be the candidate to back...nothing wrong there. The US backs candidates in other countries all the time.

So do you think Russia didn't do the same thing...and it doesn't actually matter since the two both countries backed lost...because the people voted in who they wanted not who other countries wanted.

Now don't you think if the US was as involved as much as you think the person they backed would have been elected, but he wasn't so they must not have been that involved.

It wasn't proof of some conspiracy the first time it was discussed here and it still doesn't prove a thing except the fact two US diplomats discussed a situation happening at the time.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I think its been pretty well established Russian backed Yanukovych and his government. The very same government that removed him from office under their constitution.