Der Speigel says Russia was not at fault for MH17

a reply to: yuppa

Yea proclaiming yourself as an expert...

Well here a real expert saying its 30mm cannon fire:
investmentwatchblog.com...

originally posted by: Plugin
a reply to: yuppa

Yea proclaiming yourself as an expert...

Well here a real expert saying its 30mm cannon fire:
investmentwatchblog.com...

never said I was a EXPERT did i. Show me where i claimed that. I said the MANUFACTURER OF THE AIRCRAFT IN QUESTION HAS SAID IT COULD NOT HAD DONE WHAT WAS SAID IT DID. The COmmercial aircraft is too fast fo the su-25 to catch according to specs. MH17 was doing 490 Knots which is 900 KPH. Hitting just the cockpit that many times at those speeds is impossible in two passes. Also RADAR data can be simulated as well you know correct?

Also Any airliner pilot I know of would call mayday if under attack by a aircraft. according to some at the very least the co pilot should a been able to signal may day if they were under gun attack. And right a retired general(who isnt specified and is prolly been paid) is their source? pathetic.

The article was also written by a man who has been caught playing with the facts before.

a reply to: yuppa

You said:

''You obviously do not know what that size cannon fire holes look like. It looks more like a fragmentation warhead hit of a sam.
''And yes SAM CAN hit a cockpit just ask some of the pilots in vietnam.''

So sure that it are holes caused by a sam rocket, if so you must be an expert.
You didn't say you are an expert but basically acting like one.

originally posted by: Plugin
a reply to: yuppa

You said:

''You obviously do not know what that size cannon fire holes look like. It looks more like a fragmentation warhead hit of a sam.
''And yes SAM CAN hit a cockpit just ask some of the pilots in vietnam.''

So sure that it are holes caused by a sam rocket, if so you must be an expert.
You didn't say you are an expert but basically acting like one.

Yet i DO NOT SEE the word EXPERT in my post. You can STUDY though right? you can research right?you can look at aircraft damage comparison as well. Does that make me a expert? No it does not. A sam has FRAGMENTATION thet is around the same size as a gun round though. think of a shotgun blast.

What about the speed diffrences? you didnt answer that. The su25,s being used that day were loaded with a full load to use on ground attack as well. And since it had a full load it was not able to hit 950 kmh let alone the 33-32,000 ft altitude. That at that height could not even fly. Ask a sukhoi representative by e mail if you dont believe it.

a reply to: maghun
The BBC will go to any lengths to protects its political paymasters and I am still waiting for images of the latest Russian invasion two days after a massive convoy was spotted in the Ukraine but unless the rebels in the east have machine guns that can reach 10,000m into the sky to bring down flight MH17 then I say it was shot down by cannon fire from a fighter jet and I am not alone.


Pause it and look at the images that are being reported as 30mm machine gun fire and tell me what else it could be.

a reply to: yuppa

The su25,s being used that day were loaded with a full load to use on ground attack

So they now admit they had SU-25 in the area and now just want to argue if they were fully loaded or not

Funny but every time the rebels try to escort investigators to the crash site that the Ukraine military army starts sending tank shells into the area because you would think they would want to clear the investigations up don't you think.

According to the manufactures the bombers used by the dam busters where too heavy to leave the ground but they did.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

It's always amusing as hell to see people say that those tiny little holes came from this shell.

Almost all Russian built aircraft use the Gsh-30-2 gun, which uses the 30x165 mm armor piercing round. That means large holes would be punched into an unarmored target like the Boeing 777, not the tiny little holes that were seen in the wreckage of MH17. Those holes were smaller than any canon used on any fighter flying, and looked like a combination of shrapnel, and possibly small arms rounds after the debris was on the ground (witnesses reported the rebel forces shooting the wreckage after it was found).

a reply to: VirusGuard

According to the manufactures the bombers used by the dam busters where too heavy to leave the ground but they did.

And after seeing you post this...

Yes you are right about flight data being changed about a SU-25 on the internet to LOWER its flight celling but I won't give a link because even when I do you will still break out and demand that I prove it.

I find it hard to take what you say serious.

Funny but every time the rebels try to escort investigators to the crash site that the Ukraine military army starts sending tank shells into the area because you would think they would want to clear the investigations up don't you think.

Really because the separatists are the ones who prevented the investigation from actually happening in the first place, because they had to move wreckage and contaminate the crash scene.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It's always amusing as hell to see people say that those tiny little holes came from this shell.

But they used that special 30 mm round from the CIA that looks like shrapnel holes that they shot from that special CIA SU 25 that exceeds it's flight limitations.

Come on man get with the program...

originally posted by: VirusGuard
According to the manufactures the bombers used by the dam busters where too heavy to leave the ground but they did.

It's one thing to be able to leave the ground with a heavier payload, it's quite another to be able to fly at an altitude your wings and engines were designed to fly at.

This page has a great example of what a 30mm round can do. The Mk108 vs Spitfire picture is a Spitfire hit by a 30mm round, and it's almost blown completely in half. But somehow a 30mm shell in this case leaves tiny holes.

originally posted by: VirusGuard
a reply to: yuppa

The su25,s being used that day were loaded with a full load to use on ground attack

So they now admit they had SU-25 in the area and now just want to argue if they were fully loaded or not

Funny but every time the rebels try to escort investigators to the crash site that the Ukraine military army starts sending tank shells into the area because you would think they would want to clear the investigations up don't you think.

According to the manufactures the bombers used by the dam busters where too heavy to leave the ground but they did.

By IN THE AREA I MEANT UKRAINE AIRSPACE. Sheesh way to put words in someones mouth there buddy. ANd ZAPHOD explains it very well below. POint is fully loaded it will not achieve that altitude. E mail SUKHOI and ask them yourself. And do show the addies and prove the e mails are real and not manipulated by posting its meta data.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Well most planes back then where made of wood or at many parts very thin layers of metal.
Also they say they used ''high explosive''' ammunition (no penetrating needed and so not penetrating ammunition) for those massive damage in your pictures.
So when using armor piercing ammo those holes are no where so big.

a reply to: Plugin

And you think that a commercial plane ISN'T made of thin sheets of aluminum? You can hole an aircraft by walking on it if you step wrong. The Spitfire, and almost all fighters in WWII were made exactly the same way that planes are still made today, out of thin aluminum, over metal framing, with armor over certain portions of more vulnerable parts, such as the cockpit.

As for HE vs AP, even if they used an AP round on MH17, it STILL wouldn't leave tiny holes that were seen on the wreckage of the plane after the crash.

These are 30mm AP holes, in armor plating. But again, somehow, despite MH17 being sheets of aluminum so thin that you could put a foot through it, the rounds left itty bitty holes.

a reply to: Zaphod58

In that link I posted they talk about ''Type GSch-302 /AO-17A, with 250 rounds of splintering exploding bullets on a belt – shrapnel rounds'''.

So; many bullets in 1 (30mm) ammunition shell.

a reply to: Zaphod58

This page has a great example of what a 30mm round can do.

That's one ugly hole right there.

a reply to: Zaphod58

As for HE vs AP, even if they used an AP round on MH17, it STILL wouldn't leave tiny holes that were seen on the wreckage of the plane after the crash.

Maybe they are so small is because the plane is much bigger...

a reply to: Plugin

No, the shrapnel doesn't occur until the round hits. As it penetrates the armor, it splinters into shrapnel, that then hits the crew and tears the crew apart. It doesn't split in flight. If it splintered before hitting the target, it wouldn't even make a dent in the targets armor when it hit. Rounds that detonate before hitting the target are used as flak rounds, usually by ground based weaponry, against aircraft, not against tanks and ground targets.

a reply to: Zaphod58

OKay could be but you say tiny holes, it's hard to really see how big they are, an airliner is very big.

Here you got a big picture from it:
www.anderweltonline.com...

a reply to: Plugin

Well here a real expert saying its 30mm cannon fire:

And here is something your expert said...

“The cockpit of the MH017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment” of the cockpit, so that there had to have been two SU 25s, and not merely one, which were escorting that plane into the rebel-held area.

www.washingtonsblog.com...

So when did the SU 25 get the ability to fly at that altitude, and how can they shoot a plane from both sides when they can't fly high enough to do so?

You see things like that make your source very questionable as an expert in knowing what caused those holes.