It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: spy66
MH17 would have broken into many Peaces do to the damge and the friction that would be caused. And there would be a solid smoke trail from where the BUK missile hit it and all the way to the ground. But there were hardly any smoke trail at all.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66
You mean like that solid smoke tail the DHL Airbus left over Iraq after being hit by a missile, and having the outer peron of the wing visibily on fire?
Ok, so it was an air to air missile. Where was the massive smoke trail they leave on launch? There were allegedly eyewitnesses that saw fighters flying near the plane, fighters that don't leave smoke trails, but missed the huge tail that would point straight back to them somehow?
originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
originally posted by: spy66
MH17 would have broken into many Peaces do to the damge and the friction that would be caused. And there would be a solid smoke trail from where the BUK missile hit it and all the way to the ground. But there were hardly any smoke trail at all.
How many more PIECES do you want?
secure.flickr.com...
Spread over 15km? Me thinks you're not informed.
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
DONETSK, Ukraine, July 23 (Reuters) - A powerful Ukrainian rebel leader has confirmed that pro-Russian separatists had an anti-aircraft missile of the type Washington says was used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and it could have originated in Russia.
In an interview with Reuters, Alexander Khodakovsky, commander of the Vostok Battalion, acknowledged for the first time since the airliner was brought down in eastern Ukraine on Thursday that the rebels did possess the BUK missile system and said it could have been sent back subsequently to remove proof of its presence.
Before the Malaysian plane was shot down, rebels had boasted of obtaining the BUK missiles, which can shoot down airliners at cruising height. But since the disaster the separatists' main group, the self-proclaimed People's Republic of Donetsk, has repeatedly denied ever having possessed such weapons.
Since the airliner crashed with the loss of all 298 on board, the most contentious issue has been who fired the missile that brought the jet down in an area where government forces are fighting pro-Russian rebels.
Khodakovsky accused the Kiev authorities for provoking what may have been the missile strike that destroyed the doomed airliner, saying Kiev had deliberately launched air strikes in the area, knowing the missiles were in place.
"I knew that a BUK came from Luhansk. At the time I was told that a BUK from Luhansk was coming under the flag of the LNR," he said, referring to the Luhansk People's Republic, the main rebel group operating in Luhansk, one of two rebel provinces along with Donetsk, the province where the crash took place.
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: flibblebee
Actually we do. All you have to do is look at what was found where. The aircraft broke up at high altitude, and the cockpit broke off first, because it was found farthest away from the main fuselage.
originally posted by: flibblebee
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
We don't know how the plane broke up and in what sequence, so that is purely conjecture.
originally posted by: dragonridr
originally posted by: flibblebee
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
We don't know how the plane broke up and in what sequence, so that is purely conjecture.
Yeah we do weve seen shrapnel damage and it had to be a large warhead so it had to be a same or a huge flock of metallic exploding birds. Im waiting for russia to use that one next lol.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: flibblebee
That would be because it's a fragmentation warhead. It creates a cloud of shrapnel that does the damage to the plane, not just in one area.
originally posted by: flibblebee
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
We don't know how the plane broke up and in what sequence, so that is purely conjecture.
originally posted by: roadgravel
originally posted by: flibblebee
originally posted by: roadgravel
Way too much destruction, too fast on a large plane. SAM strike.
We don't know how the plane broke up and in what sequence, so that is purely conjecture.
Wreckage scattered over a very large area says it did not do it as it hit the ground.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: flibblebee
It depends on the missile, obviously. A missile like the R-60 has a very small warhead, so it's a very small cloud of fragments. A missile like the SA-11 has a very large warhead, so it has a very large cloud of fragments.