Satellite photo of fighter jet zapping MH17

Because of all the propaganda and blame throwing on both sides and the fact that evidence that does not support the sides theory is discounted, we as regular people will probably never know the answer to what happened there. I do not feel
Russia was involved in this directly though, but either it was a setup by Ukraine or the rebels did it with missiles they took from Ukraine.

I hate the way that the governments are handling this more than the fact that a commercial jet got shot down.

Maybe someone can translate here,



This extract is interesting,
"The time on the image corresponds to the time indicated in the data of objective control presented by the Ministry of Defense of Russia. According to the inscription, the international designations of time, the picture would be from the US satellite intelligence apparatus.”- RB"

Elsewhere it states that the cockpit crew were killed first, then a missile hit an engine and wing blowing the wing off, and the plane spiralled or rolled down, which is consistent with eyewitness reports.

Just looking at that pic the angle for the missile hitting the cockpit would be wrong.
I think a missile fired like that would be chasing the plane from behind to hit it.

I don't know what the math would be.

However we have a boeing 777 with a cruising speed of close to 600mph. so that's 880 feet per second.

Then we need to figure out the top speed of the missile.

And the arc it would have to traverse in order to intersect the plane.

Anyone up for that challenge?

a reply to: stormcell

Except that killing the pilots would have knocked out the electronics that controlled the autopilot, and the plane would have crashed anyway. And there is no evidence of anything hitting the cockpit, prior to the explosion that destroyed the aircraft, according to what's been released from the FDR/CVR.

a reply to: grey580

The missile wouldn't have had any trouble hitting the plane, as its top speed is above Mach 2. The problem is that it wouldn't have homed in on the cockpit. Radar guided missiles home in on the largest signature, be it EM or radar return, and that is the center wing box, not the cockpit.

originally posted by: PurpleDog UK
Zap hod

Was there not wreckage showing fragmentation damage possibly caused by an air to air missile...?

PDUK

They showed a panel with holes in it. Those could just as well be created by someone on the ground using them for target practise.

The only way to know what happened for sure would be to collect all the wreckage, reconstruct the plane as best as possible and figure out the trajectories of shrapnel.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I get that.

I'm just curious to see what the trajectory would be of the plane and missile on impact.

a reply to: rickymouse

or the rebels did it with missiles they took from Ukraine.

Well that theory has been debunked by the separatists themselves as they said the ones they took from Ukraine weren't operational.

Khodakovsky said he did not know where the missile system had come from but it may have come from Russia. He added the separatists had seized several Buk systems from Ukrainian bases, but none of them were operational.

www.theguardian.com...

a reply to: tabm1

this is just trolling of our state TV

Possibility is high and the timing is perfect.

PM’s office says Abbott told president in brief meeting he had information missile that destroyed plane had Russian origin

www.theguardian.com...

Hey, wouldn't a missle leave a radar signature?

a reply to: smurfy


What's interesting is that you can't find anything on George Bilt as being an expert in aviation, and you also have to remember where the source is coming from. Russia's channel 1, not the most credible for information regarding Ukraine.

a reply to: maghun

This looks like a fake to me..

And I am pretty sure I saw damage on the other side of the plane in any case.

Based on reading between the lines I think it was Ukraine that shot the plane down. But who knows?

a reply to: randyvs

If you were really close and had a powerful enough radar.

Case closed. Look at the photo of Donetzk from 8/28/2012 in Google Earth. A little cloud at the south of the city (NNE relative to the big cloud in OP) is the same as in OP photo. Awful photoshop skill. I was hoping that our FSB can do better fakes.

OMG! And yet another cloud was taken from Google Earth photo from 9/18/2011.

a reply to: KnightLight

Based on reading between the lines I think it was Ukraine that shot the plane down. But who knows?

Here's the thing...Why would Ukraine be operating the missile system as they hadn't had a problem with fighter jets in Ukraine, but the separatists did, as they had shot down planes days before this incident.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Ok, we will not see any low altitude satellite or drone-captured image, because it is "secret".

You mentioned all other available "sources". In such "case" (mass murder) is there any possibility to disclose some of them (data gathered during an "exercise")? Or the famous Su-24 turned off AEGIS forever?

However, 200 U.S. Army personnel normally assigned to bases in Germany were in Ukraine during the time of the MH-17 fly-over. They were participating in NATO exercise RAPID TRIDENT II. Ukraine's Ministry of Defense led the exercise.

BREEZE included the AEGIS-class guided missile cruiser USS Vela Gulf. AEGIS cruisers' AN/SPY 1 radar has the ability to track all aircraft over a large region. For example, the AEGIS test center in Moorestown, New Jersey, was able to see the Boeing 747 TWA Flight 800 when it disappeared from radar screens in 1996 near East Moriches Bay, Long Island. According to Lockheed Martin personnel who operated the AEGIS test center in New Jersey, the Navy ordered the SPY 1 radar turned off for «maintenance» shortly before the downing of TWA 800.

From the Black Sea, the Vela Gulf was able to track Malaysian Airlines 17 over the Black Sea and any missiles fired at the plane. U.S. AWACS electronic intelligence (ELINT) aircraft were also flying over the Black Sea region at the time of the MH-17 flyover of Ukraine. Growler aircraft have the capability to jam radar systems in all surface-to-air threats.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: PurpleDog UK

Without extensive analysis there's no way to tell the difference between an air to air, or surface to air missile. But an air to air missile wouldn't have hit near the cockpit, unless it was fired from the front, which the crew would have seen either the launch, or the launching aircraft. A SAM from the ground would be much harder to see unless you were looking for it, and in exactly the right spot, just as it was launched. The damage is consistent with a fragmentation warhead, which both types use.

An infrared missile fired from an aircraft would have tracked on the engines, the center fuselage, or aft fuselage, the three hottest areas of the aircraft. A radar guided missile would track on the center fuselage, which would give the strongest return for the seeker. The cockpit would actually be one of the weakest returns.

Hmm, a radar guided missile (such as the R-27 Alamo-A/B/C variants) with proximity warhead could have been used even head-on to MH-17. Interestingly Soviet/Russian pilots are trained to use two different types of AA missile to make evasion/countermeasure more difficult.

Thus it is possible, as a result of practice and habit that the Ukrainian pilot launched two AA missiles at MH17. One a radar-guided missile the other IR.

Obviously that is conjecture, but given the apparent "high velocity" damage to the front (front and side) of MH-17 a head-on (or even a 40 degree+ angle of attack, depending on the missile, and other factors) such an attack cannot be ruled out.

Naturally, if radar AND IR missiles were used in the attack then the target strike areas would be different, giving different results. This may explain eye-witness reports that spoke of MH-17 breaking apart into distinct pieces, with two distinct explosions heard:


What we need is the investigators on the ground to do their job. I think only physical evidence of those "high velocity objects that impacted MH-17 will settle this matter. That evidence could very well still be there amongst the wreckage.

a reply to: maghun

Looking at the insert, you can not see an exhaust trail which would be present if a missle were fired from the plane. By the time th missle had moved this far, the plane would have over ran it my several meters.

If I had to make a guess at to the type of projectile which can be seen, I would suggest it is tracer fire from a cannon.
I know the plane would be "barely" within range at this point, but a pilot will often use a few rounds to line up on his target.
Actually the fighter should be aiming slightly ahead of the other plane at this point, but I am not flying either plane.

a reply to: maghun

No Su-24 turned off an Aegis. That's another BS story.

Some data may be released. It has in the past, but not until the report is released.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h


Here's the thing...Why would Ukraine be operating the missile system as they hadn't had a problem with fighter jets in Ukraine, but the separatists did, as they had shot down planes days before this incident.

I don't know but they are acting guilty. Maybe someone had a motive to hit that particular plane and based on the separatists shooting planes down earlier they had cover for it since why would they be operating anti aircraft missiles?

This picture in this thread is fake to me.

Like I ended my last post I don't know, but Ukraine has my attention.