Interesting article on Ukraine shooting down MH17

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks for the search.

By a Russian Mig-29 or by a BUK ?

It`s the Ukrainians themselves who said they were targeted by a Mig-29, so with the Separatists story being so flimsy it could also easily have been the Ukrainians thinking they were targeting a Mig. The Ukrainians also had several BUK systems in a much better position right below the explosion.

The Su-25 could also have been guided towards the Mh17 by the BUK radar thinking it was a Mig-29, and seeing the plane from a long distance, panicked and fired too soon.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

And they couldn't tell the difference between a plane coming from the complete wrong direction, not flying like a combat aircraft, and a high performance combat aircraft that would be flying fast and maneuvering. All they'd have to do is make a phone call and they could verify a commercial flight with ATC.

If they thought it was a MiG-29 why on earth would they send a ground attack aircramft after it instead of scrambling their own MiG-29s or Su-27s?

a reply to: Zaphod58

The one you pointed at in your list exploded at 160ft, IR missiles have also proximity fuse which could be set to go off earlier.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Because the story about planes who got shot down happened also at the 17th according to the witness and not at the 16th as being claimed by the Ukraine. It seems they were altering the story if the witness is to believed.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Most missiles use proximity fuses to increase the odds of a hit. The distance depends on many factors, but an IR missile would have triggered closer to the wing not the cockpit.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Doesn`t that depend from which way it comes ?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

The Su-25 could also have been guided towards the Mh17 by the BUK radar thinking it was a Mig-29, and seeing the plane from a long distance, panicked and fired too soon.

Except the Ukranian BUK operators would have the battery and not just the launcher which would be able to identify the planes that are flying...something the separatists didn't have which is why they didn't know it was a passenger airliner.

And their recorded phone conversations prove it.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

It doesn't matter when it happened. If they thought there was a Russian fighter wandering in their airspace the last thing they'd send to investigate is a ground attack aircraft.

a reply to: Zaphod58

If they thought there was a Russian fighter wandering in their airspace the last thing they'd send to investigate is a ground attack aircraft.

But they upgraded the electronics, so why wouldn't they send it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

...if the BUK is that bad in seeing what it is, it would make some sense.

But I`m going to bed, goodnight !

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

That's one of the reasons I've said all along they shot it down by mistake. There was an Antonov cargo plane expected about that time, and no way to tell the two apart with the system.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I do understand that coincidences are possible, but given the fact that this shoot down took place on the anniversary of TWA800, my bet it that it was NOT accidental.

a reply to: Salander

Even just starting with 1990 you could probably point to a commercial aircraft crash for every day of the year. So yes it's just a coincidence.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

But they upgraded the electronics, so why wouldn't they send it

Yes they can also upgrade a SU-25 to fly higher if they wanted too but i guess that won't fit in with your theory that Putin shoot flight mh17 down.

Tell me do you beleive anything people have said about the US-Liberty because i suspect you would have that down as a lie too.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Every source for the M1 upgrade agrees there were no structural or major engine changes to allow for higher flight. It was meant to be a relatively cheap upgrade, so it was limited to electronics and avionics.

a reply to: VirusGuard

While it's true there are variants of the Su-25 that can theoretically hit 10km Ukraine doesn't have any of these. Besides why would they risk such an expensive and limited aircraft when they have plenty of MiG-29s?

Ah very good so at the end Of this debate we can conclude that apparently the su-25 is not capable of shooting down mh-17 despite the evidence of eye witness and radar conformation and the fact nobody in the debate has flown one that theory remains to be debunked
Now the other theory that the defence force's shot it down with a buk well one the only evidence is a severely tampered with social media video and the word of an anonymous Pentagon official who says they have prof that nobody can see
Yea the jury is still pretty much out on this one let's just hope nothing out of the ordernary happens to distract the world before we get to the truth reply to: Xcalibur254

a reply to: RyleeNator

The radar data that came from a set in another country, that was in standby? Yeah that's reliable.

a reply to: RyleeNator

despite the evidence of eye witness and radar conformation

The problem is that the witness claimed there were three Su-25s involved, two of which were shot down, but the alleged radar capture only shows one. Which is correct? If one is correct, the other is a fraud. My money is on both being frauds intended to confuse the issue.

The press conference I seen said one maybe two planes tailing mh-17 on radar and the radar is available for inspection but nobody has debunked it inspected it asked.to look at the radar reports to prove or improve if they are legit so by my logic I reckon it's best to ignore the radar reports if your trying to hide something and that's exactly what the investigators are doing how hard could it be to take a look and prove the radar report fake ?????;; reply to: DJW001