Interesting article on Ukraine shooting down MH17

The only fact of the matter is nobody actually knows who shot down the plane if the USA had any evidence they would nip it in the bud and end the mystery so could somebody intelligent and unchildish tell me what the implications are if the story in the op become matter of fact ????????

You can jam a mayday call. You can engage above flight ceiling. Putin's plane was in the same airspace. All that and I still don't believe this was air-to-air.

a reply to: FlyingFox

Jamming would blot out everything in the area, and be obvious. As for Putin being in the area, according to the Kremlin he wasn't, and hasn't flown over the Ukraine in a long time.

originally posted by: RyleeNator
The only fact of the matter is nobody actually knows who shot down the plane if the USA had any evidence they would nip it in the bud and end the mystery so could somebody intelligent and unchildish tell me what the implications are if the story in the op become matter of fact ????????

Well that's not true, someone does know as someone pulled the trigger.

But I understand what you're saying. Because of the games played out in recent history, namely Iraq, there is much mistrust in people's minds, therefore it is very difficult to accept things at face value.

So after much posture and accusation of Russia in Crimea by the West, if the Dutch found evidence of a Ukranian military aircraft shot a civilian airliner then possibly there may be political pressure to get rid of the evidence, but I don't think in countries like the Netherlands, it would be possible for politicians to have that much power.

So what's the implications? Ukraine looks ridiculous for trying to cover it up, Europe turns its back on Ukraine and leaves it to sort out its own problems, Russia annexes Ukraine once again. Russian proper gander has a small win over USA, NATO countries bolster defence spending.

I don't think its worth politically (I don't think its possible) trying to pervert justice of 200 lives for a small intelligence failure on behalf of western countries.

Here`s a theory, new SU-25`s have been outfitted with the R-27 missile which has an explosive warhead of 39kg.

Armament Su-25T - One NNPU-8M 30mm gun. Ten underwing hardpoints for laser guided rockets, bombs, Vikhr M anti armour tube launched missiles, laser guided Kh-25ML (AS-10 'Karen') and Kh-29L (AS-14 'Kedge') ASMs, KAB-500 laser guided bombs and Kh-58 (AS-11 'Kilter') anti radiation missiles, and R-27, R-77 and R-73 AAMs.

Source

The main new equipment will included the Pantera nav/attack system with the internal radar RLPK-25SM, the Pastel RWR and the Omul ECM pod. All that equipment is derived from that developed for the Su-25TM. The weapons arsenal of the Su-25SM will be extended with R-27 AA-10 'Alamo', R-73 AA-11 'Archer' and R-77 AA-12 'Adder' air-to-air missiles, as well as the Kh-29T AS-14 'Kedge' TV-guided air-to-ground missile and the optically-guided KAB-500Kr bomb.

Source

So while it doesn`t seem it`s now standard, the Ukrainians could have done the modifications themselves.

I came across this with the Ukrainian army claiming Russian Fighters Jets Shootdown SU-25

What if the Ukrainians were telling the truth about Ukrainian jet fighters being shot down by Russian jet fighters and went on modifying a SU-25 to fit R-27 missiles. The Ukraine were producing them and had them on other planes too. The R-27 is also modular and can be outfitted with just IR.

So why not try and take out Russian fighters with also an R-27 missile if the Russians were actual targeting them ?

That would also explain the story from the eyewitness about him hearing the pilot say that he shot down the wrong plane and the 2 Ukrainian planes which were shot down who were close by.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

As far as I can see the largest AAM the Su-25SM currently uses is the R-73. So what you're proposing is that the Ukrainians are better at aircraft design than the Russians. They were able to build this Su-25SM in complete secrecy without Russia finding out. Then the sole reason they built it was to take down a commercial airliner. If that's true then we must conclude that the Russian military is extremely incompetent.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

No, the Su-25SM is just an old SU-25 with upgrade package, only the Ukraine calls them Su-25M1 and does the upgrading themselves.

Four Su-25M1 and one Su-25UBM1 were upgraded in 2010-2011.

Source

The Ukraine had a good defence industry and was doing a lot for the Russian military. They even make the R-27 missiles and are selling them.

Ukraine sends first batch of air-to-air missiles to India

Artem signed a contract with the Defense Ministry of India for the supply of R-27 missiles to the Indian Air Force in March 2012.

Source

If you get attacked with medium range missiles, it makes sense to replace the short range with medium range ones.

The Ukrainian Air Force claimed an Su-25 was shot down by an R-27.

Source

And with two planes already down by possible Russian jets, the pilot could just have panicked and shot down MH17.

Knowing the TPTB, they never let a good crisis go to waste and immediately started to blame Russia for it.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

So why retrofit a CAS A2G platform with advanced A2A missiles and send it on a highly improbable mission when you have modern fighters to perform that role?

Unless, you sent up a modified SU-25 into an area with known AA units operating into a very vulnerable slow climb to intercept a commercial airline on a mission which has a very low chance of success but a high chance of failure to commit an act of terrorism against innocent people with no idea of what may happen but relying on them fact it's an SU-25 so no one would suggest it was capable of doing this?

Those crafty Ukrainian geniaii

a reply to: TheCrowMan

Because a lot of Ukrainian aircraft had been shot down already by that time and they still thought about doing something (desperately) as an defence against it. With medium range missiles you still might have change, short range forget about it.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: TheCrowMan

Because a lot of Ukrainian aircraft had been shot down already by that time and they still thought about doing something (desperately) as an defence against it. With medium range missiles you still might have change, short range forget about it.

Wouldn't sending an SU-25 against the SAM systems be a better option of stopping the attacks than shooting down a commercial airline?

Are you saying that Ukraine shot down MH-17 to stop Russian AA activity in Ukraine?

it's a very dangerous tactic.

a reply to: TheCrowMan

The Ukrainian jet fighters were targeted by medium range missiles (40km) from Russian fighters jets while they only had the R-60 and R-73 which are short range. So it makes perfect sense to load also medium range missiles on your planes.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Here`s a theory, new SU-25`s have been outfitted with the R-27 missile which has an explosive warhead of 39kg.

That doesn't make the plane able to fly high enough to shoot down a commercial airliner, in fact it is adding weight with the bigger warhead so that in turn makes it even a bigger improbability that an SU25 could do this.

But hey what do the real experts know...and by that I mean the manufacturer.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It doesn`t need to be at 10km to shoots the missile, the missile flies the other part.

Time to change the broken record dude.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

No, the Su-25SM is just an old SU-25 with upgrade package, only the Ukraine calls them Su-25M1 and does the upgrading themselves.

And unless they upgraded the engine and the airframe it still isn't possible for an SU 25 to do what you think it can.

Source

So now the Kiev Post is a credible source, but when others use them as a source it isn't credible...listen carefully and you can hear it...it's called hypocrisy and you are in full use mode I see.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

It doesn`t need to be at 10km to shoots the missile, the missile flies the other part

To hit where the airliner was it would have to. Time to learn how a plane that isn't designed to do this cannot do this...except in your fantasy world.

You can change everything on the plane, but unless you upgrade the airframe and engines the plane will still not fly that high, and the SU 25 upgrade was only for the cockpit displays and better flight controls...no engine upgrade to the plane so it will not fly any higher than it was manufactured to do.

Time to learn how aviation works...dude.

a reply to: TheCrowMan

Wouldn't sending an SU-25 against the SAM systems be a better option of stopping the attacks than shooting down a commercial airline?

Yes it would, but Russia thinks the world is full of idiots and didn't think people would actually look up the capabilities of the plane in question.

Which btw was the reason they tried to change the wiki page on the SU 25...all while forgetting the manufacturer has the capabilities on their own site.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Thanks for proving I`m right by trying to bury it with senseless postings.

There is no evidence the self defence force's shot down mh 17 there is mounting evidence Ukraine/USA USA shot it down its only a matter of time before this becomes evident and probably blacked out of US media

originally posted by: RyleeNator
... there is mounting evidence Ukraine/USA USA shot it down its only a matter of time before this becomes evident and probably blacked out of US media

Are you able to point to a credible source that shows evidence of such kind? Otherwise, your remark will just be taken for drivel.

Regards

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

If it really was the modified Sukoi, my bet is the Elbit of Israel did the mods.