How We Know Russia Shot Down MH17

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: micpsi

People are still trying to push the SU-25 angle? Even Russia trotted out the BUK manufacturers to claim it was downed by a BUK. According to the story you posted three jets were scrambled but only one returned. The rebels had made it known in the past when they downed Ukrainian aircraft. So why not this time? Then there's the fact that the separatists don't have any aircraft. So why would Ukrainian jets be scrambled with A2A misses? And finally there's the simple fact that an SU-25 doesn't have the capability to catch a 777 even when it's unloaded. Its ceiling and speed are both far below that of the 777.

Just something you should understand, service ceiling is the height at which an aircraft can fly and do everything it says on the pack ( in other words everything the makers say it can do) absolute ceiling is the max height an aircraft can fly at, its often 20 thousand feet more than the service ceiling, same goes for speed,aircraft speed is always higher than manufacture recommended.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Well it becomes hard to deny when a fragment of one was found around the wreckage.

One found 'around' the wreckage? The place is dangerous to aircraft, I don't doubt the land is littered with frag bits of all kinds.

What about the round 30 mm cannon holes in parts of the fuselage? Thats not BUK.

And how would one know the difference between the sounds of a BUK and something like say grad rockets if they have never heard them before this?

Grads are cluster fired, short burntime rocket motors. Woosh, woosh, woosh!

Buk, not. Hi altitude anti air craft missile, burns a lot longer climbing to altitude. Then, theres the report, away up there. let alone the missile track of smoke. That can hang in the sky for minutes, long enough for people to come out and see it.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

look for the truth where ever it is spoken . You have remained consistent on the Ukrainian deal from the get go and have only regurgitated their rhetoric .

Obviously you don't.

As compared to towing the Russian line which has been shown to be full of more holes than Swiss cheese.

Point for that but you are only keeping alive a bunch of things that are not true and avoiding things that are true that could get us closer to the truth .

SO everything Russia says it the truth and everything else is a lie...oh my!

Why is the CIA silent ? Why haven't the State Dept . releases anything more the Google sourced social media reports ?

Who says they haven't...just because Russia and people like yourself aren't privy to what the US has for evidence that doesn't mean those who are privy don't have it.

Russia has supposedly invaded Ukraine 20 times over the past while . Where is the official prof ?

Crimea

Putin own admission to sending troops to Crimea for the sole purpose of annexation.

What more do you need?

Could it be that there is none and the officials will only spout propaganda and not provide prof because they have none ?

Please re read the reply above.

Putin admitted to invading a sovereign country for the sole purpose of annexing Crimea.

Russian president Vladimir Putin revealed that he secretly planned the annexation of Crimea months before the country's disputed independence referendum.

www.ibtimes.co.uk...

WHat more do you want...he planned the invasion of Crimea which was and still is part of Ukraine...a sovereign country .

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

The US isn't obligated to show what they have as evidence in an international event such as this, especially not to those who aren't involved in the investigation…

Whomever is keeping the evidence secret is the guilty party.

global research

a reply to: intrptr

What about the round 30 mm cannon holes in parts of the fuselage? Thats not BUK.

What about them there weren't any, and just what plane was it that supposedly put those there?

Grads are cluster fired, short burntime rocket motors. Woosh, woosh, woosh!

And manpads make what sound...although I see you totally missed the point and why am I not surprised at that?

Buk, not. Hi altitude anti air craft missile, burns a lot longer climbing to altitude. Then, theres the report, away up there. let alone the missile track of smoke. That can hang in the sky for minutes, long enough for people to come out and see it.

Glad to see you are now an expert at the BUK missile system...Putin would love you.

You seem to forget the fact that this was shot down over a war zone where people are hiding in basements and not out taking a stroll in the park.

a reply to: intrptr

Whomever is keeping the evidence secret is the guilty party.

global research

Seriously...you think posting something from them actually represents evidence?

How about something unbiased and actually credible?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

The US isn't obligated to show what they have as evidence in an international event such as this, especially not to those who aren't involved in the investigation…

Whomever is keeping the evidence secret is the guilty party.

global research

Once again Global research has been shown to be as biased as Alex jones,and or RT news or stormfront. Also the SU-25 by its own manufacturers words cannot stay at the altitude long enough to fire its 30 mm cannons. Zaphod has eductated posters in these threads on this topic one time before should I PM him to come school them again?

As to the missiles from the SU-25. With those loaded on board the aircraft cant get high enough to fire them on a airliner with any accuracy.

a reply to: yuppa

Considering the SU-25 coudnt get up to that altitude and stay there long enough to even fire its cannon to put holes in the aircraft id say its SHRAPNEL/rods from the SAM/buks/ Fragmentation warhead. Tungsten rod penetrators most likely.

The SU25 is capable of reaching that altitude…

The BUK chases its target, impacting from behind, center mass, not the side/front of the nose of the aircraft.

The shrapnel of a BUK is not 30 mm 'paper punch' holes either. The holes in the nose of Mh17 are perfectly round 30 mm , and associatedtwith in and out perforations in the fuselage, resulting from explosive cannon shells, standard armor piercing, incendiary ammunition for the Su-25.

The shells punched through the light skin exploded within so explains the in and out frag with round holes the size of cannon shells.

BUK tungsten 'rods' would be a mix of round, oblong and slotted perforations, no explosive deformation or in and out holing from secondary explosions.

Remember a tweet that was sent out by the men in donbass saying they shot down a transport that was then deleted once they figured out it was nto a transport? smoking gun to me.

Well the new vid has them talking second plane, chutes seen and pilot "crawling" while they're standing next to the burning wreckage of MH 17.

Now tell me how unreal that vid is but some 'deleted tweet' is more valid.

a reply to: yuppa

Once again Global research has been shown to be as biased as Alex jones,and or RT news or storefront.

But your 'deleted tweet' more evidentiary.

Maybe you could grace us with any evidence of your claims whatsoever. Whatsoever is obvious is dismissing content and links out of hand, providing none of your own to back your well worn official version, page sliding others content off the page.

Obviously driven by an agenda other than your own.

I played along with that so others could see.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Seriously...you think posting something from them actually represents evidence?

How about something unbiased and actually credible?

Like, a pic of Putin is your "credible" evidence?

a reply to: imod02

Yes and no. Service Ceiling is the highest an aircraft can fly with a combat load and maintain a 100 foot per minute climb rate. So while Absolute Ceiling is higher, it's set by a clean aircraft with no combat load.

Top speed is set clean, with a limited amount of fuel, under ideal conditions. You'll never hit top speed with anything hanging off the aircraft because it creates drag.

The facts so fare are as stands nobody but governments know who shot down mh17 USA has satellite images of who shot it down but don't want to show the public which is strange but true the black box has been analysed by the British and is not being made public like wise Ukraine has air traffic controllers conversations and they also are being kept secret.The Russians have radar of mh 17 being tailed by a jet they also have a witness willing to testify and have named the culprit furthermore there are eyewitnesses who seen fighter jet at time of the shooting down as reported by the BBC in there now deleted report other facts an su_25 can fly over the recommended ceiling height buk missiles leave a trace that last between 8 to 15 minute weather plays its part how long it last can last longer nobody has seen nor photographed a trail in the area at the time of the of the crash these are the only facts available to the public everything else is just speculation and propaganda

a reply to: intrptr

Like, a pic of Putin is your "credible" evidence?

I wasn't posting it as any type of evidence...

a reply to: intrptr

I played along with that so others could see.

Well at least you admit your just trolling so that others could see...good job.

a reply to: RyleeNator

The recorders aren't going to show any evidence as to who fired the missile and a transcript of the last few minutes has been released. As has the transcript of the air traffic control conversations.

a reply to: RyleeNator

The Russians have radar of mh 17 being tailed by a jet they also have a witness willing to testify and have named the culprit furthermore there are eyewitnesses who seen fighter jet at time of the shooting down as reported by the BBC in there now deleted report other facts an su_25 can fly over the recommended ceiling height buk missiles leave a trace that last between 8 to 15 minute weather plays its part how long it last can last longer nobody has seen nor photographed a trail in the area at the time of the of the crash these are the only facts available to the public everything else is just speculation and propaganda

So you mean this deleted report?



An SU 25 fully loaded with weapons will only reach 23000 ft, the only way it reaches the height of MH 17 it will have no weapons and can only do it briefly...but what does the manufacturer know...right?

www.sukhoi.org...

Except what your doing is parroting Russian media when it comes to the SU 25, so your just pushing the propaganda all on your own. And the capabilities of the SU 25 are fact not speculation or propaganda.

And it seems their were witnesses to this event...

www.bellingcat.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Transcripts are written by men under orders so there not exactly the real deal are they?? Now be honest with yourself anything can be added or left out so as I said the recording s are being kept secret I'd say there is a different sound between cannon fire and buk shrapnel or cannon fire followed by a missle strike

a reply to: RyleeNator

Recordings are almost ALWAYS kept until the final report is released, it's standard practice unless there's something compelling in them. And I've never seen an air to air cannon that can cause a 777 sized aircraft explode instantly like this one did. Not even the 30mm that's the Russian aircraft standard has that much power.

If the cockpit had been hit, killing the crew instantly, it also would have knocked out the autopilot and the aircraft would have wandered for a bit before crashing and probably would have broken up at much lower altitude, while diving, resulting in a tighter debris field.

Contrary to Hollywood, air to air missiles almost never cause the target to just explode. They frequently shed pieces depending on where they're hit and catch fire. Then they tumble and break up if there is enough altitude. Going by the debris field this aircraft exploded at high altitude without shedding parts first.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I'm going by what combat pilot's that have flown them but hay I'm sure the guy who designed it on a drawing board would know more but you official story guys change your tune pretty quick now it's can fly that high but only without weapons and not for long you should inform the the proper people who published these ceiling height s

a reply to: RyleeNator

See my post above about the difference between service ceiling and absolute ceiling. It's absolute ceiling is higher, but that is set by a clean aircraft.