HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Current Events > Russia, Central Asia, and The Caucasus > Ukrainian Crisis

Notices and Announcements

Ukrainian Crisis Discuss the unfolding crisis in Ukraine.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01 Aug 14, 06:41
amvas's Avatar
amvas amvas is offline
RKKA in World War II Forum CO
Russia
Distinguished Service Award ACG Ten Year Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive 
 
Real Name: Alex
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 5,651
amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200] amvas is walking in the light [200]
Flight MH17 Analysis thread

OSCE investigator about MH17 flight.
__________________
If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....
Reply With Quote
Facebook Connect and Magazine Promotions

World War II Magazine
$26.95

Armchair General Magazine
$26.95
Military History Magazine
$26.95
  #2  
Old 01 Aug 14, 10:14
hawker_gb's Avatar
hawker_gb hawker_gb is offline
Colonel
Croatia
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Split
Posts: 1,878
hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99]
Stealing gas is not enough for Ukraine and now they spread criminal activity on forgery also:

‘Wrong time, altered images’ Moscow slams Kiev’s MH17 satellite data

http://rt.com/news/177296-ukraine-mh...ellite-images/

Satellite images Kiev published as ‘proof’ it didn’t deploy anti-aircraft batteries around the MH17 crash site carry altered time-stamps and are from days after the MH17 tragedy, the Russian Defense Ministry has revealed.

The images, which Kiev claims were taken by its satellites at the same time as those taken by Russian satellites, are neither Ukrainian nor authentic, according to a Moscow statement.

The Defense Ministry said the images were apparently made by an American KeyHole reconnaissance satellite, because the two Ukrainian satellites currently in orbit, Sich-1 and Sich-2, were not positioned over the part of Ukraine’s Donetsk Region shown in the pictures.

Moscow claims weather and lighting conditions in the images were not be possible at the dates and times Ukraine claims they were made, the Russian military said.

At least one of the images published by Ukraine shows signs of being altered by an image editor, the statement added.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01 Aug 14, 14:36
Crimean's Avatar
Crimean
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Machine gun pock marks on fuselage

Quote:
Originally Posted by amvas View Post
OSCE investigator about MH17 flight.
Thank you for this post. Is there anyone on this forum who has looked at the photos of fuselage and believes those holes were not made by bullets as opposed to shrapnel? They appear to me to be going into the craft on one side, and out on the other. That does not leave a lot of room for alternative explanations, and now one Canadian and one German expert have weighed in. If MH17 was shot down by another aircraft using a machine gun, there are not a lot of suspects left.
http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2014/07/...ir-force-jets/
The Ukrainain Minister Avakov has posted alleged proof of a Russian controlled BUK in Ukraine with patently obviously phony documentation, which is a strong indication of an improper campaign to shift blame to Russian. The US has failed to make satellite imagery available to the Russians they accuse, or to the rest of us to demonstrate allegations coming from the US President and Secretary of State - yet they were willing to give them to the Ukrainians, and now it is clear the Ukrainians have again deliberately altered evidence to implicate Russia.
http://eng.mil.ru/en/analytics.htm
The weight of current evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the conclusion that the Ukrainian military shot down MH17. There is no longer any getting around that.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01 Aug 14, 15:26
Vaeltaja's Avatar
Vaeltaja Vaeltaja is offline
Lieutenant General
Finland
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: -
Posts: 3,389
Vaeltaja has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimean View Post
Thank you for this post. Is there anyone on this forum who has looked at the photos of fuselage and believes those holes were not made by bullets as opposed to shrapnel? They appear to me to be going into the craft on one side, and out on the other. That does not leave a lot of room for alternative explanations, and now one Canadian and one German expert have weighed in. If MH17 was shot down by another aircraft using a machine gun, there are not a lot of suspects left.
Actually that claim of gun usage is more than a bit ridiculous - see for example:

Quote:
According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

The cockpit of MH 017 was hit from TWO sides, as there are entry and exit holes on the same side
That is some real mighty piloting from SU-25 in that case. Especially when flying in a way that makes it possible for that alleged SU 25 to shoot at the cockpit (and not hitting the rest of the fuselage) from both sides while staying non-detected for the Russian radar (which readily detected objects close to MH17) and while flying several thousand of feet above the ceiling of the aircraft...

Real irony is that Russian radar data is really already disproving this theory - FYI to use gun an aircraft would need to get close, real close, especially if trying to land a precise shot. So you have option that Haisenko doesn't have a clue what he is talking about - which BTW debunks the whole gun firing theory. Or that Russian radar is incapable of detecting SU 25 flying next to the airliner - which BTW debunks the whole gun firing theory - unless of course the radar is selectively picking up the SU 25 when it is preferable for it to do so from the Russian perspective...

So with the current evidence there is really no reason what so ever to belive the 'gunfire' theory. Nor is there really much of a reason to believe 'air to air missile theory' - especially with the 'SU 25 claim' as it can only carry heat seeking missiles that would have homed into the engines and not to the cockpit.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01 Aug 14, 15:47
vathra's Avatar
vathra vathra is offline
Captain
Yugoslavia
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Real Name: Miloš
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgrade
Posts: 845
vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimean View Post
Thank you for this post. Is there anyone on this forum who has looked at the photos of fuselage and believes those holes were not made by bullets as opposed to shrapnel? They appear to me to be going into the craft on one side, and out on the other. That does not leave a lot of room for alternative explanations, and now one Canadian and one German expert have weighed in.
So far, there is only few photos of damage to airplane, and it is very confusing since they look very concentrated. If it was warhead explosion, it would shower schrapnel all over airplane. Also, it is difficult to imagine that so large and straight forward flying airplane could be missed by far by missile, explosion should be closer.
On the other hand, there are also "holes" in gun theory.

So it seems that proper investigation should be conducted to see damage on entire plane and collect pieces of missile, in order to dismiss all other theories.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01 Aug 14, 15:54
Vaeltaja's Avatar
Vaeltaja Vaeltaja is offline
Lieutenant General
Finland
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: -
Posts: 3,389
Vaeltaja has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by vathra View Post
So far, there is only few photos of damage to airplane, and it is very confusing since they look very concentrated. If it was warhead explosion, it would shower schrapnel all over airplane. Also, it is difficult to imagine that so large and straight forward flying airplane could be missed by far by missile, explosion should be closer.
On the other hand, there are also "holes" in gun theory.

So it seems that proper investigation should be conducted to see damage on entire plane and collect pieces of missile, in order to dismiss all other theories.
You need to keep in mind that if the assumed missile detonated close enough to the nose of the aircraft that part of the fuselage would have shielded the rest of the hull from the shrapnel. Both due to geometry as well as due to mass. Missile would only be able to shower the aircraft along its full length if it detonated abeam (or slightly prior to reaching position that would be abeam of it) of the aircraft.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01 Aug 14, 16:03
vathra's Avatar
vathra vathra is offline
Captain
Yugoslavia
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Real Name: Miloš
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgrade
Posts: 845
vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100] vathra has demonstrated strength of character [100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaeltaja View Post
You need to keep in mind that if the assumed missile detonated close enough to the nose of the aircraft that part of the fuselage would have shielded the rest of the hull from the shrapnel. Both due to geometry as well as due to mass. Missile would only be able to shower the aircraft along its full length if it detonated abeam (or slightly prior to reaching position that would be abeam of it) of the aircraft.
Hardly possible, look at the holes on cockpit. But as I said, let's wait for complete analysis.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01 Aug 14, 20:42
Metryll's Avatar
Metryll Metryll is offline
General of the Forums
EU
ACG Ten Year Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive 
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toulon, France
Posts: 7,270
Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500]
Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimean View Post
Thank you for this post. Is there anyone on this forum who has looked at the photos of fuselage and believes those holes were not made by bullets as opposed to shrapnel?
I saw some photos. I'm not a expert but for me those holes are not result of gunfire due to angle. A side shot is highly improbable due to speed. A B 777 cruise speed is about 905 km/h, at this speed an eventual pilot would have seen the B 777 for a very short time, some seconds if not less, in his arc of fire. Moreover debris fell from 32000 ft and contact with ground may well be the origin of holes depending of the nature of the surface it impacted with.

Quote:
They appear to me to be going into the craft on one side, and out on the other. That does not leave a lot of room for alternative explanations, and now one Canadian and one German expert have weighed in. If MH17 was shot down by another aircraft using a machine gun, there are not a lot of suspects left.
The problem is that a Su 25 is one of the worst platform to fire an airliner or any other aircraft. It would be the same that trying to shot down a airliner with an A-10. It's possible but with a rear shot, neither with a frontal/side one. Moreover Su 25 maximum ceiling is about 23.000 ft while the B 777 was flying at 32.000 ft.

Quote:
The weight of current evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the conclusion that the Ukrainian military shot down MH17. There is no longer any getting around that.
The weight of current evidence is overwhelmingly in support of nothing. The air liner may have crashed for technical failure or human error. But if a military cause is to be considered then a RH missile is the most likely event. Damage are incompatible with both gunnery and IR missile. For now we can only state what did not caused the crash.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02 Aug 14, 01:40
Vaeltaja's Avatar
Vaeltaja Vaeltaja is offline
Lieutenant General
Finland
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: -
Posts: 3,389
Vaeltaja has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by vathra View Post
Hardly possible, look at the holes on cockpit. But as I said, let's wait for complete analysis.
The whole machine gun or autocannon stuff is bonkers. It is impossible for any aircraft available to Ukrainians to pull of that kind of a feat let alone for the SU 25. Keep in mind that it ought to have pretty much hit specifically the nose of the aircraft while leaving the rest of the aircraft intact. Not to mention being required to hit it from the side (not from behind - actually per the 'holes' theory it ought to have hit it from both sides). And to do all this while target aircraft is traveling at over 900 kph at 33000 feet - i.e. at pretty much the top speed of a SU 25 and way above the ceiling of SU 25. All the while being undetected for the nearby Russian primary radar...

There are nothing but holes in the machine gun theory.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02 Aug 14, 03:01
hawker_gb's Avatar
hawker_gb hawker_gb is offline
Colonel
Croatia
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Split
Posts: 1,878
hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99]
There is examples from Afghanistan where Su-25 fly at 12.5 km.
You doing mistake by mixing service ceiling with max ceiling.
Su-25 can go on 10000 m without problems but also without good part of armament.
And nobody said that liner was shot down with Su. Su WAS there. Question is why.
__________________
Fortess fortuan adiuvat
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #11  
Old 02 Aug 14, 03:12
Vaeltaja's Avatar
Vaeltaja Vaeltaja is offline
Lieutenant General
Finland
5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: -
Posts: 3,389
Vaeltaja has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawker_gb View Post
And nobody said that liner was shot down with Su. Su WAS there. Question is why.
Actually, no. What there was - from Russia radar - was an additional radar target appearing close to the impact site -after the impact - which may or may not have been an aircraft and if it was an aircraft it may or may not have been an Su 25. It could just as well have been debris from the 777.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02 Aug 14, 03:25
hawker_gb's Avatar
hawker_gb hawker_gb is offline
Colonel
Croatia
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Split
Posts: 1,878
hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99]
Both Russia and US know who shot plane down.
We don't know and there is good chance we never find out.
__________________
Fortess fortuan adiuvat
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02 Aug 14, 04:45
Metryll's Avatar
Metryll Metryll is offline
General of the Forums
EU
ACG Ten Year Service Award 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive 
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toulon, France
Posts: 7,270
Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500]
Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500] Metryll is a jewel in the rough [500]
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawker_gb View Post
There is examples from Afghanistan where Su-25 fly at 12.5 km.
You doing mistake by mixing service ceiling with max ceiling.
Su-25 can go on 10000 m without problems but also without good part of armament.
"Service ceiling (without external ordnance and stores), km 7"

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su25k/lth/

Altitude above 7.000 m call exclusively for a gunnery action which also exclude the IR missile scenario supported by many pro Russian here. Current known data are incompatible with a gun use. For so, the pilot would had to jettison all others armaments, climb close to maximum ceiling at a land speed lower than B 777 which implies a frontal shooting of which no effects are visible.

Quote:
And nobody said that liner was shot down with Su.
Which model of Su ?

Quote:
Su WAS there. Question is why.
In what does this relate to capability for a Su 25 to shot down a B 777 ?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02 Aug 14, 04:55
hawker_gb's Avatar
hawker_gb hawker_gb is offline
Colonel
Croatia
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Split
Posts: 1,878
hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99] hawker_gb is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metryll View Post
"Service ceiling (without external ordnance and stores), km 7"

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su25k/lth/

Altitude above 7.000 m call exclusively for a gunnery action which also exclude the IR missile scenario supported by many pro Russian here. Current known data are incompatible with a gun use. For so, the pilot would had to jettison all others armaments, climb close to maximum ceiling at a land speed lower than B 777 which implies a frontal shooting of which no effects are visible.
I said that in my post already.
Su-25 can go well above 10000m.


Quote:
Which model of Su ?
Su-25

Quote:
In what does this relate to capability for a Su 25 to shot down a B 777 ?
Su-25 was there.
Nobody said it actually shot down liner.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02 Aug 14, 04:56
Miep's Avatar
Miep Miep is offline
Banned
Armchair_General
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: WU
Posts: 380
Miep is on the path to success [1-99] Miep is on the path to success [1-99] Miep is on the path to success [1-99]
Omg, this discussion again.


Its shrapnel damage.
In no imaginable way caused by 23mm or 30mm shells.

Reasons:
1) lots of different sized holes.

2) different impact ankles

3) an attacking aircraft like the infamous su-25 ground attack one mentioned by the russian defense minister would have needed to come from the direction of the russian border to be able to face the 777 frontal at this distance at the known speed. unrealistic. An attack from the side is even impossibel given the laws of physic.

4) dmg is consistent with a big fragmentation warhead exploding close to the nose of the cockpit, this would suggest the missile was fired by the seperatists or even russia considering course, speed and distance to the border as it was hit.

5) Damage is inconsistent with an infrared missile (to stay close at the su-25 conspiracy, R60 has a continuous rod warhead) which would have hit the turbines proberbly anyway.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:00.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.