Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Very good article by Mark Galeotti, a leading expert on the Russian military.
    http://inmoscowsshadows.wordpress.co...els-have-lost/


    Although I wish it were otherwise, I feel the overwhelming odds are that MH17 was shot down by a Buk-M1 surface-to-air missile fired by the rebels (but supplied by the Russians):
    1. The rebels, notably generalissimo Strelkov actually claimed to have shot down a government An-26 in the general area of the MH17’s demise. The social media claims in question have been retrospectively deleted, but in this age nothing is truly lost.
    2. The rebels have shot down other government planes and indeed there is strategic merit to their denying their airspace to Kyiv’s forces, given that air power is one of the government’s real advantages. If they thought the MH17 was a government plane, then this might have seemed a great opportunity.
    3. MH17 was flying too high for the man portable and light vehicle-mounted SAMs the rebels have openly deployed, but recently they admitted–and again these claims seem to have been retracted–to having at least one Buk-M1 SAM system, a tactical battlefield system that has the range to claw a civilian airliner out of the sky, and the warhead to do it with one hit.
    4. The Buk is a radar-guided missile, so it could quite possibly have been launched without any eyeballing of the target. Furthermore, while the rebels may have the Buk’s radar targeting system, they lack the extensive radar network and, above all, the skilled sensor operators who might have been able to tell a passenger airliner from a government troop plane.
    5. The pattern of wreckage, the state of the corpses, suggests a catastrophic in-air impact and then rapid descent, not a crash from engine or system failure. Again, this speaks to a missile attack, and there do not seem to have been Russian or Ukrainian fighter jets in the air near there. So, again we’re back to a SAM.
    Yes, I am excluding the more outré conspiracy theories, that MH17 was destroyed by government forces to demonize the rebels and likewise that it was shot down by an S-300 from Russia. This was, in my opinion, a tragic and murderous blunder rather than an intentional atrocity. This in no way excuses the attack–human lives are human lives, whether Ukrainian airmen or multinational civilians–but helps explain what’s going on.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It would show the position and speed of the aircraft at the time when it was shot down. This would help to refute the RT/Kremlin propaganda that it was the Ukrainian government who shot it down, which is why Russia has illegally sequestered the black box.
    Speed would have been typically cruising speed at 33000ft, which is somewhere around 300kts if I recall correctly at that altitude.

    Still, I don't think the black box is needed to refute that either. The flight was travelling in a northwest-southeast direction, already well into Ukrainian airspace. Add to the fact that the Ukrainian military has access to civilian transponders and airspace, it makes it even more likely. In contrast, pro-Kremlin groups don't have access to such technology.

    I don't think the black box is much of an issue, really. It is more symbolic than anything.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It would show the position and speed of the aircraft at the time when it was shot down. This would help to refute the RT/Kremlin propaganda that it was the Ukrainian government who shot it down, which is why Russia has illegally sequestered the black box.
    That stuff is pretty well known already. Independent bodies like the FlightRadar application, various ATC zones have all confirmed where it was, as, indeed, has the wreckage. The FDRs aren't going to be needed for that.

    What they may be useful for is showing what was being talked about on the radio in the minutes leading up to the event. There is still speculation and reports of other aircraft in the area. Communication in the cockpit may be able to help that story.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It would show the position and speed of the aircraft at the time when it was shot down. This would help to refute the RT/Kremlin propaganda that it was the Ukrainian government who shot it down, which is why Russia has illegally sequestered the black box.
    Russia is a permanent member of the UN, the UN is dealing with this issue therefore it is not illegal for Russia to request the black box. In my opinion.
    * I've read some articles and there is nothing in them about it being illegal for Russia to have to black box, of course concerns will always be raised but nothing illegal like you said.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LightBlueSoldier)
    People have already been quite rightly speculating that it was the Russian military. And to be honest the only thing the media has been doing has been wildly speculating about how the separatists did it.

    And yes it is a real motive. I think you are vastly overestimating the probability that we ever find out what really happened.

    I just think you seem incredibly biased in this. You've been brainwashed by the western media.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well the only people who have been shooting down planes in the area is the separatists, they are the only ones who have a non-tin foil hat conspiracy theory motive, it's looking incredibly likely that they have the weaponry required to shoot it down, so no it's not wild speculation. Instead it's by far the most likely explanation.

    I'm not biased, if someone presents a credible motive and credible evidence then I'll consider it, until then there is nothing to consider. You've been brainwashed by Russia Today.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Or the SPLA , or the French, , or Zimabwe who have a history of doing it, or Angola, Japan, A bunch of people in western Africa, Israel, Somalia, Tamils, Congo, oh, Israel have a history too, more Soviets, and Japan again, three lots by the soviets now, Pakistan, Bulgaria, the Dutch, China, Germany, Iraq (first successful landing without hydraulics in a modern plane, damn fine flying), Gerogia.

    I don't think you understood the argument. It was that it is possible that the Ukrainian "government" accidentally shot it down and not just the separatists. And just because you haven't done it before mean you never will, most of those cases are a first time for the belligerent.
    I'm fully aware of that, you've completely missed the point, I was simply pointing out that a case of Ukrainians shooting down a passenger jet years ago means very little. I think your post would be better directed at LightBlieSoldier.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Russia has illegally sequestered the black box.
    Be really careful with your judgements. It seems to me that you want to blame Russia for anything no matter what.

    Black boxes were supposed to be handed to Moscow not because Putin really wants to see them, but because the main office of Interstate Aviation Committee is situated there. Ukraine is one of this organization participants.

    Anyway Sergey Lavrov (Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs) has recently told that they don't want black boxes to stay in Russia and ready to hand them to international experts.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexKay99)
    Russia is a permanent member of the UN, the UN is dealing with this issue therefore it is not illegal for Russia to request the black box. In my opinion.
    The investigation of a crash in a country is usually lead by the organisation in that country with assistance from other countries as required, so as the crash occurred in Ukraine, to a Malaysian aircraft that originated from the Netherlands, the FDRs going to Russia is an unusual step.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    Well the only people who have been shooting down planes in the area is the separatists, they are the only ones who have a non-tin foil hat conspiracy theory motive, it's looking incredibly likely that they have the weaponry required to shoot it down, so no it's not wild speculation. Instead it's by far the most likely explanation.

    I'm not biased, if someone presents a credible motive and credible evidence then I'll consider it, until then there is nothing to consider. You've been brainwashed by Russia Today.



    I'm fully aware of that, you've completely missed the point, I was simply pointing out that a case of Ukrainians shooting down a passenger jet years ago means very little. I think your post would be better directed at LightBlieSoldier.
    But Iran Air Flight 655 wasn't shot down by Ukraine, it was the Americans, so you clearly didn't look at the referred to incident and therefore completely missed the point.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    The investigation of a crash in a country is usually lead by the organisation in that country with assistance from other countries as required, so as the crash occurred in Ukraine, to a Malaysian aircraft that originated from the Netherlands, the FDRs going to Russia is an unusual step.
    Unusual maybe, but not illegal. Firstly Ukraine is basically at war and the FDR's can't stay there. I will say again, this case has been handed to the UN to resolve therefore in this instance it may not be as unusual as many may think also given that Russia is one of the 'founders' of the UN. (24 Oct 1945)
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexKay99)
    Russia is a permanent member of the UN, the UN is dealing with this issue therefore it is not illegal for Russia to request the black box. In my opinion.
    * I've read some articles and there is nothing in them about it being illegal for Russia to have to black box, of course concerns will always be raised but nothing illegal like you said.
    It's an unorthodox move, and given the debated legality of the separatist movement (and the "government" in Ukraine for that matter) any legal issues can kinda be disregarded. However, the investigation is not UN business, it is the business of the local Air Crash Investigation organisation and anybody they are willing to let in. The Dutch can reasonably get involved since it came from the Netherlands, the Malaysians because it was a Malasian carrier, and the Americans insist on getting involved because it was a US plane. The UN have nothing to do with it. There also aren't mean "non-permanent" members of the Un, the security council is a different thing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The airspace in which the accident took place instigates the investigation and commences the search, other nations may assist in the search if they wish and are invited to be the state of occurrence. The state in which the aircraft is registered must be informed and must also be invited to participate in the investigation.(International Air Law ICAO, annex 13) Obviously in this case some tension exists as to who is in charge of this particular piece of airspace!

    It was deeply unfortunate that any civilian aircraft was under threat. Even more so that it happened to be Malaysian Airlines, on a fully serviceable Boeing 777, which, in this case just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (or the right place at the right time!). Civilian aviation must never become involved in conflict.

    I hope that investigators will be allowed to do their job and not be obstructed in any way by the complicated politics of the area (which I won't pretend to understand). However if history repeats itself this looks unlikely.

    RIP to all those involved in the accident.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I knew after the BRICS summit the US would need some kind of false flag to ramp up conventional military intervention. Since the sanctions pretty much weren't working (they were sanctioning themselves in the long run).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexKay99)
    Unusual maybe, but not illegal. Firstly Ukraine is basically at war and the FDR's can't stay there. I will say again, this case has been handed to the UN to resolve therefore in this instance it may not be as unusual as many may think also given that Russia is one of the 'founders' of the UN. (24 Oct 1945)
    The UNSC hasn't even discussed this yet, it's the OSCE that are currently doing most of the investigating, along with Malaysian officials.


    Whether or not someone is a founder member of the UN is completely irrelevant to their stature within the UN and you are confusing the UN and the UNSC.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It's an unorthodox move, and given the debated legality of the separatist movement (and the "government" in Ukraine for that matter) any legal issues can kinda be disregarded. However, the investigation is not UN business, it is the business of the local Air Crash Investigation organisation and anybody they are willing to let in. The Dutch can reasonably get involved since it came from the Netherlands, the Malaysians because it was a Malasian carrier, and the Americans insist on getting involved because it was a US plane. The UN have nothing to do with it. There also aren't mean "non-permanent" members of the Un, the security council is a different thing.
    I understand your point, in most instances you'd be correct but in this case the UN has called for a global inquiry amid demands for an independent investigation;
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...nto-mh17-crash
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexKay99)
    I understand your point, in most instances you'd be correct but in this case the UN has called for a global inquiry amid demands for an independent investigation;
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...nto-mh17-crash
    Saying that there "needs to be an inquiry" is categorically and very obviously not the same thing as running that inquiry.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    The UNSC hasn't even discussed this yet, it's the OSCE that are currently doing most of the investigating, along with Malaysian officials.


    Whether or not someone is a founder member of the UN is completely irrelevant to their stature within the UN and you are confusing the UN and the UNSC.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...nto-mh17-crash
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Saying that there "needs to be an inquiry" is categorically and very obviously not the same thing as running that inquiry.
    Already answered you. Asking for an inquiry does not mean they are running one. The UNSC hasn't even met yet. You are confusing things.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Saying that there "needs to be an inquiry" is categorically and very obviously not the same thing as running that inquiry.
    Just yesterday on Sky News I heard the foreign secretary say something along the lines of we are happy to allow the UN to investigate this and that it is investigating it already.
    Please find me some evidence if I'm totally wrong but the UN will take over sooner or later.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexKay99)
    Just today yesterday on Sky News I heard the foreign secretary say something along the lines of we are happy to allow the UN to investigate this and that it is investigating it already.
    Please find me some evidence if I'm totally wrong but the UN will take over sooner of later.
    "something along the lines of"... devastatingly accurate reporting there.

    You are saying something has happened or is happening that has not yet been discussed. And no, I don't believe the UN will get involved, it's got no reason to. There are many far better qualified organisations - like the ones that actually regularly investigate plane crashes - that are far better suited to something like this and fully capable of operating independently - which is all the UN wants.

    The various members of the UNSC are simply saying they want an independent investigation to happen. They are not saying they are running one, they are not saying they will run one.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I can't be bothered with the last 20 pages. Has anyone blamed Israel and the CIA yet?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.