Claim BUK launcher trucked out of Ukraine

[Jason]

This is allegedly a photo from Gerashchenko's facebook page showing the contrail from the Buk Missile System that was used to shoot down Mh-17. He goes on to accuse Putin that he will not get away with it.

Gerashchenko also continued to accuse Russian president Vladimir Putin of helping the "terrorists" who shot down the plane in his Facebook post.

Anton Gerashchenko

Putin! You and your cronies can not escape international tribunal! This photo contrail left after launch missiles SAM "Buk." Made a few minutes after the rocket launch of three neighborhood Torez city from west to east.Thousands of people saw the launch and flight of the missile, which you kindly gave her the sponsored terrorists!.

He also goes on to say;

Facebook post, Anton Gerashchenko, a senior advisor to the Ukrainian government, wrote: "The Buk installation by means of which the rocket launch was produced was moved onto the territory of the Russian Federation, where it will be most likely destroyed."

 

[jonnyH]

Please keep on topic. The topic is the evidence of a Buk launcher being used to bring down the plane, and then removed from the area.

I think what I am clumsily trying to suggest is that since the trailer seems to be easily identifiable as the property of the Russian military it would make sense that it was headed back to Russia. I can't imagine they want to be caught with any of their assets the wrong side of the border at this stage.

 

[Mick West]

This photo:

Is listed in the daily mail article as being Torez, but looks more like this road from Snizhne (Google Earth viewpoint attached)

So would be heading towards the border crossing 10 miles south of there (14 miles, 24 km by road), near Repyakhovatyy

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Snizhne, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine/Repyakhovatyy, Rostovskaya oblast', Russia/@47.9123467,38.8692437,12z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x40e0527fe326ac47:0xa186a4453c6414ce!2m2!1d38.765611!2d48.028278!1m5!1m1!1s0x40e1a87bae687587:0x58d358c62ae6028!2m2!1d38.8665098!2d47.8486798

Better pic from the video:

 

[Mick West]

I think what I am clumsily trying to suggest is that since the trailer seems to be easily identifiable as the property of the Russian military it would make sense that it was headed back to Russia. I can't imagine they want to be caught with any of their assets the wrong side of the border at this stage.

I agree. (the "off topic" warning was not aimed at you, but at the two posts I had deleted).

 

[Jason]

But how do we know we are talking about the same piece of hardware since some of the photos show the Buk missile system on the back of a flatbed, and others show it driving down the street without the flatbed truck.
These are with the flatbed.

And this one is without the flatbed truck. below

 

[Jason]

Is there a way to identify where this photo is from because it might lead to the exact location from where the missile was fired from since Ukranians are claiming this is the contrail from the buk missile, which could in turn give us a better idea of which roads the Buk missile system would've had to follow to get back to Russia, to see if the roads you suggested above make sense in this photo

 

[Efftup]

It might well be that the separatists had more than one Buk available to them and are moving them ALL to try and show they didn't have any.

 

[Jason]

Anders Frick (frick) on twitter is reporting that this photo is buk traveling TOO its launch site, not from the launch site.
Retweeted by Anders Frick
djp3tros @djp3tros · Jul 17
Video geolocated of #Russian BUK that brought down #MH17 driving to it's launch location. http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/2014/07/russia-shoots-down-malaysian-mh17.html… pic.twitter.com/Uz38yGPwGV

 

[Mick West]

But how do we know we are talking about the same piece of hardware since some of the photos show the Buk missile system on the back of a flatbed, and others show it driving down the street without the flatbed truck.

According to the Ukranians, there were multiple launchers that were removed:
http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article?art_id=129116&cat_id=35317

The Security Service of Ukraine has compelling evidence that a Boeing 777 aircraft was shot down with the use of Buk anti-missile system which together with a crew had been transferred from Russia to Ukraine, the Head of the SSU Department Vitalii Naida informed during the briefing at the Crisis Media Center.

'The SSU conducts investigative actions and receives irrefutable evidence that Russian citizens were involved in the act of terrorism,' – Naida said. He assured the evidence had been already forwarded to all the Service's international partners. The SSU directly cooperates with the Dutch police and law enforcers from other states whose citizens became victims of the 17 July terrorist act.

The SSU senior officer showed journalists photos of a Buk launcher on one of the streets in the town of Torez, and photos of a convoy transporting the launcher across Donetsk region.

In addition, a photo was released taken at the moment of a missile launch near Torez towards the village of Snizhne. It distinctly depicts contrail of the missile that shot down the Boeing 777 with civilians aboard. Vitalii Naida emphasized that the Service had identified a launch point in the district controlled by terrorists and Russian military.

The SSU representative informed as well that the Russian side ordered terrorists to withdraw Buk launchers from Ukraine.

At 2:00, July 18, two movers each with a Buk missile launcher crossed the Russian border in Luhansk region. At 4:00, another three movers: one of them empty, other carrying a launcher with four missiles and the latter allegedly with a control unit, crossed the state border.

He stressed that Russia attempted to suppress evidence of its involvement in the terrorist act.

 

[David Coulter]

Worth noting this is near the Ukrainian border, but this would be under Ukrainian government control (Kharkiv area). I doubt they'd be amenable to a border crossing... If it came from Donetsk then it's a very weird route to take.

From the video (and above analysis) it is clear that military equipment with Russian plates was being moved around in a hurry covered with tarpaulins. The sky/lighting seems to match the time stamp at that latitude (pinkish sky near civil twilight and fair weather cumulus is typical of Europe this time of year). Perhaps they were large artistic works being moved from eastern Ukraine only to be revealed in Moscow that matched the shape and size of BUK's? I think Putin is a bit naive concerning the situation in eastern Ukraine and social media in general in that there are a lot of people with smart phones that can upload images and videos that make his protestations of innocence look pretty lame to the rest of the world.

 

[Pete Tar]

What aerial surveillance of the area is likely to going on right now by US/NATO/Ukraine, and will it be able to pick up truck movements? Could they have high flying drones, would a drone see enough detail at or above 30000 feet? Would the US have military satellites scanning the area right now and wouldn't any destruction of a missile launcher be observable from the air or orbit?

 

[Mick West]

What aerial surveillance of the area is likely to going on right now by US/NATO/Ukraine, and will it be able to pick up truck movements? Could they have high flying drones, would a drone see enough detail at or above 30000 feet? Would the US have military satellites scanning the area right now and wouldn't any destruction of a missile launcher be observable from the air or orbit?

Given it's a bit of a hotspot, I think it is likely that the US must have some assets focussed on the area.

High resolution satellites are in low earth orbit, and so can only take images when they happen to pass over a region. Drones or spy planes could easily see trucks - but you've got to know where to look. And the weather might not allow this. You can just move things out under clouds, or at night.

So they can probably detect when something has moved (if they knew where to look), but not always follow where it moves to.

 

[Pete Tar]

Are their laws saying they aren't allowed to look at anything over Russia? Would they avoid using evidence gathered that way because it shows they were over their airspace and would be an act of hostility?

 

[Mick West]

Are their laws saying they aren't allowed to look at anything over Russia? Would they avoid using evidence gathered that way because it shows they were over their airspace and would be an act of hostility?

I think any law would be more about what areas they can fly over, not taking photos. Any country can restrict the airspace. But you could still take photos from just over the border.

 

[TEEJ]

A new claim has appeared in relation to the following video.

User claims, (s)he was able to unequivocally determine the place. Address: Krasnoarmeysk, Gorkovo 49 road, Donetsk Oblast.

http://en.eurasianunion.ch/2014/07/19/transport-of-buk-system-to-russia-filmed-really/

So far just the claim and no photographic proof. If the claim was true it should be something that is easily verifiable. Russia Today have been running the video on a regular basis so it would something that they would be eager to debunk. I've had a look on Google Maps but the Krasnoarmeysk area is not ground view covered.

 

[Mick West]

Text from that image is found here: 0https://www.facebook.com/KNNUK/posts/735639363159197

В украинских пабликах распространяется видео, где якобы ополченцы вывозят в сторону РФ стрелявший Бук. Но на видео город Красноармейск, виден бигборд с рекламой автосалона на Днепропетровской, 34. С 11 мая и до сих пор город под контролем войск хунты, проводящих АТО!
На Буке не хватает одной ракеты. На фото и видео с тягачом (тем же) есть магазин Стройдом. Адрес: Красноармейск, Горького 49. То есть стрелявший Бук находился на территории, подконтрольной хунте и до сих пор там. Какие вопросы? Все ясно как день - Боинг сбили украинские военные вот этим вот самым Буком, и теперь, чтобы просочившееся в сеть видео не стало компроматом они просто тупо валят все с больной головы на здоровую, типа это "ополченцы везут". Остаются верны своей брехливой натуре (одесситы сами себя сожгли, луганчане сами взорвали кондиционер, ДНР само стреляет по городам и так далее). Ублюдки

Google Translated:

In the Ukrainian public servers distributed video where militias allegedly trafficked to the side Russian gunman Beech. But the video Krasnoarmiysk city, visible billboard advertising dealership to Dnipropetrovsk, 34. May 11, and is still under the control of the city junta troops conducting ATO!
On Boquete lacks one rocket. Pictures and videos of the towing vehicle (the same) has a shop STROYDOM. Address: Krasnoarmiysk, Gorky 49. Beech That is the shooter was on the territory controlled by the junta and still there. What issues? All clear as day - Boeing Ukrainian military shot down here it's the most Buck, and now to the network leaked video was not compromising just stupid they are cutting all the blame on others, such as this "militia driven". Remain true to their nature brehlivoy (Odessites themselves burned themselves luganchane blew air conditioning, DNR shoots itself on cities and so on). bastards

 

[Jason]

Are their laws saying they aren't allowed to look at anything over Russia? Would they avoid using evidence gathered that way because it shows they were over their airspace and would be an act of hostility?

I doubt drones will be used since there are SAM in the area, satellites will be their best bet.

 

[Mick West]

I doubt drones will be used since there are SAM in the area, satellites will be their best bet.

Global Hawk drones fly at 60,000 feet, so SAM is less of an issue.

 

[Jason]

Global Hawk drones fly at 60,000 feet, so SAM is less of an issue.

In addition to the fact that there is a temporary cease fire for the humanitarian clean up

 

[Soulfly]

Global Hawk drones fly at 60,000 feet, so SAM is less of an issue.

The Buk has a height ceiling of 82,000 feet.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-18/did-a-missile-down-the-malaysian-jet-over-ukraine/5606156

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

Global Hawk drones fly at 60,000 feet, so SAM is less of an issue.

this SAM no, some other SAMs very much yeah, an U2 was shot down flying at 70K feet half a century ago, you can bet they have better SAMs now

 

[Stevan Gvozdenovic]

The Buk has a height ceiling of 82,000 feet.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-18/did-a-missile-down-the-malaysian-jet-over-ukraine/5606156

newer missile has, older missile has flight ceiling of around 50K feet

 

[Soulfly]

newer missile has, older missile has flight ceiling of around 50K feet

Okay, so the new ones can shoot down a global hawk.

 

[Jason]

It seems the daily mail is at it again. How do they keep getting all of these photos by the way. Ukranians are claiming this is proof the Russians did it. A russian blogger said the following;

'For two kilometres, a blogger from Russia has been driving behind covered BUK 1M which, according to his words, had been driving from the Ukrainian border. His opinion it that is exactly that BUK that made the shot,' said one version spreading on the web.

The driver is heard saying: 'No kidding.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...litary-truck-carrying-BUK-M1-border-town.html

Offending launcher? A driver filmed this BUK launcher on the back of a military track rumbling back across the Russian border on Saturday

Claims: Ukrainian officials have seized the footage and labelled it a 'film of the BUK M1 in Russia, the one that shot the Boeing'



'For two kilometres, a blogger from Russia has been driving behind covered BUK 1M which, according to his words, had been driving from the Ukrainian border. His opinion it that is exactly that BUK that made the shot,' said one version spreading on the web.

The driver is heard saying: 'No kidding.'

While the footage is visibly in Russia rather than Ukraine, the exact location is not given.

A second truck is also evident in some frames.

It was filmed at around 8.45pm on Saturday.

Reports from Ukraine suggested the BUK had been smuggled in the dead of night into Russia soon after the plane was blasted out of the sky on Thursday last week.

It came after images were released of a launcher rumbling through Torez, held by pro-Russian separatists, just two hours before the Malaysia Airlines flight was shot down.

In a tense phone call with Vladimir Putin, David Cameron said Russia would have to 'present compelling and credible

 

[Pete Tar]

Okay, so the new ones can shoot down a global hawk.

Still, doing so would almost be an admission of guilt. It's a game of bluff if they deploy one, it probably won't be shot down.

 

[Mick West]

It seems the daily mail is at it again. How do they keep getting all of these photos by the way.

They are from a video that was posted earlier.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claim-buk-launcher-trucked-out-of-ukraine.3977/#post-117075

 

[Pete Tar]

49 Horkoho road Krasnoarmejsk (address given in the link, not the translation that Mick posted)
Can't get a street view.
(horkoho seems to be google's spelling of gorkovo)

 

[Jason]

They are from a video that was posted earlier.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claim-buk-launcher-trucked-out-of-ukraine.3977/#post-117075

OT: thanks for moving my post, I just realized I was in the wrong thread before

 

[Joeybegood]

I have yet to see any hard evidence that this plane was "shot down" at all. The claim that it was shot down was made very early on (the same day it came down I think) and this was spread around the media etc. to the point that it is being taken as fact. Historically, many more commercial airliners have been destroyed via a bomb on the plane than shot down by a missile. Given this, I am surprised that so much stock is being placed in the missile claim.

 

[Soulfly]

I have yet to see any hard evidence that this plane was "shot down" at all. The claim that it was shot down was made very early on (the same day it came down I think) and this was spread around the media etc. to the point that it is being taken as fact. Historically, many more commercial airliners have been destroyed via a bomb on the plane than shot down by a missile. Given this, I am surprised that so much stock is being placed in the missile claim.

What sort of hard evidence do you require? What sort of evidence do you have to support that it was a bomb and not a missile?

 

[Bill]

this SAM no, some other SAMs very much yeah, an U2 was shot down flying at 70K feet half a century ago, you can bet they have better SAMs now

I have yet to see any hard evidence that this plane was "shot down" at all. The claim that it was shot down was made very early on (the same day it came down I think) and this was spread around the media etc. to the point that it is being taken as fact. Historically, many more commercial airliners have been destroyed via a bomb on the plane than shot down by a missile. Given this, I am surprised that so much stock is being placed in the missile claim.

None of the governments or militaries seem to be questioning the claim that the aircraft was shot down and no organization or government is taking credit for a bombing. What leads you believe that it was anything besides a civilian aircraft shot down by a SAM?

 

[Hevach]

I wonder what sort of access control systems a BUK has?
As an absolute minimum I would expect some kind of PIN or password would be required before you can operate the weapon. The last thing you want when your military hardware falls into enemy hands is for it to be used against you.
Pretty much every doomsday device in the movies has a "self destruct" button

The unfortunate thing is, once you have physical access, access control is useless.

Most systems have a built in way to reset or bypass controls, because incompetence happens and you don't want a ten million dollar piece of hardware to brick itself because the guy you assigned to run it had a few too many last night. Those light up street signs that people occasionally hack, for example, usually have either a backdoor password, or a set of jumpers on the circuit board that can be crossed to reset the password to the factory default. In normal operation, there's supposed to be people there who will notice a hacker disassembling part of the sign and stop him, but if the hacker has access without anyone to watch him, there's nothing to stop him.

Military hardware's more secure, but again, the best access control systems in the world are only meant to make it visibly obvious when somebody is trying to break in. If they have unmonitored access, they already have control.

As I've said before, a lot of ex-Ukraine and ex-Soviet military guys with the rebels, at least some of them probably used the system and would know how to do this. And since they captured the whole base, there was probably documentation around somewhere.

 

[David Coulter]

I have yet to see any hard evidence that this plane was "shot down" at all. The claim that it was shot down was made very early on (the same day it came down I think) and this was spread around the media etc. to the point that it is being taken as fact. Historically, many more commercial airliners have been destroyed via a bomb on the plane than shot down by a missile. Given this, I am surprised that so much stock is being placed in the missile claim.

Lots of circumstantial evidence (deleted social media "bragging" posts by the shooters, some shot as debris was still falling). Intercepted communications. Radar and heat plume tracking by the US. Eyewitness accounts from currently inaccessible people in eastern Ukraine and western Russia that are posting photos and videos. Photographic and video evidence of BUK systems being rapidly moved out of Ukraine and away from the Russian border. Attempts to restrict access for official investigators. Removal of bodies and physical evidence from the scene by rebels and possibly Russian operatives. As pointed out, no denials from any party that it was a missile (just lame claims by Russia that it was a Ukrainian air-to-air missile).

 

[Sgt.Tinfoil]

deleted social media "bragging" posts by the shooters, some shot as debris was still falling

I have been following this war for few weeks and _every_ day literaly some pro-separatists socialmedia/tweeters etc. have claimed to shoot something from the sky. For example I linked in another thread a video where supplies were dropped to Ukrainian army positions. Originally when I found the place I found the video they claimed that those are the crew of the plane which was just shot down.

But since you are claiming that "the shooters" did post something after the hit can you give some proof that it was actually them or not for example some over excited local who has twitter account seeing plane coming down and just making assumption that another Ukrainians Army plane coming down and tweeting so?

Intercepted communications.

The other argument is that the communication was altered from various other communications 0:33-1:09. (Note that this channel might be highly biased towards separatists. Might even be their "official" newschannel)

Eyewitness accounts from currently inaccessible people in eastern Ukraine and western Russia that are posting photos and videos.

In the early times of the cras the eye witnesses which I _read_ from different sites claimed that plane was followed by Ukrainian Army jets which according to them shot down the plane.

Photographic and video evidence of BUK systems being rapidly moved out of Ukraine and away from the Russian border.

To be honest I am not convinced with this. I am lacking evidence where the BUK system really was and where it was going.

Attempts to restrict access for official investigators

Agreed with this one. Then again in what excess this has been happened and what portions are true of the claims. For example there were reports how separatists shot at the investigators which turned out to be warning shot for the locals who tried to come too close to wreckage (probably looting). I would wait for investigators report before making too big claims.

Removal of bodies and physical evidence from the scene by rebels and possibly Russian operatives.

Don't know about this one. Honestly some claim that bodies were not removed thus showing what anmals Russians are because they leave bodies to be eaten by animals. Then again some people are complaining that they have moved the bodies. And what physical evidences are removed from wreckage and what is you base of claim of Russian operatives?

 

[Joeybegood]

(just lame claims by Russia that it was a Ukrainian air-to-air missile).

That's a value judgment right there. All other claims and 'evidence' could also be referred to as "lame claims by the Ukrainian and US governments". I don't view unverified Youtube videos as evidence of anything. The US claims of "heat plumes" etc. have yet to backed up by evidence (I'm sorry I'm not taking anyone's word in this situation given the vested interests involved). BUK systems being "rapidly moved out of Ukraine" is not proven either, and even if it is, it is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the plane was shot down given that it is a war zone and such movements are to be expected. Removal of evidence from the scene is normal after a plane crash, the rebels are, after all, in control of the area so that is their prerogative.

 

[Joeybegood]

What sort of evidence do you have to support that it was a bomb and not a missile?

I don't have any. My point is that from the very day of the crash, news media was already 'theorizing' that it was a missile. The idea has become all but established 'fact' now and yet there is no hard evidence. It is essentially a trial by media and the verdict is in it seems, at least as far as the public is concerned. That pretty irresponsible. Proper investigations into airplane crashes usually take months, and for good reason given the implications.

 

[Soulfly]

I don't have any. My point is that from the very day of the crash, news media was already 'theorizing' that it was a missile. The idea has become all but established 'fact' now and yet there is no hard evidence. It is essentially a trial by media and the verdict is in it seems, at least as far as the public is concerned. That pretty irresponsible. Proper investigations into airplane crashes usually take months, and for good reason given the implications.

What sort of hard evidence do you require?

 

[Sgt.Tinfoil]

What sort of hard evidence do you require?

Well the fragments and parts of misle in wreckage would be good hard evidence.

 

[David Coulter]

That's a value judgment right there. All other claims and 'evidence' could also be referred to as "lame claims by the Ukrainian and US governments". I don't view unverified Youtube videos as evidence of anything. The US claims of "heat plumes" etc. have yet to backed up by evidence (I'm sorry I'm not taking anyone's word in this situation given the vested interests involved). BUK systems being "rapidly moved out of Ukraine" is not proven either, and even if it is, it is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the plane was shot down given that it is a war zone and such movements are to be expected. Removal of evidence from the scene is normal after a plane crash, the rebels are, after all, in control of the area so that is their prerogative.

I am making a value judgement: the western authorities don't have a vested interested in covering up facts, the entities that "reportedly" shot down a civilian aircraft do have a vested interest in covering up facts. If you want to reserve judgement until all the results are released that is fine, but there will be some data that will not be released to the general public as the sources will be classified.

You should watch a few episodes of Aircrash Investigation (I think it is called "Mayday" in the US). Aircrash scenes are secured and all interested parties are allowed to investigate before aircraft parts are moved. International convention would have the US NTSB and Malaysian investigators on the ground immediately as the the aircraft was built in the US and operated by a Malaysian company. I wholeheartedly disagree that removal of aircraft parts is "their prerogative".

 

[David Coulter]

Apologies to the moderators. This is spinning off the thread's topic......