Claim: MH17 was shot down by separatists using BUK stolen from Ukraine army

[mvdb22]

German magazine Der Spiegel revealed at October 19 that German Secret service BND has evidence that separatists downed MH17 using a BUK stolen from Ukraine army. The evidence was presented to a limited group of German parliament members at October 8.

Gerhard Schindler, president of the BND, told a secret parliamentary committee on security affairs earlier this month that separatists had used a Russian Buk missile defense system from a Ukrainian base to fire a rocket that exploded directly next to the Malyasia Air plane, Der Spiegel reported.

"It was pro-Russian separatists," the magazine quoted him as saying.

The BND concluded the rebels were to blame after a detailed analysis based on satellite and other photos,

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-ge...ger-plane-crash-spiegel-2014-10#ixzz3GfzAjMrg

The evidence presented by BND has not been not made public. So how likely is this statement of BND?
As far as I know:

-the separatists claimed on Twitter they stole a BUK from Ukraine. There was an Ukraine army base just North of the Donestsk airport with BUKs stationed. A photo of a BUK was added to that Tweet
-the separatists posted a video showing a discussion of people talking about a BUK and having it repaired
-the separatists bragged about downing an aircraft at July 27. When they found out it was MH17 the post on vKontakte was deleted
-a telephone conversation between two separatists was captured by Ukraine secret service.
-there are photos showing a BUK on a red trailer with a white Volvo truck. The truck and trailer were stolen in Donetsk according the owner of the truck.
-this same trailer was seen multiple times carrying other vehicles. Recently seeing carrying a tank.
-a BUK was photographed next to the headquarters of the separatists in Snizhne.
- Ukraine rebel commander Alexander Khodakovsky of the Vostok battalion, acknowledges fighters had BUK missile (Reuters). The next day he denied he spoke about BUK in the interview and had audio tapes to prove it (Russia Today). However, Reuters published the audio tapes. See and hear it here.

Ukraine@war blog published a blog debunking the possibility that a BUK was captured from Ukraine Army http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/2014/10/google-earth-shows-russia-used-photos.html

Then there is the story published at Bellingcat about a Russian BUK. A photo taken at Donetsk of a BUK has matches (same dent, same place for white paint) with a BUK previously seen in Russia on its way to the Ukraine border.

 

[triumph61]

Schindler told the 9 Members of the "Deutsche Bundestag" some things. What he told exactly is not known yet. One Person of the nine has told "the Spiegel" about the briefing. It could be Hans-Christian Ströbele, he is known as one who claims often Details of Briefings. He is also known as a near Pro Russian. But this is Spekulation.
That what The Spiegel postet was not an offical Statement of the German BND.
The Captured Military Base was not in the North of the Airport, is was nearby the Airport in the South, Namend as A1402.
The Base in the North, A1428 was not captured.

 

[Rob]

For starters, there is no public BND report. Nothing that you or me can look at read and verify.

At this time, BND reports only via PKGr, a committee of politicians (one from each party).

Here is an Interview with Armin Schuster, PKGr member for CDU who was also at BND briefings :

http://www.mdr.de/mediathek/ra...

He calls the Spiegel statements "Geschwätz" (nonsense) and emphasizes that it is based on "nicht gesicherten erkenntnisse" (evidence is inconclusive).

As to why one of the 8 member committee made such definitive statements as we find in Der Spiegel, he shares some suspicions, but suggests that it was probably based on mis-interpretation of what BND states.

What are we mortals to make of all this ?

The Dutch blogger gives a pretty clearheaded summary of all this confusion :

http://georgeknightlang.wordpr...

Personally, I would not take any of these words from any politician at face value, especially not if that politician anonymously reports his interpretation of BND words via the media.

As a result of this political hoopla, all the media got what they wanted.
RT is happy that to report that
"Germany's intel agency says MH17 downed by Ukraine militia"
and
"Aussie PM owes Putin an apology over MH17blame game"

and western media are happy to pint that
"German intelligence report blames pro-Russian rebels for MH17 crash"
and
"Germany intelligence service concludes pro-Russian rebels downed ..."

Everybody happy, and no evidence was presented.

Meanwhile, the evidence that we DO have (such as presented by the ukraine@war)
http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/2014/10/google-earth-shows-russia-used-photos.html
suggest that rebels never captured any BUK from any Ukrainian army base,

and the Bellingcat link

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-...ia-controlled-by-russian-troops/#comment-1945

suggests that the BUK photographed in Donetsk on July 17 was spotted in Starry Oskol, Russia, as part of a convoy from the 53rd BUK brigade in Kursk.

And that all still stands..

 

[TEEJ]

Latest from Bellingcat

Origin of the Separatists' Buk: A Bellingcat Investigation

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-...e-separatists-buk-a-bellingcat-investigation/

https://www.bellingcat.com/wp-conte...paratists-Buk-A-Bellingcat-Investigation1.pdf

 

[David Coulter]

Latest from Bellingcat

Origin of the Separatists' Buk: A Bellingcat Investigation

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-...e-separatists-buk-a-bellingcat-investigation/

https://www.bellingcat.com/wp-conte...paratists-Buk-A-Bellingcat-Investigation1.pdf

The skirt damage fingerprint analysis is brilliant. I do spectroscopic analysis and that kind of a pattern match is compelling, no way it could be a random match. Would have been helpful if they had provided the Pearson's correlation coefficient, but I suspect from visual comparison it would have been over 0.95.

The OT part of this post - no need to reply to this.......

Sadly I doubt much will come of any of this. Europe will likely abandon Ukraine in the interest of the regional status quo. Putinism style "elected dictatorship" is now pretty much accepted as stronger than all the western powers combined. A recent NYT article noted that Hungary is moving toward the Putin view of governance:

Now, as the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall is commemorated Sunday, Hungary is a member of NATO and the European Union and Mr. Orban is in his third term as prime minister. But what was once a journey that might have embodied the triumph of democratic capitalism has evolved into a much more complex tale of a country and a leader who in the time since have come to question Western values, foment nationalism and look more openly at Russia as a model.

After leading his right-wing party to a series of national and local election victories, Mr. Orban is rapidly centralizing power, raising a crop of crony oligarchs, cracking down on dissent, expanding ties with Moscow and generally drawing uneasy comparisons from Western leaders and internal opponents to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/w...years-after-fall-of-the-berlin-wall.html?_r=0

 

[NAISAIAH]

Isnt the whole convoy mentioned in one of the link necessary to make this BUK Rocket Platfrom work in the first place? So didnt have the separatists to capture the whole convoy, or at least 2 mobile radar platforms to be able to shoot a BUK on a plane? On all photos and articles its only this BUK Rocket Platform to see and mentioned and its seems logical it should be a convoy. Am sorry english is not my native language and i ve overread,missed or mussunderstand some text.

 

[Pete Tar]

I think it can be operated without the other units, but it's perhaps not a good idea to, because you might not be able to distinguish a civilian target from a military one.

 

[David Coulter]

Isnt the whole convoy mentioned in one of the link necessary to make this BUK Rocket Platfrom work in the first place? So didnt have the separatists to capture the whole convoy, or at least 2 mobile radar platforms to be able to shoot a BUK on a plane? On all photos and articles its only this BUK Rocket Platform to see and mentioned and its seems logical it should be a convoy. Am sorry english is not my native language and i ve overread,missed or mussunderstand some text.

The point of the Bellingcat report is to show evidence that the launcher was provided by Russia to the separatists. Not captured but supplied by Russia.

 

[NAISAIAH]

Thank you,I see.

Anyways so far as i ve read about the technical side of this BUK its worthless without any radar guidence system since its radar guided.

 

[Ray Von Geezer]

Thank you,I see.

Anyways so far as i ve read about the technical side of this BUK its worthless without any radar guidence system since its radar guided.

The TELAR unit identified in some of the pictures is a missile launcher with its own on-board RADAR and is capable of operating independently of the other units.

Ray Von

 

[David Coulter]

The TELAR unit identified in some of the pictures is a missile launcher with its own on-board RADAR and is capable of operating independently of the other units.

Ray Von

I have seen the same information in discussions and on Wikipedia. Capable of identifying a target, tracking, and launching stand alone. But since not connected into a command and control network, incapable of IFF, or differentiating a scheduled commercial airliner from a military aircraft. That could have easily been done with FlightRadar24 on an iPhone.

Still seems like a trigger happy Cossack with a new toy to me - particularly since the Bellingcat report has the BUK arriving within hours before it was used. And being immediately recalled to Russia when the mistaken identity became obvious.

 

[Ray Von Geezer]

I have seen the same information in discussions and on Wikipedia. Capable of identifying a target, tracking, and launching stand alone. But since not connected into a command and control network, incapable of IFF, or differentiating a scheduled commercial airliner from a military aircraft. That could have easily been done with FlightRadar24 on an iPhone.

There's some good info on how the TELAR performs independently on Military Today.

That page does say that it has an IFF system, but from information I saw posted elsewhere its IFF is a version only used by the military and only capable of identifying friendly military planes, so wouldn't allow the operator to differentiate between an enemy aircraft and a neutral/friendly civilian one.

Unfortunately I can't find the link for the IFF specs - Google is now stuffed with results for BUK specs and I only found the MT link again because I posted it here previously.

If the IFF information was correct, then I could see how the system could actually have contributed to MH17 being accidentally targeted. A poorly trained or inexperienced operator could have been unaware that IFF would only be effective in a warzone closed to civilian air traffic.

Ray Von

 

[MikeC]

The relationship between Buk's various radars is summarized in this Global Security page. Note that the Global Security site limits your views unless you've a paid membership, so I'll quote eth relevant bits for ease of access:

The SNOW DRIFT warning and acquisition radar provides target height, bearing and range data. The SNOW DRIFT receives early warning from brigade-level surveillance radars such as the SPOON REST. The SNOW DRIFT has a detection range of 85 km against high-flying targets, 35 km against targets at an altitude of 100 meters, and 23 km against targets flying nap-of-the-earth (NOE). The radar's tracking range extending from 70 km for high-flying targets to 20 km for NOE targets. Tracking of helicopters hovering at 30 m can be made as far as 10 km.

Once a target is identified it is turned over to an TELAR via a data link for tracking and attack. The H/I-band FIRE DOME monopulse guidance and tracking engagement radar has an effective guidance range of 3-32 km and an altitude envelope 15 meters to 22 km, and can engage approaching targets moving at a maximum of 3000 km/h (1860 mph). The radar guides as many as three missiles against a single target.

I'm sure I've seen other info about it to that I've mentioned on here - I'll spend some time looking it up.

 

[NAISAIAH]

The TELAR unit identified in some of the pictures is a missile launcher with its own on-board RADAR and is capable of operating independently of the other units.

Ray Von

Thanks again, so BUK is the whole system and TELAR is the sort of launcher? And how realistic is it that separatists using a divice on which they never had training on? i mean it seems to be something else reading a manual of a microwave and use it as intended rather than operating such a high tech device like this BUK/TELAR.

 

[TEEJ]

Thanks again, so BUK is the whole system and TELAR is the sort of launcher? And how realistic is it that separatists using a divice on which they never had training on? i mean it seems to be something else reading a manual of a microwave and use it as intended rather than operating such a high tech device like this BUK/TELAR.

The separatists are a varied bunch. Remember that some Ukrainian units went over to the separatist side and the ranks are swelled with people with relevant military experience. That experience will obviously extend to the Buk systems operated by Soviet/Russian/Ukrainians for decades. Think how many conscripts, reservists etc that have been trained on such air defence systems? Look at the success that the separatists had using shoulder launched short range man portable air defence systems (MANPADS) against Ukrainian aircraft? The relevant experience is there all they needed was to obtain Buk or repair what they had captured. Some of the separatist leaders have also admitted that military training camps were set up in southern Russia. They boasted about this before the separatist offensive earlier this year.

To counter Ukrainian air power effectively the separatists obviously required a longer range system and the Buk fitted in nicely. The Soviets designed redundancy into such systems and the TELAR (Transport Erector Launcher) can be used on its own but obviously with limitations compared to the full system. The TELAR along with the built in fire control radar also has optical TV tracker and laser rangefinder.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html

How easy is the Buk system to operate? See following from serving/retired Royal Air Force serviceman with hands on experience.

Having operated and maintained Russian SAM systems, I can guarantee that if you just want to shot down an aircraft at high altitude with any of their high end systems without worrying about what you are shooting at in a non ECM environment they are very easy pieces of equipment to operate. The Buk is not a new piece of kit (its been kicking around for 30 years) and was widely used by the Soviet Union before 1991 and in Russia and Ukraine afterwards. The system were designed to be operated by conscripted / reservist crews and thus are fitted with a high level of automation (to shot anything down with one of these systems all you have to do is get the system's tracking radar 'on target' and press the fire button as soon as a 'Target in engagement zone' indication comes up and the system will do everything else. While the equipment was also designed for rapid replacement of defective equipment which is very modular in nature and like most Russian equipment is built like a brick sh!thouse. Due to the fact that it was operated by conscripts for best part of 30 years, there will be a sizable pool of people in eastern Ukraine (rebels) who will be able to operate it and most likely a number of ex warrant officers or extended servicemen who where the personnel would normally fixed the things who would be able to maintain it. The main question I would ask is where did the missile system come from! Was it taken across the Russian border by the Russians (or from the Crimea) or was it captured by the rebels from Ukraine stocks in the disputed region. There is footage on the internet of the shootdown, the footage looks genuine and shows the aircraft just after missile impact, there is the smoke cloud from the warhead detonation and the aircraft which looks like a 777 is descending with the inboard section of the starboard wing from the fuselage to the engine and starboard engine on fire.

From

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-15.html#post8568887

Reply to individual that posted in response.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-19.html#post8569439

The poster on PPRuNEs knowledge is from such units as Royal Air Force Spadeadam in the UK where examples of Soviet/Russian air defence systems are operated for threat training purposes.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafspadeadam/aboutus/aircraft.cfm

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafspadeadam/

 

[NAISAIAH]

The separatists are a varied bunch. Remember that some Ukrainian units went over to the separatist side and the ranks are swelled with people with relevant military experience. That experience will obviously extend to the Buk systems operated by Soviet/Russian/Ukrainians for decades. Think how many conscripts, reservists etc that have been trained on such air defence systems? Look at the success that the separatists had using shoulder launched short range man portable air defence systems (MANPADS) against Ukrainian aircraft? The relevant experience is there all they needed was to obtain Buk or repair what they had captured. Some of the separatist leaders have also admitted that military training camps were set up in southern Russia. They boasted about this before the separatist offensive earlier this year.

To counter Ukrainian air power effectively the separatists obviously required a longer range system and the Buk fitted in nicely. The Soviets designed redundancy into such systems and the TELAR (Transport Erector Launcher) can be used on its own but obviously with limitations compared to the full system. The TELAR along with the built in fire control radar also has optical TV tracker and laser rangefinder.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html

How easy is the Buk system to operate? See following from serving/retired Royal Air Force serviceman with hands on experience.

Having operated and maintained Russian SAM systems, I can guarantee that if you just want to shot down an aircraft at high altitude with any of their high end systems without worrying about what you are shooting at in a non ECM environment they are very easy pieces of equipment to operate. The Buk is not a new piece of kit (its been kicking around for 30 years) and was widely used by the Soviet Union before 1991 and in Russia and Ukraine afterwards. The system were designed to be operated by conscripted / reservist crews and thus are fitted with a high level of automation (to shot anything down with one of these systems all you have to do is get the system's tracking radar 'on target' and press the fire button as soon as a 'Target in engagement zone' indication comes up and the system will do everything else. While the equipment was also designed for rapid replacement of defective equipment which is very modular in nature and like most Russian equipment is built like a brick sh!thouse. Due to the fact that it was operated by conscripts for best part of 30 years, there will be a sizable pool of people in eastern Ukraine (rebels) who will be able to operate it and most likely a number of ex warrant officers or extended servicemen who where the personnel would normally fixed the things who would be able to maintain it. The main question I would ask is where did the missile system come from! Was it taken across the Russian border by the Russians (or from the Crimea) or was it captured by the rebels from Ukraine stocks in the disputed region. There is footage on the internet of the shootdown, the footage looks genuine and shows the aircraft just after missile impact, there is the smoke cloud from the warhead detonation and the aircraft which looks like a 777 is descending with the inboard section of the starboard wing from the fuselage to the engine and starboard engine on fire.

From

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-15.html#post8568887

Reply to individual that posted in response.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-19.html#post8569439

The poster on PPRuNEs knowledge is from such units as Royal Air Force Spadeadam in the UK where examples of Soviet/Russian air defence systems are operated for threat training purposes.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafspadeadam/aboutus/aircraft.cfm

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafspadeadam/

Thank you very much. I ve read the main post but have to go through the links aswell later. But to this time i m about to say its possible the separatists have been provided the BUK from russia directly but on the other hand im thinking this whole incedent smells fishy. The scenario in my head so far can get to the point in which the separatists shoot it down by accident since they allready shoot down another military plane this day so far i ve read. But this raises another question for me: What did this civilian airplane have to do in this area? I ve read it left its predefined route for a unknown reason into this area.
Its also hard for me to believe that the AVACS and sattelites from the western/US cant show the real tragedy and i wonder why they re not showing us. To blame putin after just a few hours allready and in our media in germany its had been biased news all day long it was putin without any proves. This reminded me in 9.11 and this WMD topics earlyer which is the reason i am very sceptical about claims coming from USA. Dont get me wrong, im not a America hater, i like the people everywhere on earth and i am multiculti so to speak but about politics and global interrests of this country i am very uncomfortable. Anyways, my thoughts are with the victims aswell thier familys and i feel not good speculating like this but the situation now and in the past showed me we never should stop questioning.

I ll get back to this later when have more time to check the links aswell. One more question about the crash site: How come almost all passport looked like print fresh, some have holes which will prevent any owner of such a passport boarding any machiene at the airport and how come most of this dead people looked like asians if it was mainly netherlands, how come there are way less children found than statet in the news (half full of children) and how come in the luggage were mostly clothing for summer when it was going to a colder country? Mebe it doesnt fit on this topic but its all glued together somehow.

 

[Pete Tar]

Check the subforum for other threads related to your questions.

 

[william wiley]

suggests that the BUK photographed in Donetsk on July 17 was spotted in Starry Oskol, Russia, as part of a convoy from the 53rd BUK brigade in Kursk.

And that all still stands..

How did you verify that image is from July 17 2014?

 

[william wiley]

Does anyone on this forum believe any of the "bellingcat" photos or videos are from July 17 2014?

 

[Pete Tar]

Is there any reason you can demonstrate that they shouldn't?

 

[MikeC]

They are certainly more convincing than any other analysis I've seen, so count me in.

 

[Whitebeard]

no reason to not to

 

[william wiley]

Is there any reason you can demonstrate that they shouldn't?

Yes...no one should blindly believe they are from July 17 2014 unless there is supporting evidence.
As it is we have no originals, we don't know who took them (buk photos that is), and most of them come via the SBU. The Donetsk "photo" may be from the SBU too.

no reason to not to

That same argument can apply to many many dates. So that being the case there is no reason to place them on July 17 2014 as opposed to the many other days they could be taken. Assuming they aren't photoshopped that is

 

[Pete Tar]

Well make that case in the thread on it then.
https://www.metabunk.org/bellingcat...used-in-russian-claims-against-ukraine.t6338/

 

[william wiley]

Yes...no one should blindly believe they are from July 17 2014 unless there is supporting evidence

Well make that case in the thread on it then.
https://www.metabunk.org/bellingcat...used-in-russian-claims-against-ukraine.t6338/

That thread doesn't seem appropriate as it's about the satellite images. I'm really talking about the images they use from social media or the "Paris Match" photo or the similar one from der spiegel.
These photos are asserted to be from or around July 17, though there is not any evidence they are.
Bellingcat has repeatedly dodged having to justify their assertion so as Rob asserted it here I wondered if he had some evidence WRT to Donetsk photo, but apparently not

 

[MikeC]

But there is evidence they are from that date - the statements from the various places that have published them. That is not "gold standard" evidence - but it does exist, and "just asking questions" is also not evidence.

In the absence of any evidence AT ALL that those statements are false, they can be accepted as true, with the caveat that there may be evidence that they are not but it hasn't surfaced yet.

 

[william wiley]

But there is evidence they are from that date - the statements from the various places that have published them. That is not "gold standard" evidence - but it does exist, and "just asking questions" is also not evidence.
In the absence of any evidence AT ALL that those statements are false, they can be accepted as true, with the caveat that there may be evidence that they are not but it hasn't surfaced yet.

So what is the "statement" with respect to any of these photos. and who made the statement?
What is this evidence?
I've been through the subforum here but don't recall seeing any evidence, only assertions such as Rob's which he did not back up.

 

[MikeC]

go to the source - it's public and there a multiple links here on Metabunk

 

[william wiley]

go to the source - it's public and there a multiple links here on Metabunk

None of the sources of any of the photos are known. Most were provided by the SBU and asserted to be from July 17. The Paris Match photo has never been sourced , of the similar one appearing in Der Spiegel

 

[MikeC]

Then you have a problem....but I don't have your problem.

 

[william wiley]

Then you have a problem....but I don't have your problem.

Rob has a problem as he made the claim. And Bellingcat has a problem

 

[MikeC]

Nope - the info that supports their claims is there - you just don't acknowledge it.

 

[Mick West]

This thread seems to have drifted into multiple topics. I'd suggest people check out the posting guidelines and start individual threads. Threads that starts with a focussed collation of an existing thread that debunks a specific claim of evidence are also useful. Threads that try to argue for a particular complex theory are not.


https://www.metabunk.org/threads/posting-guidelines.2064/