MH17: Russia Claims Ukranian military plane flying nearby before incident

Josh Heuer

Active Member
I pulled this part from the bbc's recent article on the rebels handing over the black boxes to Malaysian authorities:
(http://m.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28413467)
I noticed there was a topic discussing the BUK and it's (reasonably) likely involvement, but is there any way to verify or disprove this?

Basically, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing the BUK system to the attack, but there's nothing concrete (at this moment! Could change any time.) So shouldn't we investigate this claim?

Would a military plane be tracked by something that could verify if it was there or not? Or is this getting into classified info etc
 
Last edited:

MikeC

Closed Account
The claim seems to have originated from RT.Com ^-



What is interesting for me here is something we have seen elsewhere - a claim that military aircraft should not be using "a civil aviation corridor"......what next - perhaps het Ukrainians laced the air with something to destroy MH17....;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MikeC

Closed Account
Indeed - those are very obvious on airspace maps, and MH17 was above the restricted airspace that was current at the time, so was not in any military operational area.

Also note that the Su-25 has a service ceiling of 23,000 ft "clean", and the Russian report says it was "climbing" - so it wasn't even that high - MH17 was at 33,000 feet - that's not really "close by" in any aviation terms!!
 
well if it wasn't in a military operational area it wouldn't get hit no?! That area should be defined according to SAM limits not limits of ukrainian aircraft.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
It wasn't in a military operational area because it was above the safety area that HAD BEEN PROMULGATED.

Pretty much all airspace over Europe is within SAM range from somewhere - your point is just argumentative.
 
OK you got me wrong or vice versa, just wanted to point out that it was promulgated wrongly...

It is within SAM range but not active SAMs firing at military planes that move around that same area.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Yes there's now a suggestion from the Flight Safety Foundation to review the systems that control potentially risky airspace:

currently states (countries) have the authority to regulate airspace - in some cases they do this jointly, such as Europe. the suggestion here seems to be that the supra-national ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation - a branch of the UN) should possibly be able to over-rule states - something it cannot do now.

Cue conspiracy theories about the UN taking over the world.......
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
The presence of the Ukrainian military jet can be confirmed by video shots made by the Rostov monitoring center, Kartopolov stated.
Have they released those videos to the public then?

I thought perhaps this was third-party confirmation of the flights, but it's really mostly speculation. This person alleges all flights were 'escorted' through the airspace that day.
http://theaviationist.com/2014/07/21/su-27s-escorted-mh17/
Wouldn't other airliners be able to confirm this if it was true?
And he kind of contradicts himself by sayuing they were escorting all civilian flights that day, and the rebels saw an unexpected escort which made them think it was a high-value target.
Do the rebels even have radar screens?
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Apparently this picture was originally on the RT.com article as the radar picture "proof":



the contact that looks like "CNA351" is Cyrillic for SIA - Singapore Airlines flight 351 - a B777-200 (b772) at 35,000 ft (350)

However according to that post on ATS it has now been removed from the rt.com article

I am not sure what the "3416" contact is - but it is apparently at 40,000 ft (400)

I think the yellow lettering reads "A 360 P 0.000" - where I think the "P" is a Cyrillic letter that translates to "r" in English.
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
Russia has specifically denied supplying a BUK system, and also called on the US to provide photographic proof of a BUK system being used. They also pointed out that Ukraine denied having military aircraft in the region, and purport to show proof that this was false.
Russia's claims of the Ukraine having military aircraft in the air coincides with the claims of purported Air Traffic Controller @spainbuca as follows:
I have no idea whether this @spainbuca fellow was indeed in the tower, but found it interesting to see his twitter evidence confirmed by radar evidence presented by a military superpower. Perhaps the rest of his tweets deserve another look.
 
Last edited:

MikeC

Closed Account
I simply don't believe Russian statements any more - they have been caught lying way too often about the situation in Ukraine and Crimea for anything to be accepted at face value. The Su-25 is discussed above - the statement adds nothing to what is already available.
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
Carlos @spainbuca would be a star witness then for the international investigation and should be easy to track down. He appeared in the following Russia Today interview and although partially obscured someone should be able to recognize him from what is shown? He obviously has history with the state sponsored Russia Today so perhaps his social media was an easy target for the Russian Internet Troll Army?


On the Russian military briefing and radar 'evidence'. A very strange set of graphics for the aircraft. The 'Su-25' is represented by a General Dynamics EF-111A Raven.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA---Air/General-Dynamics-EF-111A/0726432/L/

Is the other aircraft (Sukhoi 25) actually there? What about a theory that the 'Su-25' radar return is actually a return off MH17 as it broke up in pieces? If a large enough part detached then it would give a big enough return. It is strange how they can track an 'Su-25' after MH17 goes off radar? Could this explain why the claimed 'Su-25' was only visible for a few minutes? The radar trace supposedly shows the "Su-25" in the same place for a few minutes with the Russians claiming that it showed that the 'Su-25' orbited the crash site. Again is this just radar returns of a large piece of MH17 as it comes down?
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
The Ukranian radar and ATC records that were (reportedly) seized - would that normally be handed over to the investigation? If the Ukraine is hiding it then there's reason to be suspicious, but they could just have secured it for the investigation, we wouldn't know straight away.
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
The Ukrainian SU-25s only carry the AA-8 "Aphid" infrared air to air missile. This missile has a range of 5nm and has a 3kg warhead. Given that it is a ground attack aircraft, with a ceiling of around clean ceiling of 22,000 feet and a loaded ceiling below 20,000 feet, coupled with no air intercept radar; ( it would have to be vectored into firing position via a ground controller), I have severe doubts about it being involved in any shoot down of a 777 flying three miles above it.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Not to mention that it's implying a now deliberate civilian shootdown, as opposed to an accidental one, an action which is several orders of magnitude even more insane. Russia just is spitting out any thing it can to distract at the moment, it's pathetic.
 
The Ukrainian SU-25s only carry the AA-8 "Aphid" infrared air to air missile. This missile has a range of 5nm and has a 3kg warhead. Given that it is a ground attack aircraft, with a ceiling of around clean ceiling of 22,000 feet and a loaded ceiling below 20,000 feet, coupled with no air intercept radar; ( it would have to be vectored into firing position via a ground controller), I have severe doubts about it being involved in any shoot down of a 777 flying three miles above it.
me too, but there was a chance that rebels have mistaken Boeing for the transport plane just because a SU25 was flying close to it
 

Jason

Senior Member
me too, but there was a chance that rebels have mistaken Boeing for the transport plane just because a SU25 was flying close to it
Is there a possibility that the SU25 was actually the target and for what ever reason the SAM veered off course or the SU25 used defensive counters to confuse the SAM.
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
From what has been posted here and elsewhere online about the launcher's capabilities, it shouldn't be possible. But that doesn't rule out older versions of the hardware, improper use, or even just over-stated capabilities.

Still, if it had happened the rebels should have known they didn't hit their selected target. If that were the case, they wouldn't have posted and later deleted claims to have shot down an SU25 and would have gone straight to, "What missiles? We have no missiles."
 

vooke

Active Member
You mean they are yet to figure out if it was a surface-to-air or air-to-air missile?
The presence of a fighter jet so dangerously close to the targeted Malaysian jet sounds contradictory
 

Juha

Member
Apparently this picture was originally on the RT.com article as the radar picture "proof":



the contact that looks like "CNA351" is Cyrillic for SIA - Singapore Airlines flight 351 - a B777-200 (b772) at 35,000 ft (350)

However according to that post on ATS it has now been removed from the rt.com article

I am not sure what the "3416" contact is - but it is apparently at 40,000 ft (400)

I think the yellow lettering reads "A 360 P 0.000" - where I think the "P" is a Cyrillic letter that translates to "r" in English.
3416 is Air India 315. (AIC315, B787@FL400). 3416 is his squawk.

Radar looks like secondary surveillance radar, that cannot track anything without transponder. So you can't see a SU-25 from that screen, even if there's a one. Of course if he illuminates himself by activating it, it shows in the screen.
Note that, those white lines are heading, not trail.
Yellow letterings is just cursor data. Nothing at the scope. That dot, that it points at, is last known place, where radar plotted MH17s transponder.
 

Jason

Senior Member
Wouldn't local radars be able to identify when MH17 started to lose altitude, which would indicate the approximate "exact" time it was hit by the missile.
 

Jason

Senior Member
Pretty much this. Also there is no concrete proof _yet_ that the plane was even shot down by an missile.
Russia is asking the west to release proof of the missile's trajectory via satellite imagery and radar. Why is there always this argument that the US can't release it because it will inform nations of where our assets are or how they are being used. If the world knows the assets are there already, whats the difference. I think its also a fair assumption given the cold war, that Russia is also probably one of the most watched nations in the world by our satellite capabilities. Also giving the world a screen shot, so to speak, of the local area without giving away too much detail could also prove to be useful. I think its important in this instance that the US backs up what the intelligence community is saying. Not that I don't believe them, but more in terms for US perception after our failed intelligence finger pointing in the past (Iraq comes to mind)...
 
Is there a possibility that the SU25 was actually the target and for what ever reason the SAM veered off course or the SU25 used defensive counters to confuse the SAM.
there is, russian military has mistakenly shot down their plane when they were in hunt for U2 (and they also shot down U2 with another missile)
 

Juha

Member
No, it's Air India 113. The other plane is Singapore 351
Confirmed by FlightRadar24.com data.
Pardon me, I mis-spelled it when I wrote it. Of course it is AIC113.

Secondary radar only shows return of transponder. If plane loses electricity or transponder is manually shut, return is lost. Like in MH370. Primary radars plot planes image, so image from it would been better to show impact, falling and debris.
Army uses primary radars and busiest civilian airspaces has it as backup.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
The actual video of radar is here - see 11 minutes for the identification of a 2nd contact on same location as MH17:


the aircraft contact is said to be at 5000m and descending - TBH it looks more like debris from MH17 "fluttering down" - the Russians suggest it is "monitoring the situation"
 
Last edited:

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
So now the US is saying that its' only evidence is youtube clips and social media posts. So if they do have satellite intelligence, they are not prepared to share it. But since the US has such a preposterous track record of lying and deceit regarding its' foreign policy, I don't think any rational person aught to believe them based on only them saying "trust us". Like Russia, the US has no rapport on which to establish trust. So at present the only evidence available is anecdodatal social media and Russia's radar presentation.

Here is the US declining to provide real forensic evidence and saying instead that its formal opinion came from youtube and twitter:
 

Jason

Senior Member
Here is the US declining to provide real forensic evidence and saying instead that its formal opinion came from youtube and twitter:
The video doesn't work for me so I will add this:
I highly doubt that their conclusions are based just on twitter photos and YT. It's embarrassing to even ponder such a thing, I mean if "we" don't accept YT and twitter as a matter of fact, I can't see US intelligence doing that.
But that doesn't mean they haven't correlated YT videos and Twitter photos to troop and convoy movements with satellite imagery.
 
Last edited:

MikeC

Closed Account
So now the US is saying that its' only evidence is youtube clips and social media posts.
Except that isn't what the lady says - "..."We make assessments based on a variety of information and a variety of intelligence, some of which we can talk about, some of which we can't" - about 5 minutes.

And "the public information is the easiest to talk about"

Please don't misquote.
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
I highly doubt that their conclusions are based just on twitter photos and YT. It's embarrassing to even ponder such a thing, I mean if "we" don't accept YT and twitter as a matter of fact, I can't see US intelligence doing that.
But that doesn't mean they haven't correlated YT videos and Twitter photos to troop and convoy movements with satellite imagery.
The problem is that US intelligence can't be trusted. Remember Iraq's WMDs? LOL! And for a more recent example, how about Assad's use of nerve gas? Why trust them? They need to PROVE IT. With EVIDENCE. Otherwise we have nothing but a liar standing on a stage. What are we supposed to think?
 

Jason

Senior Member
The problem is that US intelligence can't be trusted. Remember Iraq's WMDs? LOL! And for a more recent example, how about Assad's use of nerve gas? Why trust them? They need to PROVE IT. With EVIDENCE. Otherwise we have nothing but a liar standing on a stage. What are we supposed to think?
I know the intelligence community messed up then, and I even admitted that above, but those were trying times after a terrorist attack on the US. I too think if the US has the proof, they should share what they can with the world. Also, I know we messed up with Iraq, but how many times have we been right before. As I said above, I think it would help America's perception in the world if we could share what we have to shut Putin up and but him back in his cave. Thats why I think its important to share it.. Not because we have to..
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Here is the US declining to provide real forensic evidence and saying instead that its formal opinion came from youtube and twitter:
Sorry, @Libertarian. Just today (approx. 1700 PDT, 22 July) while I was listening to NPR in the car, and the U.S. is now revealing the intelligence that they have known...United States "spy" satellites DID detect a missile launch in the vicinity.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...-its-case-plane-wreckage-reportedly-cut-apart

 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
S Claim: Russian radar would have picked up MH17 missile Flight MH17 15
M Claim: Robert Parry: Australian 60 Minutes fudged evidence to pin blame on Russia Flight MH17 21
tadaaa MH17 Documentary from the BBC Flight MH17 81
U MH17 Missile/Plane Intersection Simulation Flight MH17 23
Mick West Almaz-Antey's Live BUK explosion tests Flight MH17 141
Bruce Lansberg Dutch Safety Board publish reports on MH17 crash, Tuesday Oct 13 Flight MH17 14
MikeC Dutch release draft report to involved parties Flight MH17 0
Herman Aven Confirmed Claim: disputed satelite imagery showing "changes in vegetation" Flight MH17 14
william wiley Does Damage to MH17 indicate or exclude a Particular Buk Launch Location? Flight MH17 662
Bruce Lansberg Claim: Jeroen Akkermans: Framents prove MH17 was shot down by a Russian made BUK Flight MH17 34
Bruce Lansberg Dutch Government discloses 245 official documents Flight MH17 0
M Debunked: this photo shows a Ukraine Mig-29 shot down MH17 Flight MH17 66
M Possible Shrapnel in MH17 Wreckage? Flight MH17 26
Bruce Lansberg Main prosecuter Westerbeke says metal particles have been found in the victims bodies and luggage Flight MH17 10
M Claim: Malaysian experts were shot at by Ukraine SU-25 and by GRAD Flight MH17 10
M Claim: MH17 was shot down by separatists using BUK stolen from Ukraine army Flight MH17 32
M What part of forward fuselage is this ? Flight MH17 1
R MH 370 Leroy Alexander? Flight MH17 1
M Solved: MH17: is this part of a missile? [Concrete Grinding Pads] Flight MH17 13
Ezswo Debunked: MH17 - 10 Previous Flightpaths Different From 17-7 Flight MH17 27
KAT MH17 - developments after a month - Aug 17 Flight MH17 4
Franckly Debunked: MH17 Air to air missile Assumption ? [Unrelated 35° angle] Flight MH17 25
Juha MH17 Hypotheses Flight MH17 159
WeeBee MH17: Pinpointing the precise location of the missile impact point Flight MH17 53
Jason Debunked: MH17: Supposed satellite video of missile launch [Fake] Flight MH17 14
Mick West Debunked: "Official Photoshopping" of MH17 photo [Window cover physically removed] Flight MH17 7
Brian Griffin Explained: MH17: Why Are There Expired "Pristine" Passports in the Wreckage? [Visa in Old Passport] Flight MH17 12
Mick West MH17: Video of flight activity before and after the crash Flight MH17 32
Mick West Debunked: MH17 Video Timestamped before the crash, and other timeline issues Flight MH17 8
TEEJ MH17: Evidence a Missile was Used. Shrapnel, etc. Flight MH17 448
Libertarian MH17 Evidence Video Time Stamped Before Crash Flight MH17 12
Mick West Flight MH17 News Flight MH17 79
Gridlock Why was MH17 Flying Over The Conflict Region? Flight MH17 102
Leifer MH17.....claiming responsibility ? Flight MH17 19
C MH17 Malaysian 777 Carrying 295 People Shot Down Over Ukraine Flight MH17 410
Mick West Claim: Julian Assange offered pardon to "Lie" for Trump Current Events 20
Stefan Leahu Russian ammo depot explosion near Achinsk, Krasnoyarsk Current Events 14
Mick West Russian Nuclear Sub Fire Kills 14, Current Events 9
Mick West Russia Predicts US Will Use Fake Chemical Attack In Syria as Pretext for Missile Attacks Current Events 9
Mick West Alex Jones Deplatforming and Related Conspiracy Theories Current Events 49
Mick West "UFO" Crash in Russia Near World Cup Match - Rocket Part UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 4
Whitebeard Sergei Skripal 'Nerve Agent' Attack Current Events 46
Mick West RT Promoting Flat Earth? Flat Earth 31
MikeG Debunked: Podesta Received $35 million from Russia Conspiracy Theories 5
jim oberg Strange cloud UFO over Russia November 2011 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
MikeG Massive Deployment of American Tanks Against Russia Conspiracy Theories 14
Mick West Did Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev say "World War"? General Discussion 28
txt29 Claim: harvesting energy from Schumann resonances and Earth's EM field (ADGEX) Science and Pseudoscience 27
Mick West Debunked: CyberBerkut Video Supposedly Showing Staged ISIS beheading of Foley Conspiracy Theories 37
SabreSaint Debunked: Russia to supply weapons to Mexico Conspiracy Theories 19
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top