MH17: Russia Claims Ukranian military plane flying nearby before incident

David Coulter

Senior Member.
We can say that the Russians gave us a nice peace of information here, something the Ukrainians or Americans have not given.
But it is not without a reason that Russia gives this information....
The key evidence is that the object has no lateral motion in relation to the fixed blue lines of the Russia border. Airplanes can't hover! I think people are confused by the motion of the two other planes, the supposed SU25 is not moving.
 
Last edited:

TEEJ

Senior Member.
The Russian Military Brief video has been posted in the above post. Obviously things can be lost in translation. The following is from the Russian Embassy in the UK.

http://www.rusemb.org.uk/press/1865
 
Last edited by a moderator:

David Coulter

Senior Member.
Of course! We would like to see what you can collect with your latest systems. For some reason I don't see that happening....
 

Tomaira

New Member
Details here, looks solid to me.

http://whoisstrelkov.wordpress.com/2014/07/23/russian-atc-lesson-101-the-phantom-su25/
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
Details here, looks solid to me.

http://whoisstrelkov.wordpress.com/2014/07/23/russian-atc-lesson-101-the-phantom-su25/
Yes, the blog has useful information, particularly the explanation of the meaning of the round and square identifiers. I do wonder why MH17 had a box around its details, whereas the other flights did not.
 

Master Yoda

New Member
Any guys here with some radar knowledge? I find it quite strange that the Russians said their radar couldn't detect planes below 5000 meters at that distance. AFAIK Radar minimal detection height is getting increased by mountains etc. or by the curvature of the earth, which is 196m on 50km distance resp. 785m on 100km distance. Rostov is almost sea Level (70m above), Torez is on 262m. The Region generally looks quite flat.

That claim sounds a bit strange to me.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Any guys here with some radar knowledge? I find it quite strange that the Russians said their radar couldn't detect planes below 5000 meters at that distance. AFAIK Radar minimal detection height is getting increased by mountains etc. or by the curvature of the earth, which is 196m on 50km distance resp. 785m on 100km distance. Rostov is almost sea Level (70m above), Torez is on 262m. The Region generally looks quite flat.

That claim sounds a bit strange to me.
Did they say where their radar is?
 

Master Yoda

New Member
@Mick

"The aircraft was steadily monitored by radar stations of Ust-Donetsk and Butirinskoe during 4 minutes period."

Ust-Donetsk is about 170km from Tores. I can't find a place called Butirinskoe on Google-Earth.
 

Libertarian

Banned
Banned
Here is a video report done by the BBC which was deleted shortly after it was put out. In it multiple eye witnesses claim seeing military aircraft next to/under the civilian plane.

One of the theories floated here for Russia's radar data was that it is the exploding plane that their equipment falsely detected as a military plane. But these women witnessed the explosion and are saying that there was a military plane.

 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here is a video report done by the BBC which was deleted shortly after it was put out. In it multiple eye witnesses claim seeing military aircraft next to/under the civilian plane.

One of the theories floated here for Russia's radar data was that it is the exploding plane that their equipment falsely detected as a military plane. But these women witnessed the explosion and are saying that there was a military plane.

A fighter jet would be invisible at 33,000 feet. It's too small.

Seems far more likely they saw one of the other two large planes that were in the region. And judging relative position is very hard for anyone to do. A plane at 37,000 feet, but several more miles away can look like it is "below" another plane that it is actually above.
 

David Coulter

Senior Member.
Eyewitnesses to air crashes often see things that are not there. Witnesses often report that an aircraft was on fire before a crash when it was not - the fire of the crash seems to leak backward into their memory. The "airplane" that the one woman saw may well have been the center section of MH17 which does appear to have curved around to the NE before crashing. The center section was not on fire and might well look like another aircraft (see video below and note that there is no smoke or fire trail prior to impact).

The BBC video was apparently taken down because the reporter referred to the rebels as "freedom fighters" rather than the BBC approved term "separatists".

 

Juha

Member
Eyewitnesses to air crashes often see things that are not there. Witnesses often report that an aircraft was on fire before a crash when it was not - the fire of the crash seems to leak backward into their memory. The "airplane" that the one woman saw may well have been the center section of MH17 which does appear to have curved around to the NE before crashing. The center section was not on fire and might well look like another aircraft (see video below and note that there is no smoke or fire trail prior to impact).

The BBC video was apparently taken down because the reporter referred to the rebels as "freedom fighters" rather than the BBC approved term "separatists".
And if you look that video's background, you see the overcast.
I don't know about witnesses, but I can't see trough clouds.
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
Maybe slightly side track to this topic; but I came across this youtube video:
Claiming the Singapore Airlines flew right behind Flight MH17.

However when you look at the places where he claims the MH17 crash happened (e.g. Novoshakhtinsk and Shakhty) you will see these are all places in Russia not the Ukraine.
It seems to me he has been using some flightradar site which does some kind of prediction of the flight path.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Maybe slightly side track to this topic; but I came across this youtube video:
Claiming the Singapore Airlines flew right behind Flight MH17.

However when you look at the places where he claims the MH17 crash happened (e.g. Novoshakhtinsk and Shakhty) you will see these are all places in Russia not the Ukraine.
It seems to me he has been using some flightradar site which does some kind of prediction of the flight path.
This video I made shows the tracks as recorded by Flightradar24:
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
This video I made shows the tracks as recorded by Flightradar24:

Is it possible to go farther back on the flight path? This video claims ( at ~1:10) the plane took a divergent path from the normal route....and that was directed by Ukraine ATC. Do we know that to be true? ( the whole movie is a gish gallop based on incredulity)

 

Juha

Member
Is it possible to go farther back on the flight path? This video claims ( at ~1:10) the plane took a divergent path from the normal route....and that was directed by Ukraine ATC. Do we know that to be true? ( the whole movie is a gish gallop based on incredulity)
Very slight correction of course, maybe due weather. It's still in route L980 limits.

 

Jason

Senior Member
For the people who want to play with this some more, I've attached the Google Earth kml file downloaded from FlightAware on the morning of the 18th.
I can't even open this attachment, is that because I don't have flightradar 24 installed on my computer?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
For the people who want to play with this some more, I've attached the Google Earth kml file downloaded from FlightAware on the morning of the 18th.
Here I've attached the JSON for the FR24 data for the flight, it could probably be munged into a KML.
 

Attachments

Elfenlied

Member
As others pointed out the spokesperson was very careful with what she said, and she she clearly alluded to other sources. You obviously would like the US to disclose everything but there is no way that will happen in order to protect "sources and methods". The woman in the video would definitely not have a security clearance and so could not possibly explain all of the assets that were used.
Is this a reference to the spokeswoman of the State Department, Marie Harf? If so, you might want to check her bio before stating she "would definitely not have a security clearance".

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/bureau/220636.htm
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
That only proves she may have had clearance in the past, not her current clearance status, as she left her previous position.
 

Jason

Senior Member
That only proves she may have had clearance in the past, not her current clearance status, as she left her previous position.
If you had top level clearance in the past, and you've been promoted to another job by the President of the US, do you think she would still have a security clearance or does the gency pull them from her. How does that work?
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I can't even open this attachment, is that because I don't have flightradar 24 installed on my computer?
I realize that this post is a bit off the topic, but since FR24 is referenced so often, I though I'd mention that "FlightAware" has modified their website, to "compete" (I guess) with FR:

http://flightaware.com/squawks/view...All_Planes_Nearby_Airports_Premium_Map_Layers

I mention this because "FA" is adding more ADS-B coverage as well. And, as a pilot, I tend to prefer the FA content as being a bit more comprehensive.

(Side-bar)...Using 'FA' when someone you know is flying, whether en-route to or away from your location? It is SO easy to "track" them, and part of the "fun". PLUS, you can tie-in to ATC (if you want...but, that's another website: liveatc.net).
 

Jason

Senior Member
I realize that this post is a bit off the topic, but since FR24 is referenced so often, I though I'd mention that "FlightAware" has modified their website, to "compete" (I guess) with FR:

http://flightaware.com/squawks/view...All_Planes_Nearby_Airports_Premium_Map_Layers

I mention this because "FA" is adding more ADS-B coverage as well. And, as a pilot, I tend to prefer the FA content as being a bit more comprehensive.
Which is better for a novice or just better all around?
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
If you had top level clearance in the past, and you've been promoted to another job by the President of the US, do you think she would still have a security clearance or does the gency pull them from her. How does that work?
I doubt she is out of the loop completely or anything like that, but I imagine clearance is based on your current job status, not a life-time membership thing.

Edit...
But it's likely it was transferred if her job requires it still -
 

MikeC

Closed Account
A spokesperson's security clearance or otherwise isn't really important - it isn't going to be high - even if it is with the CIA - it's going to be enough to "know" just a little more than is released to the public in order to make that release sound "good".

This aspect of the discussion is a red herring - a favourite way for CT's to steer discussion away from specifics and into speculation, so let's try to avoid it here please!
 

Elfenlied

Member
A spokesperson's security clearance or otherwise isn't really important - it isn't going to be high - even if it is with the CIA - it's going to be enough to "know" just a little more than is released to the public in order to make that release sound "good".

This aspect of the discussion is a red herring - a favourite way for CT's to steer discussion away from specifics and into speculation, so let's try to avoid it here please!
If you're going to resort to that kind of insinuations, then I'm out of here.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Don't take it personally - you replied to a point, I replied to your point, someone else replied to my point, etc. Yes it's now kind of off-topic.
Your point was valid in context, too much attention and it gets off-topic. It's a minor aside.
 
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