Presumably, Russia charges the airlines by mileage, therefore they try to minimise flyovers by using as much of the 'free' Ukrainian airspace as possible.Countries that are not signatories of the IASTA charge overflight fees as well; among them, Russia, is known for charging high fees, especially on the transarctic routes between North America and Asia, which cross Siberia.[11] In 2008, Russia temporarily denied Lufthansa Cargo permission to overfly its airspace with cargo ostensibly due to "delayed payments for its flyover rights".[13] European airlines pay Russia €300 million a year for flyover permissions for its airlines.[13]
Soulfly said: ↑
This is the main arguing point here. A modern, properly trained military would most likely not have made this mistake. Or it probably would have already happened before.
Are you saying something like this hasnt happened before?
Infowars is reporting that the flight was ordered to change its route. Perhaps this explains why the flight was different than the prior 10 Malaysian flights, and ended up over the conflict zone.
http://www.infowars.com/pilots-heard-ukrainian-air-traffic-control-order-mh17-to-change-route/
Infowars is reporting that the flight was ordered to change its route.
Infowars leaves out that last sentence which establishes it as fairly routine.Minutes before the crash caused by a missile strike, the AI pilots had also heard the controller give the Malaysian aircraft MH17 what is called "a direct routing". This permits an aircraft to fly straight, instead of tracking the regular route which is generally a zig-zag track that goes from one ground-based navigation aid or way point to another. "Direct routing saves fuel and time and is preferred by pilots. In this case, it proved fatal," said an airline source.
Infowars are spin doctors for Russia on this one.Questions have abounded as to why flight MH17 pilots were re-routed to overfly eastern Ukraine when most other major airlines have avoided the airspace for months. Data shows that MH17′s previous ten flight paths before the shoot down avoided eastern Ukraine entirely.
Around 200-300 of the daily flights on the route had diverted elsewhere in recent months, according to FlightRadar24 data. However, about 100 aircraft a day from more than 60 different airlines were seen in the region over the past week.
And sooner or later Kiev won't have any fighter jets left if they keep getting shot down at this rate. I read somewhere that they only have about 60 functional fighters and by my count they've lost 6 since the beginning of July.There's also a few Russian UAV's according to Kiev (and earlier)
Germany: "Kiev should have closed their airspace" says lawyer of German MH17 victims' families
lets not forget, that this lawyer has to prove why Kiev should've closed its airspace..
I'm in agreement and hind sight is 20/20. They felt commercial airlines were safe above 32000 ft though. But looking back who can argue they shouldn't have diverted since we know the outcome. But still there were a number of similar flights over that area unharmed.yep that's what court cases usually are like.
It really would've done just to divert civilian flights a bit north, to cross over a peaceful part of the country where aircraft were not being shot down every 2 or 3 days.
I won't try to estimate their chances of winning. But it is good to have some sort of court case about it, where some evidence under oath, presumably at least partly truthful, may come out. Having anyone charged doesn't look very likely at the moment.
But still there were a number of similar flights over that area unharmed.
EVERY commercial flight over there until July 17 was unharmed. "Every" is a powerful precedent for thinking the situation would continue.
Despite later denials, the military may/would have been aware the separatists had a BUK, but the civil authorities may/would not have known,
the information that separatists had powerful SAMs was all over Internet those days and it is quite easy to check/corroborate