I have been too busy to follow all this as closely as I would have liked to and have obtained most of my updating right here on OF (this thread and the basement Ukraine thread). Thanks for that, first off, as the detail and analysis is making more sense here than on the news tid-bits I am managing to see.
Though my initial response was a guffaw on hearing the allegations to the effect that a Frogfoot might have shot down MH17, the capability does non-the-less exist with a pair of Aphids, short range IR-AAMs as they are. However - and it is a huge however - the window in which these weapons could be brought to bear effectively in this situation depends on too many factors being "just right", so it is highly improbable.
I had the opportunity to have an interesting chat on the subject with an ex FAE A-37 pilot yesterday (he's a civilian A-319 Commander now), who flew in the Cenepa War. The biggest hammer on the head of the SU-25 "conjecture" is simply - training. Good GCI does not happen by magic, and requires high levels situational awareness from both the vectoring radar operator and the pilot being vectored. Ground attack pilots are not trained for GCI (unless this is different in the Russian and Ukranian forces, but I doubt it). And good GCI, superhuman in fact, would have been necessary for it to work in this case.
On the contrary, ground attack pilots are trained for disciplined formation procedures, return route re-group, attack profiles in coordination with other elements of the flight, and such, with minimum radio chatter, as possible intercepts of transmissions have the potential to give away their bearing, much like VDF is used deliberately for civilian aircraft locating purposes. Furthermore, these pilots are not "geared up" for rapid interpretation of a few vectors and relative position reports to quickly update an interception mental picture of fast moving targets and respond accordingly to it, from what I understand. If anything, they are trained to avoid interception based on any cues!
And obviously, neither do they operate at high levels in their normal role, nor, as discussed, is the type ideal for the intercept of high/fast contacts, performance-wise. Even from the best initial position possible, with a "switched on" jockey reacting immediately - and what is more, appropriately - the event would degenerate into a stern chase at dissimilar altitudes with little chance of (*cough*) "success" in a very quickly closing, diminutive window of opportunity. The whole idea fringes on being totally preposterous.
On another subject, I understand the preliminary examination of the wreckage has now produced some evidence of fragmentation blast damage coincident with the size warhead of an SA-11/SA-17. Any truth in this? Opinions here?
