Malaysian airlines aircraft "shot down", SA-11 apparently

[sorindafabico]

100 AIDS researchers on MH17? Why and how the media got it wrong

Press statement of IAS

The names of those confirmed at this time by friends and colleagues on board flight MH 17 are:

Pim de Kuijer, lobbyist Aids Fonds/STOP AIDS NOW!
Joep Lange, co-director of the HIV Netherlands Australia Research Collaboration (HIV-NAT)
Lucie van Mens, Director of Support at The Female Health Company
Martine de Schutter, Program Manager Aids Fonds/STOP AIDS NOW!
Glenn Thomas, World Health Organisation
Jacqueline van Tongeren, Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development

 

[SpaceEagle]

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/young-mh17-victim-eerie-premonition-crash-072133367.html

Kid on-board this 9M-MRD had eerie premonition of plane crash before he got into flames by a Buk Missile System controlled SA-11 NATO name: "Gadfly"

 

[Screamer7]

There is a new photo of the cockpit area at Aviation Herald.
It's just horrible to see all that shrapnel holes....
They did not stand a change.
http://avherald.com/h?article=47770f9d&opt=0

 

[kamaz]

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/young-mh17-victim-eerie-premonition-crash-072133367.html

Ouch. His mother is going to blame herself until the day she dies .

 

[kerlix]

There is a new photo of the cockpit area at Aviation Herald.
It's just horrible to see all that shrapnel holes....
They did not stand a change.
http://avherald.com/h?article=47770f9d&opt=0

Yeah, that looks like the Captain's side. If most of that was caused by shrapnel, I bet he was gone within a few seconds. His seat position was probably, at most, 1-3 feet from where the shrapnel entered.

Terrible...

---------- Post added at 11:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:57 PM ----------

Ouch. His mother is going to blame herself until the day she dies .

Despite the terrible (beyond comprehension) grief she is feeling, I hope that she can one day move on to a place where she no longer blames herself.

The last time I flew, I had a nightmare the night before the flight that the plane was going to crash. It was incredibly detailed. I remember a massive noise and then the plane rolling to the left and becoming inverted as it went towards the ground. Before this happened, I dreamt I saw the panels in the ceiling starting to spread out.

Well, it turns out that when I got to my seat (the next morning) I was actually sitting in the same spot (or at least pretty darn close) as I was in my dream. That started the initial adrenaline flow. Then as the plane was cruising, I could see the ceiling panels starting to spread out. Yes, I know this was most likely due to the cabin pressure decreasing to normal values as the plane flew. However, it was disconcerting to see a 0.5" gap grow larger and larger to an eventual 2.5" gap during the flight.

I felt as if my dream was pretty spot on. But alas, the flight landed normally and here I am.

A young child having fears about flying isn't uncommon. Could he have foreseen or sensed his own demise? Possibly. I don't know. It may have just been fear of flying without his mother. Then again, who knows? There are stories upon stories of people having bad feelings prior to (fairly) minor surgeries and then never waking up due to rare and unforeseen complications.

Whether or not its possible to sense these types of things is up for philosophers to debate. It's one of those things we may never know.



To the mother: I hope you do not blame yourself. This was a situation out of your control. May you find solice in whatever deity you believe in and I hope that you can one day move forward with your life. Your sons may not be among the living, but they live on in your heart, your memories and in the love and memories of your family. Please, one day, be at peace.

 

[Urwumpe]

The preliminary report is published and confirms that the MH17 was shot down - but can't tell by what.

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/ond...ts-towards-external-cause-of-mh17-crash#fasen

 

[Urwumpe]

And more information from the Netherlands... one Australian passenger had been found with a oxygen mask around his neck. But the investigators are still wondering about the implications.

 

[Topper]

I just saw good internet documentation from "Spiegel" and they say the Russian military had shoot down MH17.

The points:

-There was a Russian BUK in the battle area which was controlled by the separatists when MH17 was shoot down

- They reconstructed the complete route of the BUK from Russia to the battle field. They identified the BUK by its identification number painted on the vehicle on different locations using some photos and videos.

- There is a photo which shows that after the shoot down of MH17, one missile was missed on the BUK

- Russian media reported that at this time, a Ukrainian AN-26 was shot down. This never happen.

- They say, the Russian separatists are not able to handle a BUK site. You need good military education to handle it.

So now, I really think the Russians did it but it was an accident of course.

They cannot confirm it because official, they never supported the separatists. But this is my personal opinion and makes sense to me.

Before I saw this, I thought the Ukrainian military did it...


Source (German): http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gese...ueber-der-ukraine-abgeschossen-a-1011983.html

An English, German and Russian Version: https://mh17.correctiv.org/

• On July 17th Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down over Eastern Ukraine. All 298 passengers died. Back in the middle of June, the Nato showed pictures of Russian tanks in the city of Snizhne in Eastern Ukraine. The German Bundeswehr and Nato know that Russian tanks do not move through enemy territory without the protection of BUK missile systems. Therefore, the flight altitude of ordinary planes was essentially a war zone since the middle of June. According to the CORRECT!V investigation, the German government and all other Nato countries would have had to warn the airlines not to fly across Eastern Ukraine. The Dutch government already confirmed our investigation. The German government still rejects it.
• CORRECT!V talked to witnesses of the downing of Flight MH17 in Eastern Ukraine. In a complex investigation in Vienna, the Netherlands, Ukraine, and Russia, we talked to military experts, warlords of the separatists, former BUK engineers and former soldiers of the 53rd Air Defense Brigade. All of them confirm: The separatists were not able to use such a complex missile system. Therefore, only Russian officers could have given the order to down Flight MH17.
• On July 17th a lot of pictures and videos were taken of the BUK missile system in the part of Eastern Ukraine that was controlled by separatists. The international investigative team Bellingcat identified the BUK as part of the Russian 53rd Air Defense Brigade. CORRECT!V checked the locations of the pictures and followed the path the Russian BUK took.
• CORRECT!V is publishing this investigation in cooperation with the German weekly magazine Der Spiegel and the Dutch daily newspaper Algemeen Dagblad.

I can't sleep so I had read a bit further...

They say, that fighter pilots can use civilian planes as a "human shield"...
So my thoughts are now: Maybe this was the reason why they hadn't warned civil planes to fly over the battle area??? I can't belive it but who knows...

 

[Urwumpe]

So my thoughts are now: Maybe this was the reason why they hadn't warned civil planes to fly over the battle area??? I can't belive it but who knows...

First if all, you had surely been able to do so in the old times of analog radar. It can still work with civilian radar, as long as you are flying without transponder (the transponder response would simply paint over your echo).

But now to the problems with that idea:

It requires you to fly extremely close to the aircraft, so you are not in different radar sweeps.

Also, it does not work with military radar - such radar is usually capable for resolving conflicting radar returns, like you would produce. Also, already tiny variations in speed would be enough to tell you are there.

Next, you need to leave the airliner for your mission sooner or later. And 10 km altitude is not that low, especially for ground attack aircraft. It is already very hard to spot the few selected ground targets from lower altitudes and it is impossible from 10 km, so you need to leave pretty soon already for also having a chance to locate a target during the first pass. You might not get a chance for a second pass.

Of course, it can make sense to keep the high altitude jet ways open so that you have more false targets. While it is easy to filter the higher altitude targets out, you can't rely on it happening in combat situations.

But I still think, the primary reasoning why the airliner traffic was still allowed is simply communication: From July on, the minimum altitude for civilian aircraft was 7900 meters.

A few days before the incident, Eurocontrol demanded inofficially that the Ukraine completely closes the airspace over Donetsk. But not because of the fear of SAMs but because the communication between aircraft and ground is getting jammed by military ECM. The 20 shot down aircraft at this point also played a role in the recommendation.

The first confirmed attack against a high-altitude target happened only three days before in 6500 meters altitude. After this attack the NOTAM against flying below 10500 meters was published. Possibly by civilian air controllers or bureaucrats and not with input from military experts - its simply 50% higher than the last known attack. Would you care about the attack device, you would have had to close the airspace, because there is no SAM in use in this part of the world, that strikes in 6500 m and does not work above 10500 meters.

 

[Topper]

I think the points are good explained:

- It could be a decision within second if they die or be alive (shoot or don't shoot) for the guys who are at the BUK

- Additionaly, the time they can activate their radar is very short (They say maximum 40seconds) or they are localized and the enemy can kill them with passiv radar guided missiles

- The IFF can only identify friends. It's not possible to distinguish between "enemy" and "neutral" (civil planes) with the IFF

- So in this situation it makes it complicate for the ground crew if the airspace is full with civil planes. You have to think about that they risk their own live and when they fire seconds to late they are dead

What I want to say is maybe Urwumpe is right that’s very hard for a pilot to fly so close and exactly nearby another plane or so.

But however, civil traffic over a battlefield makes it hard for ground crews to be 100% sure that they looked an enemy and no civilian plane.

I don't know if they can read out the transponder code but even if yes, the transponder code can be faked easily even by fighter planes.
I don't think (I'm not 100% sure) that the BUK radar can identify the type of an airplane by the radar echo as an F-15 radar can do in the "Non cooperative target identification - mode". Of course they may can check the estimated size of the locked object, but they can't distinguish between an IL-76, an A320 and a B737 (Just examples).

 

[Urwumpe]

- The IFF can only identify friends. It's not possible to distinguish between "enemy" and "neutral" (civil planes) with the IFF

Thats wrong - almost all recent versions of SAMs can also read out civilian transponders - if you have the search radar. if you only have the radar of the launcher, its doubtful that you have this capability.

But the rebels did have a transportable radar station with this capability even before the shotdown. Even just radioing the coordinates to the launcher would be enough to give it a good long range firing solution - not perfect and not automatic, but good.

---------- Post added at 09:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 PM ----------

As addition:

I don't think (I'm not 100% sure) that the BUK radar can identify the type of an airplane by the radar echo as an F-15 radar can do in the "Non cooperative target identification - mode".

The newer Buk-M2 version is claimed to have such capability. But the older version in use there did not have it. You also have only unreliable information about the size of an aircraft, since you only have the return strength. A skilled radar operator could see from the shape of the echo on a B-scope that this is very likely a large civilian aircraft, but thats not easy and not reliable. You already need a lot of signal processing to get clues about the number of engines and the type of engines used. And you need a lot more signal generation capability to get more data about details of aircraft. General shape can be deduced by some simple filtering, but this requires already electronic beam control (passive or active phased array radars)

Even the search radar that they used around Donetsk did very likely not have such capability. By the look of it it was a simple 3D radar and not very sophisticated, just something expandable to put into the hands of rebels.

 

[Topper]

Thats wrong - almost all recent versions of SAMs can also read out civilian transponders

Ok I didn't know this... But it should be easy for a fighter pilot to set the same transponder code as a civil plane nearby if he know the flight time and route of this plane isn't it? If yes, the SAM crew has no proof that the locked target is realy a civil plane even if they know the transponder code right?

 

[Urwumpe]

Ok I didn't know this... But it should be easy for a fighter pilot to set the same transponder code as a civil plane nearby if he know the flight time and route of this plane isn't it? If yes, the SAM crew has no proof that the locked target is realy a civil plane even if they know the transponder code right?

Not sure if a military plane of Russian production can do that with their SOD-family transponder (The MiG-21 has for example an SOD-57 transponder, where you can only choose one of three channels, not octal codes), those have a much simplified user interface. A western military plane can do that.

But western planes are usually operating in Mode S, because it has been prescribed by regulations since 2008. In Mode S, the transponder also emits a fixed 24 bit code that is unique for every aircraft - you can't change it except by some massive hacking in the aircrafts transponder.

Ultimatively, using civilian transponder codes in Mode A or Mode C to pose as civilian aircraft would be a war crime.


EDIT: The Russian SOD-57 ATC transponder is a really vocal device... it transmits altitude, speed, course and even remaining fuel to the ground - or to the AWACS aircraft.

 

[Topper]

[FONT=&quot]

Ultimatively, using civilian transponder codes in Mode A or Mode C to pose as civilian aircraft would be a war crime.

[Ironic on with Ukrainian accent]:
Why it is a war crime to use manipulated transponder codes if the separatists only use shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles?
[Ironic off]

If this theory is true, both sides (The Russians and the Ukrainians) did war crimes in this conflict. Russian Tanks with removed [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]National emblem (firing a civil plane even if it was an accident) on and from Ukrainian territory is also a war crime.
And maybe the Ukrainians did know about the tanks before they manipulated the transponders. In this case, they didn't risk something and in the end, the Ukrainians won the "propaganda war" because the Russians moved back their tanks and BUKs.

In this case, silence would be the best solution for both...

I don't want to make any insinuation or so but still now this is the most plausible sounding theory to me.
Maybe it is right, maybe it's wrong - it's a propaganda war and it's hard to be sure to know the truth.
But the report I posted seems to have some interesting points and it looks like they try to be as neutral[FONT=&quot] as possible[/FONT] because they don't say that only one side is responsible for this disaster.

Many more humans lost their life in this stupid war, not only the humans in the plane and that's also a big disaster.
Sometimes I think we "westerns" and our media are arrogant because the media reports more if "western lives" has been lost - but that’s off topic sorry
[/FONT]

 

[Fabri91]

The final report has been published by the Dutch Transportation Safety Board.

PDF can be found here, with a summary in video form below:

Look for the other videos in the channel for shorter/different language versions.

 

[Soheil_Esy]

Amateur satellite tracker Marco Langbroek as Dutch Parliament expert on military satellite systems:lol::rofl:

21 Jan 2016


Sometimes the things we do have relevance in a wider setting, even if that is not necessarily our intention.

Tomorrow (Friday 22 Jan) between 12:00 and 13:00 CET (11:00-12:00 UT) I will appear as an external expert in a hearing before the permanent committee of Foreign Affairs of Dutch Parliament, on the invitation of Dutch MP Pieter Omtzigt.

They have asked me to inform them about (classified) military satellite systems and the possibility that these could have observed the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 over the Ukraine on 17 July 2014.

In that tragedy, 196 Dutch citizens lost their lives. Satellite information might shed light on where the missile that downed the airliner was fired from (and from that, who is responsible). The concern of Dutch Parliament, is to make sure that all possible avenues are taken by our Government to get these data, with an eye on bringing those responsible before an (international) Court of Justice.

This is an extremely sensitive topic in the Netherlands, and therefore garnering much political and press attention. The tragedy has had an enormous societal impact over here.

I had to provide the Parliament committee with a brief position paper on the topic, which (in Dutch, but you can Google Translate) can be found here:

http://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/detail?id=2016D01196&did=2016D01196

Focus of this position paper is mostly on SBIRS, with a brief touch upon SIGINT.

The hearing will be live-streamed on the website of Dutch Parliament.

For those with access to Dutch television: in the evening of Friday 22, I will be in a news background item on Dutch national tv at channel NPO 1, in the program "EénVandaag" starting at 18:00 CET.

- Marco


PS: I want to express my thanks to Ted Molczan, Mike McCants and Brian Weeden for their much appreciated help. Ted and Mike: I could not incorporate your revised USA 184 orbit in the position paper (I had already had to sent it out due to deadlines) but will mention things when I address the committee.

http://satobs.org/seesat/Jan-2016/0126.html

 

[Urwumpe]

Still a good and precise paper by him, amateur or not.

 

[Soheil_Esy]

Still a good and precise paper by him, amateur or not.

All he knows is footprints...:rofl:

With Langbroek as an expert, it is getting too unfair. By reading his report about the Chelyabinsk Meteor Event back in February 2013, it is obvious that Holland wants to frame Russia. Thus, to equalize Russia's chances, S☫heil_Esy is ready to volunteer himself and provide guidances to the Russian leadership, free of charges!:lol:

February 17, 2013

Movie: Why the Russian Super Meteor was not related to asteroid 2012 DA14 - explained with the help of an orange :rofl:

http://sattrackcam.blogspot.ch/2013/02/movie-why-russian-super-meteor-was-not.html

Edit: S☫heil_Esy already debunked this fallacy on another BBS (9ifly) back in 2013 with maps an not an orange, as witnessed by Galactic Penguin

 

[Urwumpe]

All he knows is footprints...:rofl:

You don't need to be ashamed if you can't read Dutch. Nobody expects you to do be able of it.

 

[Soheil_Esy]

You don't need to be ashamed if you can't read Dutch. Nobody expects you to do be able of it.

Full and even longer English version here:

http://sattrackcam.blogspot.ch/2016/01/sigint-imint-and-mh17.html