Malaysian Airliner crashes in Ukraine

[Urran]

It's tragic and inexcusable. I hope they found who is responsible and bring them to justice.

[Gravlen]

Countries directly affected by the disaster, such as the Netherlands, Australia, and the UK, have been concerned that the crash site was not properly sealed off with the risk that valuable evidence could go missing.

A spokesman for the OSCE monitors at the site, Michael Bociurkiw, told the BBC that major pieces of the plane had been cut into and that large parts now looked different from before.

BBC: International monitors say parts of the wreckage have been changed since they first saw it.

Probably trying to alter the wreckage to make it look more like an air-to-air missile hit MH17. How dumb do they think air crash investigators are?

Why did they feel they had to remove the flight recorders from the crash site anyway? I don't understand why they thought that was a better idea than to simply mark them and leave them for the investigators.

(I have my suspicions, of course, but...)

[Imperializt Russia]

Probably trying to alter the wreckage to make it look more like an air-to-air missile hit MH17. How dumb do they think air crash investigators are?

Why did they feel they had to remove the flight recorders from the crash site anyway? I don't understand why they thought that was a better idea than to simply mark them and leave them for the investigators.

(I have my suspicions, of course, but...)

Some commander presumably decided it would be better to find important items like that and secure them centrally, rather than leaving them where they could be lifted by "spies" (allegations abound), or by men under their command (but not control).
Another article on the BBC features an image of a rebel guarding a small pile of collected luggage.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Probably trying to alter the wreckage to make it look more like an air-to-air missile hit MH17. How dumb do they think air crash investigators are?

Why did they feel they had to remove the flight recorders from the crash site anyway? I don't understand why they thought that was a better idea than to simply mark them and leave them for the investigators.

(I have my suspicions, of course, but...)

Malevolent possibilities aside, it is quite plausible that the rebel response to the crash of the airline, being somewhere on the scale between 'disorganized' and 'Benny Hill theme playing whilst everyone runs around', included retrieval of the black boxes by someone there because of either legitimate interest in helping or lack of knowledge over investigative procedure.

[West Aurelia]

How Web archivists and other digital sleuths are unraveling the mystery of MH17

In the agonizing quest to pin down exactly what happened when Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 went down over Ukraine last week, Web archivists and other digital sleuths are playing an unusual — potentially pivotal — role.

Wayback Machine, the nonprofit Web crawler that archives old versions of Web pages, captured evidence last Friday that a pro-Russian group was behind the attacks. Meanwhile, @RuGovEdits — a Twitter bot that monitors Wikipedia edits made from Russian government computers — logged evidence that reflects Russia’s interest in deflecting the MH17 narrative elsewhere.

Both bits of evidence could prove important to understanding the crash and its political aftermath, particularly as investigators question the integrity of the crash site. But they’re also compelling examples of the Web’s ability to promote transparency and hold powerful people accountable for their words — even, or especially, when they delete them.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/07/21/how-web-archivists-and-other-digital-sleuths-are-unraveling-the-mystery-of-mh17/

[EU Serbia]

There is undeniable evidence that the pro-Russian rebels shot the MH17 airplane down using surface to air missile system supplied to them by the Russian military. This is evident in their public boasting on the Internet when they thought that what they shot down was a Ukrainian air foce airplane, before they actually found out that it was a civilian jet liner MH17. There is evidence in intercepted phone conversations between pro-Russian rebels and the Russian military, again before they found out that what they shot down was a civilian airplane. There is also video footage of a BUK surface to air missile system being driven out of the rebel held territory on the back of a truck, back towards the Russian border with one of the missiles on the system missing. Again when the rebels found out that they actually shot down a civilian airplane there is the intercepted conversation between them where they want to cover up the whole incident and be the first ones to find the black box to take it back to Moscow, so that international investigators couldn't get their hands on it to read the flight details from it.

Now to me it doesn't seem like they shot down this airplane on purpose. Rather it seems to me that the system was given by the Russians to the rebels who were poorly trained and thought that any radar signature they see on their screens is a valid target. Keep in mind that if you're a rebel who is not well trained and somebody just gives you basic instructions on how to operate this self-guided surface to air missile system, without showing you the exact difference between a civilian airliner radar signature and a military jet fighter radar signature, then you can assume almost anything from the radar signatures you see on your screen. This includes mistaking the radar signature of a civilian airplane for a military jet, because you just don't know how to distinguish them. This is what I think has happened here. Now regardless of whether this was an accidental shoot down or not, the blame still clearly sits with the pro-Russian rebels and the Russian military who supplied this system to the poorly trained rebels.

Now I understand that it's all too easy for someone to form conspiracy theories about the shoot down of this airplane or any other incident in the world, and thus try to blame the side that you don't like or support in this conflict for the shooting down of this airplane, but here the evidence is clear that the responsibility for this accident solely lies in the hands of the pro-Russian rebels and Russia who interfered in this conflict by supplying these rebels with arms and sophisticated weapons systems.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's very difficult to tell the difference between military and civil aviation, and it's not really something that can be trained out. It's about judgement and higher-level air defence monitoring - the latter of which rebel groups were not provided access to.

[Kahlenberg]

It's very difficult to tell the difference between military and civil aviation, and it's not really something that can be trained out. It's about judgement and higher-level air defence monitoring - the latter of which rebel groups were not provided access to.

Yet altitude of a target can be measured, even with relatively low-end radars. A target on 33,000 feet is unlikely to be a military craft. The limited scope of a radar could, however, cause considerable time pressure for the conductor of an anti-aircraft missile, which could lead to erroneous calls, especially when operated by unexperienced gunners.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's very difficult to tell the difference between military and civil aviation, and it's not really something that can be trained out. It's about judgement and higher-level air defence monitoring - the latter of which rebel groups were not provided access to.

Yet altitude of a target can be measured, even with relatively low-end radars. A target on 33,000 feet is unlikely to be a military craft. The limited scope of a radar could, however, cause considerable time pressure for the conductor of an anti-aircraft missile, which could lead to erroneous calls, especially when operated by unexperienced gunners.

It can, yes. This is pretty basic analysis of the data - after all, you can't send a missile after the target if you can't work out where it is once you've detected it.

However, stories are abound from non-Russian sources that Ukrainian Su-27 aircraft were flanking MH17. There's a variety of reasons why they may have done this which I commented on yesterday. If I say a large aircraft and two smaller aircraft, in the area where previously I'd shot down unescorted military aircraft, I'd personally assume I was looking at a military transport under escort. It's a reasonable assumption.

[Kahlenberg]

Yet altitude of a target can be measured, even with relatively low-end radars. A target on 33,000 feet is unlikely to be a military craft. The limited scope of a radar could, however, cause considerable time pressure for the conductor of an anti-aircraft missile, which could lead to erroneous calls, especially when operated by unexperienced gunners.

It can, yes. This is pretty basic analysis of the data - after all, you can't send a missile after the target if you can't work out where it is once you've detected it.

However, stories are abound from non-Russian sources that Ukrainian Su-27 aircraft were flanking MH17. There's a variety of reasons why they may have done this which I commented on yesterday. If I say a large aircraft and two smaller aircraft, in the area where previously I'd shot down unescorted military aircraft, I'd personally assume I was looking at a military transport under escort. It's a reasonable assumption.

It is never reasonable to assume a plane flying at such an altitude is non-civilian. Any trained operative would be able to work that out, no matter how many planes were escorting it. When the plane was escorted, this should show from the black box data, so we'll find that out soon enough.

[Limborg]

http://www.corriere.it/esteri/14_luglio_22/cosi-stato-colpito-l-aereo-0a7e5f9e-115f-11e4-affb-3320a03d21e8.shtml

A man admitted that they shot the aircraft. Its a tough thing to admit so i respect him for that. He would belong to a local militia and in daily life he would be a miner. I hope he gets questioned by an international team and possible charged for it together with the others that woudl be with him at the time.

[Organized States]

It can, yes. This is pretty basic analysis of the data - after all, you can't send a missile after the target if you can't work out where it is once you've detected it.

However, stories are abound from non-Russian sources that Ukrainian Su-27 aircraft were flanking MH17. There's a variety of reasons why they may have done this which I commented on yesterday. If I say a large aircraft and two smaller aircraft, in the area where previously I'd shot down unescorted military aircraft, I'd personally assume I was looking at a military transport under escort. It's a reasonable assumption.

It is never reasonable to assume a plane flying at such an altitude is non-civilian. Any trained operative would be able to work that out, no matter how many planes were escorting it. When the plane was escorted, this should show from the black box data, so we'll find that out soon enough.

Except, that the rebels have been shown in the past to have severe negligence when it comes to their weapons systems...

[EU Serbia]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

[Limborg]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

How's that? I do support Russia in the conflict, at least for a large part. The people of Donets and Lushansk have the right to their own lands and to follow their own intrests. Ukraine has done nothing to solve it through peacefull means, they chose war over diplomacy. But i'm not denying that one of those militia's there have shot the airplane.

[Organized States]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

What?

[Imperializt Russia]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

The Buk-M1 launcher was Russian supplied.
To Ukraine.
Thirty years ago, when Ukraine technically wasn't a country.

[EU Serbia]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

How's that? I do support Russia in the conflict, at least for a large part. The people of Donets and Lushansk have the right to their own lands and to follow their own intrests. Ukraine has done nothing to solve it through peacefull means, they chose war over diplomacy. But i'm not denying that one of those militia's there have shot the airplane.

To be honest you are the first pro-Russian I've come across who's not making up weird conspiracy theories to blam someone else for the crash of the MH17 flight.

However, I should now correct myself and say that most pro-Russians or Russofiles in my opinion will make up a conspiracy theory to blame someone else for the crash of this flight and not Russia. I believe that even if there was a camera on that rocket that would show the pro-Russian forces firing that rocket and then it hitting the MH17 flight there would be a conspiracy theory about how that is a video-montage.

As for the pro-Russian separatists... Well that argument about them protecting their own interests could be made anywhere in the world. In fact if you were not satisfied with the course your country is taking or with new legislation being enacted in your country, by that argument you could take up arms and try to secede your plot of land.

[CTALNH]

So who shot the plane down?

[EU Serbia]

It is only not clear to a pro-Russian that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane using Russian supplied surface to air missile system. The rest of the world sees the overwhelming evidence that clearly states that pro-Russian rebels shot down this airplane. Yet I guess if you support Russia in this conflict you will find any excuse and make up or believe any conspiracy theory to clear Russia's name and put the blame for this incident elsewhere.

The Buk-M1 launcher was Russian supplied.
To Ukraine.
Thirty years ago, when Ukraine technically wasn't a country.

The Buk system was also supplied to the rebels by Russia and there is clear evidence of that. There is also clear evidence admitted by themselves that they shot down the airplane.

[CTALNH]

The Buk-M1 launcher was Russian supplied.
To Ukraine.
Thirty years ago, when Ukraine technically wasn't a country.

The Buk system was also supplied to the rebels by Russia and there is clear evidence of that. There is also clear evidence admitted by themselves that they shot down the airplane.

Where?

[Registug]

To be honest you are the first pro-Russian I've come across who's not making up weird conspiracy theories to blam someone else for the crash of the MH17 flight.

However, I should now correct myself and say that most pro-Russians or Russofiles in my opinion will make up a conspiracy theory to blame someone else for the crash of this flight and not Russia. I believe that even if there was a camera on that rocket that would show the pro-Russian forces firing that rocket and then it hitting the MH17 flight there would be a conspiracy theory about how that is a video-montage.

As for the pro-Russian separatists... Well that argument about them protecting their own interests could be made anywhere in the world. In fact if you were not satisfied with the course your country is taking or with new legislation being enacted in your country, by that argument you could take up arms and try to secede your plot of land.

Samoz isn't Pro-Russian, he's just not getting angry and pointing fingers everywhere.

So who shot the plane down?

We have strong suspicions that it was Pro-Russian Rebels, but no clear, definitive proof yet.

[EU Serbia]

The Buk system was also supplied to the rebels by Russia and there is clear evidence of that. There is also clear evidence admitted by themselves that they shot down the airplane.

Where?

In intercepted phone conversations between the pro-Russian rebels and the Russian military officers before the rebels realized that they shot down a civilian jet liner, where they are thanking the Russians for supplying them with the Buk system. Again there was video footage of a Buk system returning back from the rebel held territory on the back of a truck towards the Russian border with one of the missiles missing from it. Clearly they are trying to hide the evidence.

[Ducrotia]

It bothers me a little that Malaysian Airlines was focused more on getting to their destination faster than getting there safely. I mean one of their planes already vanished without a trace. Maybe they should've taken that as a sign to be a little more careful?

Many other airlines used the exact same route. It's not as if Malaysia Airlines was alone. They followed all of the safety restrictions, such as staying above a restricted altitude, it could have happened to any of the many airlines flying that same route.

But still! They all were told that flying over Ukraine/Russia was a little risky.

[CTALNH]

Where?

In intercepted phone conversations between the pro-Russian rebels and the Russian military officers before the rebels realized that they shot down a civilian jet liner, where they are thanking the Russians for supplying them with the Buk system. Again there was video footage of a Buk system returning back from the rebel held territory on the back of a truck towards the Russian border with one of the missiles missing from it. Clearly they are trying to hide the evidence.

So are you gonna source this?

[Imperializt Russia]

The Buk-M1 launcher was Russian supplied.
To Ukraine.
Thirty years ago, when Ukraine technically wasn't a country.

The Buk system was also supplied to the rebels by Russia and there is clear evidence of that. There is also clear evidence admitted by themselves that they shot down the airplane.

There are few pieces of evidence to suspect that Russia directly gave or "lost" a heavy SAM system like Buk to the rebels. There are much likelier scenarios in which the separatists claimed to capture at least one Buk-M1 launcher with at least the four missiles that were mounted to it for ammunition, a claim made one month ago (three weeks before the downing of MH17), and subsequently received brief training directly from Russian advisers, or equally former Soviet or Russian or Ukrainian air-defence-trained personnel were introduced to this rebel battery to advise on its use.

Such scenarios also point to the highly likely possibility that, as separatists themselves claimed before deleting references online, they believed they were engaging a Ukrainian An-26 military transport aircraft overflying the rebel-held region.

Footage claiming that the Buk was subsequently shipped "back" over the Russian border is unsubstantiated. It shows a Buk-M1 TELAR, fitted with two missiles, being moved on a civilian low-loader. It is not clear where this is, certainly not clear that it is leaving Ukraine and being sent to Russia.
Claims that it is being sent "back" to Russia are spurious at best, as this presupposes the previous assertion that Russia indeed gave the rebels the system. In which case, a Russian Army military transporter would likely be taking it back over the border.
It is, however, perfectly likely that a civil low-loader in the possession of the rebels was taking the Buk, captured from Ukrainian forces, into Russia to hide it.