Boeing-777 was downed by Ukrainian MiG-29 flown by Polish Pilot, Romanian expert says

[Hack-Hook]

Even the Romanian expert speaks of getting within 900m...


I merely quoted from the article of the Romanian expert (to be precise, from the English translation of his French text)

. Well my little knowledge of radars say their separation distance depend on the wavelength they are working at and its something like half wavelength or perhaps twice it (well its sadly more than 15 years since I read it in my highschool textbook)

And the effective range is not about if you can kill target in that range its about how precise you can be at hitting it. You can empty all the bullets in that range into target but if you fire at maximum range then maybe from 150 bullet you fire only 30 hit the target .

I guess there must be something wrong when they translated that article from Romanian to French and then to English or perhaps the Romanian expert was not so much expert.

 

[Penguin]

. Well my little knowledge of radars say their separation distance depend on the wavelength they are working at and its something like half wavelength or perhaps twice it (well its sadly more than 15 years since I read it in my highschool textbook)

We should make a clear distinction between the concept of radar separation as used in air traffic control practise, and a radar's ability to discriminate 2 aircraft when flying close together.

The pulse width (

) (or pulse duration) of the transmitted signal is to ensure that the radar emits sufficient energy to allow that the reflected pulse is detectable by its receiver. The amount of energy that can be delivered to a distant target is the product of two things; the output power of the transmitter, and the duration of the transmission. Therefore pulse width constrains the maximum detection range of a target.
It also determines the range discrimination, that is the capacity of the radar to distinguish between two targets fairly close together. At any range, with similar azimuth and elevation angles and as viewed by a radar with an unmodulated pulse, the range discrimination is approximately equal in distance to half of the pulse duration.

Radar signal characteristics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And the effective range is not about if you can kill target in that range its about how precise you can be at hitting it. You can empty all the bullets in that range into target but if you fire at maximum range then maybe from 150 bullet you fire only 30 hit the target .

Exactly, and if you were to try and hit the cockpit, as is often suggested based on wreckage, you have to get real close to do so with some/any level of succes.

I guess there must be something wrong when they translated that article from Romanian to French and then to English or perhaps the Romanian expert was not so much expert.

I think it was written in French.

 

[notgoodenough]

I do not believe a word nato stooges say. That includes you. The Romainian experts theory sounds very plausible. Much more plausibke than anything nato has put out. You havent disproven it at all. Youve made nato arguments for them. Good boy. Now move along. Youve made up your mind to believe natos version of events. Good for you.

Assuming I am, you seriously state that you are not?
What did this thread start out with? References to various experts....

Beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?


Well, no, and not in the last place because I didn't put forward theories. Rather, I checked to see if theories put forward at the start of the thread made sense.

 

[Penguin]

I do not believe a word nato stooges say. That includes you. The Romainian experts theory sounds very plausible. Much more plausibke than anything nato has put out. You havent disproven it at all. Youve made nato arguments for them. Good boy. Now move along. Youve made up your mind to believe natos version of events. Good for you.

Oh I see: if you don't like the substance you attack the messenger.

Gun rather than missile?
Mig-29 rather than Su-25?
Polish pilot?

Not proven > speculation

Gun >
argument: midair destruction of plane possible only by uncontrolled high speed dive, cockpit area gunned.
counterargument: if cockpit hit (by missile fragments or cannon rounds), controls may have been lost and pilots killed but if hit elsewhere, controls may also have been lost as result of warhead damage or as result of parts of e.g. engine coming apart.

argument: holes bent out instead of inward
counterargument: if missile exploded on one side of cockpit, fragments could have passed in, through and exited on the other side.
e.g. The Aviationist » Analysis: what these signs on the wreckage tell us about the missile strike that downed MH17
Besides, normal SAM practise if to fire 2 missiles in quick succession at a target to maximize kill probability, which may explain presence of holes bent in 2 different directions on same piece of wreckage.
Other pieces of wreckage (not from cockpit) show patterns consistent with prox fuzed missile (i.e. AAM or SAM).

argument: no electromagnetic emissions from launcher
counterargument: While Buk missile guidance is semi-active radar homing, the system does have a TV mode for target tracking in heavy ECM environments. The system also can be fitted with a supplementary electro-optical sighting system for use in cases where electronic jamming from the target aircraft overwhelms the usual semi-active radar homing system. In this case the missile uses radio-command guidance. Buk M2E / SA-17 Grizzly TELAR has NIIP 9S36 Passive ESA Engagement Radar
International Electronic Countermeasures Handbook - Horizon House, Journal of Electronic Defense Staff Horizon House - Google Boeken and
Air defense Weapons of the Former USSR & Russia and
Engagement and Fire Control Radars (S-Band, X-band)

argument: missile plumes not observed visually
counterargument: attacking aircraft not observed visually either (or heard). aircraft would have to be very, very close and approaching from front/side (under 900m)

Mig 29 >
argument: su-25 doesn't have sufficient speed to catch up with Boeing 777
counterargument: su-25 approached from front/side (if gun attack). Properly vectored, it doesn't need to chase after the Boeing and its lower top speed wouldn't matter

Polish Pilot:
argument: Ukrainian pilot skill insufficient for single 3-4 second gun attack run, hitting cockpit area. Not so for Polish Pilot (says Rumanian expert, suggesting Polish involvement)
counter argument: Why assume Polish Pilot (what does Poland gain? proof?). How about pilots from other current or former Mig-29 operating European countries (Belarus, Bulgaria, Serbia, Slovakia e.g)? And, aren't Russian Pilots sufficiently skilled on Mig-29 too?

(Operators of the MiG-29 in blue, former operators in red)

Also, was there not earlier an accusation of Russia's involvement in downing a Ukrainian Su-25 (either via missile from Russian teritory or by Mig) days, that is to say: prior to MH-17?

On 14 July, a Ukrainian Air Force AN-26 transport plane flying at 21,000 ft (6,400 m) was shot down.[50][51] Militia reportedly claimed via social media that a Buk missile launcher had been used to bring down the aircraft.[52] American officials later said evidence suggested the aeroplane had been shot down from Russian territory.[53] On 16 July, a Sukhoi Su-25 close air support aircraft was shot down. The Ukrainian government said the Russian military had shot down the aircraft with an air-to-air missile fired by a mIG-29 jet in Russia; a spokesman for the Russian defence ministry rejected that report as "absurd".[54][55]

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Russia accused of shooting down jet
Russia Rejects 'Absurd' Accusation Over Downed Ukrainian JetUkraine: Air Force jet downed by Russian missile - Yahoo News

I'm not saying MH-17 went down this way or that, just looking at plausibility of different explanations (since the cause is as yet not unequivocally determined).

 

[Hack-Hook]

Penguin not only pro Russian side are making speculation but also the western and Ukrainian side and its all because USA inspire of claiming have evidence of what really happened there decided to withheld those evidence from the public and also Ukraine goverent for some strange reason decided to confiscate the tapes that held the communication between tower and the plane .

If they had given those evidence to the team that is investigating the evidence it was weeks ago that they could reach a conclusion .

 

[Penguin]

Penguin not only pro Russian side are making speculation but also the western and Ukrainian side and its all because USA inspire of claiming have evidence of what really happened there decided to withheld those evidence from the public and also Ukraine goverent for some strange reason decided to confiscate the tapes that held the communication between tower and the plane .

Yes, so? There are many possible reasons for surpressing information. The fact some piece is suppressed suggests there is something to hide. However, there is no telling what it is. And, even if something is being hidden, this does not automatically mean that those authorities that do so are responsible for or have organized the downing of MH-17. Unfortunately, the world is more complex than that.

If they had given those evidence to the team that is investigating the evidence it was weeks ago that they could reach a conclusion .

How do you know? Does the entire investigation hinge on those tapes? How would we know this, given the lack of acces to the tapes? It is one possible piece of evidence among many.

From what I've read on the issue of the tower communications, these relate to the circumstances under which MH-17 ended up over the area where it was eventually shot down. It apparently leaves unaffected the issue of who/how it was shot down.
» Pilots Heard Ukrainian Air Traffic Control Order MH17 to Change Route Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Besides, I just found this: Blik Op NOSjournaal: Blik op NOS-journaal calls with Ukraine Embassy in The Hague
An interview with Yuriy Zakharchuk, official spokesman of the Ukrainian Ambassy in the Hague, Thursday afternoon 14 August 2014

On the tapes of the control tower and MH17:
"...Communications between the tower and the plane... they have been transferred to the Dutch safety board. It is up to them, when to disclose this information"

The first reports of Ukraine not publishing the tower communications date from july 22. This may not be a coincidence: here is what the Dutch safety board reports on its website

Ukraine has transferred responsibility for investigating the cause of the crash to the Dutch Safety Board. The request came from Ukraine. This request was made because the flight departed from the Netherlands, and due to the large number of Dutch nationals who died in the crash. The transfer was formally recorded in an agreement on 23 July.

Non-disclosure may have been a condition of that agreement.

Note also:

The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) states that it is the responsibility of the country where an aircraft accident took place to investigate the cause. Immediately following the crash of flight MH17, aviation investigators from Ukraine began investigating the cause of the accident. The Netherlands (as one of the countries affected) received official word of the crash of MH17 from the investigators shortly after it took place, including an invitation to take part in the investigation.

The ICAO agreement dictates that certain countries are obliged to be involved in the investigation. In principle, the country where the accident took place (state of occurance) should lead the investigation. However, the option is available to transfer the obligation of the investigation to another country. The countries where the operator is based, where the aircraft was designed and where it was built are also entitled to take part. Countries that can supply specific information or expertise may participate at the invitation of the party leading the investigation. Countries that suffered fatalities are also entitled to play a part in the investigation, but have limited rights.

In the case of the MH17 crash, many countries volunteered their assistance of their own accord. In some cases this assistance was accepted because the investigators had specific knowledge, information or expertise to offer.

The following countries have contributed (to a greater or lesser extent) to the international investigation team into the crash of flight MH17: Ukraine, Malaysia, Australia, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, France, Italy and Indonesia. The ICAO and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) also contributed to the investigation as organisations. The leadership of the investigation rests with the Dutch Safety Board, which will publish both the preliminary and final report. The countries that have a formal role as participants in the investigation under the ICAO agreement will be given access to the draft reports, and may provide feedback. The country leading the investigation may offer other countries access to the draft reports at its discretion.

And

The preliminary report on the crash of MH17 being prepared by the Dutch Safety Board contains a number of facts based on various sources; allowing an initial, provisional sequence of events to be made. The investigation team collected information from various sources, such as the Cockpit Voice Recorder, the Flight Data Recorder, satellite and other images, and radar information. All the data is then compared to determine whether the various sources corroborate each other, or show a different view. This is a delicate and time-consuming process that has not yet been completed.

Dutch Safety Board | Investigations & Publication | Investigation crash MH17, 17 July 2014

Given this publicly available material, Vitaly Churkin remarks at a recent UN Security Council meeting, which was called by Russia to discuss the progress of the investigation, seem odd.

"August 19 ...As far as we know, [UN’s civil aviation watchdog] ICAO is being kept on the sidelines of the investigation, which has been conducted for some time,”
Kiev must publish record of MH17 communications with traffic control – Russia — RT News

The person who heads the Dutch Safety Board investigation into M-17 is a former collegue of mine.

 

[notgoodenough]

Okay now it all comes together. Youve been paid to post pro nato propaganda at the behest of your " friend ". How could you ever think differently or come to a different conclusion than your nato " friends ". Whatever credibility you thought you had just evaporated.

Again you havent disproven anything. And your theories have so many holes, it doesnt matter how you try and twist the facts or manipulate or omit data.

Whatever struck the plane, struck the cockpit. The missiles are heat seeking. No heat in the cockpit. Whoever shot down that plane aimed exacty at the cockpit. And aimed to kill the pilots. A plane shot by a missike would have been able to send out a distress signal before going down.

I see you are desperately trying to wash natos hands of any blame. But your posts wreak of desperation. You never once tried challanging natos story line. On the contrary, you spend time glossing over all the holes in their story. You seem to think by endlessly TRYING to cast doubt. But in reality the only doubt you are casting is on your level of intellect, critical thinking skills and motivations.

Silly little propagandist.

yes, so?

The person who heads the Dutch Safety Board investigation into M-17 is a former collegue of mine.

 

[Penguin]

Okay now it all comes together. Youve been paid to post pro nato propaganda at the behest of your " friend ". How could you ever think differently or come to a different conclusion than your nato " friends ". Whatever credibility you thought you had just evaporated.

Worry about your own credibility, since again you are just ranting and not coming up with anything substantive. All you try and do is attack the messenger because you don't like the message. You have no counter arguments.

Again you havent disproven anything. And your theories have so many holes, it doesnt matter how you try and twist the facts or manipulate or omit data.

Since I've not put forward any theory or theories, I am seriously beginning to doubt you even know what a theory is.
Theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whatever struck the plane, struck the cockpit

I've not ruled that out.

The missiles are heat seeking. No heat in the cockpit.

What missiles? You agreed with the Romanian expert who suggested it was not a missile.... no plumes etc. ... now you are backing away from the gun-scenario? Anyway, a SA-11 SAM is semi-active radar homing, with optical (TV) tracking and command guidance backup for heavy ECM conditions. In the world of AAMs there are semi-active and active radar homing missiles as well.

Whoever shot down that plane aimed exacty at the cockpit. And aimed to kill the pilots. A plane shot by a missike would have been able to send out a distress signal before going down.

Supposition. And you are suggesting there was damage only to the cockpit area, which is factually incorrect. Besides, a missile can also have come from the front (all aspect AAMs are called that for just that particular capability and they don't need a big heat source like an engine. even objects such as people or aircraft skin retain heat, and as such, are especially visible in the infra-red wavelengths of light compared to coller objects in the background.), certainly if ground launched. And as put forward, standard practise would be to fire 2 missiles in quick succession.
Infrared homing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some more non-cockpit damage areas: Does MH17 wreckage prove that it was shot out the sky by a warhead? | Mail Online

I see you are desperately trying to wash natos hands of any blame.

Rather, I've gone through lengths not to point to any party in particular. Pointed out the investigation has not finished and has not come to a conclusion.

But your posts wreak of desperation. You never once tried challanging natos story line.
On the contrary, you spend time glossing over all the holes in their story.

Excuse me for staying on topic of this thread, which is the story/theory by the Romanian expert.

You seem to think by endlessly TRYING to cast doubt.

Never doubting is the only way to always be sure... and wrong. What you know about my thoughts and thought processes is exactly ... 0, zip, nada.

But in reality the only doubt you are casting is on your level of intellect, critical thinking skills and motivations.

Silly little propagandist.

Ah, for lack of substance, here come the personal attacks again....

 

[notgoodenough]

Lol. Youre still desperately screaming at the four winds but you havent proven or disproven anything. And yes, your theories. That is what they are. Theories as to what did or did not happen.

I get it, you think nato story lines and dutch shills are correct and every other expert and theory isnt.

Youre trying to cast doubt. You havent done that. No matter how many pictures of planes you post. Those are all theories.


So what was the Ukie plane doing shadowing the passenger plane and why did the plane go down seconds afterwards?

Lets hear your theories on this one? Or are you to scared to address that simple fact?

I know you are. Which is why you cant be taken seriously. Anybody who omits such compelling evidence from their analysis is disingenuous or simply trying to hide something.

Worry about your own credibility, since again you are just ranting and not coming up with anything substantive.


I am seriously beginning to doubt you even know what a theory is.
Theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I've not ruled that out.


What missiles? You agreed with the Romanian expert who suggested it was not a missile.... no plumes etc. ... now you are backing of the gun-scenario? Anyway, a SA-11 SAM is semi-active radar homing, with optical (TV) tracking andcommand guidance backup for heavy ECM conditions. In the world of AAMs there are semi-active and active radar homing missiles as well.


Supposition. And you are suggesting there was damage only to the cockpit area, which is factually incorrect. Besides, a missile can also have come from the front (all aspect AAMs are called that for just that particular capability, they don't need a heat source like an engine. even objects such as people or aircraft skin retain heat, and as such, are especially visible in the infra-red wavelengths of light compared to coller objects in the background.), certainly if ground launched.
Infrared homing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some more bob-cockpit damage areas Does MH17 wreckage prove that it was shot out the sky by a warhead? | Mail Online


Rather, I've gone through lengths not to point to any party in particular.

Excuse me for staying on topic of this thread, which is the story/theory of the Romanian expert.


Never doubting is the only way to always be sure... and wrong.



Silly little propagandist.

Ah, for lack of substance, here come the personal attacks agains.... [/quote]

 

[Penguin]

 

[Penguin]

Portfolioholder MH-17 investigations Dutch Safety Board.

Prof. Mr. E. R.. dr. (Erwin) Muller (1965) is a council member and Vice-Chairman. He is also Professor of Security and Justice, and Scientific Director of the Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology at the University of Leiden. Erwin Muller was previously director of the Institute for Safety and Crisis Management, Member of the Council for Public Administration, Vice-Dean of the Faculty of Law at Leiden University, director of the Dutch Police Academy and director of the Dutch School of Public Administration. He has many scientific and practical investigations and publications on security and the security.

Other positions
Editor, Order and Safety series, Kluwer Publishing
Member, Advisory Council on National Security
Member, Police Knowledge Council
Member, Editorial Board Newsletter Crisismanagement and Disasterrelief
Editorial Board Member, Safety Journal (Boom-Lemma publishers)

Translated from Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid | Prof. mr. dr. Erwin Muller
See also Prof.mr.dr. E.R. Muller (http://www.narcis.nl)

 

[notgoodenough]

Repeating nato propaganda and calling it analysis. How quaint.

 

[boomslang]

Repeating nato propaganda and calling it analysis. How quaint.

Hey, you false-flagging bull shit artist. EVERYONE is on to you. Nutsack.

 

[Penguin]

Repeating nato propaganda and calling it analysis. How quaint.

 

[notgoodenough]

Basically. But go ahead and keep sucking on natos teet. Im sure they are telling you the truth.