Malaysian Airlines MH317

Oberon · 09-12-14, 06:19 PM

Probably:

But with metal instead of wood.

TarJak · 09-12-14, 07:02 PM

Maybe or hey that metal is not used in aircraft manufacture but is used in suitcases or weapons.

Jimbuna · 09-13-14, 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarJak

Maybe or hey that metal is not used in aircraft manufacture but is used in suitcases or weapons.

What puzzles me is the fact they state they are going to such detailed and elaborate lengths but the recent report said squat.

Aktungbby · 09-22-14, 05:58 PM

A little fresh perspective : http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1556036/timeline-tragic-history-civilian-airliner-shootdown-incidents

Skybird · 11-14-14, 04:38 PM

It probably is more appropriate to post it here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...et-attack.html

What I said in the other thread, still is valid here: further examination of this photo is needed. Just to claim that it is photoshopped, is not good enough. The claim needs to get proven. Because just a claim could be as wrong as the photo can be forged.

Repost from the other thread:

The airliner in the photo has two engines and it looks like a long body if judging that against the form of the wings. It seems to be a long plane, with twin-engine configuration - and that matches indeed the shape of a 777 that the downed MA17 has been.

The body length of a 777 is 63-73 meters, depending on specific model. If measuring the length of the airliner versus the distance between the fighter and the airliner, I find the distance to be around 9.5x the length of the airliner. Calculating with a airliner length of 70 meters, the shooting distance then is around 660 meters. That is the range for an infrared-guided short range AAM.

The pilot must have had visual contact then. At same altitude, he probably could not see the engine configuration, could not see whether there were two or four engines, the silhouette would allowed to see that if being at a higher or lower altitude, maybe. Maybe the pilot got an idea of the colour scheme, however.

And here we are at that old scenario again that was described as a possibility some weeks earlier - that maybe it was an intentional Ukrainian attack against the presidential Russian machine, an IL-96 with 4 engines. As I earlier showed, the colours schemes are anything but impossible to be mistaken.

Examination of this satellite image is needed. Trust in official Western sources is not justified - they are propaganda tools like Ukrainian and Russian official channels as well.

Note that the blue-red lines on both airlines are ABOVE the height level of wings and engines, they are not being partially blocked by the engines if looking at the planes from same altitude or slightly elevated position. I think for a pilot in that situation, that hprizonmtal line acros the full length of the main body served as a main hint for the pilot to identity the "Russian presidential plane".
__________________

mapuc · 11-14-14, 05:05 PM

^ You are right this photo need to be investigated by the best there are in that field of expertise

If I know the human psychology correct-there will always be people who claim the photo to be either genuin or false-what ever this investigation will show.

Markus

Oberon · 11-14-14, 05:07 PM

I thought that it was supposed to have been shot down by a Frogfoot?

That looks more like a MiG-29 or Su-27.

Skybird · 11-14-14, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mapuc

^ You are right this photo need to be investigated by the best there are in that field of expertise

If I know the human psychology correct-there will always be people who claim the photo to be either genuin or false-what ever this investigation will show.

Markus

Like with the earlier scneario (SU25 firing mike mike) I do not claim it is true - just that the claims need to be examined and further verified or falsified. The governments in Moscow and Kiev, Washington and London cannot be trusted in their claims, and they all have the means to produce forged material, and they all have motives to see their claims being pushed through.

CptSimFreak · 11-15-14, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

It probably is more appropriate to post it here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...et-attack.html

_

Original source is from a russian news channel claiming that it was from foreign satellite... absolute silliness and horrible knowledge about military aviation. They claimed first missile was into cockpit followed by gun runs and finally by IR missile.

Catfish · 11-16-14, 05:49 AM

^ Did you happen to overread this :

"Evidence Is Now Conclusive: 2 Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Did Shoot Down that Malaysian Airliner. No ‘Buk’ Missile Ground-Shot."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-...n-mh17/5394111

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/03...enario-shifts/

http://my.firedoglake.com/ohiogringo...-flight-mh-17/

B.t.w. this was analyzed by US intelligence, not even russian.

I just wonder why the russians (being officially off the hook so to speak), now present evidence, that it WAS shot down by ground launchers. Why ? More deception ? Or do they just say it, because they have to negate anything the US say ?

Stealhead · 09-12-14, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

Probably:

But with metal instead of wood.

You win at internet.

Meme master.

09-22-14, 05:58 PM	#4
Aktungbby Gefallen Engel U-666 Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: On a tilted, overheated, overpopulated spinning mudball on Collision course with Andromeda Galaxy Posts: 30,039 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Why such a fuss evidently par for the course A little fresh perspective : http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1556036/timeline-tragic-history-civilian-airliner-shootdown-incidents __________________ "Only two things are infinite; The Universe and human squirrelyness?!!

11-14-14, 04:38 PM	#5
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,679 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	It probably is more appropriate to post it here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...et-attack.html What I said in the other thread, still is valid here: further examination of this photo is needed. Just to claim that it is photoshopped, is not good enough. The claim needs to get proven. Because just a claim could be as wrong as the photo can be forged. Repost from the other thread: The airliner in the photo has two engines and it looks like a long body if judging that against the form of the wings. It seems to be a long plane, with twin-engine configuration - and that matches indeed the shape of a 777 that the downed MA17 has been. The body length of a 777 is 63-73 meters, depending on specific model. If measuring the length of the airliner versus the distance between the fighter and the airliner, I find the distance to be around 9.5x the length of the airliner. Calculating with a airliner length of 70 meters, the shooting distance then is around 660 meters. That is the range for an infrared-guided short range AAM. The pilot must have had visual contact then. At same altitude, he probably could not see the engine configuration, could not see whether there were two or four engines, the silhouette would allowed to see that if being at a higher or lower altitude, maybe. Maybe the pilot got an idea of the colour scheme, however. And here we are at that old scenario again that was described as a possibility some weeks earlier - that maybe it was an intentional Ukrainian attack against the presidential Russian machine, an IL-96 with 4 engines. As I earlier showed, the colours schemes are anything but impossible to be mistaken. Examination of this satellite image is needed. Trust in official Western sources is not justified - they are propaganda tools like Ukrainian and Russian official channels as well. Note that the blue-red lines on both airlines are ABOVE the height level of wings and engines, they are not being partially blocked by the engines if looking at the planes from same altitude or slightly elevated position. I think for a pilot in that situation, that hprizonmtal line acros the full length of the main body served as a main hint for the pilot to identity the "Russian presidential plane". __________________ __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 11-14-14 at 05:03 PM.

11-16-14, 05:49 AM	#10
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,785 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ Did you happen to overread this : "Evidence Is Now Conclusive: 2 Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Did Shoot Down that Malaysian Airliner. No ‘Buk’ Missile Ground-Shot." http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-...n-mh17/5394111 http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/03...enario-shifts/ http://my.firedoglake.com/ohiogringo...-flight-mh-17/ B.t.w. this was analyzed by US intelligence, not even russian. I just wonder why the russians (being officially off the hook so to speak), now present evidence, that it WAS shot down by ground launchers. Why ? More deception ? Or do they just say it, because they have to negate anything the US say ? Last edited by Catfish; 11-16-14 at 06:00 AM.

09-12-14, 06:19 PM	#1
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Probably: But with metal instead of wood.

09-12-14, 07:02 PM	#2
TarJak Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,052 Downloads: 150 Uploads: 8	Maybe or hey that metal is not used in aircraft manufacture but is used in suitcases or weapons.

11-14-14, 05:05 PM	#6
mapuc CINC Pacific Fleet Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 20,543 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	^ You are right this photo need to be investigated by the best there are in that field of expertise If I know the human psychology correct-there will always be people who claim the photo to be either genuin or false-what ever this investigation will show. Markus

11-14-14, 05:07 PM	#7
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	I thought that it was supposed to have been shot down by a Frogfoot? That looks more like a MiG-29 or Su-27.