MH17 might have been shot down from air — chief Dutch investigator

[asianobserve]

I have already said before, the first thing in a criminal investigation is "intent". Why would Russia shoot down a Malaysian airliner. There is no reason in hell.

"A" wanted to shoot "B" because he slept with former's girlfriend while he was busy posting here on defenceforumindia, and so "A" waited for "B" the whole day at a street corner. Then at around 7 p.m. (it was black out and the area was dark) "A" noticed the silhouette of a man who had the same height profile as "B." Seething with anger and intent on shooting the man who besmirched his honor (and all the glorious civilization behind him) and honestly believing that that man at the corner was "B," "A" shot him several times right there and then without sufficiently verifying his identity who turned out to be "C" (and not "B"). As a result "C" instantly died from multiple gun shot wounds.

Question: Can "A" claim innocence by saying that he only mistakenly shot and killed "C" and that actually he has no intention to shoot or kill him?

 

[Khagesh]

It is not difficult at all to install a missile on Su-25 that can shoot down an airliner. Why Su-25 has to rise to airliner's height at all? After all location of the airliner was available to Ukrainian radar system very well. Launching a missile at it was not at all difficult.

Ukrainians know how to make an air-air missile very well. A modified air-air missile for a well planned "false flag operation" is within the capability of both Ukraine and USA.

Exactly.

If rising to the opposing aircarft's height was a necessity, then dogfights would never happen in the vertical

Though personally I veer towards a Gun kill.

The R-60 ranges to 4 km effective and 8 km max. For the airliner with big fat engines, the max range would be relevant and not the 4 km max. dogfighting outer ranges.

For GSh30-2 the effective range would be something like 1200-1800 but the shot itself would actually keep going till around 4 km easily. Again the large size of the airliner would make the outer limit easily achievable.

The difference in altitudes was never mentioned beyond 3 km.

But my suspicion is that R-60 would be deadly accurate and go straight for those massive engines. While the pictures doing the round during those times were showing suspicious holes in the cockpit area. Also correlates with the dead silence from the pilots who were not copying any commands just a few seconds before confirmed kill. With the R-60 the cockpit would have been alive for much longer. At least enough for the pilots to copy ATC commands or report damage to engine(s).

 

[sgarg]

"A" wanted to shoot "B" because he slept with former's girlfriend while he was busy posting here on defenceforumindia, and so "A" waited for "B" the whole day at a street corner. Then at around 7 p.m. (it was black out and the area was dark) "A" noticed the silhouette of a man who had the same height profile as "B." Seething with anger and intent on shooting the man who besmirched his honor (and all the glorious civilization behind him) and honestly believing that that man at the corner was "B," "A" shot him several times right there and then without sufficiently verifying his identity who turned out to be "C" (and not "B"). As a result "C" instantly died from multiple gun shot wounds.

Question: Can "A" claim innocence by saying that he only mistakenly shot and killed "C" and that actually he has no intention to shoot or kill him?

What nonsense you write!

 

[sgarg]

Exactly.

If rising to the opposing aircarft's height was a necessity, then dogfights would never happen in the vertical

Though personally I veer towards a Gun kill.

The R-60 ranges to 4 km effective and 8 km max. For the airliner with big fat engines, the max range would be relevant and not the 4 km max. dogfighting outer ranges.

For GSh30-2 the effective range would be something like 1200-1800 but the shot itself would actually keep going till around 4 km easily. Again the large size of the airliner would make the outer limit easily achievable.

The difference in altitudes was never mentioned beyond 3 km.

But my suspicion is that R-60 would be deadly accurate and go straight for those massive engines. While the pictures doing the round during those times were showing suspicious holes in the cockpit area. Also correlates with the dead silence from the pilots who were not copying any commands just a few seconds before confirmed kill. With the R-60 the cockpit would have been alive for much longer. At least enough for the pilots to copy ATC commands or report damage to engine(s).

The older K-13 has up to 30 km range. It has bigger warhead and 2.5 mach speed. Why R-60?? Why not K-13?? Ukraine has large stocks of old weapons.

While R-60 will be more effective against fast maneuvering targets, the old K-13 WILL STILL KILL AN AIRLINER.

 

[Akim]

The older K-13 has up to 30 km range. It has bigger warhead and 2.5 mach speed. Why R-60?? Why not K-13?? Ukraine has large stocks of old weapons.

While R-60 will be more effective against fast maneuvering targets, the old K-13 WILL STILL KILL AN AIRLINER.

Each weapon has its expiration date. K-13 is not combat efficient.

 

[SajeevJino]

Each weapon has its expiration date. K-13 is not combat efficient.

in 2020. he will claim that Akim ordered his soldiers to throw stones over MH 17, which could brought down the Plane

Further the Stones were effective when a bird can bring down the Flight then why can't the stones

Keep up

 

[Akim]

in 2020. he will claim that Akim ordered his soldiers to throw stones over MH 17, which could brought down the Plane

Further the Stones were effective when a bird can bring down the Flight then why can't the stones

Keep up

In each anti-aircraft missile have a solid fuel. If not conducts its warranty, it loses the properties. Missiles K-13 were filmed long times with arms.

 

[sgarg]

Each weapon has its expiration date. K-13 is not combat efficient.

Ukraine is perfectly capable to refurbish K-13 missile or other Soviet missiles. My point is Kiev can do any amount of mischief to blame Russia.

We shall see. Let the Dutch conclude the investigation and bring specific charges against a person/persons with proof. I am waiting.

 

[sgarg]

In each anti-aircraft missile have a solid fuel. If not conducts its warranty, it loses the properties. Missiles K-13 were filmed long times with arms.

So what. Old missiles have been repaired/refurbished.

 

[Akim]

Ukraine is perfectly capable to refurbish K-13 missile or other Soviet missiles. My point is Kiev can do any amount of mischief to blame Russia.

We shall see. Let the Dutch conclude the investigation and bring specific charges against a person/persons with proof. I am waiting.

So what. Old missiles have been repaired/refurbished.

Why restore old air missile that Ukraine has a huge stock of missiles for air-to-air short-range (R-60M and R-73)?

 

[sgarg]

Watch this youtube video of K-13 missile launch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kSA_9STo-c

It shows some Mujahids re-purposing K-13 missile. If Mujahid can do this, Ukraine is capable of far more.

 

[sgarg]

Why restore old air missile that Ukraine has a huge stock of missiles for air-to-air short-range (R-60M and R-73)?

Exactly. So Kiev was in a position to shoot down this flight from Su-25. The statement that "su-25 cannot shoot an airliner at that height" is bunkum.

A heat seeking missile can be launched at a higher target any day. A difference of height of 4000 meters will not stop it.

 

[Akim]

Exactly. So Kiev was in a position to shoot down this flight from Su-25. The statement that "su-25 cannot shoot an airliner at that height" is bunkum.

A heat seeking missile can be launched at a higher target any day. A difference of height of 4000 meters will not stop it.

Such missiles fall into the engine and not into the cockpit. Fire-and-forget has a certain angle of the target. Su-25 is not able to rise vertically. Although, why would I argue? You want to believe in this version. I said that Ukraine does not have a workable К-13.

 

[sgarg]

Such missiles fall into the engine and not into the cockpit. Fire-and-forget has a certain angle of the target. Su-25 is not able to rise vertically. Although, why would I argue? You want to believe in this version. I said that Ukraine does not have a workable К-13.

Why would it "fall" into the engine? Why it won't use a proximity fuse??

See the issue is let Dutch come up with charges in a Court. We shall see if these charges hold.

Fighting a court case against a hypothetical Kub missile launcher and its crew won't be easy.

 

[Akim]

Why would it "fall" into the engine? Why it won't use a proximity fuse??

See the issue is let Dutch come up with charges in a Court. We shall see if these charges hold.

Fighting a court case against a hypothetical Kub missile launcher and its crew won't be easy.

You said that this type of missile locks onto the engine heat. Flying up to him at 1-2 metres triggered the fuse. Su-25 can not shooting radar Fire-and-forget. because he has no radar.

 

[sgarg]

You said that this type of missile locks onto the engine heat. Flying up to him at 1-2 metres triggered the fuse. Su-25 can not shooting radar Fire-and-forget. because he has no radar.

Not necessary that a missile locks to engine heat. Look here:
All-aspect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An all-aspect missile is one which is able to track a target no matter which way the target faces relative to the missile. In other words, an all-aspect missile can be launched against a target in a tail-chase engagement, in a head-on engagement, in a side-on engagement, from above, from below, etc.

 

[sgarg]

Most infrared guided missiles have their seekers mounted on a gimbal. This allows the sensor to be pointed at the target when the missile is not. This is important for two main reasons. One is that before and during launch, the missile cannot always be pointed at the target. Rather, the pilot or operator points the seeker at the target using radar, a helmet-mounted sight, an optical sight or possibly by pointing the nose of the aircraft or missile launcher directly at the target. Once the seeker sees and recognises the target, it indicates this to the operator who then typically "uncages" the seeker (which is allowed to follow the target). After this point the seeker remains locked on the target, even if the aircraft or launching platform moves. When the weapon is launched, it may not be able to control the direction it points until the motor fires and it reaches a high enough speed for its fins to control its direction of travel. Until then, the gimballed seeker needs to be able to track the target independently.

The MH17 was hit from the side. An all aspect IR missile is perfectly capable of hitting the airliner from the side and detonate via a proximity fuze.

The missile can be any modern Western missile. These days all Western weapons are available to Ukraine. With Ukraine and USA being such bumchums, such little things are not difficult for Ukraine to pull.

This was a very well planned false flag. Ukraine intentionally changed the course of the plane, reduced its height, and sent the plane to exactly where a Buk battery was located. Too perfect - isn't it.

Infrared homing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Akim]

Not necessary that a missile locks to engine heat. Look here:
All-aspect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I decided to prove it using Wikipedia? Great. Heat air missile has always focused on the engine from any angle of launch.

 

[SajeevJino]

This was a very well planned false flag. Ukraine intentionally changed the course of the plane, reduced its height, and sent the plane to exactly where a Buk battery was located. Too perfect - isn't it.

Exactly . A Nobel for you from Jesus Christ

 

[sgarg]

I decided to prove it using Wikipedia? Great. Heat air missile has always focused on the engine from any angle of launch.

How do you know??