Another Malaysia airline crashed.

[LGM]

This doesn't sound good at all...

A Malaysian airliner reportedly with 295 people on board has crashed in Ukraine near the Russian border, on a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.

Full story

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28354856

[devonutopia]

Ominous indeed!

[mender]

Reports that it was shot down by Ukraine or Russia too.....

[Clunkclick]

Somebody operating in that beknighted region is trying to get a decisive advantage in the World opinion stakes. Shame on both your houses.

 

Doesn't look too good for Malaysian Airlines. UK NOTAM advice to UK operators states avoid area - its a warzone and the least you can expect is conflicting air traffic advice ! Malaysians must have their equivalent of NOTAMS. QED, end of Malaysian Airlines.

 

Apparently, one of the passengers tweeted a picture of the aircraft on the pan at Schipol, with the caption in Dutch "In case it disappears, this is what it looks like".

 

The missile which some sources are  alleging  hit the airliner is designed to attack ground attack aircraft, drones, cruise missiles and low-flying stuff in general. The Malaysian flight was at 33,000 ft.

 

 

Nick

Edited 17 July, 2014 by Clunkclick

[Bian]

not knowing my missiles,to hit something at 33,000 ft that's not easily acquirable hardware is it?. More military than rebel surely.

[Clunkclick]

not knowing my missiles,to hit something at 33,000 ft that's not easily acquirable hardware is it?. More military than rebel surely.

That's more or less the line the BeeB has taken. Bearing in mind that each side has been breaking into one anothers arms depots . . . .

 

If the ground strike photos shown on twitter are genuine, then it looks like it was truly blown apart.

 

Some sources were saying it was a Buk (An SA-6 derivative);-

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub

 

Though, I thought these high-altitude anti-aircraft missiles operated by ejecting a continuous metal chain (Or similar)  which sliced anything in its way apart i.e. a clean cut, rather than just explode a charge. Pictures of bits of the fuselage on the ground show a ragged edge.

 

Nick

Edited 17 July, 2014 by Clunkclick

[trundlenut]

But at 33,000 ft it would be like popping a balloon, so you probably wouldn't get neat edges.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Bian]

how long does it take acquire a target on these things, based on a speed of around 535mph for the plane you have about 4 mins to get a lock and shoot it down. apparently the deployment time is 5 mins, from that i can only think it was premeditated but that's with an extremely limited knowledge of the tech.

[Clunkclick]

how long does it take acquire a target on these things, based on a speed of around 535mph for the plane you have about 4 mins to get a lock and shoot it down. apparently the deployment time is 5 mins, from that i can only think it was premeditated but that's with an extremely limited knowledge of the tech.

Yea, Copy that on the deployment time:-

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system

 

Given what's happened in the immediate area in the last week, i.e. shooting down of an Su-25 and an Antov only hours earlier, strikes me it may well have already been deployed and operating - that won't stop them claiming operator error when the firing point is identified from AWACs/E-8 traces or satellite piccies.

 

What might of course be limiting in mitigating responsibility is the limited range of 25Kms. Someone is bound to try and argue that something flying at 3000 feet, 2 miles down range, would require the same radar elevation as looking at something 19 miles away at 33,000 feet. But then, apparently both the optical and radar detection systems have greater range than the missile (Optical 50 Kms and Radar 70Kms).

 

Correction. The warhead is a 70Kg HE fragmentation device.

 

Quick calculation is that the horizon to horizon distance for an aircraft at 30,000 is about 213 miles (Apparently, the square root of the altitude x 1.23, gives this)  So it would take an airliner about 20 minutes to pass horizon to horizon. Bags of time for radar to acquire and lock-on if the radar acquires at 50 miles (its max range). But as you say that's a totally different proposition from acquiring and locking-on at short range - I would imagine different type of radar signal and different method of operating the hardware.

 

Nick

Edited 17 July, 2014 by Clunkclick

[Bian]

Yea, Copy that on the deployment time:-

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system

 

Given what's happened in the immediate area in the last week, i.e. shooting down of an Su-25 and an Antov only hours earlier, strikes me it may well have already been deployed and operating - that won't stop them claiming operator error when the firing point is identified from AWACs/E-8 traces or satellite piccies.

 

What might of course be limiting in mitigating responsibility is the limited range of 25Kms. Someone is bound to try and argue that something flying at 3000 feet, 2 miles down range, would require the same radar elevation as looking at something 19 miles away at 33,000 feet. But then, apparently both the optical and radar detection systems have greater range than the missile (Optical 50 Kms and Radar 70Kms).

 

Correction. The warhead is a 70Kg HE fragmentation device.

 

Nick

 

 

HE rounds that's crazy, considering the other shootings then it's more likely a spontaneous act. 70kms radar would give about 5 mins either side with maybe 2 mins either side of missile effectiveness. but with the radar surely you have five minutes of " that's a commercial jet" or can't certain radars detect aircraft type?

[Bian]

why would they route planes over a war zone anyway. i would have thought other planes being shot down would be something of a red flag, i know they are running a business but it still seems stupid.

[Aspman]

It's big, deliberately easy to see on radar, no countermeasures, no evasive action. IF it was a SAM it would be an easy hit.

 

Scary days ahead.

[briskycat]

Several minutes after the plane had been shot down (approximately @17:50 MSK) separatists wrote on their leader's VK page (http://vk.com/strelkov_info) a very brave and cynical report that they had shot down a Ukrainian military An-26. The post had a video attached to it. Later, they deleted that post and posted another one, also about a shot down An-26, - less brave, which I have seen myself. Now, there is no mention of An-26 on the page at all. I reckon it is a clear indication of who is guilty.

Edited 17 July, 2014 by briskycat

[briskycat]

This link to a separatists' news web site explains where they could have got armament capable of shooting down an aircraft flying at altitudes of 32000 feet: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Frusvesna.su%2Fnews%2F1404041521&edit-text=&act=url

But that was clearly not the only way.

[Huskoda]

why would they route planes over a war zone anyway. i would have thought other planes being shot down would be something of a red flag, i know they are running a business but it still seems stupid.

This. Aircraft are regularly being shot down in that area by both sides, yet they still thought it ok to fly a civilian plane through that airspace.

I see the blame has already been shoved onto The Terrorists. Quite a bit easier than admitting you let a civilian aircraft fly through an active war zone where everyone has modern AA hardware.

[briskycat]

I see the blame has already been shoved onto The Terrorists. Quite a bit easier than admitting you let a civilian aircraft fly through an active war zone where everyone has modern AA hardware.

I hope letting civilian aircraft to fly through a war zone (albeit only at altitudes higher than 32000 feet) was a mistake. But actually that - hiding behind civilians - is what the terrorists do day by day throughout this conflict.

Edited 17 July, 2014 by briskycat

[LGM]

Looking at the flight plan of the plane it appears it goes the exact same route everyday, so I can't see it being a mistake.

[Oli3000]

Interesting read! It cannot be long until we know considering the UN are still flying their reconnaissance planes, too.

 

It's not a good situation, though.

 

Very sorry for all those who lost their lives today.

[gadgetman]

Bet the Chinese aren't happy....

[Jabozuma]

 

Not your average "separatist" arsenal...

[vindaloo]

Bet the Chinese aren't happy....

 

 

More or less what my mate said. "****! That's really going to **** off the Chinese".

 

Malaysian Airlines popular with Chinese and Malaysia itself having a big Chinese or Chinese descended population, alongside ethnic Malays etc..

[sparks03]

Footage on BBC shows a huge explosion occurring on the ground but no apparent smoke/ debris fall in the sky. Plane possibly came down intact?

[FUBAR]

Footage on BBC shows a huge explosion occurring on the ground but no apparent smoke/ debris fall in the sky. Plane possibly came down intact?

 

There are reports on BBC of falling debri also. But weather it broke up in mid air or not has no bearing on what happened to it, a mechanical failure can cause mid air disintegration and AA doesn't automatically mean the same, can just cripple the aircraft shredding control surfaces with shrapnel causing it to flounder. So who knows, might as well just wait for the official findings, we will know more soon enough. 

 

In a tragic twist of fate, one of the Dutch passengers tweeted a pic of plane before boarding, joking in case it 'disappeared' :( Tragic! 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2696555/Did-passenger-doomed-flight-MH17-joke-flight-disappearing-Dutch-man-said-posted-picture-plane-boarding.html

[Can]

Most Sam systems dont actually create large fireballs they only cause fragmentation damage to the airframe which causes the engines of the target to be damaged or damages enough of the structure to cause the target to suffer structural failure. Also ccomercial airliners and military transport aircraft look very similar on radar until you start doing some advanced things.

P.S. the damaged tail section is consistent with the damage you would expect from a proximity detention from a chase shot missile.

[Huskoda]

Looking at the flight plan of the plane it appears it goes the exact same route everyday, so I can't see it being a mistake.

I wasn't suggesting this flight went there by accident, but rather that the planners didn't think it a problem. What could possibly go wrong? I think America had already said none of its airlines are to fly over the Ukraine, now Eurocontrol has declared the same. But it took an airliner being shot down for that to happen.