Malaysian Airlines 777 crashed over Ukraine

[Goran_M]

Mistaking a civilian aircraft for a military aircraft has happened before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

[Andyrooc]

Mistaking a civilian aircraft for a military aircraft has happened before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

That was no mistake. Major Genadi Osipovich (the Su-15 pilot) said  "I saw two rows of windows and knew that this was a Boeing. I knew this was a civilian plane."

 

This was though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 - that incident, and the reasons for it always remind me that these kind of mistakes can happen, even with a highly trained crew with the most sophisticated equipment.

[eaglewing7]

KAL007 was certainly a major incident, but because the Korean airliner strayed into Soviet airspace, and then when intercepted, did not respond to any air to air signals or radio comms, it was shot down.

 

If you are intercepted, you need to make contact with the intercepting aircraft immediately, and follow all orders, failure to do so tends to lead to a very ugly ending.

[ezfox]

It all has happened before. Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 for details !!!

 

For me the real question is why the FAA allowed and still allows civil planes to travel over warzones.

There was a restriction to have minimum height of 30.000ft when crossing Ukraine before MH17 happened..

Now we know that its not safe even above 30.000ft - this is proven at least now and it was known before - because of what happened to Siberia 1812 flying at 36.000ft !

And what does the FAA do in response to MH17 ? They issue a new restriction to only fly above Iraq with minimum height of: tada...30.000ft

Doesnt make any sense from my pov and until the regulators of air traffic in general dont change this behaviour, this list will grow:

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

Edited August 4, 2014 by ezfox

[eaglewing7]

The difference between Siberian 1812, and Malaysian 17, is that MH17 was shot down on purpose, or at least targeted on purpose.  Siberian 1812 was hit by an errant missile, which was certainly an unfortunate event.

 

The FAA has nothing to do with civilian airliners travelling on international air routes, their jurisdiction is in the US, only, as it should be.  The group that issues warnings, NOTAMs, etc, is ICAO.  The International Civil Aviation Organization, which is headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

 

The NOTAM issued cautioned that it could be potentially dangerous overflying Eastern Ukraine lower than 32,000 feet, MH17 was at 33,000 feet, which was perfectly legal.  The reason that 32,000 feet was picked for the NOTAM was that the aircraft that had been previously shot down over Ukraine were all Ukrainian Air Force aircraft, be it helicopters, SU-25s, IL-76s, and AN-26s.  The thought was that these had all been shot down by MANPAD shoulder launched SAMs, which have a maximum range somewhere between 15-20,000 feet.  The highest air force target that was hit was at around 21,000 feet.  So, ICAO used the data they had been supplied, and added a rather significant buffer, thus why 32,000 feet was used.  Of course, no one had taken into account that the rebels had been supplied with a BUK SA-11 SAM launcher, with a maximum target height of over 70,000 feet.

 

As for Iraq, there haven't been any incidents to begin with.  Closing down a huge chunk of international airspace is a very difficult thing to do, and is a decision that cannot be taken lightly.  Besides that, airlines are masters at risk management, and it is up to each airline to decide what routing they feel is safest.  And finally, consider the economy of forcing airlines to divert hundreds, or thousands of miles off course to skirt around a restricted area, huge amounts of fuel are consumed, ticket prices are forced up, etc.

[captainamerican]

 

Doesn't get much more incriminating than that.

 

 

As a Ukrainian myself, I can confirm that the translations were correct. I have family in Ukraine that were drafted, and they are conducting operations to stop the terrorists once and for all. Unfortunately, there is a large amount of evidence suggesting that these so called "terrorists" are russian trained undercover troops, based on their findings of russian weapons, documents, recordings, and eyewitness accounts. 

 

There is so much instability in this world but let us all remember to be kind to one another. Sometimes we forget that there are more important and more serious things happening in this world.

[eaglewing7]

I have a feeling, that what will occur in Ukraine, will follow this sort of timeline:

 

As the Ukrainian Forces continue to advance in Eastern Ukraine, against the "rebels/separatists", more Russian weapons and support will flow across the border, in an attempt to stem the tide.

 

If the advance continues, and momentum is gained by the Ukrainians, shortly before all rebel held territories are secured, and resistance is mopped up, Russia will invade Eastern Ukraine.  Now, this invasion, will be done in the same manner as was done in Crimea, under the guise of a humanitarian operation, whatever you want to call it.  In the end it is an invasion of the sovereign territory of an independent nation.

 

Now, unlike in Crimea, Ukraine will likely respond in force to this invasion, which will inevitably lead to a rather significant show of force from Russia.  All of the friendly Eastern Ukrainian territory will be taken over, and annexed by Russia.

 

With the country divided, and a visibly weakened government in Kiev, Russia will eventually envelop all of Ukraine, securing once more a puppet state between her and the EU bloc.

 

Now, the question is what response will the EU and NATO take if this is to occur?  So far, the EU has been quite reticent, mainly because of the delicate supply of oil and gas, the majority of which is imported from Russia, and as we all know, European winters can be quite harsh...  NATO may be willing to put some additional boots on the ground in Poland and around the Baltic, but I don't see there being much of an appetite for war in Europe, yet...

Edited August 5, 2014 by eaglewing7

[Goran_M]

There is so much instability in this world but let us all remember to be kind to one another. Sometimes we forget that there are more important and more serious things happening in this world.

 

 

I never forget about the more important things in the world.  I stared death in the face and I'm still here.  Believe me, when you go through what I went through, you look at things very differently.

[eMko]

eaglewing7: I also don't think that NATO will do something - Ukraine is not a part of NATO. United Nations are useless in this case - Russians have the "veto" right there*. European Union countries have a lot of business with Russians and I believe that the restrictions made by EU will harm the EU equally, may be even slightly more, than Russia. We are rather small country (Czech Republic) quite a far from Ukraine (6hr car ride to Uzhorod - but believe me, the Ukrainian vodka is worth it!), yet we will lose at least thousand work places in companies which sells their products to Russia.

 

I wish 2 things:

 

1) I wish that Ukraine was a part of NATO. Attacking 1 NATO country = attacking whole NATO, I don't believe that Russia would like to mess with whole NATO. Mr. Putin is unpredictable but I don't believe that he would be that fool.

2) I wish that Ukraine was a part of EU. I already meet people from Ukraine working here, mainly doctors and construction workers. They have problems with immigration office here, mainly the construction workers which a lot of them work here illegally. It's 21st century, why the hell somebody has to work illegally to avoid legal problems??? And of course, I would have personal profit from Ukraine being part of EU. Whenever I would go for shopping the vodka, I wouldn't have to hide it from customs officers. :-)

 

* I'm not telling that UN is generally useless. Not at all. But it's a pity that it can't do anything where Russia wants something and USA (+ EU) want something else.

[eaglewing7]

I wish that Ukraine was a part of NATO. Attacking 1 NATO country = attacking whole NATO, I don't believe that Russia would like to mess with whole NATO.

 

It doesn't matter, because as NATO has already shown, no country wants to respond to the current threats to territorial integrity, because it could provoke a further escalation.  If say Poland was attacked, odds are all that NATO would do is make a gesture in Russia's general direction, and then withdraw.  I'm sure there are plenty of plans out there in the event of a full scale attack, the question is, does anyone really want to try and counterattack against Russia?

 

Mr. Putin is unpredictable...

 

I disagree wholeheartedly.  He appears unpredictable, especially to the Western media/politicians, but his actions are very much planned, and executed with a high degree of accuracy and certainty.  An interesting piece was written by the BBC, and it explains quite clearly that the world ignored Vladimir Putin, when he was first sworn into office, but during his swearing in, he outlined his plans for the Russian Federation, plans which are currently being enacted.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26769481

[captainamerican]

I never forget about the more important things in the world.  I stared death in the face and I'm still here.  Believe me, when you go through what I went through, you look at things very differently.

Ive had life changing experiences as well and my outlook on the world is also different, however, my opinion is not relevant on this topic. Is there any update on the crash site? 

 

I never thought a plane crash would involve politics.

[howardthepilot1999]

Having a one minute silence and flag at half mast today at school for MH17