Malaysian Airlines 777 down on Ukraine / Russia Border?

[TheSnitch]

Reardy Mister said:

TPS, not once have I accused anyone of gross negligence. Read my posts, not the angry baggage handler's.

I never even said being shot down was foreseeable. I have simply pointed out that there was a risk that other airlines did not take. That demonstrates and an extra tier of operational culture or risk management in the industry that can help a consumer decide where to spend their money.

Do you think you could cut out the ''I can see you are angry/baggage handler'' Strawman stuff, please? Cheers

[Derek Smith]

skyrover said:

As expected, the Russian propaganda machine in full swing.

I don't want to start an argument that ends up with personal attacks - there's enough of them on this thread already - but are you suggesting that in the West we are not subject to propaganda over this incident?

[skyrover]

Derek Smith said:

skyrover said:

As expected, the Russian propaganda machine in full swing.

I don't want to start an argument that ends up with personal attacks - there's enough of them on this thread already - but are you suggesting that in the West we are not subject to propaganda over this incident?

I take it you are not familiar with Russia media?

[skyrover]

The Weimar Triangle (Germany, France and Poland) demands a ceasefire in Ukraine in order to investigate the crash. There needs to be a free access to the crash site. If the investigation confirms the plane was shot down, those responsible will be brought to justice, FM's Steinmeier, Fabius and Sikorski said in a joint statement

http://m.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/article/22874138/...

[mcdjl]

Reardy Mister said:

TPS, not once have I accused anyone of gross negligence. Read my posts, not The Snitch's.

I never even said being shot down was foreseeable. I have simply pointed out that there was a risk that other airlines did not take. That demonstrates and an extra tier of operational culture or risk management in the industry that can help a consumer decide where to spend their money.

Edited by Reardy Mister on Saturday 19th July 07:22

If being shot down wasn't foreseeable, what was the risk involved in doing through the area?

[Justices]

skyrover said:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/nato-...

abcnews said:

At a June 30 Pentagon news conference, NATO Supreme Commander Gen. Philip Breedlove said Russia had been providing air defense training to Russian separatists on its side of the border with Ukraine that focused on “vehicle-borne” surface-to-air missiles.

Sorry to cut in on all the back and forth but, good god, what a fantastic name!

Supreme Commander General Breedlove. Best James Bond co-star/porn name of all time?

[XJ Flyer]

Derek Smith said:

skyrover said:

As expected, the Russian propaganda machine in full swing.

I don't want to start an argument that ends up with personal attacks - there's enough of them on this thread already - but are you suggesting that in the West we are not subject to propaganda over this incident?

It's obvious that the situation in Ukraine is too dangerous to be used to route civil aircraft.

It's also obvious that Ukraine has encouraged such flights by saying that it's ok to over fly the place 'if' aircraft keep to 30,000 feet +.

The 'west' has obviously taken sides,on the side of Ukraine,in the local dispute in the region in which the Russian local majority in eastern Ukraine ( justifiably ) want to break away from western Ukraine.Because the 'west' has an obvious agenda of wanting to expand the EU and NATO right across Ukraine.

The dispute in question resulting in Ukrainian air strikes being carried out by Ukrainian forces against the Russian nationalist/seperatist population.Obviously with the support of the west.

The Russian population obviously taking matters into their own hands by using whatever air defence equipment they can get their hands on including some serious kit with the capability to reach aircraft at 70,000 feet +.Which the Ukrainian authorities seem to have been aware of together with documented reports of Russian seperatist forces already taking out Ukrainian air forces by whatever means.

In that environment it's obvious that there's a severe risk to any civil airliner over flying the region.Just as there was a risk to aircraft flying over the gulf during the 'tensions' between Iran and the US resulting in the Vincennes incident.

It's equally obvious that the inevitable results of all that in this case could be seen,by anyone who doesn't agree with the 'west's policy concerning Ukraine,as Ukrainian forces and their western allies using civil aviation as a method of compromising Russian seperatist air defences and then using the results as a propaganda opportunity when it all inevitably went wrong.IE the reactions to the whole thing and views of the causes of it,will depend on outlooks regarding the dispute that,so far,seems to have caused it.Wether that be biased in favour of the the Ukrainian side or neutral.

It seems to be that there are far too many people in the 'west' who are in the former group when the dispute needs to have the heat taken out of it by those in the latter group who can see the issues from both sides.

[Derek Smith]

skyrover said:

I take it you are not familiar with Russia media?

I think that it is unsophisticated and crude in its bias.

However, we are not getting all the information available: it is being filtered.

Whenever something that I know about is covered nationally, I have found that what is accepted is wrong in many ways, sometimes more, sometimes less. I know we are being fed the idea of the gallant against the viscous, the honest against the dishonest, the valiant against the cowards and the responsible against the mob.

[toppstuff]

Too many armchair strategists with hindsight here.

Simple fact: the global aviation community and their associations generally thought Ukraine was subject to normal rules: stay high and you can still use the route. No different to Iraq and Afghan. Hundreds of other aircraft have been using the same route. I don't blame Malaysia.

Simple fact: The Russians have piss poor command and control structures. They basically trained a drunken gibbon with a deadly weapon and they are now embarrassed how he chose to use it.


Everything else, all this armchair posturing, is just BS.

[Eric Mc]

In a nutshell - all true.

[XJ Flyer]

Derek Smith said:

skyrover said:

I take it you are not familiar with Russia media?

I think that it is unsophisticated and crude in its bias.

However, we are not getting all the information available: it is being filtered.

Whenever something that I know about is covered nationally, I have found that what is accepted is wrong in many ways, sometimes more, sometimes less. I know we are being fed the idea of the gallant against the viscous, the honest against the dishonest, the valiant against the cowards and the responsible against the mob.

Which basically translates as the EU federation wanting to trample all over what Russia justifiably sees as it's area of influence.Which has the potential to result in a lot more casualties than we've seen so far 'if' the EU and it's misguided US supporters aren't told to back off.

[ZR1cliff]

Would the passengers and crew have died instantly ?

[XJ Flyer]

toppstuff said:

Too many armchair strategists with hindsight here.

Simple fact: the global aviation community and their associations generally thought Ukraine was subject to normal rules: stay high and you can still use the route. No different to Iraq and Afghan. Hundreds of other aircraft have been using the same route. I don't blame Malaysia.

Simple fact: The Russians have piss poor command and control structures. They basically trained a drunken gibbon with a deadly weapon and they are now embarrassed how he chose to use it.


Everything else, all this armchair posturing, is just BS.

Exactly the same could have been said by Iran's supporters in the case of the Vincennes incident.

[skyrover]

Derek Smith said:

skyrover said:

I take it you are not familiar with Russia media?

I think that it is unsophisticated and crude in its bias.

However, we are not getting all the information available: it is being filtered.

Whenever something that I know about is covered nationally, I have found that what is accepted is wrong in many ways, sometimes more, sometimes less. I know we are being fed the idea of the gallant against the viscous, the honest against the dishonest, the valiant against the cowards and the responsible against the mob.

I agree... but it helps to familiarise oneself with the recent and long term history of the region, the behaviour of the protagonists and also, the freedom the press has to move about and conduct it's business.

Add these factors together and you can start to build a picture.

[greygoose]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

Ayahuasca said:

Blaming Putin is focusing attention the wrong way. Blame lies with whomever routed a civilian airliner over a known war zone where aircraft have been previously attacked.

No, its really REALLY not - for reasons that have been explained numerous times in the thread.

Do you really genuinely believe what you have written, or is this a good old PH wind up?

There are some weird points of view in this thread.

[saaby93]

toppstuff said:

Too many armchair strategists with hindsight here.

Simple fact: the global aviation community and their associations generally thought Ukraine was subject to normal rules: stay high and you can still use the route. No different to Iraq and Afghan. Hundreds of other aircraft have been using the same route. I don't blame Malaysia.

Simple fact: The Russians have piss poor command and control structures. They basically trained a drunken gibbon with a deadly weapon and they are now embarrassed how he chose to use it.

Everything else, all this armchair posturing, is just BS.

On the Beeb last night they were reporting that Ukraine had 'lost' one of its BUK things when the eastern half the country became overun. Remember that some separatists were part of Ukraine forces before separation so it wouldn't be difficult to take one with them.
Whether that's any truer than the Russians lending them one is currently anyone's guess.
Where has it gone now?

Edited for skyrover

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 19th July 08:25

[skyrover]

saaby93 said:

Remember that the separatists were part of Ukraine forces before separation

This is simply not true for the most part.

The majority of fighters are not "local"

[XJ Flyer]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

Ayahuasca said:

Blaming Putin is focusing attention the wrong way. Blame lies with whomever routed a civilian airliner over a known war zone where aircraft have been previously attacked.

No, its really REALLY not - for reasons that have been explained numerous times in the thread.

Do you really genuinely believe what you have written, or is this a good old PH wind up?

Events prove that any 'reasons' which suggest that it's safe to over fly what is effectively a war zone knowingly involving anti aircraft weaponry with the known capabilities as in this case can't be given credibility.Other than the possibility of such 'reasons' being used to justify trying to use civil aviation as a shield for Ukrainian air attack capabilities in the conflict.

[spikeyhead]

ZR1cliff said:

Would the passengers and crew have died instantly ?

I think they'd have been unconscious very soon (a few seconds) after depressurisation due to hypoxia

[XJ Flyer]

skyrover said:

saaby93 said:

Remember that the separatists were part of Ukraine forces before separation

This is simply not true for the most part.

The majority of fighters are not "local"

Does it really matter.It's obvious that the whole thing is a Russia v EU dispute by proxy and it's the EU which needs to back down before yet more people get hurt.