MH17 crash: Victims' families sue Putin and Russia

[Deleted]

You are easily pleasured.

Do you wanna find out sweetiepie?

[Deleted]

dubbelpost

[Deleted]

GMD is a developmental system and won't be ready for another 10 years. But that'll be on top of 35 years of work. And we won't have gotten to that actual functioning system without going through all that period of having a half-functioning or non-functioning system. But once we have it, like Aegis, we'll ALWAYS have it.

We in civilization call that "technology development".

The biggest failing of GMD is the interceptor is terrible. It is being replaced with a new Multi-Kill Interceptor that solves the MIRV'd warhead problem.



Each of those white things is a kill vehicle.

Once this is fully developed, GMD should be much more reliable, but it'll need a better booster after that.

But fundamentally, whats your point? Because something doesn't work fully yet it isn't worth pursuing? How should we get anything to ever work. You see, situations like this - pressing on and working through the trouble, gives the US it's lead. We can afford to do it. Russia and most others cannot.

Tell that to yourself. I still remember you saying that Bulava is shit because it didn't launch properly when the development began - and they fixed it.
But you ignored it and now you're saying something about "development".

Your opinions aren't consistent. You're talking bullshit. And you know it.

[Deleted]

http://www.ibtimes.com/mh17-crash-kr...-weeks-1632758

Do you not remember?

The source is really light "unnamed military official told RIA Novosti" that is noting International Civil Aviation can act on.

[Deleted]

Almost all warheads target military targets. Mostly other nuclear launch sites and military infrastructure (like NORAD, the Pentagon, Central Command). Because Russia doesn't want its cities nuked.

b2121945 of course, didn't know that.

Another bullshit. Our cities were and are still targeted. Our cities were PRIMARY target when nukes were at their beginning.

[Deleted]

The source is really heavy "unnamed military official told RIA Novosti"

Gerhard Schindler, president of the BND, told a secret parliamentary committee on security affairs earlier this month that separatists had used a Russian Buk missile defense system from a Ukrainian base to fire a rocket that exploded directly next to the Malyasia Air plane, Der Spiegel reported.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-ger...l-2014-10?IR=T

- - - Updated - - -

The International Civil Aviation isn't a political group. The moment that BUK were either deployed or taken from bases the place should have been declared unsafe.

[sonololo]

Another bullshit. Our cities were and are still targeted. Our cities were PRIMARY target when nukes were at their beginning.

And they will be always be, because you cannot be trusted, so its needed to force you to abide by MAD doctrine.

And, well, bases and military placements are placed in the cities.

[Deleted]

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-ger...l-2014-10?IR=T

- - - Updated - - -

The International Civil Aviation isn't a political group. The moment that BUK were either deployed or taken from bases the place should have been declared unsafe.

You link a articel after the downing hindsight is fantastic ... do you links articles at random? So where is the fact that you can take to the International Civil Aviation?

[Slant]

They are a mouthpiece of our government, I don't think that guarantees neutrality.

Honest bias is a bit more honest than just outright bullshit whatever-will-sell-more-copies...

[Deleted]

You link a articel after the downing hindsight is fantastic ... do you links articles at random? So where is the fact that you can take to the International Civil Aviation?

There is no fact, because the rebels did not claim anything and Kiev didnt either. Problem is lack of communication. When that BOK went missing Kiev should have been in touch with the International Civil Aviation.
Doesn't matter which side you support in this childish football team thing we have in here now, this is what should have happened.

[Shalcker]

hurry up and tell the intionationella investigators about it, your skills exceed their.... especially with evidence that prove that all other directions is totally improbable.....

They seem to ignore or talk around those points.

It seems to be quite basic thing for anti-air missile detonators, common in both Russian and American designs.

You are funny Shalcker in the past you was fully convinced that it was a Ukraine Su-25 and did have "evidence" now you are convinced it was a anti-air missile and you have "evidence" and it was only fire from a specific direction....

It was released fairly recently, in Almaz-Antey report (which only happened just last autumn if you don't remember it). Before that alternative scenarios could be assumed.

Witnesses heard jet sound quite clearly after plane was shot down so some kind of jet (fighter or bomber) was around at that moment.

Question, purely mental how do it feel that somthing you was totaly convinced about was totaly wrong? and then without reservations dive into a new convinction....

Well, detonator is quite damning piece of evidence against "head-on" missile course version, thus ruling out most common assumed "rebel" launch point. Do you have anything refuting that?

[Deleted]

Well, detonator is quite damning piece of evidence against "head-on" missile course version, thus ruling out most common assumed "rebel" launch point. Do you have anything refuting that?

a "head-on" missile that hit the side is very possible then the misile use a continuous-rod warhead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous-rod_warhead

But what do you care abut that facts? You only want to insert confusion and uncertainty....

[Shalcker]

a "head-on" missile that hit the side is very possible then the misile use a continuous-rod warhead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous-rod_warhead

But what do you care abut that facts? You only want to insert confusion and uncertainty....

You do see that in your image it still doesn't hit cabin? For good reason... and in MH17 case it did.

And Buk 9M38 isn't "continuous-rod warhead", it's Frag-HE.

[Deleted]

You do see that in your image it still doesn't hit cabin? For good reason... and in MH17 case it did.

And Buk 9M38 isn't "continuous-rod warhead", it's Frag-HE.

sigh its still a misile optimized to throw fragments to the side but it have "butterfly shaped" fragment insted of rods...... so it still probable.

[Shalcker]

sigh its still a misile optimized to throw fragments to the side but it have "butterfly shaped" fragment insted of rods...... so it still probable.

The point is - 9M38 detonator has quite specific algorithm for optimal explosion that tries to deal most damage to the plane being targeted.

On head-on course it waits slightly and thus should have exploded behind cockpit.
On crossing course it explodes the moment it loses radar response (as it assumes that being closest approach).

Both explosions obviously throw fragments to sides of warhead, but hit different points on plane.

Damage to MH17 is consistent with crossing detonation (missiles flies past plane to the side then explodes, getting fragments at an angle through cabin) rather then head-on detonation (where explosion point would be a few meters further in along the side of the plane).

[Deleted]

The point is - 9M38 detonator has quite specific algorithm for optimal explosion that tries to deal most damage to the plane being targeted.

Whay did you not say that the first time? or was you force to ask your handler

Damage to MH17 is consistent with crossing detonation (missiles flies past plane to the side then explodes, getting fragments at an angle through cabin) rather then head-on detonation (where explosion point would be a few meters further in along the side of the plane).

No I cant disaprove that becuse I have no knowleage about specific algorithm, but you puts great trust in a few meters....how do you know that the missile did tracke and explode optimally.... what is the standard deviation....

I call it a day now

[Shalcker]

Whay did you not say that the first time? or was you force to ask your handler



No I cant disaprove that becuse I have no knowleage about specific algorithm, but you puts great trust in a few meters....how do you know that the missile did tracke and explode optimally.... what is the standard deviation....

Obviously i'm not expert on anti-air missiles.

But officials seem to be confident enough in this to push it to Dutch for re-consideration of their findings:
Rosaviation sends the Netherlands ‘new important facts’ claiming the MH17 final report is untrue (Meduza.io is our opposition's news outlet)

14 january 2016

Russia's Federal Air Transport Agency, Rosaviation, has delivered to Dutch investigators “important new facts” concerning the July 2014 downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine.

Rosaviation believes these new facts should be “reflected in the final report” on the circumstances of the plane crash.

Rosaviation deputy head Oleg Storchevoy mentioned the new data in a letter addressed to the head of the Dutch Safety Board, Tjibbe Joustra.

“New important facts have been obtained by Russian specialists conducting additional experiments and studies on the crash. They indicate that unfounded and untrue information was cited in the final report. The new facts call into question findings on:

the likelihood of heavy air defense systems being in eastern Ukraine, which were not under the control of the Ukrainian authorities,
whether the plane was indeed impacted by an explosion from a 9N314M high-explosive fragmentation warhead,
the identification of the warhead and 9М38 rocket being fired from a BUK weapons system, and
the spatial position of the missile relative to the aircraft at the time of the explosion and the location of the missile launch site.

Rosaviation says the fragments of the warhead and the holes in the plane's fuselage “do not conform to the characteristics of a 9N314M warhead,” and “the algorithm for a radio frequency fuse used in a BUK systems 9M38 series rocket, which the final report cites, is not consistent with the way the plane was destroyed.”

Moreover, in April 2014, it was the job of Ukrainian authorities to close the airspace over the conflict zone in Donetsk, says the Rosaviation deputy head.

Another “new important fact” has to do with the location, size, and limits of the damage, and the number and density of the holes on the aircraft's remains, and the nature of the damage to the Boeing 777's structure.

Apparently, these pieces of evidence are not consistent with the detonation point and rocket orientation cited by the final report. Therefore, the rocket launch point is incorrect, says Rosaviation.

* Boeing 777 Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 crashed in Ukraine's Donetsk region on July 17, 2014. The plane was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. All 298 people on board were killed.
* Immediately following the crash, pro-Russian separatists were blamed for having fired a missile at the plane.
* The Dutch Safety Board submitted a final report on the plane crash on October 13, 2015, showing that the passenger plane was shot down by anti-aircraft missile fired from a Russian-made BUK weapons system.
* The Dutch report does not indicate the precise launch point of the anti-aircraft missile. Ukraine argues the missile was launched from a pro-Russian separatist controlled area.
* Russian-owned Almaz-Antey, which manufactures the BUK weapons system, conducted its own investigation and concluded that the missile was launched from areas under the control of the Ukrainian military. Furthermore, Russia claims that the plane was shot down with a missile fitted for BUK weapons systems, but not used by the Russian army.
* Almaz-Antey's investigation has been widely criticized, including by blogger Eliot Higgins's “Bellingcat” project.

[Shibito]

Ah Shalcker never lets me down >

[Crispin]

Obviously i'm not expert on anti-air missiles.

But officials seem to be confident enough in this to push it to Dutch for re-consideration of their findings:
Rosaviation sends the Netherlands ‘new important facts’ claiming the MH17 final report is untrue (Meduza.io is our opposition's news outlet)

14 january 2016

Russia's Federal Air Transport Agency, Rosaviation, has delivered to Dutch investigators “important new facts” concerning the July 2014 downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine.

Rosaviation believes these new facts should be “reflected in the final report” on the circumstances of the plane crash.

Rosaviation deputy head Oleg Storchevoy mentioned the new data in a letter addressed to the head of the Dutch Safety Board, Tjibbe Joustra.

“New important facts have been obtained by Russian specialists conducting additional experiments and studies on the crash. They indicate that unfounded and untrue information was cited in the final report. The new facts call into question findings on:

the likelihood of heavy air defense systems being in eastern Ukraine, which were not under the control of the Ukrainian authorities,
whether the plane was indeed impacted by an explosion from a 9N314M high-explosive fragmentation warhead,
the identification of the warhead and 9М38 rocket being fired from a BUK weapons system, and
the spatial position of the missile relative to the aircraft at the time of the explosion and the location of the missile launch site.

Rosaviation says the fragments of the warhead and the holes in the plane's fuselage “do not conform to the characteristics of a 9N314M warhead,” and “the algorithm for a radio frequency fuse used in a BUK systems 9M38 series rocket, which the final report cites, is not consistent with the way the plane was destroyed.”

Moreover, in April 2014, it was the job of Ukrainian authorities to close the airspace over the conflict zone in Donetsk, says the Rosaviation deputy head.

Another “new important fact” has to do with the location, size, and limits of the damage, and the number and density of the holes on the aircraft's remains, and the nature of the damage to the Boeing 777's structure.

Apparently, these pieces of evidence are not consistent with the detonation point and rocket orientation cited by the final report. Therefore, the rocket launch point is incorrect, says Rosaviation.

* Boeing 777 Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 crashed in Ukraine's Donetsk region on July 17, 2014. The plane was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. All 298 people on board were killed.
* Immediately following the crash, pro-Russian separatists were blamed for having fired a missile at the plane.
* The Dutch Safety Board submitted a final report on the plane crash on October 13, 2015, showing that the passenger plane was shot down by anti-aircraft missile fired from a Russian-made BUK weapons system.
* The Dutch report does not indicate the precise launch point of the anti-aircraft missile. Ukraine argues the missile was launched from a pro-Russian separatist controlled area.
* Russian-owned Almaz-Antey, which manufactures the BUK weapons system, conducted its own investigation and concluded that the missile was launched from areas under the control of the Ukrainian military. Furthermore, Russia claims that the plane was shot down with a missile fitted for BUK weapons systems, but not used by the Russian army.
* Almaz-Antey's investigation has been widely criticized, including by blogger Eliot Higgins's “Bellingcat” project.

Everyone stopped listening to Russian investigation into the matter, after the Call of Duty image, facts and Russia does not go hand in hand, a side effect of stunts like "little green men" etc.

In the end it was a Russian decision drop your credibility on the floor.

[Shalcker]

Everyone stopped listening to Russian investigation into the matter, after the Call of Duty image, facts and Russia does not go hand in hand, a side effect of stunts like "little green men" etc.

You're opening yourself to reverse psychology attacks if you dismiss facts just by source.

Go ahead, that just makes you easier to manipulate by anyone :P

In the end it was a Russian decision drop your credibility on the floor.

And it was your own decision to ignore all facts and interpretations that do not fit your own viewpoint.

Eventually reality will catch up though.