MH17 Crash In Ukraine. Known info in OP.

[SniperRed3]

Terrible incident 295 dead. A student from Leeds was on the flight as well as two Newcastle United fans. I hope Europe does something about this stupid war.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Source, please. That's a pretty bold claim to make.

That is actually what the phone conversations suggested. First they were thinking that they targeted a military cargo plane, but when they realized that they shot down MH17, they put the blame on Kiev for "dropping Spies" as one so eloquently put it not too long ago.

 

[SniperRed3]

This is the radar signature of a boeing 777

Not to mention that the people who were operating the buk are the same people who posted on twitter about shooting down a plane and putting pictures of their buk on twitter claiming they had just stolen it.

 

[TenEightyOne]

There are two black boxes on a plane. Even in the circumstances that rebels do have them, they are unreadable. They have to be sent to a facility for decoding the data. It would take weeks for even a highly skilled team of specialists to find out. For the cockpit voice recorder it first has to be decoded, then sent to a panel of experts, they then makes a transcript of the recording.

It's not quite like that nowadays and, as @prisonermonkeys already explained there were specific changes put in place on MA flights (and probably those of other airlines too) after the previous loss.

FDRs are pretty easy to read without too much know-how, the specs are open (see some of the ACARS specs I posted in the other thread). All you need is to a Boeing FMC-compatible terminal*. Which all modern NG Boeings have. Not hard for a nation power to organise. Remember that anyone trained by Boeing or who's worked for any length of time with Boeing systems would be able to do this, from technical support to flight crew. You just want to dump the data, remember?

The trick is what happens if you've got enough know-how to change the data, there are some tricks that I personally know a little about (not the full detail for obvious reasons) that create a type of "validation hash" to allow more skilled operators to validate apparently "good" data. That's not unique to FDRs, it's a feature of many industry-standard data recorders. Could a government organise that kind of operation? In fairness

In my opinion the men operating the Buk were not trained in recognizing radar signatures. They saw a big blip and fired at it, presuming it must have been a cargo plane.

Source, please. That's a pretty bold claim to make.

That is actually what the phone conversations suggested.

No, @rageracer1988 checked the translation out, there's nothing in there saying that the crews were untrained. The case of mistaken identity seems likely, sadly, but we only know what we know right now and some of that is from very politicised sources.

This is the radar signature of a boeing 777

Not to mention that the people who were operating the buk are the same people who posted on twitter about shooting down a plane and putting pictures of their buk on twitter claiming they had just stolen it.

Really? Every time a 777 appears on any type of radar at any time, at any speed, altitude or heading, whatever the weather or the ice, that's how it appears? No, no it isn't. I saw a 777 on radar the other day that appeared as 3 green spikes, you need to get that graphic over to them and tell them to look like that on radar from now on

Do a bit of research, it's a fascinating area. For some good FDR stuff check out the other MA thread.


* In some cases you don't even need the Boeing one, there's a move to standardise the data bus across all manufacturers.

 

[Sanji Himura]

No, @rageracer1988 checked the translation out, there's nothing in there saying that the crews were untrained. The case of mistaken identity seems likely, sadly, but we only know what we know right now and some of that is from very politicised sources.

Point taken, but the point remains that the phone conversation started under the assumption the DPR struck a military plane, but at 10,050 meters it is impossible for that kind of aircraft to be mistaken for a cargo plane, as there are certain elevations that military and civil planes consider "cruising altitude". If memory serves, military generally fly higher than civil planes.

Found a chart that somewhat proves my point. If you are entering Russian airspace, as this plane was, the plane had to raise their altitude to 33,000 feet, or 10,050 meters. According to this, the plane when it was actually shot, was at 33,000 feet, and not for very long either. It reached 33,000 feet at 8:04am, and was only at that elevation for only 40 minutes at the most.

 

[Exorcet]

This is the radar signature of a boeing 777

That a RCS diagrem, not what shows up on the radar, just for clarity.

 

[Dennisch]

Putin has asked for a cease fire in East Ukraine.

And Russia will not accept the flight data recorders from the separatists.

 

[SniperRed3]

I'm not saying they were definitely untrained I'm just saying someone who was trained, perhaps could tell the difference between a cargo plane and a passenger plane from the high radar cross section of the Boeing 777 due to it's size, metallic and round surfaces. On the other hand a military plane would have a lower RCS due to specially designed surfaces and paint to minimize radar detection. Yes the RCS can vary, but not to an extent when aircraft recognition becomes impossible in regards to the conditions at the time of the incident. And the maximum height of an An26 is 24,600ft much lower than flight MH17 was travelling at.

 

[Rage Racer]

If memory serves, military generally fly higher than civil planes.

Well, the An-26's ceiling is 7,300 m. It does not fly at such altitude as used by civil planes (10 km and higher).

 

[Touring Mars]

New reporting one Australian family has lost family members on both MH370 and MH17, how terrible and how unlucky.

Geez, that is pretty awful - I know it is awful for everyone involved, but that would have to be horribly unlucky.

Incidentally @TenEightyOne, I think you are tagging the wrong @Rage Racer in your posts

 

[TenEightyOne]

@Touring Mars , yes I am, @Rage Racer , sorry, @rageracer1988 I'm really sorry... I'm just lazy and hit Return to complete the tag... and you can tell I type faster than I can think...

Point taken, but the point remains that the phone conversation started under the assumption the DPR struck a military plane, but at 10,050 meters it is impossible for that kind of aircraft to be mistaken for a cargo plane, as there are certain elevations that military and civil planes consider "cruising altitude". If memory serves, military generally fly higher than civil planes.

Found a chart that somewhat proves my point. If you are entering Russian airspace, as this plane was, the plane had to raise their altitude to 33,000 feet, or 10,050 meters. According to this, the plane when it was actually shot, was at 33,000 feet, and not for very long either. It reached 33,000 feet at 8:04am, and was only at that elevation for only 40 minutes at the most.

That's roughly normal, you wouldn't expect to enter ATC below 32,000 feet unless you were cleared for a specific descent. 33,000 sounds equally reasonable, there's a 1000ft airway separation in opposing directions along the airways.

The service ceiling of military transport aircraft that are effectively the same as civilian jetliners are often the same, some flights travel along civilian corridors for convenience. Quite a few turboprops operate much lower than 34,000 feet (which I'd call the average for civilian traffic), the SU25 definitely tops out at around 26,000ft.

@Robin, if that's true then it's another incredible and utterly awful coincidence

EDIT: I stand corrected about the flight path, the final leg of the flight (despite not intended as such) fixed on a more northerly waypoint. Here's an interesting article on Le Monde, be warned that it's written in some kind of alien jibber-jabber. But there's a nice picture with lines on that helps.

 

[Exorcet]

I'm not saying they were definitely untrained I'm just saying someone who was trained, perhaps could tell the difference between a cargo plane and a passenger plane from the high radar cross section of the Boeing 777 due to it's size, metallic and round surfaces. On the other hand a military plane would have a lower RCS due to specially designed surfaces and paint to minimize radar detection. Yes the RCS can vary, but not to an extent when aircraft recognition becomes impossible in regards to the conditions at the time of the incident. And the maximum height of an An26 is 24,600ft much lower than flight MH17 was travelling at.

No one in the SAM may have seen the RCS at all, but I'm not familiar with the Buk's displays. Modern radars can automatically ID targets by RCS. This is not flawless though. The Buk could have the ability ID a 777 as a 777, it might not recognize it, or the operator could have fired without waiting for or checking for the ID.

Also, one common method of getting a transport plane is to convert an airliner. Many large military aircraft are created this way and they're have basically the same signature. You don't see stealth transports because they're not supposed to be flying over missiles.

 

[Dennisch]

For now 2 families and another 2 persons from my town have been confirmed on the plane.
Families with young children.

I really hope they will find those who did this. Terrible act of war.

 

[SniperRed3]

the operator could have fired without waiting for or checking for the ID.

This could be the most likely scenario.

 

[Sanji Himura]

EDIT: I stand corrected about the flight path, the final leg of the flight (despite not intended as such) fixed on a more northerly waypoint. Here's an interesting article on Le Monde, be warned that it's written in some kind of alien jibber-jabber. But there's a nice picture with lines on that helps.

It's in French. Two years in high school.

 

[TenEightyOne]

It's in French. Two years in high school.

Oui, j'avais passé cinq ans avec une amie Française *


*AUP Required Translation: Hunh? Honh-hi-honh? But I 'ad five years ze french, ow you say, ze gurrrll, honh honh.

 

[NLxAROSA]

For now 2 families and another 2 persons from my town have been confirmed on the plane.
Families with young children.

I really hope they will find those who did this. Terrible act of war.

A guy from my local gym was also onboard. He was emigrating to start a new life over there...A lot of people in NL seem to have people close or close by that are affected by this. Not surprisingly since the amount of NL passengers on board was at least 189.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Oui, j'avais passé cinq ans avec une amie Française *

*AUP Required Translation: Hunh? Honh-hi-honh? But I 'ad five years ze french, ow you say, ze gurrrll, honh honh.

Sounds legit. It's a well-known point of fact that all Frenchmen sound like the chef in The Little Mermaid.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Considering that the Netherlands has a population of almost 17 million people, I think there are probably plenty of dutch people with no connection to anyone onboard the flight, but still, it does get one worried that someone one is connected to might have been aboard.

 

[Cobra_GT500]

Wow this actually is crazy. I feel sorry for everyone on that plane including the kids they've lost their lives over something really dumb. On the news an Australian witness kept on swearing and saying how bad it was. Makes me think twice before flying Maylasian airlines.Apparently they fly across that way because it's cheaper every other plane company has changed routes.

 

[35mm]

Makes me think twice before flying Maylasian airlines.Apparently they fly across that way because it's cheaper every other plane company has changed routes.

"British Airways, Air France, Lufthansa and KLM are among the airlines to have used exactly the same routing over eastern Ukraine in recent days, according to website FlightRadar24.

“Fifteen out of 16 airlines in the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines fly this route over Ukraine,” Malaysia’s transport minister Liow Tiong Lai said Friday. “European airlines also use the same route, and traverse the same airspace.”"

 

[TenEightyOne]

"British Airways, Air France, Lufthansa and KLM are among the airlines to have used exactly the same routing over eastern Ukraine in recent days, according to website FlightRadar24.

“Fifteen out of 16 airlines in the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines fly this route over Ukraine,” Malaysia’s transport minister Liow Tiong Lai said Friday. “European airlines also use the same route, and traverse the same airspace.”"

Indeed they do, I point I made at length some time ago... but... in this case the flight was further north than usual as it crossed the border. Not by a huge amount, but northwards it was. [source] . You can see that on the previous 11 flights it hat crossed the Russian border over water rather than over land.

I hate to say it (cos it makes me a bit wrong ) but this is a significant fact to consider especially given that the ground situation at that land border changes very quickly.

 

[GTPorsche]

I thought the reason for the plane being further north was due to storms in Poland, which is indicated on that map by the cut it made to the northeast over Central Poland? I'm not familiar with flight paths, but wouldn't the plane have returned to it's normal flight path at some point, or would it have just continued on the path it was taking?

 

[TenEightyOne]

I thought the reason for the plane being further north was due to storms in Poland, which is indicated on that map by the cut it made to the northeast over Central Poland? I'm not familiar with flight paths, but wouldn't the plane have returned to it's normal flight path at some point, or would it have just continued on the path it was taking?

Airways run from junction-to-junction, it's likely they'd have either returned to their route or taken the cheaper Cost Index option and made the straightest junction-junction route from where they were.

 

[35mm]

Indeed they do, I point I made at length some time ago... but... in this case the flight was further north than usual as it crossed the border. Not by a huge amount, but northwards it was. [source] . You can see that on the previous 11 flights it hat crossed the Russian border over water rather than over land.

I hate to say it (cos it makes me a bit wrong ) but this is a significant fact to consider especially given that the ground situation at that land border changes very quickly.


View attachment 188491

I understand that.

But your image is actually good for my point, because it shows that the route for that same flight (from the same company) is usually a bit different than the one used this time. So - whatever the reason that caused that slight change of route - you cannot blame the company for what happened, nor judge their actions, I guess. Especially not based on being cheap.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I understand that.

But your image is actually good for my point, because it shows that the route for that same flight (from the same company) is usually a bit different than the one used this time. So - whatever the reason that caused that slight change of route - you cannot blame the company for what happened. Especially not based on being cheap.

Whoaah! Where did I say that? I've never said they were cheap, Cost Index is a normal function of route calculation dude! This is a perfectly normal diversion.

Given that the MA flight made that diversion one wonders which other aircraft may have too. Irrelevant in terms of this incident but interesting to know nonetheless.

 

[35mm]

Whoaah! Where did I say that? I've never said they were cheap, Cost Index is a normal function of route calculation dude!

No, not you!

I was still talking about this:

Makes me think twice before flying Maylasian airlines.Apparently they fly across that way because it's cheaper every other plane company has changed routes.

 

[TenEightyOne]

No, not you!

I was still talking about this:

Haha, cool Then one don't use "you" in that type of sentence, one uses "one" Especially when you replied to me specifically

So today I and some nerdy colleagues in the same business have spent a long time looking at wreckage photos, our early guess is a large outboard explosion roughly level with the rear pressure bulkhead on the starboard side (the right hand side for those like me who sometimes forget).

Or a smaller inboard explosion about 10m aft of the wing root, still right hand side.

I'm inclined towards outboard because of the other evidence and the way that the roof of the cockpit is intact but the area immediately behind it isn't. The plane hasn't "broken" along the spars as is normal in "mechanical disintegration", this was a large disruptive intrusion.

 

[35mm]

Oh, you're right! I'm sorry. 👍

 

[Vic Reign93]

New reporting one Australian family has lost family members on both MH370 and MH17, how terrible and how unlucky.

http://gawker.com/woman-loses-family-members-in-both-malaysia-airlines-di-1607152954/+pgeorge

I genuinely can't believe the amount of bad luck this poor woman has suffered.

I mean it's one thing to lose someone in an accident, but to lose multiple family members in two separate events involving the same plane company just beggars belief.