Recent reports conducted by independent journalists and Bellingcat, an organization for investigative journalists, have published a report summarizing their findings pertaining to the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17. As a reminder, the aircraft was completing a flight from Amsterdam (AMS) to Kuala Lumpur (KUL), when it was flying over Ukrainian airspace, specifically over the Donetsk region, an area under almost complete control of the Russian-backed separatists.

The report, links to which I will post at the end, has concluded that there was "undeniable evidence" that the missile that brought down MH17 was supplied by Russia and launched from a BUK missile launcher, a system that the Ukrainian army does not possess.

In addition to their findings, the report also sites videos and photos of the BUK launcher being towed across the border, back into Russia.

The link to the Bellingcat report shows pictures, videos, and other evidence that they have gathered.

Sources

Bellingcat Official Report

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2014/11/08/origin-of-the-separatists-buk-a-bellingcat-investigation/

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/57219...ne-russian-report.htm#.VGBDGytdUlM

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/m...h17-provided-by-russia-says-report

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel...ussia/story-fnizu68q-1227117844647

Does anyone think that this confirmation of what everyone already knew (OK, we might not have known the exact missile model) will have any real-world implications?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):

Well, there are still some people (granted very small amount), that still have doubts. However, that area of Ukraine is the site where numerous Ukrainian cargo planes and helicopters have been shot down by rebels, in fact 2 or 3 planes had been shot down by the separatists less than 24 hours before this tragedy.

Not to mention, the former "defense minister of the DNR" posted a picture saying "We just brought down an Antonov cargo jet that belonged to the Ukrainian Air Force" which was supposed to air drop supplies to the army and to villages, but 15-30 minutes later, once they figured out they shot down a B777, the post was deleted from his page...

The evidence in the Bellingcat report is concrete. Very commendable effort for conducting the straight forward research and collection of the facts and sources. Great effort.

[Edited 2014-11-09 21:36:54]

At this point it should simply confirm pretty much what we already knew, and quiet those Russian apologists who claim no wrong doing.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3): At this point it should simply confirm pretty much what we already knew, and quiet those Russian apologists who claim no wrong doing.

Should, but probably won't.

Quoting irshava (Thread starter): The report, links to which I will post at the end, has concluded that there was "undeniable evidence" that the missile that brought down MH17 was supplied by Russia and launched from a BUK missile launcher, a system that the Ukrainian army does not possess.

from Wikipedia Ukraine Armed Forces "Army Air Defence": Surface-to-air missile systems and complexes of division level are characterized by their long range and firepower and are equipped with surface-to-air missile complexes;S-300V,Osa, Buk, Buk-M1 and Tor. While anti-aircraft missile and artillery complexes that are of regiment level are equipped with the Tunguska-M1, Igla MANPADS system, Strela, and Shilka anti-aircraft missile systems.

What I can remember: The BUK is, as reported, a missile SYSTEM, it consists of a command vehicle, a radar unit and multiple launch vehicles. It was based on the KUB missile system, which was very effectivly used against the Israeli Air Force in the beginning when it was new, but later tackled very well. The KUB could attack one single target, BUK units can attack multiple targets.

Since the KUB missile system bekame obsolete against the Israeli Air Force very soon, western and especially NATO countries are believed to be able to tackle any attack from a BUK missile system through early warning and electronic counter measures. I remember once in an interview of a NATO general during the war in Bosnia, that, if Serbia turned on one of their radar systems of their surface to air units, they could identify it as a target from any AWACS, even if the plane was just airborne above Aviano (but I also remember that AWACS weren't stationed there).

BUK units were widely used, last time in the Russia - Gerogia conflict, in which Russia lost several aircraft to the Georgian BUK systems, including one Tu-22M. The effectiveness of the BUK was one reason Ukraine stationed its BUK as close to the rebel held area as possible, to avoid Russian aircraft intruding into Ukrainian air space. Never the less, this was widely reported in Western European newspapers, the Russian airforce flew several sorties against Ukrainian targets, thus now being able to jam BUK units. Our news was full of Russia flying in and out of Ukraine, and this was also confirmed by the Ukrainian Army (which by the way also managed to report a nuclear attack on DOK airport  ). It was only until MH17 was lost, that news reports of Russian aircraft over Ukraine stopped to appear.

I think it would be a great thing, that at least in this forum, we stay with the facts, and not with propaganda. Ukraine does have BUKs, and they are most probably not stationed at the border to Hungary! This system as, even in its modernized version M extremely complex and hard to work on. In the GDR, staff was trained at least 6 months to be able to work on the system. Please do not draw a picture in which Russia ships a launcher of the BUK system into some rebels hands, and they shoot skywards hand hit whatever. The BUK is neither a "Stinger" nor an "Igla" which you any beerded terrorist just sholders and shoots down A300 Cargo planes in approach on Baghdad!

In the end, and this is my personal believe, I think that Russia for sure, and to a very high percentage NATO also know who shot. It did not happen the first time in history, and it will again. The question I ask myself, why do we until now not know who shot the BUK (and another story, who were the snipers killing people from both sides of the Maidan movement, remember the confirmed phone call between an Estonian pilitician and Ashton)?

As to the BUK with one rocket missing being shipped back to Russia: anybody is free to google for the exact geolocation of the video, there are several goog works on it in the internet. Most of them conclude the same, and PLEASE after reading those and comparing the geo location with the videos in the images decide for yourself which direction the BUK is moving, and where the shot was taken - was it going west (Ukraine) or east (Russia).

Staying with the facts in this forum could bring up some great news, and I am keen on reading it!!!

Maybe some one from former "Easter Europe" who has served on a BUK system and being a member to the forum could explain the exact way of how MH17 could have been shot down with the launch vehicle only (as proposed). There is still so much to uncover in this mystery!

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6):

...and I think this is what everyone meant by "some people who still doubt".... you speak of propaganda, failing to understand that you have become its offspring.

I refuse to even discuss this with someone who has been presented "the facts" that he desires and arrogantly denies them. It is evident that the downing was from a Russian BUK and if you simply open the link instead of claiming "propaganda" you wouldn't post this.

Besides, if you so strongly believe the Ukrainian army, pulled up "its BUK system as close as possible to the rebel positions" INTO THE CENTER OF A CITY THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OVER, MORE SO, AN AREA IN WHICH MULTIPLE PLANES HAVE BEEN SHOT DOWN, WHERE REBELS SHOW OFF THEIR BUK SYSTEMS AND POST ABOUT EVERY PLANE THEY SHOOT DOWN, then there is nothing anyone can do to help you.

Now, I cannot help you if refuse to see the evidence that you desire, even when it is in front of you.

There really is no point of discussing this with someone who himself cannot present the facts, merely sites a wikipedia article, doesn't have any pictures, and also vehemently denies Russian involvement when all the pictures and videos show a Russian BUK, towed across the Russian border, in a Russian army column, then being towed back across to destroy the evidence.

RussiaToday and the state news channels have done their job well on some people.

Have a nice day.

I'll also let you know that when Russia invaded Ukraine, Ukraine only had 6000 battle ready troops.

[Edited 2014-11-10 04:38:57]

Today is also the day of the national remembrance ceremony for all the victims of MH17. Quite impressive to hear all the names of the victims who passed away.

Grt,
Erik

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1): Does anyone think that this confirmation of what everyone already knew (OK, we might not have known the exact missile model) will have any real-world implications?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3): At this point it should simply confirm pretty much what we already knew

      I think it was pretty much a given it was a Russian BUK operated by Russian backed rebels. The ones denying that probably will never be convinced no matter what I see. Now how much responsibility does Russia bear, if any? That is a more subjective discussion.

I can see arguments going multiple ways, but I really can't see arguments against the missile being Russian

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3): and quiet those Russian apologists who claim no wrong doing.

Probably not

Quoting irshava (Thread starter): The report, links to which I will post at the end, has concluded that there was "undeniable evidence" that the missile that brought down MH17 was supplied by Russia and launched from a BUK missile launcher, a system that the Ukrainian army does not possess.

Irshava, you say they don't ... but Wikipedia says they do.

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6): from Wikipedia Ukraine Armed Forces "Army Air Defence": Surface-to-air missile systems and complexes of division level are characterized by their long range and firepower and are equipped with surface-to-air missile complexes;S-300V,Osa, Buk, Buk-M1 and Tor. While anti-aircraft missile and artillery complexes that are of regiment level are equipped with the Tunguska-M1, Igla MANPADS system, Strela, and Shilka anti-aircraft missile systems.

Let me, as a third person not living in Europe, ask - does Ukranian military have BUK systems or not?

Simple question, YES of NO - but will tell us a lot about the objectivity of these new reports.

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6): Maybe some one from former "Eastern Europe" who has served on a BUK system and being a member to the forum could explain the exact way of how MH17 could have been shot down with the launch vehicle only (as proposed).

I'm not an ex-East European SAM operator but I do know that a Buk launch vehicle can also operate in stand-alone mode. Its built-in radar is normally used to track the target being engaged, but can be operated in a target-detection mode, allowing it to autonomously (i.e. launch vehicle only) engage targets that are present in the radar's forward field of view.

If your read up on the Buk (plenty of info, videos etc. on the web) you will find that this mode bypasses the safety features of the main radar (resulting in limited IFF, no NCTR) and was brought in as a consequence of the system's performance in the 1982 Lebanon War.

Hopefully that deals with that point.

Quoting ASA (Reply 10): Let me, as a third person not living in Europe, ask - does Ukranian military have BUK systems or not?

According to Dutch intel and quoted in the Dutch newspapers, the Ukraine Armed Forces also had/have the BUK.

Cheers!   

I'll even link you to Russian propaganda site ITAR-TASS which states that there was no way a Ukrainian weapon was used.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/militia...ukraine-general-prosecutor/5391968
http://en.itar-tass.com/world/741271

Not the first plane rebels shot down with BUKs

http://www.vox.com/2014/7/18/5914139...-down-two-planes-in-the-last-month

And for some reason, the black boxes were rushed to Moscow and quickly taken away. I wonder why.

I also wonder why the Dutch authorities and their evidence seem to coincide with Ukrainian theory. Hmmm...

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukra...ies-on-buk-missile-hit-363977.html

UKRAINIAN ROCKET LAUNCHERS AND SYSTEMS HAD NO WAY OF BEING IN A CITY DEEP WITHIN THE TERRITORY CONTROLLED BY RUSSIAN SEPARATISTS....

But yea, ok, keep telling me garbage without facts.   

Quoting irshava (Reply 7): I refuse to even discuss this with someone who has been presented "the facts" that he desires and arrogantly denies them.

I think you're just trying to justify yourself... badly...
Why not try to answer:

Quoting ASA (Reply 10): Let me, as a third person not living in Europe, ask - does Ukranian military have BUK systems or not? Simple question, YES of NO - but will tell us a lot about the objectivity of these new reports.

The question has an answer, and the answer does not automatically mean that it was Ukrainian BUK that shot down MH17.

Now Irshava, if you don't want to listen to Russian propaganda, then I suggest you also alter the tone of your writing to make it not sound like propaganda coming out of Kiev.

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6): Maybe some one from former "Eastern Europe" who has served on a BUK system and being a member to the forum could explain the exact way of how MH17 could have been shot down with the launch vehicle only (as proposed). There is still so much to uncover in this mystery!

This was discussed a lot in the MH17 topic series... and nicely summarized by GCT64 in this topic.

Quoting irshava (Reply 2): Well, there are still some people (granted very small amount), that still have doubts.

Other than the Russian-paid apologists - and and those intent on spreading disinformation - I don't think any reasonable person has any doubts at all.

Quoting irshava (Reply 2): However, that area of Ukraine is the site where numerous Ukrainian cargo planes and helicopters have been shot down by rebels, in fact 2 or 3 planes had been shot down by the separatists less than 24 hours before this tragedy. Not to mention, the former "defense minister of the DNR" posted a picture saying "We just brought down an Antonov cargo jet that belonged to the Ukrainian Air Force" which was supposed to air drop supplies to the army and to villages, but 15-30 minutes later, once they figured out they shot down a B777, the post was deleted from his page... The evidence in the Bellingcat report is concrete. Very commendable effort for conducting the straight forward research and collection of the facts and sources. Great effort.

        

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6): from Wikipedia Ukraine Armed Forces "Army Air Defence":

What a source! Did you write that yourself in Wikipedia?   

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 6): Maybe some one from former "Eastern Europe" who has served on a BUK system and being a member to the forum could explain the exact way of how MH17 could have been shot down with the launch vehicle only (as proposed). There is still so much to uncover in this mystery!

That has been explained many times.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):   I think it was pretty much a given it was a Russian BUK operated by Russian backed rebels. The ones denying that probably will never be convinced no matter what I see. Now how much responsibility does Russia bear, if any? That is a more subjective discussion.

        

We should probably never know who is behind this, one thing is for sure and that's that these poor people are a victim of a dirty political game. And we are being played by propaganda and made evidence fro russia, the ukraine and the west. My first thought was that russia was to blame but it wouldnt surprise me if the ukraine is behind it. Same of those stories about the BUK, as u can see on youtube movies u can clearly see that that missle leaves a trail what can be seen from miles away, and the trails stays for quite a while. Why dont we see any pictures of this? Cause immidiatly after the crash several photos turned up from the crash site, and the airplane crashing but none of the trail that a BUK missle should left behind. And why is it the ukraine forces keep the investigation team away from the site, ukraine forces are attacking the rebels in and around the crash area while the rebels agreed not to fire and even help at the crash site to protect the investigation team? And then the holes in the fuselage, i saw a documentary i dont have the link, that it almost look simulair to bullet holes. It wouldnt surprise me at all it those ukraine brought it down with fighter jets and make russia to blame for it. And ofcourse the gouvernement of my own country suck like hell and are weak in handling this case, really a shame. Those idiot european members who wanted to make a statement at the square in kiev to support the ukraine people, they didnt had to get involed in the first place.

[Edited 2014-11-10 11:03:50]

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1): Does anyone think that this confirmation of what everyone already knew (OK, we might not have known the exact missile model) will have any real-world implications?

For better or worse, I don't think anyone cares at the moment. NATO has bigger fish to fry with the ISIS uprising in Iraq and Syria.

Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 15): We should probably never know who is behind this, one thing is for sure and that's that these poor people are a victim of a dirty political game. And we are being played by propaganda and made evidence fro russia, the ukraine and the west

Why not? US, NL and other governments have satellite images proving a BUK was crossing into Donetsk area the day before, leaving a few our after the shooting down of MH17, and also clear satellite info tracing the rocket from rebel held territory.

Besides all that there are recordings of a phonecall from the Pro Russian terrorists blaming eachother for the disaster minutes after shouting happily they shot down an Antonov.

How much more proof do we need?

Quoting irshava (Reply 12): http://www.vox.com/2014/7/18/5914139...month

If you read the article you make reference to, it clearly mentions that the rebels had only shot down planes with MANPADS throghout the whole conflict, and that it would require Russia to launch the BUK missile from Russian territory.

So yeah, that makes me a paid idiot by the Russian government who doesn't believe the crap coming from the West.

After all, the Russians shoot down civil airliners with fighter jets. The only ones who have shot down civil airliners with SA missiles are the Ukrainians and the gringos themselves.

So i don't believe a crap about any report from Western sources as well, much less from Ukraine who we all know has prior experience on shooting down civil airliners with surface to air missiles.

Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 15): ukraine forces are attacking the rebels in and around the crash area while the rebels agreed not to fire and even help at the crash site to protect the investigation team? And then the holes in the fuselage, i saw a documentary i dont have the link, that it almost look simulair to bullet holes.

LOL, the crash site and everything within a 50-70KM radius is rebel-controlled. And you're right, the Ukrainians are the ones hiding the evidences when the black boxes were rushed to Moscow before Ukrainians even got to the site....

Quoting Wayfarer515 (Reply 18): that it would require Russia to launch the BUK missile from Russian territory.

Just wow... not only do you not know the technology in question, but you also have no idea what you are talking about. Launched from Russian territory.

I just don't understand. Are you all trolling or do you genuinely refuse to see the evidence gathered BY AN INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATION OF JOURNALISTS, who spent weeks gathering this information. Just Google Bellingcat! Read their report.

I am speechless, I thought this forum was oozing with intelligence.

The facts are there, the evidence is there. Go ahead and keep preaching false information and false theory because NONE OF YOU! have presented a single piece of evidence to support your claims. If you site wikipedia.... I need not even continue this sentence.

And also remember, in the next several years, when the investigation is over, the textbooks and newspapers will print the truth and everyone will know what truly happened.

Until then, keep on believing anything you're told, because again, none of you presented a single piece of evidence to support your claims that it was the Ukrainian side, you reference the downing of a civil jet off the Black Sea, that happened in a zone where military training was taking place, so of course, it was the Ukrainians.

I would respect your comments if they carried weight and evidence. Empty claims mean nothing. It's easy to make up things that Ukrainians shoot rebels at the site (when the area and its perimeter are surrounded by terrorists who wouldn't even let the OSCE observe at first), when the black boxes were rushed to Moscow, etc, etc. I also doubt any of you even opened the link. Any person with any rational reasoning would see this raw data and understand.

Not a single comment with a piece of evidence.

Have a nice day, see you when the truth is published.

Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 15): We should probably never know who is behind this, one thing is for sure and that's that these poor people are a victim of a dirty political game

Actually, we do know - at least, unbiased, thinking people know - who is behind it. The rebels own claim that they shot down the plane should be your first piece of evidence...

Quoting Wayfarer515 (Reply 18): If you read the article you make reference to, it clearly mentions that the rebels had only shot down planes with MANPADS throghout the whole conflict, and that it would require Russia to launch the BUK missile from Russian territory.

Until the rebels shot down MH17, no one (at least, no one but the rebels and their Russian supporters and weapons-suppliers) knew they had anything other than MANPADS; thus the restriction for civilian airliners to fly above 30,000 feet over rebel-held territory. The acquisition of the BUK - which the rebels subsequently bragged about - changed the scenario, and lead to the deaths of so many innocent civilians.

Since you claim that you won't believe anything from "Western sources", that clearly leaves you listening only to Russian propaganda... which might explain your determination to ignore the facts.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 20):

Couldn't have put it better.

It's quite obvious irshava, given the flag next to his name, is heavily biased and unable to have a discussion with anyone who disagrees with him. Ukrainian media and politicians are just as full of propaganda and corruption as the Russian ones. I wouldn't believe either. So don't give me the whole "Ukraine is innocent and 100% truthful" statement. By the way, the black boxes were examined and was confirmed that they were not tampered with, no sure why you keep bringing them up.

For the record I believe the rebels did shoot down the plane with a Buk. Whether the Buk came from Russia or was captured from Ukraine is a debatable topic since "evidence" for both cases has been seen in the past. There are most certainly Buks in service with the Ukrainian armed forces.

I'm also not sure why this is a separate topic, and not in the existing MH17 thread.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 22): I'm also not sure why this is a separate topic, and not in the existing MH17 thread.

Oh keep it separate please! We don't want to degrade the quality of the original topic series!  

Imho it is obvious that only the Ukrainian government had something to gain by shooting down an airliner.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24):

It was never a calculated action in the big political game. It was some half-drunk rebels who were convinced they had just shot down one more Ukrainian military plane. They even tweeted about it, for crying out loud!

Sadly this independent report may be the closest we may get to the truth. There is no doubt MH17 was shot down by a sophisticated missile such as a BUK, the kind governments own and operate. The real question was who controlled its launching and supplying. That is something, due to the lack of transparency of the counties and rebel groups involving in a fight over disputed territory make it near impossible to verify who controlled that missile that fateful day.

While many believe that this was an accident, an attempt of pro-Russia rebels to down a supply aircraft serving Ukrainian forces, as had been happening in that region several times before MH17 was shot down, one has to wonder if the attack on MH17 was intentional.

The pro-Ukraine or pro-Russian rebels both had plenty of reasons, access to sophisticated missiles and opportunity to shoot down a civilian aircraft to blame the other as part of a sad propaganda war. MH17 was using a well established and used flight corridor above the published NOTAMS minimum flight levels. Malaysia Airlines is not affiliated with or a major country as such like India or a European ones (yes, it is a significant country itself) who were also using this flight corridor near the time of the downing of MH 17. Malaysia had the still unknown loss of MH 570. I doubt pro-Ukraine or pro-Russia supply a/c would using this corridor at those flight levels at the time. Those that did the shoot down could look up on the internet about when MH17 could be flying over, so could make MH17 a horribly ideal target. Sadly that is the part of the situation we cannot verify but with very circumstantial evidence.

Quoting irshava (Reply 2): The evidence in the Bellingcat report is concrete. Very commendable effort for conducting the straight forward research and collection of the facts and sources. Great effort.

The Bellingcat report only shows that there was a BUK launcher with 4 missiles in the area on the day of the crash. I bet there have been many more BUK systems in the area.
As far as I'm aware, there is not 100% certainty MH17 was brought down by a missile.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 22): Ukrainian media and politicians are just as full of propaganda and corruption as the Russian ones.

  

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24): Imho it is obvious that only the Ukrainian government had something to gain by shooting down an airliner.

It's also obvious that only rebels could have shot it down by an accident, thinking it was an Ukrainian military bird. Ukrainians couldn't have possibly done that as the aircraft was coming from the west & those rebels don't even have aircraft flying for them.

Incompetent pro Russian rebels shot it down thinking it was an Ukrainian cargo plane, just like a tweet pretty much confirms, claiming that they had shot down an Ukrainian cargo plane just after MH17 had been shot down.

http://theaviationist.com/wp-content...oads/2014/07/An-26-by-accident.jpg

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 20): Quoting EVAAIRBR076 (Reply 15):We should probably never know who is behind this, one thing is for sure and that's that these poor people are a victim of a dirty political game Actually, we do know - at least, unbiased, thinking people know - who is behind it. The rebels own claim that they shot down the plane should be your first piece of evidence...

Quoting pvjin (Reply 28):

        

Apologists will remain apologists, no matter what facts are presented to them...

Am I the only one who thinks that had this been an EU airplane, say from Lufthansa or Air France, by now we would know a lot more on how it was brought down?

Quoting pvjin (Reply 28): Incompetent pro Russian rebels shot it down thinking it was an Ukrainian cargo plane,

This is probably closest to the truth...
Unfortunately, there are some who wouldn't stop at that and prefer the "Russia must have ordered the shootdown" but cannot explain why...

Quoting pvjin (Reply 28): Incompetent pro Russian rebels shot it down thinking it was an Ukrainian cargo plane, just like a tweet pretty much confirms, claiming that they had shot down an Ukrainian cargo plane just after MH17 had been shot down.

   Even Putin changed his tune real quick from "it wasn't us" to "well Ukraine shouldn't have put us in this position". Maybe his PR machine is trying to back pedal since, but he knows.

Looking at the scorch marks and shrapnel damage to the flight deck skin and neighbouring panels, as well as scuffs of green paint on the port wing and stabiliser surfaces, I think it is certain beyond reasonable doubt that a BUK missile shot MH17 out of the air.

As to whom did it, we might never get a certain answer.

Quoting incitatus (Reply 30): Am I the only one who thinks that had this been an EU airplane, say from Lufthansa or Air France, by now we would know a lot more on how it was brought down?

Probably. Just think about it, most of the people who died in this were EU nationals. In an event like this the ownership of the plane is of little importance compared to the hundreds of lives that were lost.

Quoting irshava (Reply 19): The facts are there, the evidence is there. Go ahead and keep preaching false information and false theory because NONE OF YOU!

While I do agree that the plane was most likely downed by incompetent pro-Russian rebels using a missile probably from a BUK launcher, your tone and capability of civilized discussion seems to leave a bit to be desired here.

You were asked for a source of your claim that Ukrainian military does not have BUKs. You have not answered this, but instead chose to insult the people asking. Please note that even if Ukraine would have BUKs the people asking are not necessarily implying that they don't believe that it would have been a Russian BUK that launched the missile that downed MH17.

The Bellingcat report is rather impressive though - well worth a read.

What, did the Ukrainian military hack the rebels' twitter account to make it look like they deleted a tweet saying they shot down a cargo aircraft (that was actually MH17?) Why is that piece of evidence conveniently ignored?

And no, just because a piece of evidence supports a certain side doesn't mean it was the product of that side's propaganda. Someone was responsible, the missile didn't just appear out of thin air. Let's debate content here instead of ignoring every point a poster makes and saying "oh well you're just biased to X side"

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 31): This is probably closest to the truth... Unfortunately, there are some who wouldn't stop at that and prefer the "Russia must have ordered the shootdown" but cannot explain why...

LOLOLOL. I gave you the evidence and the links, where is yours?

You are unable to produce it because the majority of the world knows who knocked the airliner down. I looked at your respect rating... and I'm baffled.

Have a nice day everyone. Look at the links and see for yourself.

Also, where did anyone claim that "Russia ordered the shootdown", shootdown, isn't a word, by the way.

Quoting irshava (Reply 37): You are unable to produce it because the majority of the world knows who knocked the airliner down. I looked at your respect rating... and I'm baffled.

Perhaps have a look at the original MH17 topic series to get your answers regarding my respect rating...
Re-read what I said in what you quoted to make sure you didn't misunderstand, and read the original MH17 topic series.
I do agree that it is most likely to be the pro-Russian rebels that fired the missile... but some, in the original MH17 topic, have tried to argue that Russia ordered the rebels to shoot an airliner down, given the position of the launcher, etc, etc, etc... Now that, to me, needs some explaining by them... You are free to join that crowd if you want.

And yes, with what you said that I quoted above, am not baffled why your respect rating is what it is.   

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 10): I'm not an ex-East European SAM operator but I do know that a Buk launch vehicle can also operate in stand-alone mode. Its built-in radar is normally used to track the target being engaged, but can be operated in a target-detection mode, allowing it to autonomously (i.e. launch vehicle only) engage targets that are present in the radar's forward field of view. If your read up on the Buk (plenty of info, videos etc. on the web) you will find that this mode bypasses the safety features of the main radar (resulting in limited IFF, no NCTR) and was brought in as a consequence of the system's performance in the 1982 Lebanon War. Hopefully that deals with that point.

so if only a single laucher unit is captured or operated, it would lead to confusion with aquiring target. is this standard for all BUKs or only the modernized ones?

also i read several times (i can't remember the sources) that a BUK missile typically rises over the target and explodes either upon impact or with it's proximity fuse in the range of up to 50m off the target. Does it always rise ABOVE the target? Why is this? Or is this just false information?

somebody mentioned the demolished fuselage sections around the cockpit. those seemed rather stange to me, since there seemed to be a grouping at exactly this spot. if the BUK spreads the shrapnel evenly (as one would assume), wouldn't this rule out the grouping of hits in one single spot?

some guys even came up with the possibility that a fighter targeted the jets cockpit. maybe some military pilot here can help: can you "sniper" into a flying jetliners flightdeck with the fighters guns? i would assume not, since it is a moving taret and it would be the targets side, making it even harder to hit it. i also remember videos of the live shootings from axalp in switzerland. the accuracy of the f-5, f-18 and mirages hitting the targets there differs from what is seen oh MH-17s flight deck section. but who knows. I also higly doubt that this could be done by a SU-25.

could an air- to -air missile generate such a perforation of the flight deck? i heard some russian rockets are not only fitted with a continous rod, but also combinded CR and shrapnell.

also the day when MH17 was lost was a rather clear day. the range of the BUK if shot to an altitude of above 10.000m is not to great (lateral). as far as i know, BUKs leave a smoke trail. is there any video evidence? i mean, this must bee seen for at least a few minutes. on the other hand, if the ukrainian army already shot into thos huge cities with rocket launchers, most probably this would not be out of the ordinary, since "smerch" and other 300mm systems, and "grad" leave also smoke trails.

some detailed info would be great, it is so hard to find it in the net. i mean there is a lot of info, but hardly non of people who really know what they are talking about (BUK operators, SU-25 pilots, guys who have had a hand on MH17s remains, eye witnesses off camera, etc....).

in the end i believe that russia, ukraine, usa and eu know not only what side shot, but also who in person. i mean, this is not a 9mm bullet lost, there is an inventory and one rocket is missing somewhere.

I think there is little doubt MH17 was shot down by Russian-supplied/sponsored/supported elements in (let's call it) "Greater" Ukraine and most likely they were separatists.
I also think it unlikely any individual or group will ever be arraigned for this as I expect summary "justice" has already been meted out and he or she who fired the missile - and perhaps a number in the vicinity or "in command" at the time - is lying face down in a ditch somewhere.
I am sceptical of the use or abuse of media by all parties in this conflict. It strikes me there are wrongs (probably as serious as war crimes) on both sides and these are being swept away under a tide of allegedly reputable/innovative/truth-seeking "journalists" or "sources" whose motivation/sponsorship/qualification or loyalty is unstated. In other words, media is being used to show "I'm right, you're wrong"; "I may be a bad boy, but you're worse" and "I've got a bigger gang on my side than you have on yours, so that makes my cause more noble!"
I have read the Bellingcat "report", just as I have read of the provenance of the group of whom I knew nothing prior to reading the original post in this thread. Lots of circumstantial stuff, excellent use of IT to try to pin things to specific places on the day in question, but where, for example, is the forensic/residual explosives trace analysis from the crash site...or was an explorative visit even made there?
Impressed but not convinced, I think I'll wait for the official crash report from properly qualified and unbiased aviation professionals - and who knows what counter arguments to the Bellingcat report will surface between now and then.

Quoting hilram (Reply 25): It was never a calculated action in the big political game. It was some half-drunk rebels who were convinced they had just shot down one more Ukrainian military plane. They even tweeted about it, for crying out loud!

        

..and they sure bragged about the shoot-down until they sobered-up...

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 40): also the day when MH17 was lost was a rather clear day.

Actually, it was a very cloudy and overcast day.

Quoting Ty134A (Reply 40): in the end i believe that russia, ukraine, usa and eu know not only what side shot, but also who in person. i mean, this is not a 9mm bullet lost, there is an inventory and one rocket is missing somewhere.

There were photos shot shortly after the incident that showed a BUK launcher - minus one missile - being taken across
the border from Ukraine to Russia.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 42): There were photos shot shortly after the incident that showed a BUK launcher - minus one missile - being taken across the border from Ukraine to Russia.

Yes, but I am skeptical of those as it was pointed out that the advertisements and street signs visible are from a city which was under Ukrainian control. The propaganda war is so deep that I can't trust anything that comes out of Russian or Ukrainian sources. There is a lot of fake information that came from both sides.

Why is everybody so obsessed with twitter messages? Haven't you ever posted something like "Yeah, we did it again! Go whatever!" after your favourite sports team win? How many goals can you usually claim for yourself in such a case?

I am actually very interested in a professional investigation with access to crash site, satellite pictures etc. But twitter messages are NOT evidence. Is there actually a criminal investigation underway? I did not follow the topic closely... but it still bothers me a little how in this day and age a large airliner can just disappear and an other is brought down and nobody seems to have a clue how it could happen.

Hats off to the people at Bellingcat for the good work that they've done. Imagine how long it must have taken to locate the Buk convoy on google streetview. All of this could have been avoided if the Buk had a cover over it. Thankfully not.  http://www.bellingcat.com/resources/...e-russian-buk-convoy-in-millerovo/
http://www.bellingcat.com/resources/...ing-the-mh17-buk-convoy-in-russia/

They also do a great job trying to GeoLocate the place where James Foley was beheaded.

Quoting hilram (Reply 29): Apologists will remain apologists, no matter what facts are presented to them...

  

Quoting incitatus (Reply 30): Am I the only one who thinks that had this been an EU airplane, say from Lufthansa or Air France, by now we would know a lot more on how it was brought down?

Yup and the shooting down would probably have much greater geopolitical consequences.

Quoting p201055r (Reply 41): I also think it unlikely any individual or group will ever be arraigned for this as I expect summary "justice" has already been meted out and he or she who fired the missile - and perhaps a number in the vicinity or "in command" at the time - is lying face down in a ditch somewhere.

I'm not a fan of capital punishment...but I hope so.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 43): Yes, but I am skeptical of those as it was pointed out that the advertisements and street signs visible are from a city which was under Ukrainian control.

The convoy clearly goes into Russian territory. Unless you're trying to tell us that Stary Oskul is Ukrainian?

Quoting tivo (Reply 44): Why is everybody so obsessed with twitter messages? Haven't you ever posted something like "Yeah, we did it again! Go whatever!" after your favourite sports team win? How many goals can you usually claim for yourself in such a case? I am actually very interested in a professional investigation with access to crash site, satellite pictures etc. But twitter messages are NOT evidence.

Yes, it is evidence, some of the best general public has in fact. They had shot down Ukrainian cargo planes earlier and tweeted about it in same manner. Now MH17 came down and they tweeted again, claiming they had shot down an Ukrainian cargo plane. Then they deleted the tweet. It's painfully obvious why.

Quoting tivo (Reply 44): how in this day and age a large airliner can just disappear and an other is brought down and nobody seems to have a clue how it could happen.

We already more or less know what happened, which group was responsible. Finding concrete proof is a different thing, Russians don't want to co-operate as their rebels are responsible.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8): Quoting PHX787 (Reply 3): and quiet those Russian apologists who claim no wrong doing. Probably not

Quoting hilram (Reply 29): Apologists will remain apologists, no matter what facts are presented to them...

You guys should see the nationalist jackoffs i have to deal with in tokyo  

Quoting incitatus (Reply 30): Am I the only one who thinks that had this been an EU airplane, say from Lufthansa or Air France, by now we would know a lot more on how it was brought down?

If it was AF, i suspect there would be an intense amount of bombing from France....

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 42): Quoting Ty134A (Reply 40): also the day when MH17 was lost was a rather clear day. Actually, it was a very cloudy and overcast day.

Doesnt the BUK use some sort of radar system, that works regardless of the weather ?

The rebels would claim any aircraft crashing as shot down. It is likely they saw the plane come down and claimed they shot it down.

Quoting tivo (Reply 44): I did not follow the topic closely... but it still bothers me a little how in this day and age a large airliner can just disappear and an other is brought down and nobody seems to have a clue how it could happen.

In a similar vein, quite amazing that seasoned investigators and multiple aviation professionals called things into question repeatedly on the bizarre TWA 800 investigation, only to be met with media 'conspiracy theory' labels and career protection by federal officials.