Live data from Hacker News

MH17 Report

bbc.co.uk

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: MH17 Report

#141
post #138
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The report answers that question.

The direct quote from the article: the report does not say who fired the missile

You ask why the report doesn't say who fired the missile. The report explains why. You are right: the report does not say who fired the missile. It merely makes it obvious who did.

Re: MH17 Report

#142

I anticipate lot of bluster. The perpetrators perhaps being named but ultimately nothing happening. A lot of nations do not recognise courts higher than their own sovereignty so will not extradite. Especially if they deem the charge to be politically motivated. Right or wrong. Russia will contest this report, and any other. Basically someone messed up with a borrowed bit of heavy kit and a tragedy ensued. There will…

> Basically someone messed up with a borrowed bit of heavy kit and a tragedy ensued. "borrowed" ?

The accusation is that the Donetsk Peoples Republic used a Russian device. Once they'd realised the enormous gravity of their misjudgment they returned it to Russia. So yes. Borrowed.

Re: MH17 Report

#143

I anticipate lot of bluster. The perpetrators perhaps being named but ultimately nothing happening. A lot of nations do not recognise courts higher than their own sovereignty so will not extradite. Especially if they deem the charge to be politically motivated. Right or wrong. Russia will contest this report, and any other. Basically someone messed up with a borrowed bit of heavy kit and a tragedy ensued. There will…

Keep in mind that around 6000 people (maybe outdated number) died from that war so far. I doubt they're getting justice for them or their families either. They might get a scapegoat in some time, however. Even a very guilty one.

Exactly my thoughts too.

Re: MH17 Report

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm interested that the missile effectively missed. Is this the intended method of action, nearby explosion with shrapnel impacts or should the missile have entered the body of the plane in a, militarily speaking, perfect deployment. With such weapons do they choose the point of impact, ie is the cockpit the target, or are the weapons not that "refined".

Intended. Planes are too fast and too maneuverable. Especially military planes — SAMs weren’t actually designed to down civilians. That’s why missiles have proximity-based detonators, so called “proximity fuze”, to explode at the right moment. BTW, here’s 8 minutes video about the history of that technology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_Uy5hGazc

Good video, thanks.

Summary of video: USA developed the "VT fuze" proximity fuse used initially in ship based AA fire; improved efficacy rates from 2400 down to 400 rounds needed to down an aircraft. First used over ground at the Battle of the Bulge.

Re: MH17 Report

#145
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, I don't know who shot the missile. But when trying to use logic here, I don't see why would Russia shoot the plane. They had nothing to gain. Ukraine? I don't know, I refuse to believe they would deliberately kill hundreds for some advantage. My bet is on the rebels who did it mistakenly. The question is whose BUK they used. One provided by Russia or one taken from an abandoned Ukrainian base.

I don't know how to respond to this comment. Your earlier comment parroted a line that is apparently popular in the Russian media, that Russia no longer uses the 9M38M1 SAM. But that missile is distinctive, and can been seen in recent photographs at Russian military installations. I didn't say that Russia shot down MH17. I said that if they're claiming not to use that missile, they're lying. Why? What a weird thing t…

Putin's lie about "Russia does not invade Crimea" (Feb 2014) was also easily falsifiable.

Nevertheless he lied about it and his ratings in Russia did not even suffer from it.

Re: MH17 Report

#146
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Next time I fly I'm going to check over which countries we fly Can you really get that info before hand(well I guess one can access previous flight plans) ? If the passengers knew that, would have they cancelled their trip ? I certainly would have. Never the less, the risk assessment was bad and too many people died that day. Should a war be blamed for being a war? Or should companies be blamed for being too greedy…

> Can you really get that info before hand? That question is not new and is rather simple to google, see for instance http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-find-the-route-your-plane... I dislike the message here, which shifts the blame on the victims (the captain who chooses the flight path, and who was killed). The blame belongs with the operators of that BUK system. (Incidentally, this victim-blaming has been one them…

I'm in no way "victim-blaming" . But I believe Malaysian Airlines are also to blame for the incident.

All I'm saying is the company flying over east Ukraine put its passengers in danger for the sake of saving fuel which I find as disgusting as the attack itself.

You're somehow suggesting that i'm a "putin-bot" and a russian troll which is insulting and ridiculous.

Post reply on HN