MH17 Report • Hacker News Board

Re: MH17 Report

#51

Post by tomlongson » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:26 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #7

rogeryu wrote: post #5

It's incredible that 61 airlines flew over that area during those days. That day alone, 160 airplanes flew over East Ukraine before MH17 was hit. Even if it's safe to fly at 10k height, what happens if you have problems with your plane, like a failing engine? Next time I fly I'm going to check over which countries we fly.

the take away is, do not fly over areas of conflict. why the international community allowed it, let alone individual airlines did not take their own action, is beyond me. On second thought, I wonder if an airline can elect to not fly on certain corridors because they declare a risk?

Why not put responsibility with the group that fired the missile? This is victim blaming.

Re: MH17 Report

#52

Post by BinaryIdiot » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:27 PM UTC

thomholwerda wrote: post #44

vkou2 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being the guy with the most nukes lets you get away with similar things. Nobody was brought to justice here, either. Two commanders did receive medals for their tour there, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

How is this relevant? Because country A murders people, country B may freely do so too?

I don't think he / she said anything about it being okay I think he / she was simply saying it's happened before with another powerful country.

Re: MH17 Report

#53

Post by samstave » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:28 PM UTC

nns wrote: post #4

Video Reconstruction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDiLEyT9spI At the 10.30 mark you can see the missile impact on the plane.

Wow, thats an amazing video.

Re: MH17 Report

#54

Post by rlpb » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:28 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #8

rogeryu wrote: post #5

It's incredible that 61 airlines flew over that area during those days. That day alone, 160 airplanes flew over East Ukraine before MH17 was hit. Even if it's safe to fly at 10k height, what happens if you have problems with your plane, like a failing engine? Next time I fly I'm going to check over which countries we fly.

Depending on your destination, you will find out that you'll fly over Pakistani tribal regions, Iraq or other unstable areas. Or the Gobi desert or the Arctic ocean. Places where you would not wish to land. There was nothing particularly strange about flying over Ukrainian airspace, because you don't really expect civilian planes to be shot down, even by rogue militias that are in power in some areas. The very fact t…

> The very fact that dozens of airlines had been doing that safely all the time that the conflict was there shows that many pilots and airlines did not think there was much risk.

The report disagrees with you. It says that dozens of airlines had been doing that all the time because everybody expected someone else to assess the risk.

Re: MH17 Report

#55

Post by tptacek » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:30 PM UTC

zilean wrote: post #46

tptacek wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did both sides have the ability to position a BUK launcher so that it was capable of hitting an airliner at 33kft at that precise location, 50 miles towards Russia east of rebel-controlled Donetsk? How seriously are we meant to take this particular controversy?

There were plenty of state controlled land east/south of Donetsk. You can check map here http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27308526

The maps you're linking to further implicate the rebels (see again the video reconstruction, which illustrates the trajectory the missile took from its launch site, which is not the same as the crash site, placing the missile launch even further from areas of Ukrainian control and even closer to Russia.)

Further, to even entertain this question, you have to believe that Ukraine positioned BUK launchers in the most heavily contested part of the country, in areas which were apparently held by rebels just weeks earlier.

This does not look like a serious controversy. The rebels shot the plane down.

Re: MH17 Report

#56

Post by cstross » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:33 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #8

rogeryu wrote: post #5

It's incredible that 61 airlines flew over that area during those days. That day alone, 160 airplanes flew over East Ukraine before MH17 was hit. Even if it's safe to fly at 10k height, what happens if you have problems with your plane, like a failing engine? Next time I fly I'm going to check over which countries we fly.

Depending on your destination, you will find out that you'll fly over Pakistani tribal regions, Iraq or other unstable areas. Or the Gobi desert or the Arctic ocean. Places where you would not wish to land. There was nothing particularly strange about flying over Ukrainian airspace, because you don't really expect civilian planes to be shot down, even by rogue militias that are in power in some areas. The very fact t…

The BUK-M isn't something where "someone was drunk and decided to give a lesson" -- it's the Russian equivalent of a Patriot missile battery, with a platoon-sized crew and several support vehicles (radar and command trucks) needed to fire the thing. Other variants have anti-ballistic missile capability and/or nuclear warheads!

It's quite likely the operators mistook the Boeing 777 for a large Ukrainian military transport aircraft. There are echoes of Iran Air Flight 655 here ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Re: MH17 Report

#57

Post by Caprinicus » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:43 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #45

aikah wrote: 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…

Nobody is blaming them for someone shooting a missile at them, but from here on I am going to check if I am going to be flying over an active warzone beforehand.

Re: MH17 Report

#58

Post by istvan__ » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:46 PM UTC

cstross wrote: post #56

ptaipale wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on your destination, you will find out that you'll fly over Pakistani tribal regions, Iraq or other unstable areas. Or the Gobi desert or the Arctic ocean. Places where you would not wish to land. There was nothing particularly strange about flying over Ukrainian airspace, because you don't really expect civilian planes to be shot down, even by rogue militias that are in power in some areas. The very fact t…

The BUK-M isn't something where "someone was drunk and decided to give a lesson" -- it's the Russian equivalent of a Patriot missile battery, with a platoon-sized crew and several support vehicles (radar and command trucks) needed to fire the thing. Other variants have anti-ballistic missile capability and/or nuclear warheads! It's quite likely the operators mistook the Boeing 777 for a large Ukrainian military trans…

This still does not prove anything, it could have been the Ukraine military as well, they have (just like any other ex-Soviet country) plenty of BUK missiles.

Re: MH17 Report

#59

Post by istvan__ » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:52 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #35

sschueller wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The report did not go into finding out who did it. Both sides own BUKs. It is very difficult to find the truth because all sides are pumping out propaganda. Even the United States is manipulating what we hear for their own political and economic gains. Here an subtle but strong example : http://www.sott.net/article/302911-Sott-Exclusive-Full-unedi...

Did both sides have the ability to position a BUK launcher so that it was capable of hitting an airliner at 33kft at that precise location, 50 miles towards Russia east of rebel-controlled Donetsk? How seriously are we meant to take this particular controversy?

They had few seconds to shoot it down. They had to coordinate very well to achieve this.

Re: MH17 Report

#60

Post by aerique » Tue, Oct 13, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #45

aikah wrote: 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 think both sides are to blame here. It's definitely questionable to fly over a warzone with a public passenger aircraft. Sooner or later something like this would have happened.

This doesn't mean the Russians shouldn't have cooperated better.

(BTW I'm Dutch.)