tonyh29 Posted July 20, 2014 Author Share Posted July 20, 2014 Tuesday is when all of Europe's Foreign ministers gather in Brussels to take it from behind off the Russians Be nice to see them grow a pair but I'm not holding my breath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 (edited) The response from the "Leaders" in Europe needs to be something special today or I think a lot of people will just give up with them and the Europe thing. What's the point really, if people can blow planes out the sky and the best we get is "Cameron had a Frank discussion with Putin on the phone":- You can just imagine it: Cameron on loudspeaker, the russians all trying not to laugh or popping into the corridor to have a proper laugh. Why when he says "Frank" discussion I think Cameron is doing the Dick Emery "Ooo you are awful but I like" you gag This is what I imagine is going on so lets see the reality today. I hope I am miles off and he has been working on something over the weekend in regard to this so for now, benefit of the doubt for one more day. Edited July 21, 2014 by Amsterdam_Neil_D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Tuesday is when all of Europe's Foreign ministers gather in Brussels to take it from behind off the Russians Be nice to see them grow a pair but I'm not holding my breath I'd like to see them answer a few questions which as far as I can see haven't yet been answered, rather than posture for the media. Questions like these. Who redirected the plane from its former flight path, through a war zone? And why? Have they asked the Ukraine to stop bombing a few km away from the scene? What response was received? Why have international investigators not arrived at the scene, though western journalists are all over it? If it is important to preserve the site as a crime scene, have they used their considerable influence with the western media to ask them not to wander all over the place (including, in the case of Sky, rummaging through the personal possessions of one of the victims; though apparently not while in a vodka-induced stupor). How can it be shown whether it was a ground to air missile or another plane which shot down the plane? What information exists which can definitively show from where the missile was fired, and why has this not yet been released to support the general accusations which are being made? I'd find some factual information like that quite helpful, rather than press briefings about how tough people like Cameron and Abbot are acting. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 21, 2014 Author Share Posted July 21, 2014 I thought I just heard Abbot on the news saying Putin was "saying all the right things" Interesting that there is a resolution vote taking place on Tuesday about defining the plane as shot down / terrorism ( or something like this ) and allowing compensation for the victims families ... one which Russia can veto and kill in its tracks ... I guess that will show if the "tough talking" is working or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 It took several days for Cameron to even be able to reach Putin on the phone that is how much Putin and Russia care what Europe and it's leaders think. None of the valid questions above will be answered or any of the many others such as the validity of the Ukraine phone intercepts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 So, this article says the aircraft was being escorted by two Ukrainian fighter jets, and suggests it may have been shot down in the belief that it was "...a high-value plane of the Ukrainian Air Force. On their radar screens, the sight of a large plane with two accompanying (or circling in CAP not too far away) fighter jets was completely new and may only mean the Ukrainians were escorting an important plane. And that would be the reason why they downed it without spending too much time analysing its transponder code and altitude". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Just read that a woman lost her son in MH370 then her husband in MH17. If that's true, then wow how horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted July 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted July 21, 2014 Just read that a woman lost her son in MH370 then her husband in MH17. If that's true, then wow how horrible. I wouldn't be getting on another plane if I was her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Kaylene Mann from Queensland lost her husband and step daughter in the 2 Malaysian aviation tragedies. How horrific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 Tuesday is when all of Europe's Foreign ministers gather in Brussels to take it from behind off the Russians Be nice to see them grow a pair but I'm not holding my breath I'd like to see them answer a few questions which as far as I can see haven't yet been answered, rather than posture for the media. Questions like these. Who redirected the plane from its former flight path, through a war zone? And why? Have they asked the Ukraine to stop bombing a few km away from the scene? What response was received? Why have international investigators not arrived at the scene, though western journalists are all over it? If it is important to preserve the site as a crime scene, have they used their considerable influence with the western media to ask them not to wander all over the place (including, in the case of Sky, rummaging through the personal possessions of one of the victims; though apparently not while in a vodka-induced stupor). How can it be shown whether it was a ground to air missile or another plane which shot down the plane? What information exists which can definitively show from where the missile was fired, and why has this not yet been released to support the general accusations which are being made? I'd find some factual information like that quite helpful, rather than press briefings about how tough people like Cameron and Abbot are acting. The idea of ascertaining facts is valid. I'm not sure the specific questions are the right ones, though. The first one you ask, I'm not sure I've seen anything about anyone external "re-directing" the plane, though I've read some stuff saying the pilot changed course to an extent, to avoid storms, whilst remaining outside (above) the no fly zone. The second one seems spurious/incidental to the incident itself. The third one - the responsibility for investigating air accidents primarily lies with the country in which they occur. Obviously they can request outside help, and this they (Ukraine) have done. I believe people have gone there asa result, however as you say it's a war zone with the area in question not under control of Ukraine, as would normally be the case. As such the safety of the aiib people is far from assured. Next - "crime scene" - not really. Air Accident scene (though obviously it's a crime and not an accident, but in terms of finding out what went on, it's an air accident type incident on the ground. The cause of the loss of the aircraft can be found, hopefully via debris evidence, with further clues from the ADR, radar, satellite and so on. I would guess satellite evidence is available to the US and maybe Russia and China. In terms of the media - yeah, some of the coverage is very one dimensional. There's been little on any other aspect. And there's been much that's utterly nonsensical - for example about "moving the bodies" as if that were terrible, somehow. Yes, much better to leave them rotting in the sun, eh? In a horrific scene like that, in a combat area, people will do their best with what little knowledge they may have - for example - do they collect passports found, so they can then collate a list of people perished, or do they leave them by the bodies so they can bury the people in the right graves, correctly identified? - there's no "right" or "wrong" thing to do there for a farmer happening across the scene. The media coverage has been just lacking in fact and full of assumption and then reverting to set piece assumptions as to who was behind it or why or what "call me Dave" said or what Putin's up to. So, this article says the aircraft was being escorted by two Ukrainian fighter jets, and suggests it may have been shot down in the belief that it was "...a high-value plane of the Ukrainian Air Force. On their radar screens, the sight of a large plane with two accompanying (or circling in CAP not too far away) fighter jets was completely new and may only mean the Ukrainians were escorting an important plane. And that would be the reason why they downed it without spending too much time analysing its transponder code and altitude". That looks to be very full of inconsistencies and inaccuracies to me and accordingly very weak in it's conclusions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 So, this article says the aircraft was being escorted by two Ukrainian fighter jets, and suggests it may have been shot down in the belief that it was "...a high-value plane of the Ukrainian Air Force. On their radar screens, the sight of a large plane with two accompanying (or circling in CAP not too far away) fighter jets was completely new and may only mean the Ukrainians were escorting an important plane. And that would be the reason why they downed it without spending too much time analysing its transponder code and altitude". Absolutely possible, there have been claims that Ukraine airforce plans have been hiding behind commercial flights to avoid detection. Similar has happened before. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 21, 2014 Author Share Posted July 21, 2014 So, this article says the aircraft was being escorted by two Ukrainian fighter jets, and suggests it may have been shot down in the belief that it was "...a high-value plane of the Ukrainian Air Force. On their radar screens, the sight of a large plane with two accompanying (or circling in CAP not too far away) fighter jets was completely new and may only mean the Ukrainians were escorting an important plane. And that would be the reason why they downed it without spending too much time analysing its transponder code and altitude". Absolutely possible, there have been claims that Ukraine airforce plans have been hiding behind commercial flights to avoid detection. Similar has happened before. I thought that was Clint Eastwood in Firefox ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meath_Villan Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 No overly knowledgeable about the radar on a commercial plane ....but would it be able to pick up two fighter jets tailing it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 21, 2014 Author Share Posted July 21, 2014 No overly knowledgeable about the radar on a commercial plane ....but would it be able to pick up two fighter jets tailing it ? TCAS only detects other planes that have the system fitted ... I'm not sure if military planes have it fitted ( or all commercial planes for that matter ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 No overly knowledgeable about the radar on a commercial plane ....but would it be able to pick up two fighter jets tailing it ?Well, I'm about as far from knowing about planes as Osborne is from knowing his arse from his elbow, but I've read that fighter planes do regularly shadow commercial planes, for practice, and are undetected or unobjected to. I gather they do it from behind, so the passengers dont see them. Sounds very dodgy to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 No overly knowledgeable about the radar on a commercial plane ....but would it be able to pick up two fighter jets tailing it ? Well, I'm about as far from knowing about planes as Osborne is from knowing his arse from his elbow, but I've read that fighter planes do regularly shadow commercial planes, for practice, and are undetected or unobjected to. I gather they do it from behind, so the passengers dont see them. Sounds very dodgy to me. Far more frequent than most realise… and done for a variety of reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meath_Villan Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Just thought a plane would have some sort of collision alert from all sides Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Surely Blandy and thetrees should be able to solve this between them? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 22, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 22, 2014 No overly knowledgeable about the radar on a commercial plane ....but would it be able to pick up two fighter jets tailing it ? no. Many commercial a/© don't have radar. Some may have weather radar, but that would be facing forward. TCAS works via IFF and requires both aircraft to have it, and again isn't an identifier in terms of "that's a fighter" of other vehicles it just gives avoidance steering commands where there's risk of flight paths converging. Dunno whether Ukraine fighters would have TCAS anyway. Unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts