Re:MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'
by erkkie on Wednesday September 28, 2016 @10:50AM
(#12598074)
Are you for real? There's war zones all over the world, usually that doesn't mean shooting down a passenger flight 10km high, for which you need specialized equipment, not just a random shoulder carry rocket. Until the incident, airspace at civilian cruising altitudes was free and open in Ukraine. Hint: space is 3d, lower levels were closed in various places.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'
by andreasley on Wednesday September 28, 2016 @11:06AM
(#12598208)
On July 14th 2014, just three days before the MH17 incident, an Antonov AN-26 Ukrainian military transport plane was hit at 21 000 feet altitude, so there was a strong indication that SAMs were available to the seperatists. According to the Dutch Safety Board, the airspace should have been closed [1].
[1] http://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/dutch-safety-board-u...
Re:MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'
by anthonybsd on Wednesday September 28, 2016 @01:05PM
(#12599354)
AN-26 was hit with a MANPADS which cannot target altitude at which civilian airliners fly. No one at the time thought that Russia was crazy enough to supply the rebels with BUKs.
Re:MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'
by andreasley on Wednesday September 28, 2016 @02:42PM
(#12600154)
While the previous aircraft were downed by MANPADS or AA, the AN-26 in question was flying at an altitude only reachable by a SAM. At the bottom of this article [1] is a good overview of the shot-down aircraft over east Ukraine in 2014.
[1] http://airheadsfly.com/2014/07/15/ukraine-latest-an-26-downi...