MH-17 Boeing-777 was downed by Ukraine – Dutch investigators

[John McWrice]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

 

[Spare_change]

Obama was made aware of this in October. We can see how liberals respond.

 

[Camp]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

 

[frigidweirdo]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

Why could only Ukrainian Buk SAM systems have shot down the plane?

The rebels also have these.

Where do Ukraine’s rebels get arms from? Old Soviet bases, says Russia’s top brass

"Russia is not waging war in Ukraine’s east, and is not supplying rebels with military equipment, according to Russian deputy defense minister Anatoly Antonov. The anti-Kiev forces get their arms at old Soviet storages - same as government troops do."

Oh, right, so the rebels are getting old Russian weaponry, which would include BUK missiles.

"Another source is operational trophies, the deputy defense minister said. “The self-defense forces seize large amounts of National Guard’s and the Ukrainian army’s weapons. Hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers fled into Russia, leaving the weapons they used to own,” he added."

 

[frigidweirdo]

9:30 minutes in, they Russians said it wasn't them, because they don't use this missile. What they didn't say was that the Rebels DO use these missiles.

Bloodiest day in Ukraine conflict as rebel missiles bring down military jet

"Pro-Russian rebels have shot down a military transport plane in Luhansk in the bloodiest single day of fighting in eastern Ukraine since the conflict began in April, setting back Kiev's efforts to end the crisis and establish control of the region."

BUK missile launcher shown in Russian separatist stronghold before MH17 crash | Daily Mail Online

Pictures of BUK missiles in rebel held territory.

 

[Tehon]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

Complete and unbiased information is passe OP. We here in America are only concerned with what "feels" right. Lucky for us we have leaders willing to go on the television and sooth our feelings. Mr. Kerry laid out the whole investigation way back in 2014. Case closed. Stop bothering us with ideas about Ukrainian operated Buk systems. We, including our puppet regimes, are the good guys. Just believe us.

 

[xband]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

 

[frigidweirdo]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

 

[xband]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

I asked about guidance because I was thinking about how to defeat BUK. Passive guidance aka heat seeker is the easiest to defeat.

 

[frigidweirdo]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

I asked about guidance because I was thinking about how to defeat BUK. Passive guidance aka heat seeker is the easiest to defeat.

Sure, I'm no expert, but I've read a few Tom Clancy, haha.

 

[Tehon]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

The rebels have Buks? Is that a proven fact?

 

[xband]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

The rebels have Buks? Is that a proven fact?

I bet that sucker takes off fast and travels 2000 miles per hour in four seconds and has a hard kick when launching to call it BUK.

 

[Tehon]

On January 22, 2017 Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services (CIVD) chief Harm Brouwer furnished the Dutch parliament with data concerning Flight MH-17 crash. According to it only Ukrainian Buk-M-1 SAM systems could shoot down the aircraft.

This information was posted on Twitter by MP Pieter Omtzight: “CIVD chief confirms: according to the investigation, only Ukraine had operable "Buk" SAM systems in the region on July 17".

However, this sensational tweet was ignored by news media. It was found by Ukrainian politologist Vladimir Kornilov a short while ago… It only goes to show that Western governments have no interest in delivering of complete and biased information to their citizens.

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

The rebels have Buks? Is that a proven fact?

I bet that sucker takes off fast and travels 2000 miles per hour in four seconds and has a hard kick when launching to call it BUK.

I bet.


The Buk missile system (Russian: "Бук"; “beech” (tree)

 

[xband]

The briefing and tweet happened on January 22, 2016, not 2017. The investigation lasted eight more months during which time the assumption that only Ukraine had access to the BUK missile system was disputed and convinced the investigators that the separatist had access to BUK anti-aircraft missile systems. The report by the JIT was issued on Sept. 28, 2016, again, eight months after the tweet in the OP.

BUK missile system is a new one for me and I was intimate with the Tartar anti-air missile system over 40 years ago. Does BUK have passive, semi-passive or active guidance?

However it doesn't really matter. The rebels have this system as well as the Ukrainians. So, saying it couldn't be the rebels would require a lot of effort to prove, seeing as both sides had the system.

The rebels have Buks? Is that a proven fact?

I bet that sucker takes off fast and travels 2000 miles per hour in four seconds and has a hard kick when launching to call it BUK.

I bet.


The Buk missile system (Russian: "Бук"; “beech” (tree)

Thanks for I did not know BUK meant Beech Tree. Beech trees are tall with a wide trunk and strong wood.

 

[yiostheoy]

Ukraine is the least of our worries.

Especially if a Dutch pilot is not smart enough to plan a flight plan around and not through a war zone.

 

[Theowl32]

Of course it was Ukraine.. eye roll.

 

[xband]

Of course it was Ukraine.. eye roll.

I am willing to wager that BUK is a heat seeker, the most primitive guided missile. Put rocket propelled flares on the plane with a thermal image computer for anti-missile and programmed to launch when a hot flash is sensed on the ground meaning launch. The heat seeker will chase after the hottest thing in its narrow range of vision.

 

[Tehon]

Of course it was Ukraine.. eye roll.

I am willing to wager that BUK is a heat seeker, the most primitive guided missile. Put rocket propelled flares on the plane with a thermal image computer for anti-missile and programmed to launch when a hot flash is sensed on the ground meaning launch. The heat seeker will chase after the hottest thing in its narrow range of vision.

Operation[edit]
The Buk is a mobile, radar-guided surface-to-air missile (SAM) missile system with all four main components — acquisition and targeting radars, a command element, missile launchers, and a logistics element — mounted on tracked vehicles. This allows the system to move with other military forces and relocate to make it a more difficult target to find than a fixed SAM system.

• The acquisition radar component (several variants have differing capabilities) allows the system to identify, track and target selected targets.
• The command component is intended to discern "friendly" military aircraft from foes (IFF), prioritize multiple targets, and pass radar targeting information to the missile launchers.
• The missile launcher component can carry a variety of missiles (as listed below) and may be able to engage more than one target simultaneously.
• The logistics component carries additional (reload) missiles and provides other supplies and parts for the system and the operators.

In general, the system identifies potential targets (radar), selects a particular target (command), fires a missile (launcher) at the target, and resupplies the system (logistics). The missiles require a radar lock to initially steer the missile to the target until the missile's on-board radar system takes over to provide final course corrections. A proximity fuse aboard the missile determines when it will detonate, creating an expanding fragmentation pattern of missile components and warhead to intercept and destroy the target. A proximity fuse improves the "probability of kill" given the missile and target closure rates, which can be more than 3,000 km/h (1,900 mph) (or more than 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s)).

Alternatively, the command component may be able to remotely detonate the missile, or the on-board contact fuse will cause the warhead to detonate. The most capable radar, assuming it has a line of sight (no terrain between the radar and the target), can track targets (depending on size) as low as 30 m (98 ft) and as far as 140 km (87 mi). The most capable missile can hit targets as far as 50 km (31 mi) and more than 24,000 m (79,000 ft) in altitude. Since the introduction of the Buk in the 1970s, the capabilities of its system components have evolved, which has led to different nomenclature and nicknames for the components' variants. The Buk has also been adapted for use on naval vessels.
Buk missile system - Wikipedia

 

[Tehon]

Of course it was Ukraine.. eye roll.

They had motive.

 

[xband]

Of course it was Ukraine.. eye roll.

I am willing to wager that BUK is a heat seeker, the most primitive guided missile. Put rocket propelled flares on the plane with a thermal image computer for anti-missile and programmed to launch when a hot flash is sensed on the ground meaning launch. The heat seeker will chase after the hottest thing in its narrow range of vision.

Operation[edit]
The Buk is a mobile, radar-guided surface-to-air missile (SAM) missile system with all four main components — acquisition and targeting radars, a command element, missile launchers, and a logistics element — mounted on tracked vehicles. This allows the system to move with other military forces and relocate to make it a more difficult target to find than a fixed SAM system.

• The acquisition radar component (several variants have differing capabilities) allows the system to identify, track and target selected targets.
• The command component is intended to discern "friendly" military aircraft from foes (IFF), prioritize multiple targets, and pass radar targeting information to the missile launchers.
• The missile launcher component can carry a variety of missiles (as listed below) and may be able to engage more than one target simultaneously.
• The logistics component carries additional (reload) missiles and provides other supplies and parts for the system and the operators.

In general, the system identifies potential targets (radar), selects a particular target (command), fires a missile (launcher) at the target, and resupplies the system (logistics). The missiles require a radar lock to initially steer the missile to the target until the missile's on-board radar system takes over to provide final course corrections. A proximity fuse aboard the missile determines when it will detonate, creating an expanding fragmentation pattern of missile components and warhead to intercept and destroy the target. A proximity fuse improves the "probability of kill" given the missile and target closure rates, which can be more than 3,000 km/h (1,900 mph) (or more than 900 m/s (3,000 ft/s)).

Alternatively, the command component may be able to remotely detonate the missile, or the on-board contact fuse will cause the warhead to detonate. The most capable radar, assuming it has a line of sight (no terrain between the radar and the target), can track targets (depending on size) as low as 30 m (98 ft) and as far as 140 km (87 mi). The most capable missile can hit targets as far as 50 km (31 mi) and more than 24,000 m (79,000 ft) in altitude. Since the introduction of the Buk in the 1970s, the capabilities of its system components have evolved, which has led to different nomenclature and nicknames for the components' variants. The Buk has also been adapted for use on naval vessels.

It must be semi-passive if it needs a ground radar to guide it. The best way to defeat semi-passive is shine the same frequency back on the tracking radar of equal or more power which makes the ground tracking radar go nuts. I had an offer to go to Iran and man their Missile Minder system (Basic Point Defense) before the fall of the Shah. Thank God I turned down that offer.

Range Gate Stealing is another option.