Results 501 to 513 of 513

  1. Post
    LOUDNOISES wrote:
    Thats not how they all work. But yes I'm aware that thats the type of missile they believe brought down MH17. I've not seen anything detailing that these missiles explode in front of the target. The shrapnel goes in the direction the missile is pointing, so exploding in front of the target would require the missile to be heading dead straight on to the aircraft in the opposite direction.

    Realistically, they just explode in whatever direction they are coming from when approaching the target. From an underneath angle gives the biggest cross section and largest chance of success.


    What? It was destroyed immediately. Thats why there's large pieces of fuselage spread out over miles.

    Again, I'm yet to see any shrapnel damage to the fuselage, wings, horizontal or vertical stabiliser. You choose to believe all of the missile damage was confined to the cockpit (super smart missile!). I find the chances fairly slim so am sceptical until we receive more evidence.

    US satellites can detect these missile launches, so I'm not sure why the only evidence they release is a cartoon google earth image when they could show us exactly where the missile came from and its flight path up until detonation.
    BS

    Any damage to a pressurized aircraft at 30,000 feet will result in explosive decompression and catastrophic failure of the airframe. Combine this with the fact that the aircraft is traveling at around mach .8 and the result is wreckage spread over several kilometres.

    Exactly as you can see in the Ukraine crash site.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontr..._and_incidents

    No country withe technical capability to record the missiles flight path is going to reveal that capability just to satisfy your idle curiosity.
    Last edited by Zarkov; 16th August 2014 at 11:43 am.

  2. Post
    "The Mystery of the Malaysian Airlines Crash Over Ukraine. A Malaysian airline safety engineer considers the facts."

    very interesting article

    http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/25...h-over-ukraine

    Another, similar to my personal conclusions:

    "Romanian military expert, pilot and former deputy commander of Otopeni military airport, Valentin Vasilescu, presented his version of the tragedy..."

    http://english.pravda.ru/world/ussr/...ash_ukraine-0/

    "The expert notes that he is not alone in his opinion. For example, Gordon Duff, a veteran of the Vietnam War, currently a security consultant, believes that the Malaysian Boeing could not be shot down by surface-to-air or air-to-air missile. According to him, it was either a bomb explosion on board, or "a gun of a Ukrainian fighter jet." "It was a diabolical brain that planned the attack, as flight MH-17 was shot down from an onboard gun. The gun left traces that make one believe that it was a small bomb that exploded inside," he said. Canadian expert Michael Bociurkiw wrote in his report that part of the aircraft fuselage was dotted with "shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes." He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials. Bociurkiw believes that Boeing MH-17 was shot down from small arms or artillery weapons of a fighter aircraft that had a high fire rate. "

    there is almost no doubt about it.
    Last edited by test123; 21st August 2014 at 12:40 am.

  3. Post
    Nm, it's impossible to figure out what's been altered and what hasn't. I don't believe any of them

  4. Post
    test123 wrote:
    there is almost no doubt about it.
    The troll returns.

  5. Post
    I think we've moved past this incident, try to keep up.

  6. Post
    So I heard theres been mass resignations by the staff of malaysian air?

    Can't say I blame them. Who would want to work for an airline where one flight ended up like the plane on the first episode of LOST, and another flight ended up like the plane on the first episode of Fringe.

  7. Post

  8. Post
    Its as if tho everything this company touches turns into a cluster****.

  9. Post
    I'd love to know how an entire marketing team could have thought this was a good idea?

  10. Post
    First offical report from Dutch investigations released.

    RT new article

  11. Post
    Zarkov wrote:
    BS

    Any damage to a pressurized aircraft at 30,000 feet will result in explosive decompression and catastrophic failure of the airframe. Combine this with the fact that the aircraft is traveling at around mach .8 and the result is wreckage spread over several kilometres.

    Exactly as you can see in the Ukraine crash site.
    I agree.

    Not sure what your point is?

  12. Post
    Looks like some shrapnel damage has been found the port wing. This image could depict an accurate scenario.


  13. Post
    LOUDNOISES wrote:
    Looks like some shrapnel damage has been found the port wing. This image could depict an accurate scenario.

    https://twitter.com/Justin_Br0nk --"Aerospace and defence news, analysis and footage from a Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) Military Sciences research analyst"

    That guy is a propaganda force to be reckoned with looking at his tweets!