July 17, Boeing crash. Malaysian Boeing flight MH17 was shot down by Ukraine on orders from the CIA. News: Flight MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian missile
| This material has nothing to do with the subject of our site. But as a Russian patriot who understands the difference between the Fatherland and the authorities, I consider it my civic duty to speak out, based on my knowledge and experience, on a very important topic - the tragic death of a Boeing 777 passenger over Donbass on July 17, 2014. |
“Many people confuse the two concepts: “Fatherland” and “Your Excellency” and even give preference to the latter over the former. There are many such people in all countries, but we have enough of them that you can even shovel them.” Russian writer (1826-1889), Ryazan and Tver vice-governor |
How and why flight MH17 died
(all illustrations and videos on this page are clickable, even despite sometimes appearing messages about “not found files”)
|
Airliner B777-200 9M-MRD "Malaysia Airliers" Flight MH17 crash: Dutch residents cannot recover from shock(TV channel Russia Today 07/18/2014). YouTube
Video recording of the program "Tamantsev. Results" (broadcast 2 July 1, 2014) on the RBC TV channel. YouTube |
The version of the destruction of flight MH17 by a Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft was first voiced at a briefing of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on July 21, 2014, which was the Russian response to a video published by the Ukrainian National Security Service blaming the destruction civil aircraft on the separatists and Russia, as well as amateur videos that appeared on the Internet of transporting the Buk self-propelled gun with full ammunition (4 anti-aircraft guided missiles - SAM - 9M38) first from Russia to the territory controlled by the separatists, and then - an emergency return to Russia by the same installation, but with incomplete ammunition consisting of three missiles.
At the briefing of the Ministry of Defense (the video is shown on the right), the following main points were made:
According to Russian military, a Malaysian Boeing 777, flying past Donetsk, deviated north by 14 kilometers; after that he tried to return to his corridor, but did not have time;
Before the crash, the Boeing 777 began to lose speed;
The Russian Ministry of Defense has at its disposal satellite images showing the location of air defense systems of the Ukrainian army in the south-east of Ukraine before the Boeing crash, according to which the Ukrainian Buk air defense systems were redeployed to Shakhtersk the day before;
On the day of the disaster, an air defense group of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was deployed near Donetsk, consisting of three or four divisions of the Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile system, and the route of the Boeing 777 fell within their range;
A Ukrainian combat aircraft, presumably a Su-25, was recorded climbing in the direction of a Malaysian Boeing; the distance between the Boeing and the Su-25 was only 3-5 kilometers; Thus, a Ukrainian combat aircraft capable of carrying an R-60 air-to-air missile flew along the airway for several minutes civil aviation, almost simultaneously and at the same flight level (altitude) with a passenger aircraft;
At the time of the disaster at the same control mark airspace another object was observed;
At the time of the crash, an American satellite was flying over this site;
Russia did not transfer Buk missile systems and other types of weapons to the militias.
The briefing by the Russian Ministry of Defense evokes a very ambiguous impression due to numerous inconsistencies, contradictions, distortions and evidence of the outright incompetence of the speakers. For example, in his speech, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Lieutenant General Andrei Kartapolov, speaks (briefing video time code 13:10) about three civilian airliners in the Donetsk area, and on the diagram ("slide") of objective control data air situation in the Donetsk area on July 17, 2014 (briefing video time code from 12:50) shows 4 airliners. But this, as they say, is “just the beginning.”
|
Thus, an impartial analysis of even the data that was presented at the briefing shows the deviation of flight MH17 from the axis of the route by only 8 kilometers, which, taking into account the standardized width of the international air corridor of 10-20 km, makes this deviation insignificant.
|
As you can see, the route of flight MH17 actually deviated slightly to the north, but the routes on the diagram of our Ministry of Defense and on FlightRadar24 intersect only at one (!) point, previously following in different (!) corridors, differing by many tens of kilometers in distance and tens of degrees in azimuth, approaching only a few minutes before the disaster, and finally meeting at the place where the debris fell... Such a discrepancy should have confused any unbiased person, including the military who drew these diagrams - after all, www.FlightRadar24.com is always at hand , and only for mobile gadgets (tablets and smartphones) it has three (!) versions - Flightradar 24 Free, Flightradar 24 Pro and FR24 Premium (more than 6 million downloads in total!)... However, our staff members preferred an unfettered flight of thought, in a fit of free creativity, coloring their paper maps with felt-tip pens... By the way, a logical question arises: if we assume the existence of a “supposedly” Ukrainian Su-25 (a 4-minute unidentified object at an altitude of more than 5000 meters), then if this Su-25 is located at the point indicated on the diagram of the Ministry of Defense, and the Malaysian Boeing - on the route according to FlightRadar24, it turns out that the minimum distance between them was different than what was announced at the briefing. It seems that this cool route squiggle on the Ministry of Defense map arose in the minds of the diagrammer before the briefing, when he needed to “join” another, more southern corridor W 633, passing over Donetsk, and the point in the L980 corridor, at which the location of the aircraft was first determined Russian dispatchers who were preparing to escort the Boeing after crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border. The erroneous corridor and the real coordinates were significantly different, and the staff hack, without hesitation, took the patterns in his hands, drew a connecting line, and, having measured the size of the resulting hump near the trajectory with a ruler, joyfully reported to his superiors “deviated north by 14 kilometers!” It’s good that the staff officer had a map of eastern Ukraine at hand, and not East Timor or Western Sahara... An important conclusion follows from all this, which will be very useful to us in the future, because it explains a lot - none of the military officers of the Russian Ministry of Defense who drew and reviewed these diagrams before the briefing, nor the senior generals who read their prepared texts in front of the cameras, even after several days after the tragedy, they have not the slightest idea about what kind of international air corridor flight MH17 took over eastern Ukraine. Even at the briefing, they were sure that the Malaysian Boeing 777 was coming from the west (in corridor W 633), and not from the northwest (corridor L980), and was flying over Donetsk, writing its “suspicious” squiggle in the sky. But these are people who worked in a normal environment in cozy Moscow offices and have (on demand) any information on air traffic management necessary for analysis. What then can we say about those who, on July 17, in the field, with a lack of information and a severe time limit, made the decision (gave the order) to destroy the Malaysian Boeing?! Both flight recorders, voice and flight data, stopped at 13:20:03.There were no reports of unforeseen situations on board." Thus, the entire development of the disaster was extremely fleeting and fell within the interval of a few seconds, if we count from the last negotiations between the dispatcher and the aircraft until the cessation of operation of the “black boxes”. The last message from the crew arrived at 13:19:56, the phrase ended at 13:19:59. The dispatcher called the plane just a second later, at 13:20:00, and spoke for five seconds, but did not receive an answer. The final conclusion based on all the data studied: flight MH17 flew on the standard route L980 with minimal deviations from the flight plan, no one deliberately took him anywhere, did not take him away from the air route and did not give any “descend commands”. Flight MH17 was in the cleared flight zone at all times and complied with all instructions from air traffic controllers. This is the price of the words of our generals at the briefing about corridors, deviations and other things... But let’s return to the situation room of the Russian Ministry of Defense on July 21 for further analysis of the statements made. Let’s say right away - when watching the 2014-style briefing of our military, a strong feeling of “de jà vu” arises, especially starting with the video time code 24:36: “... According to our calculations, from 17:06 to 17:21 minutes Moscow time on July 17, an American spacecraft actually flew over the southeastern regions of Ukraine. This is an experimental space system designed to detect and track missile launches of various ranges. If the American side has images from this satellite, they would ask that they be provided to the world community for detailed study. Whether it’s an accident or not, the time of the Malaysian Boeing crash and the time of observation of Ukrainian territory by an American satellite coincide". How can one not recall here the report of the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Soviet Union, Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov, who also stated on September 9, 1983 that the shot down on September 1 over southern Sakhalin South Korean passenger aircraft Boeing 747 was " US reconnaissance provocation, time-synchronized with the flight of an American spy satellite"! One detail attracts attention - the type of American satellite is called ( "experimental space system apparatus") and its purpose is indicated ( "for detecting and tracking missile launches of various ranges"), but even despite the approval of his flight (" really flew by") the satellite itself is not named, its designation or name - why? If we know - what prevents us from naming it, this is not our satellite, but an American one? But not everything is so simple - the search for an answer to these questions, i.e. attempts to identify the mentioned American reconnaissance satellite, which flew (as we will see, the word “allegedly” is quite appropriate here) over the Donetsk region at the time of the death of the Malaysian Boeing, leads to the idea of the desire of our military to “cast a shadow on the fence”, simultaneously trying to obtain information about one of the most classified American satellites. Only the satellites of the American two-component (two-level) integrated system for early detection of ballistic missile launches fit the description given at the briefing SBIRS ( Space-Based Infrared System - space-based infrared system). This system has been deployed since mid-2006 and is intended to replace the old DSP system, which has provided early warning functions for intercontinental ballistic missile launches since 1970. Unlike the DSP system, the satellites of which were launched only into geostationary orbit (as of mid-2013 in the DSP system included six satellites), i.e. "hung" over certain points of the equator, the SBIRS program (which has the highest priority in the United States) provides for the creation of two echelons of specialized satellites - in high orbits (two segments: in geostationary orbit with SBIRS -GEO satellites, and in highly elliptical orbits SBIRS -NEO) and in low orbits (SBIRS -Low, later renamed STSS - Space Tracking and Surveillance system,Space Tracking and Surveillance Program). Hinting at satellites of the SBIRS system, our military is repeatedly disingenuous. Firstly, this system is designed to detect ballistic missile launches and track their flight, which makes it possible to calculate possible points of impact of warheads and provide target designation to missile defense systems. We emphasize - for detection ballistic, measuring tens of meters and weighing tens of tons, and not for light surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles measuring several meters and weighing several hundred kilograms (we are not talking about miniature air-to-air guided missiles at all). The point here is the following (and this is the second cunning of our generals) - SBIRS satellites are not reconnaissance vehicles, they are observation devices “tailored” for a highly specialized task - detecting the launch of large missiles by the infrared (thermal) radiation of the fire torch created by powerful sustainer rocket engines with a thrust of many tens of tons, capable of lifting a very heavy ballistic missile. For this purpose, SBIRS satellites are equipped with special equipment operating in the short-wave and extended mid-infrared (IR) spectrum: A scanning IR sensor designed to detect ballistic missiles at an early stage of flight (at this moment the red-hot torch of rocket rocket engines reaches a length of tens of meters, which makes it possible to detect the launch of a rocket while still in the atmosphere, at altitudes of more than 5 km); An accompanying IR sensor designed to track missiles and warheads outside the atmosphere, against the backdrop of cold space. There are no cameras or similar equipment that form the familiar images of the earth's surface in the visible range on board the SBIRS satellites, and the images formed by infrared sensors are very specific. But that's not all! The detection time of a missile after its launch is the most important property of a missile launch warning system - the sooner its launch is detected, the more time will be left to respond and take countermeasures, and the more reliable its subsequent tracking will be and the more accurately its trajectory and possible target will be determined. The previous American DSP system is capable of registering a rocket launch in 40-50 seconds - this is not possible before, because For the first tens of seconds, the rocket taking off is observed against the background of the Earth. The new SBIRS system, which includes satellites in low orbits with more sensitive equipment, after its full deployment will be capable of detecting a take-off ballistic missile within 20 seconds after launch. Let us emphasize two key words here - " after full deployment" (and the standard low-orbit constellation of SBIRS satellites should consist of 24 spacecraft), and the word " ballistic"(which in any case is in no way comparable to any missile capable of shooting down flight MH17). The deployment of the SBIRS system had just begun, and by the summer of 2014 only two satellites had been launched into geostationary orbit (SBIRS -GEO-1 and SBIRS-GEO-2), and only two regular satellites in low orbits (SBIRS-NEO-1 and SBIRS -N EO-2). In addition, three more technology demonstrator satellites STSS-ATRR (USA-205) were launched as part of the STSS program, STSS-Demo1 (USA-208) And STSS-Demo2 (USA-209) Open sources claim that until the full deployment of the SBIRS system, the function of warning about ballistic missile launches will continue to be performed by the DSP system, which detects launches of heavy missiles, as already mentioned, only 40-50 seconds after launch, i.e. at flight altitudes above 15-20 km. It turns out that currently the existing satellites of the not fully deployed SBIRS system at the altitude of flight MH17 would hardly be able to detect the launch of not only an anti-aircraft, but even a ballistic missile. Or could they still do it? This is especially interesting given the fact that after full-scale deployment, the SBIRS system should detect the launch within 20 seconds after launch, and the 9M38M1 anti-aircraft missile of the Buk-M1 complex has a solid fuel engine, leaving behind a visible torch in the infrared range, running just 15 -20 seconds. So how sensitive are satellite infrared sensors cooled to cryogenic temperatures? This is the most important question of the limit of “vigilance” of the satellite’s on-board equipment, which partly explains the phrase of General Kartapolov: “ If the American side has images from this satellite, we would ask that they be provided to the world community for detailed study". In other words, show - if your satellite was there, then show - did it detect the rocket launch or not? This is especially interesting given that on July 19, 2014, the Reuters news agency quoted US Representative to the UN Security Council Samantha Power as saying that “... The infrared sensors of the geostationary satellite of the DSP missile warning system recorded the moment the airliner exploded. The data obtained shows the trace of a missile, probably SA-11, which allowed us to calculate the missile launch area near the Russian-Ukrainian border, which is under the control of pro-Russian separatists" But the Americans never provided evidence of what was said in the form of a photograph taken! So do they really have announced data that they do not present for reasons of secrecy, or is this a bluff?..." It would be useful to recall the strange statement of the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko on July 20, 2014: " We have satellite images from the rocket launch site
By the way, why " If"? Why is there some uncertainty in Kartapolov's speech: on the one hand, there is an assumption" according to our calculations", and on the other - a statement" really flew by"? Did it fly by or not? Let's try to figure it out. All objects (larger than a few centimeters in size) in near-Earth orbits have been discovered and cataloged. There are two observation systems in the world that form two corresponding catalogs - in the USA and Russia. Only these two countries have full-fledged national space control systems. In the USA, the orbital parameters (the so-called orbital elements, or a set of orbital elements) of all artificial satellites are compiled in the Strategic Command catalog, but with one feature - being publicly available, this catalog does not contain the orbital elements of some of the most secret American satellites. In Russia, a similar Main Catalog of Space Objects is managed by the National Space Control System (SCCS), which is part of the Space Forces, which is why our catalog of space objects is absolutely secret. There is also the so-called worldwide network of observers (trackers), uniting telescope-equipped enthusiasts from all over the world and headed by the famous “satellite catcher” Ted Molchan. This worldwide network is mainly engaged in the fact that with its observations it quite successfully supplements the catalog of the US Strategic Command with satellites with “missing” orbital elements. So, returning to the satellites" experimental space system designed to detect and track missile launches of various ranges"SBIRS - today the orbital parameters of all the mentioned satellites are publicly available (we omit geostationary satellites, because their orbital plane coincides with the plane of the earth's equator, and therefore they never fly over Ukraine), but with one caveat - at the time of the tragedy their ". True, there is information that sets of SBIRS equipment can (as “passing cargo”) be installed on other satellites with suitable orbital parameters. Thus, the exact elements of the orbit of these satellites are unknown, our catalog is generally closed, and the network of amateurs has not updated this data. Well, nothing is really known about the presence of sets of reconnaissance equipment on other satellites. In other words, based on open data, confirm or deny the fact of the flight of low-orbit STSS satellites over the site of the tragedy impossible . This can only be done by the Americans, who know the real parameters of the orbits of their satellites, or by the Russian SKKP, which does not publish any data at all. Now the question is - why didn’t we name this passing American satellite of the SBIRS system at the briefing? We're not sure exactly? After all, if we are sure, then we could name the satellite, showing the Americans that the parameters of its orbit are an “open secret” for us. But if we are not sure, then the phrase " We would like to ask you to provide pictures from this satellite " is nothing more than a call for Americans to voluntarily declassify its orbital elements. It seems that the orbital parameters of all American satellites of the SBIRS system are still known to our SBIRS system - it follows that Marshal Ogarkov for 31 years was more honest than Lieutenant General Kartapolov... Although... another explanation is possible - none of the SBIRS satellites actually did not fly over Ukraine during the tragedy of flight MH17, and we know this, but we publicly declare the opposite, because we are sure that the Americans will still remain silent, since any accurate information on the current orbit of these satellites is secret. On July 25, 2014, the Americans, in the words of US State Department spokesperson Marie Harf (at a briefing for foreign journalists in Washington), responded to Andrei Kartapolov as follows: “ We have already distributed our assessment, we have announced as much information as this moment <…> We distributed a photograph showing the trajectory of this rocket. It is based on classified information and we cannot explain how we know this.<…> We know who has been supporting the separatists for many months. We know that without the direct support of the Russian government, these separatists could not be in eastern Ukraine doing what they do in the first place.<…> Russia did release a map showing the estimated locations of SA-11 batteries within range of the crash site - we are convinced that this information is incorrect. We have information that the nearest Ukrainian SA-11 battery is well outside the range of both the missile launch site and the plane crash, i.e. There were simply no Ukrainian SA-11s within this radius. This is our own information. We have our eyes trained on this area.». At least two conclusions follow from this speech by M. Harf. Firstly, the United States does not really present all the information it has due to its secrecy, or pretends that this is the case. Well, and secondly, they refute the data presented at the briefing about the location of the Ukrainian Buk anti-aircraft missile systems. This means, based on the consideration that such an official statement by a representative of the US State Department cannot be completely groundless, we, while remaining objective, must question both the statement of the US State Department and the information of our military regarding “three or four Ukrainian air defense missile divisions.” And here, as presented by our Ministry of Defense at their briefing satellite images, and the missing photographs from American satellites no longer prove or refute anything: our photographs may be fake (taken at a significantly different time), and the missing American ones may actually exist, but lie in secret archives. Let us add that our images may also raise questions - they could have been taken either by a reconnaissance satellite from orbit or by an unmanned aircraft from a low height. No special “irrefutable” evidence of their “cosmic” origin was presented at the briefing. For example, all five (the second and third images out of six are two fragments of one image) satellite photographs shown at the briefing are dated to the minute:
What time is indicated is not known exactly. This could be Moscow summer time, but most likely it will be Moscow maternity time (UHF), since all Russian spacecraft are controlled using UHF. Then the flights on July 14 at 11:41 UHF and on July 18 at 11:39 UHF at an angular altitude of 78° and 80°, respectively, were carried out by the Russian reconnaissance satellite "Cosmos-2486" ("Persona" No. 2L, 39177U), i.e. he took pictures No. 2, No. 3 and No. 6, and the remaining two pictures were taken by the Resurs-P satellite No. 1 (07/14/2014 11:31, altitude above the horizon 59°, and 07/17/2014 11:32 with an altitude of 5 7 ° ) . On the one hand, ballistics confirms the authenticity of the photographs. But on the other hand, skeptics can always argue that the dating was applied during subsequent processing of the images (and it is undoubted) and does not necessarily correspond to the real one, indicating only that they worked more professionally with the preparation of the images for the briefing than with the aerial situation diagram. Thus, covering a briefing in an information war is largely a matter of faith, not evidence...Until now, the words of A. Kartapolov " -actually flew over the southeastern regions of Ukraine “we took it literally. But in fairness, we need to answer the question - were there satellites that did not fly over the area of the tragedy, but could still see it from space? Of course! Satellites could see this area SBIRSUntil now, the words of A. Kartapolov " GEO1 (point of “standing” above the equator 94°E) and SBIRS-GEO2 (2 1° E) - a significant part of the Eastern Hemisphere, including Ukraine, fell into their field of vision. In addition, at the time of the death of the Boeing 777, the highly elliptical satellite USA-161 type KN-11. USA-161 The powerful optical telescope of this satellite looks down (at nadir), photographing sub-satellite areas along the flyby path, and can deviate to the sides (right and left) at small angles. But this time the shooting conditions were extremely unfavorable - if you look at the satellite from Donetsk (more precisely, from the Zaroshchenskoe district, from the point with geographical coordinates USA-161 47.5900° N, 38.2705° E), then at the most favorable moment it barely rose above the horizon (the elevation angle, i.e. the angle of elevation above the horizon plane, did not exceed 13° at 17: 20:39). If at this moment USA-161 decided to photograph the Donetsk region, then nothing would have worked out anyway - firstly, at such an elevation angle, the area of interest on the earth's surface would have been visible almost edge-on, and secondly, any details would have been indistinguishable, since it was necessary to film through the absorbing thickness of the earth’s atmosphere, also visible almost edge-on. To make it clear, at noon we cannot look at the Sun without the risk of going blind, and at sunset or sunrise, when sunlight is weakened by the entire thickness of the atmosphere along the horizon, without problems (at the same time, the absorption of sunlight is so great that the visible disk of the Sun as it approaches towards the horizon changes its color to red). But this is not the end of the story about the American satellite. The fact is that if we look even deeper into satellites, then for Russia this topic is a “double-edged sword.” Okay, let’s assume that Ukraine was able to synchronize flight MH17 with the passage of an American satellite, using US information support. Ukraine is not the closest ally of the United States, and not even a NATO member with whom it is possible to initiate sensitive joint operations, but let’s say. Let all this be a joint Ukrainian-American provocation with certain goals, while Ukraine shoots down a civilian airliner, and America watches this with its satellite. Despite all the wildness of this version, let’s put ourselves in the place of the Americans who decided to use their satellite to monitor the destruction of an airplane in the atmosphere. But then for this role it is most effective to use an electronic reconnaissance satellite, which will be able to record the operation of various radars (Ukraine, Russia and the separatists), their frequencies and coordinates, intercept communications between ground-based civil services and air force and air defense units, and reveal the troop control system through interception of radio traffic. and control the passage of commands, and so on. That is why the main argument in favor of the version that on September 1, 1983, the South Korean Boeing 747 performed reconnaissance functions was the fact that the American radio intelligence satellite Ferret-D passed over it several times (by the way, this may serve as an explanation for why the Japanese controller did not informed the crew of the Boeing 747 that he was “not where he should be” - the plane was painfully effective in revealing the Soviet air defense system in the Far East for Japanese intelligence). Did any American electronic reconnaissance satellite pass over the Donetsk region at the time we are interested in? Yes! It would seem that we hit the bull's eye here - at the time of the tragedy, a pair of NOSS 3-2 satellites were on a course Cairo - Batumi - Volgograd, and their radio visibility zone was from 13:17 to 13:30 UTS (Greenwich Mean Time), i.e. these spacecraft had the opportunity to monitor the operation of ground-based radars for three minutes before and approximately 10 minutes after the death of the aircraft. But!... The main feature of the satellites is the Naval Ocean Surveillance System, NOSS) is that they are launched and operate in pairs (the latest third generation) or triplets (the first two generations), moving in orbit next to each other, clearly coordinating the distance between them. A pair of satellites NOSS 3-2 (USA-173) A and C (2003-054A and 2003-054C) was launched on December 2, 2003 by one Atlas IIAS launch vehicle and was actively operating in subsequent years, but at the time of July 17, 2014. this pair has already broken up (satellites A and C have separated), which indicates the inoperability of NOSS 3-2. Could this satellite have seen anything on July 17, 2014 - the question remains open... The next most effective in this situation are visual reconnaissance satellites, which form an image of the terrain along the flight path. These could be radar reconnaissance satellites, which, using on-board synthetic aperture radar equipment, can obtain highly detailed images of the earth's surface, regardless of weather conditions and time of day (radio radiation does not need sunlight and is not interfered with by cloud cover). As a last resort, you can also use photo- or optical-electronic reconnaissance satellites that photograph the earth's surface both in the visible range and in the infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum (as already mentioned USA-161) - they can get the most detailed images of the earth's surface, but if you're lucky, their effectiveness depends significantly on the time of day and cloud cover. But using a ballistic missile launch detection system satellite to monitor the destruction of an aircraft by an anti-aircraft missile or another interceptor aircraft at an altitude of 10 kilometers is simply useless - there is no practical sense in such “synchronization”; the satellite, by definition, will not detect anything. This in itself suggests that there was no special synchronization of the passage of flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17 with the passage of the American SBIRS satellite. And therefore the remark of Lieutenant General A. Kartapolov " ...the time of the Malaysian Boeing crash and the time of observation of Ukrainian territory by an American satellite coincide“was designed for the average person, no more (we note in parentheses that all the versions voiced at the briefing “work” only under the condition of the complete idiocy of Ukraine and America). Here's an interesting story with this American satellite... But I will continue. At the end of the briefing, the Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Lieutenant General Andrei Kartapolov, on behalf of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, said the following (briefing video time code from 26:27): " In conclusion, I would like to note that the information we present is based on objective and reliable data from various Russian technical means, in contrast to the baseless accusations against us. An example of this is the media showing the movement of the Buk-M1 launcher on a trailer, allegedly carried out from the Ukrainian to Russian territory. There is obvious manipulation of materials. The photographs were taken in the city of Krasnoarmeysk, which is confirmed by a banner located next to the road, which indicates the address of the car dealership on Dnepropetrovskaya Street, 34. But Krasnoarmeysk itself has been under the control of the Ukrainian army since May 11. In this regard, we have a number of questions - what kind of launcher is this, where it was transported, where it is now, why it is loaded with incomplete missile ammunition, and when was the last time it was launched.” Here we have to note with regret that if up to this point all the mistakes of the briefing could still be attributed to the haste in its preparation and the incompetence of the military personnel involved in this “special operation”, then from the mention of the video of the movement of the Buk self-propelled gun on a trailer and further, after words of Lieutenant General Andrei Kartapolov " ...the information we provide is based on objective and reliable data," - I remember the unforgettable from the brilliant satirical feuilleton novel by I. Ilf and E. Petrov “The Twelve Chairs”: “ Ostap suffered!" The briefing writers were guided by the rule formulated by the writer Yulian Semyonov in his famous novel “Seventeen Moments of Spring”: “ The last phrase is remembered. It is important how to enter the right conversation, but even more important is the art of exiting the conversation". Therefore, the entire briefing, everything said and shown at it so far was only a prelude, a lead-up to the most important thesis - Ukraine cannot be trusted, it itself is probably to blame, and that means all its accusations against Russia for the movement of the Russian self-propelled firing system of the Buk air defense system. to Ukrainian territory controlled by the separatists, with its subsequent destruction passenger airliner and the hasty return of this SDA back to Russia is a clumsily fabricated lie of the Ukrainian special services. But, trying in the final part of his speech to refute this accusation, Kartapolov is so wrong, to put it mildly, that this is his...... in the age of the Internet and global social networks it is opened, as they say, “at once.” And ruins the whole idea with the briefing... Judge for yourself - an inconvenient video for Russia appeared in |
On July 17, 2014, five years ago, a plane crash occurred in the east of the Donetsk region. The Boeing 777-200ER aircraft of the Malaysian airline Malaysia Airlines was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. 2 hours and 49 minutes after takeoff, the plane was shot down by a missile fired from a Buk air defense system. As a result of the plane crash, all 298 people on board died: 283 passengers and 15 crew members. It has not yet been established who shot down the Malaysian airliner.
Airplane, crew and passengers
The Boeing 777-200ER was produced at the Boeing plant in Everett (Washington, USA) in 1997. On July 29 of the same year, it was transferred to the Malaysian airline Malaysia Airlines. Therefore, the crew of the aircraft was represented by Malaysian citizens.By the time of the disaster, the plane had been flying for seventeen years, had completed 11,434 takeoff-landing cycles, and had flown 75,322 hours. The airliner last underwent a technical inspection on July 11, 2014, but it did not reveal any problems in the operation of the aircraft.
On 16 July 2014, the aircraft operated daily flight MH16 Kuala Lumpur - Amsterdam, arriving at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport at 04:23. The aircraft began its return flight MH17 Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur at 10:14 am and took off from the Schiphol airport runway at 10:31 am. We had to fly, among other things, over the territory of Ukraine, where by this time the civil war in Donbass was already in full swing.
In total, the aircraft crew consisted of 15 people. The commander of the main crew of the aircraft was 44-year-old Eugene Cho Jin Leong, and the co-pilot was 26-year-old Muhamad Firdaus Abdul Rahim. The relief crew was commanded by 49-year-old Wan Amran Wan Hassin, and the co-pilot was 29-year-old Ahmad Hakimi Hanapi. They were all experienced pilots with many thousands of flight hours. In addition, there were 11 flight attendants on the plane - 3 stewards and 8 flight attendants - all of whom were also Malaysian citizens.
There were 283 passengers on the Boeing on this ill-fated flight. Most of the passengers were Dutch citizens as the plane took off from Amsterdam. In addition to the Dutch, citizens of Malaysia, Australia, Indonesia, Great Britain, Germany, Belgium, the Philippines, Canada, Romania and New Zealand flew on the Boeing.
Tragedy in the skies over Donbass
At 13:20 UTC, an aircraft flying over eastern part Donbass, was shot down by a missile. Its warhead exploded to the left of the plane, in the area of the cockpit, after which the plane began to disintegrate in the air. The cockpit and half of the business class cabin almost immediately broke away and fell to the ground, and the rest of the plane remained in the air for some time, flying another 8.5 kilometers to the east. From the moment of defeat until the last parts of the plane fell to the ground, only about one and a half minutes passed.
The plane, or rather its wreckage, crashed near the village of Grabovo in the vicinity of the city of Torez, Donetsk region. Debris was scattered throughout the area with total area more than 15 square kilometers. All people on board the plane died.
In terms of the number of deaths, the disaster in the Donetsk region became the largest since the events of September 11, 2001. It also entered the top ten worst aviation disasters in the entire history of aeronautics.
National Bureau of Aviation Accident and Civil Incident Investigation aircraft Ukraine received information about the disappearance from radar screens Boeing aircraft 777-200 s registration number 9M-MRD on the morning of July 18, 2014. Notifications about the incident were sent to Malaysia as the country of registration and operation of Boeing, the United States of America as the country of origin, as well as the Netherlands and Australia, whose citizens died as a result of the plane crash.
Search work began on the ground. Since the plane crashed in a zone under the control of Donetsk militias, the leadership of the Donetsk People's Republic allowed Ukrainian specialists to participate in the search operation.
On July 21, 2014, the train carrying the bodies of 282 victims departed from railway station Thorez to Kharkov. It was decided to carry out the procedure for identifying the bodies of the dead in the Netherlands. Another 16 bodies were located under the wreckage of the fuselage and were recovered only after the entire search operation was completed. The Netherlands took the leading role in investigating all the circumstances of the tragedy. The flight recorders were handed over by representatives of the DPR to the Malaysian authorities, who, in turn, handed them over to the Netherlands.
The airliner was shot down by a missile
The investigation into all the circumstances of the disaster took more than a year. Initially, different versions of what happened were put forward, but ultimately the final conclusion was made - the plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. On October 13, 2015, the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) presented the final version of the investigation report into the circumstances of the disaster. Analysis of the wreckage of the plane and fragments recovered from the bodies of passengers and crew members of the airliner showed that the plane was shot down by a missile with a 9N314M warhead. Such warheads are equipped with the 9M38 and 9M38M1 missiles. These missiles are used as part of the Buk, Buk-M1 and Buk-M1-2 anti-aircraft missile systems.The second part of the report concluded that the Ukrainian services responsible for organizing air traffic did not adequately take into account all the risks that could accompany the flight of a civilian aircraft over the combat zone in Donbass.
The results of the investigation caused a negative reaction in both Ukraine and Russia. President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko hastened to refute the accusations against the Ukrainian air services, emphasizing that they had already closed the airspace to an altitude of 9725 meters and did not assume that flying above this level was also dangerous.
In the Russian Federation, the results of the Dutch investigation were considered biased and tendentious. Information was published that the missile was launched from territory that was at that moment under the control not of the DPR militias, but of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Deputy head of the Federal Air Transport Agency Oleg Storchevoy, speaking at a press conference on October 14, 2015, called the report of the Dutch side fabricated, carried out using “the technique of adjusting facts to predetermined conclusions.”
On January 14, 2016, they sent a letter to the Dutch Safety Board criticizing the report, but the Dutch authorities responded that the letter did not contain any new or valuable information. Meanwhile, almost from the very beginning of the investigation, the fact that Malaysia was allowed to see the results of the investigation only a few months later could not but arouse suspicion. But Malaysia was the country of registration and operation of the crashed plane, and both the crew and a significant part of the passengers were citizens of this country.
In turn, the United States and the European Union fully supported the Dutch report, since it fit perfectly into their paradigm of attitude towards Russia as a country that allegedly started a war in Donbass and poses a threat to both Ukraine and the world as a whole.
The Dutch Foreign Ministry and the Australian Foreign Ministry officially blamed Russia for the disaster. The international Joint Investigation Team (JIT), formed after the disaster, which included representatives of the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Ukraine (Malaysia was admitted to it only in the fall of 2014), stated that the airliner was shot down by a missile that belonged to the 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade of the Russian Armed Forces, stationed in the Kursk region. But, of course, no real evidence was provided for this.
As for Ukraine, its President Petro Poroshenko almost immediately after the disaster accused Donbass militias and Russian special services of involvement in it. The Security Service of Ukraine opened a criminal case in connection with the incident under Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine ( terrorist attack). Naturally, the West immediately took advantage of the disaster in Donbass to impose additional economic sanctions against the Russian Federation.
In turn, Alexander Borodai, who then held the post of chairman of the DPR government, said that the militias do not have in their arsenal such anti-aircraft missile systems that could shoot down such a high-flying aircraft.
The representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense, Major General Igor Konashenkov, said that the missile that hit the airliner was actually made on the territory modern Russia, but back in Soviet times, and after the collapse of the USSR, the missile ended up on the territory of Ukraine. Russian Buk-M1-2 anti-aircraft missile systems, according to a representative of the Ministry of Defense, did not cross the border between the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
Five years later. The West continues to blame Russia, Malaysia has doubts
In June 2019, it became known that the Ukrainian side had also appointed “suspects” of organizing a missile attack on the airliner. These are Igor Girkin (Strelkov), who at that time held the post of Minister of Defense of the Donetsk Republic, Sergei Dubinsky, who headed the intelligence of the DPR, the commander of the reconnaissance unit of the GRU of the DPR Leonid Kharchenko and lieutenant colonel of the Russian army reserve Oleg Pulatov.All of the above, except Kharchenko, are citizens of the Russian Federation. At the same time, information has also appeared that the Ukrainian authorities will not demand the extradition of the listed citizens, and this circumstance in itself raises big questions. In fact, it is completely unprofitable for Kyiv to have a public trial of those who were “appointed” in Ukraine as the perpetrators of the tragedy. After all, any trial can shed light on the real reasons for the crash of the airliner. It is not for nothing that the Dutch authorities still do not agree to publish the results of the investigation into the disaster.
The position of the Malaysian leadership is very interesting in this context. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad (pictured) said in June 2019 that Malaysia was very disappointed by the attempts Western countries place all the blame for what happened on Russian Federation and exploit the disaster for political purposes.
According to the Prime Minister of Malaysia, until now the world has only “rumors” regarding Russia’s alleged involvement in this tragic event. As for evidence, the West does not provide it, but accusations against Moscow began to pour in even before the investigation into all the circumstances of the disaster began.
They blame Russia, but where is the evidence? We know that the missile that brought down the plane was Russian, but it could also have been made in Ukraine. The idea seemed to center on trying to pin the blame on the Russians,
- said Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad.
These words from the head of government of the country that owned the downed Boeing, and more than any other country is interested in an objective investigation of what happened, are very indicative, as is the fact that Malaysia is still not allowed to access the data decoding the “black boxes” of the aircraft.
It is beneficial for the West to portray Russia as the direct culprit of the disaster, and for this purpose, Amsterdam, Brussels, Washington, and London are ready to do anything, including outright falsification of evidence and suppression of facts.
A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 was flying MH17 from Amsterdam, the Netherlands, to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in eastern Ukraine. There were 298 people on board the liner (including 15 crew members), among them 85 children. Citizens of 10 countries died, including 43 Malaysians. Most of the dead - 193 people - were Dutch citizens.
The plane, following the established international transit corridor, passed Donetsk, and further north 14 kilometers and began a maneuver to return to the established air corridor. The crew did not have time to complete the maneuver they had begun; at 17.20 Moscow time, at an altitude of 10 thousand meters, the plane began to sharply lose speed and disappeared from the radar screens at 17.23 Moscow time. The wreckage of the airliner was in the area settlement Grabovo near the city of Torez, Donetsk region, on territory controlled by the self-proclaimed Donetsk militia people's republic(DPR).
On the evening of July 17, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, after a “terrorist attack”, adviser to the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Anton Gerashchenko announced that the plane was shot down from a Buk anti-aircraft missile system (SAM). Kyiv in the crash of a militia liner, which, according to the West, is supported by Russia. The militia stated that they did not have the means to shoot down an aircraft at such an altitude.
In mid-September 2015, the Prosecutor General's Office of the self-proclaimed DPR of a crashed Malaysian plane, which was found by local residents. She appealed to the Prosecutor General of the Netherlands with a request to take away the debris collected in Donbass. On September 28, Dutch experts together with the OSCE mission visited the village of Grabovo, Donetsk region. They spoke with local authorities and also examined the area.
Dutch Safety Board October 13, 2015 plane crash. The report noted that the crash of the airliner was caused by an explosion on the left side of a 9N314M type warhead mounted on a 9M38 series missile fired from the Buk system. However, the document shows from which territory the aircraft was shot down and who is to blame. The Chairman of the Dutch Security Council said that further investigation would be required to establish the exact location of the missile launch on the Malaysian airliner.
The Russian concern Almaz-Antey (manufacturer of the Buk anti-aircraft missile system), in turn, reported on its study of the MH17 plane crash. According to his data, Boeing launched from the area of the village of Zaroshchenskoye, which was controlled by Ukrainian security forces. It was this area that the Russian Ministry of Defense mentioned a few days after the tragedy.
In January 2016, after Russian experts studied the final report of the Netherlands, the deputy head of the Federal Air Transport Agency, Oleg Storchevoy, sent a letter to the Security Council of the Netherlands, in which he indicated that research and field experiments conducted by Russian experts indicate that the conclusions of the Dutch side are unreliable.
In June 2016, a joint international team of investigators investigating the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine acknowledged the difficulties associated with the lack of experience in investigating disasters of this scale and knowledge of special terms.
In the summer of 2016, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, together with the National Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands, as part of the investigation into the crash, requested the competent Russian departments, including the Almaz-Antey concern, to provide materials that could contribute to the progress of the investigation. In particular, Holland also requested raw primary radar images of the Ukrainian airspace of the Lugansk-Donetsk region for the period when the airliner crashed.
In July 2017, members of the international investigation team announced that the trial in the case of the crash of the Malaysian Boeing would take place in the Netherlands. In the same month, Ukraine signed an agreement on international legal cooperation with the Netherlands, which gives the Dutch side the right to conduct a trial in the case of the plane crash. The signed document provides that the Netherlands has the competence to prosecute persons for crimes related to the crash of the Malaysian Boeing, as well as
A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 passenger flight MH17 from Amsterdam (Netherlands) to Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) crashed on July 17, 2014 in eastern Ukraine. There were 298 people on board the liner (including 15 crew members), among them 85 children. Citizens of 10 countries died, including 43 Malaysians. Most of the dead - 193 people - .
The plane, following the established international transit corridor, passed Donetsk, at 17.20 Moscow time at an altitude of 10 thousand meters, it began to sharply lose speed and from the radar screens at 17.23 Moscow time. The wreckage of the airliner was discovered near the city of Torez, Donetsk region, in territory controlled by the militia of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR).
On the evening of July 17, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, adviser to the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Anton Gerashchenko announced that the aircraft (SAM) was a Buk. Kyiv blamed the crash of the airliner on militias, which the West believes are supported by Russia. The militia stated that they do not have the means to...
In December 2014, the international criminal investigation team for reasons Boeing crash MH17 included Malaysia. Before that they .
By the end of April 2015, the international mission of experts completed its work, and in early July, a draft version of the final report on the causes of the Malaysian plane crash was sent to the countries participating in the investigation. From the point of view of the Federal Air Transport Agency, the document contains “more questions than answers.” The Russian department reported that they were interested in argumentation and technical information and expressed the hope that the additions and comments of the Russian Federation will be reflected in the final version of the report.
On July 29, the UN Security Council considered the initiative of a number of countries to establish an international tribunal for the plane crash in Ukraine. Russia blocked the draft resolution. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, the crash of the airliner is the result of a criminal offense, and not a threat international peace and security, which was what the draft resolution implied. According to the minister, the UN Security Council will never be involved in a situation with airliner crashes, and the very idea of its creation is intended to ensure the guilt of those whom Washington considers responsible.
After the draft resolution on the establishment of an international tribunal was not adopted by the UN Security Council, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said that Malaysia would pursue various legal options regarding the Boeing crash in eastern Ukraine.
In mid-September 2015, the DPR Prosecutor General's Office received 2.5 thousand fragments of a Malaysian Boeing, which were found by local residents. She appealed to the Prosecutor General of the Netherlands with a request to take away the debris collected in Donbass.
On September 28, Dutch experts together with the OSCE mission visited the village of Grabovo, Donetsk region. They also explored the area.
On October 13, 2015, the Dutch Safety Council presented the results of the investigation into the plane crash. The report noted that the airliner crashed on the left side of a 9N314M warhead mounted on a 9M38 series missile fired from the Buk system. However, the document does not provide information about from which territory the aircraft was shot down and who is to blame. Chairman of the Dutch Security Council that further investigation will be required to establish the exact location of the missile launch on the Malaysian airliner.
The Russian concern Almaz-Antey (manufacturer of the Buk anti-aircraft missile system), in turn, is responsible for the MH17 plane crash. According to his data, Boeing was shot down by a 9M38 missile of the Buk complex, launched from the area of the village of Zaroshchenskoye. It was this area that the Russian Ministry of Defense mentioned.
In January 2016, after Russian experts studied the Netherlands, Deputy Head of the Federal Air Transport Agency Oleg Storchevoy sent a letter to the Security Council of the Netherlands, in which he indicated that research and field experiments conducted by Russian experts indicate that the conclusions of the Dutch side are unreliable.
In June 2016, a joint international team of investigators investigating the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine acknowledged the difficulties associated with the lack of experience in investigating disasters of this scale and knowledge of special terms.
In the summer of 2016, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, together with the National Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands, as part of the investigation into the crash, requested the competent Russian departments, including the Almaz-Antey concern, to provide materials that could contribute to the progress of the investigation. In particular, Holland also requested raw primary radar images of the Ukrainian airspace of the Lugansk-Donetsk region for the period when the airliner crashed.
The Almaz-Antey concern managed to obtain from one of its factories - the Lianozovsky Electromechanical Plant - from the head processors of the Rostov route radar. He provided these materials to the competent authorities of the Russian Federation for study.
On September 26, 2016, the head of the radio technical troops of the Russian Aerospace Forces, Major General Andrei Koban, stated that the analysis of primary radar information refutes the assertion of the Ukrainian side and the conclusions of the technical Dutch investigation that the missile that shot down the Malaysian Boeing could have been launched from the eastern regions of Donbass. According to him, the technical capabilities of Russian means of objective control do not allow us to conclude whether the missile was launched from territories located to the south or west of the point of the disaster. Koban noted that space images, “the existence of which was announced by the American and Ukrainian sides, but no one has seen,” could clarify the situation with the missile launch from territories controlled by the Ukrainian security forces.
On September 28, an international investigative team presented a preliminary report on the investigation into the MH17 crash near Donetsk. It claimed that the Boeing was shot down from the area of the village of Pervomaiskoye, south of the village of Snezhnoye, which on the day of the tragedy were under the control of the militia. It also follows from the report that the Buk anti-aircraft missile system that shot down the airliner, which allegedly arrived from Russia on the territory of Ukraine, returned to the Russian Federation in the morning.
The Almaz-Antey concern said that it had already conducted three experiments that confirm the version of the missile being launched from another location - from the area of the village of Zaroshchenskoye, which is under the control of the Ukrainian army. The Russian Foreign Ministry expressed disappointment with the situation surrounding the investigation into the MH17 crash and that the group's findings confirm the bias of the investigation.
In October 2016, Russia transferred radar data to the Netherlands Malaysian Boeing in as much detail as possible, unprocessed, which indicates their authenticity. At the end of January 2017, the media reported that the Dutch prosecutor's office could not decipher the radar data transmitted by Russia, and Dutch investigators were sent to Moscow. The Russian side stated that it was ready at any time to provide international investigators with the assistance of specialist developers, who and that no one had come to the Russian Federation for help in decrypting the data during this time.
Russia has repeatedly stated that Holland is trying to delay the investigation and that the investigation was provided by the Russian side.
The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources
It might be useful to read:
- How to get on an excursion to Antarctica?;
- Czech Republic Troy Castle. Troja Castle in Prague. Ancient winery and museum;
- Böcklin and his “island of the dead” A cultural phenomenon of its time;
- Air tickets to Crimea Air tickets to Crimea will become cheaper;
- What you can and cannot take with you;
- Open left menu Heviz How to get from Budapest to Lake Heviz;
- Cable car in Nha Trang (Vinpearl) The longest cable car in the world Vietnam;
- Kamenets-Podolsk fortress - a historical monument of Ukraine Life outside the walls of the Kamenets-Podolsk fortress;