This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Malaysia Airlines taken down again!

Joined
24 December 2010
Posts
1,154
Reactions
50

http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...inerussia-border/story-fnizu68q-1226992889461

Unbelievable!
 
Pro-Russian separatists ?


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...-phone-tap-separatists-responsibility/5606578

Whatever the truth, Malaysia Airlines is having a rough trot.
 
My money is on the Russians (probably accidental) because I think it's highly unlikely that the separtists have acquired the equipment necessary to take down a plane at that altitude.
 
My money is on the Russians (probably accidental) because I think it's highly unlikely that the separtists have acquired the equipment necessary to take down a plane at that altitude.

I dont have the link and it is unverified, but apparently a reporter who was in the rebel area recently said they had 6 or 7 tanks and a BUK missile system.
 
I dont have the link and it is unverified, but apparently a reporter who was in the rebel area recently said they had 6 or 7 tanks and a BUK missile system.

Well they could certainly hit a plane with a BUK. If the Russians are dumb enough (and I don't think they are) to give a bunch of disorganised rebels a system with that sort of capability then they should be held accountable.

They'd been shooting at military aircraft for the last few months (Qantas was no longer flying over Ukraine) but I doubt anyone thought they had the firepower to get above 30,000ft.
 
It's a bit different, doc, to ship a system off to the military of a sovereign state, with a clear CoC -- whatever you may think of the government -- than to ship it off to a few cowboys on the Ukrainian steppe with more vodka than sense. It's completely irresponsible, if it turns out they gave this system to the rebels.

It's really utterly disgraceful if that's what has happened.
 
Airline management and associated under pressure bean counters are the greatest risk to safe aviation worldwide.
The risk to reward, ie. the $$$$ saved has once again proven to be a major factor.
A major factor is that everyone wants cheap flights and to achieve the best cents per seat per kilometer sometimes corners have to be cut, both safety wise and geographically (hand in hand in some cases).
 

You seem surprised that Russia would support a terrorist organisation whose sole aim is to regain control of sections of the Ukraine, to hand back to mother Russia, as happened in the Crimea. Sure they shot it down. Their reasoning is they thought it was a Ukrainian transport plane. Still terrorism in any language.
 
It's really utterly disgraceful if that's what has happened.

In my books Putin has gone from billionaire oligarch who doesnt give a f@$k, to unstable war criminal. He is quoted as saying:

"This tragedy would not have happened had there been peace in that land or at least had hostilities not been resumed in the south-east of Ukraine,

Certainly the state over whose territory this happened bears responsibility for this terrible tragedy."

The fact that he can say this when it is Russia that has caused the hostilities and lack of peace, and the suspected weapon is Russian made, and probably supplier shows that he is now as dangerous as the US media and officials have been portraying him
 

No, I'm surprised that the Russians would allow a piece of equipment like a BUK to be used by a non-state actor. I assumed they were smarter than that. I can't count the number of times since 2001 that I have flown over Afghanistan, and never once was there any concern of being hit by a SAM.
 
Why would the flight path take them over this area? Does this go to Boggo's point about cost cutting?
If so, Malaysia Airlines has some questions to answer as well as Putin et al.
 
Why would the flight path take them over this area? Does this go to Boggo's point about cost cutting?
If so, Malaysia Airlines has some questions to answer as well as Putin et al.

It's a standard flight corridor. Ukraine had closed it below 32,000ft (FL320) but above it was business as usual. ICAO and IATA both said it was safe at high altitude, but some airlines had opted to avoid the area. Behind the Malaysian flight, there were Singapore and Qatar Airlines flights. All through the war in Afghanistan, the standard routing for Qantas flights enroute to/from Singapore/Bangkok to Europe went straight over Afghanistan.
 
Why is it that Qantas avoid route now.
Remember the volcanic eruption, Australia's three main airlines, Qantas, Virgin and REX all left their aircraft parked costing them a fortune. Who kept flying ?????
That war is happening between the ground and 60,000 feet, the climb ability of the rockets they have been supplied, going through there is gambling.
 

Err except the war Australia was part of in Afghanistan didn't stop Qantas flying over Afghanistan. I doubt ICAO/IATA/EU/Eurocontrol were all in cahoots keeping the airspace open to maximise the profitability of airlines.
 
Err except the war Australia was part of in Afghanistan didn't stop Qantas flying over Afghanistan. I doubt ICAO/IATA/EU/Eurocontrol were all in cahoots keeping the airspace open to maximise the profitability of airlines.

Maybe they learn faster than most [emoji53]
 
Only in the last week the Euro zone had gone cold in supporting US sanctions against Russia.

So i ask a big question, "who really could have been behind this shocking event"?
 
Well plod I'm really worried your actually going to tell us who you think is behind this lol .
 
So i ask a big question, "who really could have been behind this shocking event"?

Now that's a hard one Plod. Perhaps it was the Russian supported separatist terrorists. After all they fired the missile. I don't think it was Abbott.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...