The Malaysian Airlines crash: a word of caution

A question: If the Americans find the Ukrainians were responsible for shooting down the airliner what are they going to do with this information?

A word of caution about premature conclusions

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.co.nz/2014/07/a-word-of-caution-about-premature.html

I am very sorry to have to tell you all that it is too early to conclude that the Novorussian forces did not shoot down the Malaysian airliners. Though most Novorussian air defense systems are man-portable, the Resistance forces did get their hands on some 9K37 Buk missile systems which are quite capable of hitting a civilian airliner at normal cruising speed and altitude.

I am not, repeat, NOT saying that the Novorussians did it. Furthermore, at least one Russian military expert, Igor Korochenko, has declared that the Ukrainian side had officially declared that the Ukrainian soldiers had managed to disable these systems before they fell into the Novorussian hands. But even that is hardly proof of anything. First, I have seen no such Ukrainian official statement. Second, the Ukrainians soldiers could have lied to cover their collective read ends. Third, the Novorusssians could have fixed these systems. So unless the Novorussians have some solid proof that their Buks were inoperable, they have to be included in a list of possible suspects.

There are already speculations about a false flag, about Ukie military aircraft seen flying next to the Malaysian aircraft, even about some parachutes seen near the place were the plane was shot down. I have even seen some speculations about Putin's official aircraft looking like the Malaysian one and that this could have been an attempt to shoot it down. Clearly the rumor mill is blasting at full power.

Still, the Ukies have already immensely benefited from this incident: now that all the media is completely focused on what happened to this Malaysian airliner, nobody is informed of the catastrophic failure of Poroshenko "surprise" offensive. Right there we already have the first cui bono going to the junta. Second, since no matter what happened the western regimes and media will blame the Russians for this incident, the Ukies will use it in their propaganda campaign (they apparently have already asked NATO for "help" whatever that means). So that is a second cui bono for the junta. As for the Novorussians and Russia, this incident is really the last thing they need.

For whatever it's worth, and without wanting to give anybody false hopes, I personally think that it is extremely unlikely that the Russians did it because they have a fully integrated, multi layered, advance air defense systems staffed only by specialists. In contrast, the Ukies have an old, decrepit, non-integrated air defense "system" staffed by underpaid, demoralized and poorly trained conscripts. And since the Kremlin likes to maintain the illusion that it does not control the Novorussians, even if there is proof that the latter are responsible for this catastrophe, this will not directly implicate Russia (which would have been the worst option). I hope that the Russians will be able to prove that the Novorussians did not do it by, for example, finding key parts of the missile(s) which hit MH17 or by showing all the Resistance missiles "unshot", right there in the hangars were they were found.

Another thing which has not been done is a careful calculation of the exact flight envelope of the missiles in Novorussian hands. In the real world, you cannot just say that a missile can shoot a target going at speed X and altitude Y. You need to calculate an exact flight envelope and compare it against the exact flight characteristics of the target supposedly hit. In other words, until somebody makes such an analysis, there is no proof that the Novorussian Buks could have shot down this aircraft.

Then, let's see what the black boxes show. Apparently, those were found by the good guys and sent to Moscow. Also, the Russian Air Defenses have the exact flight parameters of the Malaysian aircraft and of any missile(s) which could have hit him. If the Ukies did it, chances are pretty good that the Russians will be able to prove it. Alas, if the Novorussians did it, the Russians will probably also provide the evidence as covering up for it would be foolish.

For the time being, let's not run after each rumor and let's just wait for 48 hours or so, when at least we will have some facts to look at. And let's pray that this was not a mistake by the Novorussians.

The Saker

I gravitate personally to this assessment by RT commentator Alexander Mercoulis

Rather than speculate about why the aircraft may have been shot down it might be more appropriate to discuss who had the capability to do it.

1. There was some talk a few days ago that the NAF had captured some Buk antii aircraft missiles. I have never seen any photographic evidence of this. Even if they did would they have the knowledge or training to use them? These are sophisticated weapons that are integrated into a complex air defence system that includes radar stations and command and control vehicles. Certainly not the sort of weapons one can learn how to use in a few days even if a whole complete system had fallen into NAF hands, which seems unlikely.

2. The NAF now say they only have short range man portable anti aircraft missiles. This seems far more likely and I have heard on BBC television an expert from Jane's Defence Weekly who has said the same thing. it seems these missiles simply lack the range to hit an aircraft at the altitude the Malaysian airliner was flying.

3. By contrast the Junta undoubtedly does have Buk anti aircraft missiles with the necessary range in its arsenal and there are reports that it moved some of these weapons into the warzone yesterday possibly in response to reports (almost certainly untrue) that one of its SU25s was shot down by a Russian fighter. There is also a report that the Junta actually closed the airspace over the battle area to air traffic some 3 days ago, which if true begs the question of what the Malaysian airliner was doing there. If one thing has become blindingly obvious over the last few weeks it is that the Junta's troops though heavily armed are poorly trained and very trigger happy whilst episodes like the Kiev sniper saga show how ruthless and cynical some of the people involved in the junta are.

4. It seems inherently more likely therefore that airliner was shot down by the Junta's military either by accident or intentionally. There is a very small possibility that it might have been shot down by the Russian air defence system but the aircraft was in Ukrainian air space, there is no evidence that the Russians have ever shot down any Ukrainian aircraft (even those that have been seen crossing over into their territory) and frankly I think the Russian air defence is nowadays too well organised and professional to make this sort of mistake.

5. The working hypothesis therefore is that the junta's forces shot the airliner down. there will now be an investigation which ought to be run by the Malaysians. Apparently the NAF is cooperating fully with them and is doing what it can to retrieve and hand over the flight recorder and black box. Hopefully we should have some clarity about this incident soon enough.

In the meantime it is important to remember that this is first and foremost a terrible human tragedy. My feelings go out to the victims and their families.

Kiev deployed powerful surface-to-air missile systems to E. Ukraine ahead of the Malaysian plane crash – reports

The Ukrainian military reportedly deployed a battery of Buk surface-to-air missile systems, capable of bringing down high-flying jets, to the Donetsk region the day before the Malaysian passenger plane crashed in the area

RT,

17 July, 2014

READ RT'S LIVE UPDATES ON MALAYSIAN PLANE CRASH

Itar-Tass and Interfax news agencies are citing a source familiar with the issue, who said that another battery of Buk systems is currently being prepared for shipment to Donetsk region from the Ukrainian city of Kharkov. 

The Donetsk region remains the scene of heavy fighting between government troops and the forces of the opposition, which refused to recognize the regime change in Kiev and demand federalization. 

A Malaysian Airlines aircraft en route from Amsterdam to Malaysia crashed in Eastern Ukraine – not far from the Russian border – on Thursday.)

There were reportedly 280 people and 15 crew members on board the Boeing-777 plane, who reportedly all died in the crash. 

There were unconfirmed reports the Malaysian plane was travelling at an altitude of over 10,000 meters when it was allegedly hit by a missile. 

There’s no way that the self-defense forces in Donetsk Region are in possession of such complex weaponry, he stressed. Only S-300 and Buk surface-to-air missile systems are capable of hitting targets at such altitude, the source said. 

Buk is a family of self-propelled, medium-range surface-to-air missile systems developed by the former USSR and Russia to engage targets at an engagement altitude of 11,000-25,000 meters depending on the model.

 Chances are high that the Malaysian plane was really downed by the Ukrainian anti-aircraft defense, Yury Karash, pilot and aviation expert, told RT. 

“A Boeing-777 is an extremely reliable piece of machinery. Modern planes don’t just crash with no reason,” he said. “Let us recall how a Ukrainian missile downed Russian TU-154 aircraft ten years ago. I can’t completely exclude the possibility the Boeing-777 was also hit by a missile.”

“I don’t know who could’ve shot it down. But I can allege that it was most likely the Ukrainian armed forces: simply because its military – anti-aircraft defense, in particular – are, unfortunately, unqualified. As judging by the overall state of the Ukrainian armed forces, insufficient attention has been paid to their training,” Karash added. 

Reports in the Western media hurried to blame the self-defense forces of the People’s Republic of Donetsk for bringing the plane down.

The claims were denied by the representatives of the Donetsk People’s Republic, saying that it’s the Ukrainian military, which destroyed the aircraft. 



“We simply don’t have such air defense systems. Our man-portable air defense systems have a firing range 3,000 - 4,000 meters. The Boeing was flying at a much higher altitude,” Sergey Kavtaradze, special representative for the prime minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic, explained. 

Kavtaradze also expressed condolences to the relatives of all of those who lost their lives in the tragedy.

IHS Jane’s Defense analyst, Nick de Larrinaga, also shared the belief that the self-defense forces lack the capability to bring the Malaysian plane down.

 

“At normal cruising altitude a civilian passenger aircraft would be out of the range of the sort of manned portable air (defense) systems that we have seen proliferate in rebel hands in east Ukraine,” he said in a statement. 



But the aircraft would be within range of Buk or other medium-range surface-to-air missile systems, he stressed. 



“Both Russia and Ukraine have such SAM systems in their inventories,” the expert added. 



It seems unlikely that the self-defense forces could’ve used Buk surface-to-air missile systems to down the Malaysian plane, retired Brig. Gen. Kevin Ryan, the director of the Defense and Intelligence Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, said. 



“It takes a lot of training and a lot of coordination to fire one of these and hit something,” he told CNN. “This is not the kind of weapon a couple of guys are going to pull out of a garage and fire.” 

According to Ryan, if the plane was really taken down then it was done by a professional military force.