Malaysia Airlines MH370

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (870 of them)

It seems likely that they only got some of the parts, allowing them to launch missiles but not giving them a clear picture of what they were firing at.

Great combination.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 July 2014 22:53 (eleven years ago)

xp they do read a little bit like they were written by a russian-speaking reddit user tbh

caek, Friday, 18 July 2014 22:55 (eleven years ago)

The Strelkov VK update was probably real, the phone intercepts are as questionable / reliable as any phone intercepts from dubious ex-KGB states.

Wristy Hurlington (ShariVari), Friday, 18 July 2014 22:57 (eleven years ago)

This article says that if you're just relying on radar you can't actually tell the difference between a cargo transport and a commercial plane:

Latiff said that if they had only one radar, as Ukrainian officials suggest, it would have been pointed at the target. A second, rotating one would normally have been part of a battery to pick up other planes in the immediate vicinity, but he said even that would not have established whether it was a commercial plane and there would normally have been communications equipment to pick up signals showing the plane was non-military.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/18/separatist-links-malaysia-airlines-mh17-removed

dem bow dem bow need calcium (seandalai), Friday, 18 July 2014 22:58 (eleven years ago)

The United States government has concluded that the passenger jet felled over Ukraine was shot down by a Russian-made surface-to-air missile launched from rebel-held territory and most likely provided by Russia to pro-Moscow separatists, officials said on Friday.

While American officials are still investigating the chain of events leading to the destruction of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on Thursday, they pointed to a series of indicators of Russian involvement. Among other things, military and intelligence officials said there was mounting evidence that a Ukrainian military plane shot down just three days earlier had been fired upon from inside Russian territory by the same sort of missile battery used to bring down the civilian jet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/world/europe/malaysia-airlines-plane-ukraine.html

So if this is correct, then it wasn't the BUK system that they took from the Ukrainian military.

o. nate, Saturday, 19 July 2014 02:25 (eleven years ago)

Doesn't seem to be any solid evidence there. The allegation about Russia firing missiles into Ukraine related to a different missile system (GRAD rather than Buk). You couldn't hit anything in Ukraine from Russia with the latter and there has been no suggestion so far that the separatists have the former.

Wristy Hurlington (ShariVari), Saturday, 19 July 2014 07:37 (eleven years ago)

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/nato-general-warned-of-russian-anti-aircraft-training-for-separatists/

USAF and NATO said back on June 30 they had intelligence indicating Russia had been training the separatists to use "vehicle-born" surface to air missiles.

Johnny Fever, Saturday, 19 July 2014 07:59 (eleven years ago)

Still waiting for someone to blame Israel for all this

Tommy McTommy (Tom D.), Saturday, 19 July 2014 12:20 (eleven years ago)

israel more interested in killing children on the ground than adults in the air

balls, Saturday, 19 July 2014 13:57 (eleven years ago)

i'm pretty cynical but given the fact that there were children on board that post is pretty gross

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 14:00 (eleven years ago)

you're right, maybe israel was involved then. branching out and killing children wherever they may find them - on the beaches, in the air.

balls, Saturday, 19 July 2014 14:02 (eleven years ago)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/world/europe/malaysia-airlines-plane-ukraine.html

<-- rebels and kyiv jockeying to handle bodies, recovery of debris, etc.

also more details about what military tech the rebels may have had, when, and where

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 14:04 (eleven years ago)

xpost

i'm not exactly zionist no. 1 but that's still pretty gross, but whatever, it's ilx.

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 14:05 (eleven years ago)

ugh please don't bring Israel/Palestine into this.

Roz, Saturday, 19 July 2014 17:31 (eleven years ago)

i agree

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 19:14 (eleven years ago)

(btw i think i have spent the past year or two thinking "balls" was "cutty." does "cutty" post on ilx anymore? he was the lawyer, right?)

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 20:09 (eleven years ago)

balls is not cutty.

a biscuit/donut hybrid called “bisnuts” (stevie), Saturday, 19 July 2014 20:25 (eleven years ago)

cutty posts as underrated aerosmith etc now iirc

balls, Saturday, 19 July 2014 20:36 (eleven years ago)

i thought that was t0m h4milt0n, so confused

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 21:13 (eleven years ago)

anyway, let's not dwell on this here. sorry.

I dunno. (amateurist), Saturday, 19 July 2014 21:14 (eleven years ago)

started new thread for discussion of current events: Malaysian flight MH17 / Ukraine conflict 2014

I dunno. (amateurist), Monday, 21 July 2014 03:38 (eleven years ago)

three months pass...

PBS' Nova covers the disappearance.Good summary of everything.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/why-planes-vanish.html

Elvis Telecom, Thursday, 23 October 2014 00:34 (eleven years ago)

one month passes...

Search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Hampered by Disagreements

The five teams of investigators were made up of officials from Boeing, Inmarsat, France’s Thales Group , the U.S.’s National Transportation Safety Board, and the Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation. Each was asked by the ATSB to analyze the data independently and draw their own conclusions.

“Originally we thought we had a consensus among the five groups, based on the best data available at the time,” Mr. Dolan, head of the Australian air-accident investigator, said in an interview. “Once we refined the data again the methodologies diverged.”

Investigators haven’t made clear why using an autopilot would result in such a different flight path from that suggested by the plane’s satellite signals. Mr. Dolan declined to say which of the experts supported which of the crash-site theories. Representatives from the NTSB, Inmarsat, and Thales said they couldn’t immediately comment, and a Boeing spokesman declined to comment[

Elvis Telecom, Sunday, 30 November 2014 02:07 (eleven years ago)

four weeks pass...

Because 2014 is the worst: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-2888817/Flight-Indonesia-Singapore-loses-contact--media.html

Roz, Sunday, 28 December 2014 03:34 (eleven years ago)

Ugh. So sorry

Pigbag Wanderer (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 28 December 2014 04:53 (eleven years ago)

exact same make/model i just took to heathrow. yikes.

TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Sunday, 28 December 2014 13:09 (eleven years ago)

Agence France-Presse ✔ @AFP
Follow

#BREAKING AirAsia Flight #QZ8501 likely 'at bottom of sea': Indonesia search chief
2:26 AM - 29 Dec 2014

Enterprise Lesotho (nakhchivan), Monday, 29 December 2014 02:31 (eleven years ago)

one month passes...

Well, someone's gone off the deep end.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/02/jeff-wise-mh370-theory.html

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 24 February 2015 04:25 (eleven years ago)

I have some clients at Baikonur - i'll ask around.

I have no idea how something this crazy actually ends up being published.

Rainbow DAESH (ShariVari), Tuesday, 24 February 2015 08:25 (eleven years ago)

richard belzer's new book will answer all our questions...

http://www.amazon.com/Someone-Is-Hiding-Something-Happened/dp/1632207281/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0

scott seward, Tuesday, 24 February 2015 18:12 (eleven years ago)

https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/ice-t-confused.gif?w=650

bizarro gazzara, Tuesday, 24 February 2015 18:16 (eleven years ago)

seems legit

when is the new Jim O'Rourke album coming out (spazzmatazz), Tuesday, 24 February 2015 20:09 (eleven years ago)

in re: nymag's jeff wise article. the biggest weakness in his theory is the total lack of a coherent motive for such an elaborate plot. even the most off-the-wall speculative motives seem far too weak to justify the theorized actions. one simply asks why on earth would anyone conceivably do this?

as long as you disregard this glaring hole, his theory hangs together fairly well.

Aimless, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 03:45 (eleven years ago)

It's still pretty impossible for someone to do this undetected while crossing over land borders too, even by flying close to territorial boundaries, as Wise suggest.

somewhat related: I've found that it's not a good idea these days to tell cab drivers in Malaysia I'm a reporter. Every single one of them is a Jeff Wise.

Roz, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 08:46 (eleven years ago)

xp wise did a q&a on gawker and was asked about motive a couple of times - his response was basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

bizarro gazzara, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 09:32 (eleven years ago)

that is my motivation for most things so im a believer baby

johnny crunch, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 12:55 (eleven years ago)

Tbf, I think he was less :shrug: and more admitting that lack of motive is a major missing component of his theory.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 14:53 (eleven years ago)

seems kinda nuts to dream up an outlandish and insanely detailed theory without also coming up with an answer to the very first question any rational person will ask - 'why'?

bizarro gazzara, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 16:02 (eleven years ago)

Well, once you move well beyond the realm of Occam's Razor, I imagine "why" becomes less important.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 16:05 (eleven years ago)

also, when there's no clear indication of who or why, it perhaps makes (or seems to make) more sense to deal with the evidence you do have than to speculate about motives.

describing a scene in which the Hulk gets a boner (contenderizer), Wednesday, 25 February 2015 16:31 (eleven years ago)

when you hypothesize a state-funded and state-planned crime on this scale, yet you cannot supply the first idea of what possible benefit they could derive from it, as opposed to the massive risks involved, then you have a deeply, deeply flawed hypothesis. because equipment malfunction followed by a crash does not require a crime, a criminal, or motives, it becomes the most reasonable default explanation.

Aimless, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 16:44 (eleven years ago)

otm

bizarro gazzara, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 16:50 (eleven years ago)

love the bit about the Kazakh Cosmodrome and the big pile of dirt just exactly right for covering a plane that size with

nashwan, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 18:02 (eleven years ago)

As far as I know, Baikonur cosmodrome is actually a really busy "spaceport" full of non-Russian scientists and engineers working to get stuff up and down to the International Space Station and the like--you'd think they'd notice a massive jet landing there and being buried.

as verbose and purple as a Peter Ustinov made of plums (James Morrison), Thursday, 26 February 2015 00:46 (eleven years ago)

It's basically the centre of day-to-day space transit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikonur_Cosmodrome

as verbose and purple as a Peter Ustinov made of plums (James Morrison), Thursday, 26 February 2015 00:47 (eleven years ago)

Was the suggestion that something was buried? I thought the implication was that this was a disused temporary way station that got torn down after the plane landed, refueled/etc., and then was flown out somewhere else within Russian-controlled airspace where no one else's radar was going to notice.

Anyway, the topic most here and elsewhere seem to be missing and perhaps part of the reason this was published is that this is supposed to illustrate in passing how easy it is for someone who leans rational and skeptical to fall down the rabbithole of a theory of their own invention. Both this and the theory itself are somewhat unclear on the face of the piece, because it appears to be overly-abbreviated, not necessarily by the author.

Banned on the Run (benbbag), Thursday, 26 February 2015 04:53 (eleven years ago)

I'm not saying I agree with the theory by any means, but it's not completely implausible.

Banned on the Run (benbbag), Thursday, 26 February 2015 04:55 (eleven years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.