Malaysia Airlines has tweeted that they have lost contact with a Boeing 777 flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur as it flew through Ukrainian airspace. Early reports indicate 280 passengers and 15 crew were on board at the time. Bodies and wreckage with Malaysia Airlines insignia have been reported found at the crash site.
The crash site is 25 miles from the Russian border in an area of fighting between Ukrainian military and Pro-Russian rebels. A Facebook update by Anton Gerashenko, advisor to the Ukrainian interior minister, states that the plane was flying at 10,000 metres (32,000 feet) when it was shot down "by a missile fired from a Buk launcher."
This news will be especially hard for Boeing and Malaysia Airlines to digest having lost without trace flight MH370 in March this year, another Boeing 777.
UPDATE: There is no official confirmation that a missile was used to bring the aircraft down. Both sides are denying that they have fired at the aircraft.
UPDATE2: Aircraft reported flying at 32,000 feet - 10,000 metres.
Related Stories
It has been over a year since Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, bound for Kuala Lumpur from Amsterdam, crashed in eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 crew and passengers. The Dutch Safety Board has released its complete findings.
News links for quicker reading: BBC, CNN, MSN
Key points:
- The crash was caused by catastrophic structural failure of the airframe after a 70kg warhead detonated several meters off the left side of the aircraft, severing the forward cabin and cockpit from the rest of the aircraft
- The specific warhead was identified as a 9N314M warhead, based on size of the blast, recovered fragments, and chemical analysis
- The warhead was carried on a 9M38 series missile and launched by a Buk surface-to-air missile system
While the report does not specifically identify the missile launch site or operators, as they are outside the scope of the accident report, it does narrow down the launch site to a 320km² area in eastern Ukraine. A separate criminal case is also underway in the Netherlands, but Russia previously vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for a UN tribunal, and is working on their own report. Russia has also disputed many of the findings of the report, saying the evidence is insufficient to narrow it down to a specific warhead type. Their favored theory is an air-to-air missile, a theory soundly rejected by the Dutch report.
Although the blame for the missile is left unstated, the report does find fault with Ukraine for not fully closing the airspace to civilian flights (airspace below 32,000 feet was closed; MH17 was flying at 33,000ft). It was clear to the Ukrainian military that full-sized surface-to-air missile launchers were being operated by rebel forces, not just small man-portable launchers. SAM launchers have a much higher maximum altitude; the 9M38 has a maximum altitude of 46,000ft, above the 43,100ft service ceiling of the Boeing 777. Recommendations are made to more strictly define when airspace should be closed due to conflict, and suggesting that aircraft operators be more aware of military dangers to civilian flights.
(Score: 4, Informative) by NCommander on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:25PM
Aircraft shootdowns are rare, and the region is in war; I've heard other comments on Ukraine Airspace being closed in general, so the primary question is, why was MH17 flying over it?
Some people might be familiar with KAL 007 [wikipedia.org] which was shot down by the soviets due to navigation error, or IR665 [wikipedia.org], which was a case of mistaken identity by a US AEGIS destroyer.
I think navigation error can be ruled out; MH17 has radar tracks available and should have been visible on both radar stations in Russia, and in western Europe, even if its mode C transponder was not functional. Furthermore, unless its been reported otherwise, we have to assume the plane was in contact with air traffic control (as it would have had to get IFR clearances leaving Polish airspace, and entering Ukrainian airspace). So, the million dollar question, why was this plane where it was?
Looking at flightaware radar tracks, today's flight was further north [flightaware.com] than previous flights; compare that to yesterday [flightaware.com] or a week ago [flightaware.com], and on its way into Russian airspace, which seems unusual. I realize that the FlightAware track might be incorrect, but what little information tells me something is funny. Large commercial flights are always conducted under IFR; that plane should be exactly where ATC said it should be, so either it was diverted by ATC, or they went off course and no one noticed.
The ATC transcripts will be very interesting when they come to light.
Still always moving
(Score: 5, Informative) by janrinok on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:31PM
Only certain airlines had announced that they were avoiding the airspace prior to this incident - the airspace has, as you have noted, remained open. Many more airlines are now announcing that they are diverting all flights away from that area. My cynical guess? - it was cheaper to fly over rather than route around.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday July 18 2014, @08:39AM
And kudos to them - BA of course, and surprising AF, which has history of diverting to Damascus in the middle of a civil war.
http://oi60.tinypic.com/264rm3b.jpg [tinypic.com]
(Score: 1) by richtopia on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:34PM
This flight path has flown over Russian territory in the past, for example on the 7th http://flightaware.com/live/flight/MAS17/history/20140707/1000Z/EHAM/WMKK [flightaware.com]. Might be a weather dependent decision.
(Score: 2) by NCommander on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:51PM
You're correct on that, good catch. Still, none of the flight logs suggest why it went that far north. Regardless on who pulled the trigger, that plane shouldn't have been there.
Still always moving
(Score: 2) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:06PM
Funny, Malaysia now has an awkward historical pattern of commercial aircraft going off-track.
There are any number of speculative outlets in this regard, but I begin to think "coincidence" may not be the most valid or fruitful.
Wheels within wheels.
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 5, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:21PM
It was the missing flight MH370 airliner diverted to Diego Garcia, retrofitted with a nuclear payload and a cabin full of passengers drugged with scopolamine and bound to their seats, then the airliner's markings/callsign was changed and the plane was aimed straight at Russia with the intent to start World War III.
It goes without saying that all Boeing airliners could be remotely compromised and controlled, duh, all four flights involved in 9/11 were Boeing aircraft and, well, they're Boeing.
Once again, brave Putin has compromised and foiled the evil plots of the criminally-insane war-hungry Catholic/Mormon/Baptist/Eposcopalian-dominated intelligence agencies running America, fighting on the side of God.
Godspeed, Comrade Putin. Godspeed.
(Score: 5, Funny) by tibman on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:30PM
* Ethanol-fueled logs in and sees a new article.
* Rolls dice.
* Checks his comment roll table and sees he will be posting at a +4 Crazy
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:00PM
You've got to admit that the man is a pro.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Alfred on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:23PM
It is good. So good it's not impossible. :-)
We should write a movie script from this.
(Score: 1) by redneckmother on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:23PM
A script about EF's method of posting? I'm cornfused (but not cornfed).
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 2) by Alfred on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:02PM
Nooooo.
About a missing remotely compromised and controlled airliner diverted to somewhere, retrofitted with a nuclear payload and new markings/transponder, the passengers drugged and bound to their seats, the plane aimed straight at [Country] with the intent to start World War III. Brave [Political Figure] has foils the evil plot of the [idealogical group]-dominated intelligence agencies running [Opposing country], fighting on the side of God.
Godspeed, [Political Figure]. Godspeed.
Well maybe just a trailer for now
I'm sure Michael Bay could do something with it.
(Score: 2) by Rune of Doom on Friday July 18 2014, @05:09AM
Even Joss Wheadon couldn't make it any better than the Lone Gunmen pilot episode about a remotely hijacked airliner being crashed into the World Trade Center as a false flag operation by the government. (Six months before 9/11, mind you.)
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Friday July 18 2014, @02:11PM
Hah. I re-watched all of The Lone Gunmen about a year ago...also noticed this time that a couple episodes later (still only a month or two before 9/11) there was a line about Saddam Hussein flying a Cessna into the White House.
All they needed was a reference to terrorists flying a plane into the Pentagon and they would have had the whole damn thing down...
(Score: 2) by Tork on Friday July 18 2014, @12:43AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:23PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:26PM
More believable is that the CIA stole a Russian SAM, dropped it behind rebel lines in dead of night, use a Stealth fighter to shoot down the Malaysian plane then hacked the rebels Twitter account to make them look guilty, and all so that Chevron can frack for Ukrainian gas.
Obvious.
(Score: 2) by ls671 on Friday July 18 2014, @07:49AM
If you look more closely, with a chess player like mind, it is more likely that US and Ukraine would benefit from that even than Russia. Access to Russian backed rebels controlled Ukrainian territory for the investigation, public opinion etc.
It's like when one of our ship shot an Iranian plane quite a while ago. It sure didn't benefit us.
This time, it will be harder to locate the source of the missile and who fired it. They might have goofed but don't rule out that we or the Ukraine by itself could have pulled out that stunt.
We will probably never know what really happened anyways..
Everything I write is lies, including this sentence.
(Score: 1) by clone141166 on Friday July 18 2014, @04:20PM
lol
<3 Ethanol-fueled
(Score: 3, Funny) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Friday July 18 2014, @11:21PM
You got 3 out of 5 correct. Not bad, for an amateur.
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 3, Funny) by Darth Turbogeek on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:51PM
The rain in Ukraine consists mainly of plane?
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Friday July 18 2014, @09:52AM
Bro.. Too early!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Friday July 18 2014, @11:28AM
I realize this was a tragedy. But I will say I have laughed all night at this joke in between thinking about mortality. This is probably one of the best spontaneous jokes of all time. Well played Sir!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:50PM
Looking at the Malaysian Airlines aircraft paint, it looks like the Russian flag, flying that at lower altitude through that war zone seems at least a little bit crazy.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:14PM
Malaysian Airlines [wikipedia.org], again?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:21PM
The colors look indeed exactly like the Russian presidential machine
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:27PM
https://twitter.com/Adham_Kassem/status/489853584750944256/photo/1 [twitter.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by mth on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:27PM
A pilot on the Dutch (NOS) evening news said the airspace was closed below 7.5 km, but civilian flights above that altitude were still flying there.
(Score: 5, Informative) by FakeBeldin on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:21PM
I've heard other comments on Ukraine Airspace being closed in general, so the primary question is, why was MH17 flying over it?
Eurocontrol [eurocontrol.int] says that the plane was flying in allowed space.
Following this event, Ukraine has closed the airspace in eastern Ukraine completely.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by hellcat on Friday July 18 2014, @01:24AM
Flight paths can vary at a pilot's discretion within a proscribed box that is defined by their flight plan.
In addition, the flight plan can be adjusted depending on weather; turbulence, storms, winds are the major factors.
Don't hold your breath for tapes from an air traffic control center - chances are it would be a Russian center and they won't know any more than you do. My guess is that it's our military that watched the missle take down the 777 - and our guys will probably know far more than they'll let on.
The real issue here is that Putin has armed an insurgency far beyond its need - and that firepower is now out of control. What will the rest of the civilized world - aka our national leaders - consider an adequate response?
(Score: 2) by ls671 on Friday July 18 2014, @09:39AM
> Flight paths can vary at a pilot's discretion within a proscribed box that is defined by their flight plan.
There was a pilot on TV tonight who just flew a 777 from London and he said, on a 777, you only deviate from your planned route by a few feet. Of course, routes can be readjusted in flight but the pilot rarely decides nowadays on big computerized birds like these. Gone are the days of "pilot's discretion" or flying over your mother's house because she is in the plane.
Routes are dictated by specialists within the carrier company based on efficiency as well as political, meteorological and other factors. The fact that the plane was 100 miles more north than the days before doesn't mean it deviated but it might have contributed to confusion when came the time to fire
Everything I write is lies, including this sentence.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by frojack on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:31PM
News is pretty clear that it was a shoot down, so it doesn't look bad for Boeing.
The separatists (who are led by an Ex Russian FSA officer, first claimed credit, now backing away, and the Pentagon not convinced that they actually had those missiles. The shootdown may have been from Russian territories.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Dunbal on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:45PM
Flight was from Amsterdam. I'm sorry but 10,000 feet is not a regular cruising altitude for a 777. This is suspicious. Which controller ordered the aircraft down to 10,000 feet over a war zone?
(Score: 4, Informative) by janrinok on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:47PM
10000 metres! 32,000 feet. This was in Europe!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Dunbal on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:49PM
Eh, bad summary then. Still RT is saying the flight was pretty much on the same flight path that Putin's plane was going to take a short while later, and the dogs in Kiev probably thought they were shooting down Putin.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:50PM
Apologies - but I am tracking this as quickly as I can find news feeds.
(Score: 1, Troll) by frojack on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:15PM
RT is Putin's sockpuppet.
Please!
Since Ukraine doesn't possess any missile tech capable of reaching that altitude, that pretty much leaves the separatists or the Russians themselves.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:31PM
This is a tech site, please stay to facts and don't post your bullshit propaganda here. At the moment no one knows anything so please stay away from unsupported accusations.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:49PM
Such naïveté!
It would actually be cute, if it weren't so tragically sad.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:27PM
No, it is not a tech site, stop trying to pigeon-hole us. If this were nothing more than a tech site, we wouldn't have articles talking about planes possibly being shot down by missiles over a war-zone.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:29PM
missiles and planes are tech you faggot
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Friday July 18 2014, @09:05AM
I agree & appreciate that SN has a much broader focus than the corporate swamp we all escaped from... But as far as I've ever understood the term, jet airplanes, anti-aircraft weapon systems, guided (or non-guided) missiles, etc. were all completely reliant on technology -- it's just not consumer technology.
That's largely why I turn first to sites/communities like SN at times like this: to get info from people that know enough about the technology involved (or historic cases similar to the current situation) to comment factually. Beats the pants off of relying on the political spin machines in the mainstream media for info...
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:57PM
"Since Ukraine doesn't possess any missile tech capable of reaching that altitude"
lol
(Score: 1) by turgid on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:07PM
For the BBC's take on events [bbc.co.uk].
And the evil, pinko-commie grauniad [theguardian.com] out to subvert decent, right-thinking western democracy.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @11:50PM
Where'd you get that info, from Obama's sockpuppet?
Ukraine army ground forces surface-to-air missile system Buk-M1 [ukrainetrek.com]. What is a BUK? It's a Surface to Air (mobile) missile system [wikipedia.org], some of which the Ukraine sold to Georgia a couple of years ago.
Now, Frojack, I understand it's hard to believe that the side you chose are the bad guys, but there's still time to reassess your position in this conflict.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by frojack on Saturday July 19 2014, @07:06AM
Dunbal, posting as AC isn't going to help you hide.....
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @12:19AM
First, this is not Dunbal. Second, I've invalidated your previous argument and you're off topic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @06:53AM
> Dunbal, posting as AC isn't going to help you hide.....
Weren't you one of the people insisting that the missing malaysian plane had to absolutely be a terrorist act because a couple of people boarded with stolen passports?
You really, really, really need to stop believing your own bullshit.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday July 20 2014, @06:53PM
And its still most likely a terrorist act.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:41PM
Yeah, also called a false flag operation, perpetrated by the US, and there the plane magically reappears a couple of months later in the sky above Ukraine to be "shot down" by a "rebel" ground-air missile, which were actually two Ukrainian Migs.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:57PM
Your meds.
Find them and get back on them.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @11:47PM
From the fine summary: "...was flying at 10,000 metres (32,000 feet)..."
(Score: 1) by wantkitteh on Friday July 18 2014, @08:44AM
Sorry, my bad - should know better than to try and proof read an article in a hurry with a pounding headache. I hate summer :(
(Score: 2) by omoc on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:45PM
easy there, that is a serious claim without anything to support it. Until you can show proof this is nothing but propaganda. Russia has nothing to gain from such an action, neither do the separatists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @07:39AM
You are tad naive, comrade. Russia always has something to gain. As well as USA for that matter.
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Friday July 18 2014, @07:42AM
(Score: 2) by omoc on Friday July 18 2014, @08:27AM
German foreign ministry already said, even with this tragedy they still support a diplomatic solution.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday July 18 2014, @12:28AM
No, it doesn't look bad for Boeing, but it certainly does look bad for Malaysian Airlines. What idiot would fly with that airline now? First they completely lose one plane, and now they're stupid enough to fly a plane directly over a war zone, resulting in it being shot down.
If I was a finance expert, I'd be figuring out how to short Malaysian Airlines stock right now. I can't imagine how that company will stay in business now.
(Score: 2) by Darth Turbogeek on Friday July 18 2014, @12:48AM
It's govt owned - So it can most likely weather this crash.
It's gonna run at a much increased loss for a while tho.
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Friday July 18 2014, @12:50AM
---
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by ls671 on Friday July 18 2014, @09:46AM
> News is pretty clear that it was a shoot down, so it doesn't look bad for Boeing.
Yep, sadly, it is the best case scenario for them economically speaking. Well, I can only think of a midair collision between two planes as a scenario that could match...
Everything I write is lies, including this sentence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @04:22PM
Off topic I know, but:
)
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday July 18 2014, @08:03PM
Thank you for the closure. I feel better now.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:40PM
I remember reading in a book, that during the 1980s Afghanistan war, international flights took place over Afghanistan, while fighting was visible below.
Now we have the three most likely parties in the Donezk region all pointing the finger at each other, no "we don't know yet", but "they definitely did it".
If it really was the Russian separatists, they can probably forget about leaving the failed state of Ukraine and rejoining Russia after this.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:53PM
I doubt it was them MANPADs don't reach 30,000 feet.
(Score: 5, Informative) by gman003 on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:20PM
MANPADs don't reach 30,000ft, but that does not rule out these rebels. They are ridiculously well-armed - it's quite obvious that they're being sponsored by Russia (if they don't outright consist of Russian soldiers).
There are reports of these rebels shooting down an An-26 at 20,000ft earlier. They obviously have much more advanced anti-air capabilities than any other insurgency in history.
Unverified reports have them using a Buk missile system, as noted in the summary. The summary does not make it clear that that is not something you can just "use" - that's a multi-vehicle battery that requires no small amount of training to use. These are missiles that are ten meters long and weigh nearly a full ton. And unless they knew the course of the aircraft ahead of time, they likely needed a dedicated target-acquisition radar vehicle as well (the radar on the missile launchers themselves have much lower range).
A Buk, or other large anti-air system, is the only thing that makes sense (I'm counting fighter aircraft in that). The question then becomes "whodunnit" - the suspects are Russia, Ukraine, or the Donetsk rebels. If it's the rebels, the question is accompanied by "how did they get this?" - did Russia give it to them, or did they steal it from a Ukrainian military base? If it's Russia or Ukraine, why? Was it a legitimate mistake - did it show up on radar like a bomber or something? Is it a false-flag op of some kind?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:33PM
operating a BUK needs a trained team of experts plus a mobile radar capable of reaching and tracking such heights, quite unbelievable that the so called "rebels" are that sophisticated
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @02:54AM
Really? It sounds like the separatist forces are drawn from people who used to be regular military at some time in the past.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @09:12AM
So if they are trained experts, shouldn't they be able to distinguish between a passenger plane in a much larger height and a fast, low altitude military jet?
(Score: 2) by mendax on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:43PM
The New York Times is reporting [nytimes.com] that the plane may have attempted to make a controlled landing. It seems that many bodies are mostly intact. This would not have happened if it were an uncontrolled descent. It links to a video [youtube.com] from the site, quite graphic, which demonstrates this fact.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by NCommander on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:54PM
It might not have been a direct hit, DHL OO-DLL [wikipedia.org] took a missile to the wing and managed a safe return to Baghdad Airport (in one of the craziest bits of flying ever recorded). If it was a shootdown, if it didn't immeditately kill everyone aboard; even in the case of KAL 007; its believed that the initial missile impact didn't kill the crew and they fought for control right before they hit the ocean.
Too many unknowns to say for sure right now.
Still always moving
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:23PM
The video demonstrates nothing, other than that some people weren't burned, and other video shows no fire in the sky, only fire after the crash.
But again, that means nothing.
A tail shot off, or a wing cut in half does not always cause fire instantly, and any pilot will give every effort to gain some measure of control. Missiles target heat sources, engines, not aircraft main bodies.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:08PM
Only IR missiles target heat sources. If this was, indeed, a SAM then it is more than likely to be radar guided and fuzed, often using a fragmentation mechanism in the warhead BUT this is all speculation at present.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @06:53PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by mendax on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:26PM
Yes, but the Russians have previously shot down two airliners, two [wikipedia.org] Korean Air planes [wikipedia.org], and now perhaps a third. Of course, airliners being shot down in or near war zones [wikipedia.org] or during times of strained relations [wikipedia.org] is not exactly unknown to history.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @07:13PM
this world will be destroyed anyway
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:39PM
The Earth isn't dependent upon humans - its the other way around. Earth will survive just fine after humans wipe themselves out, probably in a much better state than its in now. She's survived the previous 5 great extinction events [wikipedia.org], and she'll easily survive the 6th one, which humans have been causing for centuries if not millennia.
(Score: 1) by Theophrastus on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:20PM
...were already prohibited from flying over such an active war-zone [theatlantic.com]. so one has to at least acknowledge that it was known risky flight path, and ask why was it taken?
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Thursday July 17 2014, @09:06PM
It was a scheduled flight following the path in the flight plan, well above the range of the small arms and tanks of the ground conflict. It is not an unusual route, and the US actually has few if any scheduled flights taking that route anyway.
But the US did have intelligence (and photos) of the Buk missile system in separatists areas, (although it takes quite a bit of training to use this system, so even if it was in separatist areas, it was most likely Russian crewed.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 17 2014, @08:52PM
https://twitter.com/vesti_kpss/status/478926313831792640 [twitter.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by evilviper on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:27PM
I think we can all agree on one thing... It sucks to work for Malaysia Airlines this year.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by lubricus on Thursday July 17 2014, @10:51PM
As reported by the AP [talkingpointsmemo.com]:
"This tragedy would not have happened if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed in southeast Ukraine. And, certainly, the state over whose territory this occurred bears responsibility for this awful tragedy."
It seems to me that he is:
1. Acknowledging it was shot down.
2. Acknowledging it was shot down by pro-Russian rebels.
3. Still blaming Ukraine.
4. Perhaps offering a concession by stating that this happened over Ukrainian "territory".
So, maybe this is the beginning of the end of hostilities?
One can hope for a little sunlight.
... sorry about the typos
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 18 2014, @08:36AM
No, it's just collateral damage as it happens in any conflict. You should blame the airline. There was a no-fly-zone to 32000ft and they thought it would be a good idea to fly just at 33000ft through that combat zone where planes are downed almost every of the last weeks. It could have been a miss of a real military machine and the missile overshoot, but we will probably keep speculating for quite a while. It's most likely a tragedy that happened coincidentally. Very few airlines avoided that airspace before as we always want to fly as cheap as possible and companies only want profits.
What's sickening now is that Kiev and Washington try to immediately use this tragedy for political gains to influence European politics.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday July 19 2014, @07:29PM
The upper limit of the restricted airspace was NOTAM'ed (Notice To Airmen) to 7,500 metres - that 24,606 feet. Malaysian aircraft were not the only aircraft flying above this altitude - so were Lufthansa and several other airlines.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by albert on Friday July 18 2014, @08:50AM
"if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed"
Wow. All on him then, seeing as he cast Ukraine into war.