Malaysian airlines plane shot down over Ukraine

[*Deidre*]

I was watching the news earlier, something I rarely do, but this story is captivating...and apparently, the latest is rebels were responsible for it?
So scary.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm surprised that they'd route an airliner over an active civil war, which is what the situation there is essentially. Setting aside for the moment any possible threat from either combatant side, the fact that you'd be severely limiting your options in the event of an in-flight emergency make this a case of extremely bad judgement, it seems to me.

I would think that the flight path of the plane would make a Russian shoot-down more likely than a Ukrainian shoot-down. Coming from the west -- Polish territory -- how might it be confused with a Russian airplane by a Ukrainian battery commander? The nearest Russian territory is several hundred miles to the east.

[Napoléon]

Interesting video that gives an insight into the actual crash scene:

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px2rfWBW4wg

---

Some graphic stuff in there, so do be aware.

[Autumnlicious]

I'm surprised that they'd route an airliner over an active civil war, which is what the situation there is essentially. Setting aside for the moment any possible threat from either combatant side, the fact that you'd be severely limiting your options in the event of an in-flight emergency make this a case of extremely bad judgement, it seems to me.

The Ukrainians never assumed at the rebels would never get their hands upon a modern, powerful anti-aircraft missile.

Why they thought that when the Russians have already been providing the rebels with weapons is beyond me.

[Autumnlicious]

I'd like to point out to at the Ukrainian incompetence is well-founded. In that the period leading up to the ousting of Yanukovych, the Ukrainian military went through drastic cuts and increased corruption. It was quite possible to buy a commission much like the British were able to in the 1700s. Like what the British discovered, allowing an unqualified person to purchase rank is unmitigated disaster in a real military situation

[Anomalocaris]

I'm surprised that they'd route an airliner over an active civil war, which is what the situation there is essentially. Setting aside for the moment any possible threat from either combatant side, the fact that you'd be severely limiting your options in the event of an in-flight emergency make this a case of extremely bad judgement, it seems to me.

I would think that the flight path of the plane would make a Russian shoot-down more likely than a Ukrainian shoot-down. Coming from the west -- Polish territory -- how might it be confused with a Russian airplane by a Ukrainian battery commander? The nearest Russian territory is several hundred miles to the east.

It is not so trivial to reroute airliners from well established flight routes. There are safety trade offs such as increased fuel consumption and diminished fuel margins, unfamiliarity of both pilots and ground controllers to new routes, unfamiliarity with emergency alternate landing sites, reduced ability to monitor air traffic from ground, increased congestion and chances of mid air collisions in other flight routes.

[Nine]

The Ukrainians never assumed at the rebels would never get their hands upon a modern, powerful anti-aircraft missile.

Why they thought that when the Russians have already been providing the rebels with weapons is beyond me.

It seems a bit ridiculous that the Russians gave them equipment like that. To me its obvious that something like that is going to make it obvious beyond denial. Then again everyone is too scared to do anything anyway. More sanctions I guess.

[Anomalocaris]

I'm surprised that they'd route an airliner over an active civil war, which is what the situation there is essentially. Setting aside for the moment any possible threat from either combatant side, the fact that you'd be severely limiting your options in the event of an in-flight emergency make this a case of extremely bad judgement, it seems to me.

The Ukrainians never assumed at the rebels would never get their hands upon a modern, powerful anti-aircraft missile.

Why they thought that when the Russians have already been providing the rebels with weapons is beyond me.

The missile system in question is big, cumbersome, intended to protect large areas against high altitude aircraft and missile threats. Basically it is a national defense asset, not a tactical battlefield asset.

It is the least useful type of surface to air missile for the purposes of an armed insurgency. Insurgencies would need lighter, agile, concealable, portable air defense system that is good at repositioning itself on demand and adept at shooting down tactical fighters and armed helicopters operating at low to medium altitudes.

This is why one would not expect the Russians to provide the rebels with this type of missile. It would be like US providing Syrian rebels with ballistic missile defense. Not only would it be overkill, it also can't kill the right kind of things.

I think all lines of evidence points to insurgents got their hands on a system by capturing one from an unguarded or poorly guarded Ukrainian army depot. They didn't really know how to use it properly, and certainly didn't know how to operate the identification friend foe mechanisms in the missile system. They also probably didn't think through what type of air threat is most dangerous to them, and what type of air targets would mostly likely bring horrible repercussions back upon them. They almost certainly had no idea there is a heavily traveled international civil aviation corridor right over their heads. So they fired up missile at the first bogey they were able to get the radar to track.

[Autumnlicious]

They're trying to do as much as possible to hide the evidence:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ju...ss-ukraine

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm surprised that they'd route an airliner over an active civil war, which is what the situation there is essentially. Setting aside for the moment any possible threat from either combatant side, the fact that you'd be severely limiting your options in the event of an in-flight emergency make this a case of extremely bad judgement, it seems to me.

The Ukrainians never assumed at the rebels would never get their hands upon a modern, powerful anti-aircraft missile.

Why they thought that when the Russians have already been providing the rebels with weapons is beyond me.

I'm sure the Ukrainians knew fully well that the rebels would be well-stocked from Russian depots. My comment was regarding the airline's routing decision. Any war zone mean that you will by necessity losing a good portion of alternate landing sites in the event of a civil mechanical emergency.

I said, nor intended to say, anything about Ukrainian assumptions at all.

---

It is not so trivial to reroute airliners from well established flight routes. There are safety trade offs such as increased fuel consumption and diminished fuel margins, unfamiliarity of both pilots and ground controllers to new routes, unfamiliarity with emergency alternate landing sites, reduced ability to monitor air traffic from ground, increased congestion and chances of mid air collisions in other flight routes.

Understood -- and those are indeed serious concerns. At least three of them, though, pertain as well to flying over a combat environment. The three which don't -- fuel margins, congestion, and mid-air collisions -- are 1) amenable to fueling stops outside the combat zone; 2) not so much an issue once away from hubs; and 3) a concern at least as unlikely as being hit by a deliberately-aimed missile. Considering the lucre on the table in the event of a lawsuit, rerouting looks like a cost-effective measure, it seems to me.

<edited as obsolete in light of your latest post>