5 ms·

Or Girkin not ordering the civilian plane full of people to be shot down. It was a civilian plane at 10km altitude with a transponder on. Really doesn't look li

Or Girkin not ordering the civilian plane full of people to be shot down. It was a civilian plane at 10km altitude with a transponder on. Really doesn't look like a jet on a radar. And up to that point Russia wasn't known to supply the separatists with an anti air system and the crew to run it.

junofan 9mo ago
It would seem the air defense systems used could not reliably determine what you imply they should [1][2]. I’m not sure where you’re coming from, or why it would matter what one country was known or not known to do. [1]: https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/18/12951/how-can-a-civilian-plane-accidentally-be-shot-down/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/18/12951/how-can-a-... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/07/18/did-the-ukrainian-rebels-even-know-they-were-shooting-at-a-civilian-aircraft/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/07/18...
- lostlogin 9mo ago
  > why it would matter what one country was known or not known to do. It absolutely matters. Flying over a war zone with known anti aircraft missiles is quite different to flying over a low level conflict that is using small arms only.
  - fluder_tw 9mo ago
    There was no war zone at that time.
  - kubanczyk 9mo ago
    > Flying over a war zone with known anti aircraft missiles is quite different to flying over a low level conflict that is using small arms only. What was in the news at the time, and the news are still linked from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas#Escalation_in_May_and_June_2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas#Escalation_in_Ma... 2 June 2014: "Luhansk airstrike" 14 June 2014: "A Ukrainian Air Force Ilyushin Il-76MD was shot down" 20 June 2014: "The insurgents [...] shot down a Su-25 bomber." 14 July 2014: "Ukrainian Air Force launched air strikes targeting insurgent positions across Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. The Ukrainian government said that 500 insurgents were killed" 17 July 2014: "DPR forces shot down a civilian passenger jet, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17"
aunty_helen 9mo ago
Doesn’t look like a F14 either but a US warship, rather than some guys in a field, still managed to pull that off and send 290 people to their graves.
- LorenPechtel 9mo ago
  But it did look like an F-14. There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase. And the Vincennes was under armed attack at the time--Iran let a civilian jetliner overfly their own attack. Plenty of blame for them, also.
  - digitalPhonix 9mo ago
    > But it did look like an F-14 It absolutely did not. The RCS of an F-14 v/s an Airbus A300 is an order of magnitude different (probably 2 or 3 orders). > There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase There was, but that’s a red herring for the root cause. Each ship’s radar independently and correctly identified and tracked the Airbus separate from the Mode 2 targets, but when communicating the track information between ships, the tracks were mixed up. Source: The US Navy’s own account: https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/leadership/director/directors-corner/h-grams/h-gram-020/h-020-1-uss-vincennes-tragedy--.html https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/l... > There was a combat camera team aboard the Vincennes, and the footage depicts considerable confusion and even ill-discipline amongst the crew (cheering, shouting, football game atmosphere) that contributed to one of the most tragic events in U.S. Navy history
    - edwcross 9mo ago
      The URL you linked to results in a 503 error (Service unavailable) and the Wayback Machine returns "Error code: 403 Forbidden" with "Looks like there’s a problem with this site", for all timestamps I tried, in 2025 or 2024. I'm outside the US so that's probably the cause. Is such information available elsewhere?
      - 9mo ago
avazhi 9mo ago
That’s not the point, though. Don’t fly a commercial passenger jet over an active known war zone. Then you don’t even really have to think about whether the separatists below you know whether your signature looks like a fighter jet or not lol. Never leave your safety to the vagaries of Russian incompetence or malice, surely.
- oneshtein 9mo ago
  Russia is active war zone. Russians are flying commercial passenger jets over active war zone and then shooting them. Embraer E190 was the latest victim of Russians. Russia is the problem.
  - avazhi 9mo ago
    I never said Russia isn’t the problem. But intentionally flying your 777 over an active war zone is asinine regardless, is it not?
    - oneshtein 8mo ago
      Yep, Russians does that intentionally, while Malaysian and other airlines are just following rules and air corridors.
tim333 9mo ago
I remember seeing video of the guys behind it seeing the wreckage and saying something like 'shit it was an airliner'. I think they shot thinking it was a military aircraft. I'm not sure why Girkin would want to shot down an airliner?

junofan 9mo ago

It would seem the air defense systems used could not reliably determine what you imply they should [1][2]. I’m not sure where you’re coming from, or why it would matter what one country was known or not known to do. [1]: https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/18/12951/how-can-a-civilian-plane-accidentally-be-shot-down/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/18/12951/how-can-a-... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/07/18/did-the-ukrainian-rebels-even-know-they-were-shooting-at-a-civilian-aircraft/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/07/18...

lostlogin 9mo ago
> why it would matter what one country was known or not known to do. It absolutely matters. Flying over a war zone with known anti aircraft missiles is quite different to flying over a low level conflict that is using small arms only.
- fluder_tw 9mo ago
  There was no war zone at that time.
- kubanczyk 9mo ago
  > Flying over a war zone with known anti aircraft missiles is quite different to flying over a low level conflict that is using small arms only. What was in the news at the time, and the news are still linked from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas#Escalation_in_May_and_June_2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas#Escalation_in_Ma... 2 June 2014: "Luhansk airstrike" 14 June 2014: "A Ukrainian Air Force Ilyushin Il-76MD was shot down" 20 June 2014: "The insurgents [...] shot down a Su-25 bomber." 14 July 2014: "Ukrainian Air Force launched air strikes targeting insurgent positions across Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. The Ukrainian government said that 500 insurgents were killed" 17 July 2014: "DPR forces shot down a civilian passenger jet, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17"

aunty_helen 9mo ago

Doesn’t look like a F14 either but a US warship, rather than some guys in a field, still managed to pull that off and send 290 people to their graves.

LorenPechtel 9mo ago
But it did look like an F-14. There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase. And the Vincennes was under armed attack at the time--Iran let a civilian jetliner overfly their own attack. Plenty of blame for them, also.
- digitalPhonix 9mo ago
  > But it did look like an F-14 It absolutely did not. The RCS of an F-14 v/s an Airbus A300 is an order of magnitude different (probably 2 or 3 orders). > There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase There was, but that’s a red herring for the root cause. Each ship’s radar independently and correctly identified and tracked the Airbus separate from the Mode 2 targets, but when communicating the track information between ships, the tracks were mixed up. Source: The US Navy’s own account: https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/leadership/director/directors-corner/h-grams/h-gram-020/h-020-1-uss-vincennes-tragedy--.html https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/l... > There was a combat camera team aboard the Vincennes, and the footage depicts considerable confusion and even ill-discipline amongst the crew (cheering, shouting, football game atmosphere) that contributed to one of the most tragic events in U.S. Navy history
  - edwcross 9mo ago
    The URL you linked to results in a 503 error (Service unavailable) and the Wayback Machine returns "Error code: 403 Forbidden" with "Looks like there’s a problem with this site", for all timestamps I tried, in 2025 or 2024. I'm outside the US so that's probably the cause. Is such information available elsewhere?
    - 9mo ago

avazhi 9mo ago

That’s not the point, though. Don’t fly a commercial passenger jet over an active known war zone. Then you don’t even really have to think about whether the separatists below you know whether your signature looks like a fighter jet or not lol. Never leave your safety to the vagaries of Russian incompetence or malice, surely.

oneshtein 9mo ago
Russia is active war zone. Russians are flying commercial passenger jets over active war zone and then shooting them. Embraer E190 was the latest victim of Russians. Russia is the problem.
- avazhi 9mo ago
  I never said Russia isn’t the problem. But intentionally flying your 777 over an active war zone is asinine regardless, is it not?
  - oneshtein 8mo ago
    Yep, Russians does that intentionally, while Malaysian and other airlines are just following rules and air corridors.

tim333 9mo ago

I remember seeing video of the guys behind it seeing the wreckage and saying something like 'shit it was an airliner'. I think they shot thinking it was a military aircraft. I'm not sure why Girkin would want to shot down an airliner?