sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 9:48:14 GMT 10
Civilian airliner crashes in Ukraine, believed to have been shot down.
Daniel Wasserbly, Washington, DC and Doug Richardson, London -
18 July 2014 A commercial aircraft operated by Malaysia Airlines crashed with nearly 300 passengers on board while flying over the contested Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine on 17 July. As of this writing it was unclear what caused the incident, but Ukrainian government officials stated that the aircraft was believed to have been felled by a surface-to-air missile (SAM). Specifically, some Ukrainian officials suggested it was a Buk (SA-11 'Gadfly') self-propelled SAM system or some variant of the Buk. Russia and Ukraine have versions of the Buk in their inventories, and it is possible that pro-Russian separatists in the Donetsk region have obtained one of the systems as well. US intelligence officials and Vice-President Joe Biden have said they believe the aircraft was shot down, but have yet not provided any specific information.
COMMENT An airliner cruising at around 30,000 ft altitude would be well above the coverage of shoulder-fired man-portable missile systems, which typically can engage targets flying at up to around 10,000 ft. Ukraine has long-range Soviet-era missile systems in its inventory such as the SA-2, -3, -5, and -12 that would have no difficulty to downing a target flying at 30,000 ft. However, these systems are deployed at permanent launch sites that have launchers and associated radars located at specific locations distributed around the site. Their operators would have a good idea of the air traffic present in the surrounding area, so it would be unlikely to mistake an airliner for a combat aircraft. Downing an airliner flying at normal cruise altitude would require a mobile SAM system such as a Kub (known to the West as the SA-6 'Gainful) or the 'Buk'. Both are in Ukrainian service. The Kub can cope with targets flying at up to 26,000 ft (8,000 m), so it cannot reach the reported cruise height of the airliner. Buk coverage, however, extends up to 72,000 ft, with its maximum range being 32 km. So at first sight, the Buk seems a good candidate for this incident. When fielded, a Buk firing battery consists of: - the 9S18M1Target Acquisition Radar used to acquire potential aerial targets and transmit their position and tracks; - the 9S470M1 Command Post (CP) vehicle (contains the missile battery's data display and control system; digital fire-control computer, which assigns targets to individual launchers; and computes the engagement); and - one or more 9A310M1S launchers each armed with four radar-guided missiles. All three of these systems are vehicle-mounted. In a normal engagement, all three would operate as an integrated weapon system and crew of the CP vehicle are likely to have a good idea of the local air activity. However, a Buk launcher can also operate in stand-alone mode. Its built-in radar is normally used to track the target being engaged, but can be operated in a target-detection mode, allowing it to autonomously engage targets that were present in the radar's forward field of view. Although it has its own identification friend or foe system, this is only able to establish whether the target being tracked is a friendly aircraft. It is the electronic equivalent of a sentry calling out: "Who goes there?". If there is no reply, all you know is that it is not one of your own combat aircraft. It would not give you a warning that you were tracking an airliner. Operating Buk hardware would require a trained crew; with personnel who are currently trained operators or who learned how to operate the hardware while serving as conscripts.
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 9:49:18 GMT 10
Missile profile: 9K37 Buk
17 July 2014 Type Self-propelled Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) system Development The 9K37 Buk (NATO SA-11 'Gadfly') was developed in accordance with the Resolution of the CPSU Central Committee and USSR Council of Ministers dated 13 January 1972 using two self-propelled mounts, the 9A38 and the 9A310. The NIIP Research Institute of Instrument Design was assigned prime developer whilst the Sverdlovsk based Novator Design Bureau was tasked to develop the 9M38 missile. Developmental trials and firing took place at the Kapustin Yar Missile Test Range (KYMTR) starting in August 1975 and lasted until March 1979. The first Buk with the 9M38 missile became operational in 1978 associated with the Kub 3M9M3 missiles, this became known as the Kub-M4 system. However, the full configuration of Buk continued testing from November 1977 through 1979 and became operational in 1980. The system is part of the replacement for the Krug (NATO SA-4 'Ganef') at the army (corps) level. The first Buk brigade became operational in 1980, although significant numbers were not deployed until the late 1980s. The system is known in the Russian Federation as the 9K37 Buk (Russian for 'beech') with the complete system, including the radar and support equipment, having a Russian Industrial Index number, 9K37. The export version is known as the 'Gang', with the various sub-elements having the suffix, 'E' (for Ehksportiynyi; Russian for export) added to their designations, for example 9A310M1E. The first export order came from Syria in 1983, with deliveries beginning in 1986. Due to a number of problems with the original Buk system, including the original surveillance radar Tube Arm, an improved system was already in development in 1980 to improve its combat capabilities, protection from countermeasures and anti-radiation missiles. Testing the new system was conducted throughout 1982. Known as the Buk-M1, this entered service in 1983 and introduced the 9S18M1 'Snow Drift' surveillance radar into service. The Buk can also be used to engage tactical missiles and rockets; successful trials were undertaken in 1992 against simulated Pershing and MLRS type targets.The former Yugoslavia ordered the system in the late 1980s with a small number of tracked launchers arriving before the Civil War broke out. It is believed that these were non-operational during the NATO Kosovo/Serbia bombing campaign. The principal sub-units are based on a full-tracked chassis developed and built by the Metrovagonmash Joint Stock Company from the GM-539 design. This provides protection from small arms fire as well as being sealed against NBC attack. During June 2004, it was reported from Russia that work on upgrading the Buk SAM system's radar was continuing within the Almaz/Antei Concern of Air Defence and the development of a common surface-to-air missile system expected shortly. Furthermore, the concept was to make provision for a modular system able to engage targets in the short, medium and long ranges by re-configuring various units and modules. Description The original missile used by the Buk system is the 9M38, which was subsequently replaced with the 9M317. The 9M38 missiles employ the 9B-1103M (diameter 350 mm) seeker that has an acquisition range of 40 km for 5 m2 RCS targets. A total of six targets can be engaged simultaneously by a battery while they are flying on different bearings and at different altitudes and ranges. A typical battery comprises a Command Post (CP) vehicle, a Target Acquisition Radar (TAR) vehicle and six Self-Propelled Mounts (SPMs) that act as the launcher vehicles. A specialist Loader-Launcher (LL) vehicle that acts both as missile transloader and additional launch unit supports pair of launchers. A Buk regiment comprises four such batteries and a Regimental Target Acquisition Battery with two long-range early-warning search radars. The Buk self-propelled launcher is also offered as an upgrade to the 2K12 Kub/Kvadrat system. Known as the Kub-M4 system, it entered service in 1978 and involves a single dual-capable 9A310/9A38 SPM attached to each 2K12 battery to double the target engagement capabilities. A 9A39M1 loader-launcher supports the 9A310/9A38.
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 10:03:22 GMT 10
NATO officials believe missile attack behind MH17 crash.
Brooks Tigner, Brussels
17 July 2014
NATO sources say the circumstances of the crash of Malaysian Airlines’ Flight MH17 in east Ukraine on 17 July point strongly to a sophisticated missile attack.
“It seems pretty obvious that this was a missile attack,” a NATO source told IHS Jane’s on 18 July, although the source said the alliance has little to go on at this point.
For example, allied Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft that were loitering in eastern Europe at the time of the crash “are going through their [recorded radar image] tapes but their orbits in Poland and Romania are not likely to reveal much. It’s not like we were able to see anything beyond images of the airliner flying peacefully through the air. The missile’s signature would have been difficult to see from where [the AWACS aircraft] were.” But the official also said that the incident “does have all the appearances of a strike”.
If so, then a central question is how eastern Ukraine’s rebel forces could have pulled that off?
“This could only have been a radar-guided missile – and not a [shoulder-fired] heat-seeking one. To launch that you need a team of at least three, if not four, highly trained personnel: someone to operate the radar, another to man the igniter, a C2 (command and control) guy and so on,” said the NATO source.
The source commented that, in terms of sophistication “this kind of missile falls just below a Patriot”, which means months of training by highly trained mentors: “Rebels can overturn buses and shoot people but they don’t normally have or know how to operate this kind of capability without formal training or outside assistance.”
For their part, European Union (EU) aviation authorities are withholding opinion until all the technical evidence is in.
“We are not here to speculate whether it was a missile because we have no independent verification of that yet,” an EU aviation policy official told reporters in Brussels on 18 July. “The state investigation has begun by Ukrainian authorities, but as for the technical investigation, it is proving difficult [for international investigators] to reach the area due to its rebel control.”
Debris from the Malaysian aircraft, a Boeing 777, rained down in a “huge 20 km2 area” across Ukraine’s two rebel-controlled provinces of Lubansk and Donetsk, said the EU official.
Noting that a 777’s flight recorder registers more than 1,000 parameters, the official said its analysis of how the aircraft’s fuselage and wing skins were bent by any explosion could help determine how a missile hit the aircraft. Its cockpit recorder would have also captured the sound patterns.
Asked about BBC reports of 18 July suggesting than one or more of MH17’s black boxes may have been carried to Moscow, the EU official declined to comment, saying only that “every parameter is dated, making it almost impossible to tamper with”.
Asked by IHS Jane’s if there have been any previous incidents where a government refused to hand over black boxes to international investigators, the EU official pointed to one: Korean Air Lines Flight 007, which was shot down in 1983 by a Soviet Su-15 interceptor in the Sea of Japan. “The black boxes were taken by the Russian authorities but only returned after the Cold War [ended],” the official observed.
The NATO source said there were previous signs the rebels were using more aggressive military tactics in their operating area. “They shot down three aircraft in the last week, so that perhaps should have been a warning,” said the source.
Officials from Eurocontrol – the pan-European aviation navigation authority – also briefed the EU press corps. According to one Eurocontrol official, only 25% of the world’s international carriers were steering around Ukraine when the Malaysian aircraft was brought down.
Meanwhile, a senior US State Department official said repeated efforts by the EU and Washington “have failed to persuade Russia” to stop its support for Ukraine’s separatists and to end its supply of weapons and financing to them – thus justifying the latest round of transatlantic sanctions against Moscow.
“In the face of the aggression that Ukraine faces and the continuing escalation of weaponry [in the region of eastern Ukraine], the US and Europe cannot stand by this threat, which is not just to Ukraine but to the peace and stability of Europe as a whole,” Victoria Nuland, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, told reporters during a 17 July webinar briefing.
Noting that the new US sanctions ring-fence two Russian banks, two energy companies and eight defence manufacturers from the global economy, Nuland praised the EU’s recent moves to give itself the political and legal ability to impose sanctions in more sectoral areas.
“This means they can hit more individuals and entities and thus they will be able to do more in defence, banking, and energy as we have done,” she said.
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 10:11:39 GMT 10
Looking at these three posts above, it leaves me to wonder at how Americas satellite surveillance system has failed dismally here as it's primary function was to detect this sort of threat. Some analyst also asked SIMILAR QUESTIONS TO THIS ALSO.
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 10:17:21 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by Ausprep on Jul 19, 2014 10:19:18 GMT 10
To save time and money (fuel)
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 10:27:07 GMT 10
To save time and money (fuel) Short answer - Yes. This was only being avoided by a small number of international carriers until this occurred.
Now it is a No-Fly Zone as declared by Euro-control after the event!
|
|
remnantprep
Senior Member
People do not exist for the sake of governments!
Posts: 4,399
Likes: 3,968
Email: remnant@ausprep.org
|
Post by remnantprep on Jul 19, 2014 11:25:22 GMT 10
|
|
sentinel
Senior Member
Posts: 463
Likes: 253
|
Post by sentinel on Jul 19, 2014 13:17:48 GMT 10
|
|
remnantprep
Senior Member
People do not exist for the sake of governments!
Posts: 4,399
Likes: 3,968
Email: remnant@ausprep.org
|
Post by remnantprep on Jul 19, 2014 21:10:26 GMT 10
|
|
Frank
VIP Member
APF Life Member
Posts: 1,864
Likes: 2,739
Email: frank@ausprep.com
|
Post by Frank on Jul 20, 2014 16:08:44 GMT 10
Going to be some interesting developments from this I think. From questions as to why the plane was there in the first place, who shot it down and then the way the scene is being treated by the rebels........bad times
|
|