Replies

It looks like it took considerable incoming cannon fire, with one round skimming along the top of the wing, from an angle of attack slightly above and behind the aircraft. Also there was explosive residue INSIDE the cabin, it appears. That could explain the absence of any voice recording of the attack. The pilots were dead before they could say anything.

It looks like it took considerable incoming cannon fire, with one round skimming along the top of the wing, from an angle of attack slightly above and behind the aircraft.

What was that, a UFO? And how long were they shooting at it? 30 minutes straight? The plane was torn to shreds. The BUK also explodes at proximity and releases shrapnel into a target, such as steel balls. The SU-25, by the way, accused of doing this by the Russkies, which the report says didn't exist contrary to Russkie claims, could only get within 3KM of the airliner... directly beneath it, and that, without carrying anything, because it can't climb that high, and definitely not "above" it, and definitely not fast enough to catch it.

Are the Russkies switching to evil Banderovite aliens, armed with 30mm cannons, as attacking the airliner and avoiding all detection while the stupid Russkies scatter to hide their Buk?

Also there was explosive residue INSIDE the cabin, it appears. That could explain the absence of any voice recording of the attack. The pilots were dead before they could say anything.

How'd that happen? Maybe there was a bomb? Or did a Banderovite teleport into the cabin, assassinate them, and then leave to avoid the incoming 30mm cannon fire?

Air-to-air missiles like the R-60, Mr. Larringa said, generally use infrared guidance systems and seek out heat sources like engines, which he said was inconsistent with evidence released Tuesday that the projectiles that shot down Flight 17 were concentrated around the cockpit. Buk missiles are radar-guided and home in on the body of their target.

Hmmm.