But Su-25 doesn’t carry R-27.

A Ukrainian Mig-29 was shot down in the area yesterday. Might have been the same one that fired the missile that downed MH17. Bad karma etc.

Yes a R-27 could indeed have brought the Boeing down, though even then its likely the missile would only have fatally damaged the aircraft, still giving time for a radio call. However it’s all a bit irrelevant, considering that the air-to-air claim is based on an interception by a Ukrainian Su25, and no where have I seen the R-27 as being part of the weaponry used a Su25.

Not at all. 40kg warhead, instant death, not too different to a 70kg warhead.

Su-25s may look a lot like MiG-29s on a radar scope, or maybe there was another aircraft shadowing MH17 as Falcon’s link said.

Kiev replacing stock?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=536_1406271216

Finland Government Confirms Seizing Missiles Being Smuggled Into Ukraine for Not Paying Customes Duty

Why is the obvious never clear to you Lukos? The owner in the news article is clearly claiming that his vehicle is “easily recognizable”. Clearly the article is somewhat lost in translation but don’t you think that the stripe/decal has something to do with this claim of being “easily recognizable”?

Haulage firms usually have many trucks and often several depots. And with haulage being haulage, they get around. Why isn’t the obvious obvious to you?

The way two-bit rebels with a little state support are swatting-down Su-25s nowadays, I’d say crowd-sourced arguments for relevancy of the A-10/Scorpion are starting to fall apart. SNAFU can go choke himself.

Agreed. Afghanistan-style strafing runs can be thwarted by Iglas and Strelas and even high altitude stuff can be FUBARed by Buk and Tor.

.

Another two Ukrainian Su 25 Shot downed by Terrorists

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/23/ukraine-rebels-separatists-fighter-jet-shot-down/13034005/

Can we stop using the word ‘terrorists’ because it isn’t appropriate and it’s political? Whatever your views, we have two uniformed, armed sides with political differences in a complicated situation. One is using planes to attack and the other is shooting down the attack planes. That isn’t terrorism, it’s just good old fashioned warfare.

Only white truck with a cabin in the whole of Donetsk and Lugansk? The trailer is definitely different at any rate. Board above twin wheels is white not yellow. Trailer frame stands higher.

^
That’s 2S9 NONA self-propelled 120 mm mortar.

Like the ones frequently raining down on Donetsk and Lugansk from Kiev forces.

I was thinking 2030 but I’m forever an optimist.

I disagree. ATC were aware of such missiles because an An-26 was shot down only 10,000ft lower 3 days prior, so there was a direct reason to keep them clear, the same applies to the airline, who’ve now re-routed their flights over Syria – clear indication of their stupidity.

Nobody on either side has alleged that it was a deliberate act. SAM operators in a conflict zone under heavy duress made a mistake. Were they competent? Were the crew of the USS Vincennes competent? How about pretty much any case of mistaken identity during war, e.g. friendly fire – are the USAF competent? When someone targets an airliner for practice during peacetime and accidentally launches a missile that could be described as incompetence, but during wartime, engagements are critical and haste is necessary, as such mistakes are bound to happen. Are all military personnel trained to the same standard? Hell no. Are there internationally recognised standardised rules governing the standard of training provided to armed personnel. Hell no.

Your analogy has no parallel in this situation whatsoever. I can’t even see the resemblance. How can you equate a pedestrian zone with slow moving delivery vehicles to a war zone with supersonic fighters, bombs and Mach 3+ SAMs. In war zones people fire SAMs (or speed if you like), so really it’s more like letting your kid cycle in the middle of the Indy 500 and then trying to persuade authorities to hand out speeding tickets after they’re killed. You’re to blame for letting your child out there, track officials are responsible for letting you past and track authorities are responsible for not governing them properly.

From a military perspective it’s an accident unless someone has proof of a deliberate conspiracy.

True but if someone is pushed off a platform into the way of a train, do we talk about train drivers and who supplied the driver with the train, or the ATC that pushed them off the platform, the airlines that stood too close to the platform and the civil aviation authority that didn’t put a guard rail up or have station guards enforcing a safe distance policy? It seems that criticising train drivers and suppliers won’t stop the problem from occurring again.