Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crashes in Ukraine

[opusman]

Surely the most sensible and risk averse option would be to have not flown at all. I can't believe MAS were this foolhardy.

 

[drron]

Except nobody did foresee this except perhaps the Russians and they weren't telling anyone.
the retrospectroscope is a marvellous piece of equipment.

 

[artemis]

in a car crash, or if a soldier member of your family is killed in war... do we want to be told it was quick? or that they suffered terribly, crying out for their family. There are certain convention with these things.

I think the only convention when it comes to describing the demise of a loved one is that of the truth.

It is unfortunate that some deaths are terrible, and fortunate that some are peaceful. Some people suffer for a lengthy period, others have a brief struggle.

One doesn't have to emphasise the gruesome parts of dying, but the truth is the best testament to the deceased's memory.

The truth may not be comforting for survivors, but it's dignified.

It makes me wonder who you're trying to protect when you lie about the manner of a death - yourself? the decedent? their loved one? It seems a little selfish to me to not honour their memory with the truth.

$0.02

 

[dajop]

China is a red herring-their flightpaths were to the north of Ukraine in the main not over this area.

True. Great circle routes for PVG-FCO and HKG-MXP both traverse eastern Ukraine (counting CX as a Chinese carrier), but not over the Donetsk region, more over Kharkiv. In fact MU did fly over Ukraine before July 17, but over Kiev but not more east than that. HKG-FCO great circle route traverses the Crimea, so that was probably moved long ago. It seems the list of carriers actively avoiding the Donetsk area, before July 17, who actually had reason to travel across that area (ie normal flight paths across the area) is very small indeed, BA and AF are the only two that immediately come to mind, although there may be others.

 

[markis10]

Not necessarily, for most destinations - yes, but not for Italian routes. Great circle maps for PVG-FCO and HKG-MXP both traverse eastern Ukraine (counting CX as a Chinese carrier).

Great circle maps are great if there is no wind, I would not put much credence into who was flying and who was not.

 

[dajop]

Great circle maps are great if there is no wind, I would not put much credence into who was flying and who was not.

Yes true, but you can see historical routes on flight aware and the MU flights in one direction between PVG & FCO tracked pretty close to the great circle map, albeit slightly to the north (in the other direction, ex PVG they seem they veer right a bit across Russia to Belarus, I assume due to the impact of winds).

Also it is pretty obvious from flight aware that BA and AF were going around Ukraine, when SQ and MH were not on the same city pairs on the same days, nor were KL & LH on similar city pairs (assuming the effect of winds would be similar for AMS-KUL/SIN as CDG-SIN, or for that matter FRA-SIN or LHR-SIN).

I guess the crux of it is that there is a lot of commentary that X airline and Y airline were avoiding the area - when X and Y airlines regular flight paths never went near the area.

 

[medhead]

The US have satellite imagery of the rocket launcher.There are the telephone and social media evidence.apparently the US has verified the phone intercepts.What does this mean?
The rocket launcher only arrived in the area a few hours before MH17 flew over.Previously the rockets launched from East Ukraine were man held-hence the notification to fly above 24000 feet with the 30% buffer to 32000 feet.
So tell me precisely how was MAS to know that the rebels would bring a system very capable of reaching 33000 feet after their flight had left AMS?
A little more evidence of the rockets in Torez-very close to the crash site-
http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/locals-say-rebels-moved-missile-launcher-shortly-before-mala

Also in the SMH. Rebels likely downed MH17 'by mistake', say US officials
It's pretty compelling.

And I cannot believe anyone is holding up an extremist who thinks this is punishment for serving booze. Frankly on my recent MH flight the booze was limited.

Surely the most sensible and risk averse option would be to have not flown at all. I can't believe MAS were this foolhardy.

Just like cars, a zero speed limit would stop of those deaths and injuries.

Not precisely, but it was foreseeable. The rebels are backed by a large Govt.

So there are Govt backed rebels fighting a real Govt. Does anyone disagree with this? If you don't disagree then keep moving the chess game ahead as things escalate and sooner or later the capability is there on both sides.

While I am not totally surprised MH routed themselves over this area to expedite flights, I am shocked that others did which should have more mature risk systems in place.

Matt

I'll disagree that it is foreseeable, on the cost argument alone. While I'll argue the missiles are cheap, they are not cheap for rebels. Who can predict that any government would put such a system in the hands of dumb dirt farmers with minimal training?

MH are certainly not alone in flying in the area. The article I linked above suggests not even the yanks knew the system was available in the area, even if they had rumours about training rebels in the use. (they didn't even have evidence the rebels were being trained, however) The fact that other airlines, with much more developed national security resources still flew the route is a pretty good indication that the MH risk assessment process was reasonable. Something that couldn't be said if they were the only airline flying the route.

Then the missile system was moved only very recently and then moved out quickly as well. I'd be willing to bet the MH17 was the first aircraft that came along after the system was deployed. A matter of hours and we could have been talking about any one of 37 other airlines.

 

[markis10]

Yes true, but you can see historical routes on flight aware and the MU flights in one direction between PVG & FCO tracked pretty close to the great circle map, albeit slightly to the north.

Also it is pretty obvious from flight aware that BA and AF were going around Ukraine, when SQ and MH were not on the same city pairs on the same days, nor were KL & LH on similar city pairs (assuming the effect of winds would be similar for AMS-KUL/SIN as CDG-SIN, or for that matter FRA-SIN or LHR-SIN).

Again that really does not mean much, different aircraft and different altitudes, just look at how much variance LAX SYD has between QF, VA , DL and UL.

 

[mannej]

I guess an alternative question to ask is did or should MAS have known that a system was likely to have been brought into the area?

I sometimes wonder if countries down the intelligence pecking order - Malaysia being one of them, may not have access to the sort of intelligence that, for example UK and the US do. Airlines from France, UK and China were actively avoiding the area - airlines from Germany, Netherlands, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Thailand were not. Does that say something about risk acceptance/avoidance or access to appropriate intelligence, or a bit of both?

Funny you mention that - BA are still flying to TLV even with the current issues. I find that quite intriguing considering all things.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/w...ncel-israel-flights-after-gaza-rocket-strike/

 

[lovetravellingoz]

So how many airliners have been shot down at 33,000 ft before?

And how many people knew that the rebels had just by hours gained possession of the technology to do so?

The Titanic was thought unsinkable, till a particular set of circumstances happened.

There seems to be a few people wanting to hang out to dry MAS for not being omnipotent.

 

[artemis]

Also in the SMH. Rebels likely downed MH17 'by mistake', say US officials
It's pretty compelling.

Actually my first thought when I read that article this morning was "huh, that's interesting - the US is winding back its rhetoric on Russia". After having very quickly come out with the satellite intelligence regarding the cause of the crash, sounds like they're now trying to give Russia an out...

 

[medhead]

Actually my first thought when I read that article this morning was "huh, that's interesting - the US is winding back its rhetoric on Russia". After having very quickly come out with the satellite intelligence regarding the cause of the crash, sounds like they're now trying to give Russia an out...

They were pretty circumspect in the language, but the finger was clearly pointed.

 

[drron]

Powerful indeed-
pic.twitter.com/2znpTooOmA

 

[moa999]

So how many airliners have been shot down at 33,000 ft before?
.

Iran Air 655 was above the handheld missile range, but only at 14,000ft due to short flight.
Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[burmans]

Funny you mention that - BA are still flying to TLV even with the current issues. I find that quite intriguing considering all things.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/w...ncel-israel-flights-after-gaza-rocket-strike/

Really, even when the European authorities have specifically advised against it, not much of a role model!

 

[jimg1111]

Interesting, from today's Age -

"US response to Iran in 1988 not so clear cut:
Boris Johnson speaks for us all in demanding Russia tell the truth about who shot down flight MH17 (''This is Putin's war and he bears responsibility'', Comment, 22/7). But he weakens his case by inaccurately comparing the initial Russian response to the Pentagon's eventual admission in 1988 that its forces were to blame when they shot down Iran Air flight 655.
The initial US response in 1988 was to try to blame the victims. The then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Crowe, told the world that flight 655 was flying outside the civilian flight corridor, was emitting military transponder signals, had ignored radio warnings, was flying low and was descending on the USS Vincennes at a rapid 450 knots when the captain ordered that it be shot down. All these claims were false, even if Crowe believed them at the time. It was only two days later, under intense questioning from journalists, that the Pentagon admitted the evidence showed that flight 655 was in fact a routine scheduled flight, emitting civilian transponder signals, flying in its proper corridor, climbing to a 4000 metre altitude, at normal speed. The US sailors clearly got much wrong. Similarly, the Russian rebels clearly mistook MH17 for a military jet and seemed unaware that commercial airlines routinely fly 10 kilometres above their land.
The US military admitted its mistakes. But President Reagan never publicly apologised to the victims' families. The inquiry cleared the Vincennes commander, and he was later awarded the Legion of Merit. And US public opinion overwhelmingly blamed the victims. As UK Prime Minister David Cameron puts it, Russia is facing ''a defining moment'' in its history. The US offers both good and bad examples for it to follow.
Tim Colebatch, The Age's Washington correspondent, 1986-89, Hackett, ACT"

 

[MEL_Traveller]

As i said you do not consider negligence. You agar repeated stated they are automatically liable and you've done it again. Guilty until proven innocent. You also continuing fail to consider the circumstances in particular that it is pretty obvious MH were not negligent.

Otherwise, I wonder want a ? means. I wonder want the conclusion sentence means. I'm certainly not going to take the opening sentence out of context.

That's because the law is very clear... MH is 'guilty' (liable) unless they can prove they weren't. Guilty until proven innocent as you put it.

The passenger does not need to show how MH was negligent, MH must show they're not.

That is the law relatives will likely be relying on for their compensation.

I have no idea how a court will decide on the negligence issue.

 

[burmans]

So how many airliners have been shot down at 33,000 ft before?

And how many people knew that the rebels had just by hours gained possession of the technology to do so?

The Titanic was thought unsinkable, till a particular set of circumstances happened.

There seems to be a few people wanting to hang out to dry MAS for not being omnipotent.

In my working life (projects) there are two basic types of people, the doers and the reviewers. Those in the second category think their job in life is to offer commentary on the first and forever are telling us what the doers are doing wrong and "what they would do differently". Of course the reality is that these type of people rarely do much at all of any value, they are two busy in their role of criticising others. I think there are a few "reviewers" on this site!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

In my working life (projects) there are two basic types of people, the doers and the reviewers. Those in the second category think their job in life is to offer commentary on the first and forever are telling us what the doers are doing wrong and "what they would do differently". Of course the reality is that these type of people rarely do much at all of any value, they are two busy in their role of criticising others. I think there are a few "reviewers" on this site!

Do you include the legal system in that? The job of the legal system is essentially to review what people have done, and if necessary, as you put it, 'criticise'. And get compensation where compensation is due.

The secondary benefit of this review and compensation is that it should stop others doing the same thing.

 

[burmans]

Do you include the legal system in that? The job of the legal system is essentially to review what people have done, and if necessary, as you put it, 'criticise'. And get compensation where compensation is due.

The secondary benefit of this review and compensation is that it should stop others doing the same thing.

Ah yes, a special breed. Given I have recently worked on many compliance projects have had good and bad lawyers but there are plenty when we've had a discussion about a number of options can tell what is wrong with all of them but won't give advice on what is the preferred option. So yes by definition they'd be in my group of reviewers.