Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crashes in Ukraine

[Steelo]

Why wouldn't he make this statement - its based on the current evidence that is available. Its a huge leap to suggest that MH were in the wrong when it was standard practice at the time for airlines to fly this route.

How would Tony Abbot know at this stage that the airline was not negligent in their chosen flight path for MH17? Seems to be a brave statement pre-empting any judicial finding.

 

[whatmeworry]

Has Tony shirt fronted Putin yet?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Why wouldn't he make this statement - its based on the current evidence that is available. Its a huge leap to suggest that MH were in the wrong when it was standard practice at the time for airlines to fly this route.

the exact quote from Mr Abbot is this:

"given that Malaysia Airlines has a very good record and the two incidents involving Malaysia Airlines this year certainly shouldn't be taken as a reflection on the professionalism or the safety of that particular airline".

We don't know what happened to MH370. We don't know the outcome of the current inquiry into MH17 flight path, or of likely judicial proceedings. Either of those could expose shortcomings.

 

[drron]

the exact quote from Mr Abbot is this:



We don't know what happened to MH370. We don't know the outcome of the current inquiry into MH17 flight path, or of likely judicial proceedings. Either of those could expose shortcomings.

But I am very confident that Tony Abbott has a lot more information about both those incidents than virtually all of us on this forum.

 

[Mattg]

I thought Mattg's comment was that most people would see it as an unfortunate event. Not sure if that is right or not, given as far as I know no one has done a comprehensive survey, but it is a position a lot of respondents have taken on this thread.

But I don't see his comments as saying that those directly involved should not pursue all the options available to receive both compensation and answers.

That is correct. I'm not saying that the families should not be entitled to compensation. I'm saying that no-one predicted this was going to happen and it's not fair to single out MH when the vast, vast majority of other airlines were still flying there. Where were all the people saying they shouldn't be flying there before the shoot-down? There weren't any.

Of course they should pay whatever compensation they legally have to, as that is their responsibility, however I don't think it is fair to blame them for the crash.

 

[whatmeworry]

Russian manufacturer admits missile came from the ground but still insists the Ukrainians shot the missile.

"If the Boeing was downed with an air defence missile, it could be only Buk-M1 and this type of missile," the company's director Yan Novikov told reporters.
Mr Malisevskiy said that type of missile was out of production in Russia but the Ukraine army had 991 such missiles at the time of the attack.
The company also claimed it could prove the missile was shot from a region controlled by Kiev's forces, not separatists. The Russian military has previously made similar claims.

MH17 plane was shot down by a Buk missile, Russian weapons manufacturer says

 

[OATEK]

New strategy:

MH17 - countries want UN Tribunal

 

[defurax]

New strategy:

MH17 - countries want UN Tribunal

Not sure what it would achieve since it seems pretty clear that the rebels thought they were shooting down a military aircraft (if the audio recording we heard about in the news are real).Do they really think that they will convict Russia of illegally providing weapons to a militia?
What happened is awful, but I think this UN special tribunal would actually serve Russian propaganda of being a target of the US/West.

 

[RAM]

Not sure what it would achieve since it seems pretty clear that the rebels thought they were shooting down a military aircraft (if the audio recording we heard about in the news are real).Do they really think that they will convict Russia of illegally providing weapons to a militia?
What happened is awful, but I think this UN special tribunal would actually serve Russian propaganda of being a target of the US/West.

I haven't read the entire thread so I may be repeating someone's earlier post - but I suspect not.

(1) Putin gave an interview to a Russian Govt tv channel a few months back where he boasted about being totally in charge of the initial idea, planning and implementation of the Ukraine invasion by around 20,000 special forces troops including the elite Spetsnaz commandos.

He went on to explain that as the only person making the decisions the takeover of the Crimea and surrounding area was more efficient than if there had been a normal military chain of command etc.

Point being that he had been interviewed dozens of times by the western media previously and EVERY time Putin had strenuously denied that Russia had anything to do with the "rebels" in the Crimea until after they had seized control and requested Russian govt support.

I don't remember seeing this Putin admission reported in any Australian media at the time or subsequently. I came across it reading a UK media article. The article had a link to Putin's tv interview. It seems that Putin is more off-limits for lying than Shorten!

(2) Operating the Russian's most advanced anti-aircraft missile system successfully is not something even an advanced/elite simulator war games player can do. It is not like using a shoulder launched, heat seeking, point, hear tone & shoot missile. It is far more complex.

The fact that the 'offending' launch vehicle was filmed being driven back into Russia subsequently and traced to a previously closed Russian military base that had been reactivated - creates a pretty damning audit trail.
_______________________________________________________

The point being that it is quite a high probability that the operators of the missile launcher were Russian special forces. What was reported to the local rebel leader by them is another story. Why they targeted the MH flight in a line of many other passenger planes following the near identical path, at similar speeds, altitude etc is the real unanswered question.

The initial smokescreen of 'downing a Ukrainian military aircraft' held no water.

A Ukranian plane coming in to any airfield in the contested region or operational theatre would not have been at that altitude. There is no record of any Ukrainian military aircraft operating at that height in the region either previously or subsequently. All this has been reported by overseas media but does not seem to have made it into the Australian media.

The many Ukrainian military aircraft shot down were not travelling at high altitude - not one of them.

What happened throws up many questions but for some reason, we here in Australia are not seeing/hearing much of the information that has been unearthed. Not from the Govt nor the media.

Totally coincidental that cattle shipments to Russia were in contention shortly after the shooting down of MH17.

 

[Danger]

The Federal Government this week announced that flags will fly at half mast around the country and at our overseas posts on the first anniversary of the loss next month. Additionally, a memorial to the lost will be constructed in the House of Representatives gardens at Parliament House.

 

[dajop]

The Federal Government this week announced that flags will fly at half mast around the country and at our overseas posts on the first anniversary of the loss next month. Additionally, a memorial to the lost will be constructed in the House of Representatives gardens at Parliament House.

Why the memorial? No disrepect to the relatives of those who perished in MH17, but why do we feel necessary to remember those who lost their lives in big events, and not those who do in ordinary events? I remember a few weeks after MH 17 three people died in Vic after a BP trailer came loose from a truck. No national day of mourning, no flags at half mast, no memorials for those poor people (and there are countless others). Is it mainly a grief coping mechanism? I am struggling why, when accidental death takes many victims every year, we single out some but not others for special treatment.

 

[UP4014]

Why the memorial? No disrepect to the relatives of those who perished in MH17, but why do we feel necessary to remember those who lost their lives in big events, and not those who do in ordinary events? I remember a few weeks after MH 17 three people died in Vic after a BP trailer came loose from a truck. No national day of mourning, no flags at half mast, no memorials for those poor people (and there are countless others). Is it mainly a grief coping mechanism? I am struggling why, when accidental death takes many victims every year, we single out some but not others for special treatment.

Agree, one can only think "media opportunity" for this. Yes, people are tragically killed every day with little comment.

Matt

 

[Danger]

Why the memorial? No disrepect to the relatives of those who perished in MH17, but why do we feel necessary to remember those who lost their lives in big events, and not those who do in ordinary events? I remember a few weeks after MH 17 three people died in Vic after a BP trailer came loose from a truck. No national day of mourning, no flags at half mast, no memorials for those poor people (and there are countless others). Is it mainly a grief coping mechanism? I am struggling why, when accidental death takes many victims every year, we single out some but not others for special treatment.

Agree, one can only think "media opportunity" for this. Yes, people are tragically killed every day with little comment.

Matt

Valid points, in my opinion. I don't know the reason but I will enquire.

 

[whatmeworry]

Why the memorial? No disrepect to the relatives of those who perished in MH17, but why do we feel necessary to remember those who lost their lives in big events, and not those who do in ordinary events? I remember a few weeks after MH 17 three people died in Vic after a BP trailer came loose from a truck. No national day of mourning, no flags at half mast, no memorials for those poor people (and there are countless others). Is it mainly a grief coping mechanism? I am struggling why, when accidental death takes many victims every year, we single out some but not others for special treatment.

On the Melbourne western ringroad, one worker died and has a plaque Near MEL.

 

[Himeno]

I am struggling why, when accidental death takes many victims every year, we single out some but not others for special treatment.

Same reason many people fear flying and are more then happy to drive, despite driving being more risky then flying.

 

[Major]

Apparently the Dutch Safety Board has forwarded a draft final report to affected Countries for comment. The final report is due in Oct

Malaysia Airline flight MH17: Australian government experts received secret draft of crash report

 

[SeatBackForward]

The secret draft is probably the only way they can diplomatically point that finger. Not sure why, its bleating obvious who is to blame, and despite this, there will be no repercussions. So not sure why it has to be kept secret.

 

[dajop]

The secret draft is probably the only way they can diplomatically point that finger. Not sure why, its bleating obvious who is to blame, and despite this, there will be no repercussions. So not sure why it has to be kept secret.

Any investigation shouldn't just be about "who to blame". There will always be rogue states, rogue groups and rogue individuals - as we have seen in a 12 month period definitely 2 and in all likelihood 3 aircraft were brought down by such rogues, deliberate acts. Apart from the individuals directly involved in the acts, questions have been rightly asked about the adequacy of risk management in preventing the incidents.

In the investigation, beyond the obvious (who to blame) it seems there will be discussion of flight path planning and flight path authorisations. Which is just as important.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Any investigation shouldn't just be about "who to blame". There will always be rogue states, rogue groups and rogue individuals - as we have seen in a 12 month period definitely 2 and in all likelihood 3 aircraft were brought down by such rogues, deliberate acts. Apart from the individuals directly involved in the acts, questions have been rightly asked about the adequacy of risk management in preventing the incidents.

In the investigation, beyond the obvious (who to blame) it seems there will be discussion of flight path planning and flight path authorisations. Which is just as important.

Indeed the news article says the report:

assesses whether the plane should have been assigned that flight path

but it's not clear whether they will cover the assigning of the flight path only by regulatory agencies/ATC, or by MH management as well.

 

[basso]

The secret draft is probably the only way they can diplomatically point that finger. Not sure why, its bleating obvious who is to blame, and despite this, there will be no repercussions. So not sure why it has to be kept secret.

Secret tries to imply they are hiding something. It is completely normal for final drafts to go to all interested parties (airlines, govnrment agencies, etc.) for review and comment, and sometimes making changes to the final report. It happens here with ATSB reports before we get to see them....