The CIA wrote the scenario for the crash of Flight MH17. Part 1

Today is two years since the tragic crash of the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 in the skies over Ukraine. There are still more questions than answers.

I. The plane was shot down according to the scenario of Operation Northwoods

Few people paid attention: the scenario of the catastrophe and further events fully corresponds to the American operation "Northwoods" (Northwoods). The operation was planned in 1962 by the US Department of Defense and was intended to prepare American public opinion for an armed invasion of Cuba with the aim of overthrowing the government of Fidel Castro. The operation involved the implementation of terrorist acts with imaginary or real victims in the United States, Cuba and other countries, including hijacking planes, imitation of hostile actions under a false flag, acts of terror organized by the state.

With regard to the downed civilian aircraft, the declassified primary source literally says the following:

“You can create an incident that convincingly demonstrates how a Cuban plane attacked and shot down a civilian charter liner from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The direction is chosen so as to cross Cuba. Passengers can be students or any other group of people with a common interest to justify the off-schedule charter flight. ”

If we assume that in Ukraine we are dealing with such a special operation-provocation, it becomes clear why the civilian Boeing seemed to be deliberately sent through the ATO war zone, where navigation actually did not work anymore. Moreover, the plane was released from the transport corridor.

“At Eglin Air Force Base, an aircraft will be prepared, painted and numbered as the exact counterpart of a civilian registered aircraft belonging to an organization under the patronage of the CIA in Miami. At the appointed time, the backup aircraft, filled with specially selected passengers under carefully prepared fictitious names, will be replaced by a civilian aircraft, remotely controlled. "

And again, remember: on March 8, 2014 and July 17, 2014, two aircraft of exactly the same modification were lost. 777-200ER the same airline. Such a coincidence, you see, can hardly be an accident. The meaning of this situation lies in saving on operations: the aircraft does not need to be repainted, it is only necessary to replace a very similar number ( MO on MD). Greed and got caught.

“The takeoffs of the RC and the real liner will be coordinated to ensure they cross routes south of Florida. After that, the plane with passengers will descend to the minimum altitude and land on the additional field of the Eglin airbase, where the passengers will be evacuated, and the plane will be returned to its original status.

The radio-controlled aircraft, meanwhile, will continue to fly along the planned route. Over Cuba, he will begin to transmit on the international distress frequency SOS that he was being attacked by a Cuban MiG. The transmission of this message will be interrupted by the destruction of the aircraft via the radio signal. This will allow the radio stations of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in the Western Hemisphere to inform the United States of what happened to their aircraft, thereby eliminating the need for the United States to 'sell' the incident. "

Now let's compare this plan with several key events of 2014:

1. On February 23-27, 2014, the leadership of the executive branch of Sevastopol and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was changed. The new Crimean authorities declared the illegitimacy of the new leadership of Ukraine and appealed for assistance and assistance to the leadership of Russia, which provided the Crimean authorities with all possible support.

2. On March 7, 2014, a delegation of the Supreme Council of Crimea met in Moscow with the Chairman of the State Duma Sergei Naryshkin and Speaker of the Federation Council Valentina Matvienko. Naryshkin said that Russia will support the free and democratic choice of the population of Crimea and Sevastopol. Matviyenko assured that the senators will support the decision on Crimea's joining Russia, if it is adopted.

3. On March 8, 2014 the Boeing-777 flight disappears MH370 Malaysian Airlines. The wreckage of the plane was never found. In the future, a version runs and even testimony of Maldives residents appears, which gives reason to believe that the plane was hijacked and landed on the territory of a military base. Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. These facts are not commented on by the West in any way.

4. Mid-July 2014 - units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (about 5,000 soldiers and dozens of pieces of equipment) fall into the Izvarinsky cauldron. On July 16, the cauldron was closed, hundreds of servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine perished in the “Izvarinsky cauldron”.

Again, such coincidences are not accidental: expecting such a random coincidence is like waiting for a coin tossed into the air to stand on its edge. Therefore, we have no doubts: the operation was planned by the US special services and implemented by the armed forces of Ukraine with the aim of blaming Russia. Moreover. to blame both for the events in eastern Ukraine and for the allegedly shot down Boeing. The very next morning after the tragedy, in the West, the media came out with such accusations, with portraits of the President of the Russian Federation Putin and the image of the Buk air defense system.

However, a lot went wrong - after a year the West cannot figure out how to "hang" an airplane on us. The problems started from the very first day.

II. Strange video recording with Ukrainian Buks

Immediately after the disaster on the leading Ukrainian portal liga.net An article was published with the headline: "Poroshenko on the Boeing 777: The Army Has No Targets in the Air." Samantha Power in the UN Security Council, in her lies, she went even further and stated: "The Ukrainian military had the SA-11 (Buk) systems in their warehouses, but there were no such weapons near this area."

Samantha Power

However, we know what happens when the right hand does not know what the left is doing. In this case, all attempts to justify the downed plane are refuted by the following video from the Ukrainian media the day before the crash:

The video shows: SAM "Buk" and SOC "Kupol" (target detection system) of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are in full combat readiness in the ATO zone as of July 16, 2014. It turns out: they have targets in the air. Follows: Poroshenko and Power are lying?

III. Fakes

Immediately after the disaster, many fakes are born in Ukraine. This strategy was also part of Operation Northwoods: Create a lot of rumors.

Fake 1... A photograph of the "contrail" in the Snezhnoye area, capturing an absolutely clear sky! The real sky at the time of the disaster was cloudy enough.

Fake showing contrail from Snezhnoye

The actual situation at the time of the explosion of the aircraft.

Actual situation according to meteorological data from the Commission's report. The green point marks the last position of the aircraft, followed by the maximum cloud cover - 8 out of 8. It doesn't look like a completely clear sky, does it ?!

Fake 2... “Telephone conversation” by Igor Bezler (Bes), who reported the downed plane to “his curator” in Russia. But everyone knows that Bezler was defending Gorlovka at that moment, so he could not have first-hand information about the situation in the Grabovo region. Moreover, the entry says about the plane that fell behind Yenakiyevo (32 km from the site of the tragedy), that is, about a completely different plane. This information was then relayed in the Western media as clear evidence of Russia's guilt. Hackers discovered - the recording was made before the plane crash .

Fake 3... The recording of another conversation asserted that the militias, according to them, according to the fake, had already "felt better after the arrival of Buk" - they (Buk) had already "managed to knock down two dryings yesterday and already a second one today." At the same time, judging by the chronology of events in the Ukrainian media, Buk arrived at the place of combat duty only a few minutes before the downed plane!

Moreover, not a single aircraft before Boeing contained traces of the Buk air defense missile system, all were shot down from portable air defense systems. The recording ends with an intriguing horror story - a statement about an imminent attack by Russian troops in Ukraine.

There were many provocations - a photograph of the "Russian soldier" in the Buka of Sani Sotkin (with identification marks!) With studio-quality processing and theatrical expression on his face depicting an idiot. Or the movement of a clean "shooting" Buk in an urgent manner "back to his homeland", and, as you know, to such a state, it only takes two or three days to wash it after the shot. Or the version that Russia wanted to shoot down an Aeroflot flight (which actually flew 140 km from the war zone), and then blame Ukraine. Missed.

It is reasonable to ask the following question to Pan Poroshenko and the Ukrainian media: if you are so sure that you are right, why do you lie so much? The word "right" and the word "truth" are similar, aren't they?

IV. Inconsistencies

Mismatch 1... Few have bothered to compare the latest video from the plane with real debris. But in vain. The video clearly shows: the marking of the places is to the left of the handle, and at a considerable distance. The markings on the fragments of the aircraft are strictly above the handle, and on the right, not on the left.

Photo of the salon on the video - the seat numbers are located on the edge of the shelf, to the left of the handle.

Close-up detail of interior with shelf number 31 HGFED.

The CIA wrote the scenario for the crash of Flight MH-17. Part 2.

V. Mathematical calculations

Place of defeat

Mathematical calculations show that the plane was hit at a distance of over 34 km from the town of Snezhnoe. The plane began to lose speed no later than 16.20 and disappeared from radar at 16: 21.35 at a speed 200 km / h (presumably at an altitude 5000 meters). Real cases and mathematical models of such disasters show that the time of debris falling is unlikely to be less than 2 minutes, and the distance traveled to the point of impact is unlikely to be less than 20 km.

Radar data indicate that up to 16: 20.43 the plane was still flying at a speed of about 900 km / h. 40 seconds of flight at such a speed is already 10 km. It is interesting that the aircraft, after the alleged defeat, first increased rather than decreased its speed. The distance from Snezhnoye to Rassypnoye is 18 km. After its separation from the aircraft, the cockpit flew 6.5 km to Loose. Only after the cab was separated (not earlier) did the speed begin to drop. It is obvious that the separation of the cabin did not take place immediately, but some time after the explosion. According to radar data, the cockpit separation time was about 40 seconds.

We get:

From Snezhnoye to Rassypnoye: 18 km;

From Rassypnoye to the cockpit separation point: 6.5 km;

From the place of the alleged defeat at 16: 20.03 to the separation of the cockpit and the beginning of a catastrophic drop in speed at 16: 20.43 - 10 km.

Total: 34.5 km.

These facts, however, do not coincide with the data of the Preliminary Report of the International Commission, according to which the estimated coordinates of the point of destruction of the aircraft are 48º07 '37.7 ”N; 38º31 '34.7 ”E, closer to the crash site. Probably, it was advantageous for the commission to submit a report in which the place of the plane's destruction would be as close as possible to the town of Snezhnoye. However, this conclusion contradicts the laws of physics and mathematics.

The nature of the damage to the aircraft, severe damage is highlighted in red.

According to the preliminary report of the International Commission, the most severe damage can be attributed to the destruction of the power frame of the airframe of the aircraft nose. It was this damage that led to the further destruction of the aircraft. At the same time, it is obvious that these destruction did not lead to an immediate stall of the aircraft at its peak.

Until the moment when the plane began to crumble, it moved horizontally, and did not dive. Usually, one missile hit is not enough to immediately destroy an aircraft with a mass of about 250 tons (the missile's warhead is 70 km, the mass of the striking elements is about 2 times less, while most of them do not hit the target). The kinetic energy of the striking elements that have reached the target is too small (much less than 0.1% of the corresponding indicator of the aircraft) to lead to a significant change in the characteristics of the movement of the aircraft, or to the immediate destruction of its structure. It can be concluded that the plane gradually dropped to 5000 meters, where it crumbled.

At the same time, we are not inclined to judge that the defeat took place much to the west of Kirovskoe (see below). The collapse of the bow resulted in a relatively rapid loss of speed than would be the case with standard gliding.

Therefore, it is unlikely that the Buk air defense missile system could shoot down an aircraft from Snezhnoye (the main version of the Ukrainian media), since 35 km - this is the limit of performance characteristics. And at the limit of performance characteristics, the Beech works with a low probability of defeat. It is also necessary to take into account the flight time of the rocket, during which the rendezvous took place. At the moment of launch, the aircraft would be even further, not to mention the fact that having only a Buk air defense missile launcher available, without a target detection system and a command post for processing information, it becomes impossible to hit the target at the considered distance. In this case, the beech will turn into a blind weapon that will fire "from a cannon at sparrows."

Rocket launch site

We covered in detail the cases of aerial terror in the article “History of aerial terror. Who is to blame for the destruction of aircraft in the air. " We have only one question left to ask: how many more years and how many more victims will it take for the "world community" to pay attention to the US "Aerotherror", to stop indulging and broadcasting everything that is beneficial to the United States? Perhaps the existence of an operation Northwoods can also be attributed to the invention of Russian propaganda? It is time for the world to say a resolute "no" to US provocations.

Questions to be resolved:

3. If another plane crashed - who are the people who flew in it?

These questions were asked by us on the Russia-1 TV channel in a program dedicated to the loss of a Boeing-777 in March 2014. To put it bluntly, the fate of the passengers on this flight is unknown. Based on the scenario of Operation Northwoods, these are specially selected people, that is, those who have connections with the special services. It is not difficult to change documents and legends for them.

Nevertheless, we understand that this is a sensitive issue, people may have relatives, therefore, if the assumption about their recruitment is incorrect, then we would not want to hurt the feelings of relatives. Perhaps time will reveal more information regarding these terrible events.

There has already been a lot of speculation about the fate of the passengers on this flight. However, as of March 27, 2015, 296 bodies were identified (all but two passengers). Thus, if you follow the official version, the list of people who flew out corresponds to the list of those found in the Donetsk region.

Nevertheless, there are also an endless number of questions here - the identification process dragged on for several months and we did not see the indignation of their relatives. In general, we saw them unprecedentedly little. On April 9, 2015, the Dutch authorities published 569 documents related to the disaster. Personal Information the killed passengers of the plane and their relatives were retouched.

However, we are not ready to make statements on this topic. So far, there is too much evidence in favor of the scenario of a pre-planned provocation.

4. Why come up with such a complex scenario?

In our opinion, for maximum effect. If special people do not participate in a special operation, the likelihood of failure will increase dramatically. Relatives will do their best to get to the bottom of the truth, if something goes wrong, the truth will immediately be revealed. The consequences of such a failure can hardly be overestimated. In complex intricacies, it is always easy to hide the ends in the water! The main thing is not to get lost in them ourselves.

However, all details of the operation are unknown. There is no complete picture of the provocation. It is unlikely that we will find out the truth in the next 30-40 years. All the information that we can count on today is hypotheses.

5. Could the Buk SAM system quickly destroy the plane?

Here the experts disagree:

The Russian Union of Engineers claims that the striking elements “can penetrate the aircraft fuselage, but given the size of the Boeing 777 (63.7 meters long, with a large wingspan of more than 60 meters), they cannot lead to the destruction of the aircraft into separate small parts, like this happens with airplanes seven to ten times smaller in size. " In addition, "no plume was recorded in the form of thick white condensation from the combustion products of rocket fuel, as well as a contrail, which appear and persist for several minutes after launch and are visible within a radius of at least 10 km from the launch point of the rocket."

The experts of the Buk air defense missile system manufacturer insist that the plane was destroyed by the Buk. Corresponding traces of damage by various fractions of submunitions were found; The form of a “heavy” fragment in the form of an “I-beam” is used only in 9M38M1 anti-aircraft guided missiles equipped with a 9N314M high-explosive fragmentation warhead, which makes it possible to unambiguously determine the type of warhead - 9N314M. The specified warhead is equipped only with missiles of the 9M38M1 modification.

However, we cannot be satisfied with this answer, since no submunitions have been presented so far. The warhead contains 32 kg of submunitions: about 4,500 I-beams weighing 8 g and about 1,500 cubes of 4 g. Of course, no more than a few percent of this number got into the plane, but the world saw the first sample of the damaging element only on March 19, 2015, after 8 months after the disaster. Why was it impossible to do this before?

6. Perhaps, after all, Boeing shot down the plane?

An air strike is likely. At least, this can be at least some explanation for the changes in the parameters of the aircraft at around 16: 21.43. A heavy rocket flying at great speed can significantly change the speed characteristics.

In addition, this version was announced in December in "Komsomolskaya Pravda" to an employee of a military air base in Dnepropetrovsk, who did not want to give his last name then for security reasons. On July 17, 2014, in the afternoon, an airplane took off for a combat mission SU-25 Ukrainian Air Force, piloted by a captain Voloshin... On board were R-60 air-to-air missiles with a thermal guidance principle. They can fly up to 10 kilometers in search of a target.

Voloshin returned to the airfield with an empty ammunition load. Flight Director Dyakiv asked the captain: "What's wrong with the plane?" Voloshin replied: "The plane was at the wrong time and in the wrong place"... The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, immediately after publication in our newspaper, provided state protection to an important witness. In June, the RF IC decided to declassify it: citizen of Ukraine Agapov Evgeny Vladimirovich, who served as a mechanic of aviation weapons of the first squadron of the tactical aviation brigade of the Ukrainian Air Force in military unit No. А4465.

When the investigation lasts so long, and neither journalists, nor experts of the interested parties, nor the public are allowed access to any information, such an investigation, in our opinion, cannot be considered independent. Any conclusions and evidence of the commission for such a period of time may be falsified. It should be noted that at the request of the Ukrainian side, information may be withdrawn from the disclosure of the data of the expert commission.

Hence, various versions still have the right to exist. Moreover, the commission of inquiry has not yet rejected the version of the attack from the air. In theory, this could mean the presence of both an attack from the ground and an attack from the air. This version is very unlikely, but it could explain such a rapid destruction of the aircraft.

By the way, we would not at all take on faith any statements of the commission of inquiry. So, for example, immediately after the disaster, the information was different: the last reliable data was transmitted by the plane's transponder at 16:18 local time over Horlivka, after which reliable information ceased to flow and was finally lost at 16:20.

This means that our version of the plane crash receives additional confirmation for a longer time. But this is too inconvenient for the Ukrainian side, because the whole version with Snow is crumbling! If, however, these data are correct, then the likely picture of the incident should be changed: over Gorlovka, the Boeing was fired at from a cannon in the cockpit by a military aircraft, and then was finished off from the Buk air defense missile system in the Zaroshchenskoye area.

Traces of an attack by a military aircraft.

However, the version of the missile launched by a military aircraft is still not ruled out. For example, like this:

The famous collage in which a military plane shot down a Boeing at 4:19 p.m. local time is most likely fake.

In particular, the collage claims to be a snapshot from space, but uses Google maps from 2012, and the time is incorrect (UTC 1:19 instead of UTC 13:19). However, many perceived it as a deliberate stuffing in order to hint to the States that we know everything.

7. Was the Boeing shot down at all?

There are versions that there was no disaster at all, and the previously prepared wreckage was dropped from a transport plane. This version was presented by Yuri Mukhin. The author convincingly, using photographic material, proves: on the wreckage we see traces of the work of the tool - the hydraulic shears. Some of the wreckage actually contains cuts that could not have occurred in a disaster of this kind. In addition, all the wreckage of the aircraft is approximately the same size, as if pre-cut into pieces that are convenient for transportation by transport aircraft. In accidents of this kind, large pieces are always contained, this is ensured by sufficiently strong materials from which the aircraft is made.

However, the edition New Straits Times tried to explain the presence of many pieces of approximately the same size by constructing a model of the destruction of the aircraft:

Nevertheless, since contradictions in the official version of the incident are visible to the naked eye, one can believe in any version, even the most fantastic, since it provides at least some explanation of the events - something that is not in the official conclusion of the commission.

8. The Commission has not provided information to the public for too long.

There is too little meaningful information in the Commission's Report.

There is no exact flight route - even a year after the accident, it has not been made public. Still would! It is not difficult to guess how many questions there will be about this "exact route".

There is no protocol for conversations in the cockpit. At first, there was so much talk about the fact that the last voice on the recording did not belong to the pilots. Everyone was intrigued. Today we have only radio and telephone communications with dispatchers. The Report states that the Commission has 30 minutes of perfectly clear notes, which abruptly end at 16: 20.03. Nothing interesting, says the Commission, is not there. But what about the intrigue? There is a hypothesis - the recordings are interrupted earlier, and the last voice on the air on behalf of MH17 may be from another device. But they promised to provide the records a year ago. Was it really that difficult?

There is no information about what traces of damaging elements were found on the plane, in the bodies. Chemical analyzes of the debris in the affected area were not sampled.

9. Why did the Commission refuse to deliver all the aircraft wreckage to the investigation site?

This fact is very strange. In conditions of complete confusion of the case, do not use the opportunity to obtain all possible information - it's criminal... This fact indicates that the commission is not interested in the investigation.

10. The plane was flying very strange.

The maximum cruising speed of the Boeing 777 is 905 km / h, while it should be taken into account that the aircraft flew with almost full fuel supply, which increased its mass. Why exceed cruising speed, because it is very uneconomical? There is clearly no question of the airline's impressive financial results, the economy mode is very tough. Boeing 777s usually fly much slower.

The plane left the transport corridor, and the dispatchers decided to ask him to return there. If you think about a conversation with dispatchers, then it gives a lot of ground for doubts about the adequacy of the situation. The conversation between Dnepropetrovsk and MH17 begins with an exchange of pleasantries at 16:08 local time. After that, for 12 minutes, Dnepropetrovsk does not communicate with the plane at all.

All this time, flight MH17 does not pass in the transport corridor, it goes to a dangerous rapprochement with the other two aircraft. Additional tension is provided by flight height restrictions, which greatly narrow the air corridor. Why didn't the Dnepropetrovsk dispatchers themselves send the plane back to the corridor? We see only two reasons - they didn't need it, or the plane had already been attacked by that time.

Protocol of conversations with dispatchers.

The transport corridor was very heavily loaded, and the maneuver to the north looks highly unjustified.

In our opinion, the information presented in this article confirms: the whole picture of the disaster from beginning to end is deliberate performance Western provocateurs, as well as all the events of the "color revolution" called "Euromaidan".

Witness: Malaysian Boeing 777 was shot down by a Ukrainian attack aircraft

Donetsk, Torez. Downed Boeing-777, with my own eyes. Autumn 2014

MH17: rejected flight

More detailed and a variety of information about the events taking place in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of our beautiful planet, can be obtained at Internet Conferences, constantly held on the website "Keys of Knowledge". All Conferences are open and completely free... We invite all those waking up and interested ...

On July 17, 2014, five years ago, in the east of the Donetsk region, an aircraft crash occurred. The Boeing 777-200ER of the Malaysian airline Malaysia Airlines followed the Amsterdam - Kuala Lumpur route. In 2 hours and 49 minutes after takeoff, the plane was shot down by a missile fired from a Buk air defense system. The plane crash killed all 298 people on board: 283 passengers and 15 crew members. It has not yet been established who shot down the Malaysian airliner.

Airplane, crew and passengers

The Boeing 777-200ER was built at Boeing's Everett, Washington, USA in 1997. On July 29 of the same year, it was transferred to the Malaysian airline Malaysia Airlines. Therefore, the crew of the aircraft was represented by citizens of Malaysia.

By the time of the crash, the plane had already flown for seventeen years, completed 11 434 take-off-landing cycles, and had flown 75 322 hours. The airliner last underwent technical inspection on July 11, 2014, but it did not reveal any problems in the operation of the aircraft.

On July 16, 2014, the plane operated the daily flight MH16 Kuala Lumpur - Amsterdam, arriving at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol at 04:23. At 10:14 am the plane began its return flight MH17 Amsterdam - Kuala Lumpur and at 10:31 am it took off from the runway at Schiphol Airport. They had to fly, among other things, over the territory of Ukraine, where by this time the civil war in Donbass was already in full swing.

The total crew of the aircraft consisted of 15 people. The commander of the main crew of the aircraft was 44-year-old Eugene Cho Jin Leong, the co-pilot was 26-year-old Muhammad Firdaus Abdul Rahim. The replacement crew was commanded by 49-year-old Van Amran Van Hassin, the co-pilot was 29-year-old Ahmad Hakimi Hanapi. They were all experienced pilots with many thousands of hours flown. In addition, there were 11 flight attendants on the plane - 3 stewards and 8 flight attendants - all of whom were also citizens of Malaysia.

This ill-fated flight on the "Boeing" flew 283 passengers. Most of the passengers were Dutch citizens as the plane took off from Amsterdam. In addition to the Dutch, the Boeing flew citizens of Malaysia, Australia, Indonesia, Great Britain, Germany, Belgium, the Philippines, Canada, Romania and New Zealand.

Tragedy in the sky over Donbass

At 13:20 UTC, the plane, which by that time was flying over the eastern part of Donbass, was shot down by a rocket. Its warhead exploded to the left of the aircraft, in the cockpit area, after which the aircraft began to disintegrate in the air. The cockpit and half of the business class cabin almost immediately came off and fell to the ground, and the rest of the aircraft was in the air for some time, flying another 8.5 kilometers to the east. From the moment of defeat and until the last parts of the plane fell to the ground, only about one and a half minutes passed.

The plane, or rather its wreckage, fell near the village of Grabovo in the vicinity of the town of Torez, Donetsk region. The wreckage was scattered over an area with a total area of ​​more than 15 square kilometers. All people on board the plane were killed.

In terms of the number of deaths, the disaster in the Donetsk region became the largest after the events of September 11, 2001. She also entered the top ten largest aircraft accidents in the entire aeronautics.

The National Bureau of Investigation of Aviation Accidents and Incidents with Civil Aircraft of Ukraine received information about the disappearance from the radar screens of a Boeing 777-200 aircraft with registration number 9M-MRD on the morning of July 18, 2014. Notices of the incident were sent to Malaysia as the country of registration and operation of Boeing, the United States of America as the country - the developer, as well as the Netherlands and Australia, whose citizens were killed as a result of the plane crash.

Exploration work began on the ground. Since the plane crashed in an area controlled by Donetsk militias, the leadership of the Donetsk People's Republic allowed Ukrainian specialists to participate in the search operation.

On July 21, 2014, a train with the bodies of 282 dead left the Torez railway station for Kharkiv. It was decided to carry out the procedure for identifying the bodies of the dead in the Netherlands. Another 16 bodies were under the rubble of the fuselage and were removed only after the entire search operation was completed. The Netherlands took the lead in investigating all the circumstances of the tragedy. The flight recorders were handed over by representatives of the DPR to the Malaysian authorities, and they, in turn, handed them over to the Netherlands.

The liner was shot down by a rocket

The investigation of all the circumstances of the disaster took over a year. Initially, different versions of what happened were put forward, but in the end the final conclusion was made - the plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. On October 13, 2015, the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) presented the final version of the investigation into the circumstances of the disaster. Analysis of the aircraft wreckage and fragments recovered from the bodies of passengers and crew members of the airliner showed that the aircraft was shot down by a missile with a 9N314M warhead. Such warheads are equipped with 9M38 and 9M38M1 missiles. These missiles are used in the Buk, Buk-M1 and Buk-M1-2 anti-aircraft missile systems.

In the second part of the report, it was concluded that the Ukrainian services responsible for air traffic management did not adequately take into account all the risks that could accompany the flight of a civilian aircraft over the combat zone in Donbas.

The results of the investigation caused a negative reaction in both Ukraine and Russia. President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko hastened to refute the accusations against the Ukrainian air services, stressing that they already closed the airspace to an altitude of 9725 meters and did not assume that it was dangerous to fly above this mark either.

In the Russian Federation, the results of the Dutch investigation were considered biased and biased. Information was published that the missile was launched from the territory that was at that moment under the control not of the DPR militias, but of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Deputy Head of the Federal Air Transport Agency Oleg Storchevoy, speaking at a press conference on October 14, 2015, called the report of the Dutch side fabricated, made in "the technique of fitting facts to predetermined conclusions."

On January 14, 2016, they sent a letter to the Dutch Security Council criticizing the report, but the Dutch authorities replied that this letter did not contain any new or valuable information. Meanwhile, almost from the very beginning of the investigation, the fact that Malaysia was admitted to the results of the investigation only a few months later could not but arouse suspicion. But Malaysia was the country of registration and operation of the crashed plane, and both the crew and a significant part of the passengers were citizens of this country.

In turn, the United States and the EU countries fully supported the report of the Netherlands, since it perfectly fit into their paradigm of attitude towards Russia as a country that allegedly unleashed a war in Donbas and poses a threat to both Ukraine and the world as a whole.

The Dutch Foreign Ministry and the Australian Foreign Ministry have officially blamed Russia for the disaster. Formed after the disaster, the international Joint Investigation Team (JIT), which included representatives of the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Ukraine (only in the fall of 2014 Malaysia was admitted to it), said that the liner was shot down by a missile that belonged to the 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade of the RF Armed Forces, stationed in the Kursk region. But of course, there was no real evidence of this.

As for Ukraine, its president, Petro Poroshenko, almost immediately after the disaster, accused the Donbass militias and the Russian special services of involvement in it. The Security Service of Ukraine opened a criminal case in connection with the incident under Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (act of terrorism). Naturally, the West immediately took advantage of the catastrophe in Donbass to impose additional economic sanctions against the Russian Federation.

In turn, Alexander Borodai, who was then the chairman of the government of the DPR, said that the militia did not have such anti-aircraft missile systems in service with which it would be possible to shoot down such a high-flying plane.

The representative of the Russian Defense Ministry, Major General Igor Konashenkov, said that the rocket that hit the liner really was made on the territory of modern Russia, but back in Soviet times, and after the collapse of the USSR, the rocket ended up on the territory of Ukraine. Russian anti-aircraft missile systems "Buk-M1-2", according to a representative of the Ministry of Defense, the border between the Russian Federation and Ukraine did not cross.

Five years later. West continues to blame Russia, Malaysia doubts

In June 2019, it became known that the Ukrainian side had also appointed "suspects" in organizing a missile strike on the liner. These are Igor Girkin (Strelkov), who at that time held the post of Minister of Defense of the Donetsk Republic, Sergei Dubinsky, who headed the intelligence of the DPR, the commander of the intelligence unit of the GRU DPR, Leonid Kharchenko, and Lieutenant Colonel of the Russian Army Oleg Pulatov.

All of the above, except for Kharchenko, are citizens of the Russian Federation. At the same time, information appeared that the Ukrainian authorities would not demand the extradition of the listed citizens, and this fact in itself raises big questions. In fact, Kiev is completely unprofitable for a public trial of those who were “appointed” in Ukraine as the perpetrators of the tragedy. After all, any legal proceedings can shed light on the true reasons for the crash of the liner. No wonder the Dutch authorities still do not agree to publish the results of the investigation into the disaster.

The position of the Malaysian leadership is very interesting in this context. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad (pictured) said in June 2019 that Malaysia is very disappointed with attempts by Western countries to place all the blame for what happened on the Russian Federation and use the disaster for political purposes.

According to the Prime Minister of Malaysia, until now the world has only "rumors" about the alleged involvement of Russia in this tragic event. As for the evidence, the West does not provide it, but accusations against Moscow were rained down even before the investigation of all the circumstances of the disaster began.

They blame Russia, but where is the evidence? We know that the missile that shot down the plane was of a Russian type, but it could also have been made in Ukraine. It looks like the idea was centered around trying to put the blame on the Russians,

- said the Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir Mohammad.

These words of the head of government of the country that owned the downed Boeing, and more than all other countries, is interested in an objective investigation of the incident, are very indicative, as well as the fact that Malaysia is still not allowed to decode the plane's black boxes.

It is profitable for the West to present Russia as the direct culprit of the catastrophe, and for this, Amsterdam, Brussels, Washington, London are ready to do anything, including outright falsification of evidence and suppression of facts.

A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777, flying flight MH-17 from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, crashed on July 17 in the Donetsk region. All 298 people on board the liner, including 85 children and 15 crew members, were killed. Most of the victims of the plane crash were Dutch nationals. Investigative measures into the Boeing crash were entrusted to the Dutch Security Council. In addition to the Netherlands, experts from the UK, Malaysia, USA, Germany, Australia, Ukraine and Russia are taking part in the investigation of the causes of the disaster.

Versions of the tragedy and preliminary report of investigators

An expert preliminary report on the causes of the crash of the airliner said the plane collapsed in flight due to "structural damage from the external effects of numerous high-energy objects," but the source of these objects has not yet been identified.

Chen: opinions about Boeing crash in Ukraine are based on lack of factsUniversity of Sydney international relations specialist Peter John Chen doubts Boeing was shot down by the Russian military. Using air defense would be criminal recklessness and not in Russia's interests, he added.

As soon as the accident became known, the Kiev authorities blamed the Donbass militia for the Boeing crash, suggesting that the plane was from a Buk anti-aircraft missile system from the territory controlled by the militias. In turn, representatives of the militia said that they did not have weapons at their disposal that could shoot down an aircraft at such a height. In addition, almost immediately after the incident, materials appeared on the pages of the Western media claiming that Russia was allegedly involved in the MH-17 plane crash.

Later, as part of a briefing by the RF Ministry of Defense, images from their satellites. According to the defense ministry, the means of objective control recorded in the afternoon of July 17 the increased activity of the Ukrainian 9S18 Kupol radar of the Buk air defense missile system - nine stations were operating. A few days before the disaster, 7 and 8 radars 9S18 worked, and since July 18, 2-3 stations worked, the department said.

Dutch experts at the crash site of the Malaysian BoeingA group of Dutch experts arrived at the crash site of the Malaysian Boeing cabin in the village of Rasypnoe in the Shakhtyorsky district of the Donetsk region, RIA Novosti correspondent reports from the scene.

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation offered the United States to publish data from American satellites in order to compare the results, but so far this has not been done.

In addition, in December, the Sunday edition of the British newspaper Times, citing a representative of the European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation (Eurocontrol), reported that the Ukrainian authorities had airspace for civil aviation, despite the recommendations of experts.

During the five months of the investigation, many expert and journalistic versions of the tragedy appeared. However, representatives of the Federal Air Transport Agency say that many of them "have nothing to do with reality", and the commission will determine "real and fake".

Investigation for 36 million euros

According to the latest data, the Netherlands for investigative measures to establish the causes of the plane crash MH-17 36 million euros.

Since the versions of the cause of the accident, which are mentioned in the preliminary conclusion of the experts, have not yet been confirmed, the commission decided to extend the investigative measures until August 2015.

Investigation progress

Experts from Great Britain, Malaysia, USA, Germany, Australia, Ukraine and Russia are taking part in clarifying the causes of the tragedy.

Currently, the Netherlands Safety Council arrives from Ukraine the remaining containers with the wreckage of the airliner. All details will be photographed, studied and classified, and their research will be carried out in a special hangar.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called on the world community to thoroughly investigate the circumstances of the disaster so that it "is not" let on the brakes, "as has already happened with the investigations of many other Ukrainian tragedies, including the shooting of civilians by snipers in Kiev in February, the bloody massacres in Odessa and Mariupol in May ".

According to media reports, some relatives of the victims are going to sue Ukraine for the fact that the country violated international law by not protecting its airspace during the hostilities. The mother of one of the victims is already in the ECHR, demanding from the Ukrainian government compensation of 800 thousand euros for manslaughter.

The family also said that Holland "failed the investigation" and accuse the investigators of failing to gather evidence and coordinate the process.

This material has nothing to do with the theme of our site. But as a patriot of Russia who understands the difference between the Fatherland and the government, I consider it my civic duty to speak out, relying on my knowledge and experience, on a very important topic - the tragic death of a passenger Boeing-777 over Donbass on July 17, 2014.

"Many people confuse two concepts:" Fatherland "and" Your Excellency "and even give preference to the latter over the first. Russian writer (1826-1889), Ryazan and Tver Vice Governors

How and why flight MH17 died

(all illustrations and videos on this page are clickable, even though sometimes messages about "files not found" appear)

Airliner B777-200 9M-MRD "Malaysia Airliers" Plane crash of flight MH17: residents of the Netherlands cannot recover from shock(TV channel Russia Today 07/18/2014). Youtube Video recording of the program "Tamantsev. Results" (aired on July 1, 2014) on the RBK TV channel. Youtube

The version about the destruction of flight MH17 by the Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft was first announced at a briefing by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on July 21, 2014, which became the Russian response to a video published by the National Security Service of Ukraine blaming separatists and Russia for the destruction of a civilian aircraft, as well as on the amateur videos that appeared on the Internet of transporting the Buk missiles with full ammunition (4 anti-aircraft guided missiles - SAM - 9M38), first from Russia to the territory controlled by the separatists, and then - an emergency return to Russia of the same installation, but already with incomplete ammunition consisting of three missiles.

The Defense Ministry briefing (video shown on the right) made the following key messages:

According to the Russian military, the Malaysian Boeing 777, having flown through Donetsk, deviated 14 kilometers north; after that he tried to return to his corridor, but did not have time;

Before the crash, the Boeing 777 began to lose speed;

The Russian Ministry of Defense has at its disposal space images showing the location of the air defense systems of the Ukrainian army in southeastern Ukraine before the Boeing disaster, according to which the Ukrainian Buk air defense systems were redeployed to Shakhtyorsk the day before;

On the day of the disaster, an air defense group of the Ukrainian armed forces was deployed near Donetsk, consisting of three or four battalions of the Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile system, and the Boeing-777 route fell within their range;

A Ukrainian military aircraft, presumably Su-25, climbed in the direction of the Malaysian Boeing was recorded; the distance between the Boeing and the Su-25 was only 3-5 kilometers; thus, a Ukrainian combat aircraft capable of carrying an R-60 air-to-air missile flew for several minutes along a civil aviation route, practically simultaneously and at the same echelon (altitude) with a passenger aircraft;

At the time of the catastrophe, another object was observed at the same mark of airspace control facilities;

At the time of the crash, an American satellite was flying over this site;

Russia did not transfer Buk missile systems and other types of weapons to the militias.

The briefing of the Russian Ministry of Defense evokes a very ambiguous impression due to the numerous inconsistencies, contradictions, distortions and evidence of the outright incompetence of the speakers. For example, in his speech, the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Lieutenant General Andrey Kartapolov, says (timecode of video briefing 13:10) about three civilian airliners in the Donetsk region, and on the diagram ("slide") of objective control data the air situation in the Donetsk region on July 17, 2014 (video briefing timecode from 12:50) depicts 4 airliners. But this, as they say, is "still flowers."

1. The video presented by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation does not contain data on the Boeing-777 maneuver of flight MH17 near Donetsk, its "departure from the highway by 14 km." The flight path before the fall corresponds to the data of the website www.flightradar24.com. 2. Boeing 777 flight MH17 followed the international route L980 between the points of mandatory reporting GANRA and TAMAK. The deviation from the axis of the route was about 8 km. 3. The air navigation points MAKAK, ABOLA and GONED indicated by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on the "air defense deployment map" as mandatory flight control points are in fact control points upon request. 4. Echelons of flight SQ351, Copenhagen - Singapore on the "air situation" - 9600 meters, do not correspond to the data on the video - level 350, altitude 10650 meters. 5. The trajectory of Boeing-777 flight MH17 on the "air map" after 17:21 does not correspond to the control data on the presented video. The aircraft did not move for an additional 20 km in a straight line, but randomly fell, splitting into several parts, as evidenced by the divided weak marks on the radar. The fall zone on the radar is extended to the left of the trajectory, its length is about 7 km. 6. Summarizing the data on the drop in the speed of Boeing-777 flight MH17 and the movement of its marks on the radar, it can be argued that the catastrophe or missile hit occurred in the period from 17:20:23 to 17:20:47 according to the radar time in the video. 7. The jump in the mark on the radar at 17:20:49 may be related to the direction of movement of the largest part of the crumbling Boeing 777 flight MH17. Its position correlates well with the possible start of destruction at 17:20:23 between the settlements of Rassypnoe and Pelageevka, with the departure of this large part to the left of the original trajectory with an average horizontal speed of about 700 km / h. Probably there was a slip on the left wing and a coup through it. 8. Fragments of Boeing-777 flight MH17 could continue after the crash point to move along the intended trajectory, which probably led the computer processing the radar signals to false tuning out of interference and fixation at 17:20:27, 17:20:33, 17:20:37 , 17:20:43 continuation of the board's movement along the route with a slight decrease in speed. 9. Makushev's arguments about observing flight MH17 at the crash site of Boeing-777 by a military aircraft are untenable, since in order to attack a civilian aircraft by 10 km, a low-rise military aircraft must rise above 5 km and become visible by civilian radars in advance, before the disaster and the change in the trajectory of a civilian aircraft. And the second mark mentioned by Makushev on the radar is observed only from 17:20:47. At this moment, both marks suddenly appeared at a distance of about 3.5 km from the previous one in less than 3 seconds (the speed is more than 3500 km / h, which is unrealistic), and at a distance of about 2 km to the left of the speed vector drawn by the computer radar, which indicates "Abnormal" flight mode of a civil aircraft at this point and the inability of the radar computer to correctly calculate and display the received data. In addition, the falling wreckage of the Boeing 777 also does not have secondary identification and does not respond to inquiries, and marks are left on the radar screen.[ie can be identified as newly appeared military objects, my comments - V.L.] 10. By the nature of the scattering of the detected Boeing-777 debris of flight MH17, it is obvious that the plane collapsed into numerous fragments of various sizes while still in the air. Among other things, pieces of metal sheathing have been found that have significant aerodynamic drag along with a small mass. Such debris could well have parachuted or autorotated from an altitude of 10,000 meters to an altitude of 5,000 meters for several minutes, leaving several stable marks on the radar of the Rostov zonal center. The location of the visible markers is located only in the area where the presence of the Boeing-777 flight MH17 was previously noted by the radar and never deviates from this area. 11. It must be admitted that if we take as a hypothesis the presence of a military aircraft in the crash zone of the Boeing-777, "patrolling in order to control the development of the situation," then it should have the following outstanding characteristics: a minimum speed of 60-100 km / h at altitudes above 5000 meters, with a turning radius of no more than 300 meters at the same altitudes in order to maneuver in an area of ​​2000 × 600 meters, or have sufficient thrust-to-weight ratio to perform combat turns in this small area. And also a blind idiot pilot who flies over the cloud layer for 4 minutes, trying to understand whether the falling plane has fallen, but does not attempt to approach it at a smaller distance, having descended below. 12. Despite the existing errors in the instrumentation and applied methods, the resulting trajectories of the falling debris of Boeing-777 flight MH17 are in good agreement with the points of impact of the found fragments of the aircraft.

Thus, an impartial analysis of even the data that was presented at the briefing gives a deviation of flight MH17 from the axis of the route by only 8 kilometers, which, taking into account the normalized width of the international air corridor 1 0-20 km, makes this deviation insignificant.

As you can see, the route of flight MH17 actually deviated slightly to the north, but the routes on the diagram of our Ministry of Defense and on FlightRadar24 intersect only at one (!) Point, before that following in different (!) Corridors, differing by many tens of kilometers in distance and tens of degrees in azimuth, approaching only a few minutes before the disaster, and finally meeting at the place where the debris fell ... Such a discrepancy should have confused any unbiased person, including the military who drew these diagrams - after all, www.FlightRadar24.com is always at hand , and only for mobile gadgets (tablets and smartphones) it has three (!) versions - Flightradar 24 Free, Flightradar 24 Pro and FR24 Premium (more than 6 million downloads in total!) ... However, our staff officers preferred an unrestrained flight of thought, in a fit of free creativity coloring their paper maps with felt-tip pens ... By the way, a logical question arises: if we assume the existence of a "presumably" Ukrainian Su-25 (a 4-minute unidentified object at an altitude of more than 5000 meters), then if this Su-25 is located at the point indicated on the diagram of the Ministry of Defense, and the Malaysian Boeing - on the route according to FlightRadar24, it turns out that the minimum distance between them was different than it was announced at the briefing. It seems that this steep route squiggle on the map of the Ministry of Defense appeared in the heads of the schematic designer before the briefing, when he needed to "dock" another, more southern corridor W 633, passing over Donetsk, and the point in corridor L980, at which the location of the aircraft was first determined Russian dispatchers preparing to take Boeing for escort after crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border. The erroneous corridor and the real coordinates differed significantly, and the staff hack, without hesitation, took the templates in his hands, drew a matching line, and, measuring the size of the resulting hump near the trajectory with a ruler, happily reported to his superiors, "He deviated 14 kilometers north!" It's good that the headquarters officer had a map of eastern Ukraine at hand, not East Timor or Western Sahara ... From all this, an important conclusion follows, which will be very useful to us in the future, because it explains a lot - none of the military officers of the Russian Ministry of Defense who drew and looked at these diagrams before the briefing, like the top generals who read their prepared texts in front of the cameras, even after a few days after the tragedy, they have no idea what kind of international air corridor flight MH17 was flying over eastern Ukraine. At the briefing, they were also sure that the Malaysian Boeing-777 came from the west (in corridor W 633), and not from the north-west (corridor L980), and flew over Donetsk, writing its "suspicious" squiggle in the sky. But these are people who worked in a normal environment in cozy Moscow offices and have (on demand) any information on air traffic management necessary for analysis. What then can we say about those who, on July 17 in the field, with a lack of information and the most severe time limit, made a decision (gave an order) to destroy the Malaysian Boeing ?! Both flight recorders, voice and flight data, stopped at 13:20:03.There were no reports of unforeseen situations from the aircraft. " Thus, the entire development of the catastrophe was extremely short-lived and kept within the interval of several seconds, if we count from the last negotiations between the dispatcher and the aircraft to the termination of the work of the "black boxes". The last message from the crew arrived at 13:19:56, the phrase ended at 13:19:59. The dispatcher called the plane just a second later, at 13:20:00, and spoke for five seconds, but did not receive an answer. Final conclusion based on all studied data: flight MH17 flew on a regular route L980 with minimal deviations from the flight plan, no one specifically took him anywhere, did not take him away from the air route and did not give any "commands to descend." Flight MH17 was in the cleared area at all times and followed all instructions from the air traffic controllers.. Such is the price of the words of our generals at the briefing on the corridors, deviations and other things ... But let us return to the situation room of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on July 21 for further analysis of the statements made. Let's say right away - when watching the briefing of our military sample of 2014, there is a persistent feeling of "de ja vu", especially starting with the video timecode 24:36: "... According to our calculations, from 17:06 to 17:21 Moscow time on July 17, an American spacecraft actually flew over the southeastern regions of Ukraine. This is an apparatus for an experimental space system designed to detect and track missile launches of various ranges. If the American side has images from this satellite, they would ask to provide them to the world community for detailed study. Whether it is coincidence or not, but the time of the Malaysian Boeing disaster and the time the American satellite observed the Ukrainian territory coincide". How not to recall here the report of the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Soviet Union, Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov, who also claimed on September 9, 1983 that the South Korean passenger plane Boeing 747 shot down on September 1 over southern Sakhalin was " a US reconnaissance provocation, synchronized in time with the passage of an American spy satellite"! One detail draws attention - the type of American satellite is called ( "experimental space system apparatus") and indicates its purpose ( "for detecting and tracking missile launches of various ranges"), but even despite the statement of its passage (" really flew") the satellite itself, its designation or name is not called - why? If we know - what prevents to name it, is it not our satellite, but an American one? But not everything is so simple - searching for an answer to these questions, i.e. of the American reconnaissance satellite, which flew (as we will see, the word "allegedly" is quite appropriate here) over the Donetsk region at the time of the death of the Malaysian Boeing, lead to the idea of ​​the desire of our military to "put a shadow on the fence", simultaneously trying to obtain information about one of the most American satellites. Only satellites of the American two-component (two-level) integrated system for the early detection of ballistic missile launches are suitable for the description given at the briefing. SBIRS ( Space-Based Infrared System - space-based infrared system). This system has been deployed since mid-2006 and should replace the old DSP system, which has provided early warning functions for ICBM launches since 1970. In contrast to the DSP system, whose satellites were launched only into geostationary orbit (as of mid-2013 in six satellites worked as part of the DSP system), i.e. "hung" over certain points of the equator, the SBIRS program (which has the highest priority in the United States) provides for the creation of two echelons of specialized satellites - in high orbits (two segments: on geostationary missions with SBIRS-GEO satellites, and on highly elliptical SBIRS-HEO orbits) and in low orbits (SBIRS -Low, later renamed to STSS - Space Tracking and Surveillance system, Space Tracking and Surveillance Program). By hinting at the satellites of the SBIRS system, our military is being cunning many times over. First, this system is designed to detect ballistic missile launches and accompany their flight, which makes it possible to calculate possible points of impact of warheads and give target designation to anti-missile defense systems. We emphasize - for detection ballistic, measuring tens of meters and weighing tens of tons, and not for light anti-aircraft surface-to-air missiles measuring several meters and weighing several hundred kilograms (we are not talking about miniature air-to-air guided missiles at all). The point here is the following (and this is the second cunning of our generals) - SBIRS satellites are not scouts, they are observation devices "sharpened" for a highly specialized task - detecting the launch of large missiles by infrared (thermal) radiation of a fire torch created by powerful cruise rocket engines with thrust in many tens of tons, capable of lifting a very heavy ballistic missile. For this, SBIRS satellites are equipped with special equipment operating in the shortwave and extended mid-infrared (IR) spectrum: A scanning infrared sensor designed for detecting ballistic missiles at an early stage of flight (at this moment, the red-hot torch of rocket-propelled rocket engines reaches a length of tens of meters, which makes it possible to detect the launch of a rocket even in the atmosphere, at altitudes of more than 5 km); An accompanying IR sensor designed to track missiles and warheads out of the atmosphere, against the backdrop of cold space. There are no cameras or similar equipment that form the familiar images of the earth's surface in the visible range on board the SBIRS satellites, and the images formed by infrared sensors are very specific. But that's not all! The time of missile detection after its launch is the most important property of the missile launch warning system - the earlier its launch is detected, the more time will remain for response and countermeasures, and the more reliable its subsequent tracking will be, and its trajectory and possible target will be more accurately determined. The previous American DSP system is capable of registering a missile launch in 40-50 seconds - earlier it does not work, because for the first tens of seconds, the rocket taking off is observed against the background of the Earth. The new SBIRS system, including satellites in low orbits, with more sensitive equipment, after its full deployment will be able to detect a ballistic missile taking off within 20 seconds after launch. We emphasize here two key words - " after full deployment "(and the standard low-orbit constellation of SBIRS satellites should include 24 spacecraft), and the word" ballistic"(which, in any case, is in no way comparable to any missile capable of shooting down flight MH17). The deployment of the SBIRS system had just begun, and by the summer of 2014, only two satellites had been launched into geostationary orbit (SBIRS -GEO -1 and SBIRS -GEO-2), and only two regular low-orbit satellites (SBIRS-NEO-1 and SBIRS -H EO-2). In addition, three more STSS-ATRR technology demonstration satellites (USA-205) were launched as part of the STSS program. , STSS-Demo1 (USA-208) and STSS-Demo2 (USA-209)... Thus, by July 17, 2014, there were only seven satellites in near-Earth orbits carrying SBIRS or STSS instruments, that is, the system is still far from complete. Open sources claim that until the full deployment of the SBIRS system, the ballistic missile launch warning functions will continue to be performed by the DSP system, which detects launches of heavy missiles, as already mentioned, only 40-50 seconds after the launch, i.e. at flight altitudes above 15-20 km. It turns out that the currently available satellites of the incompletely deployed SBIRS system at the altitude of flight MH17 would hardly be able to detect the launch of not only an anti-aircraft, but even a ballistic missile. Or could it still be possible? This is especially interesting considering that after a full-scale deployment, the SBIRS system should detect the launch within 20 seconds after the launch, and the 9M38M1 anti-aircraft missile of the Buk-M1 complex has a solid-propellant engine leaving a torch visible in the infrared range just 15 -20 seconds. So how sensitive are infrared sensors on satellites cooled to cryogenic temperatures? This is the most important issue of the limit of the "vigilance" of the onboard equipment of the satellite, partly explaining the phrase of General Kartapolov: " If the American side has images from this satellite, they would ask to provide them to the world community for detailed study."In other words, show - if your satellite was, then show - did he detect the launch of the rocket or not? This is especially interesting given that on July 19, 2014, the Reuters news agency quoted US Representative to the UN Security Council Samantha Power as saying that “... Infrared sensors of the DSP geostationary missile warning system recorded the moment the airliner exploded. The data obtained shows a trail of a missile, probably SA-11, which made it possible to calculate the missile launch area near the Russian-Ukrainian border, which is under the control of pro-Russian separatists". But the Americans did not provide evidence of what was said in the form of a photograph taken! So they really have voiced data that they do not represent for reasons of secrecy, or is this a bluff? It would be useful to recall the strange statement of the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko on July 20, 2014: " We have satellite images from the rocket launch site..." Then it is clear what was said at the briefing: " If the American side has pictures ... " System video ST SS "Keeping our eye on the ball". Youtube System presentation ST SS from Northrop-Grumman Corporation. Please note - the animation shows how LEO satellites in control mode scan the earth's surface with a wide-angle infrared sensor. Youtube System video ST SS, released by Raytheon on September 19, 2003. Youtube Satellite launch STSS-Demo1 (USA-208) September 25, 2009 Youtube By the way, why " If"? Why is there some uncertainty in Kartapolov's speech: on the one hand, there is an assumption" according to our calculations", and on the other hand, the statement" really flew"? So did you fly over or not? Let's try to figure it out. All objects (larger than a few centimeters) in near-earth orbits have been discovered and cataloged. There are two observation systems in the world that form two corresponding catalogs - in the USA and Russia. Only these two countries have full-fledged national space control systems. In the United States, the orbital parameters (the so-called orbital elements, or a set of orbital elements) of all artificial satellites are cataloged by the Strategic Command, but with one feature - being publicly available, this catalog does not contain the orbital elements of some of the most secret American satellites. In Russia, a similar Main Catalog of Space Objects is handled by the National Space Control System (SKKP), which is part of the Space Forces, which makes our catalog of space objects absolutely secret. There is also the so-called worldwide network of observers (trekkers), uniting amateurs-enthusiasts equipped with telescopes from all over the world and headed by the famous "satellite catcher" Ted Molchan. This worldwide network is mainly engaged in the fact that its observations quite successfully supplement the catalog of US strategic command with satellites with "missing" orbital elements. So, returning to the satellites " an experimental space system designed to detect and track missile launches of various ranges"SBIRS - today the parameters of the orbits of all these satellites are known in the public domain (we lower geostationary satellites, because their orbital plane coincides with the plane of the earth's equator, and therefore they never fly over Ukraine), but with one caveat - at the time of the tragedy, they ". True, there is information that the SBIRS sets of equipment can (as a "passing cargo") be installed on other satellites with suitable orbital parameters. Thus, the exact elements of the orbit of these satellites are unknown, our catalog is generally closed, and the amateur network has not updated this data. Well, nothing is really known about the presence of sets of reconnaissance equipment on other satellites. In other words, on the basis of open data, confirm or deny the fact of the flight of low-orbit STSS satellites over the scene of the tragedy impossible... This can only be done by the Americans, who know the real parameters of the orbits of their satellites, or the Russian SKKP, which does not publish any data at all. And now the question is - why did we not name this American SBIRS satellite at the briefing? Are we not sure exactly? After all, if we are sure, then we could have named the satellite, having shown the Americans that the parameters of its orbit are for us the "Punchinelle's secret". But if we are not sure, then the phrase " would ask to provide images from this satellite"is nothing more than a call for the Americans to voluntarily declassify its orbital elements. It seems that the orbital parameters of all American satellites of the SBIRS system are still known to our SKKP - it follows that Marshal Ogarkov for 31 years was more honest than Lieutenant General Kartapolov ... Although ... another explanation is possible - none of the SBIRS satellites really did not fly over Ukraine during the tragedy of flight MH17, and we know this, but we publicly declare the opposite, because we are sure that the Americans will still be silent, since any exact information on the current orbit of these satellites is secret. On July 25, 2014, the Americans answered Andrey Kartapolov in the words of the US State Department spokesman Marie Harf (at a briefing for foreign journalists in Washington) as follows: “ We have already circulated our assessment, we have announced as much information as possible at the moment. Everything that we were able to declassify and what is the basis of this assessment. And we continue to work to announce more. <…> We have circulated a photograph of the trajectory of this rocket. It is based on classified information, and we cannot explain how we know this.<…> We know who has been supporting the separatists for many months. We know that without the direct support of the Russian government, these separatists would not have been able to be in eastern Ukraine at all and do what they are doing.<…> Russia did circulate a map showing the alleged locations of the SA-11 batteries within reach of the crash site - we are convinced that this information is incorrect. We have information that the nearest Ukrainian SA-11 battery is far beyond the range of both the missile launch site and the plane crash site, i.e. within this radius, there were simply no Ukrainian SA-11s. This is our own information. Our eyes are focused on the area». At least two conclusions follow from this speech by M. Harf. First, the United States really does not represent all the information it has because of its secrecy, or pretends that it is. And, secondly, they refute the data presented at the briefing on the location of the Ukrainian Buk anti-aircraft missile systems. So, proceeding from the consideration that such an official statement by a representative of the US State Department cannot be completely unfounded, we, while remaining objective, should question both the statement of the US State Department and the information of our military regarding "three or four Ukrainian air defense missile divisions." And here, both the satellite images presented by our Ministry of Defense at its briefing, and the missing images from American satellites, already prove nothing and refute nothing: our photographs can be fake (taken at a significantly different time), and the missing American photographs really exist, but lie in secret archives. We add that some questions are possible according to our images - they could have been taken both by a reconnaissance satellite from orbit and by an unmanned aerial vehicle from a low altitude. No special "irrefutable" confirmation of their "cosmic" origin was presented at the briefing. For example, all five (the second and third out of six images are two fragments of the same image) satellite photos shown at the briefing are dated to the minute: No. 1: 07/14/2014 11:31 - Lugansk region; No. 2: 07/14/2014 11:40 - Donetsk area; No. 3: 07/14/2014 11:40 - Donetsk district No. 4: 07/17/2014 11:32 - Donetsk district №5: 07/17/2014 11:32 - Shakhtersk area (interestingly - the picture shows excellent sunny weather ...) No. 6: 07/18/2014 11:39 - Shakhtersk district What time is indicated is not known exactly. This may be Moscow summer time, but most likely - Moscow Daylight Savings Time (UHF), since all Russian spacecraft are controlled by the UHF. Then the flights on July 14 at 11:41 am UHF and on July 18 at 11:39 am UHF at an angular altitude of 78 ° and 80 °, respectively, were carried out by the Russian reconnaissance satellite Kosmos-2486 (Persona No. 2L, 39177U), i.e. he took pictures No. 2, No. 3 and No. 6, and the remaining two images were taken by the Resurs-P satellite No. 1 (07/14/2014 11:31 a.m., the height above the horizon is 59 °, and 07/17/2014 11:32 a.m. with an altitude of 5 7 °). On the one hand, ballistics confirm the authenticity of the images. But on the other hand, skeptics can always argue that the dating was applied during the subsequent processing of the images (and it is undoubted) and does not necessarily correspond to the real one, testifying only to the fact that they worked more professionally with the preparation of the images for the briefing than with the air situation diagram. Thus, covering a briefing in an information war is largely a matter of faith, not evidence ... Until now, the words of A. Kartapolov " over the southeastern regions of Ukraine really flew"We took it literally. But in fairness, we need to answer the question - were there satellites that did not fly over the area of ​​the tragedy, but could still see it from space? Of course! This area could be seen by satellitesSBIRS -GEO1 (point of "standing" above the equator 94 ° E) and SBIRS -GEO2(21 ° E) - a significant part of the Eastern Hemisphere, including Ukraine, fell into their field of vision. In addition, at the time of the death of the Boeing-777, a highly elliptical satelliteSBIRS-NEO-1 ( USA-184) was at the apogee of its trajectory at an altitude of about 39,000 km, and, being over the North Sea, "saw" the scene of events. It can also be assumed that there are not many active hostilities in the Eastern Hemisphere now, and the events in the east of Ukraine should not have been the last priority for the satellites. Let's look even wider - was it possible to see from space the area of ​​the tragedy at the specified time interval from any other American low-orbit reconnaissance satellites capable of photographing the earth's surface? The answer is yes - the area of ​​Donetsk was visible from the orbit of one of the American satellite (optical-electronic) reconnaissance satellites. USA-161 type KN-11. The strong optical telescope of this satellite looks down (into the nadir), taking pictures of the sub-satellite regions along the flight path, and can deviate to the sides (to the right and to the left) at small angles. But this time the shooting conditions were extremely unfavorable - if you look at the satellite USA-161 from Donetsk (more precisely, from the Zaroshchenskoye region, from a point with geographical coordinates 47.5900 ° N, 38.2705 ° E), then at the most favorable moment it barely rose above the horizon (elevation angle, i.e. . the elevation angle above the horizon plane did not exceed 13 ° at 17:20:39). If at this moment USA-161 If he decided to shoot the Donetsk region, it would still have failed - firstly, at such an angle, the area of ​​interest on the earth's surface would be visible almost from the edge, and secondly - any details would be indistinguishable, since it was necessary to shoot would be through the absorbing thickness of the earth's atmosphere, also viewed almost from the edge. To make it clear - at noon we cannot look at the Sun without the risk of being blind, and at sunset or sunrise, when sunlight is weakened by the entire thickness of the atmosphere along the horizon - without problems (while the absorption of sunlight is so great that the visible disk of the Sun as it approaches towards the horizon changes its color to red). Taking into account the foregoing, the KN-11 satellite was guaranteed not to be able to take pictures of the Donetsk region during the indicated time period. I will note that if the task was to synchronize the passage of the satellite USA-161 with some civilian aircraft over eastern Ukraine, it was much more convenient to do it on the previous orbit of the satellite - at 15:49:21 it rose above the crash site by an angle of 35 °, and this is already something (albeit with a serious turn in roll) ... But this is not the end of the story about the American satellite. The fact is that if we look at satellites even deeper, then for Russia this topic is "a double-edged sword." Suppose one of the three parties to the conflict in eastern Ukraine (the Kiev authorities, the separatists in the southeast, and Russia) really wanted to synchronize an event in the airspace associated with a certain flight of a civilian airliner with the flight of an American satellite over it. To do this, you need to clearly know two things - the time of flight of the selected aircraft over a certain area and a possible satellite over it. And then everything is simple. The time of flight of flight MH17 (according to the flight schedule and their support by their own dispatch services) was known only by Ukraine (drove the plane) and Russia (was preparing to take it for escort in a few minutes) as subjects of international law responsible for the safety of flights over their territories. The separatists are generally no sideways here. But the situation with the satellite is different. As already mentioned, today only two countries in the world have full-fledged space control systems, which maintain catalogs of all objects in near-earth orbits - the United States and Russia. Ukraine does not have such a service. Therefore, if we are talking about synchronizing the flight of an airplane and a satellite, then Russia was much more convenient to do this than Ukraine - Ukraine had to request from the United States secret information related to the national security of the United States itself, and Russia has everything at hand. Okay, let's suppose that Ukraine was able to synchronize flight MH17 with the passage of an American satellite, using information support from the United States. Ukraine is not the closest ally of the United States, and not even a NATO member, with whom one can start joint delicate operations, but let's say. Let all this be a joint Ukrainian-American provocation with some goals, while Ukraine is shooting down a civilian liner, and America is watching this with its companion. For all the savagery of this version, let us put ourselves in the shoes of the Americans, who decided to use their satellite to monitor the destruction of an aircraft in the atmosphere. But then, for this role, it is most effective to use an electronic reconnaissance satellite, which will be able to record the operation of various radars (Ukraine, Russia and the separatists), their frequencies and coordinates, intercept the negotiations of ground civil services and air force and air defense units, open the command and control system by intercepting radio communications and control the passage of commands, well, etc. That is why the main argument in favor of the version that on September 1, 1983, the South Korean Boeing-747 performed reconnaissance functions, was the fact of several passes over it by the American Ferret-D electronic reconnaissance satellite (by the way, this may serve as an explanation of why the Japanese dispatcher did not told the Boeing-747 crew that he was "not where it should be" - the plane was too effective to open the Soviet air defense system in the Far East for Japanese intelligence). Did any American electronic reconnaissance satellite pass over the Donetsk region at the time of interest? Yes! It would seem that this is a bull's-eye - at the time of the tragedy, a pair of NOSS 3-2 satellites was heading Cairo - Batumi - Volgograd, and their radio visibility zone was from 13:17 to 13:30 UTS (GMT), i.e. these spacecraft were able to monitor the operation of ground-based radars for three minutes before and approximately 10 minutes after the death of the aircraft. But! ... The main feature of the satellites of the military observation system for the oceans (Naval Ocean Surveillance System, NOSS) is that they are launched and operate in pairs (last third generation) or triplets (first two generations), orbiting next to each other, clearly coordinating the distance between themselves. A pair of satellites NOSS 3-2 (USA-173) A and C (2003-054A and 2003-054C) was launched on December 2, 2003 by one Atlas IIAS launch vehicle and was actively working in subsequent years, but at the time of July 17, 2014. this pair has already disintegrated (satellites A and C have diverged), which indicates the inoperability of NOSS 3-2. Could this satellite have seen anything on July 17, 2014 - the question remains open ... The next most effective in this situation are the satellites of the view reconnaissance, which form the image of the terrain along the flight path. These can be radar reconnaissance satellites, which, using onboard synthetic aperture radar equipment, can receive highly detailed images of the earth's surface, regardless of weather conditions and time of day (radio emission does not need sunlight and does not interfere with cloudiness). In extreme cases, it is possible to use satellites for photo- or optoelectronic reconnaissance, taking pictures of the earth's surface both in the visible range and in the infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum (as already mentioned USA-161) - they can get the most detailed images of the earth's surface, but if they are lucky, their effectiveness depends significantly on the time of day and cloud cover. But it is simply useless to use a ballistic missile launch detection satellite to monitor the destruction of an aircraft by an anti-aircraft missile or other interceptor at an altitude of 10 kilometers - such "synchronization" has no practical sense, the satellite, by definition, will not detect anything. This in itself suggests that there was no special synchronization of the passage of flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17 with the passage of the American SBIRS satellite. And therefore the remark of Lieutenant General A. Kartapolov " ... the time of the crash of the Malaysian Boeing, and the time of observation by the American satellite of the Ukrainian territory - coincide"was designed for the layman, no more (in parentheses, we note that all the versions that sounded at the briefing" work "only under the condition of complete idiocy of Ukraine and America). Here's an interesting story with this American satellite ... But I will continue. At the end of the briefing, the Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Lieutenant General Andrei Kartapolov, on behalf of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, said (time code of the video briefing from 26:27) the following: " In conclusion, I would like to note that the information we have provided is based on objective and reliable data from various Russian technical means, as opposed to groundless accusations against us. An example of this is the demonstration in the media of the transfer of the Buk-M1 launcher on a trailer, allegedly being carried out from Ukrainian to Russian territory. There is a clear manipulation of materials. The pictures were taken in the city of Krasnoarmeysk, which is confirmed by a banner next to the road, which indicates the address of the car dealership at 34 Dnepropetrovskaya Street. But Krasnoarmeysk itself has been under the control of the Ukrainian army since May 11. In this regard, we have a number of questions - what kind of launcher it was, where it was transported, where it is now, why it is loaded with incomplete ammunition of missiles, and when was it last launched from it. " Here we have to state with regret that if up to this point all the mistakes of the briefing could still be attributed to the haste in its preparation and the incompetence of the military involved in this "special operation" words of Lieutenant General Andrei Kartapolov " ... the information provided by us is based on objective and reliable data ", - I recall the unforgettable from the brilliant, sharp-satirical novel-feuilleton by I. Ilf and E. Petrov "The Twelve Chairs": " Ostap has suffered!" The scriptwriters of the briefing were guided by the rule formulated by the writer Yulian Semyonov in his famous novel "Seventeen Moments of Spring": " The last phrase is remembered. It is important how to get into the right conversation, but even more important is the art of getting out of a conversation.". Therefore, the entire briefing, everything said and shown on it so far was just a prelude, a lead to the most important thesis - Ukraine cannot be trusted, it is most likely to blame, and hence all its accusations against Russia in moving the Russian self-propelled missile launcher of the Buk air defense missile system to Ukrainian territory controlled by separatists, with its subsequent destruction of a passenger liner and a hasty return of this SDU back to Russia - an ineptly fabricated lie of the Ukrainian special services. But, trying to refute this accusation in the final part of his speech, Kartapolov is so, to put it mildly, wrong that this his ... And ruins the whole venture with a briefing ... Judge for yourself - a video inconvenient for Russia appeared in

May 2018, Luhansk region, border area between DPR and LPR.

Next to our house is a playground with a girl playing, and next to it sits a plump woman, her mother. The site was built by Eugene, and a plump woman was the wife of the man who once betrayed Eugene to the police. Allegedly, he sheltered the pilot of the downed Ukrainian fighter.

Yevgeny was kept in a torture chamber for several days. He does not tell what they did to him, but on his head there is a web of poorly healed scars on his damaged skull, and when he was finally taken to the hospital, his relatives at first could not even recognize him because of his completely broken face.

The neighbor who betrayed Eugene lives three houses from him. Everyone in the village knows that in fact there was no Ukrainian paratrooper and that the whole thing was in the field by the river, over which the men argued. The neighbor denies this, but the separatists showed Yevgeny his handwritten testimony even during the torture.

That is life.

Context

Vesti: Flight MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian missile

Vesti.ua 17.09.2018

EU requires Russia to plead guilty in MH17 case

Inosmi 29.06.2018

Time to reveal the truth about MH17

AgoraVox 05/25/2017

MH17: the mirror of Russian terror

UNIAN 24.06.2017

We are standing with Eugene, leaning on his car, in a picturesque fishing line, smoking and looking out into the distance the first villages of the Lugansk People's Republic.

- Eugene, do you know what can happen? For this they can take not only me, but also you and your family.

Eugene shakes off the ashes and starts the car.

- Sit down.

The disaster took place just three kilometers away. At that moment, Eugene was just repairing the riser when smoke appeared in the sky. Eugene looked in that direction and saw a huge civilian plane, which no longer had wings. The plane rotated in the air and moved directly towards them. Pieces of plating and equipment fell off the hull, and bodies of people flew with them. There was no time to run. Eugene did not move.

Then the plane crashed. Soon after Yevgeny reached the place of the fall, the entire territory was cordoned off by the Donetsk army. Only in the evening did he learn that he had to observe with his own eyes. It was the crash of a civilian plane MH17, which was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur with 298 passengers on board.

Since then, there have been many legends and inventions among the locals. That summer, their region was bombarded by Ukrainian aviation, and in people's perceptions, the perpetrators of both incidents, the bombing and the crash of a civilian plane, merged into one.

According to some, a civilian Boeing MH17 shot down a Ukrainian fighter jet. Others are sure that the bodies on the plane were not living passengers, but corpses from morgues. Allegedly, by the time of the fall, they had already decayed. Another villager said that the passports of all the victims were allegedly found on the deck, prepared in advance in a safe to make it easier to identify the victims.

In fact, these people know nothing and have not seen anything. They naively repeat the disinformation that was actively disseminated by the Russian media at that time and which was later refuted by experts.

In the memory of people who experienced tremendous fear in those months, airstrikes on their villages merge with the event that shocked the whole world on July 17, 2014. Memories are confused with propaganda, rumors and facts. Fantastic theories are born.

Grass grows and cows graze at the crash site of Boeing 777 flight MH17. We came here by forgotten field paths, which even the separatists, who still guard the main routes to this place, do not know about. In the DPR, this field refers to specially protected areas.

International experts have pinpointed the origins of the weapons and the method used to destroy the aircraft by a Buk surface-to-air missile belonging to the Russian military. The only thing left for the Donetsk authorities now is to stubbornly insist on their propaganda and not let anyone in here who could refute it with some find.

Of course, the separatists here have already carefully collected everything they could. Nearby there is a monument to the victims of the plane crash. Under it are candles and teddy bears of children who died in the accident. The toys were collected by residents of a nearby village before the soldiers confiscated them. There is nothing else left here. The field is like a field.

When I returned to Donetsk a few days later, the taxi driver who was taking me said that four years ago a civilian plane had fallen nearby. Have I heard about this? Heard.

The satisfied chauffeur started talking. When this happened, he was not far away, fulfilling the order. He was on the spot almost simultaneously with the local police, which were already building a cordon.

He stood there with the villagers for several hours and saw everything that happened. He remembers how the victims' mobile phones rang at once after their loved ones around the world learned the terrible news and, in desperate hope, tried to call those who boarded the plane in Amsterdam.

- Did you hear the phones ringing in the airplane body?

“Which building?” The taxi driver laughed. “We saw with our own eyes how our fellow countrymen stole everything they found from there: phones, tablets, money and jewelry. The ringing came from their pockets and backpacks.

The article is part of a book about Ukraine "Donbass: Wedding Room at the Voina Hotel", written by reporter Tomas Forro.

InoSMI materials contain assessments exclusively of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the InoSMI editorial board.