Airliner Shot Down over Ukraine

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by stormlion1

I have to ask though, don't Civilian Airliners have anything to detect a missile lock? A warning light? Anything? I know the occurrence is rare but it has happened before.

And do what with that information? Radio "Oh god we're about to be hit by a missile"? Evasion is out of the question. Forcing a missile to overshoot requires putting huge amounts of energy into a turn, dive, pitch up etc. Energy commercial jets just do not have.

[Olefin]

You can equip an aircraft with detectors and countermeasures - but it costs money to do so and it means you are hauling them instead of passengers - from what I remember El Al equipped their planes with things like chaff and flare dispensers and missile detectors - but not sure if anyone else has.

And there are things you can do - for one turn away from the missile and hope to outrun it or get out of its range - but you have to be lucky and have someone fire at you at the outside edge of the range envelope to get away with that

Basically the best protection you can give an aircraft like that is being able to overwhelmingly hit back against anyone who would shoot at them - and while we have the capability we dont have the political guts to do so.

For instance I highly doubt they would be taking potshots at airliners if the US launched a bunch of airstrikes against every ammo dump they had on the Ukranian side of the border and took out every tank and APC they had and then said the next time it will be worse.

Sounds like we may be looking at a 1995 event here from the game if Putin doesnt pull his head out of his butt and realize what he has put in motion while there is still time to stop it.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

And do what with that information? Radio "Oh god we're about to be hit by a missile"? Evasion is out of the question. Forcing a missile to overshoot requires putting huge amounts of energy into a turn, dive, pitch up etc. Energy commercial jets just do not have.

It all depends on the pilot and on how much warning he has and what the missile used is - its one thing to get out of the range of a short range missile its another to avoid what they used.

[Raellus]

Let's not dive into politics here. Really, what can the U.S. do, short of provoking a war with Russia, that it isn't already doing (a second batch of sanctions went into effect just a couple of days ago)?

It's easy for us guys over-draft-age guys safe behind our computer screens to call for stronger measures but let's be a little more sober minded here. Any threat of or application of Western military force in Ukraine will be seen by Putin as an act of war and the consequences of such could be very dire indeed. Russian military aircraft are already flying into the airspace of NATO's Baltic members on an almost daily basis and the U.S. is scrambling intercepts on average of once per day. The situation is already ripe for an "incident". The last thing anyone needs is further provocations.

For example, NATO Wild Weasels escorting commercial airliners over a non-member nation just a few kilometers from the border with a fairly bellicose Russia? Is Russia going to let that happen? Would the U.S. allow Russian combat aircraft to fly right up to the U.S.-Mexico border? It's a recipe for disaster. Is a lack of backbone in the White House really the problem? Does the U.S. need another war? Do our NATO allies? Come on. I don't think not wanting to start a war with Russia is cowardly. It's common sense. Partisan politics seems to get people to react emotionally instead of rationally.

Commercial Airliners don't have the performance specs to outrun or outmaneuver a supersonic SAM. According to reports, it took the SAM less than 30 seconds from launch to intercept, and that with the airliner at a cruising altitude between 33k-36k feet. A 777 isn't built to outrun, outturn, out climb, or out dive a guided missile.

Bottom line is that commercial airliners should not be flying over an active conflict zone, especially one where other high-flying aircraft have been shot down. Malaysia Airlines made a disastrous call allowing its aircraft to transit that area. Their excuse that it hadn't been officially declared off-limits is patently ridiculous. Considering the events of the past year, I hope MA gets sued out of existence.

Something should be done to "punish" Russia for supplying the Ukrainian separatists with military hardware. More diplomatic and economic pressure should be brought to bear on Russia to reign in the separatists. Hopefully, this latest incident will go farther in turning global public opinion against Russia's support for the separatists in East Ukraine.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Let's not dive into politics here. Really, what can the U.S. do, short of provoking a war with Russia, that it isn't already doing (a second batch of sanctions went into effect just a couple of days ago)?

It's easy for us guys over-draft-age guys safe behind our computer screens to call for stronger measures but let's be a little more sober minded here. Any threat of or application of Western military force in Ukraine will be seen by Putin as an act of war and the consequences of such could be very dire indeed. Russian military aircraft are already flying into the airspace of NATO's Baltic members on an almost daily basis and the U.S. is scrambling intercepts on average of once per day. The situation is already ripe for an "incident". The last thing anyone needs is further provocations.

For example, NATO Wild Weasels escorting commercial airliners over a non-member nation just a few kilometers from the border with a fairly bellicose Russia? Is Russia going to let that happen? Would the U.S. allow Russian combat aircraft to fly right up to the U.S.-Mexico border? It's a recipe for disaster. Is a lack of backbone in the White House really the problem? Does the U.S. need another war? Do our NATO allies? Come on. I don't think not wanting to start a war with Russia is cowardly. It's common sense. Partisan politics seems to get people to react emotionally instead of rationally.

Commercial Airliners don't have the performance specs to outrun or outmaneuver a supersonic SAM. According to reports, it took the SAM less than 30 seconds from launch to intercept, and that with the airliner at a cruising altitude between 33k-36k feet. A 777 isn't built to outrun, outturn, out climb, or out dive a guided missile.

Bottom line is that commercial airliners should not be flying over an active conflict zone, especially one where other high-flying aircraft have been shot down. Malaysia Airlines made a disastrous call allowing its aircraft to transit that area. Their excuse that it hadn't been officially declared off-limits is patently ridiculous. Considering the events of the past year, I hope MA gets sued out of existence.

Something should be done to "punish" Russia for supplying the Ukrainian separatists with military hardware. More diplomatic and economic pressure should be brought to bear on Russia to reign in the separatists. Hopefully, this latest incident will go farther in turning global public opinion against Russia's support for the separatists in East Ukraine.

Totally agree and America's doing the right thing by economically strangling Russia into conforming to international laws.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Let's not dive into politics here. Really, what can the U.S. do, short of provoking a war with Russia, that it isn't already doing (a second batch of sanctions went into effect just a couple of days ago)?

It's easy for us guys over-draft-age guys safe behind our computer screens to call for stronger measures but let's be a little more sober minded here. Any threat of or application of Western military force in Ukraine will be seen by Putin as an act of war and the consequences of such could be very dire indeed. Russian military aircraft are already flying into the airspace of NATO's Baltic members on an almost daily basis and the U.S. is scrambling intercepts on average of once per day. The situation is already ripe for an "incident". The last thing anyone needs is further provocations.

For example, NATO Wild Weasels escorting commercial airliners over a non-member nation just a few kilometers from the border with a fairly bellicose Russia? Is Russia going to let that happen? Would the U.S. allow Russian combat aircraft to fly right up to the U.S.-Mexico border? It's a recipe for disaster. Is a lack of backbone in the White House really the problem? Does the U.S. need another war? Do our NATO allies? Come on. I don't think not wanting to start a war with Russia is cowardly. It's common sense. Partisan politics seems to get people to react emotionally instead of rationally.

Commercial Airliners don't have the performance specs to outrun or outmaneuver a supersonic SAM. According to reports, it took the SAM less than 30 seconds from launch to intercept, and that with the airliner at a cruising altitude between 33k-36k feet. A 777 isn't built to outrun, outturn, out climb, or out dive a guided missile.

Bottom line is that commercial airliners should not be flying over an active conflict zone, especially one where other high-flying aircraft have been shot down. Malaysia Airlines made a disastrous call allowing its aircraft to transit that area. Their excuse that it hadn't been officially declared off-limits is patently ridiculous. Considering the events of the past year, I hope MA gets sued out of existence.

Something should be done to "punish" Russia for supplying the Ukrainian separatists with military hardware. More diplomatic and economic pressure should be brought to bear on Russia to reign in the separatists. Hopefully, this latest incident will go farther in turning global public opinion against Russia's support for the separatists in East Ukraine.

I also totally agree with the above post.

[copeab]

There is only one way to stop Russia, and it would probably fail. That is for for all the smaller countries that border it, that have territory that that Russia wants, to band together and attack Russia if Russia attacks any one of them.

Unfortunately, with Georgia out of the way and Ukraine in tatters, it's only a matter of time until Russia knocks on the doirs of Finland and Poland.

[Olefin]

I dont agree with appeasing Russia for one big reason - its never worked in the past. With anyone. In fact appeasement has usually led to wars breaking out because of mis-calculations that the other side was too weak and that they wouldnt reply this time because they didnt all the other times.

Remember Hilter kicked off Big Mistake Number Two for the Germans on the assumption that he had gotten away with it by remilitarizing the Rhineland and the Saar, built submarines and battleships in defiance of the Versailles Treaty, taken over Czechoslovakia and Austria - so why should anyone mind if he settles accounts with Poland?

Tens of millions of dead later it was pretty apparent that if people had stood up to him earlier he would have backed down big time.

And Russia has nuclear weapons - but frankly I dont think even Putin is stupid enough to actually do something that he knows will end with his homeland a radioactive wasteland in the cause of defending the right of his boyos to shoot down unarmed airliners.

In the end if you let countries act like barbarians then you get barbaric acts and lots of of them.

And economic sanctions may work in the end - but it hasnt worked against North Korea or Iran or Cuba - and I dont see the Europeans hanging tough for years, especially if the Russians decide that their natural gas and oil can better be sold to other people.

And no one wants to start a war with Russia - but frankly Teddy Roosevelt was right - talk softly but have that big stick when you need it. Economics may in the end prove to be that big stick. And in the end that did bring down the Soviet Union. We just had to stick it out for 45 years to do that to them. But we also showed them the whole time that we were ready to back up economic power with military power as well.

And its time we grew a set and actually had the guts to stand up to Putin because frankly if the British and French had done that in 1936 or 1938 we may not have had Europe look like a moonscape by 1945.

Or are we saying that any country that has atomic weapons can act like barbarians and we will let them get away with it?

[Raellus]

Olefin, what do you suggest we do? And please be more specific than "stand up to Putin". Would you be willing to spark a war with Russia to resolve the situation in East Ukraine?

[Sanjuro]

I have to ask though, don't Civilian Airliners have anything to detect a missile lock? A warning light? Anything?

Nope, nothing- not that there is anything we could do anyway. Best defence against an inbound, tracking missile is to let it get close then try and out-turn it- difficult to do in a 9G capable fighter, pretty much impossible in a 2G airliner.
My employer stopped overflying Ukraine several weeks ago, when it was advisory only.

[unkated]

Originally Posted by Olefin

I dont agree with appeasing Russia for one big reason - its never worked in the past. With anyone. In fact appeasement has usually led to wars breaking out because of mis-calculations that the other side was too weak and that they wouldnt reply this time because they didnt all the other times.

Remember Hilter kicked off Big Mistake Number Two for the Germans on the assumption that he had gotten away with it by remilitarizing the Rhineland and the Saar, built submarines and battleships in defiance of the Versailles Treaty, taken over Czechoslovakia and Austria - so why should anyone mind if he settles accounts with Poland?

Oh, good. I'm not the only one who has noticed that Putin seems to be using Hitler's 1938 Playbook. It amused me in a horrifying way when Putin was accusing the Ukraine government of being Nazis, when his Russian government was the one most emulating the Nazis in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.

Originally Posted by Olefin

And Russia has nuclear weapons - but frankly I dont think even Putin is stupid enough to actually do something that he knows will end with his homeland a radioactive wasteland in the cause of defending the right of his boyos to shoot down unarmed airliners.

<snip>

And its time we grew a set and actually had the guts to stand up to Putin because frankly if the British and French had done that in 1936 or 1938 we may not have had Europe look like a moonscape by 1945.

Or are we saying that any country that has atomic weapons can act like barbarians and we will let them get away with it?

Two points.

• In September 1938, at the time of the Sudentenland Crisis, Chamberlain met with the heads of the British military and asked if they were ready to fight a war with Germany. They told him no, they weren't, that they needed more time. With that knowledge, he went to Munich and appeased Germany. However, also in September 1938, the British military started calling up and training their army and RAF reserves, and factories started running around the clock.
  
• You always have the question with nuclear weapons how far you can push someone before they strike back. Could we threaten Putin with losing Moscow or Volgograd? Yes. Can he offer to trade it for Chicago or LA or Miami? Yes. Hmmm.

The shooting down of the Malaysia Air liner certainly ups the ante in eastern Ukraine. Is the United States (or France, Britain, German or the Netherlands) ready to send boots on the ground? I don't think so yet.

Uncle Ted