BMW X5
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-09-2020, 08:25 AM   #45
Captain Blood
Pirate and thief, avast
Captain Blood's Avatar
United_States
9527
Rep
12,490
Posts

Drives: 135i DCT
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Tortuga

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 135  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by flybigjet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsad1 View Post
A shoulder weapon less than a mile away is hard to detect through satalite or line of sight.
Not necessarily true.

The infra-red (IR) signature of specific enemy combatant missiles (ManPad and/or SAM) are detectable due to the distinctive chemical makeup in their propellent. Missile Warning Systems (MWS) optically observe the IR plume and electronically compare the detected signature to IR templates of known missile signatures.

Additionally, due to the aerodynamic control/design properties of SAMS/ManPads, the exhaust plume can be readily observed by an observer-- traditionally it tends to occur as a white "corkscrew" plume and will be observable throughout the entire launch/boost phase of the missile.

Another aid to identifying a short-range missile launch is a characteristic "rise and drop" exhaust plume; due to the requirement to "superelevate" the missile before launch (not all ManPads, but the SA-7 and associated variants as an example) to achieve tone-lock on the target, the missile will initially fire at a higher angle upon launching before dropping somewhat in elevation. This tends to produce a semi-circular arcing smoke pattern immediately after launch, which leads into a "corkscrew" plume as the missile guidance commands control fin deflection in an effort to intersect the target.

However, once the propellent burns out and the missile follows a true ballistic/unpowered (although not necessarily unguided) trajectory, it becomes essentially unobservable to IR sensors and the naked eye.

R.
I would be skeptical about a shoulderfired missile being the culprit. They were in Iran, not Iraq. Why would the Iranians deploy shoulder launched missiles in the heart of their own country? It was either a traditional anti air missile, or anti air artillery.
__________________
My best amp goes up to 11........
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 08:50 AM   #46
flybigjet
Remove Before Flight
flybigjet's Avatar
United_States
721
Rep
435
Posts

Drives: a light twin from Boeing.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Blood View Post
I would be skeptical about a shoulderfired missile being the culprit. They were in Iran, not Iraq. Why would the Iranians deploy shoulder launched missiles in the heart of their own country? It was either a traditional anti air missile, or anti air artillery.
Um..... not saying you're wrong, but maybe because Iran considers ManPads to be an essential aspect of their IADS (Integrated Air Defense System) network?

And as such, they're in the active inventory and well-distributed throughout the Iranian military?

I could envision a scenario (without diving into "bad actor" conspiracy theories) where a young, Iranian military grunt saw a jet, thought the "Great Satan" was attacking, and pickled off a Misagh without thinking it through.

Or, more likely, a field/squad commander got bad information of an incoming American attack and was a little "too" proactive since everyone was jittery and on a hair trigger following the initial drone strike salvo from the American's-- it could be perceived as an initial "cut the head off of the military" first strike-- leading to making poor decisions based on incomplete or incorrect information.

The "fog of war" and all that.

Is it a stretch? Sure. Could it happen? I think so.

Remember not to look at their actions through Western doctrine or thought processes. The masses were on a hysterical binge with the death of their top general by US drone strike-- members of their military won't be immune to that. And, the Iranian's have grown up with America being the "boogy man", and realizing that they're outclassed in every military capability, have developed a well-versed doctrine of asymmetrical warfare.

Their IADS (integrated air defense system) is probably about the densest in the world, and ManPads are a critical aspect of it.

I've seen the depictions of their "kill-boxes" and overlapping weapons systems-- it's not something I'd like to face going "downtown". It's NOTHING like Baghdad.

However, your thoughts on it being a traditional SAM or AAA strike have merit as well. I admit that I don't know a lot about Iranian IADS doctrine on a micro level.

But, I wouldn't discount a ManPad out of hand.

R.
Appreciate 1
      01-09-2020, 08:56 AM   #47
KingOfJericho
Major General
KingOfJericho's Avatar
United_States
1798
Rep
6,954
Posts

Drives: Yes
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CT

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2010 135i Coupe  [2.63]
Quote:
Originally Posted by flybigjet View Post
It's a little like comparing apples to carrots.

A traditional SAM is about the size of a telephone pole, weighs roughly 5000 lbs, and has significant range: About 10-15 miles laterally and about 6 miles (FL360) vertically. These are often truck or platform mounted and are launched using acquisition and tracking radar by a crew working together. Think of the Wild Weasels in Viet Nam and the Gulf War-- they would fly around at fairly high altitude "trolling" for the NVA/Iraqi's to illuminate them with their search radars, and when targeted would a) evade and b) launch an anti-radiation missile on a reciprocal to (hopefully) destroy the launch site. Said launch sites are large, are easily observable on satellite imagery, and aren't particularly mobile- at least on short notice. It's fairly obvious to see if one has launched after the fact, as the missile launcher is large enough to accommodate something the size of a telephone pole and has significant ancillary equipment (target acquisition and tracking radar, etc).

Additionally, they're usually structured into an opposing forces IADS, or Integrated Air Defense System, providing synergistic defense in conjunction with other point defenses and communication assets. Launch requires several crew members working in concert to successfully engage the target.

A ManPad (SA-7/14 for example) has much more limited range; approximately 2.5 miles laterally and up to about 8-10,000' vertically (assuming a SA-14). They're (as the term implies) man-portable and are about 5' tall or so and weigh roughly 20 lbs.

They're a much more basic design than a SAM and have a much smaller warhead, but can be deadly at low altitude as they're cheap and easily used. The actual limitation on them is battery power to the seeker/heat sensing element, but insurgents have figured out how to wire them into car batteries to increase the "scan time" in the kill box. Unlike the radar guided SAM's, they're usually infrared tracking only (proximity detection notwithstanding).

Essentially, you visually point the ManPad in the direction of the aircraft and it targets a heat signature (which doesn't always have to be the engine-- for a forward aspect shot, landing lights may provide enough heat for acquisition. Engines are always better though, providing they're not masked by the wing). Once you have good "tone" (indicating lock-on), you elevate and fire. They're cheap, easily portable and easy to learn how to use by one person (e.g. with less than five minutes of training, I simulated a hard kill against a cargo jet at traffic pattern altitude using a SA-14, as confirmed by computer modeling.)

Detection and defeat is as I posted above-- usually flares for an IR threat. Said flares can be fired either manually or automatically, depending on how the system is configured. Effectiveness of flares is very dependent on the type of missile-- i.e. they have good effectiveness on some, but much less so on later generations due to IR CCM (counter-countermeasures) on the warhead seeker (i.e. the missile's smart enough to know how to differentiate from a heat source such as an engine and a heat source such as a flare and will stay locked onto the engine regardless of flares fired).

After the fact, a ManPad launch is extremely difficult to trace, as all that's left is a tube roughly five feet long that can be literally disposed of on the side of the road.

Bear in mind that very few civilian aircraft have IR/anti-missile detection systems, much less radar alert warning (RAW) or countermeasure capability (something like AF One notwithstanding)-- it's not something that is usually installed on commercial aircraft and civilian pilots are untrained in missile countermeasure/defeat actions.

For me personally? To kill a soft civilian target (i.e. a commercial B-737) at low altitude, a ManPad would be the weapon of choice. Even without installed countermeasures, if observed, the ManPad *could* still be be defeated, but that would assume immediate visual observation of the missile by the pilots and immediate and aggressive maneuvering of the aircraft to defeat the threat. Training and proficiency in the specific countermeasure maneuvers isn't something that a civilian pilot would have, nor would they be expecting (or be prepared) to execute sudden aggressive maneuvers at low altitude if they did visually acquire the threat.

There are additional tactics that can be used to defeat a ManPad threat, but they're something that a combat crew would use on takeoff/landing-- not something that a civilian crew would have any knowledge or training in.

So, long answer to short question? A ManPad launch would be *far* easier to hide after the fact--- due to portability, size, and the fact that it could be fired by a single person.

While dated (and slightly off topic), this is an interesting read about Iranian IADS capability:

https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Iran...eployment.html

Note that all information contained above, while perhaps not commonly known, is unclassified and is of a general nature concerning SAM/ManPad and CM/CCM capabilities and techniques.
__________________
The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bimmerpost.

2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee High Altitude Hemi | 2010 S4 Sold | 2010 BMW 135i Retired | 2006 Lotus Exige Sold
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:14 AM   #48
SoCalS2k
Major
SoCalS2k's Avatar
387
Rep
1,023
Posts

Drives: S2K!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2001 Honda S2k  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Blood View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by flybigjet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsad1 View Post
A shoulder weapon less than a mile away is hard to detect through satalite or line of sight.
Not necessarily true.

The infra-red (IR) signature of specific enemy combatant missiles (ManPad and/or SAM) are detectable due to the distinctive chemical makeup in their propellent. Missile Warning Systems (MWS) optically observe the IR plume and electronically compare the detected signature to IR templates of known missile signatures.

Additionally, due to the aerodynamic control/design properties of SAMS/ManPads, the exhaust plume can be readily observed by an observer-- traditionally it tends to occur as a white "corkscrew" plume and will be observable throughout the entire launch/boost phase of the missile.

Another aid to identifying a short-range missile launch is a characteristic "rise and drop" exhaust plume; due to the requirement to "superelevate" the missile before launch (not all ManPads, but the SA-7 and associated variants as an example) to achieve tone-lock on the target, the missile will initially fire at a higher angle upon launching before dropping somewhat in elevation. This tends to produce a semi-circular arcing smoke pattern immediately after launch, which leads into a "corkscrew" plume as the missile guidance commands control fin deflection in an effort to intersect the target.

However, once the propellent burns out and the missile follows a true ballistic/unpowered (although not necessarily unguided) trajectory, it becomes essentially unobservable to IR sensors and the naked eye.

R.
I would be skeptical about a shoulderfired missile being the culprit. They were in Iran, not Iraq. Why would the Iranians deploy shoulder launched missiles in the heart of their own country? It was either a traditional anti air missile, or anti air artillery.
Or why doesn't anyone say the obvious that everyone here is scare to say?

That some anti Iran group maybee the same ppl who were killing scientists a few years ago or were sabotaging missles and rockets a few years ago did this covertly. That makes much more sense.

It seems like if Iran wanted to bring a plane of their own ppl down for who knows what reason they could easily do it with their own air defense stuff. Why would they get some random guy to secretly shoot at a plan leaving their own airport filled with their own ppl. If they didn't want that plane to go they could also more easily deny the plane right to take off.

But for sure this was not a random mechanical problem I can't believe in that co incidence
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:17 AM   #49
flybigjet
Remove Before Flight
flybigjet's Avatar
United_States
721
Rep
435
Posts

Drives: a light twin from Boeing.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalS2k View Post
Or why doesn't anyone say the obvious that everyone here is scare to say?

That some anti Iran group maybee the same ppl who were killing scientists a few years ago or were sabotaging missles and rockets a few years ago did this covertly. That makes much more sense.

It seems like if Iran wanted to bring a plane of their own ppl down for who knows what reason they could easily do it with their own air defense stuff. Why would they get some random guy to secretly shoot at a plan leaving their own airport filled with their own ppl. If they didn't want that plane to go they could also more easily deny the plane right to take off.

But for sure this was not a random mechanical problem I can't believe in that co incidence
See previous statement about not diving into "bad actor" conspiracy theories.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:19 AM   #50
Conissah
Captain
Conissah's Avatar
883
Rep
793
Posts

Drives: 2020 BMW M2C
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Charlotte, NC

iTrader: (0)

Weren't the engines on this particular plane considered the most "reliable" engines on modern planes? AFAIK, if this were a failure, it would have been the first one, no?
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:20 AM   #51
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
6609
Rep
7,198
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 S5 SB 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by G35POPPEDMYCHERRY View Post
this will be more of a mystery MH370
Uh, no it won't.
Appreciate 1
      01-09-2020, 09:25 AM   #52
flybigjet
Remove Before Flight
flybigjet's Avatar
United_States
721
Rep
435
Posts

Drives: a light twin from Boeing.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conissah View Post
Weren't the engines on this particular plane considered the most "reliable" engines on modern planes? AFAIK, if this were a failure, it would have been the first one, no?
Standard, garden variety CFM-56-7's, I think?

It's been around a fair while and is on a large variety of aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFM_In...M56#Boeing_737

Certainly not the first time one has failed, but they are extremely reliable.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:27 AM   #53
G35POPPEDMYCHERRY
Colonel
G35POPPEDMYCHERRY's Avatar
No_Country
2409
Rep
2,724
Posts

Drives: Totaled Toyota Celica :((
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Trenton, NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Uh, no it won't.
alright what happened then?
Appreciate 1
Humdizzle1005.50

      01-09-2020, 09:30 AM   #54
Captain Blood
Pirate and thief, avast
Captain Blood's Avatar
United_States
9527
Rep
12,490
Posts

Drives: 135i DCT
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Tortuga

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 135  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by flybigjet View Post
Standard, garden variety CFM-56-7's, I think?

It's been around a fair while and is on a large variety of aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFM_In...M56#Boeing_737

Certainly not the first time one has failed, but they are extremely reliable.
They don't fail on takeoff on brand new airplanes. Usually if its a fanblade issue, its from wear. Except when these planes first came out, when they hadn't been tested properly (See Midlands 737-400 crash).
__________________
My best amp goes up to 11........
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:31 AM   #55
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
6609
Rep
7,198
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 S5 SB 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by G35POPPEDMYCHERRY View Post
alright what happened then?
C'mon seriously? In this instance you have video and the actual plane/pics etc. And most likely the US will have radar data from surveillance platforms in the area. There is a ton more evidence to work with, especially if somehow somebody outside of Iran gets access to the black boxes (if unaltered etc).

In short, you have a shit ton of evidence in this situation.

I've avoided your comments on purpose on the poly sci section, but this one I felt like I had to respond to.

Last edited by minn19; 01-09-2020 at 09:44 AM..
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:32 AM   #56
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9059
Rep
8,038
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

I'm curious about the black boxes and Iran's statement (did they really say that?) that they would never be released to the USA.. Is it standard procedure to send ALL crashed boxes to NTSB in the USA? Or are there other countries in the world who have similar capabilities to determine what the boxes recorded?
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:32 AM   #57
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
6609
Rep
7,198
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 S5 SB 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by flybigjet View Post
Standard, garden variety CFM-56-7's, I think?

It's been around a fair while and is on a large variety of aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFM_In...M56#Boeing_737

Certainly not the first time one has failed, but they are extremely reliable.
And a single engine failure rarely brings down a twin engine airliner.
Appreciate 2
      01-09-2020, 09:34 AM   #58
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
6609
Rep
7,198
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 S5 SB 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
I'm curious about the black boxes and Iran's statement (did they really say that?) that they would never be released to the USA.. Is it standard procedure to send ALL crashed boxes to NTSB in the USA? Or are there other countries in the world who have similar capabilities to determine what the boxes recorded?
Many many others do, Iran does as well. They aren't complicated pieces of tech. If they sent it anywhere my guess would be Russia first then France or Germany. But, if they are hiding something they obviously aren't going anyway without major outside pressure.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:37 AM   #59
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
UncleWede's Avatar
United_States
9059
Rep
8,038
Posts

Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Many many others do, Iran does as well. They aren't complicated pieces of tech. If they sent it anywhere my guess would be Russia first then France or Germany. But, if they are hiding something they obviously aren't going anyway without major outside pressure.
Playing devil's advocate (because US Great Satan) would there be somewhat legitimate fear by the Iranian government that the data would be "manipulated" to support the US-based story?

<sarcasm>Especially since Orange-man BAD!</sarcasm>
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:38 AM   #60
dsad1
Colonel
1002
Rep
2,150
Posts

Drives: car
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: United States

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Blood View Post
I would be skeptical about a shoulderfired missile being the culprit. They were in Iran, not Iraq. Why would the Iranians deploy shoulder launched missiles in the heart of their own country? It was either a traditional anti air missile, or anti air artillery.
Flybigjet, could probably answer this. But I would guess an anti air missile or artillery from further away would be detectable by foreign radar or satallite.

If you were trying to hide the takedown, you would use something that would A. be harder to detect and B. be easier to blame on others.

You couldn't blame a traditional anti air missile on a rougue terrorist group, if needed.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:43 AM   #61
minn19
Major General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
6609
Rep
7,198
Posts

Drives: 19 F150, 19 S5 SB 19 ZL1 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleWede View Post
Playing devil's advocate (because US Great Satan) would there be somewhat legitimate fear by the Iranian government that the data would be "manipulated" to support the US-based story?

<sarcasm>Especially since Orange-man BAD!</sarcasm>
From the Iranians definitely.

But, the NTSB is one of the most respected/impartial professional organizations there is and not just in the US. They truly just care about what happened and what how to prevent it from happening again. They don’t care which company or nation that will be pissed off from the report either. Just ask Egypt and some others.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:44 AM   #62
G35POPPEDMYCHERRY
Colonel
G35POPPEDMYCHERRY's Avatar
No_Country
2409
Rep
2,724
Posts

Drives: Totaled Toyota Celica :((
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Trenton, NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
C'mon seriously? In this instance you have video and the actual plane/pics etc. And most likely the US will have radar data from surveillance platforms in the area. There is a ton more evidence to work with, especially is somehow somebody outside of Iran gets access to the black boxes (if unaltered etc).

In short, you have a shit ton of evidence in this situation.

I've avoided your comments on purpose on the poly sci section, but this one I felt like I had to respond to.
fair enough. i am just saying its easy to believe whatever anyone wants to read nowadays.

why dont you respond? I don't even take sides lol.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2020, 09:46 AM   #63
Conissah
Captain
Conissah's Avatar
883
Rep
793
Posts

Drives: 2020 BMW M2C
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Charlotte, NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
And a single engine failure rarely brings down a twin engine airliner.
This is what I was referring to when I said failure, should have definitely clarified. I meant the first failure that resulted in a crash.
Appreciate 1
minn196608.50

      01-09-2020, 09:50 AM   #64
flybigjet
Remove Before Flight
flybigjet's Avatar
United_States
721
Rep
435
Posts

Drives: a light twin from Boeing.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

From the Wall Street Journal:
Boeing Jet Was on Fire Before Crash, Iran Says; Investigators Consider Hostile Act
Ukrainian officials arrive in Tehran to help determine the cause of the crash that killed 176 people

The Ukraine International Airlines flight that crashed after takeoff from Tehran was on fire before it hit the ground, Iran’s aviation regulator said, as the cause of the crash remained unclear and Ukrainian authorities considered the possibility that the plane was hit by a projectile or an explosion.

The Boeing Co. 737-800 single-aisle jet ascended to 8,000 feet before disappearing from radar and crashing, killing all 176 people on board, said Ali Abedzadeh, head of Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization, according to the state news agency. Mr. Abedzadeh said that before crashing, the plane turned around and headed back in the direction of the airport. The jet was aflame as it hit the ground and exploded, he added.

The investigation into the cause of the crash is expected to be one of the most politically thorny probes ever. Tensions are high between the U.S. and Iran over the killing of a top Iranian general. Boeing is already dealing with the fallout from the grounding of its 737 MAX fleet after two fatal crashes involving that jet.

The cause of Wednesday’s crash was unclear, and authorities in Iran and Ukraine pointed to different possible scenarios.

Iran’s minister of roads and urban development, Mohammad Eslami, said the plane suffered a technical fault. “Rumors about the incident being a terrorist attack, explosion or shooting at the plane…are not true,” he said.

A Ukraine-bound plane with more than 170 passengers and crew crashed after taking off from Tehran’s main airport.
But Ukrainian investigators were considering a number of possible versions of events. Those include a strike by an antiaircraft missile, a collision with a drone, an engine explosion or a blast inside the aircraft as a result of a terrorist attack, said Oleksiy Danilov, the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, in a Facebook post.

He didn’t mention any evidence pointing to an attack.

A Ukrainian security official cautioned that these were preliminary theories and no conclusions have been reached. “Too many things are unclear at the moment,” the official said. A spokesperson for Ukraine International Airlines declined to comment on “hypotheses.”

A spokesman for Iran’s aviation regulator couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on Mr. Danilov’s statement.

A U.S. official familiar with the matter said Wednesday that data transmitted via satellite indicated that everything was normal on the jetliner until the sudden loss of data and the fatal dive. That data suggest to some U.S. air-safety officials that there may have been some sort of hostile act, said the person, who also cautioned that it was too early to draw conclusions.

Boeing said it is in contact with Ukraine International Airlines and is ready to assist in any way.

A team of 45 Ukrainian experts and officials arrived in Tehran early Thursday and will be involved in decoding the plane’s black boxes and identifying and repatriating bodies. The team has already collected DNA samples from relatives of the victims in Ukraine.

“The priority for Ukraine is to establish the causes of the crash,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a video posted on his official Facebook page.

The crash came hours after Iran launched missile attacks on U.S. troops at two Iraqi bases in retaliation for the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani. The timing of those attacks had raised questions about whether the Ukrainian airliner was downed by a projectile.

The last high-profile shootdown of a commercial airliner occurred in eastern Ukraine in 2014, when pro-Russian separatists battling the central government downed a Malaysian plane with a surface-to-air missile. All 298 people on board the Boeing 777 died.

In response to the Iranian strikes in Iraq, and ahead of the crash, the Federal Aviation Administration said it would prohibit U.S. carriers from traveling in airspace over Iran, Iraq and the Persian Gulf. U.S. carriers don’t fly to the Persian Gulf region, but some flights skirt Iraq and Iran on the way to Asia.

Turkish Airlines and Qatar Airways flights both departed from Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport after the Iranian strikes and before the Ukraine International Airlines flight crashed, according to Flightradar24, a flight-tracking site. Since the strikes in Iraq, carriers including Air France, KLM and Qantas have said they would avoid Iranian and Iraqi airspace.

Mr. Zelensky said that he would speak by telephone with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to discuss the investigation and urged the international community to join the probe.

It isn’t clear how much access U.S. investigators will get to the crash site. Hassan Rezaifar, director general of the Bureau for Accident Investigation, said the probe would be conducted to international standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization.


That would indicate U.S. companies and entities could be involved. But Mr. Abedzadeh also told the semiofficial Mehr News Agency on Wednesday that his organization wouldn’t provide Boeing or the U.S. access to the black box.

Based on the ICAO convention, the home country of the airline and the makers of the plane and its major systems are each entitled to appoint a representative to participate in crash probes.

Canadian Foreign Minister François-Philippe Champagne spoke Wednesday night with his Iranian counterpart, Javad Zarif, and demanded that Canadian officials take part in the crash investigation and be allowed into Iran to help identify bodies, according to a summary of the conversation issued by his office. At least 63 Canadians were killed in the crash, and a total of 138 passengers were destined for Toronto, according to officials.

Canada doesn’t have formal diplomatic ties with Iran, after closing its embassy in Tehran in 2012. Foreign-policy analysts say this complicates Ottawa’s ability to participate in the probe.

Last edited by flybigjet; 01-09-2020 at 10:01 AM..
Appreciate 1
      01-09-2020, 09:55 AM   #65
anglo
Libertarian
anglo's Avatar
United_States
49673
Rep
3,601
Posts

Drives: M4
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sanctuary City

iTrader: (0)

Iran is now claiming the cockpit voice recorder is damaged. If they are not responsible why within minutes of the plane crash they claimed engine failure?
Appreciate 1
MKSixer20095.00

      01-09-2020, 10:00 AM   #66
Conissah
Captain
Conissah's Avatar
883
Rep
793
Posts

Drives: 2020 BMW M2C
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Charlotte, NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by anglo View Post
Iran is now claiming the cockpit voice recorder is damaged. If they are not responsible why within minutes of the plane crash they claimed engine failure?
Gee, golly. I can't imagine why??
Appreciate 2
MKSixer20095.00
minn196608.50

Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:33 AM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST