Comments by "Markus Müller" (@markusmuller6173) on "MH17 verdict: Three guilty of murder for downing Malaysian Airlines plane in 2014 | DW News" video.

According to a BBC report, uploaded 2 hours ago, "The airspace above this part of eastern Ukraine [...] had recently been restricted to 32,000 feet" - The plane was according to the description of the BBC video clip allegedly cruising at 33,000 feet over Ukraine. When fast travelling through different air masses atmospheric [pressure] influences (turbulences) can very quickly and drastically change this value displayed... Air Traffic Control, who prescribed this travel altitude, knew the danger !
5
According to a BBC report, uploaded some hours ago, "The airspace above this part of eastern Ukraine [...] had recently been restricted to 32,000 feet". - The plane was according to the description of the BBC video clip allegedly cruising at 33,000 feet over Ukraine. With an inadvertently incorrect QNH setting of the altimeter by the pilot, the aircraft perhaps flew at a prohibited altitude! Air Traffic Control, who prescribed this travel altitude, knew the danger !
4
@Aimless_Drive Congratulations ! You have just discovered what essential information is missing. The original recordings of the testimonies of those who operated the AA system are necessary for at least a reasonably fair judgment to be held. This show provided so far here also could very well be the clumsy attempt to cover up the drone deployment of a third-country.
3
@wom_Bat Another simple explanation could be: the pilot, in his mental holiday mode, simply forgot to switch the transponder to "standard sea level pressure 1013 hpa" when reaching FL 100. The active radar device of East Ukraine military then recognized an aircraft, which flew much too low. Whatever the case: In my opinion, the main issue here is inadequate airspace planning and separation by ATC ...
3
@SwingEzzZZ Also suggests that ATC is at least somewhat involved in cover-ups...
3
@Aimless_Drive Those who operated the anti-aircraft system knew perhaps back then, that the previously occurred bomb shelling from far distances was not only inflicted by Ukrainian artillery but als by ("third party") drones... Watch the latest documentaries about Itavia flight 870 (Missile strike during military operation 1980) to get an idea about what actually might have happened!
2
@jhoag56 Thanks for revealing your level of understanding.
2
@Aimless_Drive Who could seriously think I would post my statements if I didn't like them?
2
@joe8839 It's all about ATC's airspace planning and separation... The Puti-linskiy Punch and Judy show simply tries to expel the residents of East Ukraine to rob their soil resources and industrial assets. And both, the Anglo-Saxons and the Chinese hope to get the minerals (coal) from the natives as cheap as in Xinjiang and Australia.
2
@wom_Bat 1. The aircraft operator (MH) could have filed a flight plan back then that completely avoids the crisis area of Ukraine ... 2. Previously I wanted to write something quite different at this point. - That's why I probably still had the word 'transponder' in my fingers, although my previous statement of course refers to an altimeter, which measures the static ambient pressure of the outside air. However, a transponder in "Mode S" not only reports the call sign of an aircraft as in "Mode C", but also the altitude of the aircraft to ATC. You probably had the transponder codes (not modes) in mind (eg 7700 - SOS). 3. Of course it is the static ambient pressure altimeter that reports the measured altitude to the pilot, transponder and other A/C systems. All is therefore dependent on a correct QNH settings. Known issue: The QNH setting is not automatically reported (to ATC). An inadvertently incorrect QNH setting by the pilot will result in flying at an incorrect altitude and only (active radar, GPS or co-pilot altimeter) cross checks can actually detect an incorrect QNH setting. In conclusion: We can speculate a lot as to why the plane was ultimately shot down. But one thing is certain: most enemy military aircraft can easily reach an altitude of around 30,000 feet. And perhaps the guys on ground only have seen in a threatening war scenario a dot on their active radar in an altitude of about 30,000 feet flying direct towards their location.
2
@wom_Bat "a flight plan [..] that completely AVOIDS THE CRISIS AREA of Ukraine" Large drones with guided bombs squawk, which seems appropriate from a military-strategic point of view, disguise themselves electronically as civil aircraft and can easily fly at the same altitude as any commercial intercontinental flight.
2
@David-js2vp Watch the latest documentaries about Itavia flight 870 (Missile strike during military operation 1980) !
2
@wom_Bat But those who operated the AA system knew perhaps already, that the previously occurred bomb shelling from far distances was not only inflicted by Ukrainian artillery but als by ("third party") drones...
2
@David-js2vp I was merely pointing out that, from their point of view, those who operated the anti-aircraft system were probably just trying to "defend" themselves. The targeting system of their missile may have confused a targeted military drone with a real civilian aircraft (MH17). This can easily happen, especially when a military drone is trying to hide close behind a civilian aircraft.
2
@algoodmonin2172 Did you also read my other statements? I wrote in different previous comments: - Those who operated the AA system knew perhaps already, that the previously occurred bomb shelling from far distances was not only inflicted by Ukrainian artillery but als by ("third party") drones... - Perhaps the guys on ground only have seen in a threatening war scenario a dot on their active radar in an altitude of about 30,000 feet flying direct towards their location. - I was pointing out that, from their point of view, those who operated the anti-aircraft system were probably just trying to "defend" themselves. The targeting system of their missile may have confused a targeted military drone with a real civilian aircraft (MH17). This can easily happen, especially when an (ground attacking) military drone is trying to hide (itself) close behind a civilian aircraft.
2
@David-js2vp I merely pointed out that one of your comments on my display only appears under the notification bell, but not in this comment section. On top, my food for thought served to clarify the already known mode of action. The search radar head of a missile can confuse an airliner very easily with a drone like the Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton, especially when the two aircraft fly in a close formation. And surely, the Russians have probably been tracking something like the Triton for quite some time on their radar system before they launched the missile against the inbound presumably attacking drone...
2
@David-js2vp Seems to be difficult for some people, to understand what I previously wrote. Anyway: Feel free to read more about the speed of a Boeing X-45 and the self aiming radar head of a 9M38M1 missile during final approach sequence...
2
@David-js2vp Thanks for stating the alleged understanding.
2
@David-js2vp Thank you for specifying your perception preference.
2
@David-js2vp Ignoring the info-links already provided is not a virtue.
2
@Pronto Prosperous sympathy needs a different approach...
1
@David-js2vp I don't recognize too much benefit in answering the content of your comment (which was addressed direct to me about 40 minutes ago) if it is not visible to all panellists in this comment section. Old-fashioned GDR Stasi methods haven't been that much of a convincing success from a state and people's POV, right?!?
1