Malaysian airlines 777 crashed in Ukraine

[outlawal2]

I previously posted a link to Flightradar24. Isn't that exactly what you're looking for?

 

 

 

Well I guess the question is: did anyone think at all? Don't airlines have people dedicated to monitoring situations like in Ukraine so they can advise where to fly and where not to fly?

 

According to earlier posts here, some airlines have avoided the region for a while, whereas other airlines have overflown it and make the point that authorities didn't warn them.

 

So, do any airlines fly over Syria these days? Aircraft have been shot down there during the past months, and as an airliner pilot, I would outright refuse to fly a route over that country. According to Flightradar24, there are exactly 0 (commercial, transponding) flights over the country right now, but I didn't check the history. It just looks as if traffic between Europe and the Gulf region is avoiding that country like a plague, turning right around its north-eastern edge.

 

In any case, I'm puzzled that any pilot in his right mind would overfly Syria or (eastern) Ukraine, given the current situation in either country, and I'm even more puzzled that any airline would even consider not taking a detour.

 

I mean, it's not like the first Jumbos that flew right through volcanic ashes and had their engines fail. That was unexpected. But right now, we're talking about war-zones, and there's civilian air-traffic? Wow. Calling that short-sighted would be the understatement of the century.

 

Now I'd just like to point out that the frustration I'm voicing is not directed towards anyone on this forum, but rather at the authorities and the airlines. WTF were these guys thinking?!

 

I agree totally... Here in the states, airline pilots are not allowed to even TAKE OFF unless the airport they are flying to has clear weather RIGHT NOW. This in the name of safety.. And while I think that may be a bit too restrictive, flying over a known battle zone, where civilian planes have ALREADY recently been shot down is absolutely asinine...

 

ZERO excuse for that crap.. :mad:

[diveplane]

some grim pictures coming in, this downed jet on the net.... sad,

 

too extreme to post.

Edited July 18, 2014 by diveplane

[PFunk1606688187]

I previously posted a link to Flightradar24. Isn't that exactly what you're looking for?

Perhaps. I'm having a hard time figuring out if its possible to just see the general air traffic in a region at a given time in the past.

 

 

 

Well I guess the question is: did anyone think at all? Don't airlines have people dedicated to monitoring situations like in Ukraine so they can advise where to fly and where not to fly?

 

...

 

But right now, we're talking about war-zones, and there's civilian air-traffic? Wow. Calling that short-sighted would be the understatement of the century.

 

I think as the poster before you pointed out its not actually unusual and really when you look at it there are many more warzones around the world at any given time than most people realize.

 

Perhaps its an institutional complacency, but this is mostly a rare occurrence when you consider how many wars happen at once and how many aircraft must overfly them. FAA was concerned but the European equivalents weren't. Its hard to know what their thinking was, but there most certainly would have been some.

 

Its common also I think for us to react strongly to things we don't understand. I think its pretty clear almost all of us have no meaningful understanding of what happens with decision making amongst aviation institutions with respect to this kind of all too common situation, made uncommon by the outcome.

[dumgrunt]

whats coming through the media now is that a number of governments including the US and the UK had issued warnings about flying over eastern Ukraine, but only Delta airlines had heeded those warnings. both Lufthansa and Singapore airlines were in close proximity, and almost certainly within tracking range when the shootdown occurred.

 

hindsight is always clarifying.

 

the location itself seems too far away from the russian border to have been shot down by the Russian IAD, lest the extremely unlikely event that something like a grumble was involved. As one of our "experts" (Paul Dibb) put it: "this is what happens when sophisticated equipment is in unsophisticated hands". Yank ISR assets most likely know exactly what happened. the only question will be whether the Buks were captured Ukrainian, or came from "another 3rd party".

 

the western media certainly aren't pulling any punches.

[Cake]

I agree totally... Here in the states, airline pilots are not allowed to even TAKE OFF unless the airport they are flying to has clear weather RIGHT NOW.

 

We have plenty of rules in the US for airline transport, but it's certainly not that restrictive.

[Weta43]

Flying over this area was corporate recklessness of the highest order (a calculated risk to maintain a commercial edge & maximise profit) even supposedly well trained military make this sort of mistake in the heat of the moment (remember someone on the Vincennes taking downthat Iranian airliner in Iranian airspace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655), & niether side in this conflict is operating at peak efficiency.

[Yurgon]

I think as the poster before you pointed out its not actually unusual and really when you look at it there are many more warzones around the world at any given time than most people realize.

 

I've read several statements now that it's quite common to fly over war-zones and/or battlefields, but I can't quite believe it, as long as there are alternatives.

 

To put it another way: According to "Low Level Hell" and "Snake Pilot", chopper pilots in Vietnam had to coordinate with artillery batteries so that they would never fly through the arty's line of fire.

 

When I first read about that, I thought: Well, what are the odds of an artillery shell hitting a helicopter? And couldn't they just fly below the shell's path?

 

But obviously, why even risk blowing your own guys out of the sky when it's so easy to avoid it altogether?

 

I'm just having a hard time believing that, at least until yesterday, it was obviously considered safe to overfly such war-zones.

 

And if it should turn out that the aircraft crashed because of mechanical failure or there was a bomb on board or whatever, I still think it's a terribly bad idea to get close to such fighting.

 

Perhaps its an institutional complacency, but this is mostly a rare occurrence when you consider how many wars happen at once and how many aircraft must overfly them. FAA was concerned but the European equivalents weren't. Its hard to know what their thinking was, but there most certainly would have been some.

 

I sure hope so.

 

Not sure how accurate it is, but Wikipedia's List of ongoing armed conflicts looks pretty bad.

 

Then again, news of downed airplanes and helicopters are (naturally) mentioned in this part of the ED forum, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that eastern Ukraine has become a hotspot in that regard during the past couple of months. As someone in charge, I really wouldn't want to assume that everything would be fine just because airliners transmit civilian codes or just because they fly "too high".

[blackbelter]

It could be a mistake. Or a political conspiracy.

 

Either way, it is a tragedy.

 

Sadly, we can do nothing to prevent this from happening again in the future.

[Vampyre]

So, do any airlines fly over Syria these days? Aircraft have been shot down there during the past months, and as an airliner pilot, I would outright refuse to fly a route over that country.

 

In any case, I'm puzzled that any pilot in his right mind would overfly Syria or (eastern) Ukraine, given the current situation in either country, and I'm even more puzzled that any airline would even consider not taking a detour.

 

Yes, I flew out of Kuwait International on a 777 in route to Dulles in October of last year. I like to watch the progress of the flight on the headrest monitor while flying and we definitely flew over eastern Syria. When I boarded the flight I knew that was our most likely route but I also knew that it was highly unlikely that we would be shot at even over a war zone. It is not good for anyones propaganda campaign to shoot down civilian airliners.

 

Being a well traveled air corridor, all of the airlines that ply the routes that cross the Ukraine routinely had no reason to think that they would be shot at by SAM's capable of reaching the altitudes an airliner cruises at. As for criminal negligence on the part of the airlines, I really don't see a strong case for it at this time. The negligence is on the part of the SAM battery commander and his leadership who should have known that not every contact in the airspace is hostile and exercised due caution in targeting and firing on contacts. Basic weapons training teaches that a positive identification is a requirement for firing any weapon which leads me to believe that whoever was responsible for firing the missile was less than competent at his job. I agree with Scrim's Occam's Razor analysis of what transpired.

[aaron886]

I agree totally... Here in the states, airline pilots are not allowed to even TAKE OFF unless the airport they are flying to has clear weather RIGHT NOW.

 

Utter crap, get your facts straight or don't post. The US has very safe air travel, but it has literally nothing to do with this. :noexpression:

[YoYo]

SA-11 near Donietsk few days ago:

 

[dumgrunt]

Another thing people should bear in mind before leveling culpability or liability at the airlines that these particular set of circumstances are UNPRECEDENTED. The closest set of facts to these circumstances is the Vincennes-Iran Air shoot down. A couple of planes have been shot down on final or take off in Africa, airlines frequently seem to maintain services despite significant manpad threats, look at the circumstances surrounding the Air France Hijakcing in Algiers. It seems that it wasnt common knowledge that Buks had made it into the hands of the separatists, the fact that delta was one of the few if not the only carrier that avoided the airspace tells me that had specific knowledge of some sort.

 

looking at it legally since some people are throwing legalese around...

 

foreseeability - bugger all, it might seem "obvious" to some you, but since many many flights make these trips over contested airspace everyday for years makes it unforeseeable. hindsight is irrelevant.

the reasonable airliner - they were all doing it bar a certain few exceptions, and this has been a long time practice since. Clearly this will change, again hindsight is irrelevant.

 

will they pay out the familys anyway? most likely. but bear in mind the US government paid out compenstation after the Air Iran shoot down. Can't see the separatists or Moscow (if it discovered they actually supplied the weapon system) doing the same.

 

hence the fault lie with those that pulled the trigger. not the airliners as some of you assert. I actually feel sorry Malaysian Airlines, what a shit run of luck, and may well be the last nail in the coffin for them.

 

perspective seems an increasingly rare commodity.

[Flаnker]

Ukrainian SAM

[blackbelter]

SA-11 near Donietsk few days ago

 

Ukrainian SAM

 

I understand what you guys are trying to say. But at this stage, with no real information regarding the true culprit, all finger-pointing means very little.

 

It is laughable to see some journals that are widely respected trying to do the same thing. Now I am not so sure about their credibility.

[Flаnker]

I understand what you guys are trying to say. But at this stage, with no real information regarding the true culprit, all finger-pointing means very little.

 

It is laughable to see some journals that are widely respected trying to do the same thing. Now I am not so sure about their credibility.

 

Now a lot of lies....