SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (800708)8/10/2014 11:00:12 AM
From: combjelly  Respond to of 1582685
 
I can't say that I have seen much in the way of warhead damage. But, I do have an interest in military technology and your analysis is consistent with what I understand.

Besides, what would be the motive? Russia was already doing a great job of making itself look bad. The Ukrainian military would have known that when authorities examined the wreckage they would be able to piece together what happened. And the blow back would be severe.

Nope, the most likely scenario is a Buk without the command vehicle. They weren't able to read the IFF and didn't think about the implications of it flying well above the ceiling of the military transport they thought it was.



To: Bilow who wrote (800708)8/10/2014 6:07:44 PM
From: tbolding  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1582685
 
"These are entrance and blast from a nearby warhead explosion."

1. How do fragments from a blast create perfectly round holes?

2. How does blast from a missiles create both entrance and exist holes from on the same side? Were there two missile blasts?

Thanks for your rational contribution.

Bob


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News