Malaysia Airlines flight crashes in Ukraine

[Acey]

I can probably answer questions about the air traffic control aspect of this if anyone has any. I've been talking about it all day with controllers that have 20+ years of experience. Right now we're talking about the implications of possible notices suggesting commercial traffic avoid the area, but there's so many factors at play...

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Where did I "attack" anyone? Relax. Go for a walk. Your dialogue of is a little incendiary regarding all these "disgusting" "attacks".

If you think that firing missiles at Russian people and pro-Russian groups in Ukraine is not going to be viewed as the EXACT same thing as firing a rocket into Russia by Putin, then that's fine, but you'd be incorrect.

Hell, the Russian government got mad when the EU put sanctions against the rebels.

The difference between firing a rocket into Russia and firing a rocket into Ukraine to target Russians and pro-Russia rebels is a linguistic one, politically, it's the exact same thing.

I am calm. I just didn't like the pile on.
Still don't.

If you would've responded to lanny9 with some of the elements of this post instead of trying to make him look stupid it probably would've been more productive.

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Lanny9 you are actually ruining this thread because every second post is you. Let other people get a word in edgewise about something newsworthy, other than politics and Obama for christ's sake.

Is it being July 17th and MH17 a big coincidence? I don't really know. It does make me wonder (again) what the heck happened to Mh370 to disappear without a trace. What are the chances this is the second accidental (or non accidental) missile strike of a Malaysian airlines passenger jet?!?

In any case, it's really quite horrifying and unbelievable news.

Peanut, if you don't want to read my replies feel free to skip over them. I was attacked for my views and as such I backed up my opinion in a complete civil manner. When every second post was aimed at me I had to post lots to defend my views. But feel free to jump on that wagon, it seems to be the "in" thing today.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Acey

I can probably answer questions about the air traffic control aspect of this if anyone has any. I've been talking about it all day with controllers that have 20+ years of experience. Right now we're talking about the implications of possible notices suggesting commercial traffic avoid the area, but there's so many factors at play...

So this impact my flight on any way when I fly to Paris on August 3rd or return from Amsterdam on August 19th?


I know it's not crossing over Ukrainian airspace, but I'm more wondering if anyone thinks there'll be widespread disruption

[lanny9]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Where did I "attack" anyone? Relax. Go for a walk. Your dialogue of is a little incendiary regarding all these "disgusting" "attacks".

If you think that firing missiles at Russian people and pro-Russian groups in Ukraine is not going to be viewed as the EXACT same thing as firing a rocket into Russia by Putin, then that's fine, but you'd be incorrect.

Hell, the Russian government got mad when the EU put sanctions against the rebels.

The difference between firing a rocket into Russia and firing a rocket into Ukraine to target Russians and pro-Russia rebels is a linguistic one, politically, it's the exact same thing.

Sure it will be looked upon by the Russians as the same thing but by the rest of the world I don't think it will. That point seems to be lost. The world sees this for what it is a bunch of guys unhappy with their central government taking a part of a nation hostage.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

So this impact my flight on any way when I fly to Paris on August 3rd or return from Amsterdam on August 19th?

You'll be fine unless something worse happens between now and then.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by Acey

I can probably answer questions about the air traffic control aspect of this if anyone has any. I've been talking about it all day with controllers that have 20+ years of experience. Right now we're talking about the implications of possible notices suggesting commercial traffic avoid the area, but there's so many factors at play...

I was going to post something similar, more to the flight planning portion and what it could be mean to travellers side of things.

[lanny9]

Acey, is there any central agency that would have issued such a warning, by that I mean one agency that warns all airlines across the globe? If so should this plane have gone south around the storms rather than north?

[terminator]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

I was going to post something similar, more to the flight planning portion and what it could be mean to travellers side of things.

Might as well ask: I'm flying to Venice via Frankfurt tomorrow, will this have any bearing on that?

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

If you would've responded to lanny9 with some of the elements of this post instead of trying to make him look stupid it probably would've been more productive.

If that's what you felt it was, I'd argue it is the exact same thing you did in your initial response to me.

You seem to be focussing a lot on the way people are saying things. Let's get back to a content oriented discussion alright? A little less "You should be doing this, sarcasm is bad, don't pile on" and a little more on topic. lanny9 appears to be an adult, sounds like he can probably handle himself.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by lanny9

Acey, is there any central agency that would have issued such a warning, by that I mean one agency that warns all airlines across the globe? If so should this plane have gone south around the storms rather than north?

I can answer this question as well.

Eurocontrol had a warning issued as a NOTAM from what I have read. The airspace this flight was in was closed from FL320 to the ground. MH17 was flying above this at FL330. The airspace is now closed.

Quick flightplan with that airspace closed results in 30 minute longer flight.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by terminator

Might as well ask: I'm flying to Venice via Frankfurt tomorrow, will this have any bearing on that?

Quite unlikely. As long as you are not flying over this region, you will be fine. Things can always change however.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

I can answer this question as well.

Eurocontrol had a warning issued as a NOTAM from what I have read. The airspace this flight was in was closed from FL320 to the ground. MH17 was flying above this at FL330. The airspace is now closed.

Quick flightplan with that airspace closed results in 30 minute longer flight.

30 minutes becomes significant with fuel, correct?

[nik-]

####ing CP ... we have everything.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by nik-

####ing CP ... we have everything.

We need some American intelligence here. We have pointman who I'm sure works for the Russians somehow

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

30 minutes becomes significant with fuel, correct?

Probably not on a flight as long as this one was scheduled for.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

If that's what you felt it was, I'd argue it is the exact same thing you did in your initial response to me.

You seem to be focussing a lot on the way people are saying things. Let's get back to a content oriented discussion alright? A little less "You should be doing this, sarcasm is bad, don't pile on" and a little more on topic. lanny9 appears to be an adult, sounds like he can probably handle himself.

You're right. I did do the same thing. I apologize.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

I can answer this question as well.

Eurocontrol had a warning issued as a NOTAM from what I have read. The airspace this flight was in was closed from FL320 to the ground. MH17 was flying above this at FL330. The airspace is now closed.

Quick flightplan with that airspace closed results in 30 minute longer flight.

Just bringing in a different perspective...

Some of you probably know my stance on the Malaysian ruling party/government. So if you don't want to hear about this, just keep moving on.

I sincerely hope Malaysian Airline didn't decide to fly this path anyway for some cost saving fuel measure. The mentality of the "chin chai lah" (meaning, "it's ok to cut corners") is prominent in that society. Too often, government services have been cut to save cost to the detriment of the public, and this isn't some noble cause to save the country from deficit. More often than not, it is to line the pockets of the ruling party. I just HOPE the decision made was the belief that safety was a priority and not to save some fuel.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

30 minutes becomes significant with fuel, correct?

Tough to say without knowing how much fuel they took, and what their alternate plans were when they got to Kuala Lampur. Here, if your arrival airport has only one runway, or if the weather could potentially be bad, you need enough gas to try an approach and then be able to get to another field that has a runway long enough for your plane.

Originally Posted by lanny9

Acey, is there any central agency that would have issued such a warning, by that I mean one agency that warns all airlines across the globe? If so should this plane have gone south around the storms rather than north?

Sort of... but not really globally. Eurocontrol would handle the relevant NOTAM's (notice to airmen) for this flight, and they would have been easily accessible by Malaysia Airlines' dispatchers.

How it kinda works is... MH has a bunch of dispatchers sitting in a room in Kuala Lampur. One of them would be responsible for MH17. So when he comes to work he sits down and starts planning a route for the flight, taking into account NOTAM's, weather, high level winds, and a billion other factors. When he's happy with the route he's built, he sends it to the crew planning room for MH in Amsterdam. The pilot and his crew review the whole package which contains detailed route information, fuel burn, NOTAM's for every FIR (flight information region) they will go through, and weather stuff. The package is like 50 pages long. When they're all happy with it, they sign it, get fueled up, and away they go.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by TheyCallMeBruce

Just bringing in a different perspective...

Some of you probably know my stance on the Malaysian ruling party/government. So if you don't want to hear about this, just keep moving on.

I sincerely hope Malaysian Airline didn't decide to fly this path anyway for some cost saving fuel measure. The mentality of the "chin chai lah" (meaning, "it's ok to cut corners") is prominent in that society. Too often, government services have been cut to save cost to the detriment of the public, and this isn't some noble cause to save the country from deficit. More often than not, it is to line the pockets of the ruling party. I just HOPE the decision made was the belief that safety was a priority and not to save some fuel.

I'd be curious to know if other airlines have been avoiding that area. It would be another black mark if it turns out most international carriers had already modified their routes before today.