escalator over the hill

Buk-M1″ system is made up of 4 vehicles – An 9S47OM1 (command vehicle), SOC 9S18M1 (target detection), SDA 9A310M1 (self-propelled fire installation) and ROM 9A39M1 (loading vehicle), The “Buk-M1” is a complex, system that requires of these units to work The idea that a single vehicle ie the rocket platform can work without the command and radar unit is absurd

>>>

HOW IT WORKS

>>>

“Buk-M1” SOC 9S18M1 (target detection) vehicle scans the designated zone The target acquisition information is vectored and then directed to An 9S47OM1 (command vehicle), At this point the target is unknown together with other craft in the zone being observed.

>>>
The information is processed and calculations including timing with a goal. Target is then fixed it on the radar. Now target acquisition (target capture) is performed.

>>>

With Target capture the [bombardier] team act to prepare for launch with SDA 9A310M1 (self-propelled fire vehicle) Now coordinating all the information and all the complexities of the system a manual command given by Unit command to eliminate and focus on the target(s).

>>>

CRITICAL: A BUK IS NOT LIKE A ***GRAD (Katusha); That is stand alone!

It should also be firmly noted the Buk system in question is an 9K37-1 Buk-1 system  not a LATER  SA-17 Grizzly Buk 2

>>>

A BUK SDA-9A310M1 is an integrated firing system….. It is not LIKE  stand alone battery’s such as a

9K33 Osa, Though this also operates as a battery of 4 -6 vehicles

9K35M3 Strela-10M3 This is an interesting vehicle that first entered service in the Soviet Union in 1976 but has been subject of claims that the Russians have supplied this “advanced weapon” to  the the armies of Donetsk and Lugansk

It cannot operate like other **standalone battle platforms such as

“Katyusha”

BM Smerch or

BM-27 Uragan which launch missiles anywhere on the battlefield.

>>>

The Buk simply cannot operate effectively in “Theater” standalone. Moreover to cover the distance involved on the day of MH 17 (unless the commander was pre warned) it would require a blanket of acquisition radar vehicles to cover and to observe the airspace. It has to be linked into a wider air defense system!

Failure to have enough units to do so would reduce the 4 vehicle (sometimes 6) BUK battery to an almost useless  *“defence shield “ However in a case of direct attack from example a ground attack fighter in line of sight there is a possibility the crew would launch  a salvo as a  “last resort”  defense.

Important without the  accurate target tracking and engagement of the SOC 9S18M1 (target detection) vehicle to provide “beyond visual range” targeting  a success is very unlikely.

In summary a single  unit cannot act as an autonomous Transporter, Launcher, And Radar unit (TLAR)

All evidence to hand shows that the Buk was not the system that sho down MH17 and certainly not a stand alone vehicle in the hands of an untrained crew; remembering the conflict at the time of alleged launch was just a couple of months.

MISSILE

While focus has been on the delivery system none appears to be ABOUT the missile. The most likely is  either the 9М38 or 9М38M1 both of which detonate automatically when the distance to the target becomes smaller than a predetermined value.

The missile finds its way to the target  with Semi-active radar homing (SARH) Also needed is homing method chosen was proportional navigation. This requires expertise FOR IT TO WORK it requires  a signal to be sent from the SOC 9S18M1 (target detection) vehicle to illuminate opertrator to identify target and wave to reflect  off the target back to the missile. The missile continues to its prey. All this has to take place in matter of moments.

Remember we are talking ABOUT an untrained crew

>>>

FOOT NOTES:

BUK 312

In previous posts I have proven WITH VIDEO and independent picture the BUK 9A310M1 Self-propelled firing platform 312 alleged to have singly fired at MH17 was deployed in March and May 2014 by the Ukraine Forces along with 321

>>>

A FIGHTER JET

None of the above dispenses with the most likely cause of the MH17 disaster being caused by a Ukraine Fighter Bomber SU25….which contrary to UAF denials is capable of flying above 30,000 feet….This has also been explained here in an earlier posts here and on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/davie.ewan.macdonald

AN AIR TO AIR MISSILE

See this article for a comprehensive look at the event . All the evidence points to an air to air missile fired from a Ukrainian Fighter http://cassad-eng.livejournal.com/133434.html

UKRAINE SHOT DOWN RUSSIAN AIRLINER IN 2001

A Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 A Tu-154 civilian aircraft WAS SHOT DOWN BY Ukraine KILLING 66 over the Black Sea in 4 October 2001. Ukrainian authorities denied any involvement on the part of Ukraine’s Armed Forces.   Finally irrefutable evidence proved  Kiev to be guilty of downing it with a missile. Ukraine finally admitted this shootdown as being an accident 9 days later. Israel (Ariel Sharon) had accused Kiev of being uncooperative in getting to the cause of the catastrophe!…….Does this all sound familiar

However in January 2011 Ukrainian specialists then claimed the aircraft could have been destroyed by an outside explosion and also by a bomb installed between the outer fuselage and inner panels of the passenger compartment.

**See use of SAM systems in Vietnam and Yom Kippour

RE ROCKET ATTACK ON MARIUPOL:

*** GRAD

A single Grad is highly mobile and one cannot ignore the probability a Ukraine army “black opp’ team deployed to launch missiles ( max range 20kms min 1.5 ) at Mariupol firing close to or behind front lines to implicate LNR DNR forces.

OTHER PREVIOUS POSTS ON MH17

1

https://escalatoroverthehill.com/2014/07/30/ukraine-the-fight-against-fascism-a-series-3-mh17-part-1/

2
https://escalatoroverthehill.com/2014/08/05/ukraine-the-fight-against-fascism-a-series-3-mh17-part-2/

3
https://escalatoroverthehill.com/2015/01/06/who-dun-it-mh17/