Military Review

As a Ukrainian general, all the missiles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine considered ... "We did not have such a rocket"

76
In Ukraine, feverish attempts are being made to respond at least with something to the briefing of the Russian Ministry of Defense about the Buk air defense missile system, which shot down the Malaysian Boeing. For this purpose, those who today have nothing to do with either the military department of Ukraine or the structures of the investigation of this case are involved. One of these “experts” who wished to give a “hard answer” to the facts of the Russian Defense Ministry was Igor Romanenko, who was in the position of deputy chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the period from 2006 to 2010.


As a Ukrainian general, all the missiles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine considered ... "We did not have such a rocket"


Romanenko’s statement on the Ukrainian television channel Gromadske looks completely untenable. Retired Lieutenant-General announced that Ukraine "did not have a rocket with such a number." This refers to the same number, which in May of the current year was presented by the Dutch investigation commission, and to which the Russian Ministry of Defense refers.

Romanenko:
We have the data that we have now found, from the 1991 of the year - according to the registration in the Stryi anti-aircraft missile regiment of a rocket with such a number there. From 2013 on our account of this rocket on the territory of Ukraine is not.


According to Romanenko, the Russians “voiced only factory information, and that is not all.” According to his "version", the rocket could be faulty, and it was returned from the Ukrainian SSR back to Dolgoprudny in the same 1986 year. Surprisingly, this nonsense says the general, the candidate of military sciences. “The missile malfunction”, apparently, was revealed by an ensign in the part of the Carpathian Military District and sent the ammunition back to the factory without any documents? ..

It turns out that Mr. Romanenko actually casts doubt on the work of the commission in the Netherlands and casts a shadow on the honest investigation carried out by the group, which includes representatives of the SBU ... After all, the rocket with the number indicated in the materials was presented in Holland, and it is this rocket all documents in 1986 year was delivered to the Ukrainian SSR. Kiev did not provide any information that the missile was returned from the Ukrainian SSR back to the suburbs.
Photos used:
YouTube
76 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vadim Zhivov
    Vadim Zhivov 19 September 2018 06: 19
    +15
    That the Jews that the kakly everyone wants to turn upside down ... No one wants to admit ... There is no soldering iron on them ... am
    1. Chertt
      Chertt 19 September 2018 06: 31
      -1
      Statements are Ukrainian. military diplomats, politicians, as well as British, can not be seriously considered. Only the category is funny, not funny. This statement is not funny.
      1. Vadim Zhivov
        Vadim Zhivov 19 September 2018 06: 34
        +1
        And no one laughs, but these (not with the ladies will be said) fishing rod will still stand their ground ... hi
        1. venik
          venik 19 September 2018 08: 27
          +2
          Quote: VadimLives
          udotas will still stand their ground ... hi

          ===========
          "... Stirlitz stood" on his own "... Such a sophisticated torture could come up with only Müller !! ..." laughing bully
          PS I am never tired of being surprised by the People's Wisdom !!!: "Lord save me, from friends mine, but from my enemies, I will somehow fight off myself !!! "
          The meticulous Dutchmen wanted to "screw up" the Russians, but FUCKED - the Ukrainians !!! good laughing
      2. Serge Gorely
        Serge Gorely 19 September 2018 08: 08
        0
        Quote: Chertt
        Statements are Ukrainian. military diplomats, politicians, as well as British, can not be seriously considered. Only the category is funny, not funny. This statement is not funny.

        So what? Yes, at least you imagine a personal video recording of the pope, where Turchinov personally launches a rocket - DO NOT BELIEVE. It’s like the Olympics and doping, it’s not the one who is to blame, but the one who is needed.
        1. Chertt
          Chertt 19 September 2018 11: 42
          +2
          Quote: Serge Gorely
          - DO NOT BELIEVE

          Therefore, there is no need to seriously respond, let alone answer, to the nonsense that the idiots bear, whether they are Ukrainians or Shavers or who else.
          PS Some VNA ukRuine still do not believe in the Crimean bridge. How do you want to explain something to them?
      3. Barzha
        Barzha 19 September 2018 12: 36
        +1
        Statements ... of the British [diplomats] cannot be seriously considered

        Well, the phrase "British scientists figured out" is already causing laughter. This is also what "British diplomats said".
    2. raw174
      raw174 19 September 2018 06: 59
      -21
      Personally, I was skeptical about the information of our Ministry of Defense, after four years something was declassified, and the documents show signs of corrections and the dates are messed up ... It looks like an attempt to justify itself at all costs, but clumsy.
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 19 September 2018 07: 18
        -18
        I agree with you. There are as many shortcomings in justifying speech as in the bleating of Petrov and Bashirov. The experts considered the so-called facts with a mismatch in the video sequence even before the loud statement of the Moscow Region. And the magazines ... What will they cover when the Defense Ministry of Ukropia puts up, in contrast, military unit magazines, written in one handwriting and one paste, where, under the signature of the long-dead ensign, it turns out that they did not receive such a number of the missile.))))
        And the most interesting thing is why they did not remember the pilot Voloshin with his Su 25? Indeed, in the same walls they showed a satellite photo of how Rook launches a rocket in the direction of a Boeing!
      2. mavrus
        mavrus 19 September 2018 09: 05
        +12
        Firstly, not after 4 years, but after 4 months, the rocket number was "issued" only in May. And secondly: have you ever worked with product forms? These are still very much nothing ...
        1. Random
          Random 19 September 2018 09: 56
          +1
          Quote: mavrus
          And secondly: have you ever worked with product forms? These are still very nothing ...

          I’ve been and often soldier
          So that's what I ... "didn't like" ..... this name - .. "Recovered product form" belay
          Firstly ... "rebuilt after what"? ... Where is the Act of ... "Damage and Disposal"?
          Where is the product itself? ... A product without a passport or form is .... "a pile of metellom" and "a bunch of non-ferrous metals" no more.
          Therefore, if they say that they were sent, then they should be sent ONLY together.
          Second, there are substitutes for this - for the form it is DUPLICATE (where it is written in black and white, where and when and by whom it was issued and on the basis of what. Such a document can be issued only by the FACTORY MANUFACTURER ... period) soldier
          A DUPLICATE .... with the same criteria is also issued for the Technical Passport soldier
          And here- restored and even the AUTHORIZATION ????? request
          If presented as .... - here is a COPY of the Form for the product, which was made for a VISUAL example according to the factory documents "The movement of the product in the process of manufacturing and assembly" then yes ... and so.
          Plus, ANY product has terms of STORAGE and OPERATION, and after the expiration of these terms, certain MEASURES must be carried out ... without which this product is transferred to the category of a repair fund, with the subsequent restoration of the vehicle for further operation only after CWR or KR! WITH A MANDATORY NOTICE in the relevant SECTIONS .... who, where t when and .. "chikuha" soldier .
          The only thing when the Form can be separate from the product is ... if the terms for the Product have not passed, and the Form has become unusable .. then yes Form one is "sent" to the manufacturer and issued there .... DUPLICATE, but again on the basis of all ACTS as in part, as later and at the plant.
          Everything .... there can be no other soldier
          Respectfully to all soldier
          1. Random
            Random 19 September 2018 11: 17
            +1
            Quote: Random
            Everything .... there can be no other

            but EXCEPT THE MINUSES "ANY CONSIDERATIONS WILL BE? wassat
          2. Captain Pushkin
            Captain Pushkin 19 September 2018 12: 03
            0
            Quote: Random
            A DUPLICATE is also issued on the Technical Data Sheet .... with soldier by the same criteria
            And here- restored and even the AUTHORIZATION ?????

            Dear, if you are an employee of a defense industry enterprise, go to your archive and ask what is "original" and what does "restored" mean. And if not, then don't talk about what you are not very familiar with.
            1. Random
              Random 19 September 2018 12: 16
              0
              Quote: Captain Pushkin
              what is "original" and what is "restored". And if not, then don't talk about what you are not very familiar with.

              Dear ... for people like YOU specially wrote comments according to GOSTs .... read and .. enjoy.
              It is clear that fellow but not to the same extent hi
              And before you try to accuse a person of something or send him .. "somewhere" .. you need to think and read carefully ... tea, I'm not from the podium "Vedra" broadcasting about ... "bright future" wassat
              1. pvv113
                pvv113 19 September 2018 15: 43
                +2
                Sergey, hi !
                On the question of the form and its duplicate I agree with you. But this order is stipulated in aviation: GOST 27692-2012 for forms and GOST 27693-2012 for passports and labels. All this relates to the ponomeric documentation for AT, and this documentation is inseparable from the products. And Captain Pushkin is trying to send for information to the archive. Maybe he means the technological passport, which is drawn up in the process of manufacturing products and remains at the manufacturer.
                1. Random
                  Random 19 September 2018 16: 03
                  0
                  Quote: pvv113
                  I agree with you regarding the form and its duplicate

                  Hi Vladimir drinks
                  It’s just that Pushkin does not know that the restored original is a DUPLICATE, this is according to Section 1. TYPES OF DESIGN DOCUMENTS, clause 1.4. Name of design documents depending on the method of their implementation and nature of use, GOST 2.102-68 ESKD, Group T52
                  INTERSTATE STANDARD
                  Unified system for design documentation
                  TYPES AND COMPLETENESS OF DESIGN DOCUMENTS
                  Unified system for design documentation. Types and sets of design documentations soldier wink

                  And restoration of originals is GOST 2.501-2013 Unified system for design documentation (ESKD). Accounting and storage rules Group T52
                  INTERSTATE STANDARD
                  Unified system for design documentation
                  ACCOUNTING AND STORAGE RULES
                  Unified system for design documentation. Registration and storage rules wink
                  There is Section 8. Restoring originals, subsection 8.2 Restoring paper originals, and so out of the 7 paragraphs of this subsection only paragraph 8.2.5 is completed, and even then .. only half, and everything else ....... request what
                  1. pvv113
                    pvv113 19 September 2018 16: 13
                    +1
                    I often have to use regulatory documents for work. If you are interested, then here is an excellent GOST database http://gostexpert.ru
                    It is systematically updated, and it is possible to download
                    1. Random
                      Random 19 September 2018 16: 25
                      0
                      Quote: pvv113
                      I often have to use regulatory documentation for work

                      Me too soldier especially when "commerce" needs to hand over a finished aircraft from ARZ, and half of the passports for equipment ... duplicates bully , however, we have never had such "reclamations" as n MiG-29SMT (which are "Alzhirskie").
                      But even with the Duplicate on the APU form, "problems" have already begun, although the manufacturer produced and repaired by the way the same thing ... the same with engines ... if Motor Sich "duplicates" it goes away. and if any of our ARZ ... the engine was very difficult .. "to attach" ... only to ... "the black continent" bully
                      1. pvv113
                        pvv113 19 September 2018 16: 33
                        +1
                        I also work at ARZ. If the form is still good, then with passports and labels - a nightmare. Half of the duplicates come from operation for repair, while the other half of the rooms do not converge. It is necessary to send requests to manufacturers to verify authenticity.
                        With the black continent it’s easier, but not everywhere. Worked with the Rwandan Air Force - meticulous guys
            2. Random
              Random 19 September 2018 12: 18
              0
              Quote: Captain Pushkin
              what is "original" and what is "restored".

              And especially for people like you ... "chewed" what an ORIGINAL is and what an ORIGINAL is wassat (according to GOST, of course .. not a gag) soldier
        2. tv70
          tv70 19 September 2018 17: 02
          +1
          Forms, as well as acts, if there were words, then I, personally, have not had them for a long time.
        3. Igoresha
          Igoresha 20 September 2018 10: 14
          0
          "Novaya Gazeta" also does not believe, I tried to read, I didn’t understand nifiga, link to experts

          https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2018/09/18/77867-vosstanovlennomu-verit
      3. bk316
        bk316 19 September 2018 12: 05
        +1
        Well, show the traces of corrections and at the same time where the dates are messed up. Even liberal media should be read carefully.
        1. Random
          Random 19 September 2018 12: 35
          0
          Quote: bk316
          Well, show the traces of corrections and at the same time where the dates are messed up.

          About traces of corrections is a mess, since the Form and any current documentation can be filled in by several "authorized" persons.
          But with the dates ... yes ... there is a "inconsistency" - the engine was installed on a product that was released 12 months later ... after its "birth", but it must be ... on the contrary soldier First, the "skeleton" with the Form (with the date of course), and then the filling, because to release the engine and "write down" it for a specific rocket, which will appear in a year ..... agree that this is ... request recourse repeat
          1. bk316
            bk316 19 September 2018 15: 03
            +2
            the engine was installed on a product that was released 12 months later .... after its "birth",

            But this is done with rocket engines. Now in the warehouses of Roscosmos are engines launched for rockets which are not yet available (it was these engines that had to be sorted out recently, which we all read about in). But at the same time, each engine is made (contracted) for a specific rocket. And often a year passes until this engine becomes a rocket
            1. Random
              Random 19 September 2018 15: 41
              -1
              Quote: bk316
              Now in the warehouses of Roscosmos are engines released for rockets which are not yet there (these engines had to be sorted out recently, which we all read about in)

              It's not about that .. (or maybe I clumsily put it) wink
              Then on the "fingers" ..in. Section 4- "Information about the final assembly of the product 9D131" on the right edge of the sheet is signed by the person in charge, which corresponds to the provisions of GOST 2.501-213, paragraph 8.2.3. and DATE .... 14.01.86/XNUMX/XNUMX. !!!!!! wassat .
              And the Customer (a representative of the military acceptance at the plant) put his signature and "chikuha" DATE 24.12 86. !!!!! wassat
              Ie .. SUMMARY - "the restored original No. 1" was MANUFACTURED .... a YEAR before .. "birth" .... of the main product in the collection and its .. ACCEPTANCE soldier
              What is it like.....???? request
              1. Filxnumx
                Filxnumx 20 September 2018 00: 34
                0
                signature of the responsible person, which corresponds to the provision of GOST 2.501-213, clause 8.2.3. and DATE .... 14.01.86/XNUMX/XNUMX. !!!!!! wassat.
                And the Customer (the representative of the military acceptance at the plant) put his painting and "chikuha" DATE 24.12 86. !!!!!

                There are doubts, but have you ever seen a real product form at all? Because the Customer’s Representative at the Manufacturer (and not the military acceptance representative, military acceptance is the process of technical acceptance of products (manufactured or repaired) by the Customer’s representative. The military acceptance representative body, which performs the functions of controlling the quality and price of manufactured products, is a MILITARY REPRESENTATION. If you like that and respect the GOSTs of the Russian Federation (even taking into account the release date of this product, it would be more correct to cite the articles and provisions of the GOST of the USSR, although it does not matter in principle: GOSTs of the Russian Federation in particular related paperwork basically repeated the Soviet guests) then try not to confuse the process and the control of this process) with his signature and stamp allows for further technical operation already completely assembled and ready for operation of the said product. For it is only after the date of the representative of the Air Forces of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (in this case, the USSR) that this very operation begins, in fact. Simply put, the signature of the Customer’s representative indicating the date and the seal of the military mission MUST be at the latest of all the other signatures in this section of the form (usually the chief engineer and the head of the Quality Department). Here, the time gap is almost a year, I agree - for the Soviet period, this is unusual. VP-shniki then signed the forms within a day after the Quality Control Department, a maximum of a week, when there was a large shaft of products. So the deviation was written out and until the plant eliminated the discrepancy, the representative of the VP did not sign the document.
      4. Igor V
        Igor V 19 September 2018 12: 06
        +1
        Quote: raw174
        Personally, I was skeptical about the information of our Ministry of Defense, after four years something was declassified, and the documents show signs of corrections and the dates are messed up ... It looks like an attempt to justify itself at all costs, but clumsy.

        "But I believed the information of the investigators immediately and irrevocably, even before the downing of Boeing!" Is that how you should be understood?
    3. Sergey985
      Sergey985 19 September 2018 06: 59
      +6
      He would also invite a part to inspect, so that everyone is convinced that such a missile is not available now. And if not, then it never was. Clown.
    4. Mar.Tirah
      Mar.Tirah 19 September 2018 07: 03
      0
      Quote: VadimLives
      There is no soldering iron on them ...

      There’s no soldering iron, but there is a people's court, and God’s. There are also documented facts of the Russian Defense Ministry that this missile was transferred to a military unit on the territory of the misunderstanding called Ukraine. And there are no documents about its removal from this territory.
    5. Sarmat Sanych
      Sarmat Sanych 19 September 2018 08: 06
      +6
      The jamb with the JIT number is certainly notable, but there are also a bunch of other epic squabbles in the investigation of "independent experts". The number of documents, audio recordings and other evidence is unreal. But partners will still say "fyfsofreti". On Echo, the liberals commented to the point that this is NOT the same missile that shot down Boeing, i.e. JIT at the briefing just showed some kind of rocket that was found in the east of Ukraine. Kublo began to stir, they are already trying to pass off the rocket shown at the JIT presentation as one of the ones used in Georgia in 2008. At the same time, he was not embarrassed that a deliberate fake was slipped into the investigation. How can you use the same rocket twice? For the Sumerian podkastryulny consciousness - one spitlaughing.
      To paraphrase the proverb about revenge, in this case it is the truth - that dish that is served cold. And to those who say why they say they were silent for 4 years - remember when they showed the rocket with the number. Cyclists slowly and sadly pulled on the penis and begin to unwindwassat.
      1. reservist
        reservist 19 September 2018 13: 02
        -2
        Quote: Sarmat Sanych
        ... i.e. JIT at a briefing just showed some kind of rocket that was found in eastern Ukraine.

        if not that rocket? fingerprints of servicemen of the 53rd brigade were found on it ...

        Do they smoke or thump? or all at once without biting ...
        1. Sarmat Sanych
          Sarmat Sanych 20 September 2018 03: 15
          +1
          I gave you a minus. But if you have such a subtle irony, then I apologize. Because the article about "prints" is even more than insanity.
          1. reservist
            reservist 20 September 2018 13: 00
            0
            Quote: Sarmat Sanych
            But if you have such a subtle irony, then I apologize.

            Yes, what are you, what an irony, because in all seriousness it is claimed that they have the imprints of the Russian military ... fool
    6. ver_
      ver_ 19 September 2018 13: 37
      -1
      ... Yes, everything is there, and soldering irons and blowtorches - there is simply no desire ... It will be easier for you to sit down, or you’ll sit right in the harem pants ...
  2. Russia
    Russia 19 September 2018 06: 20
    0
    Only the rear rat can reason like that.
    1. Vadim Zhivov
      Vadim Zhivov 19 September 2018 06: 23
      +1
      They all argue and make themselves iksperds ..
  3. Sergg
    Sergg 19 September 2018 06: 27
    +2
    Ukrainian fascists are trolling their criminal regime. Even somehow not interesting. It is a pity that they were allowed to rule Ukraine.
  4. Ren
    Ren 19 September 2018 06: 40
    +2
    It is interesting, but what will the former commander of the 164th radio engineering air defense brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the military unit A-1451 Grinchak Ruslan Nikolaev say about this? How is he doing? what
  5. ANCIENT
    ANCIENT 19 September 2018 06: 41
    0
    everyone is totally lying there, who has at least some kind of power, because they are all really Mr. fool
  6. kind
    kind 19 September 2018 06: 43
    +7
    I think that Russia has not yet provided all the data on the Malaysian Boeing. There is fierce debate now. Ukraine is trying to dodge, and the Netherlands is stubbornly blaming Russia, but the main juzumina has not yet been voiced or disclosed, but it is! We wait!
    1. ser65
      ser65 19 September 2018 07: 50
      +2
      ours provided radar data from a civilian radar ... but there are means of RTV VKS.
    2. sleeve
      sleeve 19 September 2018 08: 42
      -1
      And this was the main highlight. Then the court or "additional investigation". And the guys themselves will add this "zest" to the kutya. Well, or the measure of the investigative and judicial system of Europe (with a small, with a small letter) will be newspaper barking and posts on the networks.
  7. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 19 September 2018 07: 05
    +2
    Well, the general says and let him say, he must say something, especially since it’s just a talking room. The whole Western World says something, I would say - lies and slanders.
  8. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 19 September 2018 07: 27
    +2
    wishing to give a "tough answer"
    The toughness of the answer lies in the "toughness" of what is in Romanenko's head.
    this nonsense says general, candidate of military sciences
    On this occasion, one should not even be surprised. They have candidates, professors, who suddenly, overnight, have become "independent", which means that the most correct ones are still not so stupid. It is enough to turn to their historical "gurus" and everything falls into place at once.
  9. Comrade Beria
    Comrade Beria 19 September 2018 07: 32
    +15
    This is for skeptics to increase the level of knowledge about the design work with documents:


    The original form was submitted to the engine (i.e., a document, some of which was printed (document form), and some - handwritten). The document is executed according to the ESKD rules regulated by GOSTs of the GOST 2.xxx series, and not according to the ESPD rules (GOSTs of the GOST 19.xxx series, one of which the author refers to in the article). The meaning of the terms “original”, “restored original”, “copy "Explain GOST 2.102 and GOST 2.501, which says that the original and the restored original is what they make copies of (in this case, the blanks of the document in which constant information (names of the components of the product) is in printed form, and the variable ( serial numbers, surnames, etc.) opisnym method). Therefore, the submitted form is a genuine (i.e. filled in during production) document. And the differences in dates are understandable - in January they made a restored original, then they printed a copy from it, which was filled in December.

    And several people can fill out the form, hence the difference in handwriting.

    Yes, and to put on public display such documents, without making sure of their authenticity, no one would.
    1. Random
      Random 19 September 2018 11: 45
      -3
      Quote: Comrade Beria
      The meaning of the terms “original”, “restored original”, “copy” is explained by GOST 2.102 and GOST 2.501, where it is said that the original and the restored original are

      Well, WHY DO YOU SLEEP AND OVERFUL?
      After all, you are well aware, and it is stipulated in the GOSTs that only the following names of design documents exist: ORIGINALS, ORIGINALS, DUPLICATES and COPIES ... EVERYTHING !!!! (Section 1.4 GOST 2.102-68 ESKD)
      Yes .. in GOST 2.501-2013 there is Ch. 8 - Restoring the originals, but .... it is the ORIGINALS, but not the ORIGINALS !!!
      And the FORMULAR of a product of any is the ORIGINAL !!! soldier
      Quote: Comrade Beria
      Therefore, the submitted form is a genuine (i.e. filled in during production) document.

      So you wrote .. ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY! soldier Since FORMULAR can only be ORIGINAL or DUPLICATE !!
      And it should be next to the product wassat I wrote about this in detail above.
      Therefore the RESTORED FORMULAR AUTHORIZATION is .... fool negative request belay sad
      Quote: Comrade Beria
      Yes, and to put on public display such documents, without making sure of their authenticity, no one would.

      Well, here you are generally .... "for approving" .... there are so many lapses from the Ministry of Defense that you cannot take away, or have already forgotten how VVP enthusiastically talked about the successful attack of our helicopters, demonstrating at the same time ...... lol wassat
      1. Random
        Random 19 September 2018 12: 20
        0
        Quote: Random
        WHY DO YOU SLEEP AND OVERFLOW?

        Today what ... some "silent minassaty" on the air? As a matter of fact, what ....? You yourself refer to GOSTs ..... "refine" over them lol and at the same time look for the guilty on the side wassat
        1. okko077
          okko077 19 September 2018 15: 32
          0
          The clever uncle blurted out something, but why? To show that he is a clever verbiage !!! But essentially, in the context of the discussion, why do you need this? He is not interested in this at all ... So they minus him for this stupidity, this pointlessness ....
      2. bk316
        bk316 19 September 2018 13: 38
        +3
        After all, you are well aware, and it is stipulated in GOSTs that only the following names of design documents exist: ORIGINALS, ORIGINALS, DUPLICATES and COPIES ... EVERYTHING !!!! (


        Sergey, with all due respect, you are wrong.

        Below is a quote from the guest:
        In the upper right corner of the margin of each sheet of the restored original, there must be an ink inscription or a stamp must be affixed: "Restored original N ..." indicating the serial number of the restoration of this sheet of the original.

        And now look at the photo - ALL BY GOST. It’s just not a name, but a restoration mark.

        Further in the same place "The restored originals act as replaced originals."
        That is, it inherits all the properties of the original: IF THE ORIGINAL WAS THE ORIGINAL, THEN THE RESTORED ORIGINAL IS CONSIDERED ORIGINAL (if it is a duplicate, it is considered a duplicate)
        Therefore, "Comrade Beria is right"

        Further, the form MAY NOT be filled in by several people. The number on the picking list should be filled in by one person and given to the second (which fills the tabular part). Then they will both sign on the last sheet.

        About the date, I did not see any hints of inconsistency.

        So do not look for blunders where they are not.
        Better to ask where the "act on the loss of the original"?
        I think that in the same folder.
        1. Random
          Random 19 September 2018 16: 11
          -1
          Quote: bk316
          So there is no need to look for blunders where there are none. Better to ask where the "act on the loss of the original"?
          I think that in the same folder.

          Once again I repeat ... look at the DATES ... a copy cannot be born ... before the birth of the ORIGINAL ... well, nothing.
          I see that you have carefully read the provisions of the 8th section of GOST 2.501-2013, ... try again thoughtfully to read paragraph 8.2.3 and further, well, except for the 5th and compare with the "provided" .... and as they say ... "feel the difference" wink
          With best regards, drinks
      3. Comrade Beria
        Comrade Beria 19 September 2018 13: 47
        +2
        Quote: Random
        And the FORMULAR of a product of any is the ORIGINAL !!!

        The original form appears at the design development stage, and when the product went into series, the originals are propagated based on the original, manually fill in the required positions and send it together with the product to the customer (consumer).
        1. Random
          Random 19 September 2018 16: 16
          -1
          Quote: Comrade Beria
          The original form appears at the design stage,

          In principle, I agree, only the Form is "born" at the stage of development of design DOCUMENTS for a SPECIFIC product wink and you are not spelling out correctly soldier and on the basis of the design development, the ORIGINAL of all design documentation appears, and from them the originals are "born" drinks
          And we have that "question" is discussed at all not the same wink
      4. Filxnumx
        Filxnumx 20 September 2018 00: 42
        0
        But is not a copy from the original GENUINE? What is the distortion?
  10. sabakina
    sabakina 19 September 2018 07: 39
    +3
    Since 2013, according to our accounting, this missile has not existed in Ukraine.
    Naturally, now no. No one doubts.
  11. kloss
    kloss 19 September 2018 07: 41
    -2
    In principle, refute his statement. Only the publication of negotiations registered by the intelligence center can refute. But for some reason this is not profitable for us
  12. Olddetractor
    Olddetractor 19 September 2018 07: 43
    +3
    What will they cover when the Defense Ministry of Ukropia puts up, as opposed to military magazines, written in one handwriting and one paste, where it turns out that they didn’t receive the same number of missiles signed by the long-dead ensign?))))

    These magazines will be written by General Romanenko. And will become a doctor of science of Ukraine. Such is the heavy share of Ukrainian historians - they do not study the facts, they create them!
  13. Naval
    Naval 19 September 2018 07: 49
    +3
    What's that, at first they generally stated that there is no BUK air defense system in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine! Something is still changing, now there are no missiles and there were no, although the Georgians have already stated that they bought this missile, and the Russians took it as a trophy in 2008. lol
  14. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 19 September 2018 08: 12
    +1
    According to Romanenko,

    Not enough words! Documents on the table!
  15. sleeve
    sleeve 19 September 2018 08: 38
    +2
    The lack of documentary support for weapons in Ukraine is not a reason for a criminal investigation?
  16. Forestol
    Forestol 19 September 2018 08: 42
    +3
    An amazing thing. Downed Boeing, like a litmus test. I noticed that from the first day when there was no information to this day, people who hold liberal views, Russophobes, Yeltsenists, owners of large companies, are 100% sure that Russia was hit by a Boeing. Whoever provides what facts, the opinion does not change. And this is in Russia. What is happening abroad, I think everyone understands. You just need to understand the phrase of the Gopnik from the gateway: “Are there seeds? And if I find?”, i.e. a priori, you will be robbed. The only right move, crack the gopnik in the nose with all the dope. So it is here. Recall ambassadors, terminate ALL relations with countries that will blame Russia. It’s just that many officials have personal coatings and state coatings have long been changed.
  17. aszzz888
    aszzz888 19 September 2018 08: 53
    0

    It turns out that Mr. Romanenko actually questions the work of the commission in the Netherlands and casts a shadow on the honest investigation carried out by the group, which includes representatives of the SBU ..

    ... and from where are the brains of Mizdobul, especially of Ukrokaklovsky with epaulettes? ... laughing
  18. bessmertniy
    bessmertniy 19 September 2018 09: 21
    +2
    A man was paid - a man carries a blizzard. negative
  19. Ros 56
    Ros 56 19 September 2018 09: 55
    +1
    This half-witted general just performs the role of that woman from the OBS (one woman said), so you can spit and forget his words.
  20. Peter Solntsev
    Peter Solntsev 19 September 2018 10: 11
    0
    Kindergarten, tent. Everyone guessed long ago who, why and why the Boeing was destroyed. While the lackeys throw poop at each other, leaving whose rocket, the real culprits of the tragedy are preparing another provocation, with the help of the "white goggles". If this is not enough, they will blow up a couple of skyscrapers or some country will be bombed in which there are many resources but little democracy.
  21. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 19 September 2018 10: 13
    +2
    Starper decided to cut the dough for retirement quickly! Shave a little in the box, Muscovites were given to go! Well, what to take from an old fellow? And Kyuyu’s attempts, reminiscent of efforts in case of constipation, after a week of sitting on dry land!
  22. ggl1
    ggl1 19 September 2018 12: 28
    +1
    What Igor Romanenko has come to, but he came to Minsk twice
    my family and was a normal person
    It's a shame !!!
  23. Peter Solntsev
    Peter Solntsev 19 September 2018 13: 25
    +1
    I started to guess why the Russian Defense Ministry announced the data where and when the rocket was produced. The main thing in the production date. She's too old to fly. In the rocket itself there are a lot of technical substances and liquids that lose their properties over time. The rocket has reached the warranty period. A missile may not take off or explode near the target. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation subtly hinted to the Netherlands that the rocket was dismantled into its component parts and put into the plane itself. That's why the Boeing fell into three parts and the holes from the striking elements looked as if they had flown out of the plane itself. Cool mockery of the commission. And this is only the beginning. And who could pass the missile if it was in Ukraine. And further. Lining up too long in chains. Rocket transfer. Warehouse, carriers, receivers, preparation for use (people who know the product thoroughly) mortgages preparation of the aircraft itself. Somewhere information must necessarily leak to prepare for the attack. Then it’s clear why the sky over Rostov was closed and there should be no planes in the corridor over Donetsk. Gently lay, but sleep hard.
    1. Random
      Random 19 September 2018 16: 19
      -2
      Quote: Peter Solntsev
      That's why the Boeing fell into three parts and the holes from the striking elements looked as if they had flown out of the plane itself. Cool mockery of the commission.

      Like version bully ..there is a place to be drinks
  24. sgr291158
    sgr291158 19 September 2018 14: 05
    0
    It would be surprising if they said yes it is our rocket. It was not worth expecting another.
  25. 123456789
    123456789 19 September 2018 16: 36
    0
    Nil inultum remanebit - Nothing goes unpunished. Fiat justitia, pereat mundus - May justice be done, even if the whole world perishes from it.
  26. Random
    Random 19 September 2018 17: 28
    -1
    pvv113,
    I've already done it ... since 2007 in general .... in the "train" soldier , and so .. "pedaled" since 2000 wink
  27. APASUS
    APASUS 19 September 2018 19: 51
    0
    turned out to be Igor Romanenko, who was in the position of deputy chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces in the period from 2006 to 2010.

    Such an interesting situation. The former deputy chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been retired for seven years, and still uses information marked "Top Secret"
    It turns out that Mr. Romanenko actually casts doubt on the work of the commission in the Netherlands and casts a shadow on the honest investigation carried out by a group that includes representatives of the SBU ...

    The Netherlands was asked to disclose this information about the rocket after a delegation of responsible persons visited Russia. It’s true that a couple of questions are brewing automatically. Does it mean that the Netherlands tested Ukraine for a reaction or they can’t get real numbers on missiles themselves?
  28. Zhurba
    Zhurba 19 September 2018 21: 03
    -1
    Did I understand correctly: since the form is in Russia, and it exists only with a product, then the product itself is in Russia.
    At the expense of records - they are made by the "clerk" in the batteries after the time limit.
  29. Peter Ivanov
    Peter Ivanov 20 September 2018 01: 09
    0
    But he was a Soviet officer, a member of the party. Where is conscience? How much did Monsieur pay the general, now I can’t call a comrade?
  30. LeonidL
    LeonidL 20 September 2018 05: 14
    0
    The general is right oh shit the Dutch, oh shit! Well, there’s no bullish rocket, oh no bullshit! that generally nogogisinky ne bulo ... Axis to you panowy cross on the belly Uniate!