Military Review

Still no evidence

148
The Friday story of the “However” program with Mikhail Leontiev was supposed to be a sensation. The plot showed a picture sent by some strangers, allegedly made by a spy satellite, which captured not only the flying Boeing 777, but also the very cause of his fall - the Ukrainian fighter Su-27.


Unfortunately, the original image, where the outlines of Donetsk and Donetsk airport are clearly visible with a runway length of 4 km, which is equal in size to Boeing 777 (it’s even scary to imagine at what low altitude the satellite must fly to get such a prospect) and himself A picture of a Google satellite taken as a base with a similar cloud has debunked this sensation. The Google Snapshot is now available to users of the Planet Earth program and is dated 28 August 2012.


In fact, the original source of this photo is not the First Channel at all. On the Internet, it appeared in mid-October. In its sources is listed "WikiLeaks". What exactly the author wanted to convey to us is not clear. Perhaps it was an attempt to reconstruct the events ...


Such facts give only a pretext for Ukrainian propaganda to organize anti-Russian harassment and accuse the Russian media of propaganda. I really want to hope that Russian journalists will not make more such mistakes: after all, throughout the entire civil war in Ukraine, they were almost the only source of truthful information.
Author:
148 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. Samaritan
    Samaritan 17 November 2014 07: 47
    +1
    We wanted GDP to substitute for the summit!
    1. Babr
      Babr 17 November 2014 07: 52
      +8
      (it’s even scary to imagine at what low altitude the satellite should fly to get such a perspective) ....... Or maybe he dived? lol
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. ispaniard
        ispaniard 17 November 2014 10: 22
        +17
        Quote: Babr
        (it’s even scary to imagine at what low altitude the satellite should fly to get such a perspective) ....... Or maybe he dived? lol

        And where did you get the idea that it was a satellite? For example, I am inclined to believe that it was RQ-4 Global Hawk (What is in the picture) His ceiling is quite sufficient 18, 000 meters. As to how the American spy plane could track what is happening over the territory of Ukraine ... Comrade officers, the airspace of the former Ukraine is ALREADY its own territory for the NATO Air Force (it’s enough to recall two downed American drones over the Crimea) ...
        1. Canep
          Canep 17 November 2014 10: 36
          +12
          Quote: ispaniard
          For example, I am inclined to believe that it was the RQ-4 Global Hawk (as in the picture). Its ceiling is quite sufficient 18, 000 meters.

          In order for anyone to take a picture of the Boeing so that it becomes 100 times more objects on the earth, the lens should be a hundred times closer to the Boeing than to the ground. That is, at about the same height as the Boeing, more precisely 100-200 meters above it, while the MiG is located 52 km from the Boeing and at the same height as the Boeing, at an angle of about 89 degrees from the direction to the Boeing, due to the curvature of the earth, this MiG will no longer be against the background of the earth but against the sky.

          It’s enough for people to believe what one single person said on one single Russian channel, especially since this person himself doubts the authenticity of the picture, and he is a person, which means that he can err. Boeing is shot down by another plane for me this is the only version, and this fake photo serves to discredit this version.
          1. Serrrrgo
            Serrrrgo 17 November 2014 11: 35
            +5
            Here simple geometry does not work. There are quite a few pictures of the plane online where it seems many times more objects below.
            For example, on this blog, a snapshot from google maps: http://tchaykovsky.ru/blog_a/samvladim.htm
            Although the picture is of course fake, and Leontiev is a dumbass, discrediting RosTV.
            1. Canep
              Canep 17 November 2014 11: 40
              +5
              Quote: serrrrgo
              Here simple geometry does not work. There are quite a few pictures of the plane online where it seems many times more objects below.

              Here it is simple geometry, rays of light always propagate in a straight line. And these pictures were taken from a very close distance from the aircraft. You will find at least one shot in which two aircraft located at a distance of tens of kilometers would be much more objects on the ground, well, except for this.
              1. Rus2012
                Rus2012 17 November 2014 13: 09
                +4
                Quote: Canep
                Here it is simple geometry

                ..eka sapper pereklinilo scheme young geometer :)))))))))
                from here -
                http://topwar.ru/62617-ataka-boinga-777-istrebitelem-pravda-ili-poddelka-rassled
                ovanie.html


                Looks like the truth? Seem to be. Only this is a picture for calculating the height of shooting with an unarmed eye !!!

                The satellite takes pictures through magnifying optics. And there the ray path is completely different. Here you have a distribution scheme for an ordinary optical sight. Think over it.



                Here is an example of 100% space imagery from the same Google. According to the logic of the young geometer, the picture apparently was also taken not from space ...


                1. Tektor
                  Tektor 17 November 2014 14: 17
                  0
                  An approximate calculation of the altitude of the orbit with which the image was taken is 150 km if the Boeing flew 10000 m, excluding optics. The distortion of the projections is caused by the inhomogeneity of the atmosphere, its variable density, and the nonlinear passage of oblique optical rays: the panorama is compressed multiple times.
                  1. bugaev2005
                    bugaev2005 17 November 2014 15: 40
                    +2
                    Stunned, thank you for the clarification! Such subtleties can only know a person who worked in this area!
                    And then I began to incline to the idea that the shot from the drone was taken flying just above the Boeing ... but it turns out that parallel lines still intersect smile Respect to you! Your explanation is the most technically competent and immediately puts everything in its place! One hundred pluses YOU !!!
                2. Spnsr
                  Spnsr 17 November 2014 15: 03
                  +1
                  Quote: Rus2012
                  Quote: Canep
                  Here it is simple geometry

                  ..eka sapper pereklinilo scheme young geometer :)))))))))
                  from here -
                  http://topwar.ru/62617-ataka-boinga-777-istrebitelem-pravda-ili-poddelka-rassled


                  ovanie.html


                  Looks like the truth? Seem to be. Only this is a picture for calculating the height of shooting with an unarmed eye !!!

                  The satellite takes pictures through magnifying optics. And there the ray path is completely different. Here you have a distribution scheme for an ordinary optical sight. Think over it.



                  Here is an example of 100% space imagery from the same Google. According to the logic of the young geometer, the picture apparently was also taken not from space ...



                  here you can add that when I look at the sky, it is true in clear weather, then the plane that flies there, and they usually fly at an altitude of 10000 m, is visible to me in approximately the same size! it is without optics! and objects, no matter how much larger the plane, were two times more, I would not have seen at all, well, if only the satellite, in the dark, in the form of a luminous point, then this point is so small that even if there is a starry sky , then I would not have seen him at all !!!
                  it’s a matter of the fact that the plane is large and the airport is not ..., a lot depends on the focus of the optics, if the optics are focused on damage, as it is said on TV, on the level of sensing airspace and civil aviation flights, then a fake not a fake can be obtained comparing the sizes of objects located at the same level and equidistant from the satellite with the angle error .... and this, su 27 and Boeing 777, so do not blame the TV ... not the case, the question is different, whom did the Russians again laughing or there are technologies that allow you to remove the information directly from the pin dos dos satellite ... laughing or all the same there is our satellite, but which must be in space, and which, if they recognize the pin. dos, as usual can turn off or even fall ... there were a lot of such things ...
              2. Serrrrgo
                Serrrrgo 17 November 2014 13: 33
                0
                Why, a picture from google maps. They take off satellite, if I'm not mistaken. Or the cloud in the same image, it is incredibly large in purely geometric calculations.
                The review, as it were, is conducted from the vanishing point of the perspective, which, yes, is 200 meters higher than the aircraft, and the satellite itself can be another 200 km higher.
                As far as I know, the debate about fakeness was conducted just in relation to optics, whether such wide-angle optics are placed on satellites, but theoretically it is quite possible.
                1. Spnsr
                  Spnsr 17 November 2014 15: 20
                  +2
                  Quote: serrrrgo
                  Why, a picture from google maps. They take off satellite, if I'm not mistaken. Or the cloud in the same image, it is incredibly large in purely geometric calculations.

                  in addition to this, we can add that the picture with the planes on the network for a long time ... and Google is the CIA intelligence network (in confirmation of my words, I can say that much of what the State Department quotes is very similar to the fact that there users are pouring in, the same YouTube is about the air defense system, everyone remembers the installation that was taken away from the crash site of the Boeing when it fell, and how it was procrastinated in the State Department, almost the main proof), and Google could fake its card for a photo with a self-made one, in order to add doubts, such as google maps, this is the basis on which the “fake” type was created, and not vice versa ...
                  By the way, it seems like in the Russian spring, there was a discussion of this situation ...
                  http://rusvesna.su/news/1416043616
                  1. ssergn
                    ssergn 18 November 2014 16: 17
                    0
                    And yes, YouTube belongs to Google, strange, yeah?
                2. siberalt
                  siberalt 17 November 2014 19: 15
                  +2
                  Why is the satellite optic optics on the satellite? Shoot the globe in the background of stars? laughing
                  1. Spnsr
                    Spnsr 17 November 2014 19: 40
                    +2
                    Why a DVR with a wide viewing angle? laughing remove curbs wink
                    and so, there could be several cameras that at that moment recorded the air situation over Donetsk ...
                    you need to be a connoisseur of satellites in order to say something about how they are arranged
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Aleksander
            Aleksander 17 November 2014 11: 39
            0
            Quote: Canep
            need to lens was a hundred times closer to the Boeing than to the ground

            Not a lens, but an EYE. But in the lens, the path of the beam is completely different and the lens could be much higher than the Boeing.
            1. Canep
              Canep 17 November 2014 11: 44
              +3
              Quote: Aleksander
              But in the lens the path of the beam is completely different and the lens could be much higher than the Boeing.
              Firstly, there is no fundamental difference between the eye and the camera, and secondly, as if rays in the lens do not propagate, outside it they propagate in a straight line.
          4. Taga
            Taga 17 November 2014 12: 39
            +1
            MiG on the background of the sky m. and would not have been, but would have been shot from a different angle, "in the face", and not from above.
          5. wax
            wax 17 November 2014 14: 42
            +2
            Everyone who has a camera at home can, without delving into the tricks of optics, make sure that changing the focal length of the lens is completely equivalent to changing the shooting distance at a constant focal length. Another thing is the angle of capture. Of course, the field of view seems too large for such an approach of the aircraft. The suggestion of overlapping two pictures suggests itself. As for the date of the survey of the earth’s surface, then, I think, for Google to make the necessary substitution that two fingers on the asphalt. In ensuring the execution of the liner, the involvement of professionals of the highest class is felt. Only one player (with great potential) has all the puzzles of the crime picture on hand. The rest play almost honestly. So, for example, Ukraine can sincerely believe that it did not shoot down, because the attack could have been carried out by a Romanian plane (combat aircraft did fly to Romania and back to Ukraine).
            One can argue that they say this is necessary, but subsequent events of unprecedented pressure on Russia unequivocally prove that a provocation of this level made sense (even more than) and brought the planned result. But, nevertheless, about 50 percent (at least) the secret will become obvious, although for me personally an airplane attack is practically undeniable based on the information already available: first, approaching the defeat of the pilots with machine gun fire, then a U-turn for a missile strike. I think that the implementation of the plan was under control, for which what was happening was filmed both from satellites and from the drone. Now we are witnessing attempts to discretize the aircraft version in the eyes of the general public.
            1. Spnsr
              Spnsr 17 November 2014 15: 33
              +2
              Quote: Wax
              Of course, the field of view seems too large for such an approach of the aircraft.

              I’ll add it to this phrase, you can make a photo of a person next to Belaz so much bigger! especially in the absence of foreign objects for comparison, that it will seem that a person is standing next to a little Belaz ...., despite being at a sufficient distance from the person. and so, what's the point of sending a satellite into space with a camera with a narrow viewing angle .... and there is the city of Donetsk in the picture ...
              It is necessary to measure not objects in the earth and in the air, but objects in the air ...
              believe me, if the camera was focused on the ground, then objects in the air, planes, would merge with the ground, would turn into a cloud ....
          6. Sochi
            Sochi 17 November 2014 14: 47
            +1
            This is if the lens is normal, but if telephoto or vice versa is short-focus, then the perspective changes very much ...
          7. bugaev2005
            bugaev2005 17 November 2014 15: 31
            +1
            What makes you think that the fighter was 52 km away? Do air-to-air missiles fly that far? Even the picture shows that the distance between the aircraft is no more than a kilometer. And if you take into account that the picture was not taken from the satellite, but with the RQ-4 Global Hawk, then I don’t see any contradictions at all ...

            It is also worth considering that the publicly available data about the team from the Dnepropetrovsk dispatcher, about the reduction of the Boeing by 800 meters, this also in my opinion indicates that the operation was led from one center!
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 17 November 2014 10: 42
          0
          The picture was taken by a reconnaissance aircraft under
          the name "Photoshop". And he has unlimited
          capabilities. laughing
          1. Denis fj
            Denis fj 17 November 2014 13: 49
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            The picture was taken by a reconnaissance aircraft under
            the name "Photoshop". And he has unlimited
            capabilities. laughing



            And I did the photoshop in Israel, knowing who it is --- PROFESSOR is his doing laughing
        3. bunta
          bunta 17 November 2014 11: 01
          +2
          According to the report of the Russian Defense Ministry on the downed Boeing, such a device was not seen.
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 17 November 2014 13: 13
            +4
            Quote: bunta
            such a device was not seen.

            firstly, the reconnaissance drone was made using "stealth" technology, and secondly - the specialists of the Ministry of Defense did not say anything like that!
            Our radar environment was given on the basis of the Rostov Civil Aviation Center :))) And this, by the way, is two big differences ...
        4. Rus2012
          Rus2012 17 November 2014 12: 59
          +1
          Quote: ispaniard
          And where did you get the idea that it was a satellite? For example, I am inclined to believe that it was the RQ-4 Global Hawk (What's in the picture)

          Moreover, Kermet (MH17 »Kemeth’s fiefdom» How four Ukrainian planes shot down МН17 or should I go to the fortuneteller?) - http://mh17.webtalk.ru/viewtopic.php?id=119
          claims that in the sky at that moment there were 4 (!) Ukrainian aircraft, some with objective control systems (film-photo-machine guns). Plus Globol - Navk ... There were 4 rockets, of various types, from P60 to P73
          Also, many believe that the photo may be merged with these materials ...
        5. doxtop
          doxtop 18 November 2014 09: 21
          0
          Photo Fake! And stop discussing this! Do not be like banderlogs and hounds! First of all, ANALYZE the information that is provided to you!
          I can give at least 10 examples of the fact that the photo is "sucked from the finger", but I will limit myself to the most banal and obvious ...
          What time did flight 17 crash !? According to official data (which is publicly available), the disaster occurred between 13:21 p.m. and 14:15 p.m. UTC.
          Now look at the time indicated in the photo ... this DEEP NIGHT!!!
          And arguments like ... "Well, the world is according to Greenwich Mean Time, and Ukraine in the photo" are INAPPROPRIATE here! The difference between local time and Greenwich Mean Time is 2 hours!

          PiES: I’m generally shocked by the fact that we have broadcast ABSOLUTELY Fake information on our air, without even bothering to check it first!
          In general ... Gentlemen! Before starting to seriously believe in anything, first CARRY OUT a COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS of this, and only then begin to believe or not. Otherwise ... you will be no better than the banderlogs who hang tons of noodles on your ears!
          IMHO.
    2. Canep
      Canep 17 November 2014 07: 57
      -14
      Quote: Samaritan
      We wanted GDP to substitute for the summit!

      Perhaps because of this, he dumped ahead of time, perhaps he wanted to urgently deal with this garbage. And the picture is fake, I have no doubt that the Boeing should be of such a size relative to the ground that the shooting point should be 200 METERS from the plane, but this makes it impossible to hit the MiG frame, which is 52 km from the Boeing. And a satellite can only be at that altitude if it has already left orbit.
      1. bulvas
        bulvas 17 November 2014 08: 05
        +18
        Quote: Canep
        Perhaps because of this, he dumped ahead of time, perhaps he wanted to urgently deal with this garbage.


        Putin didn’t stay for breakfast with the leaders to show that he had nothing more to talk about with “Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs,” (as E. Satanovsky called Obama and the Euroleaders.)

        Before that, he explained everything about Ukraine and decided not to waste his time on it anymore.

        1. Canep
          Canep 17 November 2014 08: 09
          +1
          Quote: bulvas
          Putin didn’t stay for breakfast with leaders to show that he had nothing more to talk about with Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs

          There were also the leaders of Brazil, India, China and South Africa, members of the BRICS. You also refer them to these dwarfs.
          1. Corsair
            Corsair 17 November 2014 11: 35
            +5
            Quote: Canep
            There were also the leaders of Brazil, India, China and South Africa, members of the BRICS. You also refer them to these dwarfs.

            It must be assumed that with the BRICS leaders, GDP has worked substantively in the framework of the official part and all the tasks have been solved.
            And BREAKFAST, this is already an informal meeting, and agreements (if any arise on it) may be optional ...
            1. Rus2012
              Rus2012 17 November 2014 13: 30
              +5
              Quote: Corsair
              It must be assumed that with the BRICS leaders, GDP has worked substantively in the framework of the official part and all the tasks have been solved.

              already brought -
              Putin arrived at the G20 summit not only as a Russian leader, but also as an informal BRICS speaker - the toughest and most respected politician who promotes the interests of developing countries. It was in this capacity that Putin directly stated that the United States violated the IMF treaty, and that political factors influence the price of oil, and that Russia is ready for any scenario for the development of the situation.

              It is not surprising that Putin provoked real psychosis among Anglo-Saxon politicians and the media. Putin’s calm and ironic manner infuriates them.

              Russia is meeting a new wave of global turbulence in very good shape, to the envy of many other countries. According to three key parameters, Russia boasts positive values:
              1. Trade balance is in the black. We sell to the world more than we buy from other countries.
              2. Energy balance is in the black. We have more energy than our economy needs. The USA, Japan, all of Europe and China cannot boast of energy self-sufficiency.
              3. Food balance is in the black. With the exception of beef, we produce approximately as much as we need or we can export. Russia is one of the largest grain exporters on the planet, which the USSR could not boast of. If you give a very crude example, without iPhones, the world will live in peace in a crisis, but without oil and grain - no.

              The meeting in Australia was the last chance to agree before the cancellation of the peace agreements reached in 2010.
              Putin clearly stated that it was not possible to agree: Obama was unable to organize the implementation of the IMF agreement by the American side.
              Now we are waiting for the era of turbulence, economic, political and military. The BRICS will try to be points of stability in the impending chaos.

              After it became clear that there would be no breakthrough in the IMF, the Russian leader fixed plans for working with his BRICS colleagues and left. And what more to talk about? It is necessary to prepare for a massive economic war.

              In history, the summit in Australia will be remembered for only one significant event: Putin hugged a koala. Nothing more extraordinary happened. Everything goes on as usual: "Nobody wanted a war. The war was inevitable."


              Source: http://politikus.ru/articles/35749-putin-i-koala-realnye-itogi-g20.html
              Politikus.ru
      2. Babr
        Babr 17 November 2014 08: 08
        +3
        Quote: Canep
        Quote: Samaritan
        We wanted GDP to substitute for the summit!

        Perhaps because of this, he dumped ahead of time, perhaps he wanted to urgently deal with this garbage. And the picture is fake, I have no doubt that the Boeing should be of such a size relative to the ground that the shooting point should be 200 METERS from the plane, but this makes it impossible to hit the MiG frame, which is 52 km from the Boeing. And a satellite can only be at that altitude if it has already left orbit.

        I understand that this is doggy crap, but I liked the previous article. Even not the article, but the comments. For me it was very informative. I went from cover to cover. good
      3. Averias
        Averias 17 November 2014 08: 16
        +15
        Quote: Canep
        but this makes it impossible to get into the frame of the MiG, which is located at a distance of 52 km from the Boeing.

        It can even, even as it can. When shooting from a satellite, a complex of photo equipment is used. The shooting is carried out simultaneously with a telephoto, short focus and the so-called dynamic lens. To create a complete picture on the survey site (large and small objects, objects located at different heights and moving away from each other). Dynamic shooting allows you to track the proximity of a small object (in our case, a military aircraft or missile to a larger object (Boeing) or commensurate). Moreover, at certain time intervals, an enlarged survey of the object at a given point can be made (at the time of the hit of the target with a rocket, for example). And much more interesting things can be seen from the satellite (for a certain purpose), but this, already, does not apply to this case.
        1. Canep
          Canep 17 November 2014 10: 29
          +3
          Quote: Averias
          The shooting is carried out simultaneously with a telephoto, short focus and the so-called dynamic lens

          You want to say that the same picture is taken with two lenses ?, and even with different focal lengths ?. Do not write nonsense.
          1. Averias
            Averias 17 November 2014 11: 31
            +8
            Quote: Canep
            Quote: Averias
            The shooting is carried out simultaneously with a telephoto, short focus and the so-called dynamic lens

            You want to say that the same picture is taken with two lenses ?, and even with different focal lengths ?. Do not write nonsense.

            Dear, I described very roughly how the equipment works. But the principle is something like this. And the shooting is conducted not with two or even three lenses. I can tell in more detail ....
            So at the expense of delirium, do not carry it yourself - if you have the knowledge of a photographer. As in these systems, from photography only the word lens and the word shooting hi
            1. Canep
              Canep 17 November 2014 11: 50
              0
              Quote: Averias
              I can tell in more detail ....

              You would have a diagram or drawing here brought cameras shooting on one matrix with several lenses at once. It is interesting to see, and if you can’t, then leave your comments to yourself.
              1. Averias
                Averias 17 November 2014 12: 00
                +3
                Quote: Canep
                You would have a diagram or drawing here brought cameras shooting on one matrix with several lenses at once. It is interesting to see, and if you can’t, then leave your comments to yourself.

                Forgive me for daring to challenge your ambitious knowledge in the field of space observation systems for tracking the surface of the earth and tracking objects. With the same result, you could ask me to sketch out the operation diagram of the matrix and the mirror system of the Hubble telescope, or the Radioastron diagram. There are such things as Resource-P, KMSS and much more, only for narrowly targeted applications. And since the satellite is foreign, I have no idea how they shot it (if this is their satellite and a photo from it).
                1. Canep
                  Canep 17 November 2014 12: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: Averias
                  You could ask me to sketch out the operation diagram of the matrix and the mirror system of the Hubble telescope

                  This is not a problem for me

                  Quote: Averias
                  or Radioastron diagram


                  The radio astron has two optical systems but also two receiving arrays, and the image is obtained using computer processing. Any photograph always has one lens with a specific focal length.
                  1. Averias
                    Averias 17 November 2014 12: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Canep
                    This is not a problem for me

                    Yeah, so I also know how the fusion reactor works, and I can draw a diagram on my knee. So what?
                    1. Canep
                      Canep 17 November 2014 12: 17
                      +1
                      Quote: Averias
                      how the fusion reactor works

                      And what does this have to do with it?
                      1. Averias
                        Averias 17 November 2014 12: 19
                        +2
                        Quote: Canep
                        And what does this have to do with it?

                        A metaphor, or rather an analogy.
                  2. Averias
                    Averias 17 November 2014 12: 18
                    +4
                    Quote: Canep
                    This is not a problem for me

                    Well, yes, Google is called to help. What you presented in the "funny" pictures is in its pure form a figurative representation of the device for the layman, no specifics. And all the "specificity" helpfully presented by the search engine .... to put it mildly if - is not correct. Although, to each his own, I said only what I have real knowledge, otherwise I would not write.
            2. Simple
              Simple 17 November 2014 13: 06
              +1
              I’ll support it: it used to be spy satellites dumped footage in capsules.

              Now (video and photos) are transmitted in Live mode and programs created for the necessary visualization of information.
        2. Airdefence_107
          17 November 2014 13: 23
          0
          Well, then please give an example of your words (any photo) and indicate which, even in theory, there can be a difference in the sizes of two objects that are at such a distance from each other, which is many times smaller than the distance from the lens to the nearest of these objects (for example 10 times).
          1. Simple
            Simple 17 November 2014 14: 49
            +2
            Quote: Airdefence_107
            Well, then please give an example of your words (any photo


            I do not have examples on hand as unnecessary.

            I think it's worth discussing this issue in terms of logic:

            1. In any digital camera, a microcircuit (processing information from a photochip) is "stitched" with a program, which ultimately makes the information happy, as it is convenient for the human eye (more precisely, as it is used to perceive it).

            Now imagine that in your camera to create a specific image, the system of lenses is running up to date. Your camera takes one picture of several (by the number of lenses). The resulting photograph (depending on the options involved in your program on the computer) will be strange in terms of geometry.

            2. If this (in the article) photo is genuine, then there are also photographs
            missiles, and the subsequent destruction of the aircraft.

            Why did the US even remove this catastrophe ?. So this is an excellent compromising evidence against the current authorities in Ukraine (just in case).

            The only strange thing is why Russia will not publish its pictures.
            1. Airdefence_107
              17 November 2014 17: 31
              +3
              Quote: Simple
              Now imagine that in your camera to create a specific image, the system of lenses is running up to date. Your camera takes one picture of several (by the number of lenses). The resulting photograph (depending on the options involved in your program on the computer) will be strange in terms of geometry.

              Lenses are different, but such a perspective is still unattainable in my opinion. If different photos, then there is no point in cutting out the planes and superimposing them on another photo. Especially made DigitalGlobe and accessible to users.

              I think Russia really did not have satellites in the area at this time.
      4. Wedmak
        Wedmak 17 November 2014 09: 10
        +8
        in order for the Boeing to be of such a size relative to the ground, it is necessary that the shooting point be in 200 METERS from the plane

        No, actually. Do not forget, the satellite has non-fake optics. Therefore, a simple triangle to calculate the apparent size, as well as the height of the satellite’s orbit will not work.
      5. WKS
        WKS 17 November 2014 09: 43
        +1
        On the Internet, it appeared in mid-October.

        The official investigation is classified, so the people are engaged in creativity. But Leontiev needs to be careful with topics, you need to check, they can deliberately provoke.
      6. L10n77
        L10n77 17 November 2014 12: 18
        0
        Teach physics and, in particular, optics, dear, apparently it's not like you didn’t even attend these classes at the university, or at least buy yourself a SLR camera with interchangeable lenses and try shooting with different lenses.
        1. bugaev2005
          bugaev2005 17 November 2014 16: 28
          -1
          Dear L10n77, Before you insult a person, think three times. Above there is a comment from a person who dealt with space optics, I give him as an example:
          An approximate calculation of the altitude of the orbit with which the image was taken is 150 km if the Boeing flew 10000 m, excluding optics. The distortion of the projections is caused by the inhomogeneity of the atmosphere, its variable density, and the nonlinear passage of oblique optical rays: the panorama is compressed multiple times.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. ABV
      ABV 17 November 2014 08: 11
      +10
      Quote: Samaritan
      We wanted GDP to substitute for the summit!

      To substitute GDP? what nonsense? Are the idiots sitting in your circle? Are we here only on VO alone so "beautiful and all in white"?
      We also learned to work in the info war. The stuffing is deliberately so brazen. the clumsy the accusation, the more difficult it is to launder! and now let them launder themselves and make excuses, why are we the only ones? let them sit and stsut - and what we really have there!
      1. Corsair
        Corsair 17 November 2014 09: 26
        +3
        Quote: ABV
        We also learned to work in the info war. The stuffing is deliberately so brazen. the clumsy the accusation, the more difficult it is to launder! and now let them launder themselves and make excuses, why are we the only ones?

        That's right ... "Throwing poop over the fence" is an element of info-war. And the fact that "MNOGOKODOVKA" with the downing of 777 did not achieve the planned result, the consequences of the fact that the special services of the Russian Federation ON TIME and EFFECTIVELY joined the counter-game ...
        Of course, the Boeing disaster will continue to surface for some time, but not with the intensity that the developers of the special operation intended to receive ...
        I’ll repeat againDURING the Russian propaganda machine worked, and this inspires hope that FINALLY, LEARNED !!!
    5. sergey261180
      sergey261180 17 November 2014 08: 55
      -7
      this bullshit was for domestic consumption. Everyone knew that Putin would be fooled, and so it was that rare bastards were fumbling, that’s an irrefutable proof.
    6. Giant thought
      Giant thought 17 November 2014 10: 32
      0
      But while official statements by independent experts are not observed, but mostly the statements of amateurs.
    7. The comment was deleted.
    8. Denis fj
      Denis fj 17 November 2014 13: 47
      0
      Where is the evidence? Evidence from the owners of the means of “objective control”. And from the owners of communication satellites. These are the USA (about 6 satellites were then in the area of ​​visibility), Russia (there was information in the media that their satellites were supposedly 3, or 5 ), and some other countries, including China.
    9. Chekan
      Chekan 17 November 2014 18: 23
      -1
      Something like that;
      1. doxtop
        doxtop 18 November 2014 09: 42
        +1
        Oh my God! So after all, they will bring to the white knee ... to comment on the attached post. Only now it’s a pity to spend your time on this!
        I invite everyone who sincerely believes in the authenticity of the photograph to forget about it for a while and turn to the materials provided by representatives of the RF Armed Forces immediately after the disaster and some time later!
        Read carefully and thoughtfully and soon you will understand ... this photo is bullshit!

        Yours!
  2. rugor
    rugor 17 November 2014 07: 48
    +13
    The picture was released to the G20. In war, all the more informational, all means are good. Beat the reptile with his own weapon!
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 17 November 2014 07: 48
    +4
    I recommend the author to read the article by E. Schultz (below). It gives reason to think.
    1. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 13: 49
      -1
      Already read and answered:
      Quote: Airdefence_107
      I am not Varlamov, therefore I agree with part of Schultz's evidence. And with the fact that "Inaccurate identification of the aircraft is available, but it is not at all a FALSE proof. This is only proof that Leontyev is poorly versed in aircraft."

      / "Remember the very beginning of the post? So far, it turns out that not the photo was pulled from Google, but on the contrary - the Google map has been adjusted with a fresh photo to question the authenticity of this photo, appealing to the fact that it was taken from Google! Who can do this, how nor the American special services? Which, let me remind you, now completely supervise all the activities of the so-called authorities of the b / u of Ukraine, and the course of the so-called ATO, which from the first day turned into a PUNISHIVE operation. " Nonsense, because Google places only part of the picture in the program. And this cloud did not appear in the history of the program yesterday. Here it is on the Donetsk website dated June 6, 2013, 14:46. We must look, guys ...
      http://dn.vgorode.ua/news/sobytyia/176710-donetsk-yz-kosmosa--yandeks-obnovyl-fo

      to-horoda-so-sputnyka
      Yandex and Google turns out to be lovers of images DigitalGlobe ...
      Ps I recommend to pay attention to the history of the picture with the planes. repeat
  4. Barakuda
    Barakuda 17 November 2014 07: 49
    +4
    Execution cannot be pardoned. Russia clearly did not shoot down there, it’s more expensive for itself.
  5. el.krokodil
    el.krokodil 17 November 2014 07: 51
    +8
    clearly not clear .. and this picture, along with the program, blew up someone’s brain laughingthey make stuffing and we make it worse? .. the fact that M. Leontyev trolls dill and makes nerves psaki is good .. only more and more often you need to do it! laughing
  6. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 17 November 2014 07: 52
    +3
    I’m trying to be constructive ... because I respect Mikhail Leontyev and his work ... Something I can’t believe in trying to substitute ... maybe they wanted to convey some information to understanding people ... maybe it's just an exchange of scarecrows ???
    1. sergey261180
      sergey261180 17 November 2014 09: 50
      -4
      Misha used to drive an incomprehensible blizzard, no one paid attention. But this time he embodied his blizzard in the picture and terribly deformed, showed his lack of professionalism. After that, he would probably only print in Speed ​​Info.
      1. ssergn
        ssergn 18 November 2014 17: 03
        0
        He just needs to be the vice president of Rosneft. So you can not jerk.
    2. Egoza
      Egoza 17 November 2014 11: 26
      +6
      Quote: silberwolf88
      Something I can not believe in an attempt to substitute ..

      Even if this photo is fake - it worked! Were there any complaints about the "downed Boeing" in Australia? No! They only walked around Ukraine. All at once bit their tongue - "what if the Russians really have proof?"
      1. Serrrrgo
        Serrrrgo 17 November 2014 11: 37
        +2
        For me it’s so worthless to be like dill propaganda, that way next time before a summit, Leontiev will announce that Ukraine is shelling Russia with nuclear weapons.
        1. sergey261180
          sergey261180 17 November 2014 14: 50
          -5
          Quote: serrrrgo
          For me it’s so worthless to be like dill propaganda, that way next time before a summit, Leontiev will announce that Ukraine is shelling Russia with nuclear weapons.

          People from the first channel pick everything up.
  7. HAM
    HAM 17 November 2014 07: 54
    +4
    The wreckage had not yet reached the ground, and in the kuevo they already announced that they had been shot down by the militiamen. Now, when trying to understand the situation, the "Serdyuk" talk about fakes: "read out the entire list, please!" - and then choose grain from the chaff.
    1. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 13: 52
      +1
      Did the author (well, STE I) argue that the plane was shot down by Ukraine? The author only contested this "proof" :)
  8. bmv04636
    bmv04636 17 November 2014 07: 55
    +12
    After all, they already wrote before and Leontiev said that this picture is not 100% true. But there is one truth that was previously shown that objective control devices recorded an unidentified aircraft. What the author will answer and why there is still no audio recording of the dispatcher’s negotiations with the Boeing.
    Not claiming that the picture is genuine, I argue that the evidence of fakeness, which is now being replicated, is just a lie and far-fetched arguments. At the same time, the frank yellowness of the plum, combined with the publication on the largest TV channel in Russia - Channel One, is a very strange thing. It all overlaps with G20. Obviously a global confrontation between the United States and Russia. Obviously, b / Ukraine is only a changeable card in this process. Draw conclusions. They are much more complicated than you think at first glance. And of course, do not believe the scoundrels who now lie that the photo is a fake. This is not true. There is no evidence of fake pictures!
    1. atalef
      atalef 17 November 2014 08: 12
      -6
      Quote: bmv04636
      You already wrote before, and Leontiev said that this picture is not 100% true

      in general, in a normal journalistic ethics, a person issuing such a report and so in half a voice declares that the picture is not 100% true, how is it?
      And what is the truth there?
      Maybe it’s not true there is only 1%, like the wrong plane?

      Quote: bmv04636
      But there is one truth that was previously shown that objective control devices recorded an unidentified aircraft.

      Of course, the truth is, su 25 (as stated)
      --- Unconditional truth - only somehow they believe in it a little.
      Quote: bmv04636
      What the author will answer and why there is still no audio recording of the dispatcher’s negotiations with the Boeing

      And why not Russian intelligence means to voice it? Or do you think that nothing was heard 20 km from the Russian border? Yes, even in the war zone, and even taking into account an unidentified military aircraft?
      Quote: bmv04636
      Without claiming that the picture is genuine, I argue that the evidence of fakeness that is now replicated is just lies and far-fetched arguments

      I wonder how did you manage to combine incompatible?
      those. stating that the picture is not genuine, you declare that this is not a fake
      What's the difference
      Quote: bmv04636
      At the same time, the frank yellowness of the plum, combined with the publication on the largest TV channel in Russia - Channel One

      Yes, no, everything was done as always stupid and clumsy. The news was voiced by Leontiev, and the news of the first channel went around it in strange silence.
      Well, of course, Leontiev (as a journalist) has the right to his own point of view and news policy, in no way dependent on the leadership of the first channel (we laugh together)
      I say again - clumsy and stupid.
      Inspiring only one - I do not believe
      Quote: bmv04636
      . And of course, do not believe the scoundrels who are now lying that the photo is fake. This is not true. There is no evidence of a fake photo!

      With the exception of Leontyev’s words, we don’t claim that the photo is real HA_HA_HA,
      1. andj61
        andj61 17 November 2014 08: 25
        0
        Greetings, Alexander! Of course, M. Leontyev substituted himself in full - I completely agree with you. And the picture, and the information, of course, is fake. But this is only the case when fake, with some exceptions (type of aircraft?), Etc., in general, is true: the Malaysian Boeing was shot down not by air defense systems, but by air, using an air gun and an air-to-air missile. Experts have already spoken about this, with cautious reservations, on the basis of studying photographs of the wreckage of the aircraft — and not only Russian experts.
        And I completely agree - M. Leontyev played in this case on the side of the enemy - this is an own goal. Or is it not in their own?
        1. saber
          saber 17 November 2014 08: 48
          +2
          Well, why are you so hard then ??? Yes, he threw in Leontyev, not the Russian Defense Ministry. so as not to push the enemy against the wall, so that in the event of possible agreements it would be possible to play back somehow. and apparently managed to agree, since the wave was quietly repaid. and 298 passengers? they died ..
        2. 2sila
          2sila 17 November 2014 11: 35
          +5
          Leontiev plays exactly by those rules. by which he is allowed.
          And the topic must have been read one hundred percent.
          And people there are not the most stupid ones, which I can give in confirmation of all their successive steps in all previous crisis situations.
        3. atalef
          atalef 17 November 2014 12: 23
          +1
          Quote: andj61
          Greetings, Alexander! Of course, M. Leontyev substituted himself in full - I completely agree with you. And the picture, and the information, of course, is fake. But this is only the case when fake, with some exceptions (type of aircraft?), Etc., is generally true:


          And if this is true, then why should such a fake garden be fenced, and then, as it seems to me, under layers of truth (each time new) - somehow you can’t see the truth
          Quote: andj61
          And I completely agree - M. Leontyev played in this case on the side of the enemy - this is an own goal. Or is it not in their own?

          In their own, in soy because taking into account * independence * of the Russian media, who will believe that this report was authorized from the top.
          You know, the best is the enemy of the good.
          1. andj61
            andj61 17 November 2014 15: 34
            -1
            The best, of course, is the enemy of the good, unless in this way Leontiev has arranged "deep probing".
            But regarding the authorization from above - Leontiev is such a proven supporter of Putin that he does not need authorization - to control everything and everything, no one has any desire, no resources, no sense. Whatever they say about it, but such total control in Russia is impossible. Therefore, simple human stupidity is also possible, or, to put it mildly, shortsightedness.
      2. bmv04636
        bmv04636 17 November 2014 08: 39
        +3
        Well, earlier all this evidence was disassembled by bones. The question is if the intelligence will tell which satellite was taken, as I understand it, the issue will be resolved. The Ministry of Transport transferred the objective control data to the commission of inquiry. There is a game and we do not lay out all the cards that we have on hand before waiting for the results of the investigation to be voiced, we wait. C. The time will come and we will lay out all the cards. We are also really looking forward to when the light elves, besides the talking room, provide at least one fact.
      3. ed65b
        ed65b 17 November 2014 08: 44
        +6
        Unlike combines and marker shooters from the Pentagon and the CIA, this is the top of a masterpiece even if fake.
      4. 2sila
        2sila 17 November 2014 11: 31
        +1
        Masterpiece and "grown-up" ....
        Option dispute degenerative-primitive option.
        One has to manage to "comment on" this way without saying a word on the essence of the issue.
        There are thoughts on the photo .....
        What is wrong? ... well, of course, in your opinion, we heard others.
      5. Max otto
        Max otto 17 November 2014 11: 41
        0
        For a journalist, 100% lie is also the norm. But what about the journalists, here the whole premieres of some kind of Australia and Holland are throwing charges without evidence at all and nothing, nifiga is not strange.
      6. bmv04636
        bmv04636 17 November 2014 21: 49
        +1
        Russia insists that the United States provide satellite images taken at the time of the death of the Malaysian Boeing, said Russia's Permanent Representative to the OSCE Andrei Kelin.
        So that the light elves must provide their photos, if not, then this picture automatically becomes true
    2. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 13: 56
      +1
      If a person does not want to see evidence that the picture is fake, he will never see it. Even if Leontiev himself says. And so no one doubts whose work this is with the downed Boeing. The question is only by mistake, like the Tu-154, or deliberately ...
      1. andj61
        andj61 17 November 2014 15: 41
        +2
        Quote: Airdefence_107
        If a person does not want to see evidence of a fake photo, he will never see them.

        It’s fake at least that the Russian means of objective control didn’t fix the MiG-29 near the Boeing, as Leontyev said, not the Su-27, as specialists said based on the analysis of the image, but the Su-25 attack aircraft. The results and evidence of this were transferred to the Dutch. True, the results and reactions to this are not visible.
        1. Airdefence_107
          17 November 2014 19: 33
          -1
          Most likely, their conclusion will indicate that "the plane was shot down by mistake from the ground by an unknown party" ... I won’t be surprised ...
        2. ssergn
          ssergn 18 November 2014 17: 10
          +1
          The result is just visible - the investigation was "extended" for a year.
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. Bronik
    Bronik 17 November 2014 07: 59
    +2
    Intelligence agencies are doing their job, we may never know the results. But this is their job.
  11. Shuev
    Shuev 17 November 2014 07: 59
    +3
    Maybe the main message of this "stuffing" is in the letter itself, this is the main and most important thing, and a photo is a way to attract attention (it succeeded)
    A picture of another place and another time was published, perhaps even finished, but which is based on a real picture from an American satellite.

    http://abrod.livejournal.com/651239.html
  12. 2sila
    2sila 17 November 2014 08: 01
    +1
    Who knows, share it!
    It is difficult to focus on the ground from the satellite and the "focus" is brought closer to the ground, passes the "turning point" and a "mirror" picture is obtained, which is rotated during processing.
    Of course I don’t know.
    And is it really a master who bungled such a high-quality fake, on which, well, at no increase, the artifacts are invisible, did not know or did not understand that there was a clear discrepancy ......
  13. parusnik
    parusnik 17 November 2014 08: 02
    +5
    What exactly the author wanted to convey to us is not clear.. Everything is clear, they threw a small card, to see what was in the hands of the enemy ... The enemy either had to refute (beat) it, or confirm (pick it up) ... The enemy took it away .. But, it seems that this is a hint. ..In Russia, there is really irrefutable evidence that dill brought down a Boeing, but it’s too early to lay out all the trump cards ..
  14. Evgeny59
    Evgeny59 17 November 2014 08: 02
    +3
    Read an article by Eugene Schultz several hours earlier written. But the author Serdyuk A. knowingly minuses instructed.
    1. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 13: 42
      +3
      I am not Varlamov, therefore I agree with part of Schultz's evidence. And with the fact that "Inaccurate identification of the aircraft is available, but it is not at all a FALSE proof. This is only proof that Leontyev is poorly versed in aircraft."

      / "Remember the very beginning of the post? So far, it turns out that not the photo was pulled from Google, but on the contrary - the Google map has been adjusted with a fresh photo to question the authenticity of this photo, appealing to the fact that it was taken from Google! Who can do this, how nor the American special services? Which, let me remind you, now completely supervise all the activities of the so-called authorities of the b / u of Ukraine, and the course of the so-called ATO, which from the first day turned into a PUNISHIVE operation. " Nonsense, because Google places only part of the picture in the program. And this cloud did not appear in the history of the program yesterday. Here it is on the Donetsk website dated June 6, 2013, 14:46. We must look, guys ...
      http://dn.vgorode.ua/news/sobytyia/176710-donetsk-yz-kosmosa--yandeks-obnovyl-fo
      to-horoda-so-sputnyka
      Yandex and Google turns out to be lovers of images DigitalGlobe ...
      Ps I recommend to pay attention to the history of the picture with the planes. repeat
  15. UV58
    UV58 17 November 2014 08: 06
    +8
    nonsense, a telephoto lens distorts perspective - any photographer knows this, and you cannot evaluate the perspective of a telephoto lens from the point of view of the "normal lens" of the human eye ...



    read, opinion and about google.map: http://rusvesna.su/news/1416043616
    1. alexbg2
      alexbg2 17 November 2014 08: 48
      -2
      These photos, as an argument, are complete nonsense, there is such a small disagreement, the distance to the camera also changed with a change in the focal length;
      If all of them were made from 30 meters, then the relative proportions of the first guy relative to the second would be the same, differ in size, both on the telephoto lens would be larger and the background would be less captured.
      1. UV58
        UV58 17 November 2014 10: 50
        +1
        learn materiel.
        1. alexbg2
          alexbg2 17 November 2014 11: 16
          +5
          Teach materiel
          1. Sochi
            Sochi 17 November 2014 15: 09
            +2
            In this case, the perspective distortion is shown for lenses with different focal lengths, for clarity, the figure was shot in the same size, and therefore the shooting point was moved.
    2. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 14: 01
      +1
      Only here the pictures were taken at different distances. Please take into account.
  16. 2sila
    2sila 17 November 2014 08: 09
    +6
    Yes, no fools are sitting in the Kremlin, and in any case, this info was launched after discussion there, at the top, with the involvement of specialists. Even if the picture was not original, how he worked the PR weapon one hundred percent, Obamka mumbled at the Australian university, he wanted to hiccup, as he was shown this masterpiece by chance.
    Yes, and the GRU are sitting good!
    Can't they imagine what the image from the optical reconnaissance satellite looks like and what is visible on it ... ... and yet the decision was made there.
  17. ICT
    ICT 17 November 2014 08: 11
    +4
    Still no evidence


    why break the spears and the geometry course for someone to explain, just look carefully and listen to Comrade leont'eva with 4m 30 sec everything is said in clear text, PROOF you give THEM
    1. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 14: 03
      +2
      Perhaps this is such an attempt to lure them from the Americans, so that they, in an effort to prove the opposite, have posted authentic photos. An interesting option.
      1. Messiah
        Messiah 17 November 2014 21: 12
        +2
        The main message of the "snapshots" is the final change of the ground version to the aviation version, which is advantageous for the Russian Federation in any case! And here you can play giveaway.
  18. African
    African 17 November 2014 08: 11
    +2
    The practice of reconstruction of aircraft accidents is the same everywhere, what we have, what they have. They assemble an airplane from the wreckage and everything immediately becomes clear to everyone. In our case, silence, the tracks from gay Europe are planning to cut parts of the aircraft so that they fit into the carriages, those parts on which the traces of aircraft shells will be cut without the possibility of restoration, etc. In general, to all of us who are on this side of the barricades, it has long since become clear that an objective investigation (or rather, not even so) we will not see objective results of an investigation, if there is no will of someone, in principle, there may not be will, when the opposite side (Russia) says: - "Gulchatay, open your face or I will do it." I think that the stuffing in of information from Leontyev can be assessed unequivocally as a reminder that the issue is not closed, and to be continued. Moreover, 20 passed, they had to be brought to life a little. Continuation will be, we are waiting.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. Shuev
    Shuev 17 November 2014 08: 13
    0
    Quote: 2sila
    Yes, no fools are sitting in the Kremlin, and in any case, this info was launched after discussion there, at the top, with the involvement of specialists.

    the first reaction will come down, inadequate "foam" and start asking the right questions, who really has an interest

    And the Russian Defense Ministry spoke of an American satellite, but the letter suggests that there was still a satellite.
    For objectivity you need some kind of foreign
  21. Barakuda
    Barakuda 17 November 2014 08: 13
    +4
    I'm kind of here. We did not shoot down this fucking plane! Not what! There are people, no technology.
  22. Olga Sinigrosova
    Olga Sinigrosova 17 November 2014 08: 38
    +3
    An expert assessment was just beginning to be carried out, and in the article, even before the final conclusions of the experts, a genius someone understood everything and put them on the shelves. Hurry, gentlemen! And, please do not forget, Prior to this, the Russian president did not put the pan, and beat the facts. So why should he start to act, as those against whom he is opposed, or rather, what he is opposed to - against double standards and deception.
    I think this article is stuffing. M. Leontiev would not be happy to play the role of "Psaki". It means questioning your professionalism and intelligence in the end.
    Hurry, gentlemen, hurry! Moreover, many of you are here. Why not think a little before you write? Why such a rush? What do you think of such an article? Joy?
    1. Stinger
      Stinger 17 November 2014 09: 36
      +3
      And where else to be smart? They don’t give it on TV, in newspapers there are enough clever men, bloggers will make fun of. Remains in.
  23. ed65b
    ed65b 17 November 2014 08: 41
    +3
    Well, what all immediately got excited that the photo is a lie? What satellite to take a close-up shot of an object on the earth now need to go down to him at 100 m? do not make me laugh. The photo could well have been real from orbit, when zooming, just what it took was all that was needed, didn’t you have your colleagues holding the camera in your hands?
  24. HAM
    HAM 17 November 2014 08: 46
    +3
    Who will openly hand over "SNOWDEN-2" and tell how these pictures appeared at Leontyev's?
    1. HAM
      HAM 17 November 2014 09: 04
      +1
      “This is not our method!” - but where to go, the “partners” run up themselves.
  25. desertfox
    desertfox 17 November 2014 09: 11
    +2
    A couple of Googlemaps shots with airplanes:

    The question remains, why is there no inversion trace in the presented photo?
    1. desertfox
      desertfox 17 November 2014 09: 12
      0
      The second picture
      https://www.google.com/maps?ll=40.309174,115.95034&spn=0.007437,0.012757&t=h&z=1

      7
    2. alexbg2
      alexbg2 17 November 2014 09: 25
      +2
      Because the inversion trace is not always present, it depends on the state of the atmosphere.
      1. desertfox
        desertfox 17 November 2014 09: 35
        +1
        Yes, I read about the trail, the question is removed.
      2. doxtop
        doxtop 18 November 2014 09: 57
        0
        When flying at altitudes of more than 8 km. - OK. 97% chance of a condensation (or inversion) trace.
        Well, at temperatures and humidity in the indicated region of Ukraine ... almost 100%. ;)
    3. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 17 November 2014 14: 44
      0
      money for fish again, read the previous article
  26. rul
    rul 17 November 2014 09: 16
    0
    Are you sure the satellite image? Perhaps the picture was taken from a spy plane. Famous have a height limit of 26 km, but there is evidence that there is a ceiling of 30 and even 40 km. The Earth’s surface is monitored not only at the surface itself, but different cameras are focused at different distances. The Ukrainian authorities themselves would not dare to bring down anything. So she was pushed to this, giving guarantees of immunity, but at the same time, in order to keep her ass in good shape (Merkel, Oland, Abbott, Solberg, Rasmussen ...), it is necessary to record the traces of the crime, to classify them and to remind them from time to time to there was no turning back.
  27. Tra-ta-ta
    Tra-ta-ta 17 November 2014 09: 25
    +1
    Everything is true in the photo: 777 flew, and then the 29 th is like a rocket ..! I believe !!!
    However, goodbye ...
  28. Bakht
    Bakht 17 November 2014 09: 32
    -4
    The most common opinion is that the scale of the aircraft is not sustained. And almost all operate with simple geometry without taking into account the focal length. In terms of angular dimensions, I personally obtained a height of about 75 km. But these are all fabrications in wit.

    When any person uses the Google Map, it can easily scroll with the mouse and get any increase. But this does not mean that changing the scale, we change the altitude of the satellite.

    So there is no evidence of fake on a scale. On the contrary, comparing the size of the plane and the airport, we can conclude that there was an increase of about 60 times.

    Doubt is caused by other points. Rocket launch from a distance of 50 km and from the rear hemisphere. Although everyone seemed to be clear that the shelling was carried out from the front hemisphere. The second point is the same distance, which excludes the firing of an aircraft gun.
    1. alexbg2
      alexbg2 17 November 2014 09: 35
      +2
      What is an increase of 60 times, an airplane or an airport? If the plane, then why the airport also has not increased 60 times?
      1. Bakht
        Bakht 17 November 2014 09: 42
        +1
        And who said that did not increase? Scale is the ratio of the line on the map to the same line on the ground. Attach a ruler to the airport and then divide the numbers. But this is all in a first approximation, because again I can get any length on the map by scrolling the wheel on the mouse. The length of the aircraft is 70 meters, the length of the airport is 4000 meters. We divide one into another and get 55 times. Or something like that. But we must take into account the flight altitude of 10 km. If the picture was taken by satellite, then this difference can be neglected.
  29. Erg
    Erg 17 November 2014 09: 35
    +6
    It's amazing how everyone was "captured" by the theme of the authenticity of the photo. Why go through your dirty laundry? Shot down the plane - for sure. There was no rocket launch from the ground - for sure. It is not profitable for Russia to shoot down - for sure. Kakly with Western demons hinder the investigation (even with boxes and dispatchers' negotiations everything was hushed up) - for sure. The entire world community cowardly has its tail between its legs (in front of the states) and yapping at Russia - for sure. Personally, I have already concluded long ago hi
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 17 November 2014 13: 44
      +4
      Quote: Erg
      Kakly with the Western demons hinder the investigation (even with boxes and dispatcher negotiations all hushed up) - for sure.

      ... and what's more, they talk about:
      - erased areas from the chronology of "black boxes" MH17
      - "GPS grid shift" on the day of the destruction of MH17 (recall what the GA pilots said that it was impossible to use the ZHPS over Ukraine)
      - brawl of Google images in this area
      - the desire of the Dutch to leave the wreckage in the snow until next year ...
      Where more?
      1. Erg
        Erg 17 November 2014 23: 14
        0
        I agree. If we were sitting with them at a table, somewhere in a tavern, then we would just put pressure on their pigs. Well, how much can you listen to this nonsense ... hi
  30. Tanechka-clever
    Tanechka-clever 17 November 2014 09: 35
    +4
    "..." However "with Mikhail Leontiev was supposed to be a sensation."

    I never liked the program "However," and Leontyev himself as a presenter. In general, I do not like the presenters on the "However" program. Talking about the "main thing" as an example of talking about "nothing", but the salary is ticking for them, and I think it is not small, and okay. And therefore, these leaders, by and large, do not care.
    But this is a matter of taste ... and when it comes to such photos, then this is politics. And her appearance on television and promotion immediately asks a lot of questions. Who today manages the info in the state - professionals, amateurs or provocateurs.
    Moreover, this is "not a puncture", but a deliberate action and ..... ALREADY NOT THE FIRST.

    What and who is behind this is not clear to me ... but rather, all at once. Professionals and patriots have not been interested in the state for a long time because they argue a lot, unless they agree to work for free, in the name of patriotism, silently and disinterestedly. And therefore, at the forefront today are accommodating and accommodating amateurs. Sales have been cultivated in the country for several decades and now has formed an entire CLASS.
    "However" this is the clearest example of our decayed society. Of course, you can put forward different slogans - but the main thing is that there would be someone ready to die for these slogans.
    For example, I really like the deputy Fedorov as he speaks, but his appeals to the people, sort of like "it's time to wake up" are already beginning to cause a smile. And he says this to the people who were robbed and humiliated by the very deputies who are in the DUMA today.

    So I want to remind him. The Bolsheviks are accused of the fact that a handful of traitors carried out a coup. In the 90s, a handful of liberals also carried out a coup, and it was not the people who destroyed the USSR.
    And now what without people is weak. It turns out that when it is necessary to capture and divide, then this can be done without the people. But when it is necessary to protect this most private good, people are needed.
    And for this, private-military companies are being created around the world today to protect private property, but the truth should be kept by private owners, not by the people, and already on a prepaid basis.

    In short, new states were born. The state appeared primarily to protect the private. Nothing new. Evolution from simple to complex.
    Today in the world, the social crisis and the PRIVATE today have thrown the world community far back.

    So why today a bunch of patriots from the DUMA cannot again decide everything without the participation of the people.
  31. Board375
    Board375 17 November 2014 09: 35
    0
    I would like to believe that Russia has proof. That is - the very "trump cards" that are "too early" to spread, about which they speak not only in the VO, but in general in the media. It is clear that they need to be used in relation to the current political situation. BUT! It is not entirely clear how we will go with these "trump cards" when it will be difficult to point out the evidence left after the fall? The place and the entrances to it were regularly fired upon with dill, the fuselage was cut into pieces, etc. It is clear that the Geyropeans will do everything to prove it was as difficult as possible. I understand that our special services are not stupid, but as a man in the street in this matter, I argue and painfully worry about this. I would like to hope that the killers of unarmed and innocent 298 people will be punished. How the murderers of Donbass civilians were punished!
    1. Erg
      Erg 17 November 2014 09: 39
      +1
      I want to upset you They won’t. Punishment is imposed for the theft of a purse or mobile phone. And for this ... Hardly ...
    2. jurassic61
      jurassic61 17 November 2014 10: 46
      +3
      In my opinion, there is evidence and this was hinted at by demonstrating the pictures as an assumption made from the UAV, and our military did not provide information about monitoring the airspace that day, and most likely they did this and saw the "Drona", but the situation silences until a certain moment ...
  32. meriem1
    meriem1 17 November 2014 09: 41
    -1
    Quote: Babr
    Quote: Canep
    Quote: Samaritan
    We wanted GDP to substitute for the summit!

    Perhaps because of this, he dumped ahead of time, perhaps he wanted to urgently deal with this garbage. And the picture is fake, I have no doubt that the Boeing should be of such a size relative to the ground that the shooting point should be 200 METERS from the plane, but this makes it impossible to hit the MiG frame, which is 52 km from the Boeing. And a satellite can only be at that altitude if it has already left orbit.

    I understand that this is doggy crap, but I liked the previous article. Even not the article, but the comments. For me it was very informative. I went from cover to cover. good

    That's it. It makes no sense to say that the picture is fake. The previous article directly points to this. The fact that he (the picture) is genuine is also not for us to prove. Or is there a "great specialist" in satellites and optics, like alexbg2 ????? The fact that the Ukrainians filled up the Boeing is no secret to anyone. The military board was seen there by the surrounding residents and a video with their comments was posted by SNN. Only after some reason was it removed.
  33. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 17 November 2014 10: 35
    0
    If Ernst is not removed for this blunder, then I don’t even know. This will mean that he has completely different bosses with whom ours cannot argue.
    1. MEDVED
      MEDVED 17 November 2014 11: 04
      +3
      Why should it be removed? In "civilized" countries for such fakes in batches are removed or what))))?
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 19 November 2014 20: 10
        0
        In "civilized" countries nobody cares about their fakes. In the UN, they are officially cowardly with incomprehensible test tubes, they do not care, then they will apologize if they face anyone. But other people's bloopers control and willingly use.
  34. Signature
    Signature 17 November 2014 11: 01
    +1
    First, the aerial attack version - regardless of the presence / absence of evidence gathered - is correct.
    Secondly, while the critic does not have in his hands the original material from the "graduate of MIT (Massachusetts Technological ...)" - nothing can be recognized as a crushing debunking.
    Thirdly, it would be nice - in principle - to find out how personally A. Serdyuk is close to the elite conducting the examination? For his opinion is against the opinion of "RSI" - too just "one more opinion".
    As for journalists, yes, bloopers are a common thing for them (as with doctors or meteorologists: they are living people, and obviously not all of them were once excellent students; now, often, any fluent speaker playfully passes for a journalist, only would not "abuse" silence). However, Mikhail Leontiev is definitely not one of them.
  35. tomket
    tomket 17 November 2014 11: 06
    +3
    The only question I have is, why are we waiting and demanding the presentation of images from foreign satellites? Where are our companions? Why did the air defense work so clumsy if they did not manage to accurately determine the number and types of aircraft present in the airspace that day. The conflict did not start there yesterday, and ours there had to seriously monitor airspace. If the ground units could not cope, then where are our A-50 ??? Why was not an air patrol organized? And if it was, then de results ??? All this to the organization’s issues.
    1. wax
      wax 17 November 2014 15: 22
      -1
      Because behind the provocation is the most powerful country, and we can’t poke it with our own nose only on our own. Therefore, the truth will be kept secret for many years.
  36. Bogranz
    Bogranz 17 November 2014 11: 08
    -1
    "Well done" author: he did not even bother to provide any evidence. He just took the pose of Kisa Vorobyaninov and said: a picture of a linden tree. But the publication was noted. If there is anything to evaluate in this essay, then only the spelling ...
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 17 November 2014 13: 36
      -2
      Quote: Bograntz
      "Well done" author: he did not even bother to provide any evidence. He just took the pose of Kisa Vorobyaninov and said: a picture of a linden tree.

      Article-bold "minus" for hanging superficial labels, the absence of any intelligible arguments and no appeal statements! Typical libroid kreakal blah blah ...
      1. Airdefence_107
        17 November 2014 14: 38
        0
        No need to judge people so harshly. For starters, you can read other articles of the author: http://topwar.ru/57035-novorossiya-dala-boy.html
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 17 November 2014 22: 43
          0
          Whatever materials the people wrote, nevertheless, the current one pours water on Kaklov and the State Department, and this must be clearly understood!
          This is what smart people write -
          "The latest version of the downing of Boeing is hasty, but reliable" And the bloggers who immediately leaned out were coordinated from a single center ...
          About this - a military expert, journalist Alexander Zhilin said in an interview with Nakanune.RU.
          Question: The unexpectedly sharp reaction of bloggers (in response to the publication of a photo of the MN17 massacre) raises questions. Just a few hours after the publication of the picture, they already rolled out gigantic materials with a bunch of linden refutations, and everything was done by a united front: from Navalny to Katz. But these bloggers do not specialize in the topic. Can we assume that they worked as a coordinated structure?
          Alexander Zhilin: Quite right. I now criticize our information policy, but on the other hand, in the same way, if you take information from bloggers right after the plane accident, you will see the same picture. Already Navalny - to sit and not stick out! Persons who, by sleep or spirit, do not understand aviation, have leaned out ... But it was necessary to raise hysteria: "Look! Falsification!" It was necessary to crush them on a massive scale. If specialists had come forward, then this whole gang of "gateway bloggers" would not have been able to work out that way, because there would have been such proofs that simply do not fight. As for structuredness: certainly. Unfortunately, this coordination is very effective. There is an information war waged by the United States using the information resource of the European Union. All this is, of course, the one who planned this terrorist attack, who controlled the implementation of this terrorist attack - these are our enemies who are waging an information war against us.

          Fully - http://www.nakanune.ru/articles/19698/
          1. Airdefence_107
            18 November 2014 13: 33
            0
            Oh, do not tell my slippers)) "coordinated from a single center"))) Do not try to prove your case if you yourself are not sure of it.
    2. Airdefence_107
      17 November 2014 14: 37
      -1
      Khe-Khe ...)

      Proof of:
      1) A snapshot of Google from 28.08.2012 and an original picture with planes.
      2) A subtle hint at the impossibility of obtaining such a perspective even from the lowest-flying satellite
      3) And what was this picture doing on this forum on "Wednesday, 15.10.2014/11/07, 59:1403"? Also the tricks of the Americans? http://obkon.ucoz.com/forum/6869-16-1413356832-XNUMX-XNUMX
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 17 November 2014 14: 50
        -1
        Quote: Airdefence_107
        Proof of:

        they are scattered !!!
        no need to blunt and repeat and pour from empty to empty -
        http://topwar.ru/62617-ataka-boinga-777-istrebitelem-pravda-ili-poddelka-rassled

        ovanie.html
        1. Airdefence_107
          17 November 2014 17: 35
          -1
          Read and analyzed, but I can quote again:
          Quote: Airdefence_107
          I am not Varlamov, therefore I agree with part of Schultz's evidence. And with the fact that "Inaccurate identification of the aircraft is available, but it is not at all a FALSE proof. This is only proof that Leontyev is poorly versed in aircraft."

          / "Remember the very beginning of the post? So far, it turns out that not the photo was pulled from Google, but on the contrary - the Google map has been adjusted with a fresh photo to question the authenticity of this photo, appealing to the fact that it was taken from Google! Who can do this, how nor the American special services? Which, let me remind you, now completely supervise all the activities of the so-called authorities of the b / u of Ukraine, and the course of the so-called ATO, which from the first day turned into a PUNISHIVE operation. " Nonsense, because Google places only part of the picture in the program. And this cloud did not appear in the history of the program yesterday. Here it is on the Donetsk website dated June 6, 2013, 14:46. We must look, guys ...
          http://dn.vgorode.ua/news/sobytyia/176710-donetsk-yz-kosmosa--yandeks-obnovyl-fo


          to-horoda-so-sputnyka
          Yandex and Google turns out to be lovers of images DigitalGlobe ...
          Ps I recommend to pay attention to the history of the picture with the planes. repeat


          Yes, and the item 3 is not even mentioned by reference.
  37. lankrus
    lankrus 17 November 2014 11: 17
    +2
    Why is there no evidence? They are, and have been cited for a long time, but for some reason they are hushed up, including by our press, and any slag is broadcasted. Here's an example proof:
    http://politobzor.net/show-36542-viktor-galenko-777-nestykovok-malaziyskogo-boin
    ga.html
    1. Bogranz
      Bogranz 17 November 2014 11: 34
      -1
      And as an addition.
    2. Signature
      Signature 17 November 2014 11: 35
      0
      But even here (http://politobzor.net/show-36542-viktor-galenko-777-nestykovok-malaziyskogo-boi
      nga.html) everything is drowning in the influx of fog (please pay close attention to the conclusions that are far-reaching from the "influx"). + The pathos of the discoverer's holy faith in his righteousness: everyone has it (this pathos), and everyone can lead anywhere.

      "Plus" you for the link: otherwise it would not be clear whether you are talking about the absence of any evidence - "for" or "against".
    3. svd-xnumx
      svd-xnumx 17 November 2014 13: 30
      0
      http://politobzor.net/show-36542-viktor-galenko-777-nestykovok-malaziyskogo-boin

      ga.html
      infection Doctor Web does not allow you to get acquainted, even when you add it to the "White List", the same nonsense with some articles on the site http://warfiles.ru
  38. Coltxnumx
    Coltxnumx 17 November 2014 11: 40
    +3
    So it seems that Russia has accurate data who brought down, but it holds them. And as for the blunders from Leontyev, they taught me in childhood: I crap one's pants, did stupid things, wipe yourself, apologize and try not to do that anymore. If Leontiev does not apologize, I will cease to respect both him and the program.
    1. alexbg2
      alexbg2 17 November 2014 11: 57
      +3
      I ceased to respect him after obgazhivaem them Primakov.
      1. Signature
        Signature 17 November 2014 12: 29
        +1
        Different things - a negative statement about who you respect, and a misinterpretation of the truth.
        If the first one is tested by your moods, then the second one cannot be "taken" by your moods: you need to find, with the help of objective information, where the truth lies.
        And then - now those who are well-disposed towards Mih. Leontyev will be motivated (in your words) to distrust you (chain reaction ...).

        Both Сolt864 and alexbg2 are "pluses" (so that, God forbid, they do not try to get offended!).
  39. aepocmam
    aepocmam 17 November 2014 12: 09
    +2
    Or maybe this is a photograph not from a satellite, but from a second plane (from an altitude of about 20000 m), which controlled the actions of the first plane. Moreover, in the first reports from the Boeing crash site, witnesses said they saw two military aircraft. Then everything seems to fall into place. It is also possible that this second military aircraft also participated in the destruction of the Boeing, or in the destruction of the first, as an unnecessary "witness".
    1. Signature
      Signature 17 November 2014 12: 30
      0
      He who seeks sometimes finds. (I'm not hinting at anything, I just want to give you a "plus").
    2. Heavy
      Heavy 17 November 2014 12: 45
      -1
      time doesn’t coincide anyway and experts couldn’t miss it, another thing is either substituting Russia with such stuff, or Russia does it intentionally, hinting that the Americans should admit, or Russia recognizes that there was an American plane there, for example
  40. demo_mag
    demo_mag 17 November 2014 12: 34
    +3
    Good day forum users.
    Personally, I think that this picture is fake, but it does its job. We are all discussing what and how in this picture, we remembered geometry, mathematics, satellites, and so on and so forth. Isn't that just perfect?
    Now I’ll say in France (and in Europe too) - well, firstly, the local Ukrainians again raised a wave from Ukraine. They break the wires about expressing their FI to our media, which for a long time could not be omitted so powerfully (and whether to omit it?). Of course it causes me personally a lot of negative emotions. On the other hand - in the Netherlands they stirred and began to collect debris, in France they remembered this story again and began to ask - what was the reality, in Germany the process was again busted - what was all this for? - And besides, they do not allow this process to be washed away as is the case with snipers and Odessa. And here I see a positive. Such stuffing is apparently needed so that the true nature of things is not forgotten. And yet - all of a sudden Svidomo began to think - that generally suggests that not everything is so bad, you look and will be more attentive to your media.
    1. Genry
      Genry 17 November 2014 18: 45
      0
      Leont'ev, apparently, performed precisely the task of inciting a "resonance" in the Boeing case.
      We really want all this to calm down and resolve.
      A stuffing or not a stuffing, but he got attention.
  41. 2sila
    2sila 17 November 2014 12: 41
    +1
    And still it is necessary to understand the focusing of the satellite and the scales and not everything lies on the "surface".
    There is a complex system of mirrors and reflections.
    Yes they spar in elliptical orbits and this affects the focusing system.
    Here is a digging system.
    This is the Persona optical reconnaissance satellite
  42. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 17 November 2014 12: 43
    +1
    It seems to me that through Leontyev often voiced what the officials can not say, so with this duck or not a duck is not so simple it is a promise, but to whom and for what is the question
  43. Bor
    Bor 17 November 2014 13: 04
    +4
    As an ordinary citizen with a humanitarian profession, not possessing technical and military knowledge, I will say that the effect of Leontief information was stunning for me! If we assume that such personalities as me are at least half, then the goal has been achieved. Everything began to stir, stir, aggravate! If this really turns out to be fake, you will have to grimace again and take a deep breath. But in war, as in war ... The plans of commanders are not always clear. Time will tell who was right and how justified it all was. It's easy to judge, but it's never necessary to judge easily.
  44. Prutkov
    Prutkov 17 November 2014 15: 06
    0
    I would like to remind dear colleagues how in the 61st year there was information about the settlement of the Caribbean conflict - a message in ITAR TASS. Therefore, I dare to assume that the message collected from various satellite images was intended not for ordinary people, like you and me, but other people. And the publication in AR of the video recording on the videophone of the Boeing crash, mind you - not on NTV, may mean that people "understood" the picture.
  45. Stallker27
    Stallker27 17 November 2014 16: 05
    0
    The one who brewed this "mess" in Ukraine was the inspirer and organizer of this monstrous crime (the destruction of Boeing). It is naive to believe that satellite imagery was not carried out. And this evidence, the "owners" have it. Why aren't they published? But this is a reliable "hook" to keep Ukraine in check. Not everyone is in the power of Ukraine "svoi", God forbid, show independence. And in order to cover up, to protect the dollars invested in "democracy". The photo (from Leontyev) is rather genuine. Could there have been a leak of information from the "owners"? Quite. Judging by the situation with Snowden, even natural. There are also assumptions. The appearance before the G20 summit is not accidental. Throwing in the photo is a kind of reminder to the Kiev authorities of "the complete DESTRUCTION of Donbass" and no other options. And, so that this (reminder) does not look so frank, they made it possible to "coincide" with this and to support the GDP. Well, somewhere like that.
  46. deman73
    deman73 17 November 2014 17: 20
    +1
    I don’t think that Leontiev wanted to substitute someone or something else, most likely it was such a subtle hint through the media to Western jackals that you don’t have to bark much, otherwise you can show on the air not a fake stuffing but something more real, I think the information reached the one to whom it was intended, and they realized that it was not necessary to yelp strongly at the bear
  47. The comment was deleted.
  48. bmv04636
    bmv04636 17 November 2014 21: 50
    0
    Russia insists that the United States provide satellite images taken at the time of the death of the Malaysian Boeing, said Russia's Permanent Representative to the OSCE Andrei Kelin.
    Another check will be mate soon
  49. Straight
    Straight 17 November 2014 21: 52
    0
    Most likely this is our snapshot, which was kept "in a stash" and waited for a convenient moment to be made public. Only they did not take into account that the war had already begun and now the enemy was on a drum!
  50. Shuev
    Shuev 19 November 2014 02: 33
    0
    At the very beginning of one of the versions it appeared that it was somehow connected with the virologists on board

    In 2001, virologists flew in another downed plane.
    the plane with 80 passengers on board was not accidentally shot down by a Ukrainian missile, but could have been eliminated by the Chinese intelligence services.

    According to this version, among the other passengers, 5 Israeli microbiologists flew on the plane

    www.newsru.co.il/rest/26jun2008/konsp306.html