All about car tuning

Where was the crashed Indonesian Boeing heading? Was there a Boeing?

Illustration copyright AFP Image caption The first flight of the C919 became a national event in China

The first medium-haul airliner C919 made its first flight in China. It is being built primarily for the domestic market, but this aircraft could potentially enter the international market.

The first flight of the Chinese airliner C919 was broadcast live on national television. This is truly a big event - the state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC), created just nine years ago, introduced the first medium-haul airliner.

The first flight lasted one hour and nineteen minutes. While in the air, the plane did not retract its landing gear - a common practice for such flights.

The C919 is expected to make its first flight with passengers in 2020. But the project has been behind schedule from the very beginning.

C919 is assembled in China, but using large quantity imported technologies - for example, engines from the French-American manufacturer CFM.

He has more than four thousand hours of test and certification flights ahead, which will involve six aircraft.


Media playback is unsupported on your device

The C919 airliner, as China hopes, will compete with Boeing and Airbus.

The first commercial carrier to use the C919 will be China Eastern Airlines, but the order book, according to manufacturers, has already exceeded 500 aircraft for 23 airlines, mostly Chinese. True, we are talking mainly about declarations of intent; COMAC has less than 100 firm orders.

Initially, COMAC expected to deliver more than two thousand aircraft within 20 years.

Illustration copyright Reuters Image caption During the first flight the plane did not retract the landing gear

COMAC is a newcomer to the aviation market. C919 is the corporation's second airliner. The first - the regional ARJ21 - made its first commercial flight in 2016, almost eight years after its first flight, but has not yet become widespread.

On the one hand, this company has no reputation; there are almost no statistics on the reliability and practical efficiency of its aircraft.

On the other hand, COMAC intends to supply airliners primarily to the large domestic market, in which the state-owned company cannot but feel more confident.

One among one's own

This market should not be underestimated. According to estimates from the largest aviation companies, the volume of the domestic Chinese aviation market in the next 20 years will amount to more than 6 thousand units, the vast majority of which are medium-haul aircraft such as the C919.

In 20 years, the Chinese market is projected to become the largest in the world.

To what extent can the factor of “own” aircraft on the domestic market help in its promotion? Will the government be able to use administrative resources, forcing national carriers to buy aircraft from COMAC?

Illustration copyright Reuters Image caption The two main competitors of the C919 are the Boeing 737 and Airbus 320

Columnist for Vzlet magazine Alexander Velovich believes that the Chinese authorities will no doubt help the state corporation, but this airliner will help them when purchasing foreign aircraft. The Chinese market is so big that it can accommodate everyone.

“Suppose some Chinese company is negotiating the purchase of a certain number of aircraft. It is conducting them in parallel with both Boeing and Airbus, bargaining for the most favorable conditions from both. Now there is a third factor intervenes. If neither Boeing nor Airbus give us good conditions, then we will buy our own," Velovich told the BBC Russian Service.

Another expert, senior researcher at the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics Vasily Kashin, believes that China will not support the production and promotion of the aircraft unless it demonstrates at least moderately good performance.

“If, based on the results of the tests, it is clear that something does not emerge there, that it demonstrates low reliability indicators, or low economic indicators, then, of course, the political resource will not be used,” Kashin told the BBC. “If If it turns out that this is a serviceable aircraft, even if not a great one, then we can be sure that it will have a significant market in China."

According to Kashin, the state has instruments of influence - the overwhelming number of Chinese airlines are state-owned, and in any case, they are all very dependent on the state regulator.

New player in the global market?

The reputation of a manufacturer of reliable aircraft in the global market plays a very important role, and this is something that COMAC is currently missing.

The strategy of promoting the C919 first on the domestic market, which, on the one hand, is large, and on the other hand, it can enlist government support, will lead to the fact that over time, if the aircraft turns out to be truly reliable and economical, positive statistics will allow COMAC to enter and to the international market.

To do this, China will need to create a technical support network for the aircraft in the places where it will fly, as well as develop financial mechanisms to support buyers.

According to Velovich, the example of the Brazilian company Embraer, which in just a few decades was able to become one of the world's largest aircraft manufacturers, shows that a competent marketing policy can allow China to make the same journey.

Illustration copyright AFP Image caption Russian S919 competitor MS-21 is due to fly in a few weeks

Kashin believes that the aircraft will have good chances in regional markets immediately after its release.

“After mass production of the C919 begins and it goes to Chinese companies, they will most likely promote it. First, to a number of countries in Southeast Asia and Africa, where they have good positions,” the expert said. “If it becomes clear, that this is a good plane, they will be able to break into new markets."

Russian analogue

In parallel with the Chinese airliner, Russia is creating a similar medium-range passenger aircraft, the MS-21.

The first aircraft was assembled at the end of April 2017, the first flight was originally scheduled for December 2016, but then it was postponed and it is scheduled to take off at the end of May.

MS-21 manufacturer Irkut Corporation says it has an order book of 285 aircraft, but only 175 of them are solid.

Just like in China, the first customer of the Russian airliner will be the state-owned company Aeroflot.

Unfortunately, there are many such tragedies in the history of Russia. And most of them have one annoying pattern - the investigations are not completed. The reports of reputable commissions appointed to reveal the causes of what happened are, for the most part, unconvincing, suffering from numerous omissions and deviations from logic.

For example, at that time it was reported that Lieutenant Colonel Gennady Osipovich, who was piloting the interceptor, fired two missiles at the State Border violator, after which the liner “went towards the Sea of ​​Okhotsk.” A little later, the Chief of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces, Marshal of the Soviet Union Nikolai Ogarkov, confirmed: the South Korean airliner was shot down by our air defense.

But even then a suspicion arose that this confession was a diversionary maneuver, with the help of which the much larger events of that day were “classified.”

However, familiar officers from various air defense formations immediately drew attention to inconsistencies in the official presentation of events, to logical gaps and technical absurdities. And although at that time it was not safe to talk about it, but even to think about it, many experts came to the conclusion: our Boeing fighter did not shoot down...

These conversations in a narrow campaign of air defense officers surfaced in my memory when, many years later, I came across a book by the French researcher Michel Brun, “World War III over Sakhalin, or Who Shot Down the Korean Airliner?” I’ll say right away that at first it was very difficult and even dreary to read Brun’s “report” - the author is so meticulous in details. But having “entered” the topic, laid out a map of Kamchatka and Sakhalin in front of me and drawn the routes proposed by the author, I came to the conclusion: the author is convincing.

It should be noted that Brun examined all publications in the world press, including the Russian one, where the most notable was a series of articles in Izvestia, and compared them. He also studied the reports of search vessels and conducted interviews with rescuers different countries, listened to tapes with recordings of radio exchanges, from which it became clear who was walking at what time and on what course, when and by how many degrees they deviated.

From a huge amount of information, Michel Brun made several amazing conclusions that changed the views of many about that tragedy. As it happened with the author of these lines.

Firstly, Soviet Boeing 747 fighters definitely did not shoot down flight KAL 007. Secondly, this plane actually participated in a large-scale US reconnaissance operation and therefore, having turned off the identification equipment, it was most likely shot down not over the Far East, but 400-500 km from the Japanese city of Niigata - either by Japanese or American fighters that were alarmed en masse.

This version is confirmed by the fact that flight KAL 007 went on air 44 minutes after it was allegedly shot down by a Soviet fighter. By the way, the pilot Osipovich, who during the years of perestroika found freedom from his previous vows regarding Boeing, later told reporters more than once: “I didn’t shoot down a Korean passenger plane!” He, in particular, clarified that he flew not on a Su-15 (as was officially announced), but on the latest MiG-31, and took off twice and attacked targets twice. Which?..

Here is the most convincing confirmation of the words of Lieutenant Colonel Osipovich: among the wreckage of aircraft found at the bottom at the site of the supposed crash of the Boeing 747, not a single body of dead passengers was found. And there were 269 people on board. By the way, the remains have not been found yet.

Certificate

“...The most important thing is not what we saw there, but what we didn’t see. But they didn’t see more than two hundred corpses... There were only 28 of them. When we went down for the first time, we expected to see a whole cemetery, but no, it wasn’t there! There were things, yes, there were: tattered leather jackets, shoes, umbrellas in covers and... mountains of radio equipment...”

Divers Grigory Matveenko and Vadim Kondratyev, who worked under water for 6-8 hours for a month, inspecting the wreckage of the plane

But many items were discovered that clearly indicated the military affiliation of the downed (in the plural!) aircraft. Michel Brun counted nine crash sites for the planes shot down that night and early in the morning. Moreover, in the wreckage of one of them there was the tail of an American air-to-air missile, which suggests that one of the victims was a Soviet plane, the rest were American.

And Bruhn concludes: there was no South Korean Boeing, but a large-scale operation, which was a “star” raid on Soviet territory, that is, almost from all directions.

This operation could well have led to World War III. Another question: why did both sides remain silent about this operation then and are they still silent? If a compromise was found, then on what terms?

In any case, the famous Russian humorist Mikhail Zadornov was right, who argued that our past is more unpredictable than the present.

Chronicle of diving spies

The account of foreign aircraft shot down by Soviet air defense was opened on June 16 and July 13, 1952 by Swedish reconnaissance aircraft PBY Catalina and DC-3. This forced the US and its allies to change tactics.

Since 1954, unmanned drifting balloons (“ADA”) began to be used for reconnaissance flights over the USSR. Over 20 years, the Soviet air defense forces recorded more than 4,000 ADA flights, but managed to shoot down only 473.

Since 1956, the American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft has been the leader in the skies. Until 1960, U-2s made 24 unpunished incursions into Soviet airspace. They even flew over Moscow, Kiev and others major cities THE USSR. The first U-2 was shot down on May 1, 1960 near Sverdlovsk.

Since the mid-1960s, US reconnaissance aircraft began flying over the Far East.

On November 28, 1973, our air border was violated by an Iranian T-33 aircraft. A MiG-21SM flew out to intercept it. Pilot Gennady Eliseev, having spent his ammunition, went to ram the intruder. This was the first aerial ramming attack on a jet aircraft. The pilot was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.

On April 20, 1978, the first acquaintance of Soviet military pilots with South Korean passenger planes violating the USSR air border took place. The state border in the area of ​​the Kola Peninsula was crossed by a passenger Boeing-707 of KAL airlines, operating a Paris-Anchorage-Seoul flight. The flight of the airliner was stopped over Karelia by two air-to-air missiles fired from a Su-15TM.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, light aircraft began to plague Soviet air defenses. In the fall of 1978, a Chinese plane was forcibly landed in Primorye; in the summer of 1986 - two Iranian planes in Azerbaijan.

Even in the 21st century, Russian air defense records several dozen violations of the country’s airspace by foreign aircraft every month.

In July 2018 alone, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, about 80 foreign aircraft conducted reconnaissance activities near the borders of Russia.

In Indonesia, after taking off from Jakarta airport, a Boeing 737 MAX 8 airliner crashed. It was heading to the city of Pankal Pinang ( administrative center Bangka-Belitung Province), located on Banka Island, east of the island of Sumatra.

According to Lion Air, which owned the plane, there were 181 passengers on board, including two children, as well as two pilots and six other crew members. The Indonesian Ministry of Finance reported that 20 representatives of the department were on that flight.

Search operation at the Boeing 737 crash site in Indonesia

At the Main Directorate civil aviation stated that the pilots of the airliner immediately after takeoff requested an emergency landing, but then communication was lost. Lion Air reports that contact with the plane was lost 13 minutes into the flight, after which it disappeared from radar. According to Flightradar data, which tracks the movement of aircraft, the Boeing 737 rose to a height of 1,524 meters, and then suddenly began to lose altitude and fell into the sea.

The wreckage of the plane, as well as life jackets and personal belongings of passengers, were found in the sea off the west coast of the island of Java. The first message about the discovery of large debris came to emergency services from the crews of civilian ships that were in the area of ​​the disaster.

Were there Russians on board?

According to preliminary information from the Russian Embassy in Jakarta, there were no Russian citizens on the plane. However, diplomats are still waiting for a response to the official request. “There was no information about the presence of Russians on board. We are working with the department of the situational crisis center of the Russian Foreign Ministry,” the department said.

RIA Novosti with reference to a representative of the Indonesian Ministry of Tourism in Russia Anna Kiseleva They report that the direction the crashed airliner was flying is unpopular with Russian tourists. People most often fly to the island of Sumatra for business purposes.

What is known about the liner?

The Boeing 737 MAX 8 is the latest modification of the airliner. The crashed plane had registration number PK-LQP, was manufactured in 2018. Operated by Lion Air, Indonesia's largest low-cost carrier, since August 2018.

The carrier company reported that both pilots had extensive experience: the crew commander had more than 6 thousand hours of flight time, and the co-pilot had more than 5 thousand hours. The plane was flown by an Indian citizen, captain Bhaway Saneja, reports the news portal Detik with reference to a representative of the air carrier. According to the publication, he successfully passed the pre-flight medical examination, and no traces of prohibited substances were found in his blood.

What caused the disaster?

The cause of the disaster is still unknown. "We can't say anything until we find the black boxes and analyze the records," said the chairman of Indonesia's National Transport Safety Committee. Soryanto Tjayono.

Europe is closing three Ukrainian airports to its planes. This is stated in a letter addressed to Vladimir Groysman from the European Agency aviation security. The EU believes that Kyiv is not able to ensure flight safety in the area of ​​the airports of Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye. This is the EU’s reaction to the crash of a Malaysian Boeing over the Donbass on July 17, 2014. Back in 2014, several Dutch citizens lodged complaints with Kyiv regarding the failure to ensure the flight safety of the ill-fated aircraft - Kyiv, out of greed, did not close the space above the combat zone for flights, while the United States did so for its aircraft.

28.9.2016 The Joint Investigation Team presented part of the preliminary results of the investigation, allegedly the Buk air defense system, the missile from which shot down the plane, was delivered to Ukraine from Russia, and after the launch of the missile that destroyed the Malaysian airliner, it was returned back to Russian territory. The only proof is a film made according to the fantasies of some director, who would be instantly exposed in court.

The squeal in the Western, Ukrainian and Russian liberal media was, of course, unimaginable, but... no trial followed. Those. Holland, at the instigation of the United States, simply launched another propaganda myth.

“According to the leadership of the LPR, the airliner could have been shot down by a Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft. The Russian authorities expressed a similar version. “This version,” the pro-American Wikipedia writes unsubstantiated but cheerfully, “was refuted during an international investigation.”

However, look at these videos, they show that the Boeing disaster was staged.

Is everything so? Knee-deep wheat in one of the videos when they loaded the remains of the Boeing - in June, and in July from the waist down - yes, a lot, but who said that the footage with knee-deep wheat refers specifically to the Malaysian Boeing? By the way, immediately after July 17, no corpses were removed; the Armed Forces of Ukraine did not allow guys from the OSCE to approach there for a couple of weeks; they fired at the area.

Well-trodden paths in the wheat to the place where the corpses lay - well, as they walked in formation, they carried them out.

The fact that when they found the black box they didn’t find anything else - well, they took what was brighter, maybe there was something else lying there.

The fact that in another video no one paid attention to the newly found black box - a man talking on the phone, AND DIDN’T SEE what his friend was carrying. Others simply didn’t know what it was.

And one more thing: if instead of corpses there were dummies, the militias would be the first to report, a wave of messages from them and from civilians of Novorossiya would go to Russia. But there was no wave. I would even dare to say that there were no such messages at all.

Is this black box video... questionable? - because it ended up in the hands of the militias, and then the Russian Federation. And the Russian Federation transferred it to Malaysia. And that one for the Dutch. What, Moscow participated together with Kiev in the production, so that sanctions were imposed on it?

How it was.

The militias were the first to start taking photos. Namely: holes in the Boeing from an air cannon and from an air-to-air missile.

Immediately a flood of publications came from “experts” who lied that the SU-25 could not shoot down a Boeing; all these publications were exposed. The “experts” confused the managers with the developers of the Su-25, mixed up the type of missile (they indicated it had been withdrawn from service), and lied that the warhead of a decommissioned missile was not capable of shooting down a Boeing (the militia shot down not just a Boeing, but a much more stable cargo IL-76 “arrow”, which has a warhead three times smaller), they lied that the attack aircraft was not capable of flying at such an altitude, that supposedly its speed was less, etc., etc. The experts lied about a lot of other things. So many. Each time prefacing his nonsense with the words: “I am such and such a great expert...” And so on. Apparently, it is precisely the nonsense of “experts” that Wikipedia passes off as a “refutation.”

Note: many of the “experts”, including officials, were Russian citizens.

Then Kyiv began to show numerous allegedly Russian Buks, all of these publications were also exposed. and with the license plate of one of Buk’s cars, and with an elderberry tree blooming in May.

However, Moscow for some reason clung to the myth of the Buk and harnessed the poor Almaz-Antey so that it “calculated” that the Buk that allegedly shot down the Boeing could only be from the Ukrainian side. On Russian TV they released a swindler named Korotchenko, about whom the presenter lied that he supposedly represented something aviation, and the swindler Korotchenko confirmed that they were shot down allegedly from a Buk. Despite the fact that the marks on the fuselage of the Boeing are from an aircraft cannon.

Reference. Igor Korotchenko gave 12 years to the army. He served in an Air Force repair shop and ensured communications security at the General Staff. There weren't enough stars in the sky. In 1994, he was dismissed from the army under the discredited 49th Article of the Federal Law “On Military Duty and Military Service” as a serviceman who ceased to “meet the requirements established for him by law.” At the mention of this, Korotchenko begins to become hysterical; in 2016, during the debate before the elections to the State Duma (he lost to G. Onishchenko), Oleg Mitvol faked his opponent - Korotchenko began yelling at the leader of the Greens, called him a “traitor to the Motherland” and threatened launch “at NATO machine guns.”

In the same 1994, Korotchenko got a job at Nezavisimaya Gazeta, found an approach to the then owner of NG B. Berezovsky and weaved intrigues against the editor-in-chief. His nickname was “Mr. Thousand Dollars.” After NG, Korotchenko got a job at the Military-Industrial Courier, where he praised Defense Minister S. Ivanov in every possible way. Then the officer who crashed out of the army... suddenly received the rank of colonel! In violation of procedure: did not pass the required military training. When the violation of the law was discovered, a new law had already been adopted, which allowed promotion on the basis of one certification.

Korotchenko, who became the editor-in-chief of "VPK", disagreed with the owner of the newspaper I. Ashurbeyli. The colonel began... to skip. It was under this article that he was fired. The court, where Korotchenko, as usual, turned, did not help him.

In 2012, he received the position of Chairman of the Public Council of the Ministry of Defense (instead of N. Mikhalkov, who had disgraced himself with a flashing light). At that time, the ministry was headed by Serdyukov, whose reforms were sung by Igor Korotchenko. Under him, 150 million rubles allocated for the formation of a positive image of the military department disappeared without a trace. The ex-head of the OS (currently in this position is opportunist P. Gusev) managed to challenge the accusations of misuse of funds. But where the money went is unknown.

Korotchenko’s colleagues laugh at his “competence” and recall the story of how he, who graduated from the Tambov School, when he headed the OS, also indicated in his biography a diploma from the Military Academy. Frunze. Journalists made an inquiry: it turned out that Korotchenko never studied there.

Mitvol recalls: “Before that very debate, when Korotchenko snapped at me, I was standing at the Mosfilm pavilion... At that moment, a car with a yellow disabled person’s badge drove up to the entrance, and a huge man, Korotchenko, solemnly emerged from the back seat.”

In a word, the Buk version does not stand up to criticism: no one heard the roar of the Buk missile, no one saw the trace of it, which remains in the air for a long time. Apologists for Banderaism presented a photograph of the trail - from afar. But this is an obvious phony: a) the person filming for some reason missed the actual fall of the Boeing, b) the trail rises vertically upward, so the Buk rocket does not take off.

It would seem that the idiocy of the Dutch examination that the Boeing was shot down by “flying objects” confirms the version that the Boeing was shot down by a Ukrainian attack aircraft. But.

1. The militia were the first to notice, reported to Strelkov, and he announced that the corpses were strange - bloodless and smelled of formaldehyde.

2. Enthusiasts picked up Dutch passports. It revealed:

A. The passports were brand new, as if there had been no fall or fire.

b. Many had round holes - this is how passports are redeemed in Holland.

V. There was NOTHING on the Internet about the owners of the passports, but all such passports were issued on the same day (I don’t remember exactly about the day, but something like that).

They immediately forgot about the passports, but regarding the bleeding, “expert doctors” (Russian!) were immediately found, who explained the bleeding as a result of the pressure difference. Real doctors laughed at these “experts”.

It is of course

b) the Dnepropetrovsk air traffic controller changed the course of the Boeing, directing it directly into the combat zone, and lowered it by half a kilometer for the convenience of the attack aircraft,

c) the words of the Spanish air traffic controller about two planes next to the Boeing (precisely two, Su-25 and Su-27, as it turned out) were not taken into account,

d) Kyiv does not issue the Dnepropetrovsk air traffic controller,

e) The United States refuses to show satellite images, citing military secrets.

All the facts strongly indicate that the Boeing was shot down by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. But

3. The first - and immediately after July 17 - was noticed by Yuri Mukhin; he published a photo of the found engine from an alleged Boeing next to a huge engine from a real Boeing.

If the disaster was staged, then this version directly contradicts the testimony of Russian radars that on July 17, at such and such an hour, out of two sighted targets, at some point only one remained.

It follows that? Right, right...

Let me remind you that Putin promised on March 4, 2014 to protect the residents of Donbass and Luhansk region, and promised a couple more times, but did not fulfill his promise - despite numerous requests from both the residents of Novorossiya and the requests of the leaders of Novorossiya. Putin proposed not to hold a referendum on independence in Novorossiya on May 11 and did not recognize its results. Result: in Novorossiya, about 300 children were killed by the fascists of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the National Guard, the Right Sector and other bastards.

Let me remind you that quite recently oligarch Lisin was caught supplying metal to fascist Ukraine; this metal goes to the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. A little later, the actual owner of Lukoil, Alekperov, publicly stated that Ukraine and the United States are more interesting to him than Russia.

Let me remind you that the Kremlin twice stopped the militia’s attack on Mariupol, each time imposing the Minsk negotiations. During the first offensive, the city could have been taken without firing a single shot - the Ukrainian Armed Forces officers escaped from the city faster than the officials. By that time, Bandera’s men had raped over 800 girls in Mariupol.

The fact is that at that time, 80% of the goods passing through the Mariupol port were Russian. If the militia had taken Mariupol, all these goods would have been subject to sanctions.

During the hot phase of the war, Lukoil and Rosneft supplied fuel and lubricants to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, KAMAZ supplied military trucks to the punitive forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Motovilikha Plants repaired damaged Grads in Bandera Ukraine and supplied components for them, Yaroslavl Diesel sent diesel engines for tanks to the Armed Forces of Ukraine , "Aviasnabservice" - spare parts for aviation. State-owned Sberbank, VTB, VEB transferred money to Ukraine from Russia, thereby financing the ATO. Even the Banderaites cooked stew in Russia, they liked it.

The Kremlin stopped supplies of aviation, armored vehicles, artillery, and small arms to Ukraine from Crimea only on July 5, 2017, at the very height of the war. Using all this equipment, the fascists of the Ukrainian Armed Forces killed children, women, and old people of Novorossiya.

All this is called aiding fascism. I’m not even talking about the monuments to the collaborators Validi (St. Petersburg), the Cossack atamans Krasnov and Shkuro (Moscow), the memorial plaque and bust of Mannerheim (St. Petersburg), the street named after Validi (Ufa), the film “Idel-Ural”, praising the Tatar-fascists.

The strange crash of a Malaysian Boeing 777 in Ukraine still raises many questions. This material contains evidence that does not appear in the media. We invite you to look at the fall of the Boeing from a different angle, different from the official versions...

Three researchers analyze, with varying degrees of detail, the strangest facts of the sensational Boeing 777 crash in Ukraine.

1. Evgeny Novikov

For regular visitors to our portal, these two releases will no longer be news, and they can move on to the other two versions described below.

For those who are not yet familiar with the Slavic News series “Black Operation”, we offer them for viewing:

But there is a horizontal notch on the doors of the Boeing 777 that crashed at London Airport in January 2008, as you can see by returning to photo 1. But here is a better picture of the doors of that Boeing (photo 10)

By the way, the Boeing 777, which crashed in San Francisco on July 6, 2013, also has such doors

This is what the British government and its intelligence service MI6 are afraid of - these are “parts from another plane” in the Donbass. Here they are - these details!

But since neither the United States nor Great Britain will answer the question of where the parts of the plane that crashed in London in 2008 (or San Francisco in 2013) came from in Donbass, the question will have to be asked to the Donbass militias. Militia, why did you drag the fragments of the fuselage of a Boeing 777 that crashed at the London airport from London (still closer to it) to the scene of the tragedy, and even so that the valiant English intelligence officers tracked you down?!

But seriously, when will they start looking for the Boeing 777 that took off on flight MH 17 from Amsterdam on July 17, 2014? And the one who disappeared on March 8, 2014. They, after all, can be whole.

And when they begin to find out the fate of their passengers.