Moderator Note
Note to all: This is a breaking news thread. Keep political comments and hot-button issues out of this thread.
From the sticky at the top of this forum:
As the sticky says, feel free to use this thread as a springboard for other posts in more appropriate forums, but let’s keep opinions about Trump and other hot-button topics out of this thread. Let’s focus on the actual incident and news and discussion about that incident.
If I may make a suggestion, maybe this belongs in Politics and Elections?
While many of the posts in this thread are probably better suited to other forums, breaking news threads belong in MPSIMS.
There is certainly a political discussion to be had. As the sticky says, feel free to use this thread as a springboard to threads in other forums.
I feel bad for the Ukrainians. The sick deja vu of another airliner shot down, and they have to be involved.
It must suck to become the world’s expert in 21st Century shootdowns of airliners by reason of experience.
As I said, that (which you might notice I mentioned in an earlier post so was obviously aware of) and every other previous such incident related to a conflict, that I can think of, going back to WWII*, involved an airliner authorized to fly from one country entering forbidden or combat-contested (‘rightly’ or ‘wrongly’) airspace and being shot down by another country. IOW the air defense forces involved had to correctly identify and avoid attacking an a/c with no reasonable presumption that they would already know its identity based on their own civil aviation authorities’ information, and likewise no de facto (knowing or negligent lack of coordination) joint decision of the same country’s military and civil aviation authorities to allow commercial flights and allow firing on potentially hostile a/c in the same area.
In this case, uniquely I believe, the same country, same side of a conflict, authorized the a/c to embark on a commercial flight from their airport, when they could have simply postponed commercial flights if they were also authorizing air defense forces to fire on potentially hostile a/c, especially at night, then shot it down. Assuming they didn’t intend to shoot it down (and I assume they did not) that’s in a different category of negligence IMO than any previous incident I’m aware of, though various of the long list of such incidents where the air defense force’s country was not controlling commercial air traffic also involved various levels of negligence.
*this list as most such wiki list is not complete, for example a French airliner was accidentally downed by British fighters over the Med after France was a neutral ca. 1941, US fighters downed what was per Soviet sources a commercial airliner on the last day of the Korean War in July 1953 which had either strayed into NK or the US fighters were across the border in China depending which side was correct, etc. One or two other incidents were launches of missiles against airliners authorized to be there by the same country which launched the missile, but in training/test operations completely separate from any conflict, IOW wasn’t supposed to down any a/c.
No offence, but isn’t that just whataboutism?
The problem with that post wasn’t the whatabout aspect though I suppose there’s that also. The logical problem was that it answered a post pointing out a categorical difference between this latest incident and almost any previous one (the same country authorized a commercial flight departure from its airport while apparently giving its air defenses in the same area green light to fire on not positively ID’d targets at night) with a cite of one of many previous incidents over decades where the air defense forces of one country (or side) misidentified an airliner another country authorized to fly in the area, or which entered forbidden or contested airspace on a flight originating in another country. Besides which, the 1988 incident had already been mentioned as an example of how ‘modern’ radars can’t necessarily tell airliners from combat a/c. Which is why you would at least cease commercial flights from your airport if you plan to give your AD forces the green light to shoot in the same area…
The point is not ‘US good, Iran bad’ from a political POV. It’s apparent (if it pans out without another major twist) Iranian negligence on a new and categorically higher level than almost any or maybe any previous such tragedy.
It seems to be meant as a direct refutation of the immediately preceding comment by Corry El, which begins: “Assuming this pans out as now being described it seems perhaps the most negligent accidental shoot down of an airliner ever.”
It’s not “whataboutism” if someone opens with “all parallelograms are rectangles,” and someone says “what about rhombuses?” or, if you disagree with the example cited as a refutation “what about squares?”
Which is to say, you could debate the relative negligence of the Vincennes incident with this one, but given a claim of “most negligent” has been levied, it does open itself up to single alternative examples which may begin with the form “What about…?” and yet not constitute “whataboutism.”
Right, the main problem with the counter point using the 1988 incident isn’t ‘whataboutism’, though I believe in honesty a ‘whatabout’ kind of thought process influenced the basic logical hole in the counter point.
Because my post did not say ‘this is more negligent, just because or because this wasn’t the good guys (as focusing on a US case tends to imply was my argument)’. I specifically explained the categorical difference between what (apparently) happened here and numerous previous incidents of airliners downed by mistake: in almost every other case the airliner was authorized by another country or just not authorized to be where it was, thus its safety relied on correct identification by air defense forces ordered to protect a certain air space against hostile a/c. Doing that without making a tragic mistake might be harder than some random internet posters might assume, though some of the previous incidents also seemed to involve negligence. Here the Iranians apparently authorized a commercial flight to depart an Iranian airport then ended up shooting it down nearby. That’s a categorical difference IMO from previous incidents I’m familiar with, avoidable with the simple precaution of suspending commercial flights from one’s own airport if one’s own air defense forces were authorized to shoot at un-ID’d a/c near that airport at night. It’s not just a matter of debating the technical issues of avoiding misidentifying airliners in a conflict zone as hostile and passing judgement based on that.
This is just ridiculous.
Of course Trump is a gargantuan asshole, but IRAN SHOT DOWN THE AIRLINER, five hundred miles from any combat zone. Iran. Bot the USA. Iran.
If the exact opposite had happened, and a plane taking off from Washington DC was shot down right after takeoff by the US Navy, and I blamed Iran, every single person reading my post would think I was a nitwit and 85% of them would reply to say so. And they’d all be right.
Iran shot down the airliner, and you didn’t even mention them once.
There is much criticism to be made of American foreign and military policy, but to say they’re responsible for Iran shooting down an airliner in Iran nowhere near a combat zone is utter lunacy.
I can grant that Iranian air defenses would have almost certainly been on higher alert in anticipation of a US retaliation for the strikes they had just launched hours before. There’s certainly a worthwhile discussion to be had about “who initiated this round of escalation and so established the conditions for this tragedy.” I have my thoughts, but I suppose that’s for “great debates.”
Certainly, this doesn’t speak well for the Iranian air defense network, in terms of command and control and communication between nodes and counterparts in civilian air traffic control (if they even have such a thing, I mean, for all I know their “civilian air control” falls under the military).
Interesting article from The Drive. on the alleged shootdiwn.
Explains the whole issue the crew might have been facing.
I do have a problem with some of the examples given.
Both were during actual combat conditions, the Indian crews especially had been bombed and were being jammed.
As far as I can tell, there is no suggestion that the US Military air assets were anywhere near Tehran or were employing electronic warfare. Even the Vincennes far less understandable shootdown occurred during an engagement.
I’m not a fan of current American foreign policy. This latest escalation began with an Iranian attack on December 27 killing Americans. I think the American response has been disproportionate and did not seem carefully considered.
But the plane seems to have been shot down by Iran. There is much reason for anger at the death of innocent civilians. The US probably bears a degree of moral responsibility. But they did not shoot down the plane or directly cause such a stupid and pointless waste of life. This should not poison relations between Canada and the US despite unfortunate and ill-considered presidential actions. Americans certainly need to elect a president who is well-informed rather than iconoclastic and inexcusable. Trump is not the people he represents.
No suggestion today, but how would the Iranians have known that on the night of? Iran had just lobbed ballistic missiles against bases housing US troops in Iraq. The US had threatened retaliation. The US is known to have stealth aircraft and EW jamming capability, is in fact very well known for conducting strikes against air defense systems with the aid of such technology. So who knows what they were thinking.
this should not happen with the US now with all the tech we have. Iran likely has older and worse radar but it is still a giant screw up.
It’s not necessarily a problem with technology, but rather with classification. That is, their radar worked, their missiles worked, only they didn’t properly classify the target as something they shouldn’t be shooting at, possibly because they had conflicting information on whether or not, when, and along what flight path aircraft would be leaving the airport.
If the last information conveyed to (or at least “received by”) the SAM battery operators was “Tehran airspace has been declared a no-fly zone for the night, any aircraft not blasting a military air defense transponder signal will be presumed hostile and shot down,” then I can see this happening no matter how good the technology involved. When major population centers are put on notice that they may be subject to attack from stealth, low-flying, or jamming aircraft, then it can be difficult to distinguish a hostile blip from a non-hostile blip in the seconds one has to make a decision.
Bottom line: I suspect this will come down to way more than just technological factors. Their radar clearly worked well enough. Their plan for the night didn’t.
The flight profile of a 737 leaving an airport has to be drastically different than what an incoming American warplane would be. I don’t know about how bombers/fighters do their strike runs these days, but presumably it wouldn’t be at all like a Boeing slowly trying to climb to Flight Level 350. In addition, the U.S. would most logically use stealth warplanes for any attack on Tehran, not something with a huge radar signature.
Edit:
Then wouldn’t the Tehran airport shut down all civilian airline traffic for the night? Or wouldn’t all airliners be getting fired upon, not just this one Boeing?
I’m not positing that that absolutely happened, only offering it as an example. There’s a range of communications breakdowns that could have occurred, for instance, they could have supplied missile batteries with projected departure and arrival times and flight paths, the Ukrainian flight could have deviated from some aspect of that, and the missile battery may not have gotten the word.
Please don’t nitpick this: I’m not trying to posit an absolute or all exhaustive list of possibilities, only to highlight that all the technology in the world (and please don’t nitpick that last statement either) may not have prevented this if it was fundamentally due to a breakdown in communication.
As to radar signature, you frankly have no idea what the Iranians would have seen, because so much of that would depend on varying atmospheric conditions and operator inputs to adjust for those conditions.
Bottom line: this shit is complicated.
The usual policy is that other than removing bodies, you make sure everything is kept exactly the same until investigators have carefully examined the evidence.
This is more support for the view that the Iranians shot down the airplane and are now trying to cover up the fact.
No coverup. They have accepted it.
https://t.co/i9WTDjzwsU?amp=1