Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Wow - the snarky comment. Really? I like how instead of just answering the question, some just had to point at the flight levels being lower in other parts of the world. Okay. "My bad" Yes, the flight levels and transition altitudes are much lower in many other parts of the world. Oops for getting that one wrong. It doesn't change the spirit of the question being asked, and in context, referring to airplanes above FL180. More specifically, in the 30,000+ altitude.
Still, some chose the dodge-the-question method (maybe it's election season getting to everyone). Comments of flying over Greece, Turkey, and Iran are not the same as a rebel-led skirmish in Crimea of 2014. There, you had active shooting down of planes. One was hit 20,000+ feet on July 14th. An Ilyushin was hit on approach to landing that killed 49 people on June 14 exactly a month prior to the Antonov.
So I asked does Iraq, in its ISIS/terrorist held grounds, have the ability to use a surface to air missile site (ground based fixed site, moving truck, anything), and launch a missile that can hit an airliner flying above 30,000+ feet?
Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and India have not shot down airliners in the last couple years. While the political stability of a country can be questionable, it's not a reasonable conclusion someone in that country will fire a missile up to FL330 and down a 777. Where that is a reasonable possibility is the situation that happened to MH17. A regional skirmish involving rebels who had their hands on missiles that were capable of hitting planes at 30k+ feet. That's why my question was posed for Iraq if the ISIS forces or even the rebels fighting them had access to these sorts of missiles currently within Iraq.
There was the DHL A300 in 2003 that was hit at about 8,000 feet by a Strela-3 MANPAD system. Which goes back to the comment I made back at Evergreen in 2005 when the crews mentioned their rapid climb method to get above 10k ASAP. Just from what I read (and please feel free to correct and add) that most MANPAD type systems have a vertical range of about ~20k tops. The highest one being about ~26k from a FIM-92? Point of conclusion being that most aircraft in the cruise flight levels (breathe, relax) I mean 30k+ feet would or should be safe from a MANPAD threat over a country.
My question though was regarding ground-based surface to air missile site (fixed or vehicle) with missile altitude capabilities in the 40k feet or higher range. Are these active or any proof of it being active in terrorist or rebel-held land in Iraq? Or Syria?
Still, some chose the dodge-the-question method (maybe it's election season getting to everyone). Comments of flying over Greece, Turkey, and Iran are not the same as a rebel-led skirmish in Crimea of 2014. There, you had active shooting down of planes. One was hit 20,000+ feet on July 14th. An Ilyushin was hit on approach to landing that killed 49 people on June 14 exactly a month prior to the Antonov.
So I asked does Iraq, in its ISIS/terrorist held grounds, have the ability to use a surface to air missile site (ground based fixed site, moving truck, anything), and launch a missile that can hit an airliner flying above 30,000+ feet?
Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and India have not shot down airliners in the last couple years. While the political stability of a country can be questionable, it's not a reasonable conclusion someone in that country will fire a missile up to FL330 and down a 777. Where that is a reasonable possibility is the situation that happened to MH17. A regional skirmish involving rebels who had their hands on missiles that were capable of hitting planes at 30k+ feet. That's why my question was posed for Iraq if the ISIS forces or even the rebels fighting them had access to these sorts of missiles currently within Iraq.
There was the DHL A300 in 2003 that was hit at about 8,000 feet by a Strela-3 MANPAD system. Which goes back to the comment I made back at Evergreen in 2005 when the crews mentioned their rapid climb method to get above 10k ASAP. Just from what I read (and please feel free to correct and add) that most MANPAD type systems have a vertical range of about ~20k tops. The highest one being about ~26k from a FIM-92? Point of conclusion being that most aircraft in the cruise flight levels (breathe, relax) I mean 30k+ feet would or should be safe from a MANPAD threat over a country.
My question though was regarding ground-based surface to air missile site (fixed or vehicle) with missile altitude capabilities in the 40k feet or higher range. Are these active or any proof of it being active in terrorist or rebel-held land in Iraq? Or Syria?
We were joking with you for the most part. How is Turkey different than Ukraine though? They both shot down fighter airplanes, which was your point in the beginning, I believe. How that was accomplished is a moot point, imo. Both were active shooters. Turkey almost lost its government. Who gets control of the fighters and missiles if that happens?