File talk:MH17 Crash Site.jpg

From Wikispooks
Revision as of 19:31, 17 August 2014 by Two Dogs (talk | contribs) (sp)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Where does the 14:15 GMT come from for the last contact? Malaysia Airways via Kiev ATC? --Two Dogs (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2014 (IST)

Looks to me like they are intended as approximations but that that GMT has also been confused with BST which is 1 hour ahead. It does indicate a certain shoddiness in the map production though. It's to avoid precisely that confusion that I have been careful to specify UTC on the timeline events --Peter P (talk) 19:49, 17 August 2014 (IST)
Oops - even more shoddiness. The Take-off time number IS correct - in UTC - but the 'Last-contact' number is not --Peter P (talk) 20:10, 17 August 2014 (IST)
If you trace it back far enough, I think you'll find that the 14:15 comes from:
Friday, July 18, 12:30 AM GMT +0800 Media Statement 1: MH17 Incident...Malaysia Airlines confirms it received notification from Ukrainian ATC that it had lost contact with flight MH17 at 1415 (GMT) at 30km from Tamak waypoint, approximately 50km from the Russia-Ukraine border. --Two Dogs (talk) 20:12, 17 August 2014 (IST)
There are two sources of potential confusion here. 1. UTC-BST-GMT and the distinction between actual contact-loss/crash times and 2. the publication of reports about them. I've tried to recognise that on the timeline but there could be mistakes there too - Checking, correcting and adding to the timeline is needed. --Peter P (talk) 20:28, 17 August 2014 (IST)

Some other points:

It could not have got as far as Snizhne by 13:15 GMT/UTC (not flying fast enough)
It could not have lost contact at 14:15 GMT (it was burnt out in a field 20 km away some time before this)
TAMAK waypoint is ON the Russian border (so it can't have been approximately 50km from the Russia-Ukraine border AND 30km from Tamak waypoint) --Two Dogs (talk) 20:18, 17 August 2014 (IST)
I vaguely recall thinking something along those lines at the time of the reports. It does look like some serious detailed forensics, taking due account of the time-standards, may be time well spent here. --Peter P (talk) 20:28, 17 August 2014 (IST)