In the case of ignition of a surface-to-air missile, U.S. satellites, specifically the Defense Support Program and Space-Based Infrared System, would easily pick up the signature of the motor and, possibly, track it during its flight. Because the SA-11 is a known system, U.S. intelligence likely has vast databases of knowledge on its operation and infrared signature; U.S. signals intelligence, imaging and infrared satellites monitor foreign missile tests to gather this knowledge, adding to a library of facts about hostile missile systems globally.
A Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT) comprising experts from Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine confirmed Aug. 11 that it was investigating several parts it had recovered from the wreckage of the downed airliner that they believe originated from a Buk, or SA-11, surface-to-air missile system. The JIT says it is investigating the origin of these parts with the help of experts including forensic and weapons specialists.
“At present the conclusion cannot be drawn that there is a causal connection between the discovered parts and the crash of flight MH17,” the JIT said in a statement.
In May, the JIT began a criminal investigation into the apparent transportation of a Buk missile system that was filmed and photographed being moved by several eyewitnesses in the region.
But what remains unanswered from the incident is how alleged separatists got the SA-11 and who ordered the shot.
Gordon, a veteran of 25 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, adds that “there is always still a judgment call because in any intelligence product there is always uncertainty. And in the case of a commercial airliner, there is a court of law.”
Gordon likened the agency’s contribution to the MH17 incident to its participation in tracking and helping to curb last year’s Ebola outbreak in Africa. “We didn’t create new content for Ebola. We didn’t develop sensors for Ebola. It just turns out that the information that we collected in the conduct of our business could be used to support that mission,” she said. “So we figured out how to make it available in a way that it could be used there. Well, the same thing [happened] in the case of the commercial airliner … It isn’t about collecting against [the incident], it is taking collections and seeing if you can add certainty and then finding a way for that to be used.”
no subject
A Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT) comprising experts from Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine confirmed Aug. 11 that it was investigating several parts it had recovered from the wreckage of the downed airliner that they believe originated from a Buk, or SA-11, surface-to-air missile system. The JIT says it is investigating the origin of these parts with the help of experts including forensic and weapons specialists.
“At present the conclusion cannot be drawn that there is a causal connection between the discovered parts and the crash of flight MH17,” the JIT said in a statement.
In May, the JIT began a criminal investigation into the apparent transportation of a Buk missile system that was filmed and photographed being moved by several eyewitnesses in the region.
But what remains unanswered from the incident is how alleged separatists got the SA-11 and who ordered the shot.
Gordon, a veteran of 25 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, adds that “there is always still a judgment call because in any intelligence product there is always uncertainty. And in the case of a commercial airliner, there is a court of law.”
Gordon likened the agency’s contribution to the MH17 incident to its participation in tracking and helping to curb last year’s Ebola outbreak in Africa. “We didn’t create new content for Ebola. We didn’t develop sensors for Ebola. It just turns out that the information that we collected in the conduct of our business could be used to support that mission,” she said. “So we figured out how to make it available in a way that it could be used there. Well, the same thing [happened] in the case of the commercial airliner … It isn’t about collecting against [the incident], it is taking collections and seeing if you can add certainty and then finding a way for that to be used.”