Maybe Fighterbomber was the one who was flying the SU-34 that was escorting the pair and is in danger of having to rectally consume an entire broom if he tells the truth about this particular incident?
They didn't post pictures at that time. Shrapnel damage matches with report, Il-22 number over Azov Sea doesn't match with number on image of "landed" plane
>shop damaged IL-22 into old article >claim new photo is old photo >therefore IL-22 landed safe!!
fricking dishonourable psyopping bastards
Wow. The firehose of falsehood in full effect.
As if war geeks would not have seen that pic of the punctured plane 100 times already
So did they in fact remove the entire article at https://www.mk.ru/news/2022/10/9/ ?
Dude. Don't get sauced up before you post. I am obviously referring to Russian maskirovka, I do not mean to imply that the people I was talking to are FUD spreaders.
>As if war geeks would not have seen that pic of the punctured plane 100 times already
reverse image searches show zero result
the pic
[...]
>So did they in fact remove the entire article at https://www.mk.ru/news/2022/10/9/ ?
they didn't delete the article
www.mk.ru/politics/2022/10/09/rossiyskiy-letchik-posle-dvukh-popadaniy-buka-posadil-samolet.html
moron, they kept photos of old aircraft for instances like this
IMAGE AIRCRAFT NUMBER DOESN'T MATCH THE ONE FLYING OVER AZOV SEA
DAMAGE MATCHES WITH REPORT IN NEWS
NEWS WERE SCRUBBED OFF THEIR SIDE
because Russian MoD still haven't admitted the loss
they unironically said >we will not comment on matters of the SMO
we only know that the IL-22 made it back but looks like swiss cheese because of fighterbomber's unofficial leak
so what do? employ disinformation >shop damaged IL-22 into old article >claim new photo is old photo >therefore IL-22 landed safe!! >AFU caught lying xaxaxa
how does that photo being shopped into the article imply that the plane landed safe? it just implies that the il-22's status is still unknown
i guess the puccians are hoping that people think that it means the il-22 landed safely
>i guess the puccians are hoping that people think that it means the il-22 landed safely
precisely
The Vatniks lost the plane. They'd never go to this much trouble if they hadn't.
the whole point of Russian disinfo is to sow doubt
the instant there is the slightest modicum of doubt, no matter how small, propagandists and fanboys can say >aha it didn't happen >we are still winning >West are lying bastards as usual
and in future, even when there IS proof, they can just go >remember that one time? West are lying! they always lie!
and they can parlay this into >West are lying therefore it is justified that we lie as well!
with Russians (and Chinese, who have picked it up), you must always always always stick to the solid evidentiary truth
cause they'll leverage every inch of doubt they can find (or manufacture)
4 months ago
Anonymous
so what are we supposed to do with this information? the ukies clearly shot down an a-50 but did not destroy the il-22. they at least damaged it, but not destroyed. has the ukrainian MOD put out a statement yet? because as far as i know all we have are statements from milblogger channels. likely will have to wait 48 hours due to ukie opsec
4 months ago
Anonymous
they officially claimed one a-50 and one il-22 as "destroyed"
now does that mean destroyed as into pieces or destroyed as grounded forever, idk
it looks like they just took the new picture and are claiming it's the plane from 2022 because it has lots of holes (200 according the article)
there is radio recording of the il22 requesting emergency landing ,we know it got hit but could still fly
ukies are quick to claim they downed it like they did with the cardboard drone attacks, where there was no proof of them destroying anything but they claimed they destroyed the whole airport
But, can the rest be found and destroyed by ground sabotage? I doubt the Russians will dare fly their planes close to the front again.....for a couple of months.
An earlier thread posted a shopped image of the plane, then in the same thread a more genuine-looking image appeared. Almost as though they were trying to obscure the tail number. I question the source, as I cannot read it, but I question you more.
That's the shoop'd image, posted by fighterbomber. The original one has no watermark, no duplication of the gap under the rudder, and the tail number.
OP is implying that that aircraft is the one hit in 2022, which was able to limp back to base. The only reason we think the one hit yesterday landed safely is because Russian sources say it did, because they broadcast a mayday over an open channel describing the situation with dead and wounded. It could be that did safely land, or it could have crashed before reaching the base, but Russia can't hide the fact that they have a damaged IL-22M.
4 months ago
Anonymous
What is the source of the "original" one?
I'm sure you have the source if you are so sure it's the original.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>The original one has no watermark, no duplication of the gap under the rudder, and the tail number. >no source, no link
Black person
>post count stayed the same
Damage control is working overtime I see. >IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT THE ONE RELEASED BY A RUSSIAN PROPAGANDIST IS OBVIOUSLY PHOTOSHOPPED >YOU CAN'T POST THE ORIGINAL SOURCE SO IT MUST BE FAKE
Can you dispute the fact the picture posted by fighterbomber is heavily edited to remove the tail number?
Who benefits from removing the tail number?
Who benefits from adding one in that is different from the one Ukraine claims to have hit?
4 months ago
Anonymous
I don't care about the tail number >they used image from 2022
post original source for this claim or FRICK OFF
4 months ago
Anonymous
Are you underaged? Do you realize that a picture can exist but not be on the internet? That's the whole reason OP made this thread. The source is less relevant than the damage control being done on a bad photoshop.
Two possibilities:
was the plane damaged over the Azov Sea, but made it back to Anapa, but pro Russian sources are trying to hide the tail number in the picture with a bad photoshop, reason unknown.
was not the plane damaged over the Azov Sea, but was damaged in a different incident. Pro-Russian sources are trying to pass of a photo of 95678 with the tail number poorly shooped out as the photo of the plane damaged over the Azov Sea. Reason: damage was much worse on actual plane or plane never made it to Anapa, and having a tail number means photo can be disproved.
>post count stayed the same
you are a moron
>1 minutes apart
Try harder next time.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>>1 minutes apart
you are a moron
learn to count you moron
4 months ago
Anonymous
>no source >N-N-NO YOU'RE UNDERAGED!!1!
everi tiem
4 months ago
Anonymous
>post count stayed the same
you are a moron
4 months ago
Anonymous
>The original one has no watermark, no duplication of the gap under the rudder, and the tail number. >no source, no link
Black person
No, the sad part would be being so reddit obsessed that you have a whole catalogue of redditjaks to use as reaction images.
successful Russian disinfo is successful. I can't tell anymore which Ilyushin pic is real.
So probably Ukies downed both planes.
you guys work it out yet? Did they fake the pics? Genuine ziggers need not reply
The photo with the tail number is presumed to be real. Where and when it was taken is unconfirmed. Level of damage control being done implies that it is not beneficial to Russia for it to be released unedited, so it is entirely possible that it's a different incident and the Il-22M crashed.
>mad
Why would I be mad? I'm not the one who keeps replying: >source source where is source
like a redditor when source isnt relevant to the conversation.
Thanks for the (You), homosexual.
what type of weapon in the ukies' arsenal could have caused all those holes? not like the patriot/s-x00 series have a bunch of fragments on them
unless im a moron
We have two angles of what appears to be the same damaged Il-22M. As far as I know, Fighterbomber is the only one claiming it is the one hit yesterday, but with the edits to hide the tail number making it suspicious.
>our own telgrams are lying about our own friendly fire incident ;*~~*~~*~~)
The official RU narrative is 0 (zero) Ukrainian involvement, brownie.
Why are you so brown and disgusting?
I meant you're a homosexual doing damage control for a shitty photoshop, since there were two replies within three minutes of posting saying the same thing.
>since there were two replies within three minutes of posting saying the same thing.
you are a moron
>mad
Why would I be mad? I'm not the one who keeps replying: >source source where is source
like a redditor when source isnt relevant to the conversation.
Thanks for the (You), homosexual.
link or your mom will die in her sleep
Maybe Fighterbomber was the one who was flying the SU-34 that was escorting the pair and is in danger of having to rectally consume an entire broom if he tells the truth about this particular incident?
Bogus. That article does not exist
https://www.mk.ru/news/2022/10/9/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mk.ru/amp/politics/2022/10/09/rossiyskiy-letchik-posle-dvukh-popadaniy-buka-posadil-samolet.html
The picture doesn’t appear anywhere in the article.
I am very confused now.
Copelord posted that everything is fine. So it's over for both of the planes
They didn't post pictures at that time. Shrapnel damage matches with report, Il-22 number over Azov Sea doesn't match with number on image of "landed" plane
>shop damaged IL-22 into old article
>claim new photo is old photo
>therefore IL-22 landed safe!!
fricking dishonourable psyopping bastards
Wow. The firehose of falsehood in full effect.
As if war geeks would not have seen that pic of the punctured plane 100 times already
So did they in fact remove the entire article at https://www.mk.ru/news/2022/10/9/ ?
>firehose of falsehood
speak for yourself, Black person
you just gonna pretend not to see the fifth fricking reply to your horseshit?
Dude. Don't get sauced up before you post. I am obviously referring to Russian maskirovka, I do not mean to imply that the people I was talking to are FUD spreaders.
>As if war geeks would not have seen that pic of the punctured plane 100 times already
reverse image searches show zero result
the pic
>So did they in fact remove the entire article at https://www.mk.ru/news/2022/10/9/ ?
they didn't delete the article
www.mk.ru/politics/2022/10/09/rossiyskiy-letchik-posle-dvukh-popadaniy-buka-posadil-samolet.html
>TRYING THIS HARD TO COVER IT UP
lol
lmao even
dare one say, kek!!
https://web.archive.org/web/20230705130152/https://www.mk.ru/politics/2022/10/09/rossiyskiy-letchik-posle-dvukh-popadaniy-buka-posadil-samolet.html
where's the source moron?
moron why did you put the new picture into an old article?
moron, they kept photos of old aircraft for instances like this
IMAGE AIRCRAFT NUMBER DOESN'T MATCH THE ONE FLYING OVER AZOV SEA
DAMAGE MATCHES WITH REPORT IN NEWS
NEWS WERE SCRUBBED OFF THEIR SIDE
moron where is the source of the photo?
there is none this is first instance of them being uploaded
moron why are you posting fake pictures?
where is the source moron?
would this mean both of them got downed? awesome
not really because OP's picture is fake
the ukies are claiming both the il and the a-50 got downed...
its a strange twist of fate when the ukie claims and puccian disinfo match up
it's a Russian reverse psych anon
because Russian MoD still haven't admitted the loss
they unironically said
>we will not comment on matters of the SMO
we only know that the IL-22 made it back but looks like swiss cheese because of fighterbomber's unofficial leak
so what do? employ disinformation
>shop damaged IL-22 into old article
>claim new photo is old photo
>therefore IL-22 landed safe!!
>AFU caught lying xaxaxa
how does that photo being shopped into the article imply that the plane landed safe? it just implies that the il-22's status is still unknown
i guess the puccians are hoping that people think that it means the il-22 landed safely
>i guess the puccians are hoping that people think that it means the il-22 landed safely
precisely
the whole point of Russian disinfo is to sow doubt
the instant there is the slightest modicum of doubt, no matter how small, propagandists and fanboys can say
>aha it didn't happen
>we are still winning
>West are lying bastards as usual
and in future, even when there IS proof, they can just go
>remember that one time? West are lying! they always lie!
and they can parlay this into
>West are lying therefore it is justified that we lie as well!
with Russians (and Chinese, who have picked it up), you must always always always stick to the solid evidentiary truth
cause they'll leverage every inch of doubt they can find (or manufacture)
so what are we supposed to do with this information? the ukies clearly shot down an a-50 but did not destroy the il-22. they at least damaged it, but not destroyed. has the ukrainian MOD put out a statement yet? because as far as i know all we have are statements from milblogger channels. likely will have to wait 48 hours due to ukie opsec
they officially claimed one a-50 and one il-22 as "destroyed"
now does that mean destroyed as into pieces or destroyed as grounded forever, idk
The Vatniks lost the plane. They'd never go to this much trouble if they hadn't.
what trouble you moron? it's one shopped picture done in 5 minutes
it looks like they just took the new picture and are claiming it's the plane from 2022 because it has lots of holes (200 according the article)
there is radio recording of the il22 requesting emergency landing ,we know it got hit but could still fly
ukies are quick to claim they downed it like they did with the cardboard drone attacks, where there was no proof of them destroying anything but they claimed they destroyed the whole airport
why are you posting fake pictures moron?
Retatd moron something something moron.
But, can the rest be found and destroyed by ground sabotage? I doubt the Russians will dare fly their planes close to the front again.....for a couple of months.
moron why did you put circles on the fire truck? there's nothing on it
I knew it was sus when the tail numbers didn't match up. Transponders usually blast that shit out to anyone listening.
>moron doesn't question op's source
An earlier thread posted a shopped image of the plane, then in the same thread a more genuine-looking image appeared. Almost as though they were trying to obscure the tail number. I question the source, as I cannot read it, but I question you more.
>i-i-it's shopped!!
so where's the original from then? post link
> where's the original from
looks like this
SO IT'S NOT ACTUALLY
>fighterbomber lied, they used image from 2022
NOW IS IT?!
/THREAD!!
That's the shoop'd image, posted by fighterbomber. The original one has no watermark, no duplication of the gap under the rudder, and the tail number.
OP is implying that that aircraft is the one hit in 2022, which was able to limp back to base. The only reason we think the one hit yesterday landed safely is because Russian sources say it did, because they broadcast a mayday over an open channel describing the situation with dead and wounded. It could be that did safely land, or it could have crashed before reaching the base, but Russia can't hide the fact that they have a damaged IL-22M.
What is the source of the "original" one?
I'm sure you have the source if you are so sure it's the original.
>post count stayed the same
Damage control is working overtime I see.
>IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT THE ONE RELEASED BY A RUSSIAN PROPAGANDIST IS OBVIOUSLY PHOTOSHOPPED
>YOU CAN'T POST THE ORIGINAL SOURCE SO IT MUST BE FAKE
Can you dispute the fact the picture posted by fighterbomber is heavily edited to remove the tail number?
Who benefits from removing the tail number?
Who benefits from adding one in that is different from the one Ukraine claims to have hit?
I don't care about the tail number
>they used image from 2022
post original source for this claim or FRICK OFF
Are you underaged? Do you realize that a picture can exist but not be on the internet? That's the whole reason OP made this thread. The source is less relevant than the damage control being done on a bad photoshop.
Two possibilities:
was the plane damaged over the Azov Sea, but made it back to Anapa, but pro Russian sources are trying to hide the tail number in the picture with a bad photoshop, reason unknown.
was not the plane damaged over the Azov Sea, but was damaged in a different incident. Pro-Russian sources are trying to pass of a photo of 95678 with the tail number poorly shooped out as the photo of the plane damaged over the Azov Sea. Reason: damage was much worse on actual plane or plane never made it to Anapa, and having a tail number means photo can be disproved.
>1 minutes apart
Try harder next time.
>>1 minutes apart
you are a moron
learn to count you moron
>no source
>N-N-NO YOU'RE UNDERAGED!!1!
everi tiem
>post count stayed the same
you are a moron
>The original one has no watermark, no duplication of the gap under the rudder, and the tail number.
>no source, no link
Black person
learn to count moron
your picture showed you are a shill you moron, couldn't resist to post your shill picture you brown turd
moron shills why do you always use the same pictures?
Another Photoshop
why do they only post the tail of the plane?
is the rest of it THAT damaged?
There is no rest of it
too dark to see the crane holding it
>I literally googled "redditor wojak"
What an incredibly sad thing to admit to.
No, the sad part would be being so reddit obsessed that you have a whole catalogue of redditjaks to use as reaction images.
The photo with the tail number is presumed to be real. Where and when it was taken is unconfirmed. Level of damage control being done implies that it is not beneficial to Russia for it to be released unedited, so it is entirely possible that it's a different incident and the Il-22M crashed.
No, using wojaks at all is sad. Being so mad that you needed to go look for one is also sad.
>mad
Why would I be mad? I'm not the one who keeps replying:
>source source where is source
like a redditor when source isnt relevant to the conversation.
Thanks for the (You), homosexual.
successful Russian disinfo is successful. I can't tell anymore which Ilyushin pic is real.
So probably Ukies downed both planes.
you guys work it out yet? Did they fake the pics? Genuine ziggers need not reply
it's shopped, i can tell by the pixels
what type of weapon in the ukies' arsenal could have caused all those holes? not like the patriot/s-x00 series have a bunch of fragments on them
unless im a moron
According to OP, this was two Buk hits in 2022. We don't have any confirmation that this is the one hit over the sea of Azov yesterday.
Patriot PAC-1 and 2 is blast frag. PAC-3 is hit to kill.
ah ok so possibly it could be a pac-1/2? unless theres something else i'm missing
so other than the photo posted by fighterbomber we have nothing?
We have two angles of what appears to be the same damaged Il-22M. As far as I know, Fighterbomber is the only one claiming it is the one hit yesterday, but with the edits to hide the tail number making it suspicious.
If Ukraine is winning why are you lying about this?
Why did Fighterbomber release a photoshopped image?
OP is so obviously lying that the shills here are getting confused and think he's pro Russian lmao
if puccia is winning why are their planes dropping like flies?
>our own telgrams are lying about our own friendly fire incident ;*~~*~~*~~)
The official RU narrative is 0 (zero) Ukrainian involvement, brownie.
Why are you so brown and disgusting?
rest
WDHMBT
I meant you're a homosexual doing damage control for a shitty photoshop, since there were two replies within three minutes of posting saying the same thing.
>since there were two replies within three minutes of posting saying the same thing.
you are a moron
you are a moron
And you are brown
post source moron
Ask Fighterbomber. He had to get it somewhere before shooping it.
and just to make it clear, you are a moron