Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

MH17 down near Donetsk

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

MH17 down near Donetsk

Old 24th Jul 2014, 17:01
  #901 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,473
What the human brain thinks it hears in an explosion is significantly delayed from what actually happens. Even area mikes get clipped and discerning a frequency content is almost impossible if the source is close.

If however the explosion is in the back of the plane the mikes might have a chance at detecting the arrival of multiple airborne and structural waves arriving at different times. Of course it still needs to be recorded and that's iffy as well. In other major explosive events most of the signature was electrical ringing as the wires were cut.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 17:23
  #902 (permalink)  

More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 72
Posts: 1,768
Discussion on Dutch tv that Marechaussee troops will provide protection for the investigators.
Lon More is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 17:38
  #903 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 86
Just caught a CNN live interview with Michael Bociurkiw from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe....an additional, very large, almost intact piece of fuselage has been found in a heavily wooded area - some pictures were shown, no video - apparently his team is still locating human remains.

'Can't find any print reports of any of this......perhaps too 'fresh'.
gwillie is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 18:30
  #904 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Washstate
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Estimate of warhead location when fragmented

from my armchair and looking at the photos of cockpit frames AND the photo of a wing segment which shows the red circled ' attach safety line here" with apparently skidding type penetrations by shrapnel - a guess would be the detonation took place slightly above or at the level the upper wing surface. This would seem to comport with some comments that the BUC is designed to hit from above. Had it been on its way up and exploded below the wing level, its a bit unlikely to have shrapnel skid along the upper surface . Safety lines are not usually attached below the wing .
SAMPUBLIUS is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 18:36
  #905 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
Curiously if you look at the remnants of the flight deck floor there appears to be shrapnel damage underneath where the commander's chair is, also one of the crew seats. I wondered how it got there as it's the only bit of the interior photographs I've seen that appear to show it, unless the detonation was very near the front.

They are in the Akkerman pictures.
JamesT73J is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 19:05
  #906 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by JamesT73J View Post

They are in the Akkerman pictures.
Stumbled over it too. This one is the largest edition:

For Orientation:
Boeing 777-3D7 - Large Preview - AirTeamImages.com

In the Akkerman picture the a/c nose would be toward 4 o'clock of the image. In the foreground there is a perforated window frame.

I'm puzzled of how locally concentrated the shrapnel marks are:

This image has the tires of the forward undercarriage unpunctured?
Could the silvery thing to the extreme left be the antennae of the weather radar?


P.S.: Can't be the weather radar, this is the starboard side, nose is to the right.

Last edited by OleOle; 25th Jul 2014 at 05:47.
OleOle is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 19:26
  #907 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Finland
Age: 54
Posts: 66
Russian Defense Ministry take rather undiplomatic tone (video): Most US evidence is based on social media posts
Caygill is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:06
  #908 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,630
a. From what I can discern via web (UNCLAS) sources, and my old memory,
the SA-11 (SA-N-7 which I was more familiar with is in the same family) warhead
is HE/Frag, and is capable of the "up to down" or "up and over" engagement geometry in the end game.
Granted, a non maneuvering heavy may not need to be so engaged, but I suspect it is an option.
b. This is handy if your target is a maneuvering jet (fighter, attack, etc)
that changes it's movement vector in three dimensions (including down) as part of evasive maneuvering.
c. Don't recall how susceptible it is to chaff ... I suspect it depends on the cut of the chaff.
d. Not sure if that is how it typically engages a target, but that might explain
what SAMPUBLIUS was referring to in terms of the damage pattern.
e. The above is subject to errors in both my memory and what is (in open sources) available.
f. Note: Whomever is posting pictures, please compress the files and repost them.
They are way too big and are expanding the window frame which makes viewing the web page difficult.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:13
  #909 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by toaddy View Post
What is that large brown thing with the rectangular openings in it ?
It's the floor of the cockpit. See link in my post above.

OleOle is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:28
  #910 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: NC
Posts: 43
It was the floor, I spotted the seat. It looked so big I didn't consider the floor. Thanks. All this debris looks like it was bulldozed up into a pile.
toaddy is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:44
  #911 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Age: 52
Posts: 65
Seems to me there's a lot of fuselage skin missing from the images of the cockpit area. Perhaps it was removed or perhaps it landed elsewhere but all I see is pretty much the floor down of this whole section.

Interesting video showing workers cutting into part of this.

Last edited by Mudman; 24th Jul 2014 at 20:44. Reason: typo
Mudman is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:55
  #912 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 78
Posts: 316
Originally Posted by Mudman View Post
Jeroen Akkermans has uploaded a 4th album of photos. This set contains close up image of the cockpit skin piece seen leaning against a street lamp.

on images 131,132,137,138 there are number of very new looking filters, part of the cargo?

Last edited by oldoberon; 24th Jul 2014 at 21:27. Reason: typo
oldoberon is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 20:58
  #913 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Europe
Posts: 7
Mickjoebill – excuse me, since you raised the matter, I might understand your viewpoint, I think, but when I was watching that sequence - the unloading of the coffins, I found the trumpet call most moving and I venture to suggest, from my knowledge of the Netherlands, all there would have recognised immediately the meaning of the plangent notes, so well played, as a moving tribute to the innocents who died.

As a matter of interest, wiki asserts that Taps originates in Holland.

I agree with passegiata and very much doubt you see this grievous event in a military light. BTW, I’m not looking for a contretemps.
Poimier is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 21:41
  #914 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
On this photo (already linked above).
Any ideas on the horizontal cut of the skin? It has a very characteristic saw tooth pattern. Is that just shear along the stringer?

And on the other photo of the flight deck debris:
Almost right in the center is a fragment of the two central windshields with one wiper still attached. See here for comparison:
Shrapnel marks there are very tiny.

Last edited by OleOle; 25th Jul 2014 at 05:32.
OleOle is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 23:26
  #915 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Hornby Island, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 102
The rest of the frame of that windshield with the wiper attached is at the bottom of the same picture. Someone who is good at Photoshop may be able to cut and paste and produce a reconstruction of the whole portside windshield. Completely peppered with shrapnel.

See post 772.

Last edited by McGinty; 24th Jul 2014 at 23:43. Reason: Added reference to prior post
McGinty is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 02:42
  #916 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 3,184
Once per second ?! Aren't they both low and high sampling rate channels (for the acceleration increments) within the FDR ?
Disclaimer, my expertise is engines, not FDR. But I've looked at lots and lots of FDR data over the years and I've never seen a parameter that was recorded at more than 'once per frame' within a one second frame (usually this has been for anomalies such as an engine shutdown or similar a anomaly, but also for a handful of crashes).
Heck, I consider myself lucky if most of the parameters I'm interested in are actually recorded, and at once/second (one incident, engine parameters were recorded every 64 seconds - for an event that lasted less than a minute ). Digital Flight Data Recorders have improved hugely over the last 30 years - way more parameters recorded at a higher update rate (during the investigation of the BA38 777 that landed short at Heathrow, I was pleasantly surprised to see the FDR recorded the fuel metering valve position - so we could definitely determine that the fuel metering valve opened but fuel flow failed to increase). Leaps and bounds better than the original FDRs that recorded a couple dozen parameters on foil

All that being said, a 200+ ton aircraft doesn't change direction that fast. Looking at 1/second data normally produces very good indications of what the aircraft was experiencing. I've seen indications of jet wake and wing vortex encounters that were pretty obvious from 1/second data.

When it's all said on done - while FDRs are hugely more capable than they were 20 years ago, there is still a limit to how much data and at what update rate. 99.9% of the time, 1/second is adequate provided the necessary parameters are recorded - so the emphasis has been on more parameters rather then fewer parameters at a high update rate. Further, to get meaningful data for something like a MH17 missile strike, you need 20 or more updates per second - something we only get with dedicated flight test data system.

If it was up to me, I'd be looking at a zero risk way to keep the FDR powered for a meaningful length of time after main bus power was lost - ideally something like capacitors that could power for another 10 minutes or so. Although it probably would make no difference in this case (the FDR on a 777 gets all it's data via AIMS, which was likely knocked out an instant after the missile strike), there have been a number if incidents where the FDR lost power well before the actual crash.
tdracer is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 02:54
  #917 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Right Here
Posts: 30
Cockpit Panel Damage

Wantion is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 03:38
  #918 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
The white painted area below the windshield is burnt to a gun metal gray.

Speculatively, I would guess the missile fused very close and slightly above the port side of the nose, and this is where the break up began.


The port window cockpit window frame is severely damaged, the skin panel is heavily sooted and perforated, the commander's floor shows evidence of shrapnel damage. The remaining glass laminate has signs of soot.

There is a photograph of the crown skin that is sooted and shows over pressure where the skin has been dished in between the supporting structure frame.

One crew seat is visible at the cockpit crash site, the other was possibly ejected early in the event. Or perhaps it was taken or moved during the recovery.

There's a huge amount of structure missing from the crucial part of the aeroplane - the front - and I hope the investigation turns it all up.

Last edited by JamesT73J; 25th Jul 2014 at 03:56.
JamesT73J is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 06:50
  #919 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 62
Posts: 558
It has been published this morning in the Russian news that there is an internal investigation being carried on by the security service of Ukraine concerning potential unintentional launch of a BUK missile by the army on the day of tragedy.
Do not trust any press, but here is the original article:


Just briefly explaining what is there.

It is written that after some BUK batteries arrived into the Donetsk area a few days prior to the event, a training campaign for the BUK crews was planned and implemented (as the crews were untrained). To be closer to the reality, a couple of Ukrainian Su-25 flew over from the Nikolaev and Dnepropetrovsk area to simulate the real targets that the ground crews should train with. Everything should have been "real", except for after "pressing the launch button" the missile should not be ignited and the whole BUK complex should remain in a simulation mode. A version to be investigated in detail implies that the ground crew of a particular BUK complex deployed near the village/town of Zaroschenskoye (south of Shakhtersk, close to the line between the rebels and the regulars) indeed acquired one of Su-25 as a target and the system started followed him. The ill-fated 777 was flying above Su-25 entering into the beam cone of the BUK radar. Then for unknown reasons the missile was launched (some experts say it indeed may happen if the system hardware was not duly reconfigured - AV) and since that radar cross section of 777 is much higher than that of Su-25, the missile chased the MH17. System wise, having two angular variables identical for both planes should not be enough, as there always is the third one - range. Was it because just the wrong plane was selected by the operator, or maybe the range channel did not work properly is difficult to say.
Again, could well be another piece of disinformation, but the whole situation is very similar to what happened in 2001 when the Ukrainian army was training in Crimea and hit (with S-200) the Tu-154 flying over the Black Sea coming from Israel to Siberia. Moreover, in 2001 the S-200 operators had enough time to realise that the missile was kept flying for much longer time and distance than to the target and could issue a self-destruction command (but did not do that probably being not trained/attentive enough). Here, the ground operator obviously did not have enough time to divert/destruct the missile.

Last edited by A_Van; 25th Jul 2014 at 07:43. Reason: Better URL used
A_Van is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 06:51
  #920 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 941
see the moment of explosion
Not every explosive creates a bright fireball. Here is a good example.
How about the stuff used in SAMs? If the explosion does not hit the fuel tank, is it likely to be visually noticed from an aircraft 20NM away? From the Ground?
Volume is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.