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 9th Sep 2014, 19:46
  #1261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, IL, US
Age: 70
Posts: 47
"Wonder if we will ever really know the truth."

In war, truth has always been the first casualty. These days there is no truth, just points of view, based on politics, not logic, for the general public. All governments lie to both their own people and to other nations to advance the careers of politicians and the wealth of those who back them. The average person, be they a passenger on the plane, a civilian on the ground, or a third party in another country are pawns in a game were only the Kings matter.

I'm of the opinion that the US, the EU, NATO, and Russia all know exactly what happened and why (Russian provided system, provided to blunt Ukrainian air power, mistakenly targeted MH17). They all agree that the unvarnished truth about the cause of dead of these 298 people, as well as thousands of other in Ukraine, isn't a truth their public will meekly accept. The mutual economic benefits of minimizing and obscuring this event are all too obvious to all parties.

The only lesson to be learned from this tragedy is that civilian aircraft must stay out of the engagement envelope of modern missile systems. However, I fully expect this too will be soon forgotten in the name of economic benefits. This will happen again.

Last edited by jmmilner; 9th Sep 2014 at 19:58.
jmmilner is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 19:56
  #1262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, IL, US
Age: 70
Posts: 47
"In such high populated area, it should be hundreds or thousands of witnesses. But there is no one."

There have been witnesses who reported the presence of the BUK system in the area at the time. You choose to ignore them. There are pictures of BUKs with their numbers painted over in both Russia and eastern Ukraine. Why would the rebels and/or the Russians hide the identity of such military equipment? There are fighters on both sides who have killed civilians. Why would large numbers of civilians report what they have seen, knowing the wrong story could get them killed by either side?
jmmilner is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 19:56
  #1263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Russian plot of primary radar:

http://avherald.com/img/malaysia_b77...k_140717_9.jpg

2 a/c west, 1 a/c east and fourth military a/c north-east. Target 3505. Map of Ministery of Defence RF.
Karel_x is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 20:04
  #1264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
There have been witnesses who reported the presence of the BUK system in the area at the time. You choose to ignore them. There are pictures of BUKs with their numbers painted over in both Russia and eastern Ukraine. Why would the rebels and/or the Russians hide the identity of such military equipment? There are fighters on both sides who have killed civilians. Why would large numbers of civilians report what they have seen, knowing the wrong story could get them killed by either side?
I spoke about very, very loud noise. Nobody heard it!

I can read Russian and I may declare, that Russian facebook (v kontakte) is FULL of photoshop FAKES at both side. The similar war like on the ground goes in the internet.
Karel_x is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 20:30
  #1265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 237
This video shows several Buk-M2 launches:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDXScnEKaP0

The sound is not particularly quiet, but it's very short-lived because the missile heads for altitude very rapidly.
Feathers McGraw is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 20:42
  #1266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 57
Posts: 106
Originally Posted by Karel_x View Post
Map of Ministery of Defence RF.
In another picture in the same bunch that ministry lied about MH17 heading north-east. Compare with the track in the preliminary report (from FDR). Do you still trust that ministry?
Lena.Kiev is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 21:36
  #1267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,230
Karel_x

Does it show another aircraft near MH17? Does it simply show the break-up of the Boeing 777 which has produced the radar returns? Has Russian military
intelligence messed up just the same as they did with the claim in the same brief of the Buk on the trailer video? Not Krasnoarmeisk as the Russians claim but Lugansk.

Transcription of the Russian Military brief at following UK Russian Embassy link.

Special Briefing by the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation on the crash of the Malaysian Boeing 777 in the Ukrainian air space, July 21, 2014

We can clearly see that its frame-up. These pictures were made in the city of Krasnoarmeisk that is confirmed by a banner situated close to the road. This banner has an address of the car shop situated at the Dnepropetrovskaya, 34. Since May 11 the Krasnoarmeysk city is under control of the Ukrainian Armed Forces
If they can't even geo-locate a video and have to spin a story then think what they have misinterpreted with the radar picture?

Last edited by TEEEJ; 9th Sep 2014 at 21:41. Reason: Added quote from Russian mil brief
TEEEJ is online now  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 23:02
  #1268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 50
Posts: 42
Dutch preliminary report

The dutch preliminary report did end some of the controversial theories that went around:

1. The claim that Ukraine ATC deliberately had MH-17 descend to FL330. The report states that Ukraine ATC wanted MH-17 to climb to FL350, but that the MH-17 crew reported that they were unable to comply.
2. The claim that there CVR/FDR was tampered with: The report found no eveidence of tampering.
3. The claim that Ukraine ATC deliberately changed the route of MH-17. MH-17 requested the reroute themselves, not on initiative of Ukraine ATC.
4. The 'gun-down' theory is now even more unlikely, as both FDR/CVR ended their recording at the same time without indication of trouble. This means that both systems were damaged simultaneously, a very unlikely event in case of canon fire, but fitting the case of a missile hit.
5. The claim that the holes were both entry as well as exit holes: the holes were caused by high speed objects entering the plane from the outside.

Probably some other theories went bust that were both too bizar and too unimportant to remember.

Despite the earlier DSB claim they could carry out the investigation in their offices using satelite images and using the internet, I sense a strong urgency to go to the crash site and do some field work. With the present cease-fire, what are they waiting for?

The most interesting news came from the chairman of the Dutch safety board. He explained to the press that metal fragments (using the word 'sharpnel' would imply missile parts) were recovered from the bodies of the pilots and these fragments were now being investigated wether these are parts of the airplanes or something else.

Last week, a Belgian dentists working on the identification process also explained that every body/bodypart is scanned for metal fragments as part of the identification process.
blackbird69 is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 23:15
  #1269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sydney (Aust)
Age: 74
Posts: 42
silverstrata says

Regards burning, the forward fuselage section in my previous post shows evidence of inflight fire/smoke damage. The smoke staining is directionally streaked, demonstrating this was inflight. ...........

........So yes, much of the fuselage would have been on fire, after this intense heat-explosion. There is a video on line showing a burning aircraft descending from great altitude, but I have no idea if this video is genuine. The truth was the first casualty of this incident.
When quoting some outside analysts please put the link so we can take deeper look. I find it hard to believe you did that analysis, based on that single piece of wreckage, and managed to miss the thousands of other pieces of evidence giving a different picture.

a) damage on the cockpit areas is soot and blistering from a nearby high heat source eg detonating missile, NOT FROM FIRE
b) there is NO fire or even heat damage on any other parts of the plane, apart from the centre section containing the fuel, which caught fire only on impact
c) the video purporting to be MH17 falling and spinning on fire was proven to be of an Antonov transport downed 2 days earlier. This has been known since about July 20.

No other air crash in history has ever been this thoroughly photographed for public consumption. Grabbing .001% to build theories on is conspiracy theory stuff, not an attempt to seek truth.

Sadly, all operators in the area use identical equipment, so finding pieces of shrapnel etc won't answer WHO???

SLF305 asks
Is there a Ukrainian military aircraft that fires high energy fragmentation air to air missiles???
yes MIG29s look them up in Wikipedia for all the armament possibilities.


EARLY ON all parties tried to use whatever partial data they had, to blame others with. Since then they have more recent propaganda incidents, and have stopped promoting the MH17 theories.

It is time people interested in how aircraft break up drop the odd theories, too. The solution to who shot MH17 and why is geopolitical. Dragging up debunked "evidences" won't get you there.
KatSLF is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2014, 23:45
  #1270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Antipodes Islands
Posts: 94
both FDR/CVR ended their recording at the same time without indication of trouble. This means that both systems were damaged simultaneously, a very unlikely event in case of canon fire, but fitting the case of a missile hit.
The two recorders stopped because of lack of power, not because of other damage.

Power to the recorders comes via the Main Equipment Bay which is located below and behind the flight-deck. MEB remnants were seen in the same wreckage cluster as the flight-deck indicating they separated at the same time.

I totally disagree with the theory it was cannon fire, but at the same time, you can't claim simultaneous cutoff of recorders proves this. All that's required is the MEB is catastrophically damaged. This can (did) result from in-flight breakup of the front section from whatever cause.
Mahatma Kote is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 00:52
  #1271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 91
I read somewhere else that high energy SAM fragmentation particles have such a high velocity/energy that an aircraft will start burning when being hit. Looks like MH17 parts started to burn on the ground and not in the air. Any experts
I've never seen an airliner hit by a SAM but when I was making my living flying over North Vietnam i saw plenty of my colleagues flying U.S. Navy fighter and light attack aircraft (and in one case a SH-3A helicopter) hit by SA-2 missiles. The results varied widely. In some instances there was warhead detonation resulting in a huge fireball of burning aircraft fuel with no large pieces of the aircraft exiting the short-lived fire. What came out of the fireball looked like confetti. Yet, in some cases, the pilot survived.

In other cases the aircraft seemingly survived the warhead detonation (which by itself produced a pretty good sized fireball) and remained essentially intact, or at least in one large piece without any fire other than the result of the missile warhead. Some pilots subsequently ejected and some did not. Sometimes the aircraft impacted the ground and burned. Others either didn't burn or perhaps I didn't notice. It's usually a busy time when the air is filled with SAMs, some of which seem to have your name on them.

In one case, I saw the aircraft main fuel cell rupture producing a big ball of white fuel vapor which did not ignite.

I would say that a large and very noticeable in-flight fuel fire might be expected when any aircraft is shot down by a large SAM, but that outcome is certainly not guaranteed. The fact that MH 17 apparently burst into flames only after impact with the ground is not all that surprising, at least to me.
Mozella is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 06:39
  #1272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 79

Left side - actual path of MAS017.
Right side - path of MAS017 according to russian ministry of defence.
Why did they lie about it? As truth could be find out from black boxes and ukrainian radar recordings.

Last edited by TC_Ukraine; 11th Sep 2014 at 06:19.
TC_Ukraine is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 07:31
  #1273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 15
Left side - actual path of MAS017.
Right side - path of MAS017 according to russian ministry of defence.
Why did they lie about it? As truth could be find out from black boxes and ukrainian radar recordings.

The scale of two maps is completely different. Russians probably reflect MAS017 request to avoid the weather, a maneuver too small to be shown on Ukrainian map.
BATHIK is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 07:50
  #1274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 50
Posts: 42
The two recorders stopped because of lack of power, not because of other damage.

I didn't write it proved it, only mentioned it is even more unlikely. This is because the recorders didn't record impact or other noises/data associated with shelling. It would mean that the first hit severed the recorders.
From other accidents (silkair 1997), we know that the CVR keeps recording about 250 msecond after power is severed (yes different CVR, but lets assume not different in this aspect), and some impact noise could have been recorded, even if power was severed at first hit.
blackbird69 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 07:59
  #1275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 782
http://avherald.com/img/malaysia_b77...k_140717_9.jpg

That is quite some relevant information. The SU-25 at 10.000 meters with a speed of 400 km/h against the MH17 at 10.000 meters with 900 km/h.

Whoever likes to believe that, , i don't.
RetiredF4 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 08:21
  #1276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Left side - actual path of MAS017.
Right side - path of MAS017 according to russian ministry of defence.
Why did they lie about it? As truth could be find out from black boxes and
ukrainian radar recordings.
From the preliminary report (page 11):

According to ATC data, at 13.00 hrs the crew of flight
MH17 requested to divert the track 20 NM to the left, due to weather. This also was agreed by Dnipro Control

It is in accordance with the russian report. While the accompanying picture is... laughable.

You should learn to discern a lie from inaccuracy (e.g. audibly they reported about a soviet-made SU-25 (with the word 'veroyatno' likely, possibly) while in the picture there is an american-made EF-111 :-D )

Last edited by GSOB; 10th Sep 2014 at 10:37. Reason: the style fixed
GSOB is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 08:40
  #1277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 52
Posts: 563
KatSLF

When quoting some outside analysts please put the link so we can take deeper look.

a) damage on the cockpit areas is soot and blistering from a nearby high heat source eg detonating missile, NOT FROM FIRE.

b) there is NO fire or even heat damage on any other parts of the plane, apart from the centre section containing the fuel, which caught fire only on impact.

c) the video purporting to be MH17 falling and spinning on fire was proven to be of an Antonov transport downed 2 days earlier. This has been known since about July 20.
This was my analysis, so no quotes. In answer to your points:

a. An explosion is not a fire? What I said was. Quote: "This would be consistent with charring and staining from the intense heat of the warhead as it exploded nearby."

I think that explanation is both clear and accurate. There was indeed an intense fire from the explosion. Did that fire cause secondary aircraft burning? Most likely. The warhead appears to have exploded to the upper rear of the cockpit, and if fragmentation balls reached the cockpit at a 45 degree angle (against the forward motion of the aircraft) they are highly likely to have reached the wing and fuel tanks too. Fuel tanks and high velocity shrapnel are likely to cause a fire. And since the flight recorder stopped at this time, one can also surmise a large rupture of the fuselage and or electrical system at the same time.

b. How do we know the center section only "caught fire on impact"? It is entirely possible that the center section was on fire in the descent. Do you have contrary evidence? What would make the center section burst into flames only on impact with the soft ground?

c. Which calls into question the sanity of overflying a region where a reasonably high-flying Antonov was shot down by a missile the previous month. And as an aside, are the Russians claiming that the Ukrainians also shot down their own Antonov? The Russian version of events is like a colander, which again calls into question their political and military motivations.
silverstrata is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 08:46
  #1278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 50
Posts: 42
Sadly, all operators in the area use identical equipment, so finding pieces of shrapn

At least it could lead to identifying the source of the high speed fragments. That would limit the number of source type probably to a BUk missile. Despite having the same name, being in production for such a long time, different variants, batches etcetera exist, and if lucky, this will further differentiate the source.

Further intelligence would lead to the launch location. The US already has this data, so that would be easier to zoom in on the who.

The US track record on launches is good, they were the first to say that SIberian Airlines 1812 was shot down by a missile, and also the launch of the iskander missile that killed Stan Storiman was detected by the US according to Jeroen akkermans. So I do have trust in this

The identification of the fragments is a first step in nailing the responisible people for this tragedy.
blackbird69 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 08:54
  #1279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 57
Posts: 106
Originally Posted by Fat Magpie View Post
Its the lack of camera phone footage of a plume from the missile, we have footage of the mess in the sky yet no missile trial footage.
Photo of the missile plume trail and geolocation of the launch site:
http://avva.livejournal.com/2788606.html
Lena.Kiev is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2014, 09:40
  #1280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by BATHIK View Post
The scale of two maps is completely different. Russians probably reflect MAS017 request to avoid the weather, a maneuver too small to be shown on Ukrainian map.
loot at map: left side shows UKCC (DON), and find it to the right were "Донецк" (Doneck/UKCCin russian is written). now compare a/c position.
TC_Ukraine 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 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.