MH17 down near Donetsk
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sydney (Aust)
Age: 78
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In case of MH17, it is not unlikely that the left engine suffered an uncontained engine failure, given that the forward ring of the intake was found at the cockpit crash site. It is possible that it ingested some radome parts or worse that could have destroyed the fan disc. It would have lost thrust altogether while the right engine would still function. Without countersteering from the cockpit the plane would enter a spin.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good set of MH17 images:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/128537380@N08/
Also contains images to help tracing shrapnel route through co-pilot seat.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/128537380@N08/
Also contains images to help tracing shrapnel route through co-pilot seat.
Last edited by sotilaspassi; 30th Dec 2014 at 10:55.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Age: 62
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Pics show the Pilots Seat.
The Source of the Pics
https://www.flickr.com/photos/podpolkovnikvvs/sets/
The Source of the Pics
https://www.flickr.com/photos/podpolkovnikvvs/sets/
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Samara, Russia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My estimation of holes sizes (20Mb):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/or6azagwe1..._size.png?dl=0
1. I took the picture of MH17 and measured the red stripe size and the fuselage size in pixels. So i got the factor to infer the red stripe size in mm (by multiplying on the fuselage size 6200mm). That is 342 mm.
2. I found a 400mm ruler image and scaled it to match the size of the red stripe
on the famous debris image (in a particular layer).
3. I copied the ruler's layer to apply it throughout the debris image close to holes.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/or6azagwe1..._size.png?dl=0
1. I took the picture of MH17 and measured the red stripe size and the fuselage size in pixels. So i got the factor to infer the red stripe size in mm (by multiplying on the fuselage size 6200mm). That is 342 mm.
2. I found a 400mm ruler image and scaled it to match the size of the red stripe
on the famous debris image (in a particular layer).
3. I copied the ruler's layer to apply it throughout the debris image close to holes.
Last edited by GSOB; 5th Jan 2015 at 05:48.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Centre of old Europe
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Role of Intelligence and Security Services
The Dutch Pariamentary Review Committee on the Intelligence and Security Services is looking into the role these services (both general and military) have in the decision making process regarding the safety of air routes.
The enquiry must provide answers to the following questions:
a) What is the formal relationship between the intelligence services and air safety related parties such as airlines, atc, and the respective ministries with regard to providing information on security threats;
b) Which are the concrete activities of the Intelligence and Security Services in exchanging information with relevant air navigation parties;
c) What information did the Intelligence and Security Services have prior to the crash of MH17 about the security situation in East-Ukraine and in how far have they shared this information with parties relevant to air navigation? Which considerations played a role to do this yes or no?
The parliamentary review commission will report their findings directly to the Safety Board in charge of the MH17 enquiry.
The questions were raised in November but were published Janary 6th, 2015.
Dutch original: Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid | Onderzoeken & Publicaties | Onderzoek crash MH17, 17 juli 2014
The enquiry must provide answers to the following questions:
a) What is the formal relationship between the intelligence services and air safety related parties such as airlines, atc, and the respective ministries with regard to providing information on security threats;
b) Which are the concrete activities of the Intelligence and Security Services in exchanging information with relevant air navigation parties;
c) What information did the Intelligence and Security Services have prior to the crash of MH17 about the security situation in East-Ukraine and in how far have they shared this information with parties relevant to air navigation? Which considerations played a role to do this yes or no?
The parliamentary review commission will report their findings directly to the Safety Board in charge of the MH17 enquiry.
The questions were raised in November but were published Janary 6th, 2015.
Dutch original: Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid | Onderzoeken & Publicaties | Onderzoek crash MH17, 17 juli 2014
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 54
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AD / Spiegel and Correctiv publish reconstruction
Dutch newspaper AD, the Der Spiegel and Correctiv have published their results on their own investigation on the downing of MH17. The AD story, in dutch can be downloaded here:
http://static3.ad.nl/static/asset/20...uctie_7788.pdf
Or press Download on the center on this page:
Raket afkomstig van Russische brigade uit Koersk - AD.nl
In short:
They point to the Russian 53th air defense brigade from Kursk, and tried to contact the individual soldiers without much success. The only guy they ware able to contact said that he couldn't tell anything because of state secrecy. They also discover that 1 sergeant and 13 soldiers were releaved of duty just 2 weeks before the convoy of BUK M1 crossed the border. The name of the sergeant is Ivan Kranoprosjin. Some of the information comes from his VKontakte page, now deleted.
They interviewed witnesses that saw the actual missile launch (on a different location than the RTL document)
More to follow.
http://static3.ad.nl/static/asset/20...uctie_7788.pdf
Or press Download on the center on this page:
Raket afkomstig van Russische brigade uit Koersk - AD.nl
In short:
They point to the Russian 53th air defense brigade from Kursk, and tried to contact the individual soldiers without much success. The only guy they ware able to contact said that he couldn't tell anything because of state secrecy. They also discover that 1 sergeant and 13 soldiers were releaved of duty just 2 weeks before the convoy of BUK M1 crossed the border. The name of the sergeant is Ivan Kranoprosjin. Some of the information comes from his VKontakte page, now deleted.
They interviewed witnesses that saw the actual missile launch (on a different location than the RTL document)
More to follow.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 61
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On https://mh17.correctiv.org/english/
this is wrong:
Watch TELAR and launches from it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HQLh-HKaz8
(0:15-0:45)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l115fJpCIfc
(3:59-5:04)
this is wrong:
The missile is launched out of a fireproof container, leaving few visible burn marks on the ground
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HQLh-HKaz8
(0:15-0:45)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l115fJpCIfc
(3:59-5:04)
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern Territory Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the truth?
The sad thing is that there is so much obfuscation that the families and friends of those who were murdered, most probably by Russian affiliates and almost certainly by mistake, will never be 100% sure who it was who "pulled the trigger" and those who were murdered will never get the justice they deserve.
It is a shameful state of affairs and I hope that one day those who were responsible, including the leadership, rue the day they tried to hide the truth
It is a shameful state of affairs and I hope that one day those who were responsible, including the leadership, rue the day they tried to hide the truth
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bellincat latest about BUK launch location:
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-a...n-flight-mh17/
(good study IMHO)
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-a...n-flight-mh17/
(good study IMHO)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Centre of old Europe
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Dutch Daily 'Algemeen Dagblad' reported 3rd Feb about a meeting of vice-ambassadors that took place some days before the MH17 disaster. A meeting report was sent to six different Dutch ministries but not to aviation related parties, neither to the Ministry of Infrastructure or KLM. The shooting down of the Antonov was discussed at this meeting. The Dutch Government will not publish the meeting report The meeting was mainly about the European attitude towards Russia.
The Dutch cabinet maintains that Ukraine is responsible for its own airspace and an airline company is resposible for its route to fly. There was no information on 'concrete threats' for upper airspace flights; The shooting of the Antonov aircraft had not changed the situation. The cabinet does not comment on the question whether they had knowledge about the presence of rocket launch systems before the 17th.
Opposition Members of Parliament are not satisfied with the answers. They think it is still unclear whether flying over conflict areas at this moment is 'structurally well organised'. They want to know who consented to MH17's route. They also want an intermediate report of the investigation. Next Thursday (6th Feb) there will be a paliamentary debate.
The Dutch cabinet maintains that Ukraine is responsible for its own airspace and an airline company is resposible for its route to fly. There was no information on 'concrete threats' for upper airspace flights; The shooting of the Antonov aircraft had not changed the situation. The cabinet does not comment on the question whether they had knowledge about the presence of rocket launch systems before the 17th.
Opposition Members of Parliament are not satisfied with the answers. They think it is still unclear whether flying over conflict areas at this moment is 'structurally well organised'. They want to know who consented to MH17's route. They also want an intermediate report of the investigation. Next Thursday (6th Feb) there will be a paliamentary debate.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Netherlands
Age: 54
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiev should have closed airspace in may?
In january the Dutch news agency brought this arctile. It stated that Kiev should have closed its airspace in May, based on 'new information' and the opninion of Nico Voorbach, former chairman of the ECA.
Nico claims that if airlines had known that air-to-air engagements were carried out over Eastern Ukraine, many airlines would have diverted outside Eastern Ukraine.
Some members of Dutch parlaiment thrive on this, and ask the dutch cabinet why the Dutch state didn't inform the airlines even after being briefed by Ukraine like previous post.
So, after Rutte stated that he wouldn't allow anybody to politically misuse the MH-17 tragedy these dutch parliament members are just doing that, over the heads of the victims.
Why?
Dutch parliament members pretend that the dutch government had both extra information on the air safety situation and obligation to share this to its national airlines. This is both not the case. There is no extra information, Ukraine invited the diplomats of 8 countries to express concern about Russian involvement. The task of evaluating of safety of airspaces for national airlines is not a task of the dutch intelligence services, who are focussed on IS. And in fact, the so-called new information was already known immediately after the downing of the different airplanes.
On the May incident, which happened in June according to ASN, there is only the mention of ground fire.
The 14th july downing of the An-26, Kiev IMMEDIATELY stated that this was either due a Russian Pantsir missile or an AIR-TO-AIR missile, and it seems that they now stick to the latter. Proof that a missile was involved was already visible on the same day (see Aviation Safety Network entry).
The downing of a SU-25 on July 16th was according to Kiev by a Russian jet.
Rebels, however, claimed that both were downed by Manpads.
That Ukraine didn't close the airspace themselves, is surely a liability, but they didn't withhold information about what was happening. We, in the West, rather wanted to believe that rebels did this by manpads than accept the deep involvement of Russian Military in this conflict, ignoring facts that showed the opposite.
So this leads to the question which I hope that the DSB will answer: why did airlines stay flying above Eastern Ukraine while they knew (or could know) that air-to-air engagements were taking place. Or do they simply follow the national NOTAMs? Because the DSB cannot interview the national intelligence agencies, it lets the intelligence commity do this for her, to get answers here.
But the worst is the way Ukraine handled the decision of closing the Eastern Ukraine airspace. Please see link below and watch the movie on the right side of the page. Military decided on the raising of the minimum altitude. But Military look different to safety than civil airlines.
link below: dutch story + piece of dutch journal, including the reaction of the Ukraine minister.
'Oekraïne had luchtruim al in mei moeten sluiten' | NOS
Nico claims that if airlines had known that air-to-air engagements were carried out over Eastern Ukraine, many airlines would have diverted outside Eastern Ukraine.
Some members of Dutch parlaiment thrive on this, and ask the dutch cabinet why the Dutch state didn't inform the airlines even after being briefed by Ukraine like previous post.
So, after Rutte stated that he wouldn't allow anybody to politically misuse the MH-17 tragedy these dutch parliament members are just doing that, over the heads of the victims.
Why?
Dutch parliament members pretend that the dutch government had both extra information on the air safety situation and obligation to share this to its national airlines. This is both not the case. There is no extra information, Ukraine invited the diplomats of 8 countries to express concern about Russian involvement. The task of evaluating of safety of airspaces for national airlines is not a task of the dutch intelligence services, who are focussed on IS. And in fact, the so-called new information was already known immediately after the downing of the different airplanes.
On the May incident, which happened in June according to ASN, there is only the mention of ground fire.
The 14th july downing of the An-26, Kiev IMMEDIATELY stated that this was either due a Russian Pantsir missile or an AIR-TO-AIR missile, and it seems that they now stick to the latter. Proof that a missile was involved was already visible on the same day (see Aviation Safety Network entry).
The downing of a SU-25 on July 16th was according to Kiev by a Russian jet.
Rebels, however, claimed that both were downed by Manpads.
That Ukraine didn't close the airspace themselves, is surely a liability, but they didn't withhold information about what was happening. We, in the West, rather wanted to believe that rebels did this by manpads than accept the deep involvement of Russian Military in this conflict, ignoring facts that showed the opposite.
So this leads to the question which I hope that the DSB will answer: why did airlines stay flying above Eastern Ukraine while they knew (or could know) that air-to-air engagements were taking place. Or do they simply follow the national NOTAMs? Because the DSB cannot interview the national intelligence agencies, it lets the intelligence commity do this for her, to get answers here.
But the worst is the way Ukraine handled the decision of closing the Eastern Ukraine airspace. Please see link below and watch the movie on the right side of the page. Military decided on the raising of the minimum altitude. But Military look different to safety than civil airlines.
link below: dutch story + piece of dutch journal, including the reaction of the Ukraine minister.
'Oekraïne had luchtruim al in mei moeten sluiten' | NOS
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Age: 62
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can also ask Russia/Rostov why the also only closed the Airspace below FL320 and not complete.
V6158/14 NOTAMN
If Rostov had complete closed so no Flight could have made over the Area.
The next Question: why wanted ATC RND that MH17 change the Route direct to RND? The ATC Reason was: we have three of them. Where?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh06SqVx_1Q
Everyone knew the Radar Vid. At 13.20.39UTC a Military Object apear on screen at Russian Border. The new flight Route would be go nearby the Object.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=766ftKQGqls
V6158/14 NOTAMN
If Rostov had complete closed so no Flight could have made over the Area.
The next Question: why wanted ATC RND that MH17 change the Route direct to RND? The ATC Reason was: we have three of them. Where?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh06SqVx_1Q
Everyone knew the Radar Vid. At 13.20.39UTC a Military Object apear on screen at Russian Border. The new flight Route would be go nearby the Object.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=766ftKQGqls
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Midpoint between equator and North Pole
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
triumph61
Everyone knew the Radar Vid. At 13.20.39UTC a Military Object apear on screen at Russian Border. The new flight Route would be go nearby the Object.
Everyone knew the Radar Vid. At 13.20.39UTC a Military Object apear on screen at Russian Border. The new flight Route would be go nearby the Object.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Age: 62
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please look at 13.20.39 in the middle, left of TAMAK over Ru Area.
About 40KM away from MH17.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=766ftKQGqls
About 40KM away from MH17.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=766ftKQGqls
Had those measurementts by ATC represented by the yellow lines been made real time or are those inserted afterwards? If it is a realtime video, what was the reason for such close continuous monitoring with this flight?
At 13:20:39 a nonsquawker shows east of Tamac close to the border.
At 13:20:39 a nonsquawker shows east of Tamac close to the border.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Eastern Europe
Age: 61
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that the monitoring was during replay of the record, not during the flight.
I suppose that yellow blinking and red are automatic warning about collision course. The blinking yellow АФЛ means Aeroflot - a Russian airline, like MH in MH17.
I suppose that yellow blinking and red are automatic warning about collision course. The blinking yellow АФЛ means Aeroflot - a Russian airline, like MH in MH17.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Age: 62
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Objekt apear left of TAMAK, directly to the UA Border.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5I...ew?usp=sharing
The new Route would be go nearly the Object
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5I...ew?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5I...ew?usp=sharing
The new Route would be go nearly the Object
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5I...ew?usp=sharing
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Objekt apear left of TAMAK, directly to the UA Border."
Interesting find.
We know from google earth pictures that there most likely was a BUK launcher, radar and command unit in that rough area. But I doubt (e.g.) BUK missile would show in radar like that.
Could military radar cause that kind of erroneous echo on civilian radar screen?
But anyway, there perhaps was something without a transponder, flying briefly from Russia towards Ukraine border. Was it a helicopter/jet attacking some border quards? Uragan salvo?
Interesting find.
We know from google earth pictures that there most likely was a BUK launcher, radar and command unit in that rough area. But I doubt (e.g.) BUK missile would show in radar like that.
Could military radar cause that kind of erroneous echo on civilian radar screen?
But anyway, there perhaps was something without a transponder, flying briefly from Russia towards Ukraine border. Was it a helicopter/jet attacking some border quards? Uragan salvo?