Yes, absolutely no need to withhold it from public knowledge.

golfyankeesierra:


That is probably limited to the crew, not third parties.

The public prosecution in NL is very actively looking for possible criminal prosecution in aeronautical incidents and accidents (ask Turkish airlines..) and I believe there is a strong understanding that they absolutely cannot use any cockpit recordings for any criminal prosecution (which they really, really would like to do).
And when they cannot indict the crew they go for the manufacturer, ATC or even the AMT who released the aircraft for flight. We have had several examples..

You can find some information about how they tried to prosecute in the Turkish accident here:
Criminal investigation into the crash of Turkish Airlines completed
The frustration is clearly present:

The public prosecution in NL is very actively looking for possible criminal prosecution in aeronautical incidents and accidents

Sometimes too much. Criminal prosecution of a controller at Schiphol for a runway incursion resulted in a decrease of incident reports of no less than 50 %.

The chairman of dutch safety board didn't want to share the FDR/CVR data because:

'only when there is murder, manslaughter, hostage or terrorism invloved, the dutch safety board is obliged to share this with the OM (public prosecution service). This is not yet the case'



'To prevent accidents and improve safety, it is important that everyone can contribute to the investigation without fear of persecution. So it is regulated by law. The Research Council believes that cooperating in a criminal investigation undermines the independence of the board.'

Based on Annex 13.

see:
http://vorige.nrc.nl/binnenland/arti..._dozen_niet_af

Just for completeness

Dear 007,

Our apologies for this late answer.

The first expected publication will be the release of the preliminary report in a few weeks. We think it is in the best interest of the investigation to bring out investigative information from various sources (like the black boxes, radar and satellites) in a coherent report, and not to bring out fragmented pieces of information. So we have to ask you for your patience a little while longer.

Yours sincerely,
Dutch Safety Board

The Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans has replied to parliamentary questions stating that there was no horizontal deviation from the route of MH017. The only change to the flight plan was a descent from 11 km (FL350) to 10 km (FL330) ordered by Dnepropetrovsk ATC in order to avoid a conflict with another aircraft at 11km (FL350).

Original text in Dutch (question 7e) is to be found:

Lijst van vragen, brieven ?Repatriëringsmissie MH17? en ?Stand van Zaken vliegramp MH17? | Kamerstuk | Rijksoverheid.nl

One element of conspiracy theories countered indeed.

On the other hand, the full CVR conversation may not be published, which will undoubtedly give room to other conspriracy theories.

Another document from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs with images of the MH017 crash site:

Beelden bij beantwoording feitelijke vragen n.a.v. RBZ en brieven inzake MH17 | Kamerstuk | Rijksoverheid.nl

It is not uncommon that CVR tapes are not published completely. Do you really want all the smalltalk about last skivacation in the report?:eek:

If it is not worth it, it is not put into the report. Also for privacy.

Not that my confidence in dutch safety board is absolute - certainly not after the Faro court case.

I might add the Tenerife case of the seventies where the Dutch report gave maximum protection to the captain of the home fleet aircraft. Team Resource Management was introduced after the Tenerife accident but not as a follow-up on the Dutch investigation report. The American NTSB had a more constructive role.

Also the Hercules crash at Eindhoven (1996) where the (military) ATCO got nearly all the blame. The accusation against him was that he had not informed the fire brigade of the number of pax as stated in the FPL - as if the first thing an ATCO does in an emergency is leafing through a heap of administrative papers at the Flight Information Office. Poor fellow, next to the victims his life was ruined as well. I think he was not well defended by his superiors, one of whom was later on tacitly removed from his job, by the way. IMHO, thinking about it, his case should be reconsidered, as a judicial error.

I agree it is too early to judge, but I hope that the MH017 report on CVR conversation will contain enough details to prevent or in any case to counter conspiracy theories.

Dutch Safety Board | Investigations & Publication | Investigation crash MH17, 17 July 2014 :
The Dutch Safety Board will issue the preliminary report on the investigation into the crash of MH17 on Tuesday 9 September 2014. The preliminary report will be available at Dutch Safety Board at 10:00 AM local time Amsterdam (08:00 hours UTC).

Radarsignals recorded by NATO-Awacs
 

German government has for the first time released information about radar-records related to MH17, that is according to a press release by the German Public Broadcasting Company WDR:
https://presse.wdr.de/plounge/wdr/pr...0906_mh17.html - in German only.

It basically says:
In answering a parliamentary inquiry by the German Left Party ('Die Linke'), the German government has for the first time released information about radar-recordings concerning the crash of MH17. The information is based on data, that was recorded by Awacs-Airplanes conducting an operation for NATO.

The NATO-Aircrafts, that were flying in Polish and Romanian airspace, detected radar-signals of an Anti-aircraft, which was automatically classified as ‚Surface to Air-Missile’ SA-3.

The answer to the parliamentary inquiry however does not say, whether MH17 was shot down by a SA3 or a missile of another typ. Experts say, it could also have been brought down by a BUK-missile, for example, if it was fired without external radar guidance.

The answer also indicates, that the german government also obtained information on possible recordings of the air-ground communication. However referring to the Chicago Convention, the german government does not want to publish any such information.

Data from NATO AWACS
 

German media - the weekly news magazine "Der Spiegel" and the public broadcasting corporation "WDR" - are reporting on data recorded by NATO AWACS operating in Polish and Romanian airspace.

Spiegel

WDR

Both reports are citing a statement by the German government in reply to a parliamentary inquiry by the German Left Party ("Die Linke"). Since they are only available in German here is a short synopsis:

NATO AWACS operating in Polish and Romanian airspace did detect radar-signals of an anti-aircraft-missile-system and another radar-signal, that could not be identified. The anti-aircraft-missile-system has automatically been classified as SA-3 "Surface to Air-Missile". The report said this would be a "signal recorded as as a matter of routine in the whole region."
The government statement to the parliamentary inquiry however does not say, whether MH17 was shot down by a SA3-system or a missile of another typ. Experts say, the signal could also belong to a BUK-missile, for example, if it has been fired without external radar guidance.
The statement concludes that concerning the use of anti-aircraft-missile-systems there was "no reliable evidence" from the Awacs.

The statement also says that the Awacs did not track MH17 during the decisive moments. The Awacs have recorded the Boeing 777 on their radar, however the tracking of MH17 stops at 14.52 CET, "as MH17 left the zone of reconnaissance of the Awacs-aircraft." MH17 was shot down some 30 Minutes later.

The statement also indicates, that the german government obtained information on recordings of the air-ground communication. However referring to the Chicago Convention, the German government does not want to publish any such information.

official German statement re MH17
 

The German government was forced to issue an official statement after an official inquiry by one fraction in the German parliament about any factual insights of German services or government entities into the crash of MH17. The German government stated, that they have "no confirmed information" whatsoever ("keine gesicherten Erkenntnisse") about who or what brought down MH17.
Flug MH17: Regierung hat keine sicheren Erkenntnisse über Abschuss - SPIEGEL ONLINE

So the Germans thankfully do not want play "Curveball" anymore...

Malaysia said Saturday intelligence reports on the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 are "pretty conclusive" and investigators are now working on assembling physical evidence that can be presented to court.
"First of all, we do have the intelligence reports [on] what happened to MH17 and the reports are pretty conclusive," Prime Minister Najib Razak said at a joint news conference with Australia Prime Minister Tony Abbott on his first official visit to Malaysia.
Both prime ministers reiterated their call for justice against perpetrators of the downing of the Boeing 777 in eastern Ukraine that killed 298 people on board, most of them Dutch.
The comments come ahead of Tuesday's release of a preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board on Fight 17's crash. The board plans to conduct further investigations and expects to publish the final report within a year of the crash on July 17.
Investigators have said they believe the plane was brought down by a surface-to-air missile from an area controlled by pro-Russian separatists.
"What we need to do next is to assemble physical evidence that can be brought to court when the time comes so that it can be proven beyond any doubt that the plane was shot down by a missile," Mr. Najib said.
Mr. Najib added that investigators will need at least a few weeks to search the crash site in the volatile Donetsk region for remains and evidence before those responsible in the "atrocious crime" can be brought to court.



Malaysia Says Intelligence Reports on Flight 17 Crash 'Pretty Conclusive' - WSJ

These reports don't make much sense to me.

The incident occurred 400 nm from the border of Romania and 580 nm from the border of Poland. Standard NATO AWACS aircraft (E-3 Sentry) has radar range of 400 nm at high altitude. It might have seen the moment of impact if it were, by extreme stroke of luck, located at the closest point along the Romania/Ukraine border at that moment. If they were any further, they would not see even that, because even MH17 itself would have been below the horizon for E-3's. As the Spiegel article points out, MH17 went out of range of AWACS 30 minutes before the crash.

Given all this, I'm puzzled by the statement about a missile "that was tagged as SA-3". Where was it observed, and by whom? If it was observed by AWACS, it wouldt follow that it's a totally unrelated missile that was launched somewhere far from the incident, e.g. by the Polish military (they do have some SA-3's left). If it was observed near Donetsk, then the German military is omitting some crucial facts.

Hamster,

No one has suggested that an SA3 was launched or observed.

The EW suite on the AWACS simply observed signals that were consistent with SA3, this could be acquisition or targeting, most probably the former. . That is all.

Strange is that a SA-3 is mentioned. I would expect the tracking radar type or guidance radar type to be mentioned. And these were/are also used with other type of SAM missiles, none of them in Ukraine.

Most likely upgraded polish or so. I believe NATO mentioned already some time ago that AWACS weren't in the area at the time of the attack, so nothing news here.

This week RTLnieuws found the Head of the Ukraine recovery mission that searched and packed the bodies of the victims after the crash. In short they say that they covered 160 km2, and searched with hundreds of men, one afternoon even with 800 men. Area's were bodies had been found were searched 3 - 4 times, by different people. Recovery was completed on July 21st, 13:00 hours. They recovered 282 bodies and these were loaded in train in Torez (back section) and in the Mortuartium in Donetsk (nose section, about 40 people)

His opninion is that all body parts have been removed, and that a new mission to recover human remains is pointless.

Strangely enough they never got in contact with the dutch mission when these came to Ukraine to recover human remains.

Unfortunately in dutch:
Fouten bij Nederlandse zoektocht slachtoffers MH17 | RTL Nieuws
Hulpdiensten Oekraïne: Geen lichaamsresten meer op rampplek | RTL Nieuws

Jeroen Akkermans (known from his pictures) visited the firemen that did the recovery work and interviewed their bosses. He also made some new pictures of de debris field.
One noticeable thing is that somebody tampered with the left wing tip. It looked like some areas have been cut open, and an access panel has been openend. Check for yourself.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeroen...s/15083315846/



From the 3 people I knew on this flight, 2 have been identified.:(

The only thing relatively certain is that MH17 was the victim of an error or carelessness by a missile crew. The lesson to be learnt? Don't overfly a war zone, where missile crews have itchy fingers. But then ever since the USS Vincennes misidentified Iran Air flight 655, in spite of flight plan and squawk, one would have assumed this lesson should have been internalized by flight planners.

preliminary report
 

The preliminary report will be published at 10AM this morning (UTC+1) on this site:

Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid

Malaysian Airliner Downed by ‘High-Energy Objects From Outside the Aircraft,’ Dutch I
 

Good euphemism. From the NY Times:

http://nyti.ms/1qIB119

Here's the report link: http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/uploads...nteractief.pdf