We simply don't know all this, we don't know how wide spread the bodies were, the tail also seems not too far from the main point of impact. Frankly Paris Match's diagram is the first sketch of the sort.

Indeed. It is beyond irony that it needs a war zone controlled by amateur forces to allow the public to learn about the details of an aircraft crash. If it has ever been hard to hide or remove ar falsify evidence, then it is probably this crash.
Once the aircraft lost its tail the trajectory of both pieces will be quite similar: straight down. An Aircraft wing and center fuselage flying horizontaly just happens in Hollywood.
The wreackage of the forward fuselage consists only of the portion below the passenger floor. So similar to Aloha probably the whole roof section was blown away by the blast and the airflow in realtively small pieces, and the lower section then broke away in one piece.
It is always amazing to see that large pieces of debris falling at terminal velicity (round 150 kt) stays much more intact, than an aerodynamically much better whole aircraft impacting at 300kt. On the other hand, the later one means 4 times the energy...
The left turn shown in the radar data looks like something the software created when the signal was lost. I would seriously doubt a quick left turn, and then a straight trajectory for a long time. The pieces have most probably been falling / flying in a random, chaotic trajectory.

What I am still wondering about is the second burned debris field, with the videos from the impact clearly showing one single fireball and plume of smoke. But maybe that is just matter of the perspective, with both fires in line from the point of view.

no CVR tampering
 

MH17 investigators download 'valid' information from black box recorder | Mail Online

Did anyone seriously expect tampering with the black boxes?

Well yes, probably the separatists -- that's why they were careful who they handed them over to.

Sure they are certainly a bunch of very "careful" folks, they can shoot first then ask questions later but at least they are careful about some other things, real trustworthy chaps :ugh:

What would happen to the fuel tanks, if they were penetrated by high energy shrapnel in mid-air?

Looking at Jeroen Akkerman's photos showing multiple perforations which created a colander effect on much of the skin I'm surprised there was so much fuel left in the tanks when the remains reached the ground.

2 OleOle

With regard to the MailOnline schematical picture showing a G2A missile below a plane, it is worth noting that the BUK missile hits the target from above. This kind of a trajectory was mentioned in some Russian sources. The warhead explodes at a distance about 17 m to target.

The pictures show the outer wing, which is outside of the fuel tanks. You can see the corrosion preventing compound (that orange-brownish stuff) on the primed structure, which is not used in tanks as it would be washed away by the fuel.

Based on the many colleagues I saw shot down over North Vietnam with blast/frag missile warheads and AAA fire, I would expect the aircraft to burst into flames as it comes apart in a collection of small and large pieces.

However, while a big ball of fire could be expected, not every aircraft burns in this way. I would expect MH17 to catch fire, but it is possible that the aircraft might not burst into flames even after being hit with a relatively large warhead. Several combat losses I witnessed did not burn up in the air.

Judging from the pictures of MH17, it looks to me as though there was a big fire after the aircraft impacted the ground. I would say there was plenty of fuel remaining when it hit. I haven't seen any good photos or videos of the aircraft as it fell, so I can't say if it was on fire or not.

Expanding rod damage (Sparrow)

http://www.navalofficer.com.au/kwd/w...artdamage2.jpg

Blast Frag damage (SA-16)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tle_Damage.JPG

MH17 damage
http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor...riginal(1).jpg

note - if an expanding rod warhead detonates at a range greater than the maximum radius of the expanding rod 'hoop' (after which the hoop breaks up into individual elements), then it gets harder to tell the difference on one piece of wreckage. A blast frag has a larger spread widthwise than an expanding rod. a few pieces of damaged wreckage from different extremities of the aircraft will confirm blast frag.

Sounds a bit optimistic for me. I do not expect more than a sudden interruption of data from a flight which was perfectly normal up to that point. Flight path was already known from several radar sources.
Tampering with any digital data of known format is a piece of cake. As thousands of people around the world must be able to read out Black Boxes, nothing about their way of working or the data format is secret. But I seriously doubt that such action was necessary, there is nothing and has never been any data on the recorder after the missile destroyed the Cockpit and ripped the nose section including the avionics bay off the plane.

True but part of accident investigation is to eliminate any other possible causes - I believe a particular signature on the CVR just before power interruption can be sign of an onboard device. Unlikely with MH17 I agree.

Aviation Week Bulletin about Buk Radar
 

FDR - CVR
 

The FDR probably will show a normal flight, then maybe nothing. Maybe. The avionics area would have been badly fragged, but the front section did not separate immediately. Nor did the tail section where the recorders were, so it could have continued to record until the wiring to the tail ripped. This would tell us when the port engine was lost and how long the starboard engine had fuel, which could reflect on where/when the main tanks ruptured. It won't help with cause, which is already known. It would help map the breakup.

The CVR will be able to settle three points
1: discussions with ATC about route or altitude changes
2: do these match with eventually compared ATC recordings which were "confiscated" at the time
3: any mention of fighter escort or activity nearby

The missile impact may be on it or not. Probably yes. But this is not important, as the skin is full of evidence.

I wonder if SIA pilots could actually see the moment of explosion or even missile trail since they were only some 20-30 miles behind and probably had MH17 in sight?

If the FDR has xyz accelerometers is it possible the initial blast impact could have registered enough to get an exact blast angle ?

AreOut:

The Australian investigators are in addition to other investigators already onsite (including Dutch, Malaysian, US, and others). This is to be expected as there were 27 Australians onboard. Normal protocol.

It does, but the FDR only updates each parameter once per second, sequencing through the thousands of recorded parameters every second (a common error when interpreting FDR data is assuming everything in a 'frame' is recorded at the same instant - within a 'frame' there can be as much as a one second shift). Given the time of the initial breakup would be measured in milliseconds, it is highly unlikely the FDR captured anything meaningful. Even if it happened to catch the accelerometer in one direction at the time of the blast, one direction wouldn't help determine the angle - you need at least two to conclude anything.

Similarly, the CVR probably captured a few milliseconds of a sudden loud noise, perhaps preceded by someone saying something along the line of "WHAT'S THAT!"

Re comments crew might have "heard" the missile detonation. Quite unlikely with supersonic shrapnel impacting cockpit area in advance of the sound wave.

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.

https://secure.flickr.com/photos/jer...h/14705660266/

That skin piece should give ample of chemical 'footprint' material, as to the clues about what warhead it was

True, but there would be the sounds from the shrapnel impacts - hence the 'sudden loud noise'. Depending on exactly how fast the CVR lost power, there might be some initial sounds of decompression/breakup as well, but we're talking small fractions of a second. The "WHAT'S THAT" would be if one of the pilots spotted the approaching missile.

All in all, it's unlikely the FDR/CVR will tell us much of anything we don't already know (or at least strongly suspect).

Once per second ?! Aren't they both low and high sampling rate channels (for the acceleration increments) within the FDR ? :ugh:

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.

Discussion on Dutch tv that Marechaussee troops will provide protection for the investigators.

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'.

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 .

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.

Stumbled over it too. This one is the largest edition:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3894/...85c6e268_o.jpg

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?

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5554/...c4e41b8b_o.jpg

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

Russian Defense Ministry take rather undiplomatic tone (video): Most US evidence is based on social media posts

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.

It's the floor of the cockpit. See link in my post above.

http://cdn-www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/aviati.../0/1705081.jpg

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.

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.

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

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.

On this photo (already linked above).
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5554/...c4e41b8b_o.jpg
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:
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/ima.../28/246196.jpg
Shrapnel marks there are very tiny.

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.

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 :mad:). 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 :D


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.

Cockpit Panel Damage
 

http://www.kyivpost.com/media/images...11q9o4/big.jpg

https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hpho...62580331_o.jpg


https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hpho...53923025_o.jpg