The proximity fuse in a missile like Buk is "side looking" rather, than "front looking" (probably at an angle of about 60deg from missile axis). It is designed to detonate when it passes close to target, there is no point to detonate ahead of a typical aircraft target. The speed of shrapnels from the warhead is much higher than closure speed of the missile/target, so the warhead doesn't work like a "shotgun shot". It just explodes passing close to target and the shrapnels are thrown to the sides fast enough to hit it (shrapnel is several times faster than the missile)

So if the missile was going head-on horizontally or from above with slight side offset, then the warhead detonated as soon as the cockpit came into FOV of side-looking proximity fuse antennas. And looking at the cockpit damage, it was only few meters, so most of the shrapnel was absorbed by front part of the hull with very high fragment density. The spread pattern of warhead shrapnels is not omnidirectional, almost all of the fragments are directed to the sides. Nearly all other plane parts were outside of the shrapnel kill-zone, only one wing and it's engine could get some.

Detonating a bit ahead of target would be good only against really fast target kile ballistic missile or anti-radiation missile, where speed of target/missile is comparable to speed of shrapnels from warhead.

The operating principle of proximity fuse radars is to detonate the warhead at the point of closest approach. Once the measured range stops decreasing and instead increases - kaboom.

The operating principle of proximity fuses is that they detonate the warhead in proximity of the target.

Some proximity fuses measure distance to target and can detect the moment of closest approach. Such method is used in torpedo proximity fuses and especially in naval mines, but is not usually needed or practical in missiles.

The proximity fuse of a a Sidewinder missile project narrow beams of laser light perpendicular to the flight of the missile. If any of the beams strikes the target it is reflected back to the missile where detectors sense it and detonate the warhead. There is no "measuring the range" at all, abd it is not needed - when a target is detected to the side of the missile then it's probably as close as it could be and is is good place to detonate the warhead.

Radar proximity fuses work on similar principle (beams of radio energy projected to the sides, perpendicular to misile or at an angle, to front-side) but they can have a predetermined maximum range at which the fuse can detonate. If the target is let's say closer than 17m the fuse would detonate warhead.

Usually there is no need to determine the "point of closesd approach" because the fuse anyway can detect a target ONLY to the side. So only when it passes by. And then in 95% of cases target is already as close as it can be (passing by) and the warhead (which is also designed to throw shrapnels to the sides) should be detonated NOW.

Radar fuse COULD measure range to target and detect optimal point for detonation, but this would be rarely usefull at all.

I suspect that a blast wave would instantly be dissipated by opposite explosive decompression and fast moving slip stream. Decompression at FL330 would not kill healthy people instantly. Occupants not directly hit by shrapnel or airframe parts during the in-flight break up would become unconscious from lack of oxygen and the freezing air blast. But when descending through lower altitude and warmer air, (FL100) surviving occupants would likely regain consciousness.

The counter to radar and also laser is a jammer that initiates the explosive train too early.

BAE Systems are now trying to drum up interest in civil aviation for military grade counter measures.

Not cheap and not effective if not kept up to date. Obviously constantly updating the jammer capability will be an ongoing cost for the operator.

IR missile jammers are of course in use by certain airlines and by certain military operators.

To actually decoy the missile is a whole different ball game as you have to counter the tracker or guidance links and well as active radar seekers.

Sudden decompression
 

Re: Glueball comment on quote: "Between the sudden decompression and the blast wave of the warhead detonation, it was instant for everybody."




An alternative and possibly more realistic description is given by Dr. Charles Wetli, the Suffolk County medical examiner in charge of autopsies for TW800.

ME: Flight 800 Injuries Reveal Sudden, Violent Deaths for Passengers

Maybe some small comfort for the relatives of MH17.

Victims Bodies Land In Malaysia
 

The first remains of the victims have landed in Kuala Lumpur.

Does anyone know if this particular 777 had pax O2 supplies as bottles or generators??

It should be an easy matter to establish the type of rocket used to down it - some of the shrapnel must be still stuck in the bodies of the passengers, plus the holes in the wing look pretty unique too - looks like they were made by triangular shaped projectiles.

So, what's taking so long?

What's taking so long?

Well it was definitely brought down by a Buk, or it wasn't.

If it wasn't then it will take time to determine what did.

If it was then the issue becomes WHO and not WHAT.

Now we all have our favourite theory but at Government level you have to be certain before naming names.

Search for MH17 victims 'too dangerous' to continue - World - NZ Herald News
Apologies to the locals? Even CFIT on a pristine mountainside (Erebus, TE901) many bodies not found.

The local volunteers deserve recognition for their humanitarian efforts, they completed a comprehensive search in a conflict zone, meanwhile being accused by Oz PM of disrespect, looting, trampling and tampering.

CVR transcript
 

Any idea how long to some or all of the CVR transcript is released - why hasn't it been released already?Seems to be taking a very long time!

The pictures of the wreakage show passenger service units with chemical oxygen generators.

Transcripts aren't published separately, if at all. We'll likely have to wait for an interim report.

Besides, I'm guessing that all the CVR will contain is bog standard conversation cut short by the sound of something hitting the cockpit, a momentary rush of air and the beginnings of the break up. Then the CVR will go dead.

If we are "lucky" (for want of a better expression!) there might be a comment by either of the pilots of something coming toward them.

I am looking forward for any transcript from CVR and communication with ATC because as long there is an information vacuum it makes a free space for wild speculation and conspiracy theorists who spread propaganda on "how Ukrainian ATC intentionally locked MH17 into war zone... etc."

As the facts will be more and more available this kind of noise will abate.

As an old man said - when truth becomes available the lies inevitably die.

OK thanks for that info. I was trying to visulise another reason for the amount of thermal damage on those front fus fragments but I guess it comes back to the closeness of the warhead/missile motor when it detonated...

Well the SBU story is the rebels were mistaken. They were to set up the BUK to the west of Donetsk, but went to the east instead.

there are some youtube videos of mh17 flight from fr24. SU2074 is there. their paths crossed at same time. Version is more probable, than russian version that ukrainian fighters confused mh17 with Putin's aircraft.

ATC Tapes
 

I find even more risible the idea that the Russians shot it down. There is no motive.

"I find even more risible the idea that the Russians shot it down. There is no motive."


There are only two logical motives:

1) the rebels shot it down thinking it was a military aircraft
2) some element within Ukraine shot it down deliberately to use as a modern version of the Lusitania

Taking the first as the simplest of those two logical options then the question becomes why they thought it was a military aircraft?

(Specifically an Il-76?)


Obviously there are a lot of possible illogical explanations as well for example the missile missed its original target and locked onto the airliner which is apparently what happened in 2001 with Siberian Airlines 1812.

"The intercept reads:

"A bird is flying towards you"
"A bird is flying to us?"
"Yes. One so far"
"A scout [recon plane] or a big one?"
"Can't see because of the clouds - too high"
"Roger"

This sounds much more like a spotter reporting a visual observation of an incoming plane (assumed to be either a recon plane or a militar transport), than an order to be ready to shoot down an incoming civilian plane."

yupp, they didn't have auxiliary radar vehicle so had to rely on spotters, it's quite clear they didn't have any intention and it's quite clear it wasn't any conspiracy being it from russian or ukrainian side

Forensic investigators identify 23 MH17 crash victims using fingerprints and dental records
176 "mostly complete" bodies were found.

Article says DNA will be used to identify the majority of victims.
As mentioned earlier in this thread, visual ID by relatives is not reliable so leaving bodies in situ to aide investigators does not compromise identification at a later time.

Have we discounted the claims of responsibility, with video, that were quickly removed after discovering it to be a civilian plane.

Or the intercepted conversations alerting the missile crew of the approaching plane.

Or the 'Oh crap' intercept explaining that the plane was full of civilians with documentation.

Or the interview with the local commander explaining where the Buk came from.

Basic trigonometry will tell you that the apparent size, elevation and speed of a high-altitude airliner and a lower-altitude turboprop are virtually indistinguishable from the ground. That's before you throw in cloud cover, sun position, distances involved, and the fact that MH17 was approaching head-on, all of which blur the ability to tell one from the other.

Basic trigonometry immediately tells you the altitude if you know the angle and distance (the two parameters Buk operator always sees).

Never know ????
 

I am sure that eventually the truth will out.


There is sure to be a very large number of people right now who know exactly what happened.


Just because no one yet is putting their hand up does not mean that they never will.


It is highly unlikely that those who know will remain tight lipped to the grave.

Only one!
 

I agree...there is only one logical and factual event...the Russian supported rebels shot the plane out of the sky! They :mad: up. Period.

Gaud. The facts have been laid out in this forum daily. Pay attention.

The propaganda that has bucketed into this forum is disgraceful. Do we have to mount a daily fight against it? Please moderate the obvious.

A massive loss of life occurred in skies thought to be quiet. Honor that first.

Put something into this forum that is not speculation, driven by whom you fear or love or are paid by. It is disgusting to read the drivel of finger-pointing.

This is not some mass forum, it is for and by people paid to fly other people, a daunting and frankly damned heroic thing lately. Stop the propaganda and :mad:

A quick calculation shows angles of 18 or 21 degrees; not a lot in it for an inexperienced operator.

Speed, or rather rate of closure, might be measured by the system or alternatively left of operator assessment.

As we don't know (I think) if the launcher/operator was fully exploited and trained or only semi-trained the differentiation may not have been that obvious.

Much as I mourn my friend and everyone else who was murdered in this event:
I still think we are dealing with a "Moron with a Missile " who, along with anyone in his crew, is in a ditch with 20 shots to the head.

New debris map from the Dutch Rijksoverheid:

http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestande...ering-1600.gif

Northwesternmost debris on this map has a distance of 16 km from the main impact site and a distance of 35 km from the BUK launch site alleged by the SBU. The mapping is cut off there, so probably debris can be found even further to the north west.

According to my calculations that would take the engagement distance to at least 44 km from the alleged launch site.

what sort of debris, personal belongings or plane.

which way was the high altitude wind blowing that day

any photos of this debris.

More likely the NorthWest Plume of debris is light airborne debris from the impact location. The Eastern leg is more likely ballistic debris on or near the flight-path

Wind records at the time are roughly South-East i.e. light debris will fall North-West. The planned track has a significant Easterly component.

OleOle's map appears to have come from here....where more info from the search team can be found: https://translate.google.com/transla...%2F&edit-text=

Just to clarify terms:

The engagement range or engagement zone is that distance from the launcher where the launch sequence starts to achieve a successful engagement.

This distance is greater than the range of the missile. It varies by target aspect t o t he missile and the velocity toward the launcher.

Assuming head on and a speed ratio of 1:4, the missile can be launched when the target is at max range x 1.20

The video from Russian Ministry of Defense includes playback of Russian civilian radar record. Based on it, a participant of aviaforum.ru determined coordinates of the missile strike:
http://sf.uploads.ru/cUoK2.jpg
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=ru&lat=48...7&z=12&m=b&v=2
Meteo: 757.2 mm Hg at sea level. Flight level 33000 feet = 10058 m, pressure correction 2,8 mm Hg = 34 m, altitude 10024 m (please check my calculations).

Geolocation of Buk missile launch site from several photos and testimonies:
http://avva.livejournal.com/2788606.html
It's betwen Snezhnoe town and Saur-Mogila hill, near Pervomajskoe village, Pervomajskij township, Chervonyj Zhovten/Krasnyj Oktjabr hamlet (AKA Beregis hamlet), Saurovka airstrip:
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=ru&lat=47...1&z=12&m=b&v=2
Elevation 231 m (from Google Earth 47.98245N 38.754101E).

Distance between launch and strike 22.5 km, altitude difference 9793 m, slant range 24.5 km, elevation angle atan(9793/22500)= 23.5°.

The SAM suspected is the single radar+launcher vehicle from 9K37M1 (Buk-M1, SA-11 Gadfly) system, missile range 35 km distance, 22 km altitude.

I suppose that the radar+launcher vehicle crew expected a military transport plane similar to the An-26 hit at altitude 6.2 km 3 days before that. For elevation 6.2 km and distance 22.5 km, elevation angle is 15.4°, elevation angle difference 8.1°. But that's at the strike. The crew saw the dot on the radar screen earlier, at farther distance. In case of distance 35 km, elevation angle difference would be 5.6°. 56 km - 3.6°. 80 km - 2.5°. I think that so little angle difference is quite difficult to notice.

If the SBU (Security Service of Ukraine) version is to be believed then I think that the Buk crew might be not informed that the target is a Russian civilian plane. They could believe that the target is a military transport.

The map is a result of the dutch governmental reply to an independent investigation by rtlnieuws (a dutch commercial news agency).

RTLnieuws bought satelite images of about 137 km2 of the area where MH17 had crashed. They bought images from 16th of july and the 26th july both taken around 09:00 in the morning. These images were analyzed by a company named NEO. This company used software to determine relevant differences between the two images. These differences were judged twice by experts to determine if these were trivial or not (i.e. moved garbage can, livestock, etc). The debris attributed to MH17 is on the map. From the satelite images it cannot be determined what the debris is.

RTL nieuws published the map, and the dutch government reacted by a fact sheet which includes the map mentioned in the post above. The colors mean: GREEN: inspected by investigation teams. RED: Areas forbidden by the rebels to be entered : ORANGE: Uninvestigated area.

The link to the RTLnieuws article is here (dutch):
Groot deel rampgebied niet onderzocht door missie | RTL Nieuws

Here is the actual images used to identify debris:
MH17

The dutch investigation teams mentioned before in an interview that they were using satelite images.

RTLnieuws is trying to get reporters in the unsearched north-west area, but has not yet been successfull. It is unclear who has control of the area of the crash site.

The news agency also interviewed a refugee who claims to have seen the plane intact but burning breaking through the clouds and see it break into two. Couldn't find a link on internet.

I wonder why russian ministry of defense keeps in secret that MH17 was flying NOT to TAMAK, but directly to RND VOR/DME. MH17 was diverted there minutes before crash, by request from Rostov's atc. They defiantly could knew that, because all telephone conversations between controllers are recorded.

And your source is?