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/