Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. After a few months of more or less silence on the MH17 downing, today, Dutch research journalist Jeroen Akkermans published an article that proves MH17 was shot down by a Russian made BUK. On his third visit to the crash site in November 2014, he took about 20 pieces of metal found in the vicinity of the cockpit and had it tested by experts from Croydon, Warsaw and Munich.



    Pictures of the chemical and microscopic analysis of the shrapnel and plane debris are included in this article:

    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Unfortunately this is worthless as legal evidence of anything.

    A reporter taking evidence from a crash site is actually a criminal offense in western countries - I have worked with air accident investigators and they are meticulous about location, recording and accounting for every little scrap of material they gather.

    So this guy has found something that could well have been important - if it had been done properly!!

    Of course there was a massive problem at MH17 with getting proper investigation done, what with access being restricted and/or considered too dangerous - so this might well end up the best evidence.....let's hope not!
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Very true. Akkermans does however explain his motivation to take away this evidence as a way of ending the most absurd speculations about the downing of the plane (in Dutch unfortunately):


    In addition, the Dutch Safety Board's investigation is still going on. It would surprise me if they would not have been able to find the same kind of evidence themselves while at the site.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Yes I have no problems with the claims or reasoning, or even, given the circumstances, with the action. But there are consequences to being a non-official sleuth.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. Ray Von Geezer

    Ray Von Geezer Senior Member

    Is there anything in the analysis that would indicate who the missile belonged to? Would different paints be used for different export markets or anything like that?

    Ray Von
  6. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    I think the fact the plane was brought down by a SAM is not in doubt, and neither is the type of missile employed.

    However the important thing is whose finger was on the trigger so to speak, Russian, Ukrainian or separatist, and that's going to be a damn sight harder to prove.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    Here's the article, run through Google Translate (it's rather messy, but nevertheless understandable):
    (The German phrase in the middle means, essentially, 'it's simple math'.)
    • Useful Useful x 3
  8. I would translate it is as "It is pure mathematics". So, basically they're not saying one and one is two, but their conclusions are based on calculations.
  9. The article is not conclusive about that. I just read some related articles, but they're not mentioning anything either.

    Lavrov (Russian minister of foreign affairs) has responded however. He wants an independent and transparent investigation. Moscow thinks the Dutch investigation is biased, RT reports. The interesting thing however is that this article only mentions the BUK-fragments in the last three sentences. The biggest part of the article is about a Reuters publication on some witnesses seeing a smoke trail of a rocket being fired, oddly enough.

    Nothing is being said about the analysis on the fragments, only pictures are briefly mentioned. Lavrov does mention something interesting though:

    Emphasis added by me.

    • Useful Useful x 1
  10. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    'Reine' does mean 'pure', but given the context, language switch, and the somewhat ironic 'Herr Akkermann' it seems to me he is trying to express what an Anglophone would by saying 'One-plus-one equals two' (ie it's obvious, simple, and incontrovertible).
  11. I see. I did just check it however with a native German speaker and she told me you are fully correct ;). The translation of the second "calculation" confused me somewhat as to the context.
  12. Henk001

    Henk001 Active Member

    Some Anglophones might in cases like this also use the phrase: "it's not rocket science". But that would be an awkward wording in this context.
    Btw I am dutch. Comparing Santa's Google's Translation with the original it is indeed a bit messy, but I think the essential information is clear. If there still is a need for clarification on details though, just let me know.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Senior Member

  14. I apologise in advance if this question is not germane to the topic, but most claims made to incriminate Ukraine in the shooting down of this plane relate to the alleged use of fighter jets. Most of these claims are backed by alleged witnesses on the ground. But this begs the question, can a fighter jet actually be seen or heard when it is flying at a passenger plane's cruising altitude, for I suppose the fighter jet needs to be at the same altitude of its target.
  15. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    I wouldn't need to be at the same altitude - missiles have a long reach. But if it was "up there somewhere" then no, it almost certainly would not be seen or heard.
  16. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    Why would that be? Fighter jets aren't that much smaller than airliners, and they tend to be quite loud in my experience.
  17. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Fighter jets are a LOT smaller than airliners - a Su-27 is 22m long by 15m wide - a 777-200 like the one shot down is 64m ling by 61m wide.

    And noise from 30-40,000 feet simply does not carry to ground level without some unusual atmospherics - the engines are developing only a fraction of their max thrust, and the sound propagates in a pretty much perfect hemisphere downwards - there's nothing solid to channel or reflec it
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Auldy

    Auldy Senior Member

    Let alone that a Su-27 would likely be carrying R-27 air to air missiles which, model depending, having a range up to and greater than 130km
  19. Robert E

    Robert E New Member

    As a Dutch citizen and almost fluent in German, i would translate it as 'pure' (or 'sheer'). What is meant with this expression: no speculation or interpretation, just stonecold facts (mathematics), there is no room for doubts, 100% hard, etc.
    The 'Herr Akkermans' means nothing ironic, this is just German culture. I have been in meeting with many Germans and they often use 'Herr ....." or " Frau .......". Even for a collegue who is sitting next to them in a meeting and are working with for years they would adress as "Herr ...." or "Frau ....". Germans are very formel in official contacts.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. mik

    mik Member

    An Su-27 is a very large fighter, though, being the same length as the famous 2nd World War bomber B-17 with half it's wingspan. WhZaFVf-640x426.

    On a clear day, it should be possible although extremely difficult to spot it unaided.

    I'm quite confident in that I've heard the transcontinental 777ERs flying over my general area at FL330 and higher on multiple occasions, though I do admit the sound is very faint, and very difficult at times to point at a non-contrailing aircraft high above due to the delay. In quiet rural areas, hearing a passenger plane cruising along should also be quite possible, and a military jet even more so.

    On a tail-chase engagement, the missile's effective range would be far shorter. Even though a passenger plane can be considered a slow and lumbering target, the 950 km/h groundspeed has a large effect on missile ranges which to my understanding are noted as either a head-on engagement range or a flat coasting range from optimal launch conditions.

    Have any official sources claimed SIGINT detections of an active Su-27 radar in the area? Especially if providing a guidance to a semiactive missile, it could be detected for a long way ahead of the plane. Was there a suspicious radar contact at a high altitude going towards MH17?

    I've been under the assumption, that an Su-25 had been confirmed to be in the general area, but such an aircraft does not have thw ability to engage a cruising passenger plane.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  21. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    Sure... But this is not a German article. It's a Dutch article in a Dutch paper.
  22. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    It wasn't a clear day, you would have difficulty seeing a B-17 at 30,000 feet too, and a 777 is still much much larger.

    Of course it is possible - ambient conditions are one of the main concerns tho

    None of this is "confirmed" - read the threads - there were no radar contacts other than other airliners.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  23. Robert E

    Robert E New Member

    Yes? And?

    Original: 'Das ist reine Mathematik, Herr Akkermans.'
    It is marked as a quote and therefor 100% according to what is really said, Dutch article/newspaper doesn't matter, those are the exact words used -> German culture/habits.
  24. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    An irrelevant side-track Herr E.
  25. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    As far as I can tell it's not a quote.
  26. Robert E

    Robert E New Member

    In German phrase, in a Dutch article and printed as a quote, but still it isn't a quote?
  27. Santa's sidekick

    Santa's sidekick Active Member

    E, not everything written in quotations is a quote. 'Et même citations ne sont pas toujours citations, mon ami'.

    Sometimes quotations are used to indicate a change of tone, as here. No one is being quoted in that part of the article.
  28. Svartbjørn

    Svartbjørn Senior Member

    Just for comparison.. here's an SU-30 escorting a boeing 777


    the SU-30 is the same size as the SU-27:


    So there's definitely quite a large difference in size. As Mike also pointed out.. at those altitudes, even on a clear day, the SU-27 would be really hard to spot from the ground.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  29. Gridlock

    Gridlock Active Member

    And it's not like they try to stand out...

    • Agree Agree x 2
  30. ad_2015

    ad_2015 Member

    All belivers in Su-27 with medium-range missile R-27 can answer on my questions:
    1. What minimal range of use R-27 against MH17?
    2. What relative position of Su-27 during launch?
    3. What range between Su-27 and MH17 during launch?
    4. What warhead used on R-27 missile?
    5. Can you a draw inteception plan?
    6. And explain damage to cabin area?
    7. When Su-27 become stealth fighter?
  31. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Senior Member

    If these are questions you know the answers to, it would be good if you can provide the answers yourself, it will make your point much clearer.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  32. ad_2015

    ad_2015 Member

    Im sorry but im cannot answer on questions, im dont believe in R-27 missile so dont imagine how Su-27 can attack B777 by R-27 missile without detection and with massive damage in cabin area. But very useful to see what answers have R-27 believers and how it interract with reality. Looks like they know only name of missile and what ukrainian plane can use it without details which "fit not well".
  33. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Senior Member

    Oh sorry, I thought you were asking questions you already had the answers for to prove a point, my mistake.
  34. ad_2015

    ad_2015 Member

    Well im have answer on one question
    4. What warhead used on R-27 missile?
    Air to air missile R-27 have continuous rods warhead. So how CR warhead can make damage from fragmentation warhead's pre-ready splinters of 3 different type-size on MH17 skin?
    Need more "fit not well" things? Answer on any question, please.
  35. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Thread has devolved off topic and has been closed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.