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.
Last year correspondent Jeroen Akkermans took with him some fragments of the murder weapon from the crash site in Ukraine for investigation. The material has been examined by an independent institute that has conducted a confidential investigation.
Investigation into the chemical composition showed that they are remains from a BUK missile, among which fragments from the warhead – the pay load. The fragment of the warhead consists of a low-quality alloy of steel common to this form of ammunition. It appears from electroscopic enlargements that a fragment shows a cast-on Cyrillic serial number from the Russian language next to a partly broken number 2.
International experts endorse the conclusions of the forensic investigation. Defence experts of IHS Jane’s in London look into all weapon systems worldwide. They regard the damaged and deformed fragment below as a first piece of evidence. According to them the fragment directly belongs to the pay load of a 9M317 BUK missile, the modern version of the BUK 1-2 system. Expert Nicolas De Larrinaga: "From the hour-glass form we can gather all the characteristics of an impact of a 9N314 warhead fragment. This fits perfectly."
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!
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!
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.
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.
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?
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.
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):
Here's the article, run through Google Translate (it's rather messy, but nevertheless understandable):
Studies wrestling. Should this mean? Can not we just wait for the final conclusion of the investigation? Which interferes with the journalist? Part of the answer lies in the role of a journalist to seek the truth always. In every war zone you immediately know that disappears behind a veil of blood. So you go to work in an attempt to put a bit, knowing that the puzzle is not complete. But there are damn 298 people died, slain, murdered.
Three days after the disaster, I was beaten by photographing between the film work, a kind of automatism. The devastating sight of MH17 is unbearable. You want to get away, away from this evil place. I tried to concentrate on the damage, the tears, the screws. Closeup held me by the journalistic lesson: record what you see and keep it dry. Any accident benefits from fast trace evidence, but three days after the disaster, I was encountered still no researcher in the field of crime scene was nowhere defined. Well armed soldiers. In a war zone is no surprise, no. You feel that the official investigation into the truth will still be some time in coming. You'll only with MH17 were on their way to Kuala Lumpur. You will be only one survivor. It will not let me go.
You will be only one survivor. It will not let me go.
Four months after the disaster, I stand to photograph again MH17. It is my third visit to the disaster zone. Yes, the pieces were still there. The uncertainty continues to increase or the wreckage for investigation would arrive in the Netherlands. There is fighting on behalf of a slot in the neighborhood. I know the location of the large pieces. It's so lonely at the pulverized holiday Boeing in a war zone. If the plane was shot down by a missile then need to find thousands still evidence of an impact in the wreckage are? So I once went searching in solitude. I was there anyway.
For two days I looked around at the fuselage and especially the cockpit remains. Eventually I found a piece or 20 bits of metal that I 'suspect' thought look like. A metal piece with a series Cyrillic character from the Russian alphabet does not belong to the interior of a Boeing, I understood also.
So I once went searching in solitude. I was there anyway.
But there is still a long way to make ugly. Conclusions may soon be too premature. On every corner you may decide to quit. But the advantage of a journalist over a researcher is that he has more freedom to do his job. I do me no one to pull something, but possess the backup of an experienced and driven RTL News editor. Good club. We can also decide if the public is informed. But then you have to sit properly.
I was looking for expertise and analysis in the Netherlands, Poland, England, Georgia, America, Germany and Finland. I made a conscious decision not to let in Netherlands examine the fragments in an attempt to approach neutrality. Eventually I traveled for interviews to Croydon in London, Warsaw and Munich. The Poles know the Soviet missiles from personal experience, the Germans are cool and the British mathematicians strongly in the analysis of weapons systems.
Croydon experts were right eye for the jump headpiece. Which was measured returned to a BUK 9M317 missile. In addition, it was critical that there could also be established in that the piece had to be flown by a metal structure. It was distorted 'typical'. After laboratory also appeared to fit the chemical composition on the reading of the British. Low alloy deformed and rusty steel with traces that indicate hull remains.
German rocket scientists calculated besides the rocket trajectory based on data from the time of launch, the height of plane, the moment of impact, the wind speed, the fragments and their chemical composition, you name it. It's their job. Only a BUK is based on a calculation of this attack is in. "Das ist reine Mathematik, Herr Akkermans."
Only a BUK is based on a calculation of this attack is in.
What we do with it? There will undoubtedly be critics who suspect that I have an agenda. I found the pieces yourself, I have put me a ride. Ach. Or that we have to wait for the outcome of the official investigation late this year. This tension can be expected after the murder of 298 people in a war zone.
But I believe that survivors - and you - eight months after the downing of MH17 entitled to our information about the murder weapon. Consequently we there yet, no. But it might put an end to the most absurd speculations about the downing of MH17.
I dare to say that we now 3 BUK missile fragments show and four pieces of the plane, based on the laboratory analysis and the findings of the experts in Warsaw, Croydon and Munich. One physical piece of the murder weapon in the remains of MH17 was basically been enough to BUK missile to blame for this. No, I feel no satisfaction, at most some relief. On to the next puzzle piece anywhere. It's my job.
(The German phrase in the middle means, essentially, 'it's simple math'.)
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.
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?
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:
The official also questioned pictures of an alleged parts of Russian BUK damage elements, reportedly found during the investigation. He said that elements on the released pictures could have been parts of BUK modifications owned by the Ukrainian army, with Russian BUKs having different types of these elements. He expressed hopes for a “more professional” investigation.
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.
'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).
'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).
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.
'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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
'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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Of course it is possible - ambient conditions are one of the main concerns tho
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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".
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".
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.
. The translation of the second "calculation" confused me somewhat as to the context.
