MH17: Evidence a Missile was Used. Shrapnel, etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Conspiracy theorists seem to be picking up on an interview given by Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE.
Yeah, that's getting repeated a lot. However Bociurkiw really isn't seeing anything that's not in the Ackkermans photos.

If it was a missile, with thousands of fragments detonated some distance from the plane, then of course some of the hole will look like bullet holes, but there's a wide variety in hole shapes and sizes that seem to suggest a variety of irregular shaped projectiles.



Now some holes do superficially look like exit holes, but look at the hole in the green substrate here:

That looks like an entry hole. It also looks like it's steel (there's some rust around the edges).

I think what is happening there is the projectile, combined with the aluminum skin, partially exploded, and pushed up the skin. Compare with these videos of bullets hitting various things, note the extreme blowback even when the bullet passes through the target.



And notice in the video just how nice and regular the bullet holes are, nothing at all like what we see on MH17.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Now some holes do superficially look like exit holes, but look at the hole in the green substrate here:

That looks like an entry hole. It also looks like it's steel (there's some rust around the edges).
Could it also be the result of the explosive decompression pushing that metal out?

The fragment goes in making a small hole but the air rushing out gets between the layers and pushes the metal out.
 

Jason

Senior Member
We should also keep in mind that a proximity warhead will also have diffraction loading. This is a good link that discusses the different energies right down to the shrapnel, and what is needed to take down an aircraft and what the effects are.
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/es310/dam_crit/dam_crit.htm
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/fun/part13.htm
 
Last edited:

BombDr

Senior Member.
Entry And Exit holes from bullets in the area of the Cockpit. This is not speculation, but analysis of clear facts: the cockpit shows clear evidence of bullet holes. You can see the entry holes and some exit points. The edges of the bullet holes are bent inwards, these are much smaller and round in shape. A 30mm calibre. The exit holes are less well formed and the edges are torn outwards Furthermore it is visible that the exit holes have torn the double aluminium skin and bent them outwards. That is to say, splinters from inside the cockpit blew through the outside of the cabin. The open rivets have also been bent outwards….There is only one conclusion one can make, and that is that this: the aircraft was not hit by a missile. The damage to the aircraft is exclusively in the cockpit area….

See, this is what really irks me: People using phrases like "analysis of clear facts/clear evidence/30mm calibre/ there is only one conclusion"

Some guy has seen some pictures on a laptop screen and has the case sown up. Why bother with an investigation then? From my extremely limited armchair investigation of the images, I see no evidence of cannon fire, but plenty of evidence of fragmentation damage. I speak as someone that had scooped up a lot of broken metal from explosives, and even so I'm not prepared to commit myself to a cause from looking at a few snapshots.

Generally speaking there are three types of Aircraft rounds, FAP type (Frangible Armour Piercing) API (Armour Piercing Incendiary) and HE (High Explosive) and variations of these, and they would indeed shred the soft skin of a 777 that is not designed to take any type of hostile damage. But for this to be the case, a whole new set of variables need to be met, and they would indeed include fragments of the rounds themselves being embedded in the harder parts of the aircraft. Then you have the air-crew, that armourers, the aircraft itself etc, and we are now in multiple people all sworn to silence, which as we know is problematic in the modern media world...
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
I noticed this on PPRuNE forum. Possible missile O-ring or part of MH17?
upload_2014-7-31_8-55-51.png


https://secure.flickr.com/photos/jeroenakkermans/14678873646/in/set-72157645790319631

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-51.html#post8585622

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-53.html#post8586368

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/543733-mh17-down-near-donetsk-53.html#post8586404
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
My apologies as I believe someone posted this link before but I could not find it...but someone I know is pushing this guy's story I am fairly certain its complete bunk.

what is MB's take:


http://www.anderweltonline.com/wiss...lysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/


 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I'd say it's not credible at all. The Russian Presidential airplane:



Looks nothing at like the Malaysia Airlines paint scheme....oh, and the Russian airplane (Ilyushin Il-96-300) has two extra engines!

Hardly likely an experienced fighter pilot would possibly mistake a B-777 in broad daylight (nor, at night for that matter...).


So, the "speculation" of 30mm cannon fire is not plausible...oh, and there is actually no evidence to support this claim.
 

Jason

Senior Member
My apologies as I believe someone posted this link before but I could not find it...but someone I know is pushing this guy's story I am fairly certain its complete bunk.

what is MB's take:


http://www.anderweltonline.com/wiss...lysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/


If I remember correctly, Obama and Putin were on the phone when this happened discussing the first round of sanctions that only the US went ahead with. While they were on the phone (before Obama's fund raising speech) in NY, I believe, Putin alerted the President that there was a downed plane in the Ukraine, and that he had to go to sort this out. Now how could Putin be on the phone with the President when this occurred if he was on a plane, and secondly if Putin was in the vacinity of this plane coming down I'm pretty sure the Russian Government would've went on high alert. I don't believe the story for a second, it was propaganda that RT news was spewing a day after the accident to combat western media.
 
Last edited:

Jason

Senior Member
I'd say it's not credible at all. The Russian Presidential airplane:



Looks nothing at like the Malaysia Airlines paint scheme....oh, and the Russian airplane (Ilyushin Il-96-300) has two extra engines!

Hardly likely an experienced fighter pilot would possibly mistake a B-777 in broad daylight (nor, at night for that matter...).


So, the "speculation" of 30mm cannon fire is not plausible...oh, and there is actually no evidence to support this claim.
Not too mention it would be national suicide for the Ukraine if they did shoot down the plane of a PM, President or King of another nation. There is no way in hell they would've shot it down even if Putin was flying in a bright pink plane with a bullzeye on it. lol
 

Jason

Senior Member
My apologies as I believe someone posted this link before but I could not find it...but someone I know is pushing this guy's story I am fairly certain its complete bunk.

what is MB's take:


http://www.anderweltonline.com/wiss...lysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/


It should also be noted that SU-25's are specifically for "ground" attacks. They aren't designed to be a fighter jet.
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
It should also be noted that SU-25's are specifically for "ground" attacks. They aren't designed to be a fighter jet.
Also, the Russians said the Su-25 was 3-5km away from MH-17, if it was closer I'm pretty sure they'd have said so. Would I be right in thinking that hitting even something the size of an airliner from that distance with a cannon would be a feat of Skywalkeresque proportions?

" You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likeley that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. The edge of the other, the larger and slightly frayed exit holes showing shreds of metal pointing produced by the same caliber projectiles."

He seems to be saying that not only was there an explosion from inside, but that the same piece of metal shows both entry and exit holes, meaning the plane would have had to be attacked from two sides? Unless it rolled presenting the other side as a target.

Ray Von
 
Last edited:

SR1419

Senior Member.
So, the "speculation" of 30mm cannon fire is not plausible...oh, and there is actually no evidence to support this claim.

To be fair, he is suggesting the shrapnel patterns has he described them is evidence.

I am skeptical that his interpretation is correct but I am not a ballistics expert and wondered if others had commented on his interpretation yet.
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
Could it also be the result of the explosive decompression pushing that metal out?
The fragment goes in making a small hole but the air rushing out gets between the layers and pushes the metal out.
Explosive decompression like this is a Hollywood thing. It doesn't actually happen.
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/explosive-decompression-minimyth.htm
It's pretty severe, and you don't want to be in the closest seat, but aside from the plastic facade on the interior walls there's no damage to the plane's structure from escaping air, it's just not that powerful. And the more punctures there are the less severe it becomes, as air is escaping through all the holes instead of just one like in the video.

You still get blowback like that in shrapnel or bullet holes with no pressure difference. It's just how the physics works when two pieces of metal hit at high enough speeds that they start behaving more like liquids than solids.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
"Juha", can you say that those two photos were taken "in situ" at the MH17 (or, 'MAS17') crash site?

Can you provide confirmation?

EDIT: Because, those (and the post above) are great at disputing the "30mm cannon shoot-down" scenario!
 
Last edited:

Juha

Member
No, I didn't mean that they are from site. Just showing the pictures from pprune.

No idea where the pictures are taken from and as default, don't suppose that they are from site. :)
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
It's definitely not 'confirmation' of bullet holes - it's just a repeat of the statement that it looks similar to bullet holes, discussed in this post already - #119
That site is also just another conspiracy content farm.
 

Juha

Member
http://www.ohln.nl/index.php/opmerkelijk-1/13746-ovse-waarnemer-bevestigt-kogelgaten-in-mh17-toestel

SU-25 doesn't have a machine gun!
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
A lot of planes don't. And ones that do rarely use them. Fighters almost universally kill planes with missiles, the days of machinegun dogfights are long past.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
http://www.ohln.nl/index.php/opmerkelijk-1/13746-ovse-waarnemer-bevestigt-kogelgaten-in-mh17-toestel

SU-25 doesn't have a machine gun!
The SPPU-22 gun pod can be equipped though.
http://weaponsystems.net/weapon.php?weapon=HH13+-+SPPU-22
 

BombDr

Senior Member.
http://www.ohln.nl/index.php/opmerkelijk-1/13746-ovse-waarnemer-bevestigt-kogelgaten-in-mh17-toestel

SU-25 doesn't have a machine gun!
A lot of planes don't. And ones that do rarely use them. Fighters almost universally kill planes with missiles, the days of machinegun dogfights are long past.
Is there some confusion over machine-guns and cannons?
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
That SPPU wouldn't be for use against high flying aircraft. The Su25 doesn't have the ceiling, nor the radar to do it.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
SPPU-22 contains 23mm cannon, not machine gun.
http://shelf3d.com/i/Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23
I didn't call it a machine gun or a cannon. I called it a gun pod, which is what they are called.


I think everyone needs to stop being so anal about machine gun or cannon.

I understand the difference. But they are both pretty much exactly the same thing. One fires big bullets the other fires bigger ones. Guns can be made to fire HE rounds and so can cannons.

I'll be referring to machine guns as cannons and cannons as machine guns from now on. Purely for spite though! :p
 
Last edited:

Juha

Member
I didn't call it a machine gun or a cannon. I called it a gun pod, which is what they are called.


I think everyone needs to stop being so anal about machine gun or cannon.

I understand the difference. But they are both pretty much exactly the same thing. One fires big bullets the other fires bigger ones. Guns can be made to fire HE rounds and so can cannons.

I'll be referring to machine guns as cannons and cannons as machine guns from now on. Purely for spite though! :p
I know what you mean and normally I would not be so anal.

But in this case there is huge difference. You can make cannon holes with MG, but with cannon you can't make MG holes.

If you look those cockpit windows bolts, which are about 1/4" bolts(?), then the holes are max .50 cal?
I haven't found anything, which can verify the size, but I don't believe they are very far from that 1/4" size. 30mm is ~1 and 1/4", 23mm is little less than 1"

 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
I know what you mean and normally I would not be so anal.

But in this case there is huge difference. You can make cannon holes with MG, but with cannon you can't make MG holes.

If you look those cockpit windows bolts, which are about 1/4" bolts(?), then the holes are max .50 cal?
I haven't found anything, which can verify the size, but I don't believe they are very far from that 1/4" size. 30mm is ~1 and 1/4", 23mm is little less than 1"

Since they can attach a cannon, I don't find it a stretch that a machine gun could be attached to an SU-25. So instead of arguing over semantics, everyone should bring the evidence that either confirms or refutes that it was something other than a missile or rocket strike. Debunk or prove both and you don't need to argue semantics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
M Claim: Robert Parry: Australian 60 Minutes fudged evidence to pin blame on Russia Flight MH17 21
Libertarian MH17 Evidence Video Time Stamped Before Crash Flight MH17 12
S Claim: Russian radar would have picked up MH17 missile Flight MH17 15
tadaaa MH17 Documentary from the BBC Flight MH17 81
U MH17 Missile/Plane Intersection Simulation Flight MH17 23
Mick West Almaz-Antey's Live BUK explosion tests Flight MH17 141
Bruce Lansberg Dutch Safety Board publish reports on MH17 crash, Tuesday Oct 13 Flight MH17 14
MikeC Dutch release draft report to involved parties Flight MH17 0
Herman Aven Confirmed Claim: disputed satelite imagery showing "changes in vegetation" Flight MH17 14
william wiley Does Damage to MH17 indicate or exclude a Particular Buk Launch Location? Flight MH17 662
Bruce Lansberg Claim: Jeroen Akkermans: Framents prove MH17 was shot down by a Russian made BUK Flight MH17 34
Bruce Lansberg Dutch Government discloses 245 official documents Flight MH17 0
M Debunked: this photo shows a Ukraine Mig-29 shot down MH17 Flight MH17 66
M Possible Shrapnel in MH17 Wreckage? Flight MH17 26
Bruce Lansberg Main prosecuter Westerbeke says metal particles have been found in the victims bodies and luggage Flight MH17 10
M Claim: Malaysian experts were shot at by Ukraine SU-25 and by GRAD Flight MH17 10
M Claim: MH17 was shot down by separatists using BUK stolen from Ukraine army Flight MH17 32
M What part of forward fuselage is this ? Flight MH17 1
R MH 370 Leroy Alexander? Flight MH17 1
M Solved: MH17: is this part of a missile? [Concrete Grinding Pads] Flight MH17 13
Ezswo Debunked: MH17 - 10 Previous Flightpaths Different From 17-7 Flight MH17 27
KAT MH17 - developments after a month - Aug 17 Flight MH17 4
Franckly Debunked: MH17 Air to air missile Assumption ? [Unrelated 35° angle] Flight MH17 25
Juha MH17 Hypotheses Flight MH17 159
WeeBee MH17: Pinpointing the precise location of the missile impact point Flight MH17 53
Jason Debunked: MH17: Supposed satellite video of missile launch [Fake] Flight MH17 14
Mick West Debunked: "Official Photoshopping" of MH17 photo [Window cover physically removed] Flight MH17 7
Brian Griffin Explained: MH17: Why Are There Expired "Pristine" Passports in the Wreckage? [Visa in Old Passport] Flight MH17 12
Mick West MH17: Video of flight activity before and after the crash Flight MH17 32
Josh Heuer MH17: Russia Claims Ukranian military plane flying nearby before incident Flight MH17 121
Mick West Debunked: MH17 Video Timestamped before the crash, and other timeline issues Flight MH17 8
Mick West Flight MH17 News Flight MH17 79
Gridlock Why was MH17 Flying Over The Conflict Region? Flight MH17 102
Leifer MH17.....claiming responsibility ? Flight MH17 19
C MH17 Malaysian 777 Carrying 295 People Shot Down Over Ukraine Flight MH17 410
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Joe Hill Beirut Explosion -- Evidence It Wasn't Just A Surface Explosion Current Events 21
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
C My girlfriend,Jungian Personality Theory and the Rabbit Hole (Dealing with Relationships) Escaping The Rabbit Hole 17
R "Breakthrough": U.S. Attorney Agrees to Present Evidence of WTC Demolition to Federal Grand Jury. 9/11 155
M How to Evaluate Specious Evidence (Like "Bubbles" in Space) Practical Debunking 6
Mick West Explained: Unburned trees next to burned down structures as evidence of secret "energy weapons" Wildfires 122
Everett Anderson Standard Atmospheric Refraction: Empirical Evidence and Derivation Flat Earth 18
deirdre J.Marvin Herndon tries to pass off Bird Poop as evidence of "chemtrail" spraying Contrails and Chemtrails 24
MikeC Claim: New Zealand quakes man made...... Conspiracy Theories 4
Bill Statler "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence": practical problems using this argument Practical Debunking 3
Mick West When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
Jonathan Evans Gyroscopes as Evidence for a Spherical and Rotating Earth Flat Earth 4
Inti Claims that compass “symbols” are evidence of Masonic involvement Conspiracy Theories 8
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top