11 ms·
MH17 Report
- danielvf 11y agoHere's the full report. (It's in English) http://cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/report-mh17-crash-en.pdf http://cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/report-mh17-crash-en....
- pms 11y agoIt was all known thanks to Bellingcat since at least 1 year.
- rtkwe 11y agoBellingcat's reporting takes for granted that a BUK was used based on a good amount of evidence there there were BUKs in the area and there was a missile fired from the ground. They didn't and couldn't prove that it was what hit and downed MH17, they didn't have access to the physical evidence and flight recorder. They seem to have done a lot of good work trying to track the launcher down and analysing the evidence that was available to them, though I haven't been following their reporting. Without the physical evidence being analyzed the link between the BUK and the plane was strong but not confirmed.
- pms 11y agoI fully agree with that, yet they were right since over a year. They do a decent job making the most out of the "open-source" evidence they have access to.
- lcswi 11y agoBellingcat was untrustworthy pseudoscience.
- nns 11y agoVideo Reconstruction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDiLEyT9spI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDiLEyT9spI At the 10.30 mark you can see the missile impact on the plane.
- samstave 11y agoWow, thats an amazing video.
- panarky 11y agoNews article reconstruction: https://archive.is/pmMY2 https://archive.is/pmMY2 Large portions of the NYT article were rewritten after first publication this morning.
- trhway 11y agothe reconstruction is wrong as they depict the missile coming from the front-right and crossing the flight path of the plane. In reality the missile came from the front-left, from the rebels positions much north of the Torez/Snezhnoe (that the report strangely insists on as the point of launch). The BUK missile shrapnel flies perpendicular to the missile's direction. It is a simple geometric task to show how that shrapnel has also hit the left engine and clipped the left wing with the direction of the shrapnel damage there matching the direction of the damage to the pilot cabin.
- rogeryu 11y agoIt's incredible that 61 airlines flew over that area during those days. That day alone, 160 airplanes flew over East Ukraine before MH17 was hit. Even if it's safe to fly at 10k height, what happens if you have problems with your plane, like a failing engine? Next time I fly I'm going to check over which countries we fly.
- Shivetya 11y agothe take away is, do not fly over areas of conflict. why the international community allowed it, let alone individual airlines did not take their own action, is beyond me. On second thought, I wonder if an airline can elect to not fly on certain corridors because they declare a risk?
- ptaipale 11y ago> On second thought, I wonder if an airline can elect to not fly on certain corridors because they declare a risk? Of course they can. But it could be that alternative corridors also have their risks, or may have a significantly longer flight time.
- waterlesscloud 11y agoMy brother and my niece will be on the second leg of their journey to South Africa in a few hours. Continuing on from London. They will overfly a couple of areas of conflict. I dunno how else they could go, though.
- avar 11y agoNot everyone was continuing to fly over Ukraine. Some including British Airways and Air France had already stopped flying over Ukraine months earlier[1] due to heightened risk in the area. Malaysian Airlines decided the risk was worth it. 1. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28356745 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28356745 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17#Ba...
- tfgg 11y agoI think it's just so unlikely that a group that couldn't be held properly responsible would have AA missiles capable of reaching to normal cruising altitude that it's not normally considered a problem and why MH17 was exceptional. Or, at least, that's how it was explained to me by the captain of a 747 while we were flying over Afghanistan.
- ed_blackburn 11y agoI anticipate lot of bluster. The perpetrators perhaps being named but ultimately nothing happening. A lot of nations do not recognise courts higher than their own sovereignty so will not extradite. Especially if they deem the charge to be politically motivated. Right or wrong. Russia will contest this report, and any other. Basically someone messed up with a borrowed bit of heavy kit and a tragedy ensued. There will be no justice for them or their families. Poor bastards, can only hope the report is accurate and any suffering was brief.
- jinst8gmi 11y ago> Basically someone messed up with a borrowed bit of heavy kit and a tragedy ensued. "borrowed" ?
- ed_blackburn 11y agoThe accusation is that the Donetsk Peoples Republic used a Russian device. Once they'd realised the enormous gravity of their misjudgment they returned it to Russia. So yes. Borrowed.
- guard-of-terra 11y agoKeep in mind that around 6000 people (maybe outdated number) died from that war so far. I doubt they're getting justice for them or their families either. They might get a scapegoat in some time, however. Even a very guilty one.
- ed_blackburn 11y agoExactly my thoughts too.
- zbyte64 11y agoRussian soldiers on vacation also borrowed surface to air missiles?
- escapologybb 11y agoCan anyone break down how they knew that the missile exploded within a one square metre volume of air, just above and to the front of the plane please? Do they do it just from the pattern of debris, or do they use other methods as well. I think I got that they can use the microphones in the cockpit to work out the direction the missile fragments came from, but not quite sure on the details. Thanks in advance!
- lennartkoopmann 11y agoThey triangulated it using the three microphones I guess. Also I guess you can figure that out by looking at the debris pattern because they seem to have a lot of knowledge about the used rocket.
- gadders 11y agoThey did that and they also used string to track back from the impact sites to a rough point in space.
- aaren 11y agoThere were actually four microphones - captain, first officer, cockpit and observer (see page 46, Figure 9). Four receivers is sufficient to determine the sound origin at a point in space, with an associated error volume (three receivers only allows you to determine a curve in space). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilateration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilateration
- aaren 11y agoThe problem is complicated if we consider that the missile is moving at supersonic speeds (~mach 3 + aircraft speed). I don't know much about supersonic fluids. For anyone interested in following this up, here is a paper on "Reproduction of Virtual Sound Sources Moving at Supersonic Speeds in Wave Field Synthesis": http://www.researchgate.net/publication/230702229 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/230702229
- jinst8gmi 11y ago
- bonkabonka 11y agoThe Aviation Herald has a very good writeup: http://avherald.com/h?article=47770f9d/010&opt=0 http://avherald.com/h?article=47770f9d/010&opt=0
- curiousjorge 11y agoThe entire world except Russia knew Russia is responsible but when you are the second guy with the most nukes, you get away with impunity. Just the idea of having one or others thinking you have more than one nuke is enough to allow others to look the other way and let you do whatever gay shit that you do
- vkou2 11y agoBeing the guy with the most nukes lets you get away with similar things. Nobody was brought to justice here, either. Two commanders did receive medals for their tour there, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
- thomholwerda 11y agoHow is this relevant? Because country A murders people, country B may freely do so too?
- BinaryIdiot 11y agoI don't think he / she said anything about it being okay I think he / she was simply saying it's happened before with another powerful country.
- marme 11y agothis is not even the first time the russian/soviet military has been involved in shooting down a civilian airliner. The last time it was even more blatant and no one did anything https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
- sschueller 11y agoThe report did not go into finding out who did it. Both sides own BUKs. It is very difficult to find the truth because all sides are pumping out propaganda. Even the United States is manipulating what we hear for their own political and economic gains. Here an subtle but strong example : http://www.sott.net/article/302911-Sott-Exclusive-Full-unedited-text-of-Vladimir-Putins-interview-with-Charlie-Rose-What-CBS-left-out http://www.sott.net/article/302911-Sott-Exclusive-Full-unedi...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- SuddsMcDuff 11y agoI find it really fascinating that they've gone to such lengths to literally recreate a large portion of the plane from the wreckage in order to better understand what happened. I can't help but think though, why weren't similar measures taken with Flight 93 (Pennsylvania, 2001-09-11) or Flight 77 (Pentagon, 2001-09-11)? I don't wish to allude to any of the many conspiracy theories, but I do find it interesting to see how a "real" crash investigation is done, as opposed to what we've been told about 9-11.
- panarky 11y agoSome airplane wreckage was discovered lodged between two buildings in New York. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22344949 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22344949
- SuddsMcDuff 11y agoI see I'm being downvoted for this. I didn't mean to be controversial, just making an observation about the stark difference between the amount and quality of information that is being disseminated to the public.
- stvswn 11y agoYou're not being controversial, because there isn't a controversy. There was lots and lots of information disseminated to the public. What do you think was withheld?
- stvswn 11y agoI see you're interested in the history of the 9/11 attacks! Here's a 600 page report with over 100 pages of footnotes. The first chapter deals with the hijackings. You can start your research there! http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf In later chapters, there's a lot of discussion about the terrorist group that planned the hijackings, and not much discussion on missile ballistics. That's because the former happened as a matter of fact, the latter is pure fantasy.
- benbojangles 11y agoMaskirovka: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b050674y http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b050674y
- kushti 11y agoInterestingly, it seems everyone has forgotten CNN top news from mid-July: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/15/politics/mh17-pro-russian-missile-crash-ukraine/ http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/15/politics/mh17-pro-russian-... . CNN did spread an outrageous lie, but nobody cares.
- kafkaesq 11y agoCNN did spread an outrageous lie, Which was?
- kushti 11y ago"Dutch accident investigators say that evidence points to pro-Russian rebels as being responsible for shooting down MH-17, according to a source who has seen the report. According to the source, the report says it was a Buk missile -- a Russian surface-to-air missile -- that was used, launched from a village in Russian rebel controlled territory. "
- tptacek 11y agoI'm not following. Everything in that CNN story seems to line up with the Dutch report, down to the type of missile system used.
- kushti 11y agoPlease point to the village name in the report then.
- tptacek 11y agoI'm lost. Can you just state outright what the "outrageous lie" you're referring to is?
- kafkaesq 11y agoThe key finding in the report was that the missile was fired from a specifically calculated area -- shown in red, in figure 62 -- that lay squarely within rebel-held territory. This by itself is quite damning for the pro-Russian side. Whether the missile happened to have been fired from one of the 3 villages within that area, or from unincorporated territory is basically irrelevant to the report's main conclusions. And whether some CNN reporter, or his editor, may have fudged a bit on this basically irrelevant detail (shortening "fired from an area near village X" to "fired from village X"), even more so.