MH17 Ukraine disaster: Dutch report blames missile

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 crashed as a result of a Russian-made 9M38 Buk missile, the Dutch Safety Board says.

The Dutch Safety Board presented its findings first to the victims' relatives before briefing reporters at the Gilze-Rijen military base in the Netherlands.

MH17 Ukraine disaster: Dutch report blames missile

The final MH17 report has been released by the Dutch Safety Board. A press conference was held at the airforce base Gilze-Rijen, Holland.

It was concluded that a BUK shot it down.

Here is the full report,

cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl...

a reply to: RogueWave

One of the other conclusions is that the Ukraine should have closed their airspace. They face criticism for not taking into account events of the weeks prior to the shootdown.

It is also claimed that the passengers didn't suffer much and lost unconsciousness quickly, however, I strongly doubt this.

a reply to: RogueWave

So the reports concludes that :

10. Weapon used
The aeroplane was struck by a 9N314M warhead as carried on a 9M38-series missile
and launched by a Buk surface-to-air missile system. This conclusion is based on the
combination of the following; the recorded sound peak, the damage pattern found
on the wreckage caused by the blast and the impact of fragments, the bow-tie and
cubic shaped fragments found in the cockpit and in the bodies of the crew members
in the cockpit, the injuries sustained by three crew members in the cockpit, the
analysis of the in-flight break-up, the analysis of the explosive residues and paint
found and the size and distinct, bow-tie, shape of some of the fragments.

11.
Missile flight paths
The area from which the possible flight paths of a 9N314M warhead carried on a
9M38-series missile as installed on the Buk surface-to-air missile system could have
commenced measures about 320 square kilometres in the east of Ukraine. Further
forensic research is required to determine the launch location. Such work falls outside
the mandate of the Dutch Safety Board, both in terms of Annex 13 and the Kingdom
Act ‘Dutch Safety Board’.

And Dutch premier Mark Rutte would rather 'not speculate about the culprits' as stated in his latest press conference :

Rutte: Lessen trekken uit OVV-rapport MH17
Article in Dutch.

Ii was conluded that the missile exploded within a few meter of the cockpit. I find this strange looking at the reconstruction of the plane. To me it seems that the spread of shrapnell does not correspond to this; I would expect the holes to be much closer to one and other. I also would expect more obvious blast damage.

I also don't get why the damage is concentrated on the part of the cockpit seating the pilots.

Regarding the outside elements recovered from the wreckage and bodies, there is actually relatively little evidence leading back to a BUK.

Over 500 fragments were recovered from the wreckage of the aeroplane, the remains of the crew members and passengers. Many of the objects were identified as personal belongings, aeroplane parts or objects that originated from the ground after impact. In addition, many of the objects were metal fragments that were suspected to be high-energy objects, or parts of them. From the second group of objects, 72 fragments that were similar in size, mass and shape were further investigated.

43 of the 72 fragments were found to be made of unalloyed steel and four of these fragments, although heavily deformed and damaged, had distinctive shapes; cubic and in the form of a bow-tie

So out of 500 objects found, only 4 had a distinctive shape and quality that is similar to BUK shrapnell.

Quite marginal imo.

The reports photos aren't linkable, some pics already out there are displayed but not addressed, except to state it was found in Ukraine, satellite images are google, lots of cgi "images" without links to their source.

This was interesting, page 80…

Oh, never mind, we can't capture text from this report, either.

So a screen shot of the smoking gun evidence, the missile itself.



See at the bottom where it says, we decided not to publish all the 'evidence'?

Below that, another screen capture of a missile engine nozzle just, "found in Ukraine".

a reply to: RogueWave

Ii was conluded that the missile exploded within a few meter of the cockpit. I find this strange looking at the reconstruction of the plane. To me it seems that the spread of shrapnell does not correspond to this; I would expect the holes to be much closer to one and other. I also would expect more obvious blast damage.

In your opinion as a munitions expert?

a reply to: intrptr

Ha, I noticed that too. They also used those images in the presentation.

Oh, never mind, we can't capture text from this report, either.

You can't? I just copied text from the PDF.

a reply to: DJW001

So it wasn't enough that I clearly stated that it was my opinion. Why don't you just respond to the actual content of my post.

originally posted by: RogueWave
a reply to: DJW001

So it wasn't enough that I clearly stated that it was my opinion. Why don't you just respond to the actual content of my post.

You are entitled to your opinion. I was merely pointing out that there are more informed opinions out there.

a reply to: DJW001

Like yours probably ...

a reply to: DJW001

Ok, for what purpose are you pointing this out?

originally posted by: RogueWave
a reply to: DJW001

Ok, for what purpose are you pointing this out?

You are trying to discredit the report based on... nothing. Why?

a reply to: DJW001

Is it me or did you just try to blame someone for trying to discredit something ?

suspect timing of the reports release. suspect motives. insufficient transparency, details witheld. i call BS. part of operation 'demonize russia'. phooey.

a reply to: DJW001

No you are trying to discredit my opinion based on nothing.

I am merely posting my opinion based on facts. I don't see how these 1000's of fragments that were positioned tightly around the warhead could spread so much in only 2 meters.

Why don't you respond to the content of my post?

a reply to: RogueWave

I don't see how these 1000's of fragments that were positioned tightly around the warhead could spread so much in only 2 meters.

High explosives. Next question.

a reply to: DJW001

BUK producer detonates missiles next to pilot’s cockpit in real-life MH17 experiment

a reply to: DJW001

That is not an answer. The fact that the warhead contains high explosives doesn't explain why the spread is that big at that distance. The explosion is supposed to be symmetric all around so the differences in the angle of trajectory between individual pieces should be fairly small at two meters distance, imo.

originally posted by: RogueWave
a reply to: DJW001

That is not an answer. The fact that the warhead contains high explosives doesn't explain why the spread is that big at that distance. The explosion is supposed to be symmetric all around so the differences in the angle of trajectory between individual pieces should be fairly small at two meters distance, imo.

The shrapnel is dispersed in two cones. The bases of the cones are nearly perpendicular to the missile's trajectory. This has been explained before.

suspect timing of the reports release. suspect motives. insufficient transparency, details withheld. i call BS. part of operation 'demonize russia'. phooey.

Agreed. Operation Phooey… Investigation objective? Not, done in secret by member state of NATO.