Tuesday, September 09, 2014

MH17: Preliminary Report

The Dutch Safety Board  investigating the downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17 in Ukraine released its  Preliminary Report earlier today.

The report states that the plane was hit by high velocity projectiles that struck the cockpit destroying the structural integrity of the plane and causing it to plummet to the ground.  There are no signs of any mechanical failure or pilot error.

Page 25 figure 10 of the report  indicates that the projectiles that punctured the plane came from above the cockpit floor

There is no damage to the bottom or the body of the plane's fuselage.

Photographs not listed in the DSB board shows gauges to the top of the left wing that align up with the plane's cockpit

Whilst the report avoided making any definitive accusations or statements to the cause of the planes demise they did not rule in or out the possibility of an air to air attack,

Russian radar recorded at the time of the incident shows that there was at least one Ukrainian Fighter jet trailing flight MH17.  This is backed up by eyewitness accounts from people on the ground

The DSB report does not rule in or out the Ground to Air BUK missile attack but there has neither been any explanation as to how a BUK can cause the damage recorded to the cockpit and the top of the planes wing.  The attack had to come from above the cockpits floor.

In the absence of this information there is only one scenario that fits the bill based on the known facts already

The only way to know for sure is to collect the wreckage of the plane and reconstruct the cockpit area and determine exactly the angle of projection of the penetration holes that struck the plane,

The DSB has said that it needs to undertake closer examination of the planes wreckage to do more testing before it brings down its final report expected before July 2015

With the ceasefire in place in Eastern Ukraine recovery of the wreckage should be possible provided the Ukrainian Government does not get there first.

The BUK scenario


Sunday, September 07, 2014

Ukraine Ceasefire Agreement September 5, 2014


on the results of consultations of the Trilateral Contact Group
with respect to the joint steps aimed at
the implementation of the Peace Plan
of the President of Ukraine, P. Poroshenko,
and the initiatives of the President of Russia, V. Putin

Upon consideration and discussion of the proposals put forward by the participants of the consultations in Minsk on September 1, 2014, the Trilateral Contact Group, consisting of the representatives of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe [OSCE], reached an understanding with respect to the need to implement the following steps:

  1. Ensure the immediate bilateral cessation of the use of weapons.
  2. Ensure monitoring and verification by the OSCE of the regime of non-use of weapons.
  3. Implement decentralization of power, including by means of enacting the Law of Ukraine “With respect to the temporary status of local self-government in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions” (Law on Special Status).
  4. Ensure permanent monitoring on the Ukrainian-Russian state border and verification by the OSCE, together with the creation of a security area in the border regions of Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
  5. Immediately release all hostages and unlawfully detained persons.
  6. Enact a law prohibiting the prosecution and punishment of persons in connection with the events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions of Ukraine.
  7. Conduct an inclusive national dialogue.
  8. Adopt measures aimed at improving the humanitarian situation in Donbass.
  9. Ensure the holding of early local elections in accordance with the Law of Ukraine “With respect to the temporary status of local self-government in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions” (Law on Special Status).
  10. Remove unlawful military formations, military hardware, as well as militants and mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine.
  11. Adopt a program for the economic revival of Donbass and the recovery of economic activity in the region.
  12. Provide personal security guarantees for the participants of the consultations.
Participants of the Trilateral Contact Group:

Ambassador Heidi Talyavini (signed)
Second President of Ukraine, L.D. Kuchma (signed)
Ambassador of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, M.Y. Zurabov (signed)
A.V. Zakharchenko (signed)
I.V. Plotnitskiy (signed)


Ukraine’s next electoral challenge

Source: The Washington Post

September 6 at 4:48 PM
As part of our continuing series of Monkey Cage Election Reports, the following is a pre-election report on Ukraine’s upcoming parliamentary election by political scientists Erik Herron of West Virginia University, and Nazar Boyko of CIFRA Group.

On Aug. 25, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko signed a decree dissolving parliament and calling early parliamentary elections for Oct. 26. Ukraine faces several critical issues to ensure that the next round of elections goes as smoothly as possible, notably administering elections in regions of instability and addressing the implications of changes in the partisan landscape.

Ukraine’s last parliamentary elections, held in 2012, used a mixed electoral system to select the 450 members of the Verkhovna Rada. The rules divide the seats into two tiers: 225 members of parliament are chosen using single member districts with a plurality rule (as in the U.S. House of Representatives) and 225 are selected in a single national district by proportional representation. At the polls, voters have two ballots: one to select their local representative and another to select a political party. While politicians have discussed the adoption of new election rules, it seems likely that the mixed system will remain in place for October’s election.

A significant consequence of retaining the mixed system is that all of the seats cannot be filled in October. Twelve seats dedicated to districts in Crimea and the city of Sevastopol will be vacant and some in Donetsk and Luhansk may be unfilled as well. However, districts that participate in the election must declare the results of voting, regardless of the number of polling stations where voting was declared invalid (Article 95 of the election law). In principle, if only one polling station were to be functioning in a district properly, it could determine the winner. With active combat in many districts of Donetsk and Luhansk, the election could generate suspicious results and challenges to its legitimacy.

In the 2014 presidential election, only 15.1 percent of eligible voters in Donetsk and 38.9 percent in Luhansk participated. Moreover, many district electoral commissions (DECs) that manage regional election administration and precinct electoral commissions (PECs) that manage the voting process were unable to function in the May presidential contest. No results were reported in 14 out of 22 districts in Donetsk, 10 out of 12 in Luhansk, and across the 12 districts in Crimea and Sevastopol. Election administrators may face issues of staff recruitment, in addition to safety and security, for the parliamentary elections.

These conditions may provide stronger incentives for fraud and manipulation than were present in the presidential election. During the presidential election, one of the authors worked with the Committee for Open Democracy, a U.S.-based NGO that fielded the sixth-largest international contingent for the presidential election and the largest for the local elections. CfOD observers were generally sent to areas of the country where problems were anticipated to be more prevalent due to separatist activity (e.g., Donetsk) or contentious local races (e.g., Odessa). Outside of Donetsk, the majority of reports indicated that PECs were functioning normally. Technical problems occurred largely due to high turnout and discrepancies between the State Register of Voters, developed to ensure accurate voter lists for national elections, and local voter lists. CfOD observers noted problems with voter lists in 21 percent of the polling stations observed. PECs also struggled with long lines (CfOD teams indicated that they observed long lines in 28 percent of polling stations).
Concurrent local elections held alongside the presidential election seemed to be the primary source of concerns about manipulation. While the local elections garnered less international media and observer attention, hotly contested mayoral and council races were held in many regions. Most of the concerns raised by officials and observers about election integrity in Cherkasy, a city south of Kiev, related to local contests.

Following the election, the Cherkasy City Election Commission, responsible for aggregating local results, was removed en masse for violations of the election law. Allegations of misdeeds were also leveled in other cities, such as Odessa. Unlike the presidential election, where Poroshenko’s victory was considered by most to be a fait accompli, local elections offered uncertain outcomes, valuable spoils for the winners, lower thresholds to win, and less international scrutiny. These features increase the potential payoffs for manipulation and may be repeated in early parliamentary elections, especially because of changes to the partisan landscape.

The results of the last parliamentary election, held in 2012, provide some hints about what is likely to await Ukraine in October’s snap election. The map above shows the winners of district races in the 2012 parliamentary election by their party affiliation. Many districts in the eastern and southern regions, as well as several in the central and western regions, were won by affiliates of the Party of Regions, Viktor Yanukovych’s party-of-power at the time. Since Yanukovych’s ouster, the political and financial networks that made up the core of the Party of Regions have been in disarray. The map below shows the level of competitiveness in the 2012 election. In much of the east, the Party of Regions won seats with strong majorities; in other parts of the country, their victories were more tenuous. While locally-powerful politicians who were affiliated with the Party of Regions may gain seats in eastern districts under a different party label (or as independents), many of the more competitive seats will be up-for-grabs.
The final map below shows the affiliations of the second-place candidates in all districts. A diverse array of parties garnered second place positions in 2012, and in many Party of Regions-dominated areas, the Communist Party (CPU) was in second. While the CPU would, in principle, be a strong contender for seats in many Party of Regions strongholds, the CPU has also been challenged in post-Yanukovych Ukraine, with some politicians calling for an outright ban on its participation in politics. On July 24, the speaker of Ukraine’s parliament announced the dissolution of the CPU faction in the Verkhovna Rada as the faction did not meet the minimum threshold of representatives (23) to maintain its status. The dissolution has affected the CPU’s participation in the current electoral process. According to the election law, parliamentary factions have guaranteed seats on each DEC and PEC. In the upcoming elections, the CPU will be deprived of guaranteed representation.

The party system has been strongly affected by the end of the Yanukovych regime and the events of the last few months, and it remains unclear precisely how candidates and parties will participate in the elections.

Some of the remaining fragments of the Party of Regions have been reorganized into the Party of Development of Ukraine, led by Yuriy Miroshchnychenko (a former member of the Party of Regions). Another new party-project, called Industrial Ukraine, was registered at the beginning of June, and its formal leader is the general director at oligarch Rinat Akhmetov’s company Zaporizhstal. In addition, Serhiy Tihipko has renewed his party Strong Ukraine that had previously merged with the Party of Regions.

The former opposition parties have also reorganized. On Aug. 25, Yuliya Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchyna Party held a party congress that featured the unexpected departures of Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk, Parliamentary Speaker Oleksandr Turchynov, Minister of Internal Affairs Arsen Avakov, Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko, and others. It is not clear how these influential politicians will participate in the elections.

Two days later, Petro Poroshenko renamed his Solidarity Party into the Bloc of Petro Poroshenko to be led by former minister of interior Yuriy Lutsenko. Lutsenko had been imprisoned by the Yanukovych regime under charges widely believed to be political in nature. The general expectation was that a Poroshenko-branded party could earn around 30 percent of the vote and perform better than the lesser-known Solidarity brand.

This shake-up of the party system creates a murky environment for voters and candidates. In 2012, the identities of the party of power (Party of Regions) and opposition (Batkivshchyna, UDAR, and Svoboda) were clear. The opposition agreed to some coordination in district races, notably between Batkivshchyna and Svoboda, but its failure to coordinate may have cost it 21 or more SMD seats that were instead won by the Party of Regions and independent candidates. In 2012, negotiations over coordination began four months before election day; with less than two months and no outward signs of negotiations, the level of competition is likely to be fierce among party-nominated and independent candidates. While efforts at coordination could be taking place behind the scenes, Ukraine could also face a “war of all against all” in the districts.

Even if a proposed cease-fire holds, the 2014 snap parliamentary elections may be the most challenging that Ukraine has faced. “Separatists” supported by a Russian invasion in the east may disrupt the elections by preventing the vote, or by making efforts to manipulate outcomes. Violence has displaced hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, disrupting their lives and threatening their ability to participate. In addition, ensuring that members of the military may exercise their rights while they are in active combat conditions away from their home districts will be a daunting task. Unlike the 2014 presidential election – but similar to the 2014 local elections and 2012 parliamentary elections – many of the races are up-for-grabs. Perpetrators of fraud will have greater opportunities and stronger incentives to be increasingly active, especially in the constituency elections. The final election results are likely to yield a divided parliament that could further undermine political stabilization. For a country that has faced an existential threat to its sovereignty over the past few months, the parliamentary elections may become a source of greater anxiety over the country’s future as politicians and parties furiously fight over the spoils.


Saturday, September 06, 2014

Ceasefire: The fragile peace from the ashes of lawlessness

The US real aim is to wage war on Russia, to economically cripple Russia in the preparation of war with the goal of having Putin removed from office.

Russia has always been concern about maintaining peace and has consistently called for dialog between the Ukrainian authorities in Kyiv and the Donbass self defence rebels.

Russia was the only state to deliver humanitarian aid to the people of Danbass who were under the reprisal attack by the Ukrainian 'National guard and US backed Millita.

The US on the other hand was behind the unconstitutional, lawless, destabilisation of Ukraine. It has backed and financed the Maidan coup. received gold payments from Ukraine and positioned its political elite and their sons on boards of influence of Ukrainian state sponsored companies.

The US has been calling for de-escalation of the crisis in Ukraine and Russia has delivered. The US/EU response is more sanctions

I fear that the agreed cease fire is a ploy to buy time and to try and portray the US backed Poroshenko junta as a "advocate for peace". Far from it.

Time will tell if the circumstances lead to a true and lasting peaceful solution. Most notably will be the period leading up to the elections and whether the Russian speaking part of Ukraine, unlike the May 25 Presidential elections, will be given all opportunity to effectively participate and be represented.

We have already witnessed the laying of foundations that will prevent a fair and democratic election taking place in Ukraine. 

It is worth noting that had the US and EU honoured the commitments of the February 21 agreement, Ukraine would have undertaken Constitutional reform and held fresh election in October without the ensuring conflict that cost billions of dollars, destroyed cities and the loss of many lives.

Not one word of condemnation from the US for the lawless state of affairs forced in Ukraine by the Maidan protestors who were the initial cause of the escalation of violence in Ukraine


Saturday, August 09, 2014

Shocking Analysis of the ‘Shooting Down’ of Malaysian MH17

Peter Haisenko in Cockpit of Condor DC 10
By Peter Haisenko                       Zur deutschen Version bitte hier anklicken
The tragedy of Malaysian MH 017 continues to elude any light of clarity being cast over it. The flight recorders are in England and are evaluated. What can come of it? Maybe more than you would assume. Especially the voice recorder will be interesting when you look at the picture of a cockpit fragment. As an expert in aviation I closely looked at the images of the wreckage that are circulating on the Internet.
First, I was amazed at how few photos can be found from the wreckage with Google. All are in low resolution, except one: The fragment of the cockpit below the window on the pilots side. This image, however, is shocking. In Washington, you can now hear views expresssed of a “potentially tragic error / accident” regarding MH 017. Given this particular cockpit image it does not surprise me at all.
Entry and exit impact holes of projectiles in the cockpit area
Source for all photos: Internet
I recommend to click on the little picture to the right. You can download this photo as a PDF in good resolution. This is necessary, because that will allow you understand what I am describing here. The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! 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. Moreover, it is evident that at these exit holes of the outer layer of the double aluminum reinforced structure are shredded or bent – outwardly! Furthermore, minor cuts can be seen, all bent outward, which indicate that shrapnel had forcefull exited through the outer skin from the inside of the cockpit. The open rivets are are also bent outward.
In sifting through the available images one thing stands out: All wreckage of the sections behind the cockpit are largely intact, except for the fact that only fragments of the aircraft remained . Only the cockpit part shows these peculiar marks of destruction. This leaves the examiner with an important clue. This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material. This is on account of the nose of any aircraft having to withstand the impact of a large bird at high speeds. You can see in the photo, that in this area significantly stronger aluminum alloys were being installed than in the remainder of the outer skin of the fuselage. One remembers the crash of Pan Am over Lockerbie. It was a large segment of the cockpit that due to the special architecture survived the crash in one piece. In the case of flight MH 017 it becomes abundantly clear that there also an explosion took place inside the aircraft.
Tank destroying mix of amunititon
Bullet holes in the outer skin
So what could have happened? Russia recently published radar recordings, that confirm at least one Ukrainian SU 25 in close proximity to MH 017. This corresponds with the statement of the now missing Spanish controller ‘Carlos’ that has seen two Ukrainian fighter aircraft in the immediate vicinity of MH 017. If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment!
Now just consider what happens when a series of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells hit the cockpit. These are after all designed to destroy a modern tank. The anti-tank incendiary shells partially traversed the cockpit and exited on the other side in a slightly deformed shape. (Aviation forensic experts could possibly find them on the ground presumably controlled by the Kiev Ukrainian military; the translator). After all, their impact is designed to penetrate the solid armor of a tank. Also, the splinter-explosive shells will, due to their numerous impacts too cause massive explosions inside the cockpit, since they are designed to do this. Given the rapid firing sequence of the GSh-302 cannon, it will cause a rapid succession of explosions within the cockpit area in a very short time. Remeber each of these is sufficient to destroy a tank.
What “mistake” was actually being committed – and by whom?
Graze on the wing
Because the interior of a commercial aircraft is a hermetically sealed pressurized chamber, the explosions will, in split second, increase the pressure inside the cabin to extreme levels or breaking point. An aircraft is not equipped for this, it will burst like a balloon. This explains a coherent scenario. The largely intact fragments of the rear sections broke in mid air at the weaker points of contstruction most likely under extreme internal air pressure. The images of the widely scattered field of debris and the brutally damaged segment of cockpit fit like hand in glove. Furthermore, a wing segment shows traces of a grazing shot, which in direct extension leads to the cockpit. Interestingly, I found that both the high-resolution photo of the fragment of bullet riddled cockpit as well as the segment of grazed wing have in the meantime disappeared from Google Images. One can find virtually no more pictures of the wreckage, except the well known smoking ruins.
If you listen to the voices from Washington now who speak of a “potentially tragic error / accident”, all that remains is the question of what might have been the nature of this “mistake” perpetrated here. I am not given to hover long in the realm of speculation, but would like to invite others to consider the following : The MH 017 looked similar in it’s tricolor design to that that of the Russian President’s plane. The plane with Presdient Putin on board was at the same time ”near” Malaysia MH 017. In aviation circles “close” would be considered to be anywhere between 150 to 200 miles. Also, in this context we might consider the deposition of Ms. Tymoshenko, who wanted to shoot Presdient Putin with a Kalashnikov.
But that this remains pure speculation. The shelling of the cockpit of air Malaysia MH 017, however, is definitely not.

Supplement, 2014-08-01:
Time and again it is stated that the SU 25 has a maximum flight altitude of 7,000 meters and that’s why this jet couldn’t be able to bring down MH 017. Seeking for an answer on Wikipedia – this statement will be confirmed. If you go to the trouble of broadening your knowledge by questioning a specialist book, you’ll get completely different information: the maximum flight altitude of the SU 25 is 14,600 meters. Check here: http://www.fliegerweb.com/militaer/flugzeuge/lexikon.php?show=lexikon-50
Until beginning of july 2014 Wikipedia gave the maximum flight altitude for the SU 25 with “ca. 10.000 Meters”. As well in the english version as in the german one. Now one finds it “corrected” to 7.000 meters. In the Wikipedia discussions-forum roared up an intensive discussion about the correct value.
The handbook “Flugzeuge der Welt” by W. Green (1984), a standard work which essentially quotes the facts of the military “Janes Manuals” (also used to be NATO reference), already 1984 determined the maximum flight altitude of SU 25 (SU 25 MK, export version) with 10,670 meters (page 208 f.). The performance of the SU 25 has been upgraded since that time.
Here a link to the statement of a canadian OSCE-participant, who observed evidence on parts of the wreckage, that the aircraft had been hit by rounds of heavy machine-gun-fire: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76PG9RQStFU#t=470


Sunday, August 03, 2014

Oleh Lyashko (Олег Ляшко)

Oleh Lyashko (Олег Ляшко) is a member of the Ukrainian Parliament and the face of fascism in Ukraine today. His tactics and methods of intimidation and violence are extraordinary in any democratic society he would be facing a court and imprisoned. So empowered with immunity he even goes as far of videoing his crimes and pasting them on the internet. YouTube

This is just a small collection of his aggression.

He is quoted as saying that "[he] will remove tanks from Donbass, turn them around and drive them to Kyiv" a clear threat and act of intimidation against the Governing Authorities in Kyiv,


Links and videos on MH17 Plane Crash

This web page is a work in progress and contains valuable and useful links to various articles and video;s on the Ukraine MH17 Malaysian Plane crash

BBC interview with  eyewitnesses highlighting the existence of Ukrainian fighter jets tailing MH17 at the time of its crash

CBC report on OSCE preliminary assessment on the crash site indicating that the fuselage of  MH17 was shot down by what looks like 30mm machine gun fire not a missile


Saturday, August 02, 2014

Malaysian Airlines MH17. Investigation Analysis (ISRTM)

Chapter 13: Analysis of the traces on the Boeing MH-17: version by type of weapons used.

Author: Yury Belous

August 1, 2014
Translated via Google Translation 
Source: http://isrtm.ru/post/96

Part 1
When analyzing the nature of the lesion is necessary to consider the following factors:
  • The number of holes and openings
  • Size of the holes
  • The direction and shape of the holes, bend the edges of the holes (inside / outside)
  • Smoke surface
The number of holes and openings
The number of holes and the holes relatively small - about 70 pieces. Almost all of them are concentrated in the residues from the cockpit (about 55). 7 more holes located on the parts of the wing and about 10 - to unknown parts plating. Probably, there are also two large holes - one in the center at the bottom, the other on the top right.
Size of the holes
Hole size can be determined from the photo in relation to the other parts. Size of a regular airplane Boeing 777-200 - 380h250. The size of the window is much more Pilot (pictured).
Conventionally, side window can be sized 500x500, greater precision for calculations we do not need. At the bottom of the frame window visible rivets 12, spaced about 4 cm. Smaller part of the holes has a size of 30-40 mm. The remaining openings have an average size of 10-20 mm. There are also very small holes about 1 mm, or even in terms of the smallest particles, which brought down the paint, there are microcraters in metal plating. The diameter of the holes is about 350 mm
The direction and shape of the holes, bend the edges of the holes (inside / outside)
Holes mostly of irregular shape, many holes are fragmentary in nature. Direction mainly bottom-up and back and forth. The hole caused a dent into the skin.
Most of the holes inside the concave, but there are five holes to the outside edges (see photo below). This means that some of the fragments went into the booth behind and flew to the front, breaking through the cabin. This proves that the plane was hit from behind.
Photo: Some traces of destruction turned outwards
Part 2
Details on the wing (part 2) shows that in the lower part of the left wing, closer to the end of the tangent there are traces of destruction in the form of one-way hole. Direction holes back and forth. These traces of defeat confirm the direction of a rear impact in the cockpit.
Smoke surface
Near holes clearly visible soot near two holes. Unspecified item plating also contains traces of the holes on the upper left, where smoke surface is maximized. Thus, this item is likely to be an element of the upper part of the cockpit, adjacent to the part 1.
Part 3
So, today we have a few available photographs, which contain traces of destruction of the aircraft. Pay attention to the pictures of the left wing. Damage traces on it went this way (wedge), which can be seen the direction of impact, which occurred towards the rear cockpit.
Traces of defeat identical standard picture of defeat high-explosive shells.
A typical example of the defeat of high-explosive shells
Warhead missiles by weight does not match the picture of defeat SAM "Buk" (CU 70 kg) because of the small number of holes. In addition, the missile air defense system "Buk" broken in 15-17 meters from the goal, and the cone of submunitions strikes and destroys the target at a huge target area. As you can see on the details of the aircraft, it did not happen. The photo below shows the components of the aircraft, which certainly would be amazed at hit missile air defense system "Buk" in the cockpit.
High-explosive shells could be applied following weapons:
  • Aviapushka GSH-30-1 with cartridges 9-A-4002, with high-explosive incendiary-or high-explosive shells, completed as part of the Su-25;
  • The R-60 "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 3 kg 120 mm diameter range up to 10 km with an infrared seeker and a range of up to 5 meters, is completed as part of the Su-25;
  • The R-73 "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 8 kg 170 mm in diameter range of 20-40 km, with IR deflectable GOS is completed as part of the Su-27, Su-25T.
  • The R-27 "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 39 kg 230 mm diameter range of 50 km with an inertial GOS with radio and heat / semi-active radar homing / passive RGSN, completed as part of the Su-27.
Analysis versions
1 aircraft shot down aviapushkoy
Since the number of traces is relatively small, it follows that affects part of the projectile was not 70 kg as beech, and much smaller. One of the experts expressed the opinion that it was not a missile at all.
Blogger Apolitikus in its заметке http://politikus.ru/events/24997-ustanovlena-traektoriya-rakety-vozduh-vozduh-vypuschennoy-po-malayzyskomu-boingu.html делает sufficiently convincing suggestion that defeat could happen by attacking "air-air" gun installation VPU-17A with a double-barreled 30-mm aviapushkoy GSH-30-2. The diameter of the holes in the observed data corresponds exactly to 30 mm.
The gun can fire the following types of ammunition:
  • High-explosive incendiary projectile OFZ-30
  • High-explosive incendiary tracer OFZT-30
  • Armor-piercing explosive shells BR-30
  • Multielement shell ME-30.
GSH-2-30 - is a two-barrel aircraft gun system Gryazev - Shipunova, caliber 30 mm, designed to equip the Su-25, Su-39 and Mi-24P.
GSh-30 aircraft as part of the Su-25
Note that numerous amounts of traces of blood in the cockpit and the number of holes near the cabin indicates a high probability of conducting aimed fire on the pilots for the purpose of instantaneous depressurization of the cabin and eliminate possible voice recording pilots recorders. Probably, this goal has not been achieved - record controllers have not been made public until now, and the story of the "black box" is gradually turning into another "soap opera."
The lamp and the nature trails in the form of a queue talking about strictly directed defeat in the fuel tanks and the cockpit, and the absence of other signs of the wreckage of the plane sharply reduces the probability of hitting the SAM system "Buk" - the number of tracks it would be much more.
Not in favor of the version SAM Beech said the fact that the trace of the launch Beech would have to clearly and long (about 2 minutes) to see the numerous witnesses, and the first interview did not contain any mention of the tracks a rocket fired by Beech. No traces of the rocket body. Bodies of people in the photo do not look well on the affected multiple elements.
It is important to remember that the complex 9K37 "Buk", the following:
• Command Post CP 9S470,
• The system to detect targets SOC 9S18 "Dome"
• Self-propelled launcher mounts JMA 9A310 (originally 9A38)
• Pre-loading the ROM installation 9A39.
All these heavy machines (about 35 tons each, pictured) effectively operate only in a bundle, so the myths about the urgent export Buka in Russia are only for low-grade propaganda. All have long been aware of who and how knocked Boeing 777.
Therefore, sanctions, mobilization, the threat of further NATO enlargement to the east - an attempt to show the strength of an emboldened Russia, ready to reveal the truth.
And what about the Ukrainian Beech in Shahtersk? It seems that he never fired. Most likely, Boeing has shot another plane that after killing the pilots finished off an attack by shooting the fuel tank, so the wings can be seen, and other signs of injury. Eyewitnesses say several explosions, which speaks in favor of this version.
So defeat Boeing may occur in the wings and the cockpit of the aircraft attack the left-rear gun GSH-30 caliber 30 mm. Firing guns is 1500 rounds per minute, the queue length of 150 rounds. For example, could be used cartridges 9-A-4511 with armor-piercing tracer shells designed to destroy lightly armored and easily vulnerable ground, surface and air targets. Weight cartridges - 0.83 kg, shells - 0.39 kg.
Version is really beautiful, but it has several drawbacks:
  • It does not explain the traces of soot in the cockpit. Soot can be fire. Aircraft typically lit so that the flame is in a direction opposite the cockpit:
  •   It does not explain the dent in the cockpit.
  • It does not explain the small holes with a diameter of about 1 mm and the point of the smallest particles, which brought down the paint.
  • It does not explain microcraters in metal plating.
  • She weakly explains the considerable extent of the damage.
  • There was radiolakatsionnoy fixing aircraft at the beginning of the fall speed.
  • She weakly explains how the Su-25 with a working ceiling 5-7 km could make a fight at an altitude of 10 000 meters.
Theoretically, this version still has the right to exist, but its viability is low.
2 aircraft shot down by a missile R-60
As a possible destruction of weapons can be considered R-60 missiles "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 3 kg 120 mm diameter range up to 10 km with an infrared seeker and a range of up to 5 m. This missile is completed as part of the Su-25 . Head of the General Staff of the operational explained that "by its characteristics of the Su-25 is able to briefly reach a height of 10 thousand cubic meters." "As part of its standard weapons included missiles" air - air "P-60, capable of capturing and hit targets at a distance of 12 km, and the warranty - at a distance of 5 km," - said the official.
This version of the user leans Ischok site "Global adventure» (www.glav.su):
"As a reserve officer, who served in the defense - will express, comrades shot down his arguments on July 17 Boeing.  
1. No one saw in broad daylight rocket launch "Earth-air". Trace of it goes into the clouds and kept in the air for 10-15 minutes. Rumble such that lays the ears for 10 km. from the launch pad.
2.Mnogochislennye witnesses saw fighter (some say two) near the wreckage of the Boeing falling out of the sky.
3.I landfill personally saw marks on the wreckage of the purposes of the R-60 missiles, beech, C-75, C-125, C-200, C-300. Affirm that the wreckage of the traces of the P-60 "air-to-air."
4.Ni one officer defense will not shmalyat neotstrelyannogo of SAM, as it could end badly. SAM "Buk" For 20 years no one to landfills not drove. Old rocket can not fly stupid, or even explode at the start. Aircraft missiles "air-air" P-60 doing in the Ukraine, so they periodically refresh.
The last reason - why not CBO. BMC in the absence of interference productions beats by half rectification, its fragments many times more powerful than the P-60. With this method can not be fragments beg the cockpit on the left and rear in the horizontal plane at an angle of 30g. If the CBO, the fragments would come from below at different angles depending on the position of the aircraft and the launcher "( http://glav.su/forum/4-politics/38-ukraine-Russia-relationships/message/2482627/#msg2482627 ).
However, the destruction of the Malaysian airliner Boeing 777, which crashed in the airspace over the Donbas, missiles "air-air" running attack aircraft Su-25 Air Force of Ukraine, it is unlikely, says chief designer Vladimir Babak stormtrooper ( http://newsru.com/ Russia / 28jul2014 / boeing_su.html ).
He said that the technical characteristics of the Su-25, let him go up to a height of 11-12 kilometers, and ground attack aircraft could reach tier, which flew Boeing (over 10 km). However, the rise to such a height would have risked the safety of pilots, given that Ukrainian pilots before, most likely, had no such experience.
In the photo: the missile R-60 under the wing of the Su-15TM. Air Force Museum of Ukrainian Armed Forces in Vinnitsa.
Designer also stressed that the power of a missile the aircraft is too small to destroy such a large target as a large passenger plane. Also, to open fire on the airliner, attack had "settle" back - but to do so it would be difficult, since Boeing is moving at 100-150 km / h faster attack aircraft, reports the words of the designer of ITAR-TASS. With expert opinion can agree: The Su-25T is usually put two R-60M. At the same time there are cases defeat the F-15 in Lebanon in 1982 (http://skywar.ru/Lebanon.html):
"It was getting into the sealed enemy aircraft. Pilot downed aircraft - to Mr. Ronen Shapiro, managed to hang on to the Ramat David air base and made ​​a landing there. Burned both the engine and the entire tail section was whip shrapnel. However, the plane was restored and operated on. "
The consequences of getting R-60 missiles to South Korea's "Boeing-707" 20th April 1978
In a similar incident, which occurred April 20, 1978, the aircraft "Boeing 707" due to the impact of the R-60 was only damaged and successfully made an emergency landing on Soviet territory. However, you should consider a different type of rocket pilots skill and luck - was not killed off and hydraulic controls.
Note that the incident with the South Korean Boeing 747 plane was hit by a missile R-98 from a distance of 5 km, which is a fragmentation warhead weight of 40 kg. In the P-60 warhead only about 3 kg.
Apparently, it should be stated - we are dealing with a more powerful weapon than cannon GS-30 or R-60 missiles.
The only chance to save a version of the P-60 - it is considered a missile in conjunction with other types of weapons.
3 aircraft shot down by missiles R-73.
The R-73 "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 8 kg 170 mm in diameter range of 20-40 km, with IR deflectable GOS is completed as part of the Su-27, Su-25T. This version also has a right to exist. As the user writes the user Observer Online "Such news" ( http://takie.org/news/chem_sbili_malajzijskij_boing/2014-07-18-11565 ):
"Here is a photo fragment plating with holes from the damaging elements. What can I say:
1 This is not getting aircraft cannon shells
2 This is not an internal explosion
3 It does not seem to hit predefined fragments, typical for a large surface-to-air missiles.
Most damages are similar to the ones that leave the so-called rod warhead, which is used in a relatively small rockets - light SAM missiles and air-to-air.
Rod warhead (English. High explosive continuous rod) designed to destroy aircraft. Striking elements are rods of square or circular cross-section. The rods can not be related to each other or connected (welded) alternating upper and lower ends. At undermining they fly away from the direction of the missile, forming a continuous ring connected rods, while non - interrupted with an overlap. Rods "cut" and trim the power range of the aircraft, resulting in an instantaneous destruction of its structure.
  • compactness compared with shrapnel or high-explosive warheads,
  • instantaneous destruction of targets in air.
For example, it is such a warhead is a popular R-73 missile, which the Ukrainian armed fighters MiG-29 and Su-27. In addition to them, such a missile could carry bombers Su-24 and Su-25. The R-73 was carried out on an aircraft factory in Tbilisi.
From land-based SAM rod warhead missiles have 9M37 and 9M333 complex "Strela-10", but their reach to a height of not more than 5 miles away, to get on a plane, flying at an altitude of 10 km, they could not. Rocket complex "Buk" and 9M38 even the newest 9M317 have a fragmentation warhead that leaves a completely different tracks when hit. So this is - not Beech.
Thus, we can quite confidently say that the Malaysian Boeing 777 was shot down by a military plane with the help of the R-73 or equivalent. "
If this version as the foundation, you need to immediately recognize that the Su-25T put Georgia. The site of the manufacturer of Ukraine's interest in the airplane specified, but information about specific transactions no ( http://newsruss.ru/doc/index.php/TAGO ). It is believed that Ukraine does not have Su-25T, but only the Su-25, Su-25M1 and Su-25UBM1. However, one of the Estonian military experts, retired general Roozimyagi sure that at this point it worked Su-25T ( http://rus.delfi.ee/daily/estonia/otstavnoj-general-roozimyagi-o-buke-i-sbitom-boinge-vot-uvidite-rassledovanie-nichego-ne-proyasnit.d?id=69454183 ).
Have this version and cons:
  •   CU is still quite small.
  • Passive infrared homing head, swing. This means that the engine will pass rather than the cockpit.
At the same time, this version can not be ruled out.
4 aircraft shot down by missiles R-27.
The R-27 "air" - "air" with rod warhead weighing 39 kg 230 mm diameter range of 50 km with an inertial GOS with radio and heat / semi-active radar homing / passive RGSN, completed as part of the Su-27.
This version is supported by expert Alexander Luzanov in the article "The defeat of the Boeing 777 air-to-air missile almost proved" ( http://vybor.ua/article/Silovye_struktury/porajenie-boing-777-raketoy-vozduh-vozduh-pochti-dokazano.html ).
Alexander Luzán
First there will be photos from the crash site talk about very much. Purpose struck large enough fragments and struck at a tangent. We have a long incision. Photo: RIA Novosti.
However, such damage is not characteristic of the high-explosive fragmentation warhead complex BEECH. By the way almost all Soviet anti-aircraft missiles of medium and long range are high-explosive fragmentation warhead of the same type design.
Rocket undermined proximity fuse at distances of 20-60 meters, when the goal is surely among the zone of fragments. Area of fragments as follows.
Due to powerful warhead we bystrorasshiryayuschiysya circle fragments with large initial velocities. A high-explosive effect increases their initial velocity. Such fragments hit the target at angles close to the right and left almost round hole. Splinter tangentially possible only on a collision course with the defeat of a supersonic target, when the relative velocity of the rocket and goals are formed and are more than 6 maha. Clearly, this is not the case.  
As an example appropriate to cite the case of the TU-154 was shot down by a Ukrainian missile C200, which has the same type with beech warhead. In the photo we see a large number of round holes.
Quite differently affects rod warhead. As a result of undermining warhead created relatively slowly expanding ring, a relatively small number of large cores, which cuts the fuselage and the plane tangent at the expense of the speed of the rocket. http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/pub/b_ch/oskol_bch.shtml. That's how it looks on the chart:
This requires greater precision missile guidance, and undermining occurs at a distance of a few (3-5) meters from the target, so that the ring was optimal for hitting radius. This missile will destroy an enemy fighter on the ground. But Boeing too large. He will be inflicted deaths, but local damage. And he for some time will be able to continue the flight.'s Characteristics warhead and photo as it looks.
  Reference: Warhead weight is 9 kg, length of the rods - about 600 mm, diameter - 9.4 mm, the diameter of the rod rings - about 5 m. Rods laid on top layer of the GGE 8 cubes weighing 2-3 g
MMA combat units are equipped with air guided missiles R-27R, P-27T, R-73. In the foreign literature rod warhead designated as HECR (High Explosive Continuos Rod). This model adopted MIG 29 and SU 27 Clarify. Means 9 kg of charge. Warhead itself with a layer of rods and GGE rocket P27 weighs 39 kg. Appeared on the network comparison with an AIM-9 Sidewinder is not correct for some than the P27 type warhead.
In general, similar munitions used in the Great Patriotic War. A Soviet anti-aircraft missile. Looks very similar.
Let me add. According to my military specialty battery commander technical anti-missile system. Which is engaged in the maintenance of missiles before they charge in the launcher. The device must know the missiles. True age is already deducted. Yeah, and judging by the photos, the top front edge of the wing. Then the direction of the section clearly indicates that the missile struck the plane and caught behind. So from the territory of Ukraine.'s Appeared analysis of any faults found. Added scheme. First, the rods hit the wing and it broke off, and then all the debris fell into the cab. Because there are visible and outlets. And a fallen Wing explains a left turn, which is shown on the map in my previous article, when there were only data flightradar.
That's 2 more Especially dull pattern with updates. To-air missile exploded a few meters from the edge of the left wing. Ring cores of the wing was cut off. Yellow in the diagram denotes the severed portion of the wing bars. Next rod ring breaks and flies like an ordinary shrapnel, only a narrow beam. And gets into the cab. Perhaps the engine clatter.
Here it was necessary to add an enlarged detail of the cut wing. There is no longer a composite and metal, and it looks like a spoiler. As seen in this fragment, except inturned edges? Visible a long scratch, which is converted into the incision. At the end of the section there are no scratches, because submunitions left inside. Also visible deformation of the metal, which is characteristic for the tangent strike in the direction of the red arrow (metal is crushed in an accordion). In this case, the metal sheet having high stresses in the directions indicated with black arrows, which leads to tearing at the edges. For the expert obviously. It should be obvious for anyone who has studied the resistance of materials. (In the CPI and other Soviet universities "Soprpomat» read all 2-3 course).
More photos and 2 circuits. For photos opponents thanks. Photo taken from the front edge of the wing, conclusively demonstrates the direction of flight of submunitions.

And two schemes pokazavayuschie that in the case of undermining warhead Bucca near the cockpit, you can not hit the damaging elements in the wing. Area of fragments from the warhead beech such. Sorry, but I have this still three years taught. And how to configure radio controlled fuses. There is technology undermining warhead was. Radio controlled fuses emits strongly in the direction of the zone of fragments. As the target enters the zone razleta- receive a response signal from the target and the warhead blasting occurs. "
In my opinion, this version is pretty well explains the picture of the tragedy, while in this case, you must also explain smoke cockpit - the main part of the rocket flew to the cabin, which has received the maximum damage.
Also rejects the version with "Buck" and is contained in the detention center of Voronezh Ukrainian military aviator taken prisoner by the militias, in an exclusive interview to Life News / http://lifenews.ru/news/137181 /:
Nadezhda Savchenko. Photo LifeNews.
"- At a time when you were already here in the Ukraine was hit by a Malaysian" Boeing 777. "How do you think it could make the militia?
- No, I could not. Well, that is, we say that brought down "Buck", but it's just my guess. That is not to comment on it, as some facts I said. This system works with the guidance. And at an altitude of 10 000 meters you will see from the plane just airflow. Ie swirls. That is, some strip. Had to work with the guidance system. Do not go "Buk" one, it's the whole system. Do they have such specialists, they could put there "Book"? Oh. Well, I doubt it, because, first of all, yes, it is necessary to adjust fire. That is it really, even if the person has served once in these troops, and then he took the side of the militia, or something else. This should really be people who have not lost the knack to get. Either they missed! Then it may be "
While the available data do not allow us to form a clear conclusion about the use of weapons. We continue to investigate.