Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile”
By Peter Haisenko Region: Russia and FSU
Global Research, July 30, 2014 Theme: US NATO War Agenda
anderweltonline.com
In-depth Report: UKRAINE REPORT
-
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 expressed 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 left.
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 likely 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 forcefully 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 ammunition
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!
Blogger's note: Here I've inserted a blow-up of the photo above as recommended by the author. |
Tank destroying mix of ammunition
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!
What “mistake” was actually being committed – and by whom?
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
construction 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 President 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 President Putin with a Kalashnikov.
But that this remains pure speculation. The shelling of the cockpit of air Malaysia MH 017, however, is definitely not speculation.
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 President 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 President Putin with a Kalashnikov.
But that this remains pure speculation. The shelling of the cockpit of air Malaysia MH 017, however, is definitely not speculation.
No comments:
Post a Comment