The geek with a cynical view: aviation

Showing posts with label aviation. Show all posts

Friday, February 26, 2021

Longtail Aviation Boeing 747-412BCF jet cargoliner, registration VQ-BWT,

On 20 February 2021, a Longtail Boeing 747-412BCF jet cargoliner, registration VQ-BWT, operating as flight 6T5504/LGT5504, had an engine failure above the village of Meerssen, shortly after taking off from Maastricht Aachen Airport on the way to John F. Kennedy International Airport. Dropped turbine blades from the exploded Pratt & Whitney PW4056 jet engine lightly injured two persons on the ground. The plane was able to land safely at Liège Airport.[4][5][6][7][8]

Dutch safety board is investigating

msdogfood@hotmail.com

United Airlines Flight 328

msdogfood@hotmail.com

United Airlines Flight 328 was a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Denver to Honolulu, Hawaii on February 20, 2021; the Boeing 777-222 operating the route on that date suffered an apparently contained engine failure shortly after takeoff,[1] that nevertheless resulted in a debris field at least 1 mile (1.6 km) wide over the Commons Park suburb of Broomfield, Colorado and surrounding area.[2][3][4][5][6] Falling debris from the affected engine cowling was recorded by eyewitnesses using smartphone cameras and a dash cam.[7][8][9]

The flight landed safely with no injuries or loss of life to those in the aircraft or on the ground.[10] Although the aircraft landed safely, the engine failure resulted in damage to the engine, an in-flight engine fire, and damage to the airplane.[11] The failed engine was a Pratt & Whitney model PW4077 turbofan.[12] The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration immediately issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive requiring U.S. operators of airplanes equipped with similar Pratt & Whitney PW4000 series engines to inspect these engines' fan blades before further flight.[11] The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is investigating the aircraft engine incident.

Contents

Aircraft

The aircraft involved was a Boeing 777-222 registered as N772UA (c/n 26930/Line no.5).[13] The aircraft was built in November 1994[14] and delivered to United in September 1995. The aircraft is fitted with two Pratt & Whitney PW4077 engines.[13]

Originally the aircraft started out as WA005, one of the original Boeing 777-200s that took part in the flight test certification program prior to its entry into commercial service.[15][14]

On the day of the incident the aircraft had arrived in Denver from Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD) as UA flight 2465, departing at 9:37 a.m. CST and arriving at 10:50 a.m. MST.[16]

Incident

United 328 departed from Denver International Airport's Runway 25 uneventfully at 12:15 local time,[17] but while climbing through 13,000 feet (4,000 m), there was an internal failure within the right engine. This resulted in some of the engine cowling becoming detached, causing it to fall to the ground, along with other engine parts. The pilots contacted air traffic control and the airliner subsequently landed safely at Runway 26 at 13:37 local time. No one on the ground or in the aircraft was injured, though flying debris resulted in a large hole in the wing to body fairing.[18][19]

Passengers were re-booked on UA flight 3025 – operated by a different Boeing 777, N773UA, a sister ship to N772UA immediately ahead of it on the production line[20] – that took off from DEN to HNL hours later. On February 13, 2018, originating from San Francisco as United Airlines Flight 1175, N773UA had a similar engine failure and loss of the engine cowling 120 miles from its destination of Honolulu, where it made a safe emergency landing.[21] Boeing has been working on a redesign for a replacement fan cowl as a result of that incident, according to documents reviewed by the Wall Street Journal.[22]

Another 777-289, JA8978, operated as Japan Air Lines Flight 904 from Okinawa-Naha Airport (OKA) on December 4, 2020, also experienced a similar fan blade out failure and partial loss of the fan cowl six minutes after takeoff;[23] it returned to OKA and landed safely, but the Japan Transport Safety Board considered it a “serious incident” and launched an investigation.[24]

Investigation

Photograph showing damage to the right engine cowling, including the loss of the inlet fairing and fan doors (NTSB photo)

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is investigating the incident.[9] A senior investigator living in the Denver area immediately coordinated with first responders. Three other investigators from the NTSB's Denver regional office are assisting. It was noted upon initial inspection that the inlet and the cowling had separated from the engine and that two fan blades had fractured, one near its root and an adjacent one about mid-span; a portion of one blade was embedded in the containment ring. The remainder of the fan blades exhibited damage to the tips and leading edges.[1]

On February 22, 2021, National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Robert Sumwalt announced that the damage to the fan blade is consistent with metal fatigue, according to a preliminary assessment.[25][26] It is unclear whether the failure is consistent with other failures attributed to metal fatigue in a fan blade in a February 2018 United Airlines flight and a December 2020 Japan Airlines flight.[25] Sumwalt also said that "by our strictest definition"[27] NTSB did not consider the incident an uncontained engine failure because "the containment ring contained the parts as they were flying out."[28] The NTSB will look into why the engine cowling separated from the aircraft and why there was a fire, despite indications that the fuel supply to the engine had been turned off.[25]

Pratt & Whitney PW4000

Damage to PW4000 hollow fan blades from UA328 (NTSB photo)

There have been previous reports of PW4000 engine failures. In December 2020, Japan Airlines Flight JL904 operating a Boeing 777 suffered a failure of the same engine type at around 16,000 to 17,000 feet.[29]

On February 13, 2018, United 1175 en route from San Francisco to Honolulu suffered from an engine failure over the Pacific. The aircraft was also a Boeing 777-222, N773UA, with an identical configuration to N772UA operating United 328. The aircraft subsequently landed safely in Honolulu with no injuries or loss of life. The NTSB eventually determined that the fan blade inside the engine fractured, leading to the failure.[21] The investigation faulted Pratt & Whitney for not doing more stringent inspections.[30] The aircraft was eventually repaired and returned to service.[21]

On the same day as United 328, a Boeing 747-400BCF belonging to Longtail Aviation experienced an uncontained engine failure, shortly after departing Maastricht Airport in the Netherlands.[31] Two people were injured by the falling debris.[32] The 747-400BCF was powered by PW4056 engines, an earlier version of the PW4000 engine.[31]

Reactions

After the accident of UA328, the Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism ordered the grounding of 32 Boeing 777 aircraft operated by Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways.[33] The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ordered increased inspections of Boeing 777 aircraft with PW4000 engines;[34] United Airlines had preemptively removed all such airliners (of which it has 28 in storage, and 24 in use) from active service.[34][35]

On February 22, 2021, following an Emergency Airworthiness Directive, Boeing confirmed that it had grounded worldwide all 128 of its Boeing 777 aircraft equipped with certain Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines because of the UA328 incident.[36] Later that day, the British Civil Aviation Authority also banned Boeing 777s powered by Pratt & Whitney PW4000-112 engines from entering UK airspace.[37][38]

On February 23, 2021, Pratt & Whitney released a statement that the company was cooperating with federal investigators and coordinating with operators and regulators to support a revised inspection interval of the PW4000 engines.[30]

Groundings by operator

As of 24 February 2021[39]

Airline In service In storage Total

United Airlines 24 28 52

All Nippon Airways 10 14 24

Japan Airlines 7 13 20

Korean Air 7 10 17

Asiana Airlines 6 1 7

Jin Air 4 0 4

Total 58 66 124

Saturday, January 9, 2021

Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

msdogfood@hotmail.com

Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article documents a recent aviation incident. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The latest updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. Please feel free to improve this article (but note that updates without valid and reliable references will be removed) or discuss changes on the talk page. (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

A shot of the plane pushing back, seen from the left side. Behind it is an Air Asia A320 parked at its gate.

PK-CLC, the aircraft involved in the accident,

in December 2017

Crash

Date 9 January 2021

Summary Crashed; under investigation (search ongoing)

Site Somewhere over Laki Island, Near Thousand Islands, Java Sea

05°57′36″S 106°34′30″ECoordinates: 05°57′36″S 106°34′30″E

Aircraft

Aircraft type Boeing 737-524

Aircraft name Citra

Operator Sriwijaya Air

IATA flight No. SJ182

ICAO flight No. SJY182

Call sign SRIWIJAYA 182

Registration PK-CLC

Flight origin Soekarno–Hatta International Airport, Jakarta, Indonesia

Destination Supadio International Airport, Pontianak, Indonesia

Occupants 62

Passengers 50

Crew 12[1][2][3]

Fatalities 62 (presumed)

Survivors 0 (presumed)

Sriwijaya Air Flight 182 (SJ182/SJY182) was a scheduled domestic passenger flight operated by Sriwijaya Air from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport, Jakarta, to Supadio International Airport, Pontianak, in Indonesia. On 9 January 2021, the Boeing 737–524 operating the flight disappeared from radar four minutes after departure. Officials confirmed that the aircraft crashed in the waters off the Thousand Islands, several kilometers from the airport. The search for the aircraft is ongoing.

Contents

Aircraft

The aircraft involved was a Boeing 737-524, registered as PK-CLC (MSN 27323/2616).[4] It was manufactured in 1994, and was first delivered to Continental Airlines the same year under the registration number N27610. The aircraft was acquired by United Airlines in 2010 when Continental and United merged. On 15 May 2012, United sold the aircraft to Sriwijaya Air. It was the first of a total of fifteen 737-500s received by Sriwijaya Air in 2012 to replace their 737-200s.[5] Sriwijaya Air named the aircraft "Citra". The aircraft was equipped with two CFMI CFM56-3B1 engines.[6]

The aircraft involved when it was in service with Continental Airlines in 2008 at Atlanta Hartsfield–Jackson Int'l, registered as N27610.

Flight details

Speed and altitude of Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

Route of Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

The aircraft was scheduled to take off from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport in Tangerang, Banten, at 14:10 WIB (7:10 UTC), and was scheduled to arrive at Supadio International Airport in Pontianak, West Kalimantan, at 15:40 WIB (8:40 UTC). After pushing back from the airport's Terminal 2D,[7] the aircraft took off from Runway 25R at 14:36 local time.[8] Due to the significant delay it was expected to land in Pontianak at 15:50 WIB (08:50 UTC).[7]

Flight 182 was climbing to 13,000 ft (4,000 m) when it abruptly swerved to the right and nosedived.[9] Air traffic controller (ATC) spotted this and asked the pilots to report their condition, but received no response.[10] According to AirNav Radarbox flight data, the aircraft reported a rapid drop in altitude during the climb phase from 10,900 ft (3,300 m) to 7,650 ft (2,330 m) at 07:40 UTC.[11] Flightradar24 reported that four minutes after takeoff, the aircraft dropped by 10,000 ft (3,000 m) in less than a minute.[12] The flight tracker noted that the last recorded altitude of the aircraft was 250 feet (76 m) at 07:40:27 UTC.[13] According to provided flight data, the plane experienced a drop of 1,755 ft (535 m) in just six seconds between 07:40:08 and 07:40:18 UTC. It was followed by a drop of 825 ft (251 m) in two seconds, 2,725 ft (831 m) in four seconds, and 5,150 ft (1,570 m) in its last seven seconds.[14] Its last contact with air traffic control was at 14:40 local time (07:40 UTC). The aircraft is presumed to have crashed into the Java Sea 19 kilometres (12 mi; 10 nmi) from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport,[15] specifically near Laki Island (Laki (Q4378768)).[16]

Passengers and crew

There were 62 people on board, with 50 being passengers, 6 being active crew members and 6 being non-active crew. Everyone on board is thought to be Indonesian.[1][2][3]

Among the passengers was Mulyadi Tamsir, a politician from Indonesia's People's Conscience Party.[17][18]

The active crew consisted of Captain Afwan, First Officer Diego M. and four flight attendants.[6][19] Afwan was a former pilot in the Indonesian Air Force.[20] The manifest which was released to the public indicated that another six crew members, including another captain and first officer, were also on board the aircraft.[21]

The cargo loaded in the aircraft was confirmed to be 500 kg (1,100 pounds).[22]

Search and rescue

Several eyewitness accounts were reported. A local fisherman reported that the aircraft crashed just 14 metres (46 ft) from his location. He stated that the aircraft exploded in mid-air. A piece of the aircraft was on fire and then fell to the sea.[23][24] Meanwhile, citizens of the Thousand Islands, near where the plane crashed, heard two explosions. It was raining in the area at the time.[25] The first report of a plane crash in the Thousand Islands was made at 14:30 local time, in which a fisherman stated that a plane had crashed and exploded in the sea.[26] At around 16:00 local time, eyewitnesses coordinated with firefighters to search for the aircraft.[25] The regent of the Thousand Islands, Junaedi, also reported that something fell and exploded on Laki Island.[27]

The head of the Indonesian National Search and Rescue Agency (Indonesian: BASARNAS), Bagus Puruhito, reported that the crash site was located 11 nautical miles (20 km) from Soekarno-Hatta International Airport.[28] Personnel from a vessel provided by the Ministry of Transportation reported that body parts, fragments of clothing, electronics, and wreckage had been recovered from the sea in waters near the Thousand Islands, with aviation fuel also reported around the location.[29][30] The water near the likely crash site has a depth of around 15–16 metres (49–52 ft).[31] BASARNAS immediately deployed personnel to the crash site[32] while the Indonesian National Police and the Ministry of Transportation set up crisis centers in Port of Tanjung Priok[33] and Soekarno–Hatta International Airport respectively.[34] The Indonesian Navy deployed a number of vessels for the SAR operations, in addition to helicopters and KOPASKA (frogman) personnel.[35]

Indonesian President Joko Widodo was immediately briefed on the accident. He ordered full coordination on the search and rescue operation and sent condolences to the relatives of the passengers and crew members.[36]

The Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) reported that it will send the research ship Baruna Jaya to assist in the search and rescue operation. The vessel had been previously involved in search and rescue operations of multiple aviation accidents, including Lion Air Flight 610 and Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501.[37] Meanwhile, the Indonesian Navy deployed seven ships and divers from the 1st Naval Regional Command to assist the search and rescue process.[38] Soon after, BASARNAS reported that the pings of the aircraft's Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) had not been detected.[39] It added that the search and rescue operation will be continued overnight, with the main focus on pinpointing the exact location of the crash site.[40] The exact crash location was later announced to the public.[41]

The Indonesian Red Cross deployed 50 volunteers and prepared at least 100 body bags for the victims of the accident.[42] Family members of the victims were asked to bring DNA samples and other antemortem information to the Disaster Victims Identification unit at Kramat Jati Hospital in Jakarta.[43] Accommodations for relatives were provided by Sriwijaya Air.[44]

On the night of 9 January, an emergency slide of the aircraft was recovered from the waters near Lancang Island, Thousand Islands.[45] Several other pieces of wreckage were recovered from the crash site; the search and rescue operation was hampered by low visibility.[46]

On 10 January, Minister of Transportation Budi Karya Sumadi alongside with the Commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces Hadi Tjahjanto supervised the search and rescue operation on board the KRI John Lie 358.[47] Hadi Tjahjanto later stated that signals from the aircraft have been detected by the army.[48] Indonesian Navy announced that the exact coordinate of the crash site has been pinpointed.[49] The Indonesian Armed Forces stated that 4 teams of divers will be deployed to the site,[50] while the Indonesian Navy will deploy 150 personnel and helicopters to the crash site.[51]

Investigation

The Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC / Komite Nasional Keselamatan Transportasi; KNKT) was immediately notified of the accident, with assistance from BASARNAS. NTSC stated that, starting on 10 January, just before 6:00 am local time, search and rescue personnel will start searching for the aircraft's flight recorders.[52] It added that the investigation will be assisted by the US' National Transportation Safety Board.[53]

Adita Irawati, a spokeswoman from the Indonesian Ministry of Transportation, reported that an abnormality was noted during the flight. The aircraft departed Jakarta's Soekarno-Hatta International Airport with a standard instrument departure. The aircraft had been cleared to fly at 29,000 ft. During its flight climb phase, Flight 182 immediately went off course to the northwest. ATC later asked the crew about the incident, but a few seconds later the aircraft dropped from the radar.[54][55]

The director of Sriwijaya Air, Jefferson Irwin Jauwena, stated that the aircraft was airworthy, despite its age of 26 years. Although a 30-minute delay was noted, he insisted that the cause was bad weather, specifically heavy rain, rather than mechanical failure. In response, KNKT said that they would be coordinating with the Meteorology, Climatology, and Geophysical Agency (BMKG) in relation to weather in the Jakartan area.[56]

Indonesian aviation expert Alvin Lie stated that based on the preliminary data retrieved from aircraft, Flight 182 might have suffered a sudden failure that happened "so fast that pilots couldn't do anything". Data also indicated that there was not a single distress call or emergency call sent from the aircraft.[57]

Sunday, June 14, 2020

The Snowbirds, officially known as 431 Air Demonstration Squadron (French: 431e escadron de démonstration aérienne), are the military aerobatics or air show flight demonstration team of the Royal Canadian Air Force.

msdogfood@hotmail.com

The Snowbirds, officially known as 431 Air Demonstration Squadron (French: 431e escadron de démonstration aérienne), are the military aerobatics or air show flight demonstration team of the Royal Canadian Air Force. The team is based at 15 Wing Moose Jaw near Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. The Snowbirds' official purpose is to "demonstrate the skill, professionalism, and teamwork of Canadian Forces personnel".[2] The Snowbirds are the first Canadian air demonstration team to be designated as a squadron.[3]

Since the Snowbirds' first show in July 1971, there have been several incidents involving damage to airplanes, loss of airplanes, and loss of life. Below is a list of notable incidents only. There are other incidents, some involving loss of aircraft, that are not listed below.
DateLocationReasonCasualtiesDamage
10 June 1972 CFB Trenton, Ontario wingtip collision 1 fatality plane crashed
14 July 1973 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan bird strike caused engine stall back injuries plane crashed
16 July 1977 Paine Field, Washington collision during formation change none 2 planes crashed
3 May 1978 Grande Prairie, Alberta horizontal stabilizer failed 1 fatality plane crashed
17 June 1986 Carmichael, Saskatchewan mid-air collision minor injuries plane crashed
3 September 1989 Toronto, Ontario midair collision 1 fatality 2 planes crashed
26 February 1991 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan crashed during flight no serious injuries plane crashed
14 August 1992 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan failed engine bearing none plane crashed
22 October 1992 Bagotville, Quebec midair collision none 2 planes crashed
21 March 1994 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan engine failure minor injuries plane crash
24 September 1995 Point Mugu, California 3 planes collision with birds none planes damaged
7 June 1997 Glens Falls, New York touched wings none planes damaged
10 December 1998 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan mid-air collision 1 fatality plane crashed
27 February 1999 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan nose gear collapsed on landing none plane damage
4 September 2000 Toronto, Ontario planes touched none plane damage
10 April 2001 Comox, British Columbia nose & wing landing gear failed none plane damage
21 June 2001 near London, Ontario mid-air collision serious injuries [23] plane crashed
10 December 2004 Mossbank, Saskatchewan mid-air collision 1 fatality 2 planes crashed
24 August 2005 near Thunder Bay, Ontario engine failure minor injuries plane crashed
18 May 2007 near Great Falls, Montana restraining strap malfunction 1 fatality plane crashed
9 October 2008 near Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan pilot error 2 fatalities plane crashed
1 March 2011 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan landed with gear up none plane damage
13 October 2019 Brooks, Georgia not yet known[24][25] minor injuries plane crashed
17 May 2020 Kamloops, British Columbia not yet known 1 fatality, 1 injured[26] plane crashed

FatalitiesEdit

Snowbird aircraft have been involved in several accidents, resulting in the deaths of seven pilots and two passengers and the loss of several aircraft. One pilot, Captain Wes Mackay, was killed in a automobile accident after a performance in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, in 1988.[27] The RCAF commented: "... there is risk associated with formation flying. Flying by its very nature has an inherent element of risk. Eight Snowbird pilots have lost their lives in the performance of their duty. We remember them."[28]
10 June 1972: Solo Captain Lloyd Waterer died after a wingtip collision with the other solo aircraft while performing an opposing solo manoeuvre at the Trenton Air Show at CFB Trenton, Ontario.[29]
3 May 1978: Captain Gordon de Jong died at an air show in Grande Prairie, Alberta. The horizontal stabilizer failed, rendering the aircraft uncontrollable. Although pilot ejection was initiated, it was not successful.[30]
3 September 1989: Captain Shane Antaya died after a midair collision during a demonstration at the Canadian International Air Show during the CNE in Toronto, Ontario, when his Tutor crashed into Lake Ontario. During the same accident, team commander Major Dan Dempsey safely ejected from his aircraft.[31]
10 December 1998: Captain Michael VandenBos died in a midair collision during training near Moose Jaw.[32]
10 December 2004: Captain Miles Selby died in a midair collision during training near Mossbank, Saskatchewan, while practising the co-loop manoeuvre. The other pilot, Captain Chuck Mallett, was thrown from his destroyed aircraft while still strapped into his seat. While tumbling towards the ground, he was able to unstrap, deploy his parachute and land with only minor injuries.[33]
18 May 2007: Snowbird 2, Captain Shawn McCaughey fatally crashed during practice at Malmstrom Air Force Base near Great Falls, Montana, due to a restraining strap malfunction.[34]
9 October 2008: A Snowbird Tutor piloted by newly recruited team member Captain Bryan Mitchell with military photographer Sergeant Charles Senecal crashed, killing both, near the Snowbirds' home base of 15 Wing Moose Jaw while on a non-exhibition flight.[35][36]
17 May 2020: A Snowbird Tutor crashed in Kamloops, British Columbia, during a cross-country tour called "Operation Inspiration", intended to "salute Canadians doing their part to fight the spread of COVID-19."[37][38] Unit public affairs officer, Captain Jennifer Casey, died. The pilot, Captain Richard MacDougall, sustained serious injuries.[39][26]
Aircraft replacementEdit

Due to the age of the Tutors (developed in the 1950s, first flown in 1960, and accepted by the RCAF in 1963[40][41]), a 2003 Department of National Defence study recommended that the procurement process to replace the aircraft should begin immediately so the aircraft could be retired by 2010 because of obsolescence issues that would affect the aircraft’s viability.[42] Some concerns include outdated ejection seats and antiquated avionics.[43][44] There has also been criticism about the aircraft not being representative of a modern air force.[44] A 2008 review recommended that the Tutors' life could be extended to 2020 because of cost concerns related to purchasing new aircraft.[45] A 2015 report called "CT-114 Life Extension Beyond 2020", outlined planned upgrades to extend the life of the Tutor beyond 2020. These planned upgrades included replacing the ejection seats and wing components, and updating the brakes.[46] A further initiative to extend the life of the aircraft from 2020 to 2030 has been implemented by the RCAF. An April 2018 RCAF document mentioned that until a decision is made on replacement, the Snowbird Tutors will receive modernized avionics to comply with regulations. The new avionics will permit the team to continue flying in North America and allow the Tutors to fly until 2030. Upgrading work will begin in 2022.[45]

Notwithstanding any upgrades, the Government of Canada plans to replace the Tutors with new aircraft between 2026 and 2035, with a preliminary estimated cost of $500 million to $1.5 billion. Official sources were quoted: "The chosen platform must be configurable to the 431 (AD) Squadron standard, including a smoke system, luggage capability and a unique paint scheme. The platform must also be interchangeable with the training fleet to ensure the hard demands of show performances can be distributed throughout the aircraft fleet." [47] The objective of the Snowbird Aircraft Replacement Project is "to satisfy the operational requirement to provide the mandated Government of Canada aerobatic air demonstration capability to Canadian and North American audiences."[47]
ReferencesEdit
NotesEdit

^ Government of Canada, National Defence, Royal Canadian Air Force. "Members – Snowbirds – Demo Teams". www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
^ a b c Dempsey 2002, p. 567.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 718.
^ Canadian Armed Forces (29 July 2019). "CT-114 Tutor". www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca. Archived from the original on 24 May 2020. Retrieved 24 May 2020.
^ Canadian Armed Forces (13 October 2019). "CT1140071 Tutor - From the investigator". rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca. Archived from the original on 24 May 2020. Retrieved 24 May 2020.
^ Canadian Armed Forces (17 May 2020). "One Canadian Military Member Killed One Injured in CF Snowbirds Accident". rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca. Archived from the original on 24 May 2020. Retrieved 24 May 2020.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 659.
^ "Air of Authority – A History of RAF Organisation." Archived 2009-08-23 at the Wayback Machine rafweb.org. Retrieved: 20 May 2011.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 95.
^ "Snowbirds – Full History." Archived 2013-05-22 at the Wayback Machine RCAF. Retrieved: 15 March 2013.
^ "Snowbirds safety incident a factor behind air show cancellations". The Star, 18 May 2017 Retrieved: August 28, 2017
^ "FAQ: Snowbirds." Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Air Force, Retrieved: 4 September 2017
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 643.
^ "FAQ: Snowbirds." Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Air Force, 20 July 2015. Retrieved: 12 August 2015.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 540.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 538
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 545.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 552.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 597.
^ Dempsey 2002, pp. 605, 606.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 615.
^ Ewing-Weisz (2012).
^ [1] CBC News, 26 June 2001. Retrieved: 17 may 2020.
^ "Global News Story." Global News, 27 November 2019. Retrieved: 17 May 2020.
^ "Global News Story." Global News, 5 December 2019. Retrieved: 17 May 2020.
^ a b Ross, Andrea (16 May 2020). "Canadian Forces Snowbirds jet crashes in Kamloops, B.C., killing 1, injuring another". CBC News. Archived from the original on 18 May 2020. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
^ "Car Crash Kills Canadian Pilot, Injures Two Others" (Press release). AP News. 25 October 1988. Retrieved 17 May 2020.
^ "Snowbirds – Tributes." Royal Canadian Air Force, Government of Canada, 9 February 2015. Retrieved: 12 August 2015.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 546.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 569.
^ Dempsey 2002, p. 602.
^ "Snowbird crash, December 10, 1998 – investigation update." Archived June 9, 2011, at the Wayback Machine airforce.forces.gc.ca, 7 June 2010. Retrieved: 16 June 2010.
^ "Canadian Forces Flight Safety Report: CT114173 / CT114064 Tutor". airforce.forces.gc.ca. 10 December 2004. Archived from the original on 10 August 2018. Retrieved 7 January 2017.
^ "Canadian Forces Flight Safety Report: CT114159 Tutor." airforce.forces.gc.ca, 18 May 2007. Retrieved: 17 March 2014.
^ "CBC News Story." CBC, 10 October 2008. Retrieved: 13 October 2008.
^ "Canadian Forces Flight Safety Report." airforce.forces.gc.ca. Retrieved: 7 January 2017.
^ Kelly, Alanna (17 May 2020). "Snowbirds plane crashes near Kamloops, B.C." CTV News. Retrieved 17 May 2020.
^ "Canadian Forces Snowbirds launch cross-Canada tour" (Press release). Royal Canadian Air Force. 29 April 2020. Retrieved 17 May 2020.
^ Petruk, Tim (17 May 2020). "With video: Snowbird jet crashes into Kamloops house". Kamloops This Week. Retrieved 17 May 2020.
^ Canadair CT-114 Tutor Retrieved 29 May 2020
^ Milberry 1984, p. 346.
^ Replace Snowbird Jets ‘Immediately,’ DND Told in 2003. The Globe and Mail. April 25, 2018. Retrieved 20 May 2020
^ Snowbirds were waiting for new ejection seats before deadly crash. Now DND won’t say if gear was replaced. The Star. May 29, 2020. Retrieved 30 May 2020.
^ a b Dempsey 2002, p. 694
^ a b Aircraft used by Snowbirds aerobatic team, on the go since 1963, will be kept flying until 2030. Saskatoon StarPhoenix. May 13, 2018. Retrieved 14 May 2018
^ CT-114 Life Extension Beyond 2020 (archived). National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces. Retrieved 30 May 2020
^ a b "Snowbird Aircraft Replacement Project." Government of Canada, 12 August 2015. Retrieved: 12 March 2015.
BibliographyEdit

Dempsey, Daniel V. A Tradition of Excellence: Canada's Airshow Team Heritage. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: High Flight Enterprises, 2002. ISBN 0-9687817-0-5.
Ewing-Weisz, Chris. "Lois Boyle was the ‘Mother of the Snowbirds’." The Globe and Mail, 17 January 2012, p. S8. Published online: 16 January 2012. Retrieved: 23 January 2012.
Fast, Beverley G. Snowbirds: Flying High, Canada's Snowbirds Celebrate 25 Years. Saskatoon, SK: Lapel Marketing & Associates Inc., 1995. ISBN 0969932707.
Milberry, Larry. Canada's Air Force At War And Peace, Volume 3. Toronto, ON: CANAV Books, 2000. ISBN 0-921022-12-3.
Milberry, Larry, ed. Sixty Years—The RCAF and CF Air Command 1924–1984. Toronto: Canav Books, 1984. ISBN 0-9690703-4-9.
Mummery, Robert. Snowbirds: Canada's Ambassadors of the Sky. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Reidmore Books, 1984. ISBN 0-919091-37-7.
Rycquart, Barbara. The Snowbirds Story. London, Ontario, Canada: Third Eye, 1987. ISBN 0-919581-41-2.
Sroka, Mike. Snowbirds: Behind The Scenes With Canada's Air Demonstration Team. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Fifth House Publishers, 2006. ISBN 1-894856-86-4.
External linksEdit
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Snowbirds.

Canadian Forces Snowbirds (official site)
431 Squadron (Department of Defence – History and heritage)
Squadron history at Canadian Wings
Watch a 1980 NFB vignette on the Snowbirds

Saturday, February 1, 2020

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) Shot down by a surface-to-air missile transported from Russia on the day of the crash[1][2] Site Near Hrabove, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine 48°8′17″N 38°38′20″E

msdogfood@hotmail.com

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17)[a] was a scheduled passenger flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur that was shot down on 17 July 2014 while flying over eastern Ukraine. All 283 passengers and 15 crew were killed.[3] Contact with the aircraft, a Boeing 777-200ER, was lost when it was about 50 km (31 mi) from the Ukraine–Russia border and wreckage of the aircraft fell near Hrabove in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine, 40 km (25 mi) from the border.[4] The shoot-down occurred in the War in Donbass, during the Battle of Shakhtarsk, in an area controlled by pro-Russian rebels.[5] The crash was Malaysia Airlines' second aircraft loss during 2014 after the disappearance of Flight 370 on 8 March.[6]
Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

9M-MRD, the aircraft involved, 2011
Shootdown
Date 17 July 2014
Summary Shot down by a surface-to-air missile transported from Russia on the day of the crash[1][2]
Site Near Hrabove, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine
48°8′17″N38°38′20″E
Aircraft
Aircraft type Boeing 777-200ER
Operator Malaysia Airlines
IATA flight No. MH17
ICAO flight No. MAS17
Call sign MALAYSIAN 17
Registration 9M-MRD
Flight origin Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, the Netherlands
Destination Kuala Lumpur International Airport, Malaysia
Occupants 298
Passengers 283
Crew 15
Fatalities 298
Survivors 0

The responsibility for investigation was delegated to the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and the Dutch-led joint investigation team (JIT), who concluded that the airliner was downed by a Buk surface-to-air missile launched from pro-Russian separatist-controlled territory in Ukraine.[7][8] According to the JIT, the Buk that was used originated from the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade of the Russian Federation,[9][10]and had been transported from Russia on the day of the crash, fired from a field in a rebel-controlled area, and the launcher returned to Russia after it was used to shoot down MH17.[1][2][9] On the basis of the JIT's conclusions, the governments of the Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible for the deployment of the Buk installation and are taking steps to hold Russia formally accountable.[11][12]

These findings by DSB and JIT are consistent with the earlier claims by American and German intelligence sources[13][14][15] and with claims by the Ukrainian government.[16] The Russian government continues to deny any responsibility for shooting down the plane.[10][17][18][19]

Contents

AircraftEdit

Flight 17, which was also marketed as KLMFlight 4103 (KL4103) through a codeshare agreement,[20] was operated with a Boeing 777-2H6ER,[b] serial number 28411, registration 9M-MRD.[7]:30 The 84th Boeing 777 produced, it first flew on 17 July 1997, exactly 17 years before the incident, and was delivered new to Malaysia Airlines on 29 July 1997.[21] Powered by two Rolls-Royce Trent 892engines and carrying 280 seats (33 business and 247 economy), the aircraft had recorded more than 76,300 hours in 11,430 cycles before the crash.[7]:30 The aircraft was in an airworthy condition at departure.[7]:31

The Boeing 777, which entered commercial service on 7 June 1995, has one of the best safety records among commercial aircraft.[22] In June 2014 there were about 1,212 aircraft in service, with 340 more on order.[23]
Passengers and crewEdit
People on board by nationality[7]:27NationNumber
Australia 27
Belgium 4
Canada[c] 1
Germany[d] 4
Indonesia 12
Malaysia[e] 43
Netherlands[f] 193
New Zealand 1
Philippines 3
United Kingdom[g] 10
Total 298

The incident is the deadliest airliner shootdown incident to date.[25] All 283 passengers and 15 crew died.[7]:27 By 19 July, the airline had determined the nationalities of all 298 passengers and crew.[6]

The crew were all Malaysian, while over two-thirds (68%) of the passengers were Dutch. Most of the other passengers were Malaysians and Australians, the remainder were citizens of seven other countries.[7]:27

Among the passengers were delegates en route to the 20th International AIDS Conference in Melbourne, including Joep Lange, a former president of the International AIDS Society, which organised the conference.[26] Many initial reports had erroneously indicated that around 100 delegates to the conference were aboard, but this was later revised to six.[27] Also on board were Dutch Senator Willem Witteveen,[28] Australian author Liam Davison,[29] and Malaysian actress Shuba Jay.[30]

At least twenty family groups were on the aircraft and eighty passengers were under the age of 18.[31][32]

The flightcrew were captain Eugene Choo Jin Leong and the first officer was Muhd Firdaus Abdul Rahim, the flight also carried a relief crew.[33][h]
BackgroundEdit
See also: 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine and War in Donbass

An armed conflict in Eastern Ukraine led some airlines to avoid eastern Ukrainian airspace in early March 2014 due to safety concerns.[36][37] Military aircraft were deployed in the conflict, and several were shot down in the months and weeks preceding the MH17 incident. In April, the International Civil Aviation Organization warned governments that there was a risk to commercial passenger flights over south-eastern Ukraine.[7]:217 The American Federal Aviation Administration issued restrictions on flights over Crimea, to the south of MH17's route, and advised airlines flying over some other parts of Ukraine to "exercise extreme caution". This warning did not include the MH17 crash region.[38][39] 37 airlines continued overflying eastern Ukraine and about 900 flights crossed the Donetsk region in the seven days before the Boeing 777 was shot down.[40]

On 14 June 2014, a Ukrainian Air Force Ilyushin Il-76 military airlifter was shot down on approach to Luhansk International Airport, with loss of nine crew members and forty troops.[7]:183 On 29 June, Russian news agencies reported that insurgents had obtained a Buk missile system after having taken control of a Ukrainian air defence base (possibly the former location of the 156th Anti-Aircraft Missile Regiment [156 zrp]).[41][42][43] On the same day, the Donetsk People's Republic claimed possession of such a system in a since-deleted tweet.[42][44]

On 14 July 2014, a Ukrainian Air Force An-26 transport airplane flying at 6,500 m (21,300 ft) was shot down.[7]:183 The militia reportedly claimed via social media that a Buk missile launcher had been used to bring down the aircraft.[45] American officials later said evidence suggested the aircraft had been shot down from Russian territory.[46] On 16 July, a Ukrainian Sukhoi Su-25 close air support aircraft was also shot down. The Ukrainian government said that the Russian military had shot down the aircraft with an air-to-air missile fired by a MiG-29 jet in Russia; the Russian defence ministry said that the accusations were false.[47][48] According to the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, the Ukrainian government also warned the government of the Netherlands and other European countries about dangers in flying over the East Ukraine three days prior to the shootdown[49][50] due to the downing of the An-26 transport aircraft on 14 July.[51][52]

On 17 July, an Associated Press journalist saw a Buk launcher in Snizhne, a town in Donetsk Oblast, 16 kilometres (10 mi) southeast of the crash site. The reporter also saw seven separatist tanks near the town.[53] Associated Press journalists reported that the Buk M-1 was operated by a man "with unfamiliar fatigues and a distinctive Russian accent" escorted by two civilian vehicles.[54] The battle around Savur-Mohyla has been suggested as the possible context within which the missile that brought down MH17 was fired, as separatists deployed increasingly sophisticated anti-aircraft weaponry in this battle, and had brought down several Ukrainian jets in July.[55]

Ukraine imposed restrictions to air traffic in the airspace of Donetsk Oblast, but did not close it. On 5 June 2014, traffic was restricted to altitudes above 26,000 feet (7,900 m) and on 14 July to above 32,000 feet (9,800 m).[7]:179–180 This did not prevent commercial overflights as commercial traffic typically travels at altitudes of 33,000 to 44,000 feet.[56] The Russian ATCclosed the airspace in the adjacent area over Russia below 53,000 feet (16,000 m), effectively closing it to civilian traffic. The reason given was "armed conflict in Ukraine". The Dutch Safety Board asked for, but did not receive, a more detailed explanation for this restriction.[57][58] As with other countries, Ukraine receives overflight fees for commercial aircraft that fly through their borders and this may have contributed to the continued availability of civilian flight paths through the conflict zone over FL 320.[59][60]

On the day of MH17 incident, a Ukrainian An-26 was scheduled to deliver paratroopers to the battle arena.[61]
CrashEdit

Route of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

Routes of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) and Singapore Airlines Flight 351 (SQ351), including airspace restrictions

On Thursday, 17 July 2014, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 departed from Amsterdam Airport Schiphol Gate G3 at 12:13 CEST (10:13 UTC)[7]:23 and took off at 12:31 local time (10:31 UTC). It was due to arrive at Kuala Lumpur International Airport at 06:10 MYT, Friday, 18 July (22:10 UTC, 17 July).[62]

According to the original flight plan, MH17 was to fly over Ukraine at flight level 330 (33,000 feet or 10,060 metres) and then change to FL 350 around the Ukrainian city of Dnipropetrovsk. When it reached the area as planned, at 15:53 local time(12:53 UTC), Dnipropetrovsk Air Control (Dnipro Control) asked MH17 if they could climb to FL 350 as planned, and also to avoid a potential separation conflict with another flight, Singapore Airlines Flight 351 (SQ351), also at FL 330. The crew asked to remain at FL 330 and the air traffic controller approved this request, moving the other flight to FL 350. At 16:00 local time (13:00 UTC), the crew asked for a deviation of 20 nautical miles (37 km) to the left (north) off course, on airwayL980, due to weather conditions. This request was also approved by Dnipro Control ATC. The crew then asked if they could climb to FL 340, which was rejected as this flight level was not available, so MH17 remained at FL 330. At 16:19 local time (13:19 UTC), Dnipro Control noticed that the flight was 3.6 nautical miles (6.7 km) north of the centreline of approved airway and instructed MH17 to return to the track. At 16:19 local time (13:19 UTC), Dnipro Control contacted Russian ATC in Rostov-on-Don (RND Control) by telephone and requested clearance to transfer the flight to Russian airspace. After obtaining the permission, Dnipro Control attempted to contact MH17 for handing them off to RND Control at 16:20 local time (13:20 UTC), but the aircraft did not respond. When MH17 did not respond to several calls, Dnipro Control contacted RND Control again to check if they could see the aircraft on their radar. RND Control confirmed that the airplane had disappeared.[3]

The Dutch Safety Board reported a last flight data recording at 16:20 local time (13:20 UTC), located west of the urban-type settlement Rozsypne (Розсипне), near Hrabove heading east-southeast (ESE, 115°) at 494 knots (915 km/h; 568 mph).[3]

At exactly 16:20:03 local time (13:20:03 UTC) a Buk ground-to-air missile, which had been launched from an area east from the aircraft, detonated outside the aircraft just above the cockpit to the left. An explosive decompression occurred, resulting in both the cockpit and tail sections tearing away from the middle portion of the fuselage. All three sections disintegrated as they fell rapidly towards the ground.

The majority of debris landed near Hrabove, a village located north of Torez in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk Oblast. The debris spread over a 50 square kilometres (19 sq mi) area to the southwest of Hrabove.[7]:53 The fireball on impact is believed to have been captured on video.[63]Photographs from the site of the crash show scattered pieces of broken fuselage and engineparts, bodies, and passports.[64] Some of the wreckage fell close to houses.[65] Dozens of bodies fell into crop fields, and some fell into houses.[66]

Three other commercial aircraft were in the same area when the Malaysian airplane crashed: Air India Flight 113 (AI113), a Boeing 787 en route from Delhi to Birmingham, EVA Air Flight 88 (BR88), a Boeing 777 en route from Paris to Taipei, and the closest aircraft Singapore AirlinesFlight 351 (SQ351) was 33 kilometres (21 mi) away, a Boeing 777 en route from Copenhagen to Singapore.[7]:41
Recovery of bodiesEdit

First arrival of bodies at Eindhoven Airport

A Ukraine Foreign Ministry representative said that the bodies found at the crash site would be taken to Kharkiv for identification, 270 kilometres (170 mi) to the north. By the day after the crash, 181 of the 298 bodies had been found.[67]Some were observed being placed in body bags and loaded onto trucks.[68][69][70]

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte complained about the lack of respect shown to the personal belongings of the dead which were reportedly being looted. He initially announced his disgust about the handling of the bodies that were reportedly being "dragged around" and "thrown", but later stated they had been handled with more care than originally thought.[71][72] On 20 July, Ukrainian emergency workers, observed by armed separatists, began loading the remains of the passengers of MH17 into refrigerated railway wagons for transport and identification.[73]

On 21 July, pro-Russian rebels allowed Dutch investigators to examine the bodies. By this time, 272 bodies had been recovered, according to Ukrainian officials.[74] Remains left Torez on a train on the evening of 21 July, en route to Kharkiv to be flown to the Netherlands for identification.[75]On the same day, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak announced that the Malaysian government had reached a tentative agreement to retrieve the remains of the Malaysians who died in the crash, following any necessary forensic work.[76]

Convoy of 40 hearses heading to Hilversum, while other traffic stopped

It was reported on 21 July that with 282 bodies and 87 body fragments found, there were still 16 bodies missing.[77] An agreement had been reached that the Netherlands would co-ordinate the identification effort. A train carrying the bodies arrived at the Malyshev Factory, Kharkiv on 22 July.[78] Dutch authorities stated that they found 200 bodies on the train when it arrived at Kharkhiv, leaving almost 100 unaccounted for.[79]In late July, the UK Metropolitan Police sent specialist officers to Ukraine to assist with the recovery, identification and repatriation of bodies.[80]

The first remains were flown to Eindhoven in the Netherlands on 23 July,[81] moved there with Dutch air force C-130 and Australian C-17 transport aircraft,[82][83] which landed at Eindhoven Airport just before 16:00 local time.[84] The day after, another 74 bodies arrived.[85] The examination and identification of the bodies was conducted at the Netherlands Army medical regiment training facility in Hilversum and was coordinated by a Dutch forensic team.[86]

On 1 August it was announced that a search and recovery mission, including about 80 forensic police specialists from the Netherlands, Malaysia and Australia, and led by Colonel Cornelis Kuijs of the Royal Marechaussee, would use drones, sniffer dogs, divers and satellite mapping to search for missing body parts at the crash site.[87][88] Australian officials had believed that as many as 80 bodies were still at the site,[89] but after some days of searching the international team had "found remains of only a few victims" and concluded that "the recovery effort undertaken by local authorities immediately after the crash was more thorough than initially thought."[90]

On 6 August the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte announced that the recovery operation would be temporarily halted due to an upsurge in fighting around the crash site threatening the safety of crash investigators and recovery specialists, and that all international investigators and humanitarian forces conducting searches would leave the country leaving behind a small communications and liaison team.[91]

On 22 August the bodies of 20 Malaysians (of 43 killed in the incident) arrived in Malaysia.[92]The government announced a National Mourning Day, with a ceremony broadcast live on radio and television.[93]

On 9 October a spokesman for the Dutch national prosecutor's office stated that one victim had been found with an oxygen mask around his neck; a forensic investigation of the mask for fingerprints, saliva and DNA did not produce any results and it is therefore not known how or when that mask got around the neck of the victim.[7]:99

By 5 December 2014, the Dutch-led forensic team had identified the bodies of 292 out of 298 victims of the crash.[94] In February and April 2015 new remains were found on the site,[95][96]after which only 2 victims, both Dutch citizens, had not been identified.[96]
Reporting in the mass mediaEdit

De Telegraaf, a large-circulation Dutch tabloid, published on 19 July a front-page photo-collage of pro-Russian rebel leaders, including Igor Girkin, under the one-word headline "Murderers" ("Moordenaars").[97]

It was suggested on other media that credit and debit cards may have been looted from the bodies of the victims, and the Dutch Banking Association said it would take "preventative measures" against any possible fraud.[98] There were also accusations that other possessions had been removed and that evidence at the crash site had been destroyed.[99][100] Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte acknowledged on 6 August that early reports of chaos and criminality around the site may have been exaggerated.[90] One eyewitness observed that valuable items like shoes and bottles of alcohol were untouched in the wreckage.[101]

On 3 July 1988, the guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes accidentally shot down Iran Air Flight 655, killing 290 passengers.[102] In July 2014, when Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down in Ukraine, some commentators noted the discrepancy of U.S. official position and media coverage of the two similar incidents.[103][104][105][106]
AftermathEdit

About 90 minutes after the incident, Ukraine closed all routes in Eastern Ukrainian airspace, at all altitudes.[7]:101 The incident dramatically heightened fears about airliner shootdowns,[107] leading to some airlines announcing they would avoid overflying conflict zones.

Shortly after the crash, it was announced that Malaysia Airlines would retire flight number MH17 and change the Amsterdam–Kuala Lumpur route to flight number MH19 beginning on 25 July 2014, with the outbound flight unchanged.[108][109] In association with the retirement of the Boeing 777 aircraft type from Malaysia Airlines' fleet, Malaysia Airlines terminated service to Amsterdam, opting to codeshare with KLM on the KUL-AMS route for service beyond 25 January 2016.[110] On 18 July 2014, shares in Malaysia Airlines dropped by nearly 16%.[111]

On 23 July 2014, two Ukrainian military jets were hit by missiles at the altitude of 17,000 feet (5,200 m) close to the area of the MH17 crash. According to the Ukrainian Security Council, preliminary information indicated that the missiles came from Russia.[112]

In July 2015, Malaysia proposed that the United Nations Security Council set up an international tribunal to prosecute those deemed responsible for the downing of the airplane. The Malaysian resolution gained a majority on the Security Council, but was vetoed by Russia.[113] Russia had proposed its own rival draft resolution, which pushed for a greater U.N. role in an investigation into what caused the downing of the aircraft and demanded justice, but their proposal would not have set up a tribunal.[114]

On 9 June 2016, a Russian businessman claimed that the shooting down of the airplane put an end to hopes of a Russian nation in Ukraine and prolonged the War in Donbass.[115]
InvestigationEdit

Two parallel investigations were led by the Dutch, one into the technical cause of the crash, and a separate criminal inquiry.[116] The technical report was released on 13 October 2015,[117] while the criminal investigation reported some of their findings in September 2016.[2][118] According to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the country in which an aviation incident occurs is responsible for the investigation, but that country may delegate the investigation to another state; Ukraine has delegated the leadership of both investigations to the Netherlands.[119][120][121][122]
On-site investigationEdit

In the hours following the crash, a meeting was convened of the Trilateral Contact Group. After they had held a video conference with representatives of insurgents affiliated with the Donetsk People's Republic (who controlled the area where the aircraft crashed), the rebels promised to "provide safe access and security guarantees" to "the national investigation commission" by co-operating with Ukrainian authorities and OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) monitors.[123] During the first two days of investigation, the militants prevented the OSCE and the workers of Ukrainian Emergencies Ministry from freely working at the crash site. Andrei Purgin, a leader of the Donetsk People's Republic, declared later that "we will guarantee the safety of international experts on the scene as soon as Kiev concludes a ceasefire agreement".[124]

Dutch and Australian police at the crash site on 3 August 2014

By 18 July 2014, the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder had been recovered by separatists,[125] and three days later were handed over to Malaysian officials in Donetsk.[7]:44[126] The voice recorder was damaged but there was no evidence that data had been tampered with.[7]:45

The National Bureau of Air Accidents Investigation of Ukraine, which led investigations, both off-site and on-site, during the first days after the crash,[127] had by August 2014 delegated the investigation to the DSB because of the large number of Dutch passengers and the flight having originated in Amsterdam.[7]:14[128][129]

On 22 July 2014, a Malaysian team of 133 officials, search and recovery personnel, and forensics, technical and medical experts arrived in Ukraine.[130] Also Australia sent a 45-member panel headed by former Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, who had earlier supervised the MH 370 probe.[131] Approximately 200 special forces soldiers from Australia were also deployed to provide support for the JIT investigators.[132] The United Kingdom sent six investigators from the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) and the UK Foreign Office sent extra consular staff to Ukraine.[80] It took until late July before the full international team could start working at the crash site,[133] under the leadership of the Dutch Ministry of Defence.[134]

On 30 July 2014, a Ukrainian representative said that pro-Russian rebels had mined approaches to the crash site and moved heavy artillery.[135]

On 6 August 2014, the experts left the crash site due to concerns about their safety.[136] In mid-September they unsuccessfully attempted to regain access to the site.[137][138] On 13 October 2014, a Dutch-Ukrainian team resumed recovery of victims' personal belongings.[139] In mid-November 2014, work was undertaken to remove part of the wreckage from the crash site. Earlier efforts by the recovery team to salvage the MH17 wreckage had been frustrated by disagreements with the local rebels.[140][141] The recovery operation took one week to complete. The debris was transported to the Netherlands where investigators reconstructed parts of the airplane.[142]

In August 2015, possible Buk missile launcher parts were found at the crash site by the Dutch led joint investigation team (JIT).[143][144]
Cause of crashEdit

A mobile Buk surface-to-air missile launcher, similar to that concluded to have been used in the incident
External audio

Pro-Russian rebels discuss the shooting down of an aircraft on YouTube Intercepted phone calls, verified with voice recognition by the National Security Agency,[145]between rebels discussing which rebel group shot down the aircraft and initial reports that it was a civilian aircraft. Audio (in Russian) released by Security Service of Ukraine with English subtitles.[146][147]

Soon after the crash both American and Ukrainian officials said that a 9M38 series surface-to-air missile strike was the most likely cause,[148] and if so, then the missile was fired from a mobile Soviet-designed Buk missile system (NATO reporting name: SA-11 "Gadfly") as this was the only surface-to-air missile system in the region capable of reaching the cruising altitude of commercial air traffic.[46][149][150][151][152][153] According to defence analyst Reed Foster (from Jane's Information Group), the contour of the aluminium and the blistering of the paint around many of the holes on the aircraft fragments indicate that small, high-velocity fragments entered the aircraft externally, a damage pattern indicative of an SA-11.[154] Ballistics specialist Stephan Fruhling of the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centreconcurred with this,

concurred with this, explaining that since it struck the cockpit rather than an engine it was probably a radar guided, rather than heat seeking, missile equipped with a proximity fuzed warhead such as an SA-11.[155]

Shortly after the crash, Igor Girkin, leader of the Donbass separatists, was reported to have posted on social media network VKontakte, taking credit for downing a Ukrainian An-26.[156][157][158] This news was repeated by channels in Russia, with LifeNews reporting "a new victory of Donetsk self-defence who shot down yet another Ukrainian airplane".[159] Russian news agency TASS also reported eyewitness accounts claiming that the Donbass militia had just shot down a Ukrainian An-26 military airplane with a missile.[160] The separatists later denied involvement, saying they did not have the equipment or training to hit a target at that altitude.[161][162][163] Russian media also reported that Alexander Borodai called one of the Moscow media managers 40 minutes after the crash, saying that "likely we shot down a civilian airliner".[158]

Witnesses in Torez reported sightings on the day of the incident of what appeared to be a Buk missile launcher,[164] and AP journalists reported sightings of a Buk system in separatist controlled Snizhne.[54] The witness reports backed up photographs and videos which had been posted online, of the Buk launcher in rebel-held territory.[164]

On 19 July 2014, Vitaly Nayda, the chief of the Counter Intelligence Department of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), told a news conference, "We have compelling evidence that this terrorist act was committed with the help of the Russian Federation. We know clearly that the crew of this system were Russian citizens."[165][166][167] He cited what he said were recorded conversations in which separatists expressed satisfaction to Russian intelligence agents that they brought down an aircraft.[168][169] While one of the involved persons acknowledged that these conversations took place, the separatists denied that they were related to the crash of MH17 and blamed the Ukrainian government for shooting it down.[62][170][171][172] According to Nayda, a Buk launcher used in the shootdown was moved back into Russia the night after the attack.[54] The SBU released another recording, which they said was of pro-Russian-separatist leader Igor Bezler being told of an approaching aircraft two minutes before MH17 was shot down. Bezler said the recording was real, but referred to a different incident.[173] The head of the SBU, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, later concluded that rebels intended to shoot down a Russian airliner in a false flag operation to give Russia a pretext to invade Ukraine, but shot down MH17 by mistake.[174][175][176]

Journalists from the Associated Press in Snizhne, Ukraine reported seeing a Buk M-1 enter the town operated by a man "with unfamiliar fatigues and a distinctive Russian accent" escorted by two civilian vehicles, which then moved off in the direction where the shootdown later occurred. According to Ukrainian counterterrorism chief, Vitaly Nayda, after downing the airplane under separatist direction, the launcher's Russian crew quickly moved it back across the border into Russia.[54]

On 22 July 2014, a rebel fighter revealed to an Italian reporter that fellow separatists had told his unit the aircraft had been shot down under the assumption that it was Ukrainian.[177] This information was verified and confirmed on the same day by a German newspaper.[178] Unnamed American intelligence officials stated that sensors that traced the path of the missile, shrapnelpatterns in the wreckage, voice print analysis of separatists' conversations in which they claimed credit for the strike, and photos and other data from social media sites all indicated that Russian-backed separatists had fired the missile.[14]

American officials said that satellite data from infrared sensors detected the explosion of Flight MH17.[179] American intelligence agencies said that analysis of the launch plume and trajectory suggested the missile was fired from an area near Torez and Snizhne.[46][150] The British Daily Telegraph said: "The Telegraph's own inquiries suggest the missile, an SA-11 from a Buk mobile rocket launcher, was possibly fired from a cornfield about 19 kilometres (12 mi) to the south of the epicentre of the crash site."[151] Other sources suggest the missile was launched from the separatist-controlled town of Chernukhino.[180] Several other media outlets including The Guardian, The Washington Post and the Sydney Morning Herald reported that the aeroplane is believed to have been downed by a rebel-fired missile.[89][181][182]

An unnamed American intelligence official stated that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 may have been shot down in error by pro-Russian separatists, citing evidence that separatists launched an SA-11 surface-to-air missile that blew up the Malaysian airliner. They said it was possible the rebel was a former member of the Armed Forces of Ukraine who had defected to the pro-Russian separatists.[13] The official dismissed Russian allegations that MH17 took evasive action and said the claim that the Ukrainian government had shot down MH17 was not realistic, as Kiev had no such missile systems in that area, which was rebel-controlled.[152] American intelligence officials also said that Russia was attempting to disguise the flow of weaponry it was delivering to the rebels by sending older weapons that matched Ukraine's inventory.[14] The British Foreign Office stated that it was "highly likely" that the missile was fired from an area controlled by Russian-backed separatists.[183]

The Russian Ministry of Defence has maintained that American claims of separatist responsibility were "unfounded", and said that the American intelligence agencies have not released any of the data on which they based their conclusions.[184] According to the Russian military, in what the New York Magazine called "Russia's Conspiracy Theory", MH17 was shot down by the Ukrainians, using either a surface-to-air missile or a fighter aircraft.[185][186]

On 21 July 2014, the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD) held a press conference and said that while the Boeing 777 was crashing, a Ukrainian Su-25 ground-attack aircraft approached to within 3 to 5 kilometres (1.9 to 3.1 mi) of the Malaysian airliner. The MoD also claimed that satellite photographs showed that the Ukrainian army moved a Buk SAM battery to the area close to the territory controlled by the rebels on the morning of 17 July, hours before the crash. They said the installation was then moved away again by 18 July.[187] Promoted by Russian media, the idea that a Su-25 could have downed the Boeing 777 with an air-to-air missile was dismissed by chief designer of the Su-25, Vladimir Babak.[188] In 2015 Bellingcat purchased satellite photos from the same area and time as used by the MoD and demonstrated that they had used older photos (May and June 2014) in their presentation that were edited to make a Ukrainian Buk launcher appear as if it was removed after the attack.[189] In the report published by the Dutch Safety Board, an air-to-air missile strike was ruled out.[8]

In an interview with Reuters on 23 July 2014, Alexander Khodakovsky, the commander of the pro-Russian Vostok Battalion, acknowledged that the separatists had an anti-aircraft missile of the type the Americans had said was used to shoot down the aircraft, and said that it could have been sent back to Russia to remove proof of its presence;[190][191][192] he later retracted his comments, saying that he had been misquoted and stating that rebels never had a Buk.[193] In November 2014 he repeated that the separatists had a Buk launcher at the time, but stated that the vehicle, under control of fighters from Luhansk, had still been on its way to Donetsk when MH17 crashed. It was then withdrawn to avoid being blamed.[194]

On 28 July 2014, Ukrainian security official Andriy Lysenko announced, at a press conference, that black box recorder analysis had revealed that the aircraft had been brought down by shrapnel that caused "massive explosive decompression." Dutch officials were reported to be "stunned" by what they saw as a "premature announcement" and said that they had not provided this information.[195]

On 8 September 2014, the BBC released new material by John Sweeney who cited three civilian witnesses from Donbass who saw the Buk launcher in the rebel-controlled territory on the day when MH17 crashed. Two witnesses said the crew of the launcher and a military vehicle escorting it did not have local accents and spoke with Muscovite accents.[196] On the same day Ignat Ostanin, a Russian journalist, published an analysis of photos and films of Buk units moving in Russia and Ukraine in the days before and after the MH17 crash. According to Ostanin, the markings on the specific launcher suspected of being used to shoot MH17, together with the number plates of the large goods vehicle that carried the launcher, suggested that it belonged to the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade of the Air Defence Forces of the Russian Ground Forces.[197][198]

On 8 October 2014 the president of the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) gave a presentation about MH17 to a German parliamentary committee overseeing intelligence activities. According to Der Spiegel, the report contained a detailed analysis which concluded that pro-Russian separatists had used a captured Ukrainian Buk system to shoot down Flight MH17. The report also noted that "Russian claims the missile had been fired by Ukrainian soldiers and that a Ukrainian fighter jet had been flying close to the passenger jet were false".[199][200]The Attorney General of Germany opened an investigation against unknown persons due to a suspected war crime.[201]

Between November 2014 and May 2016, UK-based investigative collective Bellingcat made a series of conclusions, based on their examination of photos in social media and other open-source information. Bellingcat said that the launcher used to shoot down the aircraft was a Buk 332 of the Russian 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade based in Kursk, Russia, which had been transported from Donetsk to Snizhne and was controlled by separatists in Ukraine on the day of the attack.[202][203][204][205][206]

On 22 December 2014 the Dutch news service RTL Nieuws published a statement of an unnamed local resident who witnessed the shooting down of MH17, indicating that the aircraft was shot down by a missile from rebel territory. He took photographs of what appeared to be the vapour trail of a ground-launched missile which he passed to the SBU.[207][208] On 24 December Russia's state-operated domestic news agency RIA Novosti quoted the leader of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, Alexander Zakharchenko, saying he saw MH17 shot out of the sky by two Ukrainian jets.[209][210]

In January 2015 a report produced by the German investigative team CORRECT!V concluded a Buk surface-to-air missile launcher operated by the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade shot down MH17.[211] Large amounts of other circumstantial evidence were presented separately by various parties that supports this version, identifying specific launcher vehicle, operator name, truck transporting it and its alleged route through Russia and Ukraine.[212]

In March 2015 Reuters published statements from named witnesses from Chervonyi Zhovten (Ukrainian: Червоний Жовтень), a village close to Torez and Snizhne, who said they saw the Buk rocket passing over the village when it was fired from a field around 1.5 km away. It also published a statement from a witness who was said to be a separatist fighter (referred to by first name only) who confirmed that the launcher was placed in that area on the day of the Boeing crash to prevent Ukrainian airstrikes.[213]

In July 2015, News Corp Australia published the transcript of a 17-minute video recorded at the scene shortly after the crash. The transcript and published segments of the video indicated that Russian-backed rebels arrived at the crash site in the expectation of finding the wreckage of a military aircraft and of locating crew that had parachuted from the aircraft.[214]

In May 2016, Stratfor released satellite imagery taken 5 hours before the crash which showed a Russian Buk system travelling on a flatbed truck east through the town of Makiivka, 40 km away from Snizhne. Stratfor's concluded that a Buk system had moved from the Russian border toward Donetsk on 15 July 2014, and then moved back to the east on the afternoon of 17 July 2014, hours before Flight MH17 was shot down.[215]
Dutch Safety Board reportsEdit
Preliminary reportEdit

On 9 September 2014, the preliminary report was released by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB).[3][216]:16 This preliminary report concluded that there was no evidence of any technical or operational failure in the aircraft or from the crew prior to the ending of the CVR and FDRrecordings at 13.20:03 hrs (UTC). The report also said that "damage observed on the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft appears to indicate that there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft". According to the investigators, this damage probably led to a loss of structural integrity that caused an in-flight break-up first of the forward parts of the aircraft and then of the remainder with an expansive geographic spread of the aircraft's pieces.

Tjibbe Joustra, Chairman of the Dutch Safety Board, explained that the investigation thus far pointed "towards an external cause of the MH17 crash", but determining the exact cause required further investigation. They also said that they aimed to publish the final report within a year of the crash date.[217]
Final reportEdit

Play media
Narrated reconstruction of the missile impact, produced by the Dutch Safety Board

The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) issued its final report on the crash on 13 October 2015. The report concluded that the crash was caused by a Buk 9M38-series surface-to-air missile with a 9N314M warhead. The warhead detonated outside and above the left-hand side of the cockpit. The impact killed the three people in the cockpit and caused structural damage to the airplane leading to an in-flight break-up resulting in a wreckage area of 50 square kilometres and loss of the lives of all 298 occupants.[7] Based on evidence they were able to exclude meteor strikes, the airplane having technical defects, a bomb, and an air-to-air attack as causes of the crash. The DSB calculated the trajectory of the missile and found it was fired within a 320-square-kilometre (120 sq mi) area southeast of Torez. Narrowing down a specific launch site was outside the DSB's mandate.[7]:147 The findings do not specify who launched the Buk missile but according to Al Jazeera, the area identified by the DSB was controlled by separatists at the time of the downing.[218]

In addition to the technical investigation, the selection of the flight route was also investigated by the DSB.[219] Many airlines had avoided the Eastern Ukrainian airspace for months prior to the MH17 disaster. Many others, including 62 operators from 32 countries, continued to use this route.[7]:224[220] The DSB stated that authorities should have closed the airspace above eastern Ukraine prior to the incident due to the ongoing conflict.[221] It recommended that states involved in armed conflicts should exercise more caution when evaluating their airspace, and operators should more thoroughly assess the risks when selecting routes over conflict areas.[222]
Criminal investigationEdit

The criminal investigation into the downing of MH17 is being led by the Public Prosecution Service of the Dutch Ministry of Justice, and is the largest in Dutch history, involving dozens of prosecutors and 200 investigators.[223] Investigators interviewed witnesses and examined forensic samples, satellite data, intercepted communications, and information on the Web.[224]Participating in the investigation along with the Netherlands, are the four other members of the joint investigation team (JIT),[225] Belgium, Ukraine, Australia, and lastly, Malaysia,[226] which joined in November 2014.[225] Early in the investigation, the JIT eliminated accident, internal terrorist attack or air-to-air attack from another aircraft as the cause of the crash.[1]

In December 2014, in a letter to the Security Council, the Netherlands UN representative wrote that "The Dutch government is deliberately refraining from any speculation or accusations regarding legal responsibility for the downing of MH17."[227] Also in December, the assistant secretary of the United States Department of State's European and Eurasian Affairs said America had given all of its information, including classified information to the Dutch investigators and to the ICAO.[228]

On 30 March 2015, the JIT released a Russian-language video calling for witnesses in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions who might have seen a Buk missile system.[229] The video included some previously undisclosed recordings allegedly of tapped phone conversations between rebel fighters about the Buk. In one recording, of a conversation a few hours after the shoot down, a fighter says that a member of the Buk's accompanying crew had been left behind at a checkpoint. In another recording, dated the day after the shootdown, a rebel allegedly says the Buk system and its crew had been brought from Russia by "the Librarian." The video presents a "scenario" whereby a Buk missile was transported on a Volvo low loader truck from Sievernyi (Сєверний), a town located within a kilometre of the Russian border (near Krasnodon), to Donetsk during the night of 16/17 July.[230] In the week following the public appeal, the JIT received more than 300 responses resulting in dozens of "serious witnesses".[231][232] In 2016 the presence of the transloader of matching color with a Buk missile was confirmed on a satellite photo of the area taken just a few hours before the downing of the airplane, which was described as "correlating with other evidence" by Stratfor who found the photo in DigitalGlobearchive.[233][234]

On 9 April 2015 Dutch authorities made available 569 documents concerning the shoot-down. Personal information and official interviews had been redacted. A further 147 documents were not made public.[235]
Findings of the joint investigation team (JIT)Edit

On 28 September 2016, the JIT gave a press conference in which it concluded that the aircraft was shot down with a 9M38 Buk missile fired from a rebel-controlled field near Pervomaisky (Первомайський), a town 6 km (3.7 mi) south of Snizhne.[118] It also found the Buk missile system used had been transported from Russia into Ukraine on the day of the crash, and then back into Russia after the crash, with one missile less than it arrived with.[1][2] The JIT said they had identified 100 people, witnesses as well as suspects, who were involved in the movement of the Buk launcher, though they had not yet identified a clear chain of command to assess culpability, which was a matter for ongoing investigation. The Dutch chief prosecutor said "the evidence must stand before a court" which would render final judgement.[1] During the investigation, the JIT recorded and assessed five billion internet pages, interviewed 200 witnesses, collected half a million photos and videos, and analysed 150,000 intercepted phone calls.[118][236] According to JIT head prosecutor Fred Westerbeke the criminal investigation is based on "immense body of evidence," including testimonies of live witnesses who saw the "Buk" launcher, primary radar data, original photos and videos.[237]

A Buk SAM of the type used by the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade

On 24 May 2018, after extensive comparative research, the JIT concluded that the Buk that shot down the flight came from the Russian 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade in Kursk.[238]The head of the National Investigation Service of the Dutch police asked the eyewitnesses and insiders to share information about the identities of the Buk crew members, the instruction the crew members followed and persons responsible for the operational deployment of the involved Buk on 17 July 2014.[238] According to Dutch Public Prosecution Service, by 24 May 2018 "the authorities of the Russian Federation have ... not reported to the JIT that a Buk of the 53rd Brigade was deployed in Eastern Ukraine and that this Buk downed flight MH17."[238] In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia will analyze the JIT conclusion, but will acknowledge it only if it becomes a party in the investigation.[239] The Russian Ministry of Defence in turn stated that no Russian Buk crossed the border with Ukraine.[239]

On 25 May 2018 the governments of the Netherlands and Australia issued a joint statement in which they laid responsibility on Russia "for its part" in the crash.[11] The Netherlands and Australian foreign ministers stated that they would hold Russia legally responsible for shooting the airliner down. Netherlands Foreign Minister Stef Blok stated that "the government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable," and, "The Netherlands and Australia today asked Russia to enter into talks aimed at finding a solution that would do justice to the tremendous suffering and damage caused by the downing of MH17. A possible next step is to present the case to an international court or organization for their judgment."[240]

Several other countries and international organisations expressed their support for the JIT's conclusions and the joint statement by the Netherlands and Australia.[241] UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said the United Kingdom "fully supports Australia and the Netherlands," calling on Russia to cooperate.[242] High Representative Federica Mogherini of the EU stated that the European Union "calls on the Russian Federation to accept its responsibility" and to cooperate as well.[243] The German government called on Russia to "fully explain the tragedy."[244] The US Department of State issued a statement saying that the United States "strongly support the decisions by the Netherlands and Australia," requesting Russia to acknowledge its involvement and to "cease its callous disinformation campaign."[245] NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg called on Russia to "accept responsibility and fully cooperate ... in line with United Nations Security Council Resolution 2166."[246]

In response to the JIT's conclusions, Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated that the Russians are "not involved in it."[247] Following release of the JIT report, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir said the JIT was making Russia a "scapegoat" and that he did not believe the Russians whom the JIT had charged were involved. Conversely the Malaysian prosecutor supported the investigation by saying the findings "are based on extensive investigations and also legal research".[248]
Proposed international tribunalEdit

In June 2015, the Netherlands, supported by the other JIT members, sought to create an international tribunal to prosecute those suspected of downing the Malaysian airliner, which would take up the case after the closing of the criminal investigation. The Dutch hoped that an international tribunal would induce Russian cooperation, which was considered critical.[249] In late June 2015, the Russian government rejected a request by the five countries on the investigative committee to form a UN tribunal which would try those responsible for the shooting down of the aircraft, calling it "not timely and counterproductive."[250] On 8 July 2015, Malaysia, a member of the UN Security Council, distributed a draft resolution to establish such a tribunal. This resolution was jointly proposed by the five JIT member countries. Russian UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin responded, "I don't see any future for this resolution. Unfortunately, it seems that this is an attempt to organize a grandiose, political show, which only damages efforts to find the guilty parties."[113] Russia later circulated a rival resolution which criticised the international investigation's lack of "due transparency" and demanded those responsible be brought to justice, but which did not call for a tribunal.[251] In a vote, Malaysia's resolution gained majority support of the UNSC, but was vetoed by Russia.[114]
Criminal prosecutionEdit

In a statement made on 5 July 2017 by the Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Bert Koenders, it was announced that the JIT countries would prosecute any suspects identified in the downing of flight MH17 in the Netherlands and under Dutch law.[252] A treaty between the Netherlands and Ukraine made it possible for the Netherlands to prosecute in the cases of all 298 victims, regardless of their nationality. This treaty was signed on 7 July 2017,[253] and went into force on 28 August 2018.[254] On 21 March 2018, the Dutch government sent legislation to the parliament, allowing the suspects involved to be prosecuted in the Netherlands under Dutch law.[255][256]

A joint investigation between Bellingcat, The Insider and McClatchy DC Bureau identified another person of interest to the investigation. The person known as 'Andrey Ivanovich', or by the call sign 'Orion', according to Bellingcat, is a Russian GRU officer named Oleg Vladimirovich Ivannikov.[257]Ivannikov has a distinct, high-pitched voice. The Kremlin denied this allegation.[258]

On 19 June 2019, the Dutch Public Prosecution Service charged four people with murder in connection with the shooting down of the aircraft: three Russians, Igor Girkin, Sergey Dubinsky, and Igor Pulatov, and one Ukrainian, Leonid Kharchenko. International arrest warrants were issued in respect of each of the accused.[259] Their trial in absentia is scheduled to be held on 9 March 2020 in the District Court of The Hague.[260]

In July 2019 SBU arrested Vladimir Tsemakh, head of air-defence in DPR-controlled Snizhne during the attack on MH17. Bellingcat described him as an important eye-witness to the events surrounding the downing of flight MH17. Bellingcat analysed his possible role and said that a video showed Tsemakh making "what appears to be a damning admission to his personal involvement in hiding the Buk missile launcher in the aftermath of its use on 17 July 2014".[261] In August 2019 Russia reportedly added Tsemakh to its list in a previously agreed exchange of prisoners of war with Ukraine. In an article, The Insider website commented on Russia's motives in requesting the exchange of a Ukrainian citizen.[262] On 4 September 2019, an appeals court in Kiev ruled to release Tsemakh.[263] On 7 September 2019, Volodymyr Tsemakh was released during a Ukraine-Russia prisoner exchange.[264] According to the Dutch Foreign Minister Stef Blok, the exchange had been delayed for a week so that Vladimir Tsemakh could be questioned by the Dutch Public Prosecution Service as a witness about the events surrounding the downing of flight MH17.[264] The Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the Minister of Justice and Security Ferd Grapperhaus, the JIT, and Blok added that the Netherlands regretted Tsemakh, who is a 'person of interest', being included in the exchange due to pressure on Ukraine from Russia.[263][264][265][266][267] Others including Chairman Piet Ploeg of Stichting Vliegramp MH17 which is the organization of the victims' relatives called the release of Tsemach "unacceptable".[266] The Dutch Public Prosecution Service (OM) requested that Tsemach, who is not a Russian citizen, be extradited from Russia to the Netherlands.[266] On 14 November 2019 the JIT published a new witnesses appeal and simultaneously released a number of recorded conversations of rebel leaders. JIT was particularly interested in "the command structure and the role that Russian government officials may have played."[268][269]
British ISC reportEdit

On 20 December 2017, the Intelligence and Security Committee of the UK Parliament published its annual report. It contains a short section entitled "Russian objectives and activity against UK and allied interests" which quotes MI6 as stating: "Russia conducts information warfare on a massive scale... An early example of this was a hugely intensive, multichannel propaganda effort to persuade the world that Russia bore no responsibility for the shooting down of [Malaysian Airlines flight] MH-17 (an outright falsehood: we know beyond any reasonable doubt that the Russian military supplied and subsequently recovered the missile launcher)".[270][271]
Civil casesEdit

In July 2015 a writ was filed in an American court by families of 18 victims accusing the separatist leader Igor Girkin of "orchestrating the shootdown" and the Russian government of being complicit in the act. The writ was brought under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991.[272] In May 2016 families of 33 victims of the crash filed a claim against Russia and president Vladimir Putin in the European Court of Human Rights, arguing Russian actions violated the passengers' right to life.[273][274] A group of 270 relatives of Dutch victims joined the claim in May 2018 after the JIT concluded that Russia was involved.[275] In July 2016, Malaysia Airlines was sued in Malaysia by 15 passengers' families in two separate writs, each brought under the Montreal Convention, arguing that the airline should not have chosen that route.[276] A month earlier, a separate lawsuit was brought by the families of 6 crew members who alleged negligence and breach of contract by the airline.[277]
ReactionsEdit
Main article: International reactions to the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shootdown
CountriesEdit

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called the crash the result of an act of terrorism, and also called for an international investigation into the crash.[278]

Malaysian Deputy Foreign Minister Hamzah Zainuddin said that the foreign ministry would be working with the Russian and Ukrainian governments with regard to the incident.[279] Prime Minister Najib Razak said that Malaysia was unable yet to verify the cause of the crash but that, if the airplane was shot down, the perpetrators should be swiftly punished.[280] The Malaysian government flew the national flag at half-mast from 18 July until 21 July.[281]

Flag at half mast in front of Hoorn city hall during the national day of mourning on 23 July

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and King Willem-Alexander voiced their shock at the crash,[282][283] and Minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans joined the Dutch investigation team sent to Ukraine.[284]Dutch government buildings flew the flag at half-mast on 18 July.[285]Music was cancelled and festivities were toned down on the last day of the Nijmegen Marches.[286] On 21 July the Netherlands opened a war crimes investigation on the downing of the aircraft and a Netherlands public prosecutor went to Ukraine as part of this investigation. Rutte threatened tough action against Russia if it did not help in the investigation.[287] On the same day, Timmermans spoke at the UN Security Council Meeting, after the Council had unanimously condemned the shooting down of MH17.[288] An increase in negative emotions and somatic complaints was observed in the Dutch population during the first four days after the MH17 crash.[289]

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said in an address to parliament that the aircraft was downed by a missile which seemed to have been launched by Russian-backed rebels.[290] Julie Bishop, the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, said in an interview on an Australian television programme that it was "extraordinary" that her Russian counterparts had refused to speak to her over the shootdown after the Russian ambassador was summoned to meet her.[290] The Russian government was critical of Abbott's response; Abbott was one of the first world leaders to publicly connect the shootdown to Russia.[291] Abbott later criticised the recovery efforts as "shambolic", and "more like a garden clean-up than a forensic investigation"; Bishop publicly warned separatist forces against treating the victims' bodies as hostages.[292] Abbott also said in an interview on 13 October 2014, in anticipation of Russia's President Vladimir Putin's attendance at the 2014 G20 summit, scheduled for mid-November 2014 in Brisbane, Australia: "Australians were murdered. They were murdered by Russian-backed rebels using Russian-supplied equipment. We are very unhappy about this."[293]

Russian President Putin said that Ukraine bore responsibility for the incident which happened in its territory, which he said would not have happened if hostilities had not resumed in the south-east of Ukraine.[4][294][295] He also said that it was important to refrain from reaching hasty conclusions and politicised statements before the end of the investigation. He said that Russia would help an international inquiry led by the ICAO.[296] At the end of July a Duma deputy Ilya Ponomarev said in an interview for Die Welt that the separatists had shot down the airplane by mistake and that Putin now realised he had supplied the weapon to the "wrong people".[297] The Danish Institute for International Studies has pointed out to the similarities of Russian reaction to the downing of Korean Airlines flight KAL-007 in 1983 where the USSR initially denied any involvement.[298]

United States President Barack Obama said the United States would help determine the cause.[4]In a press statement, White House spokesman Josh Earnest called for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine to allow for a full investigation.[299] Vice-President Joe Biden said the airplane appeared to have been deliberately shot down, and offered American assistance for the investigation into the crash.[295] American Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power called on Russia to end the war.[300] The British government requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council and called an emergency Cobra meeting after the incident.[301][302] Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin E. Dempsey said that instead of backing away from supporting the rebels in the wake of the airliner shootdown, Putin had "taken a decision to escalate."[303]

Memorial for the victims of Flight MH17 located in Vijfhuizen, the Netherlands

On 17 July 2017, exactly three years after the crash, a memorialin memory of the victims was unveiled in Vijfhuizen, the Netherlands. The opening of the memorial, which is located just outside Schiphol Airport, was attended by more than 2000 relatives of victims, King Willem-Alexander and his wife Queen Máxima, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Minister of Security and Justice Stef Blok and the speakers of the Dutch Senate and House of Representatives. The memorial includes 298 trees, one tree for each victim.[304]
OrganisationsEdit

On 17 July the European Union's representatives José Manuel Barroso and Herman Van Rompuyreleased a joint statement calling for an immediate and thorough investigation.[305] The EU officials also said that Ukraine has first claim on the aircraft's black boxes.[306]

The International Civil Aviation Organization announced, on 18 July, that it was sending its team of experts to assist the National Bureau of Air Accidents Investigation of Ukraine (NBAAI), under Article 26 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.[307] The United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2166 on 21 July, regarding an official crime investigation into the incident. On 24 July 2014 the ICAO issued a State Letter reminding signatory states of their responsibilities with respect to the safety and security of civil aircraft operating in airspace affected by conflict.[308]

A makeshift memorial at Schiphol Airport for the victims of Flight MH17

After the crash, memorial services were held in Australia[309]and in the Netherlands, which declared 23 July, the day when the first victims arrived in the country, a national day of mourning, the first since 1962.[310][311] The opening ceremony of the AIDS 2014 conference, on 20 July, of which several delegates had been on board Flight MH17, began with a tribute to the victims of the crash.[312] In Malaysia, makeshift memorials were created in the capital city of Kuala Lumpur.[313]
Russian media coverageEdit
See also: Media portrayal of the Ukrainian crisis

In July 2014, shortly after the crash, the liberal Russian opposition newspaper Novaya Gazetapublished a headline in Dutch that read "Vergeef ons, Nederland" ("Forgive Us, Netherlands").[314][315]

Coverage by official media and bodies has however differed from coverage in most other countries and significantly changed over time[316][317] usually in response to new evidence published by DSB and the investigation team.[318]

According to the poll conducted by the Levada Center between 18 and 24 July in 2014, 80% of Russians surveyed believed that the crash of MH17 was caused by the Ukrainian military. Only 3% of respondents to the poll blamed the disaster on pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.[319][320][321]

In December 2017 the Russian portal The Insider, the news agency McClatchyDC, and Bellingcat performed a joint investigation that confirmed the identity of a high-rank military officer using a call-sign "Dolphin" to be colonel general Nikolai Fedorovich Tkachev. Tkachev is frequently heard in the wiretaps acquired by JIT supervising the operation of "Buk" delivery and set-up.[322][323]
Initial reactions and "An-26 downing" versionEdit

On the evening of the crash, the LifeNews portal released a statement from the separatists saying that a "Ukrainian Air Force An-26 transport plane" had been shot down by a missile and crashed.[324] ITAR-TASS and RIA Novosti also reported that an An-26 had been shot down by the separatist militia near Torez at around 16:00 local time in what it described as "yet another victory of DPR self-defence".[160][325] There was no evidence about altitude and weapons used.

Shortly after it became evident that the aircraft was a civilian one, the separatist media denied any involvement in the crash and possession of anti-aircraft missiles capable of reaching this altitude.[326][327][328]
Conspiracy theoriesEdit

On 18 July Commander of the Donbass People's Militia Igor Girkin was quoted as stating that "a significant number of the bodies weren't fresh". He followed up by saying "Ukrainian authorities are capable of any baseness"; and also claimed that blood serum and medications were found in the airplane's wreckage in large quantities.[329] Girkin also claimed that some of the passengers had died a few days before the crash.[330]

The Russian government-funded[331] outlet RT initially said that the airplane may have been shot down by Ukraine in a failed attempt to assassinate Vladimir Putin, in a plot which was organised by Ukraine's "Western backers". This was quickly dismissed as Putin's flight route was going hundreds of kilometres north of Ukraine.[332][333]

Other conspiracy theories propagated by Russian media included that the Ukrainians shot down the airplane by mistake, drawing parallels to downing Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 in 2001 (reported in July[citation needed] and in December 2014[334]); that Ukrainian air traffic controllers purposefully redirected the flight to fly over the war zone (proven false by the DSB investigation); and that the Ukrainian government organised the attack on the airplane to bring infamy upon the pro-Russian rebels.[335]

The number of alternative theories disseminated in Russian mass media started growing as the DSB and JIT investigations increasingly pointed towards the separatists.[336] On 15 November 2014, Russia's Channel One reported on a supposedly leaked spy satellite photo which showed the airplane being shot from behind by a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet.[337][338] Many other Russian media reprinted the photo but its authenticity was immediately dismissed as the airplanes were out of scale which indicated poor copy-and-paste.[339] Later it was disclosed, that the photo had been initially emailed to the Vice-President of the Russian Union of Engineers by a self-described aviation expert who had found it on a Russian online forum.[340] The aviation expert later apologised, saying that he was unhappy with how the information had been used.[340] In a later interview by magazine The New Yorker, Channel One CEO Konstantin Ernst admitted that reporting on the satellite photo was a "simple error", saying that it was a human mistake not made on purpose.[341]

In July 2014, Sara Firth, who had worked as a correspondent with RT for the previous five years, resigned in protest at the channel's coverage of the crash, which she described as "lies".[342] RT said Firth had left to take another job.[343]

In 2017 Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad described how false stories about the MH17 crash had been propagated with the support of Christian Democratic Appeal politician Pieter Omtzigt, who introduced a Russian-speaking Ukrainian man as an "eyewitness" to the crash on a public expert debate in May 2017. The man, who was an asylum-seeker from Ukraine, did not witness the crash and his speech, texted to him by Omtzigt prior to the interview, repeated the Russian-promoted version that Ukrainian jets downed the Boeing.[344]
The "Ukrainian Buk" versionEdit

In May 2015 Novaya Gazeta published a report by "a group of Russian military engineers" that came to the conclusion that the airplane was shot down by a Buk-M1 launcher with 9M38M1 missile. The authors also analysed the visible impact traces on the surface of the airplane and suggested that the missile couldn't have been fired from Snizhne, but was instead fired from Zaroshchenske and claimed that a Ukrainian anti-air unit was located there at that time.[345] In June 2015 the report was the subject of a press conference and was attributed to Mikhail Malisevskiy, chief engineer at Moscow-headquartered Almaz-Antey, the Buk missile manufacturer.[346] The Security Service of Ukraine said that there were inaccuracies in this version, and called part of the report a fake.[347] Russian military expert Vadim Lukashevich argued on TV Rain that the spatial orientation of the rocket at the moment of explosion did not exclude the possibility that it was launched from Snizhne, as the report claimed. Lukashevich also noted that the report admitted a Buk missile as the cause of the crash, discrediting the previous theories about the crash (Su-25 etc.) circulated in Russian media.[348] Ukrainska Pravdaquestioned claims about the Ukrainian anti-aircraft unit and stated that Zaroshchenske was under control of pro-Russian forces on the day of shootdown.[349] Novaya Gazeta published a long analysis by Mark Solonin, also denying the Almaz-Antey version,[350] interviewed inhabitants of Zaroshchenske who denied claims that Ukrainian forces and Buk launchers were present in the village at that time.[351][352] According to Bellingcat, Russia's satellite images were from June and showed signs of editing.[353][354] Bild described the Russian satellite image as "fake".[355]

On 17 September 2018, Russia's Ministry of Defense held a press conference that aimed to cast doubt on Moscow's culpability for the tragedy. Lt. Gen. Nikolai Parshin, chief of the Missile and Artillery Directorate, told that after Dutch investigators displayed parts of the missile and their serial numbers, they studied and declassified archives at the research center that produced the Buk missiles. Parshin said the Russian archives show that the missile that was made of these parts was transported to a military unit in western Ukraine in 1986, and to Russia's knowledge never left Ukraine. Officials also claim that video evidence presented by Joint Investigation Team (JIT), in which the missile that allegedly shot down the airplane being moved from Russia into Ukraine, were fabricated.[356]

JIT responded that it had requested Russia in May 2018 on the issue of details about recovered missile parts, but had received no answer. Information from the Russian Ministry of Defense will be carefully studied as soon as the documents were made available, as requested in May 2018 and required by UNSC in 2016. JIT stated it had always carefully analysed information provided by Russia, but information presented to the public was inaccurate on several points. Russia has given differing accounts over time of how MH17 was shot down; for example they also claimed to have evidence (radar image) of Ukrainian fighter fired an air-to-air missile to MH17.[357][358]

Oleksandr Turchynov, secretary of National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, said in September 2018 that Russia's claim is "yet another failed fake report that the Kremlin made up in order to cover up their crime that has been proven by the official investigation as well as independent experts."[359]
MapsEdit

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol

Crash site

Kuala LumpurInternational Airport
Location of departure, crash site and destination

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol

Crash site
Location of departure and crash site

Presumed route ending in an area controlled by pro-Russian rebels according to The New York Times[58][i]

See alsoEdit
List of airliner shootdown incidents
List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities

NotesEdit

^ MH is the IATA designator. The flight was also marketed as KLM Flight 4103 (KLM4103) through a codeshare, and has been commonly referred to as "MH17", "Flight 17" or "Flight MH17".
^ The aircraft is a Boeing 777-200ER (for Extended Range) model; Boeing assigns a unique customer code for each company that buys one of its aircraft, which is applied as an infix in the model number at the time the aircraft is built. The code for Malaysia Airlines is "H6", hence "777-2H6ER".
^ Including:
1 dual Canadian-Romanian citizen
^ Including:
1 dual German-Dutch citizen
^ 28 passengers and 15 crew
^ Including:
1 dual Dutch-Belgian citizen
1 dual Dutch-Israeli citizen
1 dual Dutch-Italian citizen
1 dual Dutch-American citizen
1 dual Dutch-Malaysian citizen[24]
^ Including:
1 dual British-South African citizen
1 dual British-New Zealand citizen
^ The family name is Choo, as the Chinese name is Choo Jin Leong (Chinese: 朱仁隆; pinyin: Zhū Rénlóng[34] and Muhd Firdaus note that Ethnic Malays do not have family names.[7][35]
^ "A United States official said the missile that shot down the plane was launched from a region near the towns of Torez and Snizhne"[300] See also several mentions of one or both of these towns in the Cause of crash section and elsewhere in this article
ReferencesEdit

^ a b c d e Miller, Nick (29 September 2016). "Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down from pro-Russian rebel controlled territory, investigation finds". Sydney Morning Herald.
^ a b c d "MH17 missile 'came from Russia', Dutch-led investigators say". BBC News Online. BBC. 28 September 2016. Retrieved 2 October 2016.
^ a b c d "Report: MH17 hit by burst of 'high-energy objects' from outside". CNN. 9 September 2014. Retrieved 25 September 2014.
^ a b c Alexander, Harriet (17 July 2014). "Malaysia Airlines plane crashes on Ukraine-Russia border – live". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 18 July 2014. Retrieved 17 July 2014.
^ Higgins, Andrew; Clark, Nicola (9 September 2014). "Malaysian Jet Over Ukraine Was Downed by 'High-Energy Objects,' Dutch Investigators Say". The New York Times.
^ a b "Saturday, July 19, 07:30 pm GMT +0800 Media Statement 7 : MH17 Incident". Malaysia Airlines. 19 July 2014. Archived from the original on 17 July 2014. Retrieved 19 July 2014.
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w Crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 (PDF)(Report). Dutch Safety Board. 13 October 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 October 2015.
^ a b Weaver, Matthew (13 October 2015). "MH17 crash report: Dutch investigators confirm Buk missile hit plane – live updates". the Guardian. Retrieved 13 October 2015.
^ a b "MH17 missile owned by Russian brigade, investigators say". BBC News. 24 May 2018.
^ a b Smith-Spark, Laura; Masters, James (24 May 2018). "Missile that downed MH17 'owned by Russian brigade'". CNN.
^ a b Algemene Zaken, Ministerie van; Buitenlandse Zaken, Ministerie van (25 May 2018). "MH17: The Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible". www.government.nl (in Dutch). Retrieved 25 May 2018.
^ "MH17 evidence points to 'rogue state' Russia, Tony Abbott says". The Australian.
^ a b "U.S. officials believe attack against Malaysian plane was mistake". Los Angeles Times. 22 July 2014.
^ a b c Cite error: The named reference WaPoJuly22 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ "The evidence that may prove pro-Russian separatists shot down MH17". The Washington Post. Retrieved 8 September 2014.
^ "Yatsenyuk: 'We need to survive first'". Kyiv Post. 22 August 2014.
^ "No Russian air defense missile systems crossed Russia-Ukraine border – top brass". TASS (in Russian). Retrieved 25 May 2018.
^ "Ukraine crisis: Poroshenko offers rebels more autonomy". BBC News. 10 September 2014. Retrieved 19 September 2014.
^ Sipalan, Joseph (21 June 2019). "Russians made a 'scapegoat' after MH17 report released, says Malaysia PM". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 23 June 2019.
^ "Statement Malaysia Airlines MH17". KLM. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
^ "Malaysia Airlines 9M-MRD (Boeing 777 – MSN 28411) | Airfleets aviation". Airfleets.net. Retrieved 17 July 2014.
^ Larry Copeland (17 July 2014). "Boeing 777 has excellent track record, experts s

The geek with a cynical view

Friday, February 26, 2021

Longtail Aviation Boeing 747-412BCF jet cargoliner, registration VQ-BWT,

United Airlines Flight 328

Saturday, January 9, 2021

Sriwijaya Air Flight 182

Sunday, June 14, 2020

The Snowbirds, officially known as 431 Air Demonstration Squadron (French: 431e escadron de démonstration aérienne), are the military aerobatics or air show flight demonstration team of the Royal Canadian Air Force.

Saturday, February 1, 2020

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) Shot down by a surface-to-air missile transported from Russia on the day of the crash[1][2] Site Near Hrabove, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine 48°8′17″N 38°38′20″E

Search This Blog

Links

Labels