MH17 flight data analysis implicates “large number of high energy objects”

The AAIB has confirmed to me that the FDR (Flight Data Recorder) analysis for flight MH17, downed over eastern Ukraine, was undertaken at the AAIB together with their Dutch counterparts. The results were passed to the Dutch Safety board, which covers air accidents concerning the Netherlands.

What happened to flight MH17 is now a Dutch investigation and subsequently it is their decision to release any relevant information into the public domain.

It is important to note that all EU countries are prohibited from releasing data from flight data recorders including CVR under EU Regulation 996/2010, Article 14.

The Dutch Safety Board have provided an update on this investigation on their website (9 Sept), where the DSB chairman said the crash was likely due to “a large number of high energy objects that penetrated the aircraft.”

Furthermore, “The Safety Board believes that additional evidence will become available for the investigation in the period ahead.” The DSB is hoping to publish a more detailed report on the first anniversary of the crash, according to an Indian report (11 Sept).

The AAIB has not held onto any electronic records or hardware from either of the MH17 flight recorders and everything has been handed over to the Dutch Safety Board.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “MH17 flight data analysis implicates “large number of high energy objects”

    • If a war is being set up against Russia we should be aware – especially since the UK is the first to condemn them.
      Like Iraq – Iraq spawned the world’s greatest peace movement and Britain’s largest protest.
      Yet not one Hull city councillor spoke against it, and only one of 3 MPS, since gone.
      Zorro’s supposed to strike at the heart of injustice, isn’t he …?
      Do you prefer ignorance in your politicians?

  1. A Green MP would be more concerned with Russian oil drilling, tundra melting, forest burning than with the ins and outs of a plane shooting. A local green would be concerned about the effect of those things happening here. That’s the distinguishing thing about Greenyness, the point of it’s existence. Whether shells or bullets hit that plane makes no difference to what happens to Ukrainian shale deposits, they still end up being drilled – either by Russia or Ukraine. Who has the best environmental regulations, Ukraine after EU membership, or Russia ?
    Likewise whether Palestine is annihilated by Israel or visa versa – does it make a bit of difference locally to our air quality, water quality, food quality, likelihood of being flooded or whether Drax burns coal or biomass ? Is the Palestinian issue preventing windmills from being built or solar panels from going up ? Will we have no recycling schemes unless we solve the Israel conflict ?

    • I suspect your confusing Green with purely environmental concerns.
      Since its inception the Green Party has been concerned equally with social justice.
      The greatest threat to that is war.
      Just as war is a threat to the environment not just its victims.
      We do both. I know it can be confusing as the media always portrays us as environmentalists.
      But they’re wrong.
      War, and the launching of wars, is the ultimate social failure – and often a cover for greater exploitation.
      The ultimate human failure is the inability to live in ways that respect each other and the one planet we inhabit.
      The two are connected.

      • Can’t see how being called green make it not an environment oriented party. Why not just ditch the green bit and call yourselves the Social Justice party instead, if you’re not environmentalists and the environemnt isn’t your first concern ?

  2. I note also that all local MPs, instigated by a Tory, did actually manage to get together and secure funding for flood defence in preparation for climate change. Ironically in part to protect fossil fuel infrastructure, but nevertheless shows an acceptance of climate change as an issue which the new power of UKIP seems unable to do. Tory secures flood spending, Labour have helped bring the turbines to Hull. The labour council implements recycling schemes. So are the Greens even necessary ?

    • Ah Zorro, with your keen rapier, you will have noticed that the top priority besetting us politically (as opposed to environmentally) is the out of control nature of the banks.
      The Green Party addresses this with a commitment to separate high street banking from speculative casino banking.
      The next priority is to challenge rising UK inequality – with the largest number of billionaires per head on the one hand – and rocketing reliance on foodbanks on the other!
      The other year, govt tried to sell off the country’s forests! This was beaten back by popular outrage. But they’re trying again.
      They sold off Royal Mail on the cheap to their friends.
      They are trying to do the same with East Coast rail – currently making millions for the country.
      Onshore wind is under attack, just as the govt also attacked the ECO (‘green crap’ as Cameron called it) but which helps bring down fuel poverty (and winter deaths too).

      Most of what we call recycling goes off to India and China, and now there’s a scheme to burn it in a plasma incinerator in Norway! The point of recycling is to use the thing/materials/most of YOURSELF, not to export the problem or utterly destroy it by burning.

      The Green Party has hardly started yet!

      • But you didn’t address the Russian pollution problem. Whatever the ins and outs of the Ukraine war wouldn’t EU regulatory standards of Ukrainian shale production be the lesser of two environmental evils ? I notice also that both Ukraine and Russia are somewhat dependent on Christian eschatology, and hence have environmental destruction woven into their moral system.

  3. But you are a green party, so the banks should be secondary to your concern for the environment should it not ?
    Doesn’t much of the green party yearn for subsistence living anyway – back to the land and live like the Yanomamo ?

    Also, regarding the Palestinians and Israelis, don’t these two religious groups, in their ancient religious war, merely see the Earth as a disposable staging ground in their path to heaven ?

    Shouldn’t the green party be implacably opposed to this pre-modern hubristic view of the Earth, rather than helping people who look forward to and want to bring about the Apocalypse ?

    When you tell them they are not allowed to have their apocalypse after all, and someone should, they’re not going to like it. How are you going to tell 3 billion Judeo Christians that they can’t have their end-times party. After you saved all their lives that is ?

  4. Ah Zorro, what sorrow.
    You’ve gone off on one!
    Comments: a number of EU countries have fracking bans. We’re looking to expand this. Fracking is last-ditch attempts to squeeze fuel from where we live, highly pollutive and dangerous to human and livestock health. And it’s a scam. Last year the US fracking industry spent $700bn and got back $600bn. Despite the huge amount of hype and investment, it’s not financially viable, and held together with asset sales and near-zero rate loans. The Ukraine is only exploring fracking because the US is talking them into it. It may help them become independent of Russia – but if it’s not financially viable, and if it’s likely to pollute damagingly, It’s a hiding to nothing and they’d better make peace with Russia. EU fracking is fundamentally weak – indeed the UK campaigned to ensure this.

    Russian environmentalism may benefit from our example more than anything else. But you’ll probably agree we have a long way to go before attaining anything like “The greenest govt ever”.

    Where does your point on Christian eschatology come from? Sounds like you’re better describing some of GW Bush’s friends!

    Russian pollution isn’t our primary concern. However, the UK is no. 8 in the world for waste at 560 kg per head. Russia’s at roughly half that.

    The banks control how much we exploit the planet (or each other). if they’re out of control – or can crash the entire system (currently nothing to stop them), then they soon become a top priority. If you can create £375 bn out of nothing (as the BOE did last November) that’s a huge concentration of power – and very different to, say, giving every adult £7000 each, which instead of shoring up banks per se, would most likely be spent thus boosting the economy.

    And so on.

    • Not so much going off on one as merely paying attention to news reports and what religions say about themselves.
      Fracking may or may not be viable, but would it really not be an exploited resource by a Ukraine if the Americans were not into it ? Seems doubtfull.
      And, can you do a comparison between safety regulation of US fracking and Russian fracking ? I would say the latter is a mystery to the green party not least because it’s all written in Russian and you can’t send FOIA requests to Russia to see what they put in their fracking solution.
      Hence, I reason that from a Green perspective Russia is probably the worst of two evils here.

      “Comments: a number of EU countries have fracking bans. ”

      Indeed, the EU is awash with environmental regulation, and the EU and Ukraine are moving closer together with the intent eventually of bringing Ukraine under EU regulation.
      From a Green perspective this has to be preferable to whatever the Russians are aiming at.

      One waste figure doesn’t show that Russia holds environmental concerns as a high priority even if it wants to, even if it could afford to. A simple look through the wikipedia entry on Environmental issues in Russia shows they have big problems. How far would fracking in Ukraine come on their list when they can’t even clean the air in Moscow ?

      Russia, USA, Ukraine, Palestine, Israel – whichever one you want they all have apocalypse built in to their main religions, or even their government for those nations who are more like theocracies.

      Palestine/Israel is in large part a struggle over which version of Apocalypse should come about. Sustainable living doesn’t really come into that, and Earth worship is a Pagan pastime. Sadly Rome gave up it’s pagan nature a long time ago, although it’s culture lives on in America somewhat.

      We have to hope that the Islamic/Christian/Jewish population aren’t prepared to follow through on their own doctrines, but so far not so good, despite people like Des Tutu abandoning their own mythic system.

      Don’t we ?

  5. As a Green prospective you must have an estimate of how various religious groups view the environment yes ?

    Old but interesting — http://sobek.colorado.edu/~bairdv/Guth.pdf
    ” Former Secretary of the Interior James Watt, a member of a Pentecostal denomination (the Assemblies of God) ex- pressed this when he warned Congress not to gaze too far ahead on natural-resource policy because he did not know “how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns (Martin, 1980)”

    Indeed, why sweep the floor when the house is due to be demolished ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s