In his article on, blogger 0serg analyses versions and questions around the downing of Malaysian Boeing MH17.

Q: What was MH17 doing over the combat zone? What a bastard had sent it there?

A: MH17 was following the usual air route L980 for civilian aviation. There are several such air routes from the West to the East of Ukraine; I marked them in blue on the map below.


Q: So why did it not take one of the air routes to the south? I see three air routes there, two of them had been used by MH17 before

A: Do you see the black polygon on the map with a yellow and red spots in it? This polygon used to be the area of responsibility of the Simferopol air traffic control post. According to the international rules, this air traffic zone is controlled by Ukraine, but after the annexation of Crimea, Russia claimed this zone, threw out Ukrainian air traffic control officers from Simferopol and assigned their own. The Interstate Aviation Committee SUDDENLY decided this was a wrong thing to do. Obviously, so did Kyiv. And since then pilots flying through the zone have no idea, whom to listen: Ukrainian air traffic control officers, or Russian. Most of them prefer to abide by the international rules, but the Russians prefer their own, which creates uncomfortable situations when two aircrafts lead by different air traffic control officers can meet in the sky. Add Ukraine’s inability to monitor this zone effectively and you will understand, why in April 2014 the recommendations appeared, which forbid flights over Crimea for commercial aviation (red and yellow zones — FAA and Eurocontrol prohibitions).

Now, can you see two red ellipses a bit above Crimea? I heard news that during the grieved flight of MH17 there had been storm. If it is true, the pilots’ choice of L980 was logical. More information why the pilots did what they did will become available, when the «black boxes» are deciphered, yet there was nothing strange in their actions.

Q: The Ukrainian military closed the air space over Donetsk! It was forbidden to go there!

A: If you bother to read the full text of the message, the ATO zone was closed for flights at altitude lower than FL 260 (7.9 km). That tragic day the limit was temporary lifted to FL320 (9.7km). Transit over ATO at FL330, where the Boeing was hit, had never been closed.

Q: That’s still retarded, no one was even flying there!

A: Well, according to the often-cited FlightRadar — Singapore Airlines 323, KLM Flight 809 and others flew there, including MH17 days earlier. It is reported that on July 17th there were approximately 55 planned flights.

Here is the map of the air traffic heaviness in the region:


Thence, though the pilots tried flying South, there were plenty of planes on L980. According to the opinion of our own Ministry of Defence, Singapore Airlines flight 351 and Air India flight 113 were on the same path when MH17 was hit.

Q: Why did the air control officer order the Boeing to descend? It was supposed to fly at FL350 (10.7 km) why the air control officer sent it to FL 330 (10.1 km), just above the closed zone.

A: This is absolutely normal. The route of MH17 was crossing a number of other planes’ paths. If there were other aircrafts at FL350, MH17 could potentially collide with one of them. The job of the air control officers is to prevent dangerous situations, that is why they could easily change the flight level of MH17, if it was necessary. Because of various delays, such cases cannot be scheduled, so FL350 was rather optional.

Q: LOL! What a fortunate coincidence! They were bringing it closer to the limit and to the flak cannon’s reach?

Well, of you are so fond of conspiracy, I will give you one simple fact. MH17 was entering Ukraine’s air space at FL310 (9.4 km), which it had had all the way above Germany and Poland. The air control officer’s requesting FL330 when entering Ukraine’s air space increased the altitude of MH17, not decreased it. In general, the altitude of MH17 was increasing all the way and never decreasing. Fully fuelled for such a long flight, the Boeing, perhaps, could not take FL350 because it was too heavy.

Q: Yet, a Spaniard working as a flight control officer in Borispol (Kyiv) saw two attack planes following MH17 before the crash!

A: Civil flight control officers work with the so-called «secondary radar», it’s when the aircraft itself sends data about its location or after a request. When the corresponding transponder is switched off, the plane «disappears» from the civil radars. Remember the story with the disappeared MH 317? It disappeared precisely because someone had manually switched off the transponder. It is something unusual for the civil aviation, but common for the military: the coordinates of transponders can be easily traced. The already mentioned Flight Radar, for example, collects most of its data (if not all) without any help. Considering all of it, it is surprising, that according to this version, Ukrainian pilots who could stay undetected, decided to «show up» for everyone, and no one except the notorious flight control officer failed to notice them. Including the Russian military, by the way, the air situation maps published yesterday do not show these «Ukrainian attack planes following the aircraft».

Yet, there is something more interesting. The zone of the Kyiv flight control officer’s responsibility ends near Krivyi Rig, to the South from it there is the Dnepropetrovsk zone. So the unfortunate MH17 was downed in 400 km (25 min) from the zone of the hypothetical Borispol flight control officer, so I doubt the plane was appearing on the radars there (not to mention the flight controls officers hardly had the time to trace another aircraft they had already passed to their colleagues). The citizenship of the air control officer is doubtful as well, since according to the current Ukrainian legislation, only citizens of Ukraine can hold this position. To sum it up, the «flight control officer» theory is full of unanswerable questions and overall groundless.

Q: Okay, so what do we know for sure about the catastrophe?

A: Well, we know for sure that until a certain moment, it was a regular routine flight of MH17. According to the secondary radar information, the aircraft followed FL 330 without any incidents, manoeuvres or deviations. The last message from the plane’s transponder was received at 13:18 UTC, when it was above the town of Horlovka (green dot). The aircraft was precisely on the civil route (blue line) FL 330 (10.05 km altitude). After this, the transponder sent some gibberish and at 13:20 UTC a signal from the distress radiobeacon was received, which identified the crash site near the town of Krasnyi Luch (orange dot). After this, the wreckage was found near Grabovo village (red dot) on the civil route line, approximately 40 km from the last position of the route. According to the eyewitnesses, the aircraft was destroyed in the air, wreckage and bodies of the victims scattered over a vast area. The cockpit (where the distress radiobeacon was found), for example, was found near Rassypnaia village, in 5 km from the other wreckage, near Petropavlovka (7 km) more fuselage wreckage was found (lilac dot). The small pieces of wreckage, according to some reports, were scattered on the territory 15 km in length and the total square of over 50 km2.


Q: That’s a number of completely different dots on the map! So how the plane was downed? It was probably attacked before it even entered the zone that was under separatists’ control!

A: Let us look at the wreckage and imagine the situation a bit. We’ll start with something that does not create airlift, separate heavy metal parts, parts of the fuselage and human bodies. If we assume, such wreckage was formed where the aircraft was flying at the altitude of 10 km with the speed of 250 m/s and neglect the wind resistance, it is not hard to calculate, that it should hit the ground in 45.1 seconds, having flown 11.3 km from the point where it had begun to fall. The real wreckage will meet the wind resistance, so it will require more time to fall down to the ground (it will take 3 minutes for a human body to fall, for example). In addition, the wind resistance will quickly decrease the horizontal speed to zero. For example, the stable speed of a free falling human in lower atmosphere is approximately 40 m/s. With such speed, the acceleration added by the gravitation (9.8 m/s2) is compensated by the «anti-acceleration» of the wind resistance. Which means, the original 250 m/s of the initial speed with reducing acceleration will be decreased to 40 m/s within less than 21 seconds, long before the body will fall to the ground. Overall, it means, though the wreckage needs more time to fall to the ground, it travels less horizontal distance (see the picture for details). The complete equation is pretty hard, since the resistance changes with the speed of flight and atmospheric density, which differs depending on the altitude (the speed decrease in lower atmosphere is higher than in the upper), but overall the wreckage will cover the area from 0 to 10.3 km from the point where the plane was destroyed.


The «aerodynamic» case with the airlift is a bit more complicated. In this case, the air does not simply affect wreckage in the direction opposing the direction of the speed vector, but also gives it a significant perpendicular impact. There are a number of possible cases: 1. the aircraft is whole and under control. In this case, 777 would have probably remained in one piece. With one engine failure, it could have flown over 2100 km, with both engines failure over 120. The radio would have continued to function; the pilots could have turned to the nearest landing ground and would have had high chances of getting there.2. The aircraft remains whole, but for some reason loses control. Chances are low even if the engines continue to work. The plane starts wavering vertically and enters a wide bank; the wavering and bank increase until the plane hits something or enters a more extreme flight mode (see below) 3. The plane is partially or completely destroyed. We get same vertical wavering and horizontal rotation, but significantly stronger: the plane enters the spin. The aircraft’s altitude quickly decreases, while the speed of the plane and the air density increase; the combination of the two last factors leads to the aerodynamic pressure increase and, with significant altitude and speed, to aircraft’s destruction in the air.

Considering all of the above, the data of the secondary radar and the visible area of wreckage, it is safe to assume MH17 was hit somewhere between Gorlovka and Ienakievo, lost control and navigation equipment, started uncontrolled descend and was destroyed in the air before reaching Rossypne.

Q: Could it fall on its own? Most of the planes fall on their own

A: Considering the sudden navigation signal loss, absence of distress message and quick descend of the plane, such probability is extremely low. While the odds of such accident coinciding with entering the air zone over DPR are even lower. Potentially the plane could have been destroyed by a bomb in baggage or passenger compartment, if timing was right and the bomb was activated by radio, however some of the wreckage of the front part of the plane has a number of holes, which curve inside. Wing wreckage also has holes, which lead inside. Such damage hints that the plane was hit by a missile that had exploded under the front part of the plane’s fuselage, with splinters going vertically through the front part of the fuselage and hitting the wings, which were farther from the explosion.

Q: I read the damage resembles the damage from an air-to-air missileA: The damage of the wing indeed looks like it was hit by an air-to-air missile, which had followed the heat of the engine. But the splinters would not have hit the front part of the fuselage, which would have meant there is no explanation of the holes in the cockpit. Besides, such planes were sometimes downed with air-to-air missiles and in all known cases (LN114, KAL 902, KAL 007) the damage was not enough to destroy the plane completely, all three planes kept partial control after the hit and tried to land, KAL 902 even managed to perform successful landing.

While the version in which the missile exploded under the front part of the fuselage ties in with all the evidence. But in this case it had to be a heavy missile with a radar fuse. For example, a missile from the Buk missile system. Such missile is large and heavy enough to have its start detected by the missile early-warning satellites. The US possess missile early-warning satellites to monitor Russia and claim these satellites detected temperature signatures that seemed like a Buk missile start, the explosion when the Boeing was hit and the last explosion when the plane fell.

Q: You write nonsense: such heavy and powerful missile like Buk should have blown the Boeing to pieces, the plane had no armour. In addition, it was full of fuel for a long flight, so it should have exploded and burned in the air

A: The kerosene, used by the modern aircrafts, has same body and burning quality as the gas oil. It is not easy to set it on fire in the first place, and the thing is, it has to be mixed with the air first. For example, to stick the plane into the ground, so the kerosene splashes out; or to disperse kerosene with quick air stream; or to boil the kerosene inside the tank and let the air inside. Aircraft designers pay much attention to prevent accidental explosions from such reasons as fuel tank overheating. So when the missile exploded, the fuel was yet in the state when it could not ignite. Yet, after the missile exploded, it was possible for a few holes to appear and let the kerosene mix with the air, but it yet had to ignite, though it would still burn steadily, not explode right away. Still, the low temperature and pressure at the altitude of MH17 would have significantly decreased the probability of such process. For example, until 1950 the inability of the petrol to burn at high altitudes was limiting the altitude of flights for the piston airliners, which had to use mechanical compressors to increase the pressure of the air entering the engine.

Q: So the Ukrainians launched this missile themselves. Not their first time.

A: Ukraine has the Buk missile systems S-200 and S-300, which could have been used to down the aircraft. Yet, according to the eyewitnesses and the Ministry of Defence of Russia, only the missile system Buk-M1 was in the zone where MH17 fell, which has 9М38М1 missiles with 25-30 km range. Considering that MH17 was hit in 35 km from the borders of DPR, the possibility of the Ukrainian Buk reaching it is doubtful.

Here is the map published yesterday by the Ministry of Defence of Russia with marked Buk positions and their range. It is important to note that according to this map, MH17 could have been hit only by one of three Buks: from Avdeevka, to the North of Shakhtersk and Southeast of Donetsk. What’s interesting, is that all three spots were under the control of the separatists when MH17 was hit.

Q: Wait, what? You’re saying that Russian Ministry of Defence published information which proves the missile launch was made from the territory under DPR’s control?!

A: Surprised? I am surprised too, but still. For example, Avdeevka was stormed and captured by the Ukrainian army only yesterday. Shakhtersk is deep inside DPR territory, from it the rebels often perform successful breakthroughs to Russia. It’s even difficult to add anything about the Donetsk outskirts: it’s the capital of DPR after all, and the Ukrainian forces are storming it from the West. So what «Ukrainian Buks» could Russian intelligence find there?

I will repeat: this is not a joke. For example, a satellite image from Russian Ministry of Defence, on which two Buk-M1 are allegedly placed in the field. The image has the coordinates of the location – N47-59-00 E038-27-05. Let us mark this location on the map (red cross) with the positions of the other Buks reported by the Ministry of Defence (blue crosses) and the range (red circles, r = 30 km, again, the information from the Ministry of Defence)…


Oops. For those, who do not want to compare these coordinates with the news, I will give a hint: it is in 20 km from Amvrosievka village, one of the supporting points of the rebels. Donetsk is to the West, Mariinovka, stormed and captured by the rebels during the last week, to the East. So how could a Ukrainian Buk appear in 20 kilometres behind the front line?

Q: But the SSU lied about some Chernukhino, which is located somewhere in Lugansk Oblast!

A: OK, let us put more marks on the map: Chernukhino, mentioned in intercepted communications published by the SSU (cross to the north) and the Southern outskirts of Torez from which the launch was performed according to the eyewitnesses (cross to the South). The red arrows show the positions where the alleged photos of the Buks were made. As it is seen, it was quite comfortable for the Buk to shoot the plane from Chernukhino, while the photo and the video of the Buk were made incredibly close to the place, where the Russian satellite detected «Ukrainian» Buks in DPR’s area.


Q: I still don’t believe it: to launch a Buk missile you need a complex of several vehicles. You need to designate the target.

A: Let us analyse. M1 Buk includes: 9S470 command post, 9S18 Kupol / Tube Arm acquisition radar, 9A39 TELAR, and the 9A310 TEL/transloader.Two vehicles carry the missiles: 9А39 and 9А310. The pictures of Buks provided by the rebels have only 9А310 on them:


9А39 – looks like this:


Note, that the last vehicle looks much cooler. It got more missiles and can launch them, also it can self-reload and reload 9А310. While 9А310 is not capable of it. Four rockets instead of eight and it cannot even reload itself. So what was it needed for at all? What the hell is that round thing on 9А310 instead of four additional missiles?

If you don’t understand what am I getting at, the «more missiles» 9А39 cannot fire alone, without the target acquisition radar, while 9А310 can. That round thing is 9С35 radar and it is put there to target the missiles launched by 9А310. Thing is, 9М38М1 – is a missile with semi-active fire-and-forget guidance, it requires target designation from a radar. This designation was provided by 9С35 which allowed 9А310 to attack targets. While 9А39 needed 9С18 to track targets, 9А310 was enough to provide the initial target, then it can «work».

Could 9А310 down the Boeing alone? Yes, it could. It’s a bit «blind» without target designation from 9С18, I mean it has hard time finding targets on its own, but if it is facing the right direction, it can target a plane and hit it with a missile.

Q: So, the rebels were firing at random? They aren’t idiots after all!

A: Why randomly? They are talented rebels and unlike the Ukrainian military, they know how to use weapons. Just look how professionally they, for example, attacked a camp of the Ukrainian forces near the Russian border at night with multiple rocket launchers. I assure you: people who fire randomly do not hit the targets. Maybe, the rebels own their precise targeting to Russia’s intelligence? After all, a Buk only needs the direction, altitude of the target and the time when it will appear. Providing the rebels with this information could not be a hard task. Besides it wasn’t the first plane they shot down, according to the rebels, same day they destroyed AN-26 and Su-25. Could they be firing at AN-26 and hit the Boeing? I think they could. The radar was far from being perfect, which could increase the possibility of mistake in target selection.

Q: No, it was Ukrainian Buk. The SSU are idiots, they spread the video of an M1 Buk with one missile missing. They claimed the video had been made in Lugansk, that Buk had been quickly returning to Russia, but our valiant Ministry of Defence noted the Krasnoarmeisk address on one of the ads, it is under the control of the Ukrainian military. So they were the ones who had launched the missile!

A: Oh, yea, our valiant Ministry of Defence is cool, alight. Can you see the address «Krasnoarmeisk, 34 Dnepropetrovskaia St.? You can’t, but it is there, according to the Ministry of Defence. While if you pay more attention, the Ministry of Defence saw a line of text in bottom right corner of the banner in the video, which read «BOGDAN». Automobile dealership BOGDAN is situated in Krasnoarmeisk, Dnepropetrovskaia St, 34. Well connected, is it not? Now we click here and realise the Ministry of Defence made a mistake, since «Bogdan» is merely a Ukrainian car brand. You can even see its logo there. There are also trolleybus wires in the video. Now, there are trolleybuses in Luhansk, but there are none in Krasnoarmeisk. More questions?

Q: The Ministry of Defence provided the data from the radars, which shows how the Ukrainian plane had approached the Boeing. Besides MH17 left its route and performed some strange manoeuvre. You obviously can’t argue with that, ha!

A: The data of the Ministry of Defence has coordinates, which allows us to link it to the maps I showed earlier. We link it…


and see, that the Ministry of Defence is not too good at data providing. For example, according to the radar information, the plane almost reached 39 degree east, though it is known it had fallen earlier. Besides the path of MH17 is quite different compared with the information from the secondary radar, it is confusing: MH17 was flying following a straight line (because that’s the shortest trajectory) – so how did this squiggle appear, it is absent on all other maps? So why the plane’s route does this squiggle in the South, was it trying to avoid something? And why does the «route of the Ukrainian attack plane» miraculously starts from almost the same spot, where you can find two Buks on the satellite images?

Q: Well, they could have made a mistake. Ukrainians, for example, lie about dozens of children killed in Boeing crash and it’s alright with them. Only three kids died.

A: Information about three kids is merely a translation mistake: “280 passengers, 3 infants, 15 crew” was translated as «280 adults, 3 children, 15 crew». But “infant” is an «infant», while a child can be a passenger. In fact, 80 children were killed. I would like the bastards who ask «not to speculate on the numbers and stop lying about the number of children, there were only three of them» to take a look at their photos and repeat these words in private to their parents.

Q: But the eyewitnesses saw Ukrainian plane attack! The painting on the Boeing was similar to the painting on Putin’s aircraft, their routes crossed earlier! I still think it’s Ukrainian provocation, they thought they were downing Putin and hit the civilians.

A: The eyewitnesses also saw a missile launch from the ground, and this is proved by other evidence, while the attack plane version isn’t. The attack plane version looks strange because of several reasons. For example, how could people identify the type of the plane (Su-25) from 15 km distance, its attack and to which country it belonged, And why would anyone use Su-25 for such attack, if there were more suitable planes for the task?

The version about Putin is simply retarded. Yes, his plane was flying when MH17 was in the air. Yes, if you compare their routes, they crossed near Warsaw. But both aircrafts passed this «crossing point» with 35 minutes difference and the distance between them had always been over 300 kilometres! And how come Ukrainian flight control officers knew it was a civil plane, while the Ukrainian military didn’t? How was it possible to notice the colours of the Boeing, but fail to notice the “Malaysia” inscription on it, or that the Boeing had 2 engines, while the plane of Putin has 4?

To sum it upNote all the lie, spread after the Boeing-777 was downed. Friends, are you not disgusted to live among the people blatantly lying with constant patter about Tu-154 that was downed by Ukrainians thirteen (!) years ago?

I do not know who attacked MH17, and I do not want to claim it was the rebels before the investigation is over, though many facts point to this. Yet I claim, the Russian authorities echoing these jackasses whole last week, poured a bucket of lies accusing Ukraine. So, friends, is it alright with you?

And lastly

Q: The Ukrainian military are retards, they said the rebels had no Buks. Don’t you believe the Ukrainian military? They dropped a clanger!

A: There’s an important detail, which retards fail to notice: the Ukrainian military said the rebels had no captured Ukrainian Buks. But it is hard to deny Buks on DPR’s territory, as I already said, they are seen on the Ministry of Defence photos. Which means they received them from Russia. And it becomes obvious for the whole world. Aren’t you afraid of the consequences, compatriots?