It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Photographic evidence of shrapnel damage to MH17

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 03:51 AM
One of our newspapers has several pictures of some of the debris.

This piece seems to indicate there was an explosion to the right hand side of the plane close to the flight deck from the outside.

The following image is a close up view:

These look like they could have been made with ball bearings or bullets.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:10 AM
a reply to: stormcell

Wow, you must be the best explosive ordnance expert in the history of the world. To be able to specifically identify damage cause by a projectile that hasn't been used since at least WWII.

Shrapnel only comes from the Shrapnel Round which hasn't been produced in 80 years or so, let alone used.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:13 AM
a reply to: watchitburn

Just a guess, but I haven't ever seen anything with holes in in like that

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:14 AM
a reply to: stormcell

Not sure which side we are seeing, the inside or the outside, but one thing I am certain of and that is that given this damage was caused by a bomb, these pictures are not going to tell us what sort of weapon was used and who fired it.

Moreover, it is also not going to tell us whether or not the damage was caused by a bomb or by bullets fired from a military fighter plane.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:27 AM
if anything its curled from the inside out on most which would lead one to think that the force pushed through made the holes and furled the metal around on expulsion.
They do however look strikingly like strafing rounds, its intriguing.
but hey im no expert.
edit on 25-7-2014 by PLAYERONE01 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:35 AM
The missile doesn't hit the aircraft, i was under the impression it exploded away from it and it sends 100's of little body piercing projectiles flying into and through the aircraft - effectively tearing it apart.

seems to match the photos in my opinion!
edit to add


missile explodes within 65ft of target

edit on am437318252014-07-25T04:37:32-05:00042014p by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:39 AM
a reply to: stormcell

So we're talking about a bit of metal that fell roughly 10,000m after a significant and terminal event, into where?? and was then propped up against a post.

The only indication I see is that of a contaminated crime scene.

Kind Regards

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 05:12 AM

originally posted by: stormcell
a reply to: watchitburn

Just a guess, but I haven't ever seen anything with holes in in like that

There were reports of the rebels shooting bullets into parts of the wreckage. The day after the crash I think it was.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 06:28 AM
A more detailed article, but it's biased, it is US and basically blaming SA11 and of course adding Russia to that.

The missile that the US used that took out the Iran flight was a similar fragmentary device to the SA11. Just saying!

Analysis: The shrapnel came from outside the plane.
Mr. Foster said the contour of the aluminum and the blistering of the paint around many of the holes indicate that small pieces of high-velocity shrapnel entered the aircraft externally. Mr. Foster said the two most likely causes were an engine explosion or an exploding missile.

So what are the likely scenarios:

Ivan the Separatist got a hand off from a tracking radar, maybe from the Russian side of the border, or just a lucky shot.

It wasn’t Ivan the Separatist. It was the Ukrainian Military who tracked the FLIGHT and handed it off to one of its own SA11 sites not realizing that it was a commercial flight – the fact that in prior weeks they lost 2 military aircraft, their judgment or command and control may have been impaired.

Given the overt effort on the part of the Ukrainian government to release COMINT intercepts to CNN and the media, I’m incline to think the truth may be closer to scenario number 2. I’m still struggling with the idea of making a public disclosure that you are monitoring COMMUNICATIONS between Separatist and Russian Intelligence.

Weight SM-2 – 1,558 lb (707 kg)
Length 15 ft 6 in (4.72 m)
Diameter 13.5 in (340 mm)
Warhead blast fragmentation warhead
radar and contact fuze
Engine dual thrust, solid fuel rocket
Wingspan 3 ft 6 in (1.07 m)
40 to 90 nmi (74 to 167 km)
Flight ceiling > 24,400 m (80,100 ft)
Speed Mach 3.5
SM-2MR Block IIIA Command and Inertial midcourse guidance with monopulse semi-active radar homing in the terminal phase of the interception. SM-2MR Block IIIB missiles have dual infrared/semi-active terminal homing. SM-1MR Block VI missiles have monopulse semi-active radar homing without command and inertial mid-course guidance.[2]

On July 3, 1988, USS Vincennes mistakenly shot down Iran Air Flight 655, an Airbus A300B2, using two SM-2MR missiles from her forward launcher.[7] In 1988 the Iranian Kaman-class missile boat Joshan was sunk by RIM-66 Standard missiles during Operation Praying Mantis.[8]

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:16 AM
I have seen that type damage when working as a high speed camera operator doing weapons warhead testing.

Its not the big holes that show a warhead went off close by its all the tiny pits from the aluminum casing of the warhead.
and these pits can also be from parts of the guidance system as its blown up

The casing wraps around the Shrapnel and holds it in place around the explosive charge.
In the case of a missile the outside casing also connects to the guidance section and the motor section.

Even as good as antiaircraft missiles are some planes can take a licking and keep on ticking.

edit on 25-7-2014 by ANNED because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics


log in