MH17: Falsifying 9N314M by RF
January 22, 2016.
Almaz-Antey made a methodological error and must repeat their practical experiment of bowties shot through aluminum. Their fault is they erroneously combined the results of loss of weight of bowties from the blast on the written-off-IL86 airliner with the bombardment on the 5 aluminum plates. Moreover the last experiment failed in methodological sense.
The Russian static tests of A-A must be split into two parts.
1: The most important investigation is on the written-off IL-86 airliner. This is the best controlled static experiment matching the dynamic situation of MH17. From this experiment we need the total number and the average weight of bowties and their standard deviation. Then we see how significant the alleged bowties of MH17 differ from the average weight of bowties in the IL-86 airliner.
In the second test all plates were blown away in the shock wave.
Hopefully the blast causing the speed of bowties was quicker than the shock wave.
CONCLUSIONS FROM A DETONATING WARHEAD AT 1 METER FROM THE MH17:
- The shock wave reached the MH17 earlier than fragments in less than 0.0005 seconds.
- Fragments of warhead reached the MH17 in 0.0005 seconds.
- The sound of the blast by detonation reached the MH17 in 0.0033 seconds.
Note: The sound of the shock wave on the first sound peak is only received by CAM.
The sound of casing parts impacting the cockpit is received by all microphones. This sound factually is the combined factor of casing parts, primary fragments and the crashing missile.
Note: Casing parts are launched before primary fragments like bow-ties, fillers and squares, which in turn impacted before the crash of the BUK against the cockpit.
RANKING THE IMPACTS:
1: Shock waves are the fastest (> 2000 m/s).
2: Then follows fragments from the casing of the warhead (2000 m/s).
3: Primary fragments follow casing parts in time (2000 m/s).
4: Co-propagating shock waves follow primary fragments (> 2000 m/s).
5: Sound waves in cold air are not important (300 m/sec) .
Fortunately plates were numbered. From inspection of the number of holes in the first plate (plates 1.0-1.5) we find the maximum amount of shrapnel pierced through aluminum. Then we want to know how many shrapnel elements succeeded to pierce the second plate, etc. We are very interested in the rank order.
In the YouTube film it is said all bowties were gathered. That's fine but they were blown everywhere and we do not know how many plates individual shrapnel has pierced.
If most bowties pierced most plates we accept the average weight of bowties as after piercing all plates. If not we may use all kinds of estimation formulas to estimate the total effect on plates. But that would unwise.
Since, if bowties allegedly found in MH17 significantly differ from the static test on the IL-86 then the RF is almost there. Then they must be prepared to repeat the test with the aluminum plates. Then they must perform three separate tests with massive aluminum plates of respectively 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm thickness. This time the plates must be very stable and must not be blown away. Bowties in the wooden construction must not be counted. If bowties can pierce these plates without substantial loss of weight, then the bowtie hypothesis of MH17 is not confirmed. It might even be seen as falsified. Depending on earlier specified interactions. This test must be controlled by independent scientists.
- In Dutch parliament a delegation of DSB spoke condescendingly to A-A on their remarks about too much loss of weight of bowties. They spoke of rules of thumb from statistical handbooks from which they concluded bowties found in MH17 have the right and low weight.
- Indeed there might be statistical handbooks with tables with univariate or bivariate data for loss of weight for different kinds of shrapnel, made of different kind of metal, for different relative velocities of missiles, planes and speed of shrapnel. But the problem is practical rules from tables in handbooks are worthless in situations where interactions have taken place, which cannot be found in handbooks.
- And the problem is two bowties is not enough to refer to statistical data. And the mere fact that the crash site was unattended for many months and all kinds of suspects had free access corrupts the uninhibited acceptance of these bowties.
- Evidence for 9N314M is almost completely based on the two allegedly found bowties. Other evidence is circumstantial and highly questionable. For example, NLR (Dutch Aerospace Laboratory) and TNO (The Netherlands Organisation of Applied Research) projected the configuration of shrapnel of the alleged warhead identically on the cockpit or MH17. But there's not much left of that cockpit and also this projection is but a wild guess. Also doubtful is the calculation of the relative velocity of rocket and aircraft as well as the found angles are only valid for a warhead 9N314M.
- Consequently circumstantial evidence is very weak if true and only proving the discutability of the alleged bowties as coming through the windshield of the hull is already sufficient to crumble the 9N314M hypothesis. It might be true, but there is no convincing evidence. DSB is skating on thin ice.