DSB did not allow journalists to ask questions after the presentation by chairman Joustra. The response of DSB was: “all answers are in the report”. On a question of a journalist spokewomen Sara Vernooij litterly said:
So the DSB spokesman, Sara Vernooij, was asked from what source did the DSB obtain the parameters of the missile and warhead which have become the evidence for the DSB’s determination that a Buk missile was the sole cause of the MH17 crash. Vernooij said the DSB will not answer. “If it’s not in report, it is not to be released,” Vernooij said.
That does not look like transparancy at all. Now that the final report has been published we can ask questions which answers are not in the report.
Please use the comment to ask your questions. If DSB does not anwer them someone else can investigate.
- The engine exhaust nozzle have blue paint. What is the source of the blue paint ? The DSB video tells something.
- Why does the reconstruction not have all recovered parts of the cockpit roof?
- DSB used a limited reconstruction of the cockpit. Wreckage parts were tied to a wooden frame. Only end of May 2015, when the draft final report was ready, the steel frame was ready and DSB started to attach wreckage to it. The main goal of this steel frame is obviously for the presentation.
Why didn’t DSB use a professional frame soon after the wreckage arrived in Gilze Rijen (december 2014)
- Some parts of wreckage were photographed many times in the first weeks after July 17.Still these important parts like part of the cockpit roof were not included in the recovery. Some of the parts were lost. A rather large part of the roof of the business class section was never recovered. What did DSB do to find out what happened to this part. Did DSB use satelite photos to find out when the parts were taken away, how and by whom?
- The cockpit floor was not used in either the reconstruction nor in the analysis of TNO. Why not?
- Internal parts of cockpit were also not used in analysis. Why not?
- Pieces of wreckage which were photographed at the crash site, were not part of the reconstruction. DSB states these parts were not found at the time of the recovery. What efforts did DSB make to find out when these parts were removed and by whom?
- Air India and Singapore Airline flights were flying close to MH17 at the time of the crash. The DSB report does not state the crews of these flights were interviewed. Why were these crews not interviewed?
DSB answered this question at the public hearing on November 3: DSB did interview the cockpit crews of civilian aircraft flying near MH17. The crew stated they did not see anything.
- Did the DSB use the stringing method using photos of the parts that were missing but showed clear shapnel damage?
- Did NLR do the investigation on impact of fragments on a partially reconstructed aircraft missing fital parts?
- What is the range of the radar in the TELAR? How much was elapsed between detection of the aircraft and hit of the missile?
- Why is there no mentioning in the final report of other types of fragments photographed at the crashsite.
- Is it correct that Russian airlines continued to overfly East Ukraine airspace after July 17? As stated by Correct!v.
- What was the correct reason to deviate MH17 to waypoint RND by Rostov ATC?
- How often does Ukraine ATC do maintenance on their primary radar?
- How likely is it that Ukraine Air Force switch off primary radar when no sorties are scheduled for a particular day?
- Who did the shelling of areas near the crashsite? Because of the shelling it was according DSB unsafe to recover debris. Because of that crucial parts showing holes of fragments were not recovered. So which party had an interest such that parts of the cockpitroof could not be retrieved. The situation at the crashsite is described here.
- Ukraine press stated an IL76 was flying close to MH17. DSB reports there was no other aircraft near MH17 besides the three civil aircraft.How did the DSB determine this as there was no primary rader coverage.
- NATO picked up signals of a surface to airmissile system from Ukraine. Did DSB contact NATO to find out what signal? See the questions of German Parliament and answers of government here.
- Appendix X section 2.4 page 13 mentions exit damage on the righthand side of fuselage. What is the exact location of the exit damage?
- Damage to the engine nacelle is not described in the final report. Why not?
- Which states besides Russia and Ukraine did DSB consult for knowledge on the BUK system?
- How much knowledge on the BUK was provided by Russia and Ukraine?
- What is true about statement of Malaysian Minister of Transport saying Malaysia did not get full access to investigtation (New Strait Times)
- Preliminary report states DSB has primary radar provided by Russia. Final report states both Ukraine and Russia did not provide primary radar. Can you explain?
- DSB report that air to air missile is not possible. DSB states “in addition, no other aircraft that could have launched an air-to-air missile was observed on the radar data as provided by the Russian Federation (taken from ábout the investigation PDF”.
However in the actual report DSB stated Russia did not supply any primary radar. Only primary radar is able to detect an military aircraft capable of launching missile.
So how can DSB conclude there was no aircraft observed?
- DSB tried to obtain a BUK warhead to compare fragments found in MH17 to fragments in reference/obtained warhead. They did not succeed. In one of the appendix however DSB states that is does not make sense to compare fragments. Why?
- DSB stated “interview of eyewitness on the groud was not our task”. Many eyewitness said they saw one or more SU-25 flying at the time of the crash. Annex 13 of ICAO writes When possible, the scene of the accident shall be visited, the wreckage examined and statements taken from witnesses http://www.emsa.europa.eu/retro/Docs/marine_casualties/annex_13.pdf
- The only availble primary radar data was supplied by Russia. This was a video recording of the screen the air traffic controller sees. Based on this video DSB concludes there was no military aircraft in the vicinity of MH17.
Why did DSB not mention the minimal altitude the Russian radar can cover? And estimate is that the radar could not detect objects flying lower than 2000 meters.
- The final report (appedix A) mentions a loss of GPS signal over Ukraine. Sputnik reported at July 25 about loss of GPS signal. Did DSB investigate the source of the loss of GPS signal? Could loss of GPS have an effect on the transmission of transponder data?
- Did DSB establish that the foud bow-tie fragment by Jeroen Akkermans was of the same metal as the other bow-ties?