Detonation of Buk missile system-launched warhead causes MH17 crash

The crash of flight MH17 on 17 July last year was caused by the detonation of a 9N314M-type warhead launched from eastern Ukraine using a Buk missile system, said the investigation reports published Tuesday by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB).

Wreckage of flight MH17 is seen after the presentation of the investigation report on the cause of its crash, at the Gilze-Rijen air base, the Netherlands, on Oct. 13, 2015. [Photo/Xinhua]

The reports also blamed Ukraine for not banning all civilian air traffic before the Malaysian Airlines flight's crash that killed all 298 occupants.

In addition, the DSB concluded that occupants of the MH17 flight, which was on its way from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, should have lost awareness or unconsciousness "in a very short space of time" after the impact of a missile, with the cockpit crew being killed instantly.

The DSB led the investigation into the cause of the crash on July 17 last year and made public the long awaited findings during a presentation at Gilze-Rijen Airbase on Tuesday.

"A 9N314M warhead, launched by a Buk surface-to-air missile system, detonated to the left and above the cockpit," DSB Chairman Tjibbe Joustra said. "The forward section of the aircraft was penetrated by hundreds of high-energy objects coming from the warhead. As a result of the impact and the subsequent blast, the three crew members in the cockpit were killed immediately and the airplane broke up in the air. Wreckage was distributed over various sites within an area of 50 square kilometers. All 298 occupants were killed."

"Other potential causes, such as an explosion inside the airplane or an air-to-air missile, have been investigated and excluded," added Joustra when presenting the reports. "No scenario other than a Buk surface-to-air missile can explain this combination of facts."

The reports stated that the missile was launched from a 320-square-km area in the eastern part of Ukraine, but did not mention the exact location of the launch of the Buk rocket, which could have led to answering the question of responsibility.

"Additional forensic investigation will be needed to establish the exact launching location," Joustra said. "However, such an investigation lies outside the scope of the Dutch Safety Board's mandate."

The answers to the questions of blame or liability is therefor still open. Answering those questions is a matter for criminal investigation by the Joint Investigation Team, led by the Dutch national police and prosecutor.

NO CIVILIAN TRAFFIC BAN BEFORE CRASH

The DSB blamed Ukraine for not banning all civilian air traffic before the crash. "None of the parties involved recognized the risk posed to overflying civil aircraft by the armed conflict in the eastern part of Ukraine," Joustra said.

"Between July 14 and 17, 2014, 61 operators from 32 countries routed their flights through this airspace," Joustra continued. "On the day of the crash, until the airspace was closed, 160 commercial airliners flew over the area. Malaysia Airlines prepared and operated flight MH17 in accordance with regulations. As the state of departure, the Netherlands had no responsibility to advise Malaysia Airlines, or KLM, as its code share partner, with regard to the chosen flight route."

"In the preceding months, the conflict had expanded into the airspace: from late April the number of military aircraft downed increased," Joustra added. "According to statements by the Ukrainian authorities, in two cases long-range weapons were used. In the Dutch Safety Board's opinion, Ukraine had sufficient reason to close the entire airspace over the eastern part of Ukraine as a precaution. Ukrainian authorities declined to do so."

Air traffic restrictions had been in force over eastern Ukraine since July 1, 2014 because of the hostilities in the conflict between pro-independence militants and Ukrainian government troops. Since July 14 last year the minimum altitude was increased to 9.7 km and the Malaysia Airlines MH17 flew above that minimum height on July 17, 2014.

The DSB has noticed that the current system of responsibilities with respect to flying over conflict areas is inadequate. Joustra issued three recommendations to avoid a similar disaster in the future. "States involved in an armed conflict should put more effort in guaranteeing the safety of the airspace for civil aviation, other states involved should be more aware of the risks, should improve the risk analyses and operators should be more transparent on flight routes."

VICTIMS MAYBE CONSCIOUS FOR ONE MINUTE

Prior to the official publication of the reports, around 600 relatives were informed about the conclusions of the investigation during a closed information meeting at the World Forum in The Hague on Tuesday.

One of the relatives' main questions was if the victims were conscious during the crash. The DSB did not rule out that some might have been conscious for one to one and a half minutes for which the crash lasted.

However, the DSB said it was likely that the occupants were barely able to comprehend the situation in which they found themselves and that they were not able to perform conscious actions after the impact. No indications were found that point to conscious actions.

The impact of the missile fragments and the subsequent pressure wave caused the aircraft to break up, but this was only instantly fatal to the three occupants of the cockpit and not to the other 295 victims, according to the DSB.

"Some occupants suffered serious injuries that probably caused their death," the report continued. "In others, the exposure led to reduced awareness or unconsciousness in a very short space of time. It was not possible to ascertain the time at which the occupants died. It was established that the impact on the ground was non-survivable."

Among the victims of the MH17 crash were 196 Dutch citizens. Their relatives had to wait for two to four days for confirmation from the Dutch authorities that their loved ones had been on the plane. "When gathering information related to the passenger list and determining the identity of the occupants and their surviving relatives, the information that various parties gathered about the victims and their relatives was not combined," Joustra explained. "The Dutch crisis organization failed to function properly and the government authorities involved lacked direction."