oper  требует от DSB запилить ему дверной проём передней правой двери (1R),  вырванный внутренним взрывом.   
     
         

You are right that there were both typing and copy-paste errors in the text. I have corected what have found.

These are "usual drag decelerations" , not overloadings from headwind etc. like in this link.:

http://mh17.forum.camp/viewtopic.php?id=39#p1945

https://scontent.fqlf1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ … e=6199416C--

" Перегрузки >2g могут быть и при штормовой турбулентности. Вектор хаотичен, так почему бы ему не быть продольным?

И еще вопрос, выясняли тип замков, удерживающих переднюю стойку? Если завязаны на электричество, могли отключится когда пропало питание и тогда вполне возможный вариант

    Альберт Валиев написал(а):

    по какой-то причине передняя стойка сходит с замков и вываливается, по причине чего начинает отламываться кокпит - в кокпите в этот момент большая перегрузка. В таком случае момент срабатывания ELT = момент отрыва кокпита. "

These are also easily calculated from Newton´s drag law. Drag overloadinds from headwind and usual loading in normal use can be same magnitude due to the scond power on speed in equqtions.

The accelerations during explosion are not here useful. Explosion as such did not wake up ELT of longitudinal deceleration (acceleration), it was activated from drag deleleration when when cockpit was disconnected from fuselage. Despite deceleration 2 ... 2.6 g, speeds where measured. We can compare them with theoretical functions:

Time, s    Measured  v, m/s  v´(0) = 2.0 g  v(t) = 3125 m/(t + 12.5s)  v´(0) = 2.6 g  v(t) =  v(t) = 2403m /(t + 9.6s)   v´(0) = 2.3g v(t) = 2717,4m/(t + 10.87s)

   0                 250                                    250                                                           250                                                                                          250,0

   1                 230                                    231                                                           226                                                                                          229,8

   2                 211                                    215                                                           207                                                                                           211,1

According to ELT data the acceleration was -2.3 g (and deceleration 2.3 g.

Falling speed for -2.3 g   

w(t) = p⁻¹tanh(gpt) = 164,8m tanh(t/16.48s),

and falling "height" (from the top):

h(t) = k⁻¹ln cosh(gpt) = 2717,4m ln cosh(t/16.4s)   

Falling time T: => 2717,4m (T/16.4s - ln2) = 10000m   => T = 16.4s (10000/2717,4 + 0.693) = 71.7 s.

Horizontal translation during the fall:

D = 2717,4m ln(1 + T/10,87s) = 5510m.

This is best what can be reached based on informations of DSB / Bellingcat "report".  But instead of this, there is bullshit in it.

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2021-10-29 18:54:00)

I am trying to understand exactly where (according to your ideas) 2 events occurred.
1. Rocket hit the plane.
2. Cockpit department.

Can you specify the coordinates for Google Earth Pro so I can move them to the map?

BC/ρ = m/c = k⁻¹ 

I have explained already two times. But I do it still once and korrect the values.

Математическое моделирование траектории падения центроплана #2

" According to Newton´s (first and) second law and his drag law, for a body moving in a dragging fluid

v´(t)/v²(t) = constant = v´(0)/v²(0) = 2.3g/vo² = c/m  = 23m⁻¹/250² = (2717,4m)⁻¹, when no extra forces influence. 

c =ρAC/2. The dimension c is that of ρA = kg/m³xm² = kg/m. The mass dimension comes here from the mass of the gas or fluid. 

(The density of air ρ depeds on height: 1n 10000m it is about 0.5kg/m³, on sea level it is about 1.0kg/m³. We use now the former. If we use the latter for the horizontal fall, it means longer fall time T and longer fall flight D.)

When we know a (trajectory) constant in one point of a trajectory, we know it in every point.

In this case we know at the disconnection point t = 0 both the speed v(0) = 250 m/s and the acceleration v´(0) = -2.3g = -23m/s²

A verification:

v´(t)/v²(t) = - c/m = constant = -2g/vo² = -20ms⁻²/(250ms⁻¹)² = - (2717,4m)⁻¹ = -k "

In this case BC = ρk⁻¹ = 0.4kg/m³ x 2717,4m = 1087 kg/m²

No. In my presentation ρ is included in c and c/m.

I have understood "overloadings" (перегрузки) mean extra drag forces from hard headwinters in high speeds like here. They can be same magnitude as as normal drag forces in usual use, for instance -2g, due to the second power on speed according to air in drag equation.

Horizontal overloadings in this sense can be calcutated from formula

mv´(t) + c (v(t) - vo)² + F, where F is external force from motors etc. Headwinter (vstretsnij veter) is sign minus. V(t )is  according to inertial frame of reference (not according to the air).

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2021-10-26 03:14:45)

In Almaz´s analysis of radar and other points, this flap refers to the first pinpointed radar point, where the disintegration of the plane "has started".

This is 10 seconds later than the flight data acquisition unit stopped working due to energy supply breaking.

This means that the strike point has been about the FORMER radar point, which is about 12 km right west from Hrabove map denotation (the administrative center).

But Bellingcat, DSB and JIT say that the strike had been the FOLLOWING from the first pinpointed "radar point", whici is NO RADAR POINT AT ALL as there is pinted too, but the radar point were it was remarked that the plane has disappeared from radar.

Bellingcat, DSB and JIT try to "move the strike point" 5 km closer to Snizhne where BELLINGCAT "analysed from warmth
tracks in US satellite observation" (which no "third part hss not seen) to have been "the shooting place" of a BUK missile.

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2021-12-21 06:57:09)

Here are measures, but also lies.

http://graphics.wsj.com/mh17-crash-map/

Map of a Tragedy: How MH17 Came Apart Over Ukraine

The Wall Street Journal cataloged and mapped some of the debris of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which fell across three Ukrainian villages after the Boeing 777 was brought down on July 17, allegedly by a surface-to-air missile.

Read the related story »

Reporting by Jon Ostrower in Washington, D.C., Alexander Kolyandr, Margaret Coker and Paul Sonne in Ukraine

Interactive by Stuart A. Thompson / The Wall Street Journal

Renée Rigdon/The Wall Street Journal

First and worst lie: It was not USA that said the missile was shot from Snizne, but it was BELLINGCAT.

What USA recognized was "old fashioned Soviet BUK system ("Gadfly, Gainful") tracking (radar) radioation. They did and do not where the telar was with less than 100 km accuracy. Aand Bellingcat does not know anything

https://www.ibtimes.com/biden-mh17-blow … rm-1632062

" U.S. officials have said ouU.S. officials have said outright that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down with a surface-to-air missile, but are unsure of the missile’s origin.

Vice President Joe Biden said during an appearance in Detroit that it appears MH17 was “shot down, not an accident. Blown out of the sky,” and other American officials confirmed that a missile was fired at the Boeing 777, but are unsure who shot the missile.

A senior U.S. official told CNN that just before MH17 crashed, a radar system noted a surface-to-air missile system tracking an aircraft, and a second system saw a heat signature. By analyzing the trajectory of the missile, investigators can try to pinpoint the source of the attack.

... "

The crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 has been extraordinarily public. Investigators of aircraft accidents typically cordon off the scene immediately after a crash, and tightly control access for media and others to avoid disturbing the debris.

Because Flight 17 fell in a war zone —across farm fields and homes near where pro-Russia separatists are fighting the Ukraine government — control of the wreckage has been chaotic, and the comparatively sanitized photos typically released by aviation safety officials have been replaced by thousands of images distributed across wire services and social media.

Mapping that wreckage is intended to illustrate how Flight 17 may have come down and the geographical challenges of conducting an investigation in a war zone.

Hrabove

1. Vertical Tail

The jet's vertical tail with the Malaysia Airlines logo lies just down the road from the aft fuselage section to which it was once attached.

2. Aft Fuselage and Horizontal Tail Structure

One of the most intact pieces of Flight 17 is a portion of the aft fuselage of the Boeing 777. This rear part, which attaches to the rest of the jet's body behind the passenger cabin, landed upside down next to a road in Hrabove, near what was left of the connection between the jet’s horizontal tail, a wing on the tail that points the nose. One of the carbon-fiber-composite horizontal tails was severed and found roughly 1,200 feet away in a grazing field.

3. Center Structure

The single largest and most concentrated debris field is along a roadside in Hrabove, more than five miles east of the western edge of the documented debris field. The underside of the wings is visible in the wreckage, identifiable by access holes used by manufacturing and maintenance crews to work inside the fuel tanks. In the charred debris field are parts of both of the jet's Rolls-Royce engines and a major structure called the center wing box that connects both wings to the fuselage and the well that holds the main landing gear. The landing gear was tucked inside the jet when it was cruising at 33,000 feet.

4. Right Rear Door Frame

A cattle pasture in Hrabove is littered with pieces of the jet's fuselage skin. A part of the right side of the rear passenger cabin at the last set of the jet’s doors sits mangled, its door missing. The skin shows the identity of the Boeing 777, with the Malaysian registration 9M-MRD.

5. Left Wingtip

The remains of the left wingtip, with visible signs of what appear to be shrapnel or puncture damage, sits severed from the rest of the wings, which fell and burned more than a half mile away.

6. Horizontal Tail

The carbon-fiber-composite horizontal tail landed a few feet away from the remains of the wingtip near a small pond. Partially covered in mud, the tail was pulled from the nearby pond, according to one photographer.

7. Cargo Door Frame

Scattered pieces of the rear fuselage, like this one around the aft cargo bay, litter a field in Hrabove a half-mile from the largest concentration of debris containing the charred remains of the jet's center structure and wings.

8. Crew Rest Bunks

On long-range flights like those connecting Southeast Asia to Europe, cabin crews use rest bunks to work in shifts. Malaysia Airlines installed its berths underneath the floor of the 777 at the front of the rear cargo bay. The under-floor bunks and their contents landed in a field about 1,800 feet from the main debris site in Hrabove.

Rozsypne

9. Cockpit and Lower Nose

The Boeing 777’s cockpit and lower nose section landed in a sunflower field in Rozsypne, approximately 1.6 miles from the cargo floor section to which it was once attached and nearly four miles from Hrabove. The remains of the flight deck, its floor, displays and pilot controls were strewn nearby. Personal effects from the passengers and crew litter the site. The jet’s avionics components and wiring from the under-floor electronics bay were crushed into the nose landing gear, which became separated while it was tucked up into the forward wheel well.

Petropavlivka

10. Lower Forward Cargo Floor

The jet’s lower forward cargo floor landed nearly five miles from the main debris field in Hrabove on a side road in the town of Petropavlivka. Local residents collected debris littered across the neighborhood and deposited it on this section of the aircraft that was once part of the forward cargo bay. Bundles of wires, air ducting, the nose landing-gear bay door and even demolished drink carts now sit on top of the silver rollers that make up the lower belly of the Boeing 777.

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2021-10-25 08:13:04)

oper
(Бороду-то я сбривал, куда умище девать?)

А почему не 5, или 25? Стволовой это, думаю.

I have no "Method".

I have basic equation and I have initial data measured from a falling body in the air. The horizontal acceleration is v´(0) = -2.3g and the horizontal speed v(0) = 250m/s.

In the vertical direction i have speed w(0) = 0 and acceleration w´(0) = -g.

The trajectory can be calculated from these exactly (= without loosing or addind information in "method"), in spite of the somewhat deceleranting effect of higher air density lower.

We need BC only for that correction. BC = 1359 at the top and 2717 at the bottom. k = c/m = (2717m)⁻¹ is according to the former. 

This gives results which Almaz has also got in its simulations.

Cockpit and cockpit... Here as "the cokpit" is regarded all material interconnected to fall with the loose from the fuselage cockpit. The details on that paggage are not needed.

This "cockpit" was about 10000 kg.

http://mh17.forum.camp/viewtopic.php?id=39#p1945

" Альберт Валиев написал (а):

по какой-то причине передняя стойка сходит с замков и вываливается, по причине чего начинает отламываться кокпит - в кокпите в этот момент большая перегрузка. В таком случае момент срабатывания ELT = момент отрыва кокпита. "

This is not "peregruzka", this is usual deceleration from drag to loose "cocpit package".

Cockpit gets loose in transversal direction form bolts etc. (замки) of a flange (стойка) connecting it to fuselage, like a sewer tube breaks at its rusty flange bolts. The exploding on the missile does not get rise to significant longitudinal acceleration to the the top of cockpit at moment.

Boeing787 fuselage and cockpit flanges. Another left below.

No interest...

This in not перегрузка but basid drag deceleration. Don´t use таблицы перегрузoк here.

Give headwind (vstrechnyi veter), and I will calculate you перегрузка from it for MH17 "cockpit" in disintegration moment.

Don´t try to confuse with empty words.

You write bullshit.  My coefficient k is measured for MH17´s loose cockpit. It has nothind to do with other cockpits.

-2.3 g. It was measured in two ways: directly and through speeds. And it is usual deceleration of free in the air under drag moving body. It is not any accidental impact or oveloading factor. And it gives very good results in the poit vof you forming the debris deviation as it is.

Missile explosion accelerates cockpit in taransversal direction, from left to right, and maybe also somewhat downwards.

I dont´t need "such". I know the bodies speed and acceleration free in the air. The only interesting thing is WHAT THEY ARE - not that, how they were formed!

You mean "the (part of) drag to the cockpit just before it had got disconnected". It is unknown, and useless!

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2021-10-29 08:10:17)

This strike point, точка пoражения, means that possible missile flight from Pervomaike (DSB, Bellingcat) would have been abot 25 km.

In some Bellingcat/DSB flaps there is a "turbo-free fall": the plane ia said to fall FASTER THAN THE FREE FALL TIME FROM 10000m: 45 s.

That is not the real strike poin, but "DSB_Strike_Point".

Here are the flight lines of Boing jumbojets during ne week fefore and includind 14.7.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 … pe=PAYWALL

" Before Crash, Some Airlines Avoided Ukraine

Published July 18, 2014

A survey of flights to Asia from Europe in the last week found that some airlines had been flying over eastern Ukraine and some had been avoiding the area.

Source: Flight path data from flightradar24.com

Отредактировано Risto_Koivula,_Tampere (2022-01-23 14:29:01)

If the mass is in same ratio with the dragging transversal to trajectory surface.

The free fall parabola is almost in a square 10km x 10km.

The drag decelerates both falling and horizontal transition in close to each other magnitudes.