Dutch findings into MH17 crash challenged by Russian authorities

It was on the 17th July 2014 that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crashed in the war-torn Donetsk region of Eastern Ukraine killing all 298 passengers and crew on board. On the 13th October the Dutch Safety Board released its final report in which it concluded the aircraft had been struck by a BUK surface-to-air (SAM) missile. However, the remit of the DSB was to ascertain why Flight MH17 crashed and not who was responsible. The crash happened at the height of conflict in Eastern Ukraine between Ukrainian government forces and Russian-backed rebels with each side blaming the other as responsible for the downing of the Boeing 777.
A Dutch criminal investigation, which is anticipated to be concluded later this year, will be responsible for apportioning blame, however the DSB was able to make it very clear that it was a 9N314M warhead that detonated approximately one meter above and to the left of the cockpit, with missile fragments found in the bodies of the pilot, co-pilot and purser who were all killed instantly.
This week the Russians have issued an official report into the DSB findings which came in the form of a letter from Oleg Storchevoy, deputy director of Russia’s civil aviation regulator Rosaviatsia, to the chairman of the DSB, Tjibbe Joustra. In the letter and subsequent to the Russians concluding their own investigation into the crash, Storchevoy wrote that: “Additional experiments and examinations attest to the fact that information provided in the final report” in regard to several of the DSB’s conclusions were “unsubstantiated and inaccurate.”
He also indicated that several anomalies were found, including:
• the shape and chemical composition of warhead fragments retrieved from the wreckage of MH17 did not match those of the pre-formed fragments produced by the 9N314M warhead;
• penetration holes in the wreckage were not consistent with the shape of the warhead’s fragments;
• the algorithm used to detonate the 9N314M’s proximity fuse would not have produced the fragmentation spray pattern found on the Boeing 777;
• the anomalies found in the damage pattern mean that the warhead detonation point and missile orientation could not have been as described in the DSB report. In turn, this would mean that the possible launch area of the missile was calculated incorrectly.
It would appear that the final point is intended to cast doubt that the missile was launched from an anti-government rebel-controlled area of Eastern Ukraine.