A clear explanation of why the statement of the RMA and the court about the presence of an obstacle in the form of a protruding Boeing frame for the "green plug" is fake.
The clowns used an azure pointer (straight line) as an argument and demonstrated that there is indeed an obstacle in the way of the connector.

But!
This method is applicable only to objects moving at constant speeds, including a laser beam.
In the case of MH17 and the "green plug", everything is different - the "plug" was decelerated in the air! Therefore, she "went around" (conditionally) an obstacle!

It is obvious that both the Boeing frame and the "green plug" were flying in a straight line in the sky. Why is it used "rounded" or "flew in an arc"?
If you attach a video camera to a flying Boeing from above somewhere above the nose, then it will record the flight of the "green plug" precisely along the arc around the obstacle.

https://forumstatic.ru/files/0014/75/e6/69490.png

The self-destruct command is generated if the missile has stopped receiving the reflected signal from the target.

Eric van de Beek , can you provide information from the courtroom about all JIT field experiments
- Only warheads were blown up. Where?
- Combat units were blown up together with the first electronic compartment of the rocket. Where?
- Combat units were blown up together with a rocket that did not have a powder charge of the engine. Where?
- Combat units were blown up together with a rocket, which had a powder charge of the engine. Where?
- During the explosions of warheads, along with the missiles, were the powder charges of the generators removed or not?
- Were there any explanations for some part that flew far ahead during the experiment on 13-07-2016?

https://forumupload.ru/uploads/0014/75/e6/2/t403213.jpg

I would like to double check the information we have.

Eric van de Beek , in court, the green color of the rocket fragments was the only argument confirming that they belonged to the 9M38M1 rocket, or were other features of the fragments voiced, indicating that they belonged to the 9M38M1?

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    Do you mean the reflected signal from the target that the missile receives from the Buk? Or do you mean the reflected signal from the target that the missile directly receives from the target? As I understand it the missile has a built-in radar / an internal radar.

Only the radio fuse of the 9M38 rocket has an active radar (transmitter + receiver).
The 9M38 type missile does not have an active radar for targeting, there is only a receiver. For aiming at the target, the Buk signal reflected from the target is used. The missile receives a direct Beech signal as well. If the missile stopped receiving reflected from the target, but still receives a direct signal from the Buk, then the self-destruction delay will be more than 4 seconds.

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    So according to you the missile self-destructed because it stopped receiving a direct signal from the Buk or because the Buk stopped receiving a reflecion from the target? Or both?

At point "1" the missile receives a signal reflected from the target and a direct signal from the Buk.
At point "2" the target dropped below the Buk radio horizon. Therefore, the missile stopped receiving the reflected signal from the target. The self-destruct timer has started.
But at the same time, the rocket received a direct signal from Buk. Therefore, the self-destruct timer went off later than 4 seconds later.
The time of more than 4 seconds between the activation of the self-destruction timer in front of Grabovo and the activation of the timer (explosion of the warhead) allowed the rocket to fly beyond Grabovo.

https://forumupload.ru/uploads/0014/75/e6/2/646349.png

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    So according to you the missile self-destructed because it stopped receiving a direct signal from the Buk or because the Buk stopped receiving a reflecion from the target? Or both?

At point "1" the missile receives a signal reflected from the target and a direct signal from the Buk.
At point "2" the target dropped below the Buk radio horizon. Therefore, the missile stopped receiving the reflected signal from the target. The self-destruct timer has started.
But at the same time, the rocket received a direct signal from Buk. Therefore, the self-destruct timer went off later than 4 seconds later.
The time of more than 4 seconds between the activation of the self-destruction timer in front of Grabovo and the activation of the timer (explosion of the warhead) allowed the rocket to fly beyond Grabovo.

https://forumupload.ru/uploads/0014/75/e6/2/646349.png

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    The administrator of whathappenedtoflightmh17.com put this table of the Ust-Donetsk radar data on his website. Do you know where he got this table and if the data are correct? I can't ask him. He acts very hostile to anybody questioning the official narrative.

    http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17.com … rettyPhoto

The data of this table correspond to the data of the table from our forum, which I made with my own hands based on the video from the briefing of the RF Ministry of Defense on 21-07-2014 .

This video shows non-primary data from the Ust-Donetsk radar. This video shows the result of processing data from Ust-Donetsk and other radars by the INDRA system in the Rostov ATC.
The table data looked like this on the map -