Supplement for M58.

We must not forget that S40 (Kvasov) saw the same thing .
But the S40 was a little closer than the M58, so he saw the camber of the plane - the tail breaking off the center section. But from a distance, he also did not understand that it was a Boeing, and made an erroneous conclusion about a military aircraft.
However, S40 reported two more important details -
1. The low altitude of the aircraft, which corresponds to the story of M58.
2. The presence of a "parachutist" before the collapse of the aircraft. The S40 mistook the falling cockpit for a skydiver. We know eyewitnesses who described the fall of the cockpit like a parachute, the cockpit rotated like a leaf around the heavy front landing gear that fell out of the niche.

In the area where the Boeing crashed, the cloud base was high. There were also gaps between the clouds. The cloud ridge with a lower boundary of 3 km was only between the falling Boeing and Grabovo, so eyewitnesses in Grabovo saw the center section falling out of the cloud.

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    What do you make of the observations by the Aviation Herald?

    http://avherald.com/h?article=47770f9d

    "Transponder data became unreliable at 13:18Z (position N48.28 E38.08) and was lost at FL330 at 13:20Z."

I would like to know what specific transponder he wrote about, ADS-B or ATC.

The letter "T" in the name of the receiver means synthesized data. Of course, the receiver does not synthesize data, fr24 does this. But perhaps fr24 assigns a synthesized name to the mark based on the name of the last receiver with real data.

This chart combines known playback fr24 and other data. Sign "!" highlighted the match. This is playback fr24 from 17-07-2014, the very first one. Perhaps the answer is here.
Later, playback fr24 was updated with new data from other radar_IDs. Moreover, the F-UKCC1 receiver belonged to a pro-Kiev man who lived in Donetsk. On this basis, versions and fantasies were born that later Kyiv planted the necessary data from F-UKCC1.
But now my main assumption is that from the very beginning the fr24 database contained all the parcels received from ADS-B ground receivers, but at the next playback, those or receivers were selected from the database depending on their reliability rating. Receiver data with a low confidence rating may be ignored on some playback, instead a "T" synthesis is inserted with the name of the previous receiver.

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    According to you, what was the heigth of the cloud base? According to the preliminary report of the DSB the lowest clouds were at 1.5 kilometers.

    ---

    According to you, what was the height of the base of the clouds? According to the preliminary DSB report, the lowest cloud cover was at an altitude of 1.5 kilometers.

DSB has lied many times. I gave several important examples of DSB lies.
I assume that DSB's lie about the height of the cloud base of 1.5 km was caused by the need to explain the low height of the trail in Aleinikov's photographs.

https://forumupload.ru/uploads/0014/75/e6/2/t377948.jpg

This indicates a low level of qualification of DSB experts and weak logical thinking.
The low height of the smoke trail is explained as follows.
At the initial stage of the rocket’s flight, a greasy smoke trail is formed for two reasons
- the afterburner operation of the rocket engine for 4 seconds with intense smoke emission
- the rocket’s still low speed, resulting in more smoke per meter of the trajectory at the same intensity of the engine.

https://forumupload.ru/uploads/0014/75/e6/2/t95873.jpg

By the time Aleinikov photographed, the thinner trace had already dissipated, leaving only a fat trace.

Eric van de Beek wrote:

    You calculated the time when the missile was fired from the field in Pervomaiskyi by using the shadow casting method.

    Did you also try to calculate the time of the launch by matching Aleynikov's photos of the black smoke in Grabovo to the videos that were shot of this black smoke? We know for sure that Aleynikov started photographing the black smoke in Grabovo 5 minutes after he had photographed the white smoke of the missile. If we know at what time he shot his photos of the black smoke, we can establish when he shot his two photos of the white plume.

    At certains moments the shape of the black smoke in the photos match with the shape of the black smoke in the videos. What we need is the timestamps of those videos, in particular videos that were made using cameras/ phones with correct clock settings.

    ---

    You calculated the time the rocket was fired from the Pervomayskoye field using the shadow casting method.

    Have you also tried to calculate the launch time by comparing Aleinikov's photographs of black smoke in Grabovo with videos of this black smoke? We know for sure that Aleinikov started photographing the black smoke in Grabovo 5 minutes after he photographed the white smoke from the rocket. If we know what time he took his black smoke photos, we can determine when he took his two white pillar photos.

    At certain points, the shape of the black smoke in the photographs matches the shape of the black smoke in the video. What we need is the timestamps of these videos, in particular videos that were made using cameras/phones with the correct clock settings.

We have dealt with this issue on the forum a lot. The main problem was that there was no EXIF ​​with the time of photographing, which can definitely be recognized as corresponding to UTC. I advise you to read the RVSh
posts on this topic, in particular this search result , for example, this one -

    Just to remind you of my guesses. Based on unpublished EXIF , Aleinikov's pictures and 2 videos. Launch from KO 16:19:30, hit - 16:20:03, Boeing fell at 16:21:35 - fell for 92 seconds, while somewhere up to one and a half kilometers in height was seen on the Rostov primary. Aleinikov took a picture of NEF9267 at 16:25:22, NEF9273 - at 16:25:54, with wires - NEF9265 - at 16:20:57. Those. 87 seconds after the intended launch. Buka's plume should have flown 960m before the first shot. The blue line is a more or less suitable set of launch points.
    http://storage8.static.itmages.ru/i/16/ … 2b96d7.jpg

RVSh had photographs of a smoke trail from a Boeing, the owners of which did not want these photographs to be published. The EXIF ​​of these photos made it possible to make a more or less accurate correlation of events.
The conclusion of the RVSh based on all his calculations was as follows
- if the launch is at 13:19:30, then not from point "B", but closer to Pervomaisky.
- if the launch was from point "B", then at least 30 seconds later than 13:19:30

See visualization of M58 evidence .