@vicktop55 So you mean to tell me, that out of 65 Ukrainian POWs there have only been 3 bodies filmed (and blurred)? Just before the plane crashed, the entire cockpit section came loose and fell to the ground. With that kind of damage, there's no chance to control the plane.
@vicktop55 Subsequently, the nose section and rest of the fuselage are separated on the ground. The nose, being mainly light metal structure with high amount of drag, will lose inertia and fall to the ground. The rest of the fuselage continues with high speed and crashes further away...
@vicktop55 The aircraft has a whopping 10 pairs(!) of landing gear wheels. Two pairs in the nose, and 8 in the body, for a total of 20 tires. Yet only one pair is seen in the footage, no engines (which typically survive crashes more intact). This leads me to think Russia filmed the nose...
@vicktop55 Point being: if Russia is excluding footage of the main fuselage impact site (where the 65 Ukrainians in cargo would be), and only show us a couple of dead guys in the snow/cockpit section. Why? They would instantly validate their story if they just showed us the fuselage area...
@vicktop55 And if you are still wondering why? I'll give you a hint:
Russia would show us the 65 smashed Ukrainian bodies amongst the burnt-out wreckage if there was something to show us. It would be credible. The longer time it takes, the more everyone will suspect tampering with the site.
@vicktop55 Hence, there likely is no evidence of 65 dead Ukrainians. Maybe something else was in the cargo. Who knows. Only Russia at this point. Tomorrow, any "proof" will be questionable as Russia could have worked all night to interfere with the crash site.
@vicktop55 And as such, it would be moronic of Russia to wait for that to happen, if the evidence is already sitting right there, as a result of the crash where 65 Ukrainian POWs were onboard. They already filmed dead guys and 20% of the plane. Why wait with the rest and lose credibility!?
@vicktop55 @threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@NOELreports Let's say it was loaded with ammunition: Which type?
If it were air defense missiles, these contain large amounts of solid rocket propellant. This burns with extreme bright flame and generates large clouds of white/grey smoke. Based on visual evidence, I can't see any of that..
@NOELreports .. if it were cruise missiles, these contain jet fuel, and if it caught fire, it would be indistinguishable from the aircraft's fuel tanks exploding. Their presence on board is hard to determine from the footage of the crash (impact) itself...
@NOELreports High explosive warheads are found in all the aforementioned weapon types and, of course, artillery shells. The warheads are generally protected by design to not go off by accident. You would typically need a nearby detonation or prolonged overheating (cookoff) to set them off...