No, what you are seeing are the flashes that resulted from impacts on the witness plates at the other side of the test arena.

Yes, which are clearly inside the outer circle.

The purpose of a continuous-rod warhead is to create a single expanding circle of metal that will slice into the structure of the target in exactly the manner shown by the damage to the Hobart. As the man who taught me about continuous-rod warheads in 1960s put it, the rods form what is virtually a flying buzz-saw.

Had the ring still been intact at the point where it struck the witness plates in the coloured pic posted here, it would have destroyed them. But after reaching its full diameter, the ring breaks into individual rods, and I think it is the impact of these that the photo is showing.

All I can see is a series of flashes inside a circle and around its perimeter. Legacy R-27s have come with both rod-type and fragmentation warheads.

Malaysia Airlines shares suspended as state buyout is announced

Malaysia Airlines shares suspended as state buyout is announced

Alfawhiskeyrome was correct when he wrote:

” A continuous-rod warhead is a specialized munition that exhibits an annular blast fragmentation pattern, so that when it explodes it spreads into a large circle that cuts the target.The effect is very characteristic sawtooth damage more or less like that when Australian destroyer was accidentally hit by AIM 7 with 40 kg continuous-rod warhead .”

The subject of the likely pattern of fragmentation from the Buk warhead was discussed in postings 273 and 278. It will not be spherical – it too will be annular. To the best of my knowledge, directional fragmentation patterns that concentrate the destructive effect in the direction of the target were a later development.

Come now, it’s annular but it doesn’t form just one specific circle, the shrapnel is spread within that circle, otherwise it would be useless.

The fragmentation pattern on MH17 is not spherical because it doesn’t cover the whole aircraft, as mentioned before, please read.

Why didn’t it happen in Afghanistan then?

They only had camels not Iglas and Strelas.

They wanted to fly higher but Kiev wanted more effective decoys. Why even put them over the conflict zone in the first place when they’d filed for a flight path that avoided it?

No one cares about flight radar. The question is, why was it even there?

Yeah Lukos very similar indeed:highly_amused:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]230872[/ATTACH]
Damage done by AIM7 40 kg expanding steel rod warhead.
So man once again I salute you ! Your observation skills are second to none !;)

That looks like ship. What on Earth are you showing? Is it supposed to be in any way relevant for once?

Rod warheads send out shrapnel in the shape of a cone. Fragmentation warheads send out a shrapnel spherically. The effect is similar except fragmentation, by nature, peppers the entire body, not just a circular area along its width.

Second that . And R -27 could not caused shrapnel damage visible in the pictures of MH17 cockpit wreckage because it uses continues rod warhead( God even Paraley agreed with that ).Strait from producers website;
http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/527/
So Lukos suck it and find another way to blame some one else(then pro-Russian rebels) :highly_amused:

It would look very similar. We’ve also had some reports saying the damage was done by a rod-type warhead not fragmentation-type.

The fact that not all of the aircraft is covered in shrapnel damage suggests an expanding bar effect rather than a symmetrical sphere.

But the Russian claim was it was a Su-25, and not a MiG-29. The question remains, is the R-27 operational on Ukrainian MiG-29 – when was the last time the Ukrainian AF live-fired an R-27?
I can tell you one thing, no-one has any doubts that Russian separatists’ Buk missile system was certainly operational on the 17th of July – because the Buk missile system past its live-fire test on the 14th of July.

What’s the difference on a radar scope. Also, long range radar with long wavelength probably couldn’t differentiate between a 777 and a MiG-29 in its wake.

MiG-29s and Su-27s carry R-27s on nearly every sortie. Why else would Kiev be buying R-27s from Vietnam via Hong Kong at a time when they’re up against a foe with no air force?