Polaron - Get Polish Citizenship / EU Passport now!Witamy, Guest  |  Members

The Ultimate Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives

Travel to Poland
Home / News /answers: 611 - page 2 of 21

Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 29, 2011, 07:03pm  #31

Anyway - remind us - who cancelled the simulator training?


pawian Threads: 163
Posts: 8,675
Joined: May 30, 2008
  ♂   Edited by: pawian  Jul 29, 2011, 07:10pm  #32

=f stop]It's interesting that this is the one you put forth first, while the report lists 3 much more damaging causes first...

It is interesting you are more interested in the order than the content. Also, that you don`t know the rules of catching the reader`s/viewer`s attention. :):):):):)

No, elected by cartoonish people like you.


In democratic elections. Is you secret desire to abolish democracy in Poland and set up PiS dictatorship of Plastic Poles like you? :):):):)

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 29, 2011, 07:23pm  #33

In democratic elections. Is you secret desire to abolish democracy in Poland and set up PiS dictatorship of Plastic Poles like you? :):):):)


It's hardly a secret that the only democracy they like is the kind of democracy where they win.

Still, I'm waiting for someone to actually say what these "lies" are.

JonnyM Threads: 14
Posts: 3,330
Joined: Mar 9, 2011
  ♂   Jul 29, 2011, 10:20pm  #34

These are not "Polish" mistakes, these are the mistakes of the government's institutions.

The Polish government. Therefore Polish mistakes. Unless you're suggesting that the Polish government is made up of North Koreans.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 12:22am  #35

Whoever awaits for just one simple answer to all questions regarding the cause of the accident will be very dissapointed , because there is never one cause .There are faults on both sides Polish and Russian . Who claims it was just one side fault he simply doesn`t want to tell the truth . In every accident there are multiple factors of human and non- human mistakes . I don`t believe if someone claims, that it was solely a pilot`s mistake which in my opinion pilot`s mistake, if it was such, it was the least significant among many others .

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 30, 2011, 12:25am  #36

pilot`s mistake, if it was such, it was the least significant among many others .


Least and yet most significant at the same time.

They do make it clear in the report that he was under immense stress at the time. Again though - it confirms the Russian theory that he was simply too much of a nice guy to be doing that job.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 12:30am  #37

Pilot`s mistake ???? Maybe the controller`s, who were giving him false data about the flight course and the plane`s height ????

f stop Threads: 30
Posts: 3,320
Joined: Dec 9, 2009
  ♀   Jul 30, 2011, 12:37am  #38

the plane`s height

pilots should have been reading their own altitude.
And you can't have it both ways; if they were relaying on controllers information, they should have diverted and not tried to land in the fog.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 12:47am  #39

pilots should have been reading their own altitude.


If it was that simple, the controllers would be unnecessary supplement . The plane`s altimeter was unable to give them precise informations ( misleading to the real ground tarmac altitude ) , as you may have heard , because they were flying over a ravine ( if you only understand what consequences that factor have had ) .

Sorry , but this was the major cause of the crash .

f stop Threads: 30
Posts: 3,320
Joined: Dec 9, 2009
  ♀   Jul 30, 2011, 12:50am  #40

they were reading the wrong altimeter, their mistake.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 12:51am  #41

not tried to land in the fog.


If the pilots were told , that the tarmac was closed for landing, they wouldn`t bother to land . Simple as that .But it was not closed . Planes can land in a heavy fog , you know . It happens many times . I am a pilot`s daughter , so I have got some knowledge about the subject .

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 01:02am  #42

they were reading the wrong altimeter, their mistake.

Where did they know this from , that they were positioned inside a ravine , Einstein ? It was a job for the controller`s crew to inform them about such unexpected situation as flying over a ravine, which would give them a chance and time to adjust the plane to the real ground zero position of a tarmac

Wroclaw Threads: 63
Posts: 6,646
Joined: Apr 1, 2006
  ♂   Jul 30, 2011, 01:23am  #43

It was a job for the controller`s crew to inform them about such unexpected situation as flying over a ravine, which would give them a chance and time to adjust the plane to the real ground zero position of a tarmac


it wouldn't have been unexpected, if the flight crew had done a better job of their pre-flight planning like they were supposed to.

besides that they had electronic/radar equipment telling them they were too low.

ravine or no ravine... they didn't pull up when the onboard equipment told them to.

if they ignored the onboard equipment they would just as likely ignore the flight controllers.

f stop Threads: 30
Posts: 3,320
Joined: Dec 9, 2009
  ♀   Edited by: f stop  Jul 30, 2011, 01:33am  #44

Einstein

Nice! With fog, somebody should have been watching the radio altimeter.

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Edited by: delphiandomine  Jul 30, 2011, 01:39am  #45

The plane`s altimeter was unable to give them precise informations ( misleading to the real ground tarmac altitude ) , as you may have heard , because they were flying over a ravine ( if you only understand what consequences that factor have had ) .

Monia - with all due respect, this is rubbish. There were two types of altimeter used - radio and barometric. The radio one measures from the plane to the ground, while the barometric one measures from the runway height to the plane. It seems that they switched from barometric to radio in order to inhibit the TAWS system. There's no conspiracy here - their decision to do this was one of the reasons why that plane crashed.

(incidentally - Blasik was reading out barometric readings - Page 226 of the English report makes it clear that he was reading those out, while the rest were working with the Radio Altimeter)

If the pilots were told , that the tarmac was closed for landing, they wouldn`t bother to land . Simple as that .But it was not closed . Planes can land in a heavy fog , you know . It happens many times . I am a pilot`s daughter , so I have got some knowledge about the subject .

Planes certainly can, but not at an airport which doesn't have a precision landing system installed. There was no ILS at Smolensk-North, nor was there anything else (okay, so there was the 2xNDB markers - but they are hardly "precision").

The airport wasn't closed, this is true - but at the same time, they were clearly told that there were "no conditions for landing". This is as good as closed - the plane went below 100m without authorisation. In fact, if you read the report, you can clearly see that although they were cleared to 100m, they weren't allowed to actually go near that - they should've "gone around" from a much higher height. Airport open or closed, it's an irrelevance - they weren't cleared to land and certainly weren't cleared to go below 100m.

Where did they know this from , that they were positioned inside a ravine , Einstein ?

The barometric altimeter, if they were paying attention to it, would mean that they would be at least 140m over the deepest part of the ravine if they obeyed minima. However, the report makes it clear that they were aware of the ravine there.

which would give them a chance and time to adjust the plane to the real ground zero position of a tarmac

The barometric altimeter would have done just that. In fact - they shouldn't have had to adjust the plane at all, as they should've been "going around" by the time they crossed the ravine. How can you excuse the "go around" order coming far too late?

Sorry Monia, but read the report rather than the media - it's all there in black and white.

Nice! With fog, somebody should have been watching the radio altimeter.

They shouldn't have been using the radio altimeter at all, but rather the barometric one.

Again - a clear cut sign of incompetence within the Air Force.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 01:47am  #46

it wouldn't have been unexpected, if the flight crew had done a better job of their pre-flight planning like they were supposed to.

besides that they had electronic/radar equipment telling them they were too low.

ravine or no ravine... they didn't pull up when the onboard equipment told them to.

if they ignored the onboard equipment they would just as likely ignore the flight controllers.


Where did you take this information from ?

They knew, that they were flying too low and they didn`t change the altitude of a plane , right?

Don`t you think that if they knew the actual altitude, they would pull the plane up ?

The clock`s were giving the the right altitude , nothing was broken , but they were reading misleading altitude , that altitude was a ground zero for a ravine , which they didn`t have any knowledge about .

When they realised that they were inside a ravine they started pullig up the plane , and it was just seconds which they missed to survive.

Do you think that they deliberately were flying too low or you think that such simple procedure as reading cockpits clock`s was so mysterious for them, that they made a mistake in reading the real altitude .

You don`t understand the whole idea . The clocks data were telling them the distance from the base of a ravine to the altitude of a plane , which they didn`t realise about . They started to lower the plane as they were preparing a plane for landing . Once of a sudden the clock were starting to show unexpected low position so then instead of landing they picked up the plane but it was too late as the trees damaged wings .

If they knew they were in a ravine they wouldn`t prepare for landing inside the ravine . I am sure you understand it was crucial to that whole situation .

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 02:00am  #47

There were two types of altimeter used - radio and barometric.


Which one was on , do you know ? How did they know they were flying over a ravine from ? If they knew they wouldn`t start lowering their altitude to prepare for landing ?

Why did the controller run out from a building and started shouting - what did I do ?

Even if they were reading radio altimeter , it was up to controllers to give them proper information about the course of the plane which was totall false as they were out of course several degrees . That wrong course off tarmac`s position was crucial, because they might not be flying over a ravine then .

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 30, 2011, 02:02am  #48

They knew, that they were flying too low and they didn`t change the altitude of a plane , right?

Don`t you think that if they knew the actual altitude, they would pull the plane up ?


In a situation like this, where you can't see anything out of the window and with the head of the Air Force breathing down your neck, along with the President of the country on-board, who *must* attend a very important ceremony (for him)? It's pretty obvious that they were under huge stress at the time, not helped by the utter unfamiliarity with such a situation.

Anyway - the real altitude was available to them all the time. General Blasik was even reading it out to them!

The clock`s were giving the the right altitude , nothing was broken , but they were reading misleading altitude , that altitude was a ground zero for a ravine , which they didn`t have any knowledge about .


They didn't need to have any knowledge of it - they shouldn't have been using the Radio Altimeter. It's as simple as that. Can you give me any credible explanation why they were using the Radio and not the Barometric altimeter? Blasik was able to use the Barometric readings - so...

When they realised that they were inside a ravine they started pullig up the plane , and it was just seconds which they missed to survive.


Now - under such a high stress situation, is it such a surprise that the events spiralled out of control for them? They more-or-less had to descend to minima to make sure that their boss didn't give them hell afterwards, after all. Now - perhaps you might want to explain why the plane had already gone down to below 100m before the "go around" command was given? That's well below the height that they were allowed to be at!

Do you think that they deliberately were flying too low or you think that such simple procedure as reading cockpits clock`s was so mysterious for them, that they made a mistake in reading the real altitude .


Using the radio altimeter rather than the barometric - no-one knows. As for flying too low - it's quite possible that the commander of the flight chose to go lower than he was allowed to go in order to give himself a chance at landing the plane. We'll never know, but such behaviour was/is common in the Air Force.

You don`t understand the whole idea . The clocks data were telling them the distance from the base of a ravine to the altitude of a plane , which they didn`t realise about . They started to lower the plane as they were preparing a plane for landing . Once of a sudden the clock were starting to show unexpected low position so then instead of landing they picked up the plane but it was too late as the trees damaged wings .


The whole idea is that they were wrongly using the radio altimeter instead of the barometric altimeter - for reasons unknown. It may have been to silence the TAWS system - which didn't have Smolensk-North in its database. Don't forget - the navigator and Blasik were both reading out numbers - one, the RA data, the other, the Barometric data.

f stop Threads: 30
Posts: 3,320
Joined: Dec 9, 2009
  ♀   Jul 30, 2011, 02:02am  #49

They shouldn't have been using the radio altimeter at all, but rather the barometric one.[/quote]
dang, you're right, they were watching radalt and thought they were closer to the runway than they were.

Wroclaw Threads: 63
Posts: 6,646
Joined: Apr 1, 2006
  ♂   Jul 30, 2011, 02:06am  #50

Don`t you think that if they knew the actual altitude, they would pull the plane up ?


pilots are taught to trust there equipment. they didn't. they ignored it.

which they didn`t have any knowledge about .


which is what pre-flight planning is about. making sure you are aware of possible difficulties. before encountering them.

You don`t understand the whole idea .


it doesn't matter if they were watching a good or bad clock. they ingored an onboard warning, which would have saved the aircraft, had they reacted to it immediately.

setting the clocks was their responsibility. reading them correctly should be second nature. there is no-one else to blame for it other than the crew.

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 30, 2011, 02:15am  #51

pilots are taught to trust there equipment. they didn't. they ignored it.


Quite badly, actually - from the report, it says that the command to go-around was given at a mere 39m above the runway.

hague1cmaeron Threads: 20
Posts: 1,761
Joined: Mar 30, 2010
  ♂   Jul 30, 2011, 03:56am  #52

They won't believe it because it's said by the Government that they blindly hate. If it was Jaroslaw Kaczynski in power, they'd believe whatever he says - poor, deluded, stupid people.


My sentiments exactly .

czar Threads: 2
Posts: 200
Joined: Mar 3, 2010
  ♂   Edited by: czar  Jul 30, 2011, 06:57am  #53

the investigation did not follow international protocall, in what world does putin head the investigation of a downed plane?

when the plane was downed poland became a russian puppet government, hence the institutional problems and collusion with pilot error

anyone who beleives otherwise is the enemy.

pawian Threads: 163
Posts: 8,675
Joined: May 30, 2008
  ♂   Jul 30, 2011, 09:15am  #54

=czar]anyone who beleives otherwise is the enemy.

Stop saying insanities.

milky Threads: 18
Posts: 1,782
Joined: Oct 26, 2009
  ♀   Jul 30, 2011, 10:35am  #55

How did they know they were flying over a ravine

Where the Pilots not familiar with the airport?

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 30, 2011, 11:08am  #56

the investigation did not follow international protocall, in what world does putin head the investigation of a downed plane?


Care to tell me what international protocol is when dealing with a military accident over your territory?

Hint : ICAO regulations don't apply.

when the plane was downed poland became a russian puppet government, hence the institutional problems and collusion with pilot error


Yawn. Same old nonsense. People on here (who can actually fly planes) have already attested to the attitude of the Air Force in Poland, and the CASA accident certainly had nothing to do with Russians.

anyone who beleives otherwise is the enemy.


Keep your opinions on the other side of the pond - we don't need them.

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 11:24am  #57

Just ask yourself a question , why there was no other non Russian investigators right on the spot ? Few reports were missing ( the vital one of the controller`s ) . Polish prosecutors were just puppets .

Putin ( former KGB agent ) is the last Russian to be trusted . Their report is just one big lie as Putin as the head of the investigation had the final word about the report contents .

which is what pre-flight planning is about. making sure you are aware of possible difficulties. before encountering them.

it doesn't matter if they were watching a good or bad clock. they ingored an onboard warning, which would have saved the aircraft, had they reacted to it immediately.

setting the clocks was their responsibility. reading them correctly should be second nature. there is no-one else to blame for it other than the crew.


Wrong altitude was one factor , the other was wrong course which the controllers knew . Why didn`t they give the pilots the proper data for the plane to be adjusted to the proper path of landing .

Nothing would help, as they were given wrong flight course by flight controllers . Wrong course just seconds before landing means inevitable crash .

Like I said there were other important factors , one of the most important was the idea of landing on the russian air force tarmac unequipped with modern technology devices .( it was not any civil airport by all means ) . The modern electronical equipment was removable .If someone iportant was langing the devices were being installed , why at that day they were not . It was someone`s mistake not to install such for the polish aplane to give it safer conditions . In such case they would be able to land in a fog , whatever .

It was not pilot`s fault .

If I was a person to decide I would never land on such tarmac I would chose the civil airport .

Monia     Jul 30, 2011, 11:40am  #58

Where the Pilots not familiar with the airport?


They knew but it was not on the proper course .

delphiandomine Threads: 51
Posts: 12,806
Joined: Nov 25, 2008
  ♂  :-( Jul 30, 2011, 12:07pm  #59

Just ask yourself a question , why there was no other non Russian investigators right on the spot ? Few reports were missing ( the vital one of the controller`s ) . Polish prosecutors were just puppets .


Puppets?

That's a pretty serious allegation to make. Bear in mind that the report actually does contain heavy criticism of the controllers - and they are mentioned as one of the contributory causes of the accident.

Putin ( former KGB agent ) is the last Russian to be trusted . Their report is just one big lie as Putin as the head of the investigation had the final word about the report contents .


Whether or not you trust the Russians is one thing, but I trust the Poles. The guys investigating this were some of the top guys in the country - to accuse them of being puppets is very, very serious stuff.

Nothing would help, as they were given wrong flight course by flight controllers . Wrong course just seconds before landing means inevitable crash .


Again - you don't seem to understand the concept of minima. If they had kept to the minimums that they were authorised to go to (it's all in the report) - then the plane wouldn't have crashed. The Captain went way, way below them - and that caused the crash. Unless of course, you're telling me that there were obstacles at the 100-130m (Barometric) height? That's news to me.

Like I said there were other important factors , one of the most important was the idea of landing on the russian air force tarmac unequipped with modern technology devices .( it was not any civil airport by all means ) .


Correct, it was sheer idiocy to put the President and Prime Minister there. The airport was essentially a piece of tarmac with some very basic landing aids - and was more or less not operating as an airport. The state (as shown in the report) of the infrastructure was shocking and certainly not suitable for a 'HEAD' flight.

The modern electronical equipment was removable .


Perhaps so. However, it's an irrelevance - as far as the Poles knew, there was no ILS installed at Smolensk-North. At the end of the day - if there was such equipment or not, it really doesn't matter - it wasn't being used on this approach and that's that.

If someone iportant was langing the devices were being installed , why at that day they were not . It was someone`s mistake not to install such for the polish aplane to give it safer conditions . In such case they would be able to land in a fog , whatever .


Again - it's the captain's responsibility to fly the plane safely. If there was no ILS, then he shouldn't have been taking risks - and he certainly shouldn't have gone below 100m barometric. Of course, an ILS system would help - but it wasn't there, so what were they doing going below 100m?

If I was a person to decide I would never land on such tarmac I would chose the civil airport .


That's why the Defence Minister has gone.

You're actually right here - it was sheer madness to allow a plane with the President to go to such an airport, even in perfect weather conditions - they simply weren't set up for accepting such flights. Even the Russians were pretty reluctant to allow them to land there before that day - and you can hear from the ATC discussions that they were preparing to send them to Moscow.

The fact that the BOR officers couldn't gain access to the airfield should have been enough reason to not go there.

Monia, some Poles do have blood on their hands, but at the end of the day - the commander of the plane took it into the ground, not anyone else. It happens a hell of a lot - I seem to remember a figure of 1/3rd of aviation accidents are due to pilots flying planes into the ground. The CASA accident was a great example, as was Korean Air Flight 801 among countless others.

It happens :(

isthatu2 Threads: 7
Posts: 3,942
Joined: Apr 3, 2008
  ♂   Jul 30, 2011, 01:00pm  #60

I don't think the Russians will ever take responsibility.

why the hell should they? It was a Polish f**k up.



Home / News / Unanswered [this forum]

Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash

  Important: If you post a link to a non-English source, please ALWAYS summarize / translate the relevant parts into English!  

To post as guest, enter a temporary and unique username (without password) or login and post as a member.