Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Polish President and wife killed in Tu-154 crash

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Evan View Post
    - failure to accept a Russian navigator familiar with the field when offered;
    I don't think that this was ever offered by the Russians. Ether way, presence of a foreign navigator, the so called "sthurman" on board would violate NATO rules of which Poland is a part.

    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    - failure to apply pitch, TOGA thrust and retract gear/flaps at 100m;
    - failure to apply TOGA thrust and retract gear/flaps at 60m;
    You don't start cleaning up the aircraft before a positive rate of climb is established. If they were glued to the radar altimeter, they never raised it or by the time they did, it was too late.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Evan View Post
      What would that change? It was a non-precision approach. It required visual flight below 100m QFE.
      A report from an aviation accident investigation is supposed to include results of examination and evaluation of ALL circumstances and conditions that might have lead or contributed to the accident. The Russian report is far from that.

      Comment


      • Let's not talk here about prejudices, being anti-Russian or anti-Polish.
        I have Russian friends and I think Russia is a great country that produced great artists and scientists.
        I have a problem with this crash and the way this investigation is conducted.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Evan View Post
          The autopilot in pitch mode will automatically disengage when the column is brought back more than 50mm from trimmed. The PF obviously either was not aware of this requirement, or chose to continue the descent.
          How could he be unaware? I mean, he pulled (only) a bit and thought what? That the AP will take a hint? I can't imagine this.

          It's so weird - perhaps each pilot thought the other one is flying and/or has disconnected AP and so on?

          But you are right, the autopilot should have been manually disengaged before this point. That alone might have saved them. They were aware they were using it because there was no control force on the column at this point, so either intentional AP or look Mom, no hands.
          I think they didn't need to apply much force before they "decided" to go around (except maybe to reduce vertical speed since they were aiming at the NDB and not the threshold). They were trimmed and the AP was in fact in control.

          The autothrottle requires an ILS glideslope to go-around (unless the aircraft has mods we aren't aware of):
          I assume even without go-around mode, the autothrottle would try to keep the commanded speed (and they weren't short of speed). I think it's more about AP pitch control, probably the APP/GS mode must be selected for the autopilot to pitch up (and the actual ILS GS signal may be not needed at all).

          Anyway:
          However, the APPROACH and GLIDE SLOPE buttons as well as the GO-AROUND button were not used by the crew in the accident flight.
          Originally posted by Northwester View Post
          That does not change the fact the the ATC had RIGHT and INTENTION to interrupt the approach and divert the plane but was ordered otherwise. If he was left alone to exercise his best judgement, without outside interference, the plane would have landed safely in Moscow.
          I think so. Nevertheless it's the PIC who is responsible for safety of his flight (esp. WRT meteorological conditions). Perhaps they would ignore ATC like the Yak pilots reportedly did? ATC told them the conditions several times.
          Sure planes land in worse conditions, but on different airdromes with different landing systems.
          Of course. The point is ATC doesn't have to see the runway.
          Page 143 of Polish comments: "According to the CVR recording, read by Polish side, the PIC announced, after crossing 100m alt, that he is doing go around. The co-pilot cofirmed it.
          Hmm... "According to the CVR recording, read by the Polish side, the commander of the crew reported, after passing a height of 100 m, that he leaves for the second circle. The second pilot has confirmed. There is however no strong command commander (pilot flying), consistent with AFM initiating this process."
          I wonder why isn't it in the transcript, not even the "(Unintelligible)", and what do they mean by "reported". Reported to whom?

          But let's assume for a moment that he was really going around. Then why did he fail to pull up? Let's assume he pressed the "go around" button. Why didn't he pull up when AP ignored the button?
          Let's assume F/O "confirmed" going around at 10:40:50.5 and PIC "reported" GA at 10:40:49.5 (while F/O was saying "normal" - that could explain why it's missing). He'd have 10+ seconds to react and pull up (and advance the throttles).

          Agree. About the PIC electronic baro alt. According to Polish side, navigator could not have done it where he was strapped in his seat.
          So who did it? PIC? Why? Certainly not to silence EGPWS? Incidentally?

          None of that can be confirmed till Poland gets the ORIGINAL equipment including FDRs and FMS. Now that the official investigation is over one would expect that the original equipment is sent to Poland. Let's see if that's going to happen.
          Isn't it true Poland has received the original QAR (months ago btw), and that EGPWS and FMS have been processed by the manufacturer in the USA?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by kris View Post
            Hmm... "According to the CVR recording, read by the Polish side, the commander of the crew reported, after passing a height of 100 m, that he leaves for the second circle. The second pilot has confirmed. There is however no strong command commander (pilot flying), consistent with AFM initiating this process."
            I wonder why isn't it in the transcript, not even the "(Unintelligible)", and what do they mean by "reported". Reported to whom?
            I think you are looking at the narrow, secondary meaning of "zglosic". The primary meaning is: announce, notify, declare. Maybe the authors of the text used the wrong word in this case.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              - The Russians might have taken one hour to respond with the rescue. But the people on the plane was all dead 0.1 seconds after the final impact.
              Where did you get this information from? All dead within 0.1 sec after the impact?

              Comment


              • There is a whole string of threads that are very interesting yet go without answer.

                These are very early on and despite their seeming importance they never get anywhere close to resolution?

                #39 Myndee indicates that General Alyoshin says the pilot disregards the ATC instructions to divert. There seems to be common agreement on this.

                #29 finds Evan asking who makes the decision to divert a presidential aircraft.

                Fast forward to posts #485 through #502 and there are a series of questions and:

                Peter K in #485 (in a tired state from the kids cites "Article 13 of the Geneva Convention" ... I mention this not to embarrass Peter of course but to try to get it to ring a bell ...an important point goes unanswered.

                #488 has Northwest comments on the responsibilities of ATC.

                #503 has me questioning any prior precedent or agreement how the flight should be conducted. What is the normal protocol for such a flight (military versus civilian) and such.

                #502 I comment that it was said in the beginning that the investigation was under the Chicago Guidelines and it appeared from earlier comments that ATC had, under military protocols the power to divert.

                So can we please come to some definitive resolution to the questions.

                Who was directing the flight in and during the approach phase and did ATC have the power to divert the aircraft?

                There are indeed rules and yes .... I am fully aware that the PIC has the ultimate responsibility for the aircraft and the conduct of the flight.

                Again .... did ATC (since it was so intimated if you read the series of posts and some intermingled throughout), did ATC have the authority to order the flight to divert.

                From Myndee's comment (General Alyoshin) indicated they did.

                Please do not comment on hypothetical in flight emergencies or equipment failure. Just who had the power to do what.

                Did Russian ATC have the power to close the airport and failed to do so? Did they have the power to divert and failed to do so?

                Thanks but it seems these are salient points that we allude to but then dance around because we don't know the answer. IMHO (I know since when is Guam humble), these are some of the most important points of all since they do indeed involve who had control of the fate of this aircraft.
                Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                  All the data is fabricated, in which case the Polish government needs to make an outright accusation against the Russians that the data is fabricated, not misinterpreted. This constitutes an enormous international crime and therefore before they make such an accusation they must be able to back it up with hard evidence, and, of course, motive.
                  A little bit about politics. Even if Polish government had a proof of Russian criminal involvement, they would not disclose it. For two reasons:

                  - it would cause a major international crisis that US would not allow to happen
                  - it would be contrary to Polish political raison d'etat.

                  I think the main goal of Polish government, that is Russian friendly and in a strong opposition to political stance of the late president, is to convince Russians to accept part of the blame and close the whole affair. I think it would be in Russian interest to accept that and make it go away. Otherwise there is always a danger of some sensitive information accidentally slipping out and leading to unpredictable developments.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fear_of_Flying
                    It should be the goal of the investigation to arrive at the cause of the accident through an objective examination of the facts. It should be the goal of the aviation community - which presumably includes many of the members on this forum - to learn whatever they can from this accident to prevent a similar occurrence in the future. I really couldn't care less what the political goal of the Polish government is, nor do I see much point in so obsessively trying to assign blame. But that's just me. Why should the Russians say it was their fault, again?
                    No one is saying that the Russians should accept all the blame. Don't twist my words. They just should not maintain that everything on their side was 100% perfect as they did in the report. The condition of the airdrome, lighting, ATC issues - these should be acknowledged to make the report complete.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by guamainiac View Post
                      Thanks but it seems these are salient points that we allude to but then dance around because we don't know the answer. IMHO (I know since when is Guam humble), these are some of the most important points of all since they do indeed involve who had control of the fate of this aircraft.
                      I agree. Let's try to revisit some of them.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Northwester View Post
                        No one is saying that the Russians should accept all the blame. Don't twist my words. They just should not maintain that everything on their side was 100% perfect as they did in the report. The condition of the airdrome, lighting, ATC issues - these should be acknowledged to make the report complete.
                        They haven't maintained that everything was 100% perfect on their side. They disclosed that the approach lights were damaged. They disclosed that the landing radar was not accurate enough to determine a perfect glidepath, and that the actual glidepath deviated from the prescribed angle.

                        None of this matters. None of this caused the crash. Landing radar is not meant to be precision guidance. Approach lights are meaningless if they can't be seen. If you attempt a landing without ILS in those conditions, you have no one to blame but yourselves.

                        I understand politics, but I don't subscribe to the theory that they should have precedent over the truth. These are democracies, and therefore they must provide the truth to the electorate. From what the report reveals, I think the Russians are being quite diplomatic. The Polish need to let their people know the truth and who to hold responsible.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Northwester View Post
                          Where did you get this information from? All dead within 0.1 sec after the impact?
                          Northwester, will you do us all a favor and READ the report...

                          The medical tracing examination revealed that at the time of the aircraft destruction, inverted, the passengers and crew members were exposed to acceleration of over 100g. According to the medical experts, death of all persons on board occurred instantaneously at the time of the collision due to numerous mechanical injuries incompatible with life obtained due to traumatic effect of the outrageous impact deceleration forces and destructed parts of the aircraft.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            Northwester, will you do us all a favor and READ the report...
                            And I am supposed to say: oh, ok over 100g, I guess I have to shut up now.

                            Even a high school student can tell you that if you bring a body to a COMPLETE stop from a horizontal speed of 300km/h in a time of ONE TENTH of a second, you will expose that body to a 84.97g. And race car drivers survive crashes where they are exposed to 100g. By my estimation the passengers were exposed to the range of 80 to 40g. These forces are not fatal if they happen in general horizontal direction and are short in duration. What kills people are the impact forces when they collide with the parts of the plane. But these impacts are not uniform or universal. The body of the plane desintegrates and some passengers are thrown out without hitting anything.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Northwester View Post
                              What kills people are the impact forces when they collide with the parts of the plane. But these impacts are not uniform or universal. The body of the plane desintegrates and some passengers are thrown out without hitting anything.
                              Except... the ground...

                              Ok, perhaps a very adept Super-Pole could tuck and roll at 300km/h and hit the ground running, while inverted, in a way that overcomes these enormous g-forces. We can't rule that out just because some Russian "medical experts" have. After all, if a NASCAR driver strapped securely into a roll cage by a racing harness and wearing a helmet can survive a high-g racetrack crash, certainly a passenger wearing a lap-belt on a Tu-154 can survive an inverted, airframe-disintegrating crash into a wooded area at maximum thrust. Yes, I can see that now.

                              Comment


                              • Not a single chair survived this accident in a recognizable condition. You can imagine what happened to people occupying them.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X