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 Northwester View Post
    According to the prosecutor and the cell service provider, someone was using the president's cell phone 3 times after the crash on the 10th and the 11th. The first time the cell phone was used at 10:46 on the 10th, so 5 minutes after the official crash time. It took the first firefighters more than 10 minutes to arrive at the crash site. Whoever was using the phone logged into the network and checked the voicemail. The voicemail was checked again on the 11th at 12:40 and 4:20 PM.
    That is a bit vague. I can check my cell voicemail from any phone in the world. Are you saying that EXACT phone was used OR did someone (wife, etc) check the cell phones voicemail from another phone?

    EDIT: I apologize for stepping in the manure of this thread , but Northwester seems to either link , or quote what was said.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TheKiecker View Post
      That is a bit vague. I can check my cell voicemail from any phone in the world. Are you saying that EXACT phone was used OR did someone (wife, etc) check the cell phones voicemail from another phone?
      Wife was with the boss on the plane. You can check it from any phone but in order to do it you need to have the PIN handy. If you do it from your phone, you get the voice mail without any extra hassle

      Comment


      • Not to pick nits, but if only one person can answer the President of a Countries Cell phone ( I assume he'd have more than one)... They got bigger problems than missing phantom trees.

        Comment


        • There are several issues connected to the use of the president's phone after the crash. Known facts: someone was logging several times into a cell network and checking president's voicemail from the president's phone - not from some other phone; the president's phone was returned to Poland destroyed (burnt) in an unusable shape; the prosecutors decided not to pursue the matter since only few minutes were used and the cost was minimal (this is really strange - someone steals president's phone and uses it to get access to privileged information and the prosecutors are talking about the cost?).
          The simplest explanation is that the phone was found burnt at the crash site, the sim card was removed, and placed in a different phone to access the voicemail. Some people say that it is also possible that the phone was destroyed after it was used. This is not as improbable as it sounds. There were confirmed cases where some ID documents were photographed on the site in a perfect shape but later returned half way burnt.

          Comment


          • I forgot to mention the source:
            Records of the 5th Investigative Department of the District Prosecutor's Office in Warsaw coded as V Ds. 230/11.

            Comment


            • SO Russians did probably cause the Polish Air Force crash and it's not pilot error if you jam the signal.


              Well well Russians say they have (to jam signals from the ground or cause parameter readings to malfunction,' said the unnamed intelligence official

              A headline to a story in Russia's biggest newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda today read: 'Are the Americans implicated in the Superjet crash?'
              'We know that they have special technology - that we also have - to jam signals from the ground or cause parameter readings to malfunction,' said the unnamed intelligence official, highlighting a US military presence at Jakarta Airport from where the plane took off on May 9.
              The Sukhoi Superjet 100 is the first entirely new passenger plane unveiled by Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union.




              Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1voAIcO2O

              Comment


              • Originally posted by justLOT787 View Post
                'We know that they have special technology - that we also have - to jam signals from the ground or cause parameter readings to malfunction,' said the unnamed intelligence official, highlighting a US military presence at Jakarta Airport from where the plane took off on May 9.
                And they put those fog generating machines on the side of the vulcano...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Peter_K View Post
                  And they put those fog generating machines on the side of the vulcano...
                  Not to mention that machine that causes you to appoint an inexperienced and ill-prepared crew who will definitely choose, without VIP pressure of any kind, to attempt a risky and fairly hopeless approach while transporting Poland's most valuable passengers. Because they have that machine too.

                  But please explain to me this existing technology that can jam radar altimeters, pressure altimeters, yokes and thrust levers...

                  Comment


                  • Scientists gathered at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, on May 23rd, 2012, after examining the results of prof. Binienda's research, stated that there is no doubt that if the wing hit the tree, the tree would have been broken, not the wing, and the wing would have maintained its aerodynamic characteristics. Therefore the crash could not have been caused by the tree breaking off the wing.

                    Confirmed by:
                    Prof. dr hab. eng. Janusz Kawecki – Director of the Mechanical Department of Cracow Institute of Technology
                    Prof. dr hab. eng. Andrzej Michal Oles – Department of Physics, Astronomy, and Applied Computer Sciences of the Jagiellonian University
                    Prof. dr hab. eng. Jacek Ronda – Department of Metals Engineering and Industrial Computer Sciences of the Mining-Smelting Institute of Technology
                    Prof. dr hab. Edward Malec – Director of the Physics, Astronomy, and Applied Computer Sciences of the Jagiellonian University
                    Prof. dr hab. eng. Piotr Witakowski – Department of Geomechanics, Construction, and Geotechnics of the Mining-Smelting Institute of Technology

                    Comment


                    • Prof. Binienda has been visiting Poland in the last few days presenting the results of his and dr. Szuladzinski's research at several universities, amongst many at the Warsaw Institute of Technology, his alma mater, and the Jagiellonian University. The reception at all places has been overwhelmingly positive. He also got an invitation to meet with the prosecutors still conducting the crash investigation.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Northwester View Post
                        Scientists gathered at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, on May 23rd, 2012, after examining the results of prof. Binienda's research, stated that there is no doubt that if the wing hit the tree, the tree would have been broken, not the wing, and the wing would have maintained its aerodynamic characteristics. Therefore the crash could not have been caused by the tree breaking off the wing.

                        Confirmed by:
                        Prof. dr hab. eng. Janusz Kawecki – Director of the Mechanical Department of Cracow Institute of Technology
                        Prof. dr hab. eng. Andrzej Michal Oles – Department of Physics, Astronomy, and Applied Computer Sciences of the Jagiellonian University
                        Prof. dr hab. eng. Jacek Ronda – Department of Metals Engineering and Industrial Computer Sciences of the Mining-Smelting Institute of Technology
                        Prof. dr hab. Edward Malec – Director of the Physics, Astronomy, and Applied Computer Sciences of the Jagiellonian University
                        Prof. dr hab. eng. Piotr Witakowski – Department of Geomechanics, Construction, and Geotechnics of the Mining-Smelting Institute of Technology
                        Ok, Northwester, you've almost won me over. There's one thing left to do...

                        Put Prof. Binienda's and his colleagues above in a Tu-154. Find a suitable tree of the same specifications as the one in the report. Fly them into it, knocking the tree down with the wing at the same point along the leading edge. Then make a safe landing and issue them my congratulations on solving this mystery. Do you think they would take me up on this? If not, why not?

                        Comment


                        • I wish I spent immense amounts of time weaving in and out seeming less data. It just makes you sound soooooo impressive and the "ooooooh and ahhhhh" effect is just awesome.

                          How did they speciatate the tree in the winter? Did they use leaves or leaflets? If so, how did they determine the origin. What of the bark, how many species and how did they extrapolate the dimensions? If so, did they use a "foresters prisim" which would be the conventional means to determine bark and leaf litter on the ground? Or, perhaps aviation essperts are more adept than dendrologists at such determinations. Yes, that must be right or planes would fall from the sky. But wait, planes do fall from the sky so .... "bother said mouse".

                          Did they do a Geno-type cross match with litter found in the structural components? Big fancy words like "university" have no effect on me and usually PhD means just "piled higher and deeper". Did they factor the temp and the strength as the one went down the other would go up?

                          Oh dear?
                          Last edited by guamainiac; 2012-05-29, 00:31. Reason: I confused myself.
                          Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                          Comment


                          • The accurate altitude data that puts the craft above the trees has been recorded by the board computers that were read in the US at the Universal Avionics lab. The first pic shows the TAWS numbers, 47 ft (or 14.3 m) at 10:41:02 when the FMS froze, and 120 ft (or 36.6 m) one second earlier (10:41:01). Considering the climb rate of 603 ft/min (or 3 m/s) slightly less than 3 seconds before the FMS froze the aircraft was at 30 m at TAWS #38 - way above the tree tops.
                            The official reports (second pic) place the aircraft at alt of 15.6 m at 10:41:04.5 (TAWS time 10:41:01). That's less than half of the actual altitude recorded by TAWS.

                            Comment


                            • Sync

                              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Northwester View Post
                                Considering the climb rate of 603 ft/min (or 3 m/s) slightly less than 3 seconds before the FMS froze the aircraft was at 30 m at TAWS #38 - way above the tree tops.
                                I know a tree who'd beg to differ

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X