News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Can you explain to us why they even attempted the approach, given that the approach flown required 1200m of visibility - after being told by a couple of different sources that visibility was 400m and falling?

Of course, the answer is simple - no guts, no glory. The Captain was going to get it from his bosses if he didn't attempt a landing - that much is obvious, given the PAF culture and attitude towards safety/training.


The Poles have their own 'black box' which the Russians had no idea about - it was dealt with in Warsaw, because the piece of kit was specialist Polish equipment. I've heard and seen nothing which suggests that the Russians even knew what it was, let alone how to deal with it.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Generally speaking, you're better reading the official reports than the media.


Again - you show a total inability to understand the concept of "minimums". You know, you need to learn about aviation before you can comment on it.


Then Seanus, you need to explain to me one thing. The 100m thing is actually a red herring - because for the approach flown (2xNDB) - he was required to have 1800m of visibility. Can you explain why he even attempted to land when he clearly didn't have 1800m of visibility?

Incidentally,


Not just a Wroclaw thing. I've seen guys drive like absolute maniacs with kids in the car - one idiot spent about 5km driving about 10m from my car, getting more and more angry because I wouldn't speed up - and he had two small kids in the car. What were their chances of surviving a sudden impact at 90km/h? He had no time to brake if I did.

Convex, one thing I don't understand - how come the captain was only qualified to fly ILS Cat. I approaches and not II or III?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]

I feel sorry for them - they're going to spend an eternity hunting for something that just isn't there.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]

Amusing, isn't it?

I'm still wondering why no-one has given a credible explanation for why they busted their minimums yet.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


I can't help but think that a lot of the ignorance comes from the point of view that ATC are somehow responsible for everything that a plane does. It's definitely not common knowledge that the captain of the plane has the final say among non-aviation types.

Anyway, Seanus/Monia/anyone else - please, tell me one thing.

Why did the Captain break his minimums?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]

So, instead of sticking to facts, you chose to yet again make ridiculous statements. I know the stuff on this thread is too difficult for you to understand - so zip it, eh?

But let's just go into some more details.

The guy was attempting an approach in some very difficult conditions. If he couldn't land the plane, with the forecast getting worse - they would almost certainly have to go to Vnukovo in Moscow, or head back to Warsaw. Either of these would be a PR disaster for the President - he was relying on a good speech at Katyn to improve his ratings, and either turning up massively late or not at all would be a nightmare.

So, the commander of the Air Force is in there, helping out - so he's breathing down his neck, too. He doesn't have to say anything - the commander already knows that if he doesn't at least try, his career could be over. He also knows that if he makes a landing in exceptionally difficult (and well below minimums) conditions, he'll have a chance at being rewarded (we can see that the Air Force doesn't particularly care about safety - the report makes that clear). So - he attempted the approach.

How many times do humans do risky things like this? All the time.

Off-Topic / When do you teach a Polish \ English child a second language? [8]


Almost all schools of thought on this say that the parents should use their native tongue. However - the children will always speak the "language of the playground" slightly better - unless you're in a 3rd country independent of either home country.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Ask the BOR that question.

Life / Why Polish people should be proud of being Polish? [370]


Right. That's why millions of Poles collaborated with enemies throughout history, including even betraying the country in order to prevent their countrymen from enjoying democracy. Give me a break - Poles are as conformist as everyone else.


Innate sense of justice? You've clearly never studied the Polish legal system - if you had, you'd soon know that "justice" often depends on personal contacts.


Anarchical spirit? When was the last time Polish-Americans rebelled against...well..anything?


Watch it.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


To me, it suggests a desire to get that plane down and "be a hero". Bear in mind that if the plane didn't land in Smolensk, it would've been a disaster for the President, especially after Tusk got the headlines a few days before.


No. The report makes it clear - the Russians asked if they could have two separate ceremonies for logistical reasons (protecting both the Prime Minister and President at the same time - difficult).

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Because...it wasn't?


What conflicting accounts?

Every single account of the crash has the same story - the pilot busted his minimums.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Let's see..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_965
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Airlines_Flight_605
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RusAir_Flight_9605
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlasjet_Flight_4203
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armavia_Flight_967

Plenty of examples in history.


The only people pushing that line are the ones who think that Putin cared less about a ceremonial President of a minor European country.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


As I read it - the report makes that conclusion based on the inactivity between the "go-around?" comment and answer and the flight controls being pulled. There's nothing to "prove" it one way or another - which is what this military report it saying. The basis of the conclusion in the report is that earlier in the flight, they had planned such a move (to go around on autopilot).

They do agree with each other - there's no contradiction, the military is merely saying that there is no evidence of the button actually being pressed (which is what the test flights were for - to see if the button press was recorded despite being non-operative).


Well, using the radar rather than barometric altimeter might have something to do with that belief.

They knew that they didn't have data for that part of the world - that's why the deliberate act of setting the barometric altimeter 'high' (in order to silence the TAWS device) was made.

As for margins of error - well, may I remind you of the way that there are many, many "controlled flights into terrain" in history?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Accidents_and_incidents_involving_controlled_flight_into_terrain


You, along with a minority of others, seek to blame Russia because it's simply easier than accepting that some of the best Poland has flew the plane into the ground.


One thing that you should bear in mind is that while ATC can give clearance to a certain level, it doesn't mean it's legally binding - the pilot is still bound by his minimums. In this case, while ATC could clear him to 100m - he wasn't allowed to go there.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Yep. It's a huge problem with the Air Force - the report makes this so clear. The training simply isn't good enough - Sky mentioned the reaction to "pull up, pull up" - why didn't they have it?

Personally - I wouldn't be pointing the finger at the Russians, but rather at the Defence Ministry. I thought from the beginning, and still think, that the opposition should have focused on the incompetence of the Ministry rather than crosses, Russians and conspiracies. There's absolutely no doubt that heads must go in the Air Force - but with the reports coming out of Afghanistan, it seems that the Army isn't fit to do the job as well.

If you ask me, the one failing in the report is that it didn't do a good enough job of digging into the culture of the Air Force that allowed this to happen.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]


I had the pleasure once. Amusing, if only because she hit a child because he dared to tell the truth rather than their hate-fuelled version.


History shows that the Soviets seriously over-stretched their supply line in order to get to Berlin first. The same history tells us the AK had some capability in Poland - not a lot, but some. We also know that the Germans were willing to fight to the death in many places - Poznan, Kustrin, etc.

Now - do you honestly think the Western Allies would have been particularly keen on helping out Stalin if the Poles were destroying their supply lines? Germany was losing the war anyway by late 44, early 45 - and they may actually have been quite happy to see the Poles fight the Soviets in order to take Berlin before the Soviets.

Sure, it might not have worked - but it would've been a damn sight smarter than sending children to the slaughter needlessly. Poland had to do something, that was sure - but the Warsaw Uprising was the wrong time to do it.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


They do?

Any evidence? You know, real evidence that suggests that Russians actively monitor websites, and for what purpose.

(incidentally - you do realise that Echleon is far more scary than anything the Russians could come up with?)


Perhaps, just maybe, we have an interest in the subject? I live here, I saw the aftermath of 10.04 first hand when in the city centre - kinda natural to be interested in such a thing, no?


Actually - everyone sane on this thread has already said "yup, Russians made mistakes" and moved on from the topic. There's not much to say about them - everything is in the report.

Incidentally, what do you know about sterile cockpit rules? While it's a cruel twist of fate that Blasik was the only one that appeared to be able to read an altimeter correctly, he still shouldn't have been there and could very well have influenced the accident. Unless of course, you wish to claim that the commander wouldn't have been influenced by the possibility of getting a lot of credit from the "big boss".

Tell you what though MediaWatch - can you find me a valid reason why the commander of the plane went below minimums?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Leave it, please - a lot of the "counter" arguments are only in Polish, and the sources in English tend to be utter rubbish - and there's very little "new" being published in English about the opposing point of view.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Of course. But the law in question is referenced in the report - go ahead and check it.


The information comes directly from the report, in accordance with the law in force at the time of the accident. If there was such an agreement, can you provide me with a link to it?


Indeed. The LZC guy did mess up, and there's questions over the radar equipment - but it didn't cause them to crash. It would be a different story if they were told "on course" and then hit something while above 100m - but they hit something when going below 100m without clearance.

But as several pilots have informed you - it is the commander's responsibility to keep within minimums, not the ATC.

And - Seanus - that link is factually inaccurate. I can't be bothered to go through it, but one example -


One problem. The other approach was decommissioned and a NOTAM issued about this well before 10.04.

Also -

Blasik was confirmed to be in the cockpit by the Polish experts.

Plenty of other misleading statements in that link, too. For instance - it wasn't a PAR approach, so comments about "ATC must be talking constantly" are just wrong.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


However, that doesn't excuse him going below 100m when not cleared to do so. As I mentioned earlier - the last "on glidepath" call was made above 100m.


The report authors disagree with you. Care to provide any evidence that it was a civil flight?

I'd honestly expect a lawyer to know the provision in the Aviation Law which clearly states that a flight operated by the Polish Air Force is classed as a military flight.


Answer my question. What justification did the commander have in breaking various minimums - his own, the plane and the one set by ATC?


10 seconds? That's nothing in a moment of high stress. Still doesn't excuse the commander going below 100m on the barometric altimeter, does it?


Again, and for the final time. Did they have clearance to go below 100m? No. Therefore - there is no justification for doing so.

Unless they were explicitly cleared to go below 100m (and a "on glidepath" call above 100m does not constitute clearance to land in aviation) - they are strictly responsible for taking that plane below 100m.

I'm still waiting for you to justify why they attempted an illegal landing in the first place.


The Russians didn't chose anything - the Polish report makes it clear that an aeroplane operated by the PAF must be military. The law of "Rzeczpospolita Polska" governed the flight - not the rules of the Russian Federation.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


I didn't, no -


Difficult question, and one that the investigators couldn't answer either.

However - the Aviation Law in question makes it clear that a flight operated by the Polish Air Force must be a military flight. It also had the status of "HEAD" (a term used for VIP transport, which was conducted by the military in Poland when it came to flights) - and it was operating under military, not civilian rules.

For the Chicago Convention to be relevant - it would require the flight to be conducted under civilian rules - which it clearly wasn't.


I think they'll be rather too busy prosecuting Poles to bother with Russians, don't you think?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Tell you what - while we're talking about facts.

What was the minimum visibility required for landing legally at Smolensk-North, and what was the actual visibility on that day?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


Unforgivable mistakes?

Monia, an unforgivable mistake is what the Commander did on that plane - as the person in supreme authority, his decision to begin the approach (despite not being legally allowed to do so!) was reckless when you consider who was board. I mean, the guy was only carrying around some of the very top people in Poland - why was he even attempting to approach when he was prohibited from doing so, and also in the knowledge that the airport had told him clearly that "conditions for landing : none"?

Then we have the unforgivable mistake of going below the level to which he was cleared to. Can you justify this in any way? You can't.

No-one here is denying that the Russians made mistakes too, but they certainly didn't put that plane below 100m (barometric) without clearance.


Utter lies. You know why? I don't recall any court martials of people in the 36th regiment, especially those responsible for training. Likewise, I don't see any BOR officials being prosecuted despite their inability to check the airport in Smolensk - and for letting the President fly there when it wasn't checked.


Good - we might see prosecutions of all those incompetent people who failed to do their job in Poland.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]


I'm harsh on them because they effectively sent people to their doom - when there was an alternative option available. In my opinion - they had the resources for one attack - and they chose the worst time.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]

Seanus, they should've increased the thrust far earlier. Even if they were using the Radio Altimeter - as I understand it - they should have applied thurst as early as 160m to compensate for the TU-154M dropping 30m (which seems to be a well known/understood 'feature'). The ravine was about 40m deep - so in a worst case scenario, they would've ended up at around 90m above the runway before pulling up. Quite survivable.


They did know. The report makes it clear that General Blasik was reading out the correct (barometric) altitude readings. It's all checked and there in black and white. In fact, when Blasik made the 150m call - they should've either spotted the runway or performed a "go around". Nothing more to it.


Why did he start the approach, then? He was breaking the regulations by even attempting to approach in those conditions. Look at what his minima was for the 2xNDB approach.

What distortion? Blasik clearly reads out the barometric altimeter, and the navigator is clearly reading out the radio altimeter. No distortion there - they knew where they were at all times.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]

I just don't understand it - wouldn't it be obvious that the Soviets would have no interest in helping Poland, especially after 1939?

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


He's not blamed 100% - but he has the ultimate responsibility.


The driver is still responsible for the safe operation of the car. It's his job to stop if the road isn't suitable, not the passenger.


You can "think" all you want - there is absolutely no evidence that suggests that the pilot thought so. That - again - is just idle speculation. If he expected an ILS, then discovered there wasn't one - don't you think it would be on the cockpit voice recorder? Don't you think he'd ask the Yak guys "hey dudes, where's the ILS gone?". Don't you think the Yak pilots themselves would mention such a thing?

It's pretty obvious that you know nothing about aviation from such comments.

They weren't *allowed* to perform this landing. Training or no training, it won't change the fact that they attempted an approach in which they were required to have over 1km of visibility - and it won't change the fact that they went below 130m without visually spotting the runway.

Landing at this airport in Russia is no different to thousands of airports in the West. There are rules and regulations applied, and the pilot broke them. End of story.


Failed to provide them? What are you talking about? ATC doesn't "give" them an alternative airport - they define it themselves. ATC can, of course, advise them to go somewhere - but again - it's advisory. It's very likely that after PAF 101 missed the approach, they'd be advised to divert to Moscow.

Incidentally, it's not a matter of "thinking it's acceptable" - visibility was down to 200m (by the way, the report shows a nice foggy picture for you - and Blasik already reported that visibility was zero) - which made his landing attempt illegal. As a pilot, he should've known his qualifications - and his qualifications didn't allow him to attempt it.

MediaWatch, I understand you - you're trying to apply common sense to a situation that's highly regulated and specific. But it just doesn't work like that - aviation is full of regulations and rules that simply don't make sense to us mere mortals.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]

Same could be said for Warsaw's ignoring of the uprising here.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]


Insulting?

Insulting is the way that Warsaw demands respect throughout the country for her failed uprising, while ignoring all the other uprisings and especially ignoring the one that actually succeeded!

Anyway, it would be a far grander gesture to have a single flag flying - less is more when it comes to this sort of thing. Having flags flying throughout the country means nothing when many people simply ignore it - I had to ask several people to find out what the reason was for them flying in Poznan - most people simply didn't know - because they have their own uprising here.

I honestly think that a single flag, combined with the air raid sirens going off would be a grand gesture - and far more poignant than flags everywhere. Funny though - virtually no private people will fly a flag here to commemorate it - only in official places.

History / Warsaw Rising 1944 - National Disaster or Triumph of Spirit ? [515]


Sorry, but when was the last time that Warsaw ever celebrated the successful Wielkopolska Uprising?

I fail to see why one of the worst military decisions of the 20th century should be celebrated with flags flying and so on.

News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]


And yet - he made a fatal mistake. His training wasn't up to scratch, and he wasn't qualified at that moment in time to fly the plane.