News /
Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [859]
What page was this on?
248
My Dad is very skeptical if it comes to the state of current training of pilots , not enough flight hours . My father also says it is outrages that pilots have as little flights hours as he had in just one year . The lack of money is the main issue .Every military pilot according to previous plans in 2010 was to spend in the air over 40 hours.
I don't think it's as much a problem with hours as it is just creating a more professional environment, and enforcing the rules. I obviously don't mind you taking part in the conversation, some of your questions are valid, and I like to explain things. A kind of learning through teaching thing.
Well no surprise that MAK has rejected any part of the Polish Report that puts the Russians at fault.
The MAK report cited plenty of problems on the Russian side.
Maybe pilots are responsible maybe not, maybe it was an accident and then maybe not - thats all who any sentient being can say on the issue.
They usually are. That's a very important thing which is ingrained in your mind. If you fly a plane without a current annual and you crash due to a mechanical issue, it's your fault for flying an aircraft that isn't airworthy. If you get caught in ice and go down, it's your fault for not properly judging the weather. If you taxi out onto a runway while an aircraft is approaching, it's your fault for not making sure the runway was clear. If you're out practicing maneuvers and some goober in a sailplane plows into you, it's your fault for not doing clearing turns. See the pattern? The responsibility for the safety of the aircraft always rests with the captain who has ultimate authority. If a captain is issued an instruction by ATC, it's their duty to deviate from it if they feel it is unsafe.
that is a separate issue...
No, it came down to training and deviation from SOPs. Again, the important thing is that lessons learned weren't applied. The Smolensk accident could have easily been avoided.
I'm beginning to believe the same, I-S. We can't trust these idiots who conduct the investigations and they simply CANNOT reach such different conclusions from the black box recordings.
The reports don't really differ all that much on the root causes. They both acknowledge mistakes on behalf of the flight crew and the controllers.
As I said, a man who sees and who has the required talent can land. Take that away and he becomes blind. Does he need a lot of help? Of course he does. He needs the aviation equivalent of a guide dog and the Russian ATC failed to be that. Delph, for the last time, they went under 100m as they had distorted readings and the Russian ATC really HAD TO see they were dipping too fast.
That's completely inaccurate. It was an NDB approach, the crew was solely responsible for guiding the plane in. He went under 100m on his out instruments in the cockpit. Those are his eyes, not the voice on the other end of the radio. And if he was primarily using the advisory information from the radar controller, he was already making a huge, huge, huge mistake. That's a very basic no-no.
I'm taking flying lessons
Congratulations man :) Say goodbye to your friends, family, free time, and whatever you have in your bank account. PS, don't ever go anywhere with a pilot and non pilot....you just end up talking airplanes the entire time and the earthbound person will have to pretend to be interested, check their phone alot, and stare out of the window :)
Also, can you expand on the "aviation as a hobby" part? Just curious...
Well, no one pays me to fly. I would like to take some time off and get an instructor rating. Not many FAA CFIs over here...It'd be more along the lines of having someone else pay the fuel and put some much needed hours on the TB10. I guess it's more of a lifestyle :)
