The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Posts by convex  

Joined: 25 Nov 2009 / Male ♂ 		Last Post: 28 Nov 2011
Threads: Total: 20 / Live: 15 / Archived: 5
Posts: Total: 3,928 / Live: 3,896 / Archived: 32 		From: Wroclaw
Speaks Polish?: un poco...wait
Interests: aviation

Displayed posts: 3911 / page 3 of 131
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
convex   
6 Aug 2011
News / Andrzej Lepper committed suicide [98]

What does rhetoric (coming from all sides mind you) have to do with police and PO men with fierce looking dogs imprisoning, beating up, and killing PiS voters?

Anyway, back to Lepdawg, I used to enjoy telling people in the student bars that he was by far the best politician for Poland. Such angry people...
convex   
6 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Polka Parade Television Show [43]

Not many Mexicans listen to Czech music :)

...but lets keep this one on topic..there is another thread out there for it.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
Travel / Whats your favourite Polish city and why? [132]

Amen to that. Krakow is nice, I've lived in Wroclaw long enough to be completely militant against Poznan, Warsaw is meh. Wroclaw has nearly everything (hangers at the airport would be nice, but that's another story). It's also really easy to get around. Little corners around the city stacked with pubs. Yea, not too shabby.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Why are Polish restaurants not successful in the USA? [698]

hahahaha, oh just knock it off already with the "we're so natural" crap. remind me how much ketchup Poland goes through again....

I always get a dumbfounded look at Rodeo when I tell them I don't want sauce :) "....but it's free"

Anyway, like I was saying about Maggies in OKC, the food was crap. Just garbage. That's the only Polish place that I've been to in the US, and good riddance.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Why are Polish restaurants not successful in the USA? [698]

Having it served on porcelain plates and eating it with real silverware instead of eating it out of a carton in your car on the way home also helps in delighting your senses and enjoying few pleasures that life has to offer, but hay whatever floats your boat, who am I to judge?

Wow, that sounds exactly like eating out in Poland...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

The controller was providing advisory information. It was a non-precision approach, a pair of NDBs. It was not a radar approach. A radar approach wasn't available in Smolensk...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Heavy, thick fog was at 10:00 AM, much later. Also, it is only 500 m. 500 m is enough for soft crash.. Somewhere, it says 80 m. Which is true?

10am local, 7 zulu which is what the transcripts are given in.

here it is from avherald:

10:00Z (1pm) Temp 3°C Dew 2°C Humidity 94% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 4 kilometers Winds east 14.4 km/h / Mist
07:00Z (10am) Temp 1°C Dew 1°C Humidity 98% QNH 1026 hPa Visibility 0.5 kilometers Winds SE 10.8 km/h / Heavy Fog
04:00Z (7am) Temp 0°C Dew -1°C Humidity 89% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 4 kilometers Winds ESE 7.2 km/h / Mist
01:00Z (4am) Temp 3°C Dew -0°C Humidity 72% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 10 kilometers Winds SE 7.2 km/h /
22:00Z (1am) Temp 6°C Dew -0°C Humidity 52% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 10 kilometers Winds SE 7.2 km/h

The two relevant ones are bold.

You say "fast and hard" - Of course, any airplane crash will be hard - but, how hard? In 500 m visibility, landing at an airport can't be that hard. People in the airplane knowing the risk of landing would be taking some small protections for their lifes and probability of some people surviving from such softer hard crash is 1-5%. It is not a bomb, suddenly exploding..

They didn't know they were going to hit the ground. 400m of visibility is nothing when you're travelling at 150 knots. 2-3 seconds max to avoid something. Regarding survivability, posted a couple of messages above on it from the report.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

TMC-65, what a convenient tool ;) ;)

*sigh* are we really going back to fog machines and executions?

In that case, I will stick by the "aliens took over the bodies of the crew and caused them to descend below their minimums" as my entry.

Enjoy...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Visibility was reported at 400m, not 80. "Mist" can turn into "Fog" in a matter of seconds. It's simply a change in visibility. If the temperature changes and the dew point remains the same, mist or fog will form. It's not an uncommon thing...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Minsk reported fog to the crew over half an hour before the approach. The only difference between mist and fog is visibility, any number of atmospheric changes could cause visibility to decrease by 500m very quickly. It didn't go from being bright and sunny to foggy, temperature/dew point spread was between 1 and then at dew point for quite a bit of the morning.

Perhaps, they thought that even if they pulled up, airplane would explode, by bombs inside airplane with remote controller and they tried their little chance, land dawn.. In this soft-crash, we can assume that at least 1-5% of people could survive.. Likely, it happened - and, the shot fire sounds heard in the video is about that..

They came down fast and hard.

From the report:

1.15.3 Possiblities of crew’s and passengers’ survival
The configuration of the aircraft at impacting the ground created no chances of the crew and/or passenger survival.
According to the trajectory which the aircraft followed on the surface of the ground, the flightcrew were subject to impact acceleration along the ―x‖ axis (back-to-chest). Assessing the character of injuries of crewmembers‘ heads, chests and spines, their bodies were given a surge load not smaller than 100 g.
The cause of death of 8 members of the crew and 88 passengers was massive multiorgan trauma due to deceleration force on the impact of the aircraft against the ground 45.

I didn't hear gunshots in the video, but I'm not an expert in grainy camera phone videography.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Moving from United Kingdom to USA. Is it worth it? [136]

How much is your homeowners insurance? Can get very expensive. 10 years ago our electricity bill in Austin was over $300 a month during the summer in a 2br apartment.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Whether it was artifical or natural, communications about the weather between people and stations are not normal, considering time differences/delays.

What wasn't normal? Mist/Fog was reported the entire time. I've seen it go from legal to fogged in over the time it takes to drink a cup of coffee. The crew had information about fog at least half an hour before the approach. They had current weather when they started the approach and themselves agreed that it was unsafe for landing.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Moving from United Kingdom to USA. Is it worth it? [136]

electric, gas and water, in an avg sized house, is nowhere near $500/month. that would be crazy.

That would be having an airconditioner in the south.

regarding medical insurance, I'd have to ask how old your mother is. if she's 65 or over, she's completely covered by Medicare.

Think she meant insurance for the house/car.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Mist turned into fog, it's only a difference in visibility. Visibility deteriorated even worse and it was reported by Minsk and then also later at the airfield.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

I don't buy the barometric altimeter idea. It is FAAAAR too amateurish a mistake to make without other factors being present.

Based on the experience of the crew, it would seem that they were used to flying approaches which relied on decision height and not decision altitude. Combine that with the fact that the airport wasn't in the DB and gave warnings which caused the Captain the set standard pressure to shut it up...well, not good, not good. Simple fact is, if he would have been using the baro altimeter like he was supposed to, they'd probably still be alive, even after knowingly busting minimums (as they did).
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

But you don't believe it, or? There are lots of questions being asked which would have been answered by reading the report.

So your bet, delph, is that they went against probability and hoped they wouldn't hit a tree? They were so close to escaping but that one tree screwed them. Bravado sometimes pays off but it often doesn't.

I think a combination of failure to use the barometric altimeter, over reliance on advisory information, and having the boss in the cockpit killed them.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

It is same that you and those who say it was pilot's fault have not given a credible explanation for why they busted the minimum yet.

The same reason that pilots knowingly bust minimums all the time, they wanted to get down. Do you think an exchange like this might add pressure to land?

Fog has appeared just now and under the existing conditions we cannot make it‖ (meaning a landing). We'll make one attempt, one approach, probably for no good. You can now begin to think what decision to take and do terwards he named two airports that could be taken into account, viz. MIŃSK and WITEBSK. The director left the cockpit to brief the President on the situation.
[b]The aircraft was descending and at 500 meters entered the SMOLENSK NORTH landing circuit. At 06:30:33, the diplomatic protocol director appeared in the cockpit for a moment to say: ―As for now, no decision from the President about what we do next.‖
Progressing along downwind to the base leg, the crew configured the aircraft for landing. At the time, the Aerodrome Controller asked if the crew had ever landed at that military aerodrome. Before beginning to make the turn to the base leg, the purser reported to CC cabin readiness for landing. To a command from the Aerodrome Controller the Commander turned onto the base leg and continued approach to Runway 26 (RWY26). When the aircraft was on the base before the final leg, the Aerodrome Controller advised the crew to be ready to make a go-around when at 100 meters. Then, the Commander-in-Chief of the Polish Air Force entered the cockpit and CC reported that the Yak-40 aircraft's CC advised on runway visibility which was 200 meters.

Questions unanswered are not only this. Also, why computer power went off before landing.

I didn't read that in the report.

Now in all seriousness, who here actually took the time to read either the Russian or Polish report?

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?

They were fully within their right to attempt an approach. I would have.

Convex, the conditions deteriorated rapidly after that. The Yak pilot recommended that they try once and then go around. That was their green light.

Those weren't suitable conditions for landing, not even close.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Let's face another fact, though, the official visibility recordings were not exactly presented on time and details were sparse.

From the transcripts:

D: Polish Air Force 1-0-1, for information at 06:11 Smolensk visibility 400 meters fog.

What information are you looking for?

The series "Air Crash Investigations" covers the Crossair accident
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossair_Flight_3597

Lots of similarities. Have a watch as a 17000hour pilot busts minimums at his home airport.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

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?

The report doesn't specifically say that, it just has the minimums for a couple of different approaches. VOR approach isn't listed either. I think they just listed the approaches relevant to the accident.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Actually, that's a good point...Those families are accepting risk when they decide to drive on the connecting roads, or in snow, or in the rain... But seriously, how many times do you see crazy passing with a car full of kids, or someone blasting through a yellow light? Maybe it's just a Wroclaw thing...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Half of Poland isn't normal in that case :)

Now, say you have the President on board, and he's late for a meeting. You have an added pressure to make it in time. Someone else arrived on time and you have blasted through yellow lights before and were praised for being a great driver and getting the VIPs there on time. You are the best of the best after all, it's just a yellow light...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / TOP 500 Young Polish Innovators program - short internships in USA [14]

CThere is absolutely nothing that they will learn in that period of time.

Tend to disagree. It's enough time to see how things are done in another environment, and take that knowledge back home. I'm guessing that's the whole point.

*cough* and maybe poach some of the best and brightest...
convex   
5 Aug 2011
USA, Canada / Polish or American Education? [180]

For one it seems to put people in the mindset that you don't have to go to school for 6 years to design a logo. On the other hand, the doing is just half of it, teaching how to do it right is the other. Seems like you get the first a lot in the US, the second needs a bit of work.
convex   
5 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

But the Russians who said this thought it was important because it would make him look like he was drunk. They were disengenuous since most human corpses biologically generate alcohol within 24 hours of death. This autopsy showing alcohol in the body was done AFTER 24 hours of death. They should have noted the 24 hour plus / body decomposition alcohol relationship.

Agreed.

You would have never known that coming from the Russian news reports. They made it sound like it was 100% the fault of the Poles and that the Russians could do no wrong.

News reports vs. official report. One more reason to ignore the news...

Yes in the end it was the mistake of the pilot to trust the assurance of the airtower that he was landing OK.

The pilot most likely thought another human being would not give him instructions that would lead to his death and the deaths of almost a hundred other people, so that's why he trusted the air tower guy. He was wrong to do that.

That's piloting 101. You trust your instruments, not some junk radar installation and advisory information from a controller that can barely speak English.

I simply refuse to believe that a pilot worth his salt would intentionally go too low over an afforested area. It's tantamount to suicide and jeopardised too many lives.

Again, pushing the gas when the traffic light turns orange. I see drivers do it every day, hell, I've done it. Does that mean that I'm suicidal?
convex   
4 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

You are right Seanus , no accurate data given to him , so the pilot had to adjust the barometric altimeter using only his predictions , after he set the pressure , controllers reassured him he was right . That was their major mistake .

Did you read the report? I even gave you the page number.

You should watch the videos I posted above, Monia. They are in Polish and professionally cover, through the insight of experts, that which the official reports duck. The lack of final guidance is covered too.

With the assumption that somehow the controllers were responsible for the approach, which is ridiculous.
convex   
4 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Following height because?

Using a fancy radar altimeter instead of the barometric altimeter. It corresponds with the navigators callouts.

I was wondering convex where are you from? I am asking out of curiousity. You seem to have an answer for everything, a bit like the Russians.

We'll go with Moscow to add a little fuel to the fire. Just read the reports (both of them, I prefer the Polish one myself, but...meh).

As for your comment about the right to assume there was pressure.

The presence of a superior is pressure. There is absolutely no reason he should have been in the cockpit. Ask any airline or mil pilot (sky mentioned it earlier as well).

Basically what the Russians said seem very convenient in concluding that Poland is totally at fault and Russia did nothing wrong.

The MAK report criticized the Smolensk controllers as well as ATC.

Honestly if the Russians did not feel they were at fault from the start and had nothing to hide then why be so protective? Why not assist and say here is the evidence gathered, it was a terrible tragedy, very sorry fo you, feel free to go and investigate the cause of it. Not, go away, wait till it is checked here first and then you can look at it later on when it is time to.

There weren't any complaints.

The report by Macierewicz is something that you should look at as the Polish Report was always going to put more blame on the Polish side and this was said many times even before it was officially released.

It makes a couple of decent points, like placing blame on BOR, but the majority of it reads like political campaign material. Pilots place the majority of the blame on the Polish side for very obvious reasons. You don't bust your minimums. Simple as that. Instrument approaches are designed to be safe down to minimums, everything past that is rolling the dice. Simple fact of the matter is, had they respected the minimums and flew the approach properly, they would still be alive. Kaczynski would have a bit of egg on his face for showing up late, but they'd still be alive.
convex   
4 Aug 2011
News / Polish final report on Smoleńsk aircrash [853]

Weather was NOT given properly and timeously, convex. Read the report again.

Again, page 212.

Wow, so 2 other planes did the same and STILL the ATC sat on their arses drinking vodka. Do you know that one of the guys wasn't tested for alcohol on that day? They MUST be, it's protocol.

They saw the runway before it became an issue.

Blasik also thought they were at a different altitude and that's the main thing. 100m my butt, they were well below.

Then they screwed up, again, page 212. No excuses. Had pressure, following height instead of altitude.

The Russians allegedly wanted to kill the maker of that video, convex. There is an account online somewhere of people interviewing him and him being petrified that he'd be caught. There was even a scare story that they caught up with him in Kiev, Ukraine, and killed him.

Link? And please not that Chechen separatist site again...