You can believe tt was a 30cm twig that did it, took the win right off and flipped the plane over.
This has nothing to do with belief. Do not mix religion into this. Deal with facts.
Dr. Wieslaw Binienda, an adviser to the parliamentary committee of Antoni Macierewicz, in TVP1 program: "Politics over coffee":
- My model shows that the tree will be cut through (by the wing of the Tu-154M) and the damaged aircraft will be able to continue flying.
But he qualifies that statement with:
- It is possible that they (the other experts) have made a mistake, it's possible that I have made a mistake
:Dr. Wieslaw Binienda , adviser to the parliamentary group Macierewicz , arms in the TVP1 "Politics over coffee " his thesis : " My model says that the tree will be cut ( by wing Tu- 154M ) , and a damaged aircraft will be able to continue to fly ." We reserve the right , however : " It is possible that they ( other experts ) made a mistake , it's possible that I made a mistake ."
Dr. Wieslaw Binienda from the American University of Akron, who prepared for the parliamentary expert team Macierewicz for . Study of the Smolensk disaster , occurred today in the TVP1 "Politics over coffee ." He is the author of the thesis that the tu- 154M could lose wings when hitting the birch in Smolensk. - It is possible that they [ other experts - editor. eds. ] made a mistake , it's possible that I made a mistake - he said.
Now I am beginning to like him. He is no longer presumptuous. He finally displays traits of a real resercher: SOME DOUBTS about his own work.
And trees of the 30-40cm diameter can easily shear off wings of airplanes.
There are several documents on youtube showing simulated crash of DC-7 (if I remember it correctly) against several obstacles: a bump on a runway, one shallow and one steep hill and two telephone poles. With a bunch of dummies inside, red-coloured water simulating aviation fuel, many accelerometers in fuselage and in wings (monitoring both horizontal and vertical vibrations) and a bunch of high speed cameras inside and out they ran the plane against those obstacles. One telephone pole was broken, the other one went through the wing like a knife through butter.
But there are plenty of examples of real life plane crashes, where one or both wings were sheared off by trees. Here are few, randomly chosen.
There was a case, very similar to the one I described in the message #465. The difference was in tree sizes: in Russian case there was just a bush (oversized Christmas trees), in the following case the trees were mature.date: 1943-01-29
, plane: B-23 Dragon Bomber, operator: USAF, location: Loon Lake, Idaho, USA
Emergency landing on frozen lake. Sliding across the ice and through the trees. With both wings sheared off, the plane came to rest 150 feet from the shore of Loon Lake in the timber. All eight men survived and rescued 21 days later.
The bomber hit the far shore, sawing off 20-inch trees for about 100 yards. Both wings were sheared off and the nose was smashed, but the fuselage remained intact.
To be fair, 20-inch trees, sound thicker than the Smoleńsk's birch, so this is not the strongest proof here. But look at the pictures of the wreck - still there!date: 1950-12-22
, plane: Douglas C-47A-20-DK, operator: Canadian Pacific Air Lines, location: Penticton Airport, BC, Canada
Approching Okanagan Mountain, the DC-3 hit the trees. The port tail of the plane and elevator were almost immediately sheared off by the trees while the port wing struck a large tree shearing the wing off.
The wreckage rotated to the left and slid until coming to rest approximately 400 feet from the first contact with the trees. Both the co-pilot and pilot-in-command sustained fatal injuries.
, plane: DC-8, location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Pilot, uncertain whether or not the landing gear was down and locked, decided to circle around to burn off fuel. It was against an advise of several crew members, and specifically a visiting captain, who said: "I know these DC-8s and one thing I know for sure - they don't fly well without fuel". Upon final approach, the plane ran out of fuel, crashed into two large (empty) homes, skidded across a busy street, had its wings sheared off by trees
, and broke in half.
Somebody asked the Smoleńsk question (birch vs. wing) on AllExperts forum. The answer came from Kevin Parker, who has the following credentials:
Experience: I have 30 years experience in Commercial Type Rating training, program development, human factors, instructor training, flight simulation and flying large aircraft in general. Operated L188, DC8, B747, B757, A320, A330 and A340 aircraft. Involved in cockpit design, flight testing and type certification.
Education/Credentials: Aviation college, military flight instructor, ATPL, check airman, maintenance test pilot, Simulator Test and Evaluation Pilot, Production Chief Pilot
Yes, tree vs. wing the tree almost always wins. That's not saying that the tree is in fine shape after the encounter but you can't read those things in accident reports. No one includes the damage caused to trees unless it's unique or different. In many cases they don't fair very well and end up in the same shape as the wing, broken particularly small ones as you describe.
There is a slightly better chance of the wing maintaining its integrity if it a military design. The military are not as much interested in economy as the commercial designers and there is an expectation of survival from battle damage. The commercial side is all about fuel saving and being lIght without sacrificing the appropriate strength.