Safety, CRM, QA & Emergency Response Planning A wide ranging forum for issues facing Aviation Professionals and Academics

Polish Presidential Flight Crash Thread

Old 25th May 2010, 19:10
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hammsterdam
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ok Chuks, i'm sorry for my previus maybe a little bit rude post.
But believe me, we all are (well most of us) far from blaming pilots, ATC guys or somebody else (at this stage - until cockpit records will be known).
We all are humans and make mistakes. And we're well aware of this 'expert' poses (and trully bullish) seen shortly at media after the crash.
I dont know if You followed original thread - there was couple of russian friends (now they contribute also here) translating from smolensk blogs and forums.
Political influence and media merry-go-round are also known well here. Trust me we're very sensitive for that bulls**t.
mirogster is offline  
Old 25th May 2010, 23:40
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RatherBeFlying,
I wouldn't have guessed myself but for a Russian control tower and pilots it means "level off" ? out? - Stop descend take horizontal flight.

Head of the Polish Investigation committee - Mr Klich - after listening to the ground-crew talks' record - expressed doubt the pilots understood what the control tower wants from them.

Now I tend to understand why.

We checked it on ordinary Poles in the Smolesnk blog they understand "gorizont" in Russian as "horizon" in Polish without any doubts, but no one could check there if they know what the command means - as all there are way too well informed, read the Klich interview several times first, themselves, in Poland, and NOW know what a Russian control tower wants when it says "Board xxxx, horizon".
Alice025 is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 00:09
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: More or less all over the place
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Intuitively I would think it could be an (astonished), hasty, urgent exclamation (in surprise of realizing that may be now things look like they really may go wrong) trying to say, suggest, order or demand in just one single word something like:

"(Go) horizontal !"

Meaning to say horizontAL (action), rather than just horizon (the horizon) . . .

(Put it horizontal... (Go) straight... Level off...)

learner . . .

Last edited by learner001; 26th May 2010 at 00:26.
learner001 is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 00:24
  #104 (permalink)  
dvv
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: KIAD east downwind
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
60m on RA

As per Google Earth terrain data, the terrain dips down to approx 180m MSL between ДПРМ (compass Locator at Outer Marker, LOM) and БПРМ (compass Locator at Middle Marker, LMM, where the aircraft first impacted a tree). With the field elevation at 262 meters, it is possible to have 60m on RA and be below the field.
dvv is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 00:41
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Head of Polish Investigation Committee said he knows content of all talks but as investigation formally goes on - he won't tell anybody media. When they were terrorizing him - this "101, horizon!" was one of the very few things that media managed to get out of him.

Also, much know the Yak crew - but these all signed they will stay numb until are allowed to talk, and it's an awful pity as from what was confirmed the Yak spoke to the TU non-stop and through to the very end.

The other blog meanwhile is puzzling over the position of various devices in the pilots' cabin, looking at photos here and there and trying to figure out at which "height-meter" of all the crew would look and when and what could have been possibly set on each and when exactly.
There is an idea the captain set one of their "height-meters" a-la Russian way (distance to the runway), made a mental tick in mind "I have corrected it", then switched on auto-piloting to be able to speak with VIPs in the cabin, then returned back to the height-meters but glanced at the un-corrected one (while thinking "I had done it").
Especially that the captain flew the previous flight, on the 7th, as the second pilot (sitting on the right side) (and being used to looking at what's near him), and when he changed the chair this time ? may be looked again at what's usual for him - there - in haste - when things began taking a strange turn (TAWS, ground control) ?
could be he didn't believe they crossed the 100 metres as his un-corrected "height-meter" was set at sea-level - in which case he'd think he's got safe 300 meters or so more.
? Approx.
Alice025 is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 06:19
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Grrr

The Russian word "Gorizont"- means " Horizon" in English.

The Russian word " Gorizont" - would have been pronounced " Horyzont " in Polish, and the meaning is the same as in English.

Any Polish with a minimum, or no knowledge of the Russian language would have understood what " Gorizont " mean ..
Both, Russian and Polish word " Horizon" sound practically the same and mean the same in both languages.

Both words are very close in pronunciation in both Russian and Polish languages...
MD801717 is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 07:51
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Age: 57
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
E.Klich blames pilots and lack of training

It seems E. Klich gets more and more clear in blaming directly the pilots and the way they had been trained.

Here the article:
Ekspert obwinia pilotów - Rzeczpospolita

Google translation:
Google T?umacz

and an interview with Klich
Gdyby si? szkolili, nie podj?liby ryzyka - Rzeczpospolita

Google translation:
Google T?umacz
Tonden is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 08:08
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, someone has to be blamed (?), but is it the pilots... or the one who is responsible for the personnel work?
Generally, it all sounds logical if you have had some soviet practice. There are rules, of course, but not for people who are in unique positions (high officials). If they really organised the flight the way described in the report (preparation, people in cocpit etc.).
Unfortunately some rules apply to all.
probes is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 11:47
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: White eagle land
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
As per Google Earth terrain data, the terrain dips down to approx 180m MSL between ДПРМ (compass Locator at Outer Marker, LOM) and БПРМ (compass Locator at Middle Marker, LMM, where the aircraft first impacted a tree). With the field elevation at 262 meters, it is possible to have 60m on RA and be below the field.
According to all the drawings and data published on the Smolensk forum, the lowest point is at 202 m.

Now, tha latest news. When they went below the 100 m, as was already said, the counted 90 m, 80 m... etc They counted down to 20 m. Taking into account the topography, it means they were descending using RA.

Another point, just my guess.
I belive, they could have mixed WGS-84 coordinates and Pulkowo coordinates. So far MAK was slightly enigmatic on that just informing that they didn't have the actual data (NOTAM, etc...). MAK wasn't very specific here.
Second option is a scud run.

Arrakis

Last edited by ARRAKIS; 26th May 2010 at 12:07.
ARRAKIS is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 12:45
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There decision height was 362m QNH (baro) or 100m QFE (baro). Which is 262m field elevation plus 100m decision height ABOVE FIELD ELEVATION. This is the relevant date.
The use of the radio altimeter is not permitted during a non-precision approach.

According to state regulations I am aware of there is no authorization to start an approach when the airfield is below published minima. There is nothing like a "trial" approach.
They were far below published minima.

There has been another occasion (Armavia A320 Sotchi) where a Russian ATC controller was not aware that he was not empowered to order a FOREIGN registered aircraft's pilot to go around, deny an approach approval due to weather or deny a landing clearance due to other than operational circumstances. This empowerment of ATC is valid for RUSSIAN registered aircraft only. Therefore the gorizont command and the approval for the "trial" approach is legally not relevant and the responsibility for the approach is only with the pilots, as in the Western countries. (Understanding that the "trial" approach was a NDB but not a PAR approach which would be different, of course)

Nuff said.
threemiles is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 13:08
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,553
Received 24 Likes on 13 Posts
When Russian ATC says "Gorizont" -- What is the Pilot Expected to Do?

The word is a noun, but in this context it seems to be a command to ... ?
RatherBeFlying is online now  
Old 26th May 2010, 14:13
  #112 (permalink)  
dvv
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: KIAD east downwind
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ARRAKIS, what is the source of those Smolensk forum data?
dvv is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 15:26
  #113 (permalink)  
dvv
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: KIAD east downwind
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
60m on RA

Also, have a look at this picture from МАК: http://www.mak.ru/russian/info/news/...m_101_pic1.jpg
dvv is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 15:27
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: White eagle land
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The use of the radio altimeter is not permitted during a non-precision approach
Like going below minimum, attempting to land way, way below aircraft minimas, not respecting FM and many other things. This is all I can say.
There was a "go around" from the II pilot when they were at 80 m. PIC continued the descent.

"Tunnel" vision. Landing and only landing. I think, it's now up to the shrink to say why.
Reminds a little bit the 2006 Sochi A320 crash
(http://www.bea-fr.org/docspa/2006/ek...ek-9060502.pdf)

Arrakis
ARRAKIS is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 16:59
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hammsterdam
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When Russian ATC says "Gorizont" -- What is the Pilot Expected to Do?

'HORIZON!' it obviusly means 'you gonna meet him sooner as you think' = pull up or you gonna crash. Is that complicated?
mirogster is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 17:02
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hammsterdam
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ARRAKIS or 'capitanosis' in few other crashes.
mirogster is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 17:09
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: White eagle land
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
ARRAKIS, what is the source of those Smolensk forum data?
I presume, that getting topography data of the town is no rocket science for the people living in Smolensk.

Alice,
could you ask Sergiei or any other Smolensk forum member to check this difference. What is the lovest point of this valley they flew over? Is it 202 m or around 180 m?
Best wishes to all the forum members. I'm reading the crash thread since the first day.


By the way. E. Klich, the head of the Polish investigation body confirmed today. They used RA.

Arrakis
ARRAKIS is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 17:38
  #118 (permalink)  
dvv
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: KIAD east downwind
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ARRAKIS,

I presume, that getting topography data of the town is no rocket science for the people living in Smolensk.
Most probably, you presume correctly — if they used rocket science for their illustrations, their data would've been more in line with Google's — Google did use rocket science for their Earth (SRTM to be precise). As МАК's data seem to be confirming those of Google, I suspect that there's some element of rocket science in МАК's data, too. Now what science was used for the Smolensk forum data — I hope you can help to find it out for me.

Thanks!
dvv is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 17:44
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Major Fiszer zadał Klichowi pytanie dotyczące tego, czy piloci mieli świadomość, na jakiej wysokości się znajdują:
- Załoga czytała wysokość: 70, 80 metrów.
Czy to poszło dalej? - pytał Fiszer.
- Poszło dalej, doszło do 20 metrów - odpowiedział Klich - Piloci mieli świadomość, że są poniżej wysokości decyzji.

Major Fisher ask Klich if pilots had information which real altitude is:
- Crew read altimeter: 70, 80 m.
And they keep counting?
- Keep counting till 20 m. Pilots know that they are below decision altitude.
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 26th May 2010, 17:59
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sure I'll ask Amelin. So we are asking - "202 or what"?

I remember there was an alarm when MAC published numbers and Amelin's previous "formal" map disagreed with that of MAC, and the chaps were thinking what to do. To import the MAC map into the summary or not to believe and leave own old.

The Smolensk blog operates on 2 levels: the blog itself, where all quarrel and discuss and bring in fresh snippets of news, from Russia and Poland likewise. And the Amelin blog - which is the summary of all worthy things obtained in the main bulky multi-page blog.
Amelin summary was originally in Russian, now is being doubled in Polish and English - folks are translating the summary at home.

Page 1,100 or so runs now LOL, on the main blog, for a second. Which is 220,000 messages, hard to get oriented in there.
Alice025 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.