janeczku, Kulverstukas
"I am devastated as a pilot and a Pole. For many critical seconds the pilot was "wrestling" with the autopilot, while "the plane was flying" as used to say my instructor Col. M. It would have been sufficient to just execute the procedure that follows the instruction to "go around". Firewall throttle, level, climb... Those are things which are learned already in the basic training for the private pilot license! First full throttle, then pull the stick! ... But he went on, and went, and nothing ... Or maybe he did not want to make a "go around" just-level, and rat crawl to the runway?"
The whole problem with this theory is precisely that it is very, very unlikely and thus absurd.
The idea that they decided to do go-around at 10:40:42, pushed the goaround button, and then did NOTHING and said NOTHING till 10:40:57 (that is for 15 seconds) while engines idled all this time is very unrealistic. They would have to be complete vegetables to do something like that. And so, this leads to: they could not have done that, and maybe something else was at play, etc, etc.
Is it possible that they tried the GoAround button? Sure it is. I will agree they busted the minima and then tried goaround button at say 10:40:55 and thus lost another 2 or 3 seconds because of it. Quite likely and realistic based on all that we know.
So why would someone pursue that theory with attempted goaround at 120m RA? Because it is a good opening salvo to another good feel good/conspiracy theory. The gazeta.pl article that Kulverstukas asked me about and that started this conversation already does that. I didn't want to discuss all the details of it precisely because I personally consider it stupid unsubstantiated speculation. But here it is, this is what they hint:
1. The pilot flies by the book and at 10:40:42 RA 120[m] gives the goaround command, command is acknowledged, but none of it was shown in the original transcript because it was obstructed by the TAWS warnings.
2. They try everything and nothing happens and so at 10:40:51 the "Podchodzimy" (landing approach) command is given and not goaround. (Podchodzimy/Odchodzimy – not that much difference if recording is noisy). Meaning, they tried goaround, all possible ways, and nothing happened and so, to save the plane they made the desperate attempt to land in spite of the fog. Meaning, the pilots were HEROs, the politicians were HEROs and martyrs and so on and so forth.
I would have nothing against this theory, if someone offered some proof of it, but they don't. Those who fall for that goaround at 10:40:42 theory (also without any proof) are sort of useful … silly people, you see. The way to stay sane is to stick with what we know, and reject the highly improbable theories.
Now, if this theory is pushed through, they will officially blame the problem on "mechanical failure" (which happens way too often since machines cannot talk and hire lawyers), while silly people will "know" that the bad Russkies must have installed some device on board that temporarily disabled the throttle connections to the engines to cause the crash – no proof necessary – as it is "obvious" because the throttles didn't work for a while and then started working again and the plane was serviced and "crashed on purpose" in Russia so the bad Russkies could hide the proof. Wait till the "Polish Report" comes up and you will know I was right.
While I see why stupid politicians and non-Slavs might find such idiotic theories "useful", it is absolutely deadly to those of us who hoped for us becoming normal people with normal relations. Again – no problem pursuing any realistic theory IF there is some proof. Problem with unrealistic theories without proof because they only open door to conspiracy theories.