Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Polish Government Tu154M crash

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Polish Government Tu154M crash

Closed Thread

Old 13th Apr 2010, 20:34
  #521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 79
@hetfield

hmm it could be point..
I'm wondering how many fuel they should have on board..
Yeah is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 20:36
  #522 (permalink)  

Mess Your Passage
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Temporarily Unaware......
Age: 19
Posts: 313
what are the gun shots about???
Flash0710 is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 20:49
  #523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 79
what are the gun shots about???
From the begining I'm wondering, why they fly so low so far from rynway?
I knew this guys and I'm sure that something must suprice them.
They knew this airport well, they knew what is berofe runway. I'm wondering if this was human factor (f.e. CFIT), some malfunction or other technical fault (lack of fuel). I got some theories about each of these causes but we have too less facts now..
Yeah is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 20:51
  #524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: White eagle land
Posts: 298
Maybe one of the sidearms of the president security team, that was onboard.

Arrakis
ARRAKIS is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 20:56
  #525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 79
Maybe one of the sidearms of the president security team, that was onboard.

Arrakis
really, It isn't funny for me.
I lost few friends in this plane
Yeah is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 21:06
  #526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: White eagle land
Posts: 298
According to official information, 7 sidearms were recovered from the crash site.
I don't see anything funny about it. Maybe you?

Arrakis
ARRAKIS is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 21:24
  #527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 79
I don't understand your point with gun..
Yeah is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 21:43
  #528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 38
In the background of the video you can hear "Come over here! Get out of here, b.." and then a gunshot. I can only assume that some local security or militia is on the way (firefighters certainly are, judging by the siren) and they might be shooting in the air or otherwise chasing gawkers away. The guy with the camera also scrams before firemen and security arrive.
brak is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 21:43
  #529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 54
Posts: 631
protectthehornet

Back a few hundred posts ago I have referred to some fundamental differences that have existed in the Russian/Soviet airspace ATC/crew relationship compared to what you and most of the rest of the world is accustomed to. In the old Soviet days ATC was supreme authority over all air traffic, the pilots HAD to follow their instructions, the only exception being an emergency. In this respect, ATC did have the authority to prohibit an approach or any other maneuvre, or close an airport if they wished to do so. While in modern Russia this has changed to western norms as far as civilian traffic is concerned, the mentality still lingers, especially in areas unaccustomed to international traffic, and is still valid for military airspace.

I'd need to check which one it was, in one of the official Russian statements it is explicitely said that the Russian AF IL76 that tried to land at the airfield before 101 was orderd to divert because the weather was below minimums. As 101 was classified as a civilian flight, ATC could only make a suggestion as to what action to take, but final decision rested with the pilot. This clearly speaks of double military/civilian standards.

I'm sure on aspect of the investigation will be to take a good hard look at the options and authority available to ATC, and the extent to which the controller have exercised them.
andrasz is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 21:48
  #530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: EDDF
Posts: 15
"I don't understand your point with gun.."

Is it possible that the heat from the post crash fire made the guns to shoot? Those guns belonged to the security officers present on board of the doomed plane.
GfaRm is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 22:36
  #531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 557
Those sounds aren't necesarily from "gunshots" or even ammunition going off -- though they could be. There are many other things that can and do explode in the immediate aftermath of an accident, including oxygen canisters and/or other small pressurised containers.
grizzled is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 02:37
  #532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,851
Those sounds aren't necesarily from "gunshots" or even ammunition going off -- though they could be. There are many other things that can and do explode in the immediate aftermath of an accident, including oxygen canisters and/or other small pressurised containers.
Good point Likely tie-in is a gun firing into a canister to make sure it doesn't go off when being handled. Somewhere I have a picture of one of these canisters with a convenient hole in it. They stick out among all the debris because they typically keep their shape
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 07:38
  #533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Poland
Age: 43
Posts: 9

I'm wondering how many fuel they should have on board..
The report says they were on "there and back" fuel load, so probably at this point no less than 3.5hrs. So probably not less than 20tons.

Adam
Gloom_PL is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 08:15
  #534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 79
Iteresting analize

???-??????? Picasa - ?????? ?????? - ?????????????...
Yeah is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 08:45
  #535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 94
That picasa montage conjures up a vivid impression (though it seems to be composed over a much older sat image than the one posted earlier). The tree in overlay number 6 (an image which has been posted individually already) looks like it would have closed all betting, however slim the odds already. The subsequent tree in overlay number 9 is a very chilling image indeed...
robdean is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 09:08
  #536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
In my earlier post http://www.pprune.org/5627132-post208.html
I mentioned the possible death trap:

4. When in doubt about PAR directions to pull up and about the altitude
readings of GPS and ALT, they may have used the radar altimeter readings.
Those showing them the bottom of the valley instead of alt. above threshold.

5. When the altimeter reading started to rise quickly, it was too late.


In the first pictures of this analysis (1. and 2.) you can clearly see the valley
I am referring to.

This "death trap" has been mentioned before by the Russian pilots current to this airfield.
Ptkay is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 10:33
  #537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 58
Posts: 539
No Approach Lighting??

What the picasa pictures also show is the lack of any real approach lighting......

The equivalent at UK military airfields with a published precision [instrument] approach would have been been centre line lighting with 5 bars extending out into the undershoot, mounted on poles, if required by the terrain. Plus VASIs/PAPIs and high intensity runway edge lighting.

At civillian airfields there is a similar set up often augumented by touchdown zone lighting, runway centre line lighting and high intensity strobe lighting. At Alconbury I remember approaching in poor viz with a "running rabbit" strobe which stood out very clearly in the murk.

Does anyone know what the airfield actually had available and also importantly, was it switched on or had ATC deliberately turned it off so as to "force" the ac to divert?

MB
Madbob is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 10:34
  #538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
The third black box

The third black box - registering vibrations of the engine - will be examined in Poland because it was invented by Polish engineers. - Third recorder, which was sent for examination to Poland, monitors and records, in addition to the standard FDR, the vibration on the engine bearings and suspension.

This monitoring and recording system was developed for, and installed on the
notorious Soloviev engines by the Polish engineers after the accidents
of the Il-62, using the same engines as tu-154.

The system was supposed to detect and register any abnormalities in the
turbine parameters to prevent and avoid the uncontained engine failures, for which
the engines were notorious.
Ptkay is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 10:45
  #539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
No Approach Lighting??

According to a pilot, familiar with this airfield, the only lights available
were, as he called them, three "spot lights" aiming at the incoming a/c
positioned at the threshold.

If they were on or off, nobody can tell at the moment.

As of, "turning them off to prevent the landing", it is hardly possible.

In the recent interviews the authorities of the airfield confirmed,
that they feel responsible for the accident, not taking the decision to close
the airfield. (Yes, in Russia they can do it.)

They argument, that they were afraid to cause a diplomatic scandal,
after letting the Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk to land on April 7th,
and then preventing the President, Lech Kaczyński, known for his
critical attitude against Russia, from landing 3 days later.

I think the chain of factors leading to this accident is long.

The "Swiss cheese" lump was quite thick this time...
Many holes lined up...

Ptkay is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2010, 11:52
  #540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 333
According to preliminary information from the CVR, the decision about approach was taken by the crew themselves. Direct cause of getting too low - wrong altimetry, wrong wx data or busting the minima not yet announced. It was also said that in final moments crew was aware of iminent disaster and that it was too late to recover.

A/c flipped to its back before crashing, hence the reason everyone on board perished - similar accident of Tu204 near Moscow recently claimed no fatalities.
criss is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service