Polish Government Tu154M crash
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solution To The Question Why ????
Or maybe if these "three yellow buckets" are really
the "tree spot lights directed at the aircraft" mentioned
by the Polish 36th squad pilots and other Russian pilots,
as the only approach lights, then this might be THE ANSWER: WHY ??
The pilots mentioned above all confirmed the these lights were
expected (supposed) to be "at the threshold".
but from the same blog and image below they were in zone 5.
This zone 5 is at least 800m before the runway threshold.
If the pilots took them for the runway lights, then
this is the answer, why they were so low.
If this would have really been the runway, than their glide-path
would have been perfect...
(do you remember the gear touch down marks almost exactly at this point?)
the "tree spot lights directed at the aircraft" mentioned
by the Polish 36th squad pilots and other Russian pilots,
as the only approach lights, then this might be THE ANSWER: WHY ??
The pilots mentioned above all confirmed the these lights were
expected (supposed) to be "at the threshold".
but from the same blog and image below they were in zone 5.
This zone 5 is at least 800m before the runway threshold.
If the pilots took them for the runway lights, then
this is the answer, why they were so low.
If this would have really been the runway, than their glide-path
would have been perfect...
(do you remember the gear touch down marks almost exactly at this point?)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Age: 52
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember reading here that they were EMERCOM lights. And I believed that and sticked to this idea for a while. But so far I haven't seen a single photo with them in this role. Only those pointed upwards.
So what happend to the old ones then? How different they were?
Either the plane landed to these on these pictures or...
... there were no lights (?!).
Anyway, from the blog linked above it turns out pilots did not see any lights until they crashed.
Maybe the standard EMERCOM lights (obviously portable)
have been put on the poles remaining from the former ALS,
now defunct and non-operational since years (looking on their condition),but certainly not an ALS system available at the moment of the Tu-154 landing.
have been put on the poles remaining from the former ALS,
now defunct and non-operational since years (looking on their condition),but certainly not an ALS system available at the moment of the Tu-154 landing.
Either the plane landed to these on these pictures or...
... there were no lights (?!).
Anyway, from the blog linked above it turns out pilots did not see any lights until they crashed.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Age: 52
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, and painstakingly translated.
I was reading it first in Polish, but before posting the link here switched to English and was greatly surprised seeing how good it is.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KingOfBongo:
This is the system, the same poles, picture taken on April 10th.
Foto - portal TVN24.pl
Clearly no bulbs iside...
The images you linked are from April 13th.
The article in the Polish media on Militia repairing the lighting system seems
to be true, and my theory, mentioned above wrong...
Google T?umacz
Whatever the system was at the time of the accident, it was mostly INOP.
More pics, Russian site.
Google Tłumacz
This is the system, the same poles, picture taken on April 10th.
Foto - portal TVN24.pl
Clearly no bulbs iside...
The images you linked are from April 13th.
The article in the Polish media on Militia repairing the lighting system seems
to be true, and my theory, mentioned above wrong...
Google T?umacz
Whatever the system was at the time of the accident, it was mostly INOP.
More pics, Russian site.
Google Tłumacz
Last edited by Ptkay; 17th Apr 2010 at 21:41.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Nie wyobrażam sobie, by podczas lądowania polskiego samolotu, które odbyło się w tak trudnych, system oświetlania nie działał "
"I can not imagine that the Polish aircraft during landing, which took place in such difficult lighting system did not work "
Bartosz Stroiński, dowódca eskadry samolotowej Pułku Lotnictwa Specjalnego
Bartosz Stroiński, plane squadron commander of the Special Aviation Regiment
"I can not imagine that the Polish aircraft during landing, which took place in such difficult lighting system did not work "
Bartosz Stroiński, dowódca eskadry samolotowej Pułku Lotnictwa Specjalnego
Bartosz Stroiński, plane squadron commander of the Special Aviation Regiment
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was about to recommend the link to the Smolensk man reconstruction, but see all have got it already, and translated by google (in Russian it's three ? sets, 3 separate links, in time consequitive order, intermitted by quite big pictures of the whole tree-touching route). He did a lot of climbing and measuring there, on the place, checking the level of the plane wings by what it touched and what not, along the way.
That's the same man who painstakingly was making and improving his aerial map of the course, throughout (all had it here many times quoted).
I didn't notice in his text much about which and where the lights are, that is were. He wrote at once the area was boarded and he couldn't get to his tracing the route self-mission in the first? 3 ? days (can be asked).
He wrote of lights - in that text - as "starting from the near beakon and, with intervals, following up to the beginning of the runway."
Matter of factly wrote - but, I guess, he can be asked straight - are those "yellow buckets" - like, what are they? Normal there, the guiding lights, or something new.
I am not logged in in neither Smolensk city ordinary people blog, nor Smolensk city avia blog, nor the two avia blogs general, of Russia. Only reading. If somebody from here has registered in either of the Russian blogs - ask him, he seems to be the only practical treasure about. And he is in all Russian blogs related, the guy middle-aged in glasses and suit with tie, serious looking, and the nik name everywhere Aml.
That's the same man who painstakingly was making and improving his aerial map of the course, throughout (all had it here many times quoted).
I didn't notice in his text much about which and where the lights are, that is were. He wrote at once the area was boarded and he couldn't get to his tracing the route self-mission in the first? 3 ? days (can be asked).
He wrote of lights - in that text - as "starting from the near beakon and, with intervals, following up to the beginning of the runway."
Matter of factly wrote - but, I guess, he can be asked straight - are those "yellow buckets" - like, what are they? Normal there, the guiding lights, or something new.
I am not logged in in neither Smolensk city ordinary people blog, nor Smolensk city avia blog, nor the two avia blogs general, of Russia. Only reading. If somebody from here has registered in either of the Russian blogs - ask him, he seems to be the only practical treasure about. And he is in all Russian blogs related, the guy middle-aged in glasses and suit with tie, serious looking, and the nik name everywhere Aml.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And look at this. There is another set of these lights, with parts of the aircraft lying nearby. They are near the main road, on the runaway axis, and they are working.
It is taken from the wikimapia site. Click at the small white rectangle near the road, center, left, labeled "Landing Mark".
Wikimapia, crash site
Is it really possible that they were, in the mist, mistaken for some other lights, higher up?
It is taken from the wikimapia site. Click at the small white rectangle near the road, center, left, labeled "Landing Mark".
Wikimapia, crash site
Is it really possible that they were, in the mist, mistaken for some other lights, higher up?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
? ????????? ???? ??????? • ?????????? ?????
That's the man in glasses and suit, Sergey Amelin. Page 203! of Smolensk ws (don't know what it is) but definitely local blog. Nick name everywhere Aml.
That's the man in glasses and suit, Sergey Amelin. Page 203! of Smolensk ws (don't know what it is) but definitely local blog. Nick name everywhere Aml.
PJ2:
Sorry I cannot claim recent experience but last time I went to Russia it worked as advertised by the current AIP paragraph you published.
Any clearance below the transition altitude is an height above the runway threshold. Foreigners generally are given the QFE in millibars by ATC. It is also very often appended in the remarks section of otherwise standard METARS but sometimes only in mm Hg.
DJ.
Anyone who operates in Russia or has recent experience, can you clarify?
Any clearance below the transition altitude is an height above the runway threshold. Foreigners generally are given the QFE in millibars by ATC. It is also very often appended in the remarks section of otherwise standard METARS but sometimes only in mm Hg.
DJ.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I readed some have ideas about cut trees ...
Mething it's useless ...
The trees are where they must be ... the aircraft was not where he must be.
The trees have no responsability with this accident. Blame anything or anyone .. but not the trees.
I readed some have ideas about cut trees ...
Mething it's useless ...
The trees are where they must be ... the aircraft was not where he must be.
The trees have no responsability with this accident. Blame anything or anyone .. but not the trees.
Because, look at the situation we have here. This tree, and its neighbors, is probably 20m high.
Tree with the cut near the main road
By the look at the satellite image, it's not much different 30m to the left, at the real axis of the runaway.
Road is at the runaway level. At the 860m distance from touchdown and with 3% approach, plane should be 45m above the road. With 20m trees, plane wheels are ideally some 20m above the tops of the trees that flank the road. Isn't that a bit to close for the runaway without modern equipment, and invisible hole in front of it?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PaleBlueDot "in places like this some additional measures be taken"
PaleBlueDot :o), with all respect. Even for me it is clear you are thinking along the wrong path.
I don't think they will cut trees. They might grow more :o))))
You didn't notice that it is located not in the most, how to say, convenient place? And all is very uninterestingly un-pronounced, un-intersting, boring, old, some huts here and there :o))), etc.
The only "measure" they might have to take, as was marked in the other blog :o), is as good as to re-locate the airport entirely, after all this attention and detailed terrain study to the last metre internationally.
PaleBlueDot :o), with all respect. Even for me it is clear you are thinking along the wrong path.
I don't think they will cut trees. They might grow more :o))))
You didn't notice that it is located not in the most, how to say, convenient place? And all is very uninterestingly un-pronounced, un-intersting, boring, old, some huts here and there :o))), etc.
The only "measure" they might have to take, as was marked in the other blog :o), is as good as to re-locate the airport entirely, after all this attention and detailed terrain study to the last metre internationally.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,810
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
PJ2 .. what is the white (or pale gray) straight line in the graphic (view from above)
Methink it's the line where must normally be the plane .. so the plane is not only too low but also left of the normal approach (and this already before struck trees) ?
Using this new, more accurately-scaled graphic, I re-drew the 3deg theoretical glideslope (blue line) which I assumed began about 300m into the runway, (normal touchdown point). I used another line to show the extended the runway elevation, (brown line).
Methink it's the line where must normally be the plane .. so the plane is not only too low but also left of the normal approach (and this already before struck trees) ?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EU
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hallo
I think ALS was working at that time. Photos from Polish website maybe taken few days earlier when Russians prepared airfield for Polish visit.
According to the trees you must refer to OCH(A) which tells you about that.
I flew to Russian airport several times they always gave us QNH and altitude in meters. ATIS was in EN and RUS language including wind on pattern high. The NDBs were very strong. ALS was very simple when you try to compare with Europe. I think is no any reason to blame airfield for this crash. It looks like they were on the GPS approach. It happened very often we got GPS offset to the correct approach path in eastern airfield.
I think ALS was working at that time. Photos from Polish website maybe taken few days earlier when Russians prepared airfield for Polish visit.
According to the trees you must refer to OCH(A) which tells you about that.
I flew to Russian airport several times they always gave us QNH and altitude in meters. ATIS was in EN and RUS language including wind on pattern high. The NDBs were very strong. ALS was very simple when you try to compare with Europe. I think is no any reason to blame airfield for this crash. It looks like they were on the GPS approach. It happened very often we got GPS offset to the correct approach path in eastern airfield.
