TECHNICAL REPORT Facts regarding the crash of the TU-154M No. 101, (Fight PLF101)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Nearby SBBR and SDAM
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TECHNICAL REPORT Facts regarding the crash of the TU-154M No. 101, (Fight PLF101)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An amazing read. I can't wait to read the Russian reaction to this report. It is fascinating to get a little insight into the detail that investigators go to in order to determine the facts. Thanks RR.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We've been through this several times -you can either believe a vast conspiracy or that the pilot was under serious pressure from his boss's, boss, boss, boss to make the approach in dreadful conditions
William of Occam should be our guide here
William of Occam should be our guide here
So we are either to believe that the pilot tried to force a landing below minimums or that the Russians bombed the plane ? If so to what end ??
I have no idea what happened there but unless some neutral third party gets involved (assuming such a thing can be arranged) it will be hard to form an opinion.
I have no idea what happened there but unless some neutral third party gets involved (assuming such a thing can be arranged) it will be hard to form an opinion.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is rather easy to form an option:
1) how many times presidential aircraft was bombed in the last 20 years?
2) how many times there was a CFIT in last 20 years caused by any kind of factor, let alone busting minimas under pressure?
1) how many times presidential aircraft was bombed in the last 20 years?
2) how many times there was a CFIT in last 20 years caused by any kind of factor, let alone busting minimas under pressure?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegase Driver
how many times presidential aircraft was bombed in the last 20 years?
At first I thought this" technical report" was a fake made up by Polish nationalists that still cannot accept the accident, but it looks made by professionals from inside the "normal" Polish Investigation bureau. But it is still a report made by a so called " re-investigation committee," meaning it is not the official report . Am I correct to assume ?
In fact quite a few in the last 50 years , the last one being the Rwanda President in 1994. (which started the Tustsi genocide )
At first I thought this" technical report" was a fake made up by Polish nationalists that still cannot accept the accident, but it looks made by professionals from inside the "normal" Polish Investigation bureau. But it is still a report made by a so called " re-investigation committee," meaning it is not the official report . Am I correct to assume ?
At first I thought this" technical report" was a fake made up by Polish nationalists that still cannot accept the accident, but it looks made by professionals from inside the "normal" Polish Investigation bureau. But it is still a report made by a so called " re-investigation committee," meaning it is not the official report . Am I correct to assume ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_P..._investigation
It's a political job but with an official stamp. Actually quite frightening - this is how wars start.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fact quite a few in the last 50 years , the last one being the Rwanda President in 1994. (which started the Tustsi genocide )
At first I thought this" technical report" was a fake made up by Polish nationalists that still cannot accept the accident, but it looks made by professionals from inside the "normal" Polish Investigation bureau. But it is still a report made by a so called " re-investigation committee," meaning it is not the official report . Am I correct to assume ?
At first I thought this" technical report" was a fake made up by Polish nationalists that still cannot accept the accident, but it looks made by professionals from inside the "normal" Polish Investigation bureau. But it is still a report made by a so called " re-investigation committee," meaning it is not the official report . Am I correct to assume ?
This report refers an old 707 incident with youtube video (!) as a proof of something but hey the only common thing between 707 and 154 is that they were built like a brick but otherwise 154 is unforgiving plane.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I began reading this under the impression that I was embarking on another technical accident analysis like the innumerable others I have read. It only dawned on me incrementally quite what an absurd confection of tin-foil-hat nonsense this purported 'report' in fact is.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recently reviewed an academic paper based, as far as I can see from the author list and contents, upon this report. It was by a considerable margin the least scientific paper I've ever read, to the extent it was offensive that it'd even been sent out for expert review.
Funnily enough - I presume because of the political dimension - it had 9 other reviewing it too (2 or 3 others is typical). All rejected the paper as unscientific. This type of nonsense has no place in professional aviation, including PPRuNe.
Funnily enough - I presume because of the political dimension - it had 9 other reviewing it too (2 or 3 others is typical). All rejected the paper as unscientific. This type of nonsense has no place in professional aviation, including PPRuNe.
