Polish Presidential Flight Crash Thread
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On the ground too often
Age: 49
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worst that could happen in case the pilot of the chartered jet telling the customer to bug off was the charter company loosing a customer.
It all boils down to how you handle these pressures and if you can put them into perspective or not. Some people have the traits needed to be a commander, some just do not.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pressure Evaporates along with the Smolensk Mist
The latest analysis by Polish specialists on the Jerzy Miller committee revealed that the transcripts from May and June 2010 included by the Russians in their official report differ significantly from those deciphered by Polish investigators from the transcripts of the conversations in the cockpit of Tu-154M.
The words, introduced by the Russians into the report in May 2010 and which were reported in the media for nine months, had the aim of suggesting pressure being applied by the passengers of the plane. However, the Polish analysis of the transcripts of the MARS-BM CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) showed conclusively that no evidence exists that pressure was brought to bear on the crew by any member of the passengers of Tu-154M. This was mentioned in the Polish comments to the MAK (Interstate Aviation Committee) report, yet these points were ignored and the final report contains unconfirmed theories about passenger pressure. This is now admitted by Major Michal Fiszer who previously supported the Russian version.
“The Navigator of the Polish Tupolev was not concerned during the flight to Smolensk whether President Lech Kaczynski will ‘get mad’, and the Captain never asked the Minister Mariusz Kazana to ‘ask the boss what [he] should do”. Contrary to the Russian report, these exchanges are absent from the recordings presented on Tuesday by the Polish Committee. In the segments of the transcripts which to the Russians constituted proof of passenger pressure, our specialists heard different exchanges to the MAK report. Their analysis undermines the Russian theory of pressure exacted by passengers” – Major Michal Fiszer told TVN24 in January 2011.
In the Russian report, disseminated so widely by the media, the following sentence was included in the transcript:
08:38:00,4 – 08:38:02,2 Anonymous: “He’ll get mad, if (undeciphered).”
This phrase was used in the Russian final report, translated into English as “he’ll go crazy”.
No such phrase exists in the transcripts! The actual Navigator’s sentence is:
08:38:00,4 – 08:38:02,2: “Confirm that we’re a mile away.”
A similar discrepancy occurs at the time 08:30:54 and the Captain’s question: “And what’ll be of us, Basiu?”. Together with other non-existent excerpts from the transcript, this served the purpose of suggesting to observers of the official MAK report that the crew was afraid of their main passenger. “And what’ll be of us, Basiu” also does not exist in the transcripts!
The Russians’ final report not only used non-existent sentences and phrases, it also manipulated the formations of sentences and individual words to imply acquiescence on the part of the Captain. In truth, the picture of the Captain and his crew that emerges from the real words is significantly different to the one presented by the Russians. The Polish comments on the Russian report clearly state that the psychological pseudo-analysis of the Tu-154M crew is not based on any kind of evidence and has no basis in reality.
After the presentation of the Jerzy Miller Committee findings, during which the Polish specialists’ deciphering of the CVR transcript and Polish comments on Russia’s handling of the disaster were revealed, the situation became absurd. Sections of the Polish media which had supported the Russian findings for nine months alleging passenger pressure on the crew now claimed that the pressure was... a lack of pressure to land...
Yet the same media forgot or chose to forget two facts:
- secondary airports had not been ratified by the Poles (the job of ministers Bogdan Klich, Jerzy Miller and Marian Janicki);
- from the presentation of Minister Jerzy Miller and the corresponding audio transcripts from the air traffic control tower in Smolensk airport it is clear that the Russians were in no way prepared to direct flight Tu-154M to a secondary landing location - one of the reasons for long and inconclusive communications between Smolensk air traffic control and their superiors in Moscow, during which the tower in Smolensk was given a clear order to bring the plane in on their runway. The flight controller in Smolensk at no point received confirmation of any other airports to which he could direct flight Tu-154M.
The presentation of the Polish analysis of the CVR transcript recorder also draws attention to the absence of the only issue relating to the Commander of the Polish Air Force General Andrzej Blasik, which is missing from the Russian version of the transcript at time 08:39:07:
08:39:02,2 – 08:39:08; Navigator: Cockpit. Front landing gear steering activated. Wings set.
08:39:07,5 – 08:39:10,7; Anonym: Wing control passed on to [undeciphered] [voice in the background– Gen. Blasik].
According to the Russians this confirms the presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit. At this point in the presentation of the MAK report the Russians cut it short and maintain the version of events which place the General in the cockpit, despite not having provided any evidence. The MAK report differs, again significantly, from the analysis provided by the Jerzy Miller Committee. The section concerning the wings, which according to the Russians was voiced by General Blasik, in the Polish analysis is shorter, and instead voiced by the navigator and the co-pilot.
(NB: all the times in the Jerzy Miller transcript are reduced by five seconds)
08:37:57,4 – 08:38:00,2: Navigator: Tell me there’s a mile left.
Here all the pressure evaporates... Nobody is getting mad! Further, the navigator’s clear readings of the distance from the runway are excluded by the Russians, and a phrase is changed, which in reality reads:
08:38:15,0 – 08:38:17,1: Navigator: Half a mile left.
This last communication regarding a distance of half a mile was made by the navigator fifty seconds before the air traffic controller’s communication of “10km, on course and flight path”, which signals that the plane is aligned to land. Presented in the analysis of Jerzy Miller and his committee, the navigator’s clear countdown of the distance completely exposes the lie presented in Moscow by MAK, which stated that the plane entered the landing path too late.
The Russians also excluded this excerpt:
08:38:56 – 08:38:58 Mjr. Protasiuk: Procedures please.
08:38:59 – 08:39:00 Mjr. Protasiuk: Read.
The navigator’s statement in the Russian version beginning with the word “Cockpit” from the very beginning indicated an exchange over the intercom or a manipulation of the transcript. However the aforementioned sentences from the June transcripts along with General Blasik’s words do not exist. The real exchange is as follows:
08:39:02 – 08:39:03 Navigator: Wings set.
08:39:03 – 08:39:04 Co-pilot: Wings set. 08:39:04 – 08:39:06 ATC – Smolensk: [Flight]101, distance 10, enter flight path.
The presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit and overall pressure on the flight crew existed only in the Russian version of the transcript. In the course of proceedings, the only Pole accredited to the MAK investigation to hear the original CVR recordings of the black boxes of flight Tu-154M, Edmund Klich, as late as May 2010 reported that he did not hear a single voice on the recording that was not one of the crew. He only changed his mind when he received a piece of paper from the MAK Committee in May 2010 claiming that the voices were there.
And so evaporate the pressures of a piece of paper and the presence of General Blasik as quickly as the Smolensk fog descends.
Conclusion
Theories claiming passenger pressure on the crew are false; the Russians inserted into the official MAK report statements which don’t exist in the audio recording or were manipulated, in order to justify the pressure theory. The Polish corrections to the final report stated clearly that there is no evidence that any passenger brought pressure to bear on the crew of flight Tu-154M. The Russians justified their conclusions with non-existent or manipulated dialogue from the CVR. They falsified the Captain’s words to support the theory of his alleged acquiescence; the audio recording proves that he was not under the thumb of his passengers. Polish analysis of the findings also contradicts Russian claims of acquiescence on the part of the crew while also rejecting the Russians’ psychological pseudo-analysis of the crew, which was not conferred on with the Polish investigators.
Also worth adding is that General Blasik’s body was found over 24 hours after the crash. Russian claims that Gen. Blasik’s sobriety can be questioned over the presence of alcohol in the blood in a concentration of 0.6 grams per litre are spurious, considering it is medically noted that a body can posthumously and endogenously produce up to 1.0 grams of alcohol, thus conclusions based on 0.6 grams per litre alleging that General was not sober are abusive. The procedures used to determine this alcohol level were also in breach of procedures normally used to obtain such readings.
Also spurious are the claims that the body of General Blasik was found in the cockpit of the wrecked plane; first of all, there was no cockpit – it was obliterated. Secondly, the section which encompassed the cockpit also encompassed the presidential suite and two VIP cabins; Gen. Blasik was sitting in one of these cabins, and was therefore found where one could expect to find him in the event of a crash.
And so history has come full circle. Just as notorious German newspapers were placed by Russian Burdenki Committee agents in 1941 in the pockets of Polish army officers murdered in 1940 to deflect blame for the murder of the Polish elite away from Russia/Stalin, so papers placed by the MAK Committee into the hands of Edmund Klich and some Polish-language media (I purposely do not call them Polish) were once again supposed to deflect blame away from Russia.
Kajetan Marzec
The author, taking advantage of his experience of military and civilian air traffic control, has been conducting an independent investigation of the facts of the Smolensk tragedy for many months. He is in constant contact with pilots, physicists, mathematicians, engineers and other persons, who with their experience are struggling to preserve the honour of the Polish soldiers and the dignity of those who died on April 10, 2010 in the catastrophe which befell the Polish Tu-154M.
English translation Mateusz Fenrych
http://www.nowyczas.co.uk/news.php?id=994
The latest analysis by Polish specialists on the Jerzy Miller committee revealed that the transcripts from May and June 2010 included by the Russians in their official report differ significantly from those deciphered by Polish investigators from the transcripts of the conversations in the cockpit of Tu-154M.
The words, introduced by the Russians into the report in May 2010 and which were reported in the media for nine months, had the aim of suggesting pressure being applied by the passengers of the plane. However, the Polish analysis of the transcripts of the MARS-BM CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) showed conclusively that no evidence exists that pressure was brought to bear on the crew by any member of the passengers of Tu-154M. This was mentioned in the Polish comments to the MAK (Interstate Aviation Committee) report, yet these points were ignored and the final report contains unconfirmed theories about passenger pressure. This is now admitted by Major Michal Fiszer who previously supported the Russian version.
“The Navigator of the Polish Tupolev was not concerned during the flight to Smolensk whether President Lech Kaczynski will ‘get mad’, and the Captain never asked the Minister Mariusz Kazana to ‘ask the boss what [he] should do”. Contrary to the Russian report, these exchanges are absent from the recordings presented on Tuesday by the Polish Committee. In the segments of the transcripts which to the Russians constituted proof of passenger pressure, our specialists heard different exchanges to the MAK report. Their analysis undermines the Russian theory of pressure exacted by passengers” – Major Michal Fiszer told TVN24 in January 2011.
In the Russian report, disseminated so widely by the media, the following sentence was included in the transcript:
08:38:00,4 – 08:38:02,2 Anonymous: “He’ll get mad, if (undeciphered).”
This phrase was used in the Russian final report, translated into English as “he’ll go crazy”.
No such phrase exists in the transcripts! The actual Navigator’s sentence is:
08:38:00,4 – 08:38:02,2: “Confirm that we’re a mile away.”
A similar discrepancy occurs at the time 08:30:54 and the Captain’s question: “And what’ll be of us, Basiu?”. Together with other non-existent excerpts from the transcript, this served the purpose of suggesting to observers of the official MAK report that the crew was afraid of their main passenger. “And what’ll be of us, Basiu” also does not exist in the transcripts!
The Russians’ final report not only used non-existent sentences and phrases, it also manipulated the formations of sentences and individual words to imply acquiescence on the part of the Captain. In truth, the picture of the Captain and his crew that emerges from the real words is significantly different to the one presented by the Russians. The Polish comments on the Russian report clearly state that the psychological pseudo-analysis of the Tu-154M crew is not based on any kind of evidence and has no basis in reality.
After the presentation of the Jerzy Miller Committee findings, during which the Polish specialists’ deciphering of the CVR transcript and Polish comments on Russia’s handling of the disaster were revealed, the situation became absurd. Sections of the Polish media which had supported the Russian findings for nine months alleging passenger pressure on the crew now claimed that the pressure was... a lack of pressure to land...
Yet the same media forgot or chose to forget two facts:
- secondary airports had not been ratified by the Poles (the job of ministers Bogdan Klich, Jerzy Miller and Marian Janicki);
- from the presentation of Minister Jerzy Miller and the corresponding audio transcripts from the air traffic control tower in Smolensk airport it is clear that the Russians were in no way prepared to direct flight Tu-154M to a secondary landing location - one of the reasons for long and inconclusive communications between Smolensk air traffic control and their superiors in Moscow, during which the tower in Smolensk was given a clear order to bring the plane in on their runway. The flight controller in Smolensk at no point received confirmation of any other airports to which he could direct flight Tu-154M.
The presentation of the Polish analysis of the CVR transcript recorder also draws attention to the absence of the only issue relating to the Commander of the Polish Air Force General Andrzej Blasik, which is missing from the Russian version of the transcript at time 08:39:07:
08:39:02,2 – 08:39:08; Navigator: Cockpit. Front landing gear steering activated. Wings set.
08:39:07,5 – 08:39:10,7; Anonym: Wing control passed on to [undeciphered] [voice in the background– Gen. Blasik].
According to the Russians this confirms the presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit. At this point in the presentation of the MAK report the Russians cut it short and maintain the version of events which place the General in the cockpit, despite not having provided any evidence. The MAK report differs, again significantly, from the analysis provided by the Jerzy Miller Committee. The section concerning the wings, which according to the Russians was voiced by General Blasik, in the Polish analysis is shorter, and instead voiced by the navigator and the co-pilot.
(NB: all the times in the Jerzy Miller transcript are reduced by five seconds)
08:37:57,4 – 08:38:00,2: Navigator: Tell me there’s a mile left.
Here all the pressure evaporates... Nobody is getting mad! Further, the navigator’s clear readings of the distance from the runway are excluded by the Russians, and a phrase is changed, which in reality reads:
08:38:15,0 – 08:38:17,1: Navigator: Half a mile left.
This last communication regarding a distance of half a mile was made by the navigator fifty seconds before the air traffic controller’s communication of “10km, on course and flight path”, which signals that the plane is aligned to land. Presented in the analysis of Jerzy Miller and his committee, the navigator’s clear countdown of the distance completely exposes the lie presented in Moscow by MAK, which stated that the plane entered the landing path too late.
The Russians also excluded this excerpt:
08:38:56 – 08:38:58 Mjr. Protasiuk: Procedures please.
08:38:59 – 08:39:00 Mjr. Protasiuk: Read.
The navigator’s statement in the Russian version beginning with the word “Cockpit” from the very beginning indicated an exchange over the intercom or a manipulation of the transcript. However the aforementioned sentences from the June transcripts along with General Blasik’s words do not exist. The real exchange is as follows:
08:39:02 – 08:39:03 Navigator: Wings set.
08:39:03 – 08:39:04 Co-pilot: Wings set. 08:39:04 – 08:39:06 ATC – Smolensk: [Flight]101, distance 10, enter flight path.
The presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit and overall pressure on the flight crew existed only in the Russian version of the transcript. In the course of proceedings, the only Pole accredited to the MAK investigation to hear the original CVR recordings of the black boxes of flight Tu-154M, Edmund Klich, as late as May 2010 reported that he did not hear a single voice on the recording that was not one of the crew. He only changed his mind when he received a piece of paper from the MAK Committee in May 2010 claiming that the voices were there.
And so evaporate the pressures of a piece of paper and the presence of General Blasik as quickly as the Smolensk fog descends.
Conclusion
Theories claiming passenger pressure on the crew are false; the Russians inserted into the official MAK report statements which don’t exist in the audio recording or were manipulated, in order to justify the pressure theory. The Polish corrections to the final report stated clearly that there is no evidence that any passenger brought pressure to bear on the crew of flight Tu-154M. The Russians justified their conclusions with non-existent or manipulated dialogue from the CVR. They falsified the Captain’s words to support the theory of his alleged acquiescence; the audio recording proves that he was not under the thumb of his passengers. Polish analysis of the findings also contradicts Russian claims of acquiescence on the part of the crew while also rejecting the Russians’ psychological pseudo-analysis of the crew, which was not conferred on with the Polish investigators.
Also worth adding is that General Blasik’s body was found over 24 hours after the crash. Russian claims that Gen. Blasik’s sobriety can be questioned over the presence of alcohol in the blood in a concentration of 0.6 grams per litre are spurious, considering it is medically noted that a body can posthumously and endogenously produce up to 1.0 grams of alcohol, thus conclusions based on 0.6 grams per litre alleging that General was not sober are abusive. The procedures used to determine this alcohol level were also in breach of procedures normally used to obtain such readings.
Also spurious are the claims that the body of General Blasik was found in the cockpit of the wrecked plane; first of all, there was no cockpit – it was obliterated. Secondly, the section which encompassed the cockpit also encompassed the presidential suite and two VIP cabins; Gen. Blasik was sitting in one of these cabins, and was therefore found where one could expect to find him in the event of a crash.
And so history has come full circle. Just as notorious German newspapers were placed by Russian Burdenki Committee agents in 1941 in the pockets of Polish army officers murdered in 1940 to deflect blame for the murder of the Polish elite away from Russia/Stalin, so papers placed by the MAK Committee into the hands of Edmund Klich and some Polish-language media (I purposely do not call them Polish) were once again supposed to deflect blame away from Russia.
Kajetan Marzec
The author, taking advantage of his experience of military and civilian air traffic control, has been conducting an independent investigation of the facts of the Smolensk tragedy for many months. He is in constant contact with pilots, physicists, mathematicians, engineers and other persons, who with their experience are struggling to preserve the honour of the Polish soldiers and the dignity of those who died on April 10, 2010 in the catastrophe which befell the Polish Tu-154M.
English translation Mateusz Fenrych
http://www.nowyczas.co.uk/news.php?id=994
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Tiger65,
What do you think of this video:
YouTube - Kaczynski plane crash explained: Full minute-by-minute reconstruction
Russian propaganda again! I agree with you, they should stop misleading the world.
Cheers.
What do you think of this video:
YouTube - Kaczynski plane crash explained: Full minute-by-minute reconstruction
Russian propaganda again! I agree with you, they should stop misleading the world.
Cheers.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dortmund
Age: 54
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The current issue of AeroSafety World has a summary of the accident report.
Text only: ?Clash of Motives? | Flight Safety Foundation
Full PDF version: http://flightsafety.org/download_fil...b11_p20-24.pdf
Text only: ?Clash of Motives? | Flight Safety Foundation
Full PDF version: http://flightsafety.org/download_fil...b11_p20-24.pdf
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The author, taking advantage of his experience of military and civilian air traffic control, has been conducting an independent investigation of the facts of the Smolensk tragedy for many months.
Another "Ruskies" conspiracy theoretician published by the conservative
Polish emigration newspaper as "an expert".
The "Miller commission" never concluded their work, so quoting the alleged
"Miller commission" CVR transcripts is more than doubtful.
As it was suggested before, stop this politically motivated propaganda.
Wait until the Polish official report is published, and then we can discuss again,
but based on facts, not on the speculations of a home grown investigator.
Last edited by Ptkay; 11th Mar 2011 at 11:00.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As it was suggested before, stop this politically motivated propaganda.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Other London
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've followed this thread for quite some time and refrained from commenting. However, for all of you who have watched it and are trying to make any sense of it all, ask yourself those questions.
Do you not find it interesting that certain individuals join this forum and start presenting / commenting on this topic in a very biased manner? Why don't they comment on any other threads, but this one?
Do you not find it very curious that the wreckage of this plane is still sitting on the pavement, unprotected from the elements? How often do you see that happen in any 'normal' air accident investigation.
I agree that politics should be kept out of this forum. However, if certain people can join the conversation and try to put blame on pilots, with so many uncertainties in this whole investigation, so can I post my few cents. (lets see how long my opinion lasts here)
I don't think we'll find out the truth behind this event for a long time. Too much disinformation has occurred so far, with pilots being blamed in the first HOURS after the crash. Too bad this whole thread is being polluted by people who are definitely trying to sway public opinion in a certain direction. It is your right to disagree but too many strange things have happened during the course of this so called 'investigation' not to question it. If you've paid any attention to this situation, you'll know what I mean.
Do you not find it interesting that certain individuals join this forum and start presenting / commenting on this topic in a very biased manner? Why don't they comment on any other threads, but this one?
Do you not find it very curious that the wreckage of this plane is still sitting on the pavement, unprotected from the elements? How often do you see that happen in any 'normal' air accident investigation.
I agree that politics should be kept out of this forum. However, if certain people can join the conversation and try to put blame on pilots, with so many uncertainties in this whole investigation, so can I post my few cents. (lets see how long my opinion lasts here)
I don't think we'll find out the truth behind this event for a long time. Too much disinformation has occurred so far, with pilots being blamed in the first HOURS after the crash. Too bad this whole thread is being polluted by people who are definitely trying to sway public opinion in a certain direction. It is your right to disagree but too many strange things have happened during the course of this so called 'investigation' not to question it. If you've paid any attention to this situation, you'll know what I mean.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium
Age: 43
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too much disinformation has occurred so far, with pilots being blamed in the first HOURS after the crash.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you not find it interesting that certain individuals join this forum and start presenting / commenting on this topic in a very biased manner?
Do you not find it very curious that the wreckage of this plane is still sitting on the pavement?
I don't think we'll find out the truth behind this event for a long time.
Last edited by Kulverstukas; 13th Mar 2011 at 12:40.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why don't they comment on any other threads, but this one?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What "truth" dou you want to find out? Technically, we know precisely WHAT and WHEN happened in this poor flight. We don't know WHY for sure, but this is not strange because it is psychological, not technical issue. You can't know for sure peoples motives, you can only explain them with some degree of likelihood.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Other London
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I do not, because if you look into any other threads about, say, India or asia accident, you can always find peoples who will put comments based on nationality and if you look into any thread about accident in Russia or former Eastern block countries, you always find somebody who comments on basis east vs west
What so precious is left in this poor debris to sacrify it? I think anything of interest is already investigated. Such question can only arise if you doesn't want to belive in "Russkies investigation", so then you too commenting on this topic in a very biased manner.
What "truth" dou you want to find out? Technically, we know precisely WHAT and WHEN happened in this poor flight. We don't know WHY for sure, but this is not strange because it is psychological, not technical issue. You can't know for sure people motives, you can only explain them with some degree of likelihood.
I am not trying to open up a can of worms which caused the shutdown of the original thread about this accident. However, I will reiterate that too many uncertainties still remain to conclude the cause of this tragedy.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium
Age: 43
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will reiterate that too many uncertainties still remain to conclude the cause of this tragedy.
The CAUSE of the accident was the crew flying the plane into the ground. End of story. WHY did they do that is a little harder to ascertain for certain. There may have been outside influences, pressure from passengers, inept ATC....none of these things change that they flew the plane into the ground apparently unaware of the gravity of their situation almost until the moment where they clipped a tree (going by the chilling reconstruction with CVR audio)
If, I repeat, IF for the sake of argument the Russian ATC failed in his job and failed to stop the tragedy that still would not make it a cause. The crew of the plane set the whole thing in motion with first poor judgement of what they tried to do, and then made a hash of the attempt itself.
If a Russian navigtor (which Poland refused) would have made the difference -which is not altogether unlikely- the fact that they refused one still is not a cause of the accident. A possible break in the chain of events is never the cause itself. I dont see how this can be argued about endlessly.
There just aren't that many people you can blame for a CFIT.
Kind of simplistic approach. Doing it that way, crash investigation reports would be very short.
1.No technical problems on the aircraft.
2.CFIT
3. End.
There is always more than that. Much more.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I always thought, that crash investigations were about finding the chain of events leading to the disaster (and prevention). Not about guilt.
1.No technical problems on the aircraft.
2.CFIT
3. End.
There is always more than that. Much more.
There just aren't that many people you can blame for a CFIT.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Belgium
Age: 43
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, but there is a difference between chain of events and cause. The cause here is obvious. Not the Russians nor the politicians on the plane were at the controls. It should of course still be investigated how and why certain mistakes happened (to avoid them in the future) but none of that will ever change the root cause of the accident. 2 different things! My reply was to someone who said the cause was still uncertain, which it is not. Why the accident was not prevented can be a different question.
Investigations are not about assigning blame but to improve safety by learning from mistakes.
Investigations are not about assigning blame but to improve safety by learning from mistakes.
Yes and no. Yes, because it was a CFIT and we know who was flying the machine.
No, because ...
Around 2002 there were some changes made in PAF, having for effect many older pilots leaving the service. To many. That effect was later amplified by some beancounters decisions. The continuity of training and passing the experience from older pilots to freshmens was lost to some extent. I know it's not something you can weight or measure, and many people will probably disagree, but this is for me the root cause of that crash. Error margins were reduced. When poor weather and some other elements were added to the equation, it lead to that crash.
No, because ...
Around 2002 there were some changes made in PAF, having for effect many older pilots leaving the service. To many. That effect was later amplified by some beancounters decisions. The continuity of training and passing the experience from older pilots to freshmens was lost to some extent. I know it's not something you can weight or measure, and many people will probably disagree, but this is for me the root cause of that crash. Error margins were reduced. When poor weather and some other elements were added to the equation, it lead to that crash.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I really do not think that this could have consequences for this accident.
The rules who were not respected by the crew are basic rules.
Certainly not rules that require intensive training and followed, and a contribution from the experience of other expert pilots.
Anyway .. same intensive training and the benefit of feedback can never stop a pilot to make decisions that run counter to established rules.
It's happen every days and not only in the aviation business
You have just to check a road near you
The continuity of training and passing the experience from older pilots to freshmens was lost to some extent.
The rules who were not respected by the crew are basic rules.
Certainly not rules that require intensive training and followed, and a contribution from the experience of other expert pilots.
Anyway .. same intensive training and the benefit of feedback can never stop a pilot to make decisions that run counter to established rules.
It's happen every days and not only in the aviation business
You have just to check a road near you
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can anyone talk of a 'fair' investigation if the Polish side was not and is not able to perform its own independent investigation of the wreckage? Please, provide us an example of a multinational accident where remains of the plane were left outside, unprotected for months.
As an example, the Polish side has uncovered discrepancies in the transcripts of CVR provided by the Russian side.
There is one simple question: WHO IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CFIT? Do you think it is not answered already?
Is it official already?
I also wouldn't call it discrepancies, as it would suggest some bad will. It's more a "version 1", with a lot of incomprehensible elements and a refined "version 2", yet still to come.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anniversary
As many will know, today is the first anniversary of this tragedy, just one of many in the history of the great Polish nation.
There has been an excellent series of articles about Poland in this week's left wing rag, the Guardian, which I do not normally buy.
BBC News - Poland marks Smolensk plane crash anniversary
Laying Poland's messianic complex to rest | James Hopkin | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
There has been an excellent series of articles about Poland in this week's left wing rag, the Guardian, which I do not normally buy.
BBC News - Poland marks Smolensk plane crash anniversary
Laying Poland's messianic complex to rest | James Hopkin | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk