|
Methinks the reasons why the report is regarded as unacceptable to the Polish government are emotionally very similar to the reasons why the crew could not divert. Also, the poor Ruskies have got such a bad reputation for covering things up that when for once they have Pravda (truth) on their side many will not believe them.
|
Radio altimeter
RegDep
Maybe pressure, but why and how did it lead to CFIT? What made them think that they were higher than they were? That's what we want to know. "- early transition by the navigator to the altitude callouts on the basis of the radio altimeter indications without considering the uneven terrain;" Earlier in this thread there were many models of the flight path relative to the terrain created and resultant trajectories posted from data released by the investigators. These strongly suggested that the crew began to rely on the radio altimeter when overhead low terrain close to the runway. When the terrain rose sharply as they approached the runway they were unable to climb sufficiently rapidly to reach the runway altitude. As I remember they crashed into terrain below the runway altitude just short of the runway. It appears that the followed the radio altimeter down into a hole and failed to recognise the situation in time to climb out the other side. Sorry, but I am not at present going through the thread to look for the cross-sections that were posted so I have no exact links or references. PS I posted some trajectory models myself but stopped their development when superior versions that were not in disagreement were created by others:) |
jimjim1:
I think you answered your own question here. And I agree with what you say. Reg |
… why and how did it lead to CFIT?
|
Smolensk Report
It is a sobering read. We all know it: Thou shall know thou limitations. And again a crew vanised by not respecting their limitations, outside pressure or no pressure. Many of us will say: how is it possible. But you can read it here again, it still happens. When will we ever learn. Because that is the point learn from this. I am very afraid that when you change the title of this report into "Tripoli A330 crash" then that report is also ready for publication...
Safe flying and learn from this. |
sp - I have not read the report you link, but would it not be right to say that TAWS in this accident would not help? Almost certainly the airport would not be in the database, Thus at some point the TCF would have triggered, even on a 'normal' approach. What would the crew be expected to do?
|
What would the crew be expected to do? |
Not fly in IMC. (especially in a non-precision approach) |
Almost certainly the airport would not be in the database, Thus at some point the TCF would have triggered, even on a 'normal' approach. What would the crew be expected to do? For some unknown reason, the PICs altimeter was switched at some moment from 745 mmHg to 760mmHg leading to more than 100 m altitude overestimation. Arrakis |
What?Are you real? Tell me you are a troll. What they should do is go around immediately once the TAWS warnings sound and try again, or divert. Or perhaps I'm just a troll. |
BOAC
A very good point; however I would hope that, like hearing the stall warner on a 152 I instinctively ease forward on the stick, anyone hearing PULL UP would do just that. You only hear those words when the proverbial has well and truly hit the fan. These guys must have been under serious pressure (which is understandable) But I'm not sure that the blame can be laid squarely at the pilot's doors. - The big wigs in the back should have known better. If a pilot broke one of their shiny jets by going below MDA, you know they wouldn't get any sympathy. - I question the culture within such an organization. "No" can be a very difficult word to say. Particularly in (some) military situations where people are drilled always to say "yes" to the man in the fancy hat. |
Originally Posted by ARRAKIS
(Post 6175125)
For some unknown reason, the PICs altimeter was switched at some moment from 745 mmHg to 760mmHg leading to more than 100 m altitude overestimation.
I wonder (being neither aviation nor psychological expert) if the PIC shut out all aural warnings (navigator counting to zero, TAWS) and relied on his altimeter and looking outside for any ground indicators. |
OK, m1B, obviously not the troll I thought you were. My understanding is that at some point on an approach to an airfield NOT in the database the system will warn you of terrain ahead. Again, my understanding is that this is normal. Are you are saying that at the first 'Terrain Ahead' warning (they had one at 200m) they should have gone round and diverted? That would mean you would never be able to approach a non-database a/field in IMC even using a CATIII ILS! Just a little limiting.
If you are saying they should have gone round at the 'Pull Up' I quite agree, of course, but that was, I assume, a basic GPWS warning. welliewanger - I assume the massey post related to the 'Terrain Ahead' warning, not the 'Pull Up' (see above)? |
Russia blames Polish crew in Kaczynski air crash
Russian officials investigating the plane crash that killed Polish President Lech Kaczynski placed the blame squarely on the Poles on Wednesday, saying the crew was pressured to land in bad weather by an air force commander who had been drinking.
|
Reading the final report, it would seem that the Polish Air Force does not operate a "sterile cockpit" environment. :sad:
|
Just reading the part that RegDep posted, my heart was in my mouth - its like watching a disaster movie, knowing what is going to come next....
Haven't flown an approach in 5 months and going to be carrying the heads of state of the country? Can't/don't get actual and forecast weather prior to departure, so decide to bust minimums? Ignore TAWS warnings, while reading radar altimeter heights? The utube video is heart-breaking - PULL UP, PULL UP, crunch..... What a terrible waste of life. What on earth was going on with Polish airforce training and operations that this crew thought they would be ok? This could be a fascinating example of CRM - cheese holes lining up and whole bunch of other CRM cliches.... I just listened to a Polish politician speaking on the BBC World Service. He claims the Russian ATC could/should have been more professional and should have done more to stop the pilots making the approach! The interviewer pushed him on that, saying "shouldn't the pilots be making that decision" or words to that effect, at which point he backed down, saying "I'm just a politician and don't know all the technical stuff"... Sounds like they need to take a long hard look at how honest they are being with themselves.......... |
I just listened to a Polish politician speaking on the BBC World Service. He claims the Russian ATC could/should have been more professional and should have done more to stop the pilots making the approach! The interviewer pushed him on that, saying "shouldn't the pilots be making that decision" or words to that effect, at which point he backed down, saying "I'm just a politician and don't know all the technical stuff". |
fernytickles
"Haven't flown an approach in 5 months and going to be carrying the heads of state of the country?"
Flying time last month: PIC 17.07 h, SIC 35.27 shorley thay must have done an approach during the last month? Nevertheless CFIT! |
Skyglider,
From RegDep's post, the excerpt from the report... The PIC had a break of over 5 months in approaches in complicated meteorological conditions (corresponding to his weather minima 60х800) on Tu-154M. The PIC had not had enough training on approaches in manual steering mode using non precision type of approaches. |
Here the youtube link with detailed reconstruction incl. english comment:
YouTube - Kaczynski plane crash explained: Full minute-by-minute reconstruction |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:50. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.