Just saw this. Many of the top civil and military leaders were on the plane. There were no survivors. Strange to see this happen to a plane carrying such important people.

Holy crap............ 

They're saying right now that is was pilot error, due to their insistence to land at Smolensk in poor conditions.
The aircraft involved was a Tupolev Tu-154M, with one of the most unique panels of the bunch.

This is a really sad day for Poland....

EDIT:
I'm prepared to defend the Tu-154M type, so before anyone starts ripping on it....don't try it.
Focus on the victims and the tremendous impact that is tragedy is having and will have on Poland.

Quote:


Not quite sure what there is to defend, though from 205 aircraft 37 hull loses is rather high. However in this case it is looking like pilot error. Reports have it that the crew ignored air traffic instructions to divert due to the fog.

Matt

Yeah I saw this when I was going to work, very sad thing to happen to Poland's leaders.

And the plane was not at fault:
Quote:

To think that the pilot would try something so unsafe with the President on board is unthinkable! I thought that every pilot no matter who they are flying puts the safety of passengers first, not trying to show how bold you are.

I have never hard of any pilot flying any high ranking VIP/DV around every thinking of any thing other then the safety of the plane and the passengers.

Rich H wrote on Apr 10^th, 2010 at 6:04pm:

I know this really sucks.
The guy in charge now is in lower parliament. And I can't imagine what the people are feeling. And thankfully no outrage has happened because of this(in the Polish gov't)
Hopefully they can recover from this loss (politically).
I read out of the 90 something people like 80 of em were in the government.

@sean: when you exclude all 'external factors' crashes (shot down, bomb on board) the score is not bad at all.

But looking at the cockpit photos i can see some things which (combined with pilot error) could have lead to this happening:
The airport that they were landing on does only have NDB and RSBN beacons (with only the RSBN providing distance information), while the plane only has VOR, NDB and something that looks like a combined INS/GPS unit. They were flying into there whitout any distance reference (and being a military airport, the published GPS data, if available, is almost certain to be incorrect)

While it is rare to have a RSBN reciever in a civil plane, some have it (LZ-LCQ, RA-85840), and even military planes were delivered whitout these.

It now appears that the is more to this story than meats they eye. It turns out that the Polish president had a habit of dismissing flight crews if they did not land at his chosen airport, for what ever reason. So add a life as a grounded, embarrassed, shamed and jobless flight crew into the equation, it would appear that the presidents demise could have been of his own making

Matt

Quote:



But what about the two other diverted aircraft that had tried too make a couple of approaches due to the fog 

As for the reported dismissal
"It is It was known that Mr Kaczynski once fired a flight crew when they refused to land at Tbilisi - and flew to another airport, he said" Here Saw it at a couple of other sites too, but I am at work and don't have time to look further.

Matt

expat wrote on Apr 12^th, 2010 at 4:54pm:


Then your previous post was over stated. One time does not a habit make.

All of this is theory, as I said. Unless something akin to a smokin gun is heard on the tapes, we may never know for certain.

I agree with rottydaddy. If the pilot did have the option, Unemployed vs Dead. the choice is easy to me.

beaky wrote on Apr 12^th, 2010 at 9:38pm:



If it was a Western airline/air force/accident I would agree with you 100%, but we are talking about a former Eastern Block country and old habits, traditions and work practices die hard. Sadly the pilot would not have the last word. They did what ground controllers and superiors would tell them and nothing else. When that sort of thing is part of the aviation set up and deeply ingrained, if the president tells you (if that actually happened) then you do it. If as an American, President Obama said, "right Sean, your WILL do XYZ", under your constitution, you would have the right to say, "not today Mr President". A luxury that people in other parts of the world do not have. Also not helping is press-on-itus, because an accident, that always happens to the next guy.

Matt

1) just because you can tell the President of the United States something like that, does not mean that it will be said. I think many pilots would go for it if they were in those shoes. I mean, I've never heard of Air Force One having to go to their alternate, they probably never even have to overshoot. The case is, when your superior is your passenger, you clearly want to look impressive, you're going to want to stand out. Decision making processes can become compromised, judgment can become non-existent. The result is about 97 people dead in an airplane accident including much of the Polish government (so I've been told)
2) Hagar, while it is important to find the cause of an accident, and to learn from the mistakes. Trying to prevent human error is like trying to freeze fire into a block of ice, it's just not going to happen. Even if we somehow deter that certain error from occurring again, we'll just find a new way to mess up and kill ourselves.

expat wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 3:51am:


Doesn't matter what the culture is, or even the written rules under which a pilot is flying- unless the VIP passenger wants to have a whack at the approach himself, and has the qualifications and authority to take that seat, it's up to the PIC. 

It doesn't matter who's sitting back there- the boss, the President, God Himself- the PIC has to make the call. It's simply a matter of what's possible and what isn't- if the prez wanted to fly to the Moon, he'd have to accept that it's just not possible. Likewise an approach below minimums for that aircraft and airport landing system. One attempt? sure, why not. But two? Three? Four?
The reports I've read so far say they went missed three times. All the PIC had to do was say "Very sorry, Mr. President, but as you can see, this isn't going to work.For safety's sake, we must land at an alternate."

These pilots weren't even Polish military, who could be ordered by the president to try again, in some situation where it was absolutely vital to make the attempt... but even then, I can't imagine what situation would require endangering so many top-level officials.

In the end, assuming there was no malfunction involved, and there was sufficient fuel to go to an alternate, it doesn't matter whether or not there was official pressure or the PIC was just in denial about his chances of making a safe landing at that airport on that day... it was his responsibility, and his mistake, IMHO.

I have read on the same link Expat posted that the pilot was a Polish AF pilot, rank of Captain.

But ExPat, you also mentioned that this is a former Eastern block country and blamed some of the mentality on that. Poland was the always the out-lier. They were one of the first to really resist and break away. They are a very Catholic country. Your "life is cheap" analogy earlier does not really fit with the personality of the few Poles I have met. Granted, those that I have met would be a very small sampling, and all very religious.

*corrected names*

HectorD wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 1:12am:

There's no room for sentiment at accident inquiries. It's important to find the cause of these incidents to prevent them happening again. [/quote]
Yes, I wasn't talking about finding the cause. I was talking about other people blaming the death of people on people that are dead. If you are familiar with the Dash 8 crash in buffalo, people still call the pilot an idiot etc. Just let it go.

HectorD wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 9:37am:

Yes, I wasn't talking about finding the cause. I was talking about other people blaming the death of people on people that are dead. If you are familiar with the Dash 8 crash in buffalo, people still call the pilot an idiot etc. Just let it go. [/quote]
Perhaps blame is not the word you want. Blame, while it has negative connotations, is the correct word to describe the pilots omissions that reulted in the crash.
Speaking ill of the dead, name calling, degradation. This is what should be left out.

Why does half of the people in here still think in the civil chain of command...

This was a military crew with both the chief of staff and the highest airforce general on board. As a soldier on duty, you respond to the highest rank available... If they say land, you simply do it or face the consequences.

And when an Il-76 crew decides that the weather is too bad to land, you'd better do the same... as these things have a lot better low-visibility equipment on board

expat wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 8:49am:


Well, the stereotypical "Eastern fatalism" aside, I don't see it as a cultural imperative-  I'm talking about common sense, here.
I know that "common sense is not so common", but among pilots worldwide, it certainly is, despite glaring exceptions in all corners of the world.
And on the other side of the coin,this sort of mistake could have been made by pilots of any nationality, creed, status, etc.

After the third missed approach, it's probably time to go somewhere else, unless you want to die. All pilots would probably agree with me... at least when they're sitting in the hangar talking about it. 

Anyway,I don't believe,  that there is no room at all in Polish aviation culture for common sense... I know a very good pilot who learned to fly in Poland; he's maybe a little crazy (       ), but I don't think he'd take such a chance as these guys seem to have taken, even if the plane was full of "brass hats" and his career was on the line.

I know he'd be tempted- most pilots would- but I doubt he'd lay his life- and the lives of those who he is trying to please- on the line, only for the sake of a schedule.

As for the crew being PAF personnel, possibly given a direct order by their CIC to try again, I could be wrong, but I think
they would have the right to refuse, on the grounds that the order itself constitutes a violation of the rules.

It's not like there was some sound reason why they should all die, therefore such an order would make no sense (remember, this was attempt number four).
And here's a thought: what if the approach had gone bad, killing the VIPs, but the PIC had survived? I think any military pilot would fear the repercussions of that more than death itself!

I could be wrong... maybe this crew saw things exactly as you described- CIC says "try again" so you try again, even though it's pretty obvious that it will not end well. We'll never really know, I guess. 

I don't know how it is in Poland, but here, no officer (flag or not) can override the judgment of a sane captain as long as the aircraft is airborne.

To be fair, the TU-154 has an very AVERAGE safety record, it ain't dangerous, but it ain't a bundle of bubble wrap either. In my opinion, that pilot was nothing short of a complete dumbass putting his aircraft in a situation like that, especially when carrying VERY PRECIOUS cargo. There is absolutely no reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime. Given the alternatives of a funeral on a sunny day or a ride in a limousine, I'm almost certain that man's president would've most certainly opted for the latter.

expat wrote on Apr 14^th, 2010 at 3:16am:

Quite. This is what it actually says in the article. "The [control tower] head said three times to execute a flyby procedure. When the crew did not listen, the control tower could only continue to guide the plane and watch it. It was the only landing approach, the plane crashed at once," he added.

The way I read it the pilot was advised three times during the approach to execute a fly-by. He ignored the advice & the aircraft crashed on its only attempt at landing.

Just been reading an interview in the German press with the pilots father. Seems he is poring scorn on the language barrier aspect of the crash. He says his son spoke excellent Russian. I wonder if the voice recorder will be made public, but somehow I doubt it. The pilot also has 1930 hour on type.

Matt

It was a case of either:

1. Try the approach with a chance of success.

2. Abort the approach and have a 100% guarantee that your career is ruined and that you will be blacklisted by future employers. (Going by reports that the brass has dismissed pilots from the force for such actions before.)

Yes, it may be considered a "poor decision", but it's either take the chance of success, or take the 100% chance of dishonorable career termination.