Polish President and wife killed in Tu-154 crash

[Northwester]

Northwester,

Do you have any alternate theory in mind about how the tip of the left wing separated from the rest of the wing/airplane and came to rest well away of the main wreckage?

What makes it also difficult is the existence of so called "gray zone", an area with no data. If you look at the various parameters plots, you will see all lines changing to gray for about 1 second about 1.6 seconds from the end of the recording. Then they continue as before. What happened in that no-data area is anyone's guess. They just interpolated data to connect the points. It is shown on picture #1. On picture #2 I am showing 2 possible locations of this "gray zone", depending on where you place the end of recording, at the first ground contact, or at the power loss of FMS. It is possible that this no-data area coincides with the loss of the wing part.

[Northwester]

Northwester,

Do you have any alternate theory in mind about how the tip of the left wing separated from the rest of the wing/airplane and came to rest well away of the main wreckage?

One theory, that is a pure speculation, is that the plane tried to execute a turn in order to avoid some obstacle, rolled, and scraped ground with the wing tip. The collision with the tree weakened already that part of the wing so it separated.

But there are still too many unknowns here to form a solid theory.

[Northwester]

I also have no idea what your ultimate goal is. The few people who read this thread do so only out of idle curiosity as to what ridiculous intimation of a conspiracy you have invented today.

Out of idle curiosity, what conspiracy intimation do you see in my last 5 posts? Why does it bother you so much when I find errors, gaps or made up things in the reports? If it upsets you so much, maybe you should not read it and leave it for those who read it for entertainment purposes only.

[Evan]

Out of idle curiosity, what conspiracy intimation do you see in my last 5 posts? Why does it bother you so much when I find errors, gaps or made up things in the reports? If it upsets you so much, maybe you should not read it and leave it for those who read it for entertainment purposes only.

Fabricated report, but no conspiracy. Ok...

(Should we really be getting so much entertainment value out of a crash that took so many lives?)

[Northwester]

Fabricated report, but no conspiracy. Ok...

There is absolutely no doubt that you are smarter than I think but why do you put "conspiracy" label on every statement that points to errors in the reports?

(Should we really be getting so much entertainment value out of a crash that took so many lives?)

Everyone who reads this thread for entertainment purposes, please raise your hand. Oh, I see...

[Evan]

There is absolutely no doubt that you are smarter than I think but why do you put "conspiracy" label on every statement that points to errors in the reports?

Let's put it this way: since the causes of this crash are known, why do you feel the need to point out all these collateral errors in the reports?

A) You suspect a conspiracy.

or

B) ...?

What is B?

[Northwester]

Let's put it this way: since the causes of this crash are known, why do you feel the need to point out all these collateral errors in the reports?

A) You suspect a conspiracy.

or

B) ...?

What is B?

B) Not all causes of this crash are known.

[Evan]

B) Not all causes of this crash are known.

Go on...

[Gabriel]

why do you put "conspiracy" label on every statement that points to errors in the reports?

Northwester,

When you say "made up things" you are not talking about "errors" but about things made intentionally wrong. Since this report is not the work of one single person, and the order to fabricate things has to have come from the highest levels, this is a conspiracy.

While you try to hide it, and probably you will deny it, it's evident (to me anyway) that your "investigation of the errors in the reports" is not neutral. Far from that, it's absolutely skewed to take blame from the Polish side and put it on the Russian side. You might be right in some cases, but that's not the point. You are not trying to find the truth. You are trying to find or interpret every thing, big or small, in a way that supports "your thrust" and to dismiss, "forget" or question those things that support "the official version".

There was pressure due to the previous incident: "On the contrary, the President was ridiculed".
There was a violation of the sterile cockpit: "Come on, that guy was not disturbing the crew".
The approach should have never been attempted to begin with: "It was the standard procedure and they were following the ATC instructions".
The knew that the weather was impossible: "They could not know until they try"
They initiated the go-around too late: "Well, depends on what of the twelve paths that I prepared you look, because in this one if you offset the time in half a second..."
The crew did not meet the requirements for the jobs they were doing: "But they were authorized"
The autopilot manual says that a go-around in autopilot is permitted only when in an ILS approach: "But it still works, maybe, sometimes, in other circumstances too".

Bullshit, bullshit, and a thousand times bullshit. "You don't want the truth. You can't handle the truth" (C). You are looking for a conspiracy. You want it. You need it. And all your posts have the conscious intention to steer the discussion in that direction: Conspiracy.

By the way, there is no need for me to make all that evaluation to reach to this conclusion. You've said yourself, when I questioned you, that you thought that this was not accident but an intentional magnicide, planed, executed and fakely investigated to look like an accident. That was exactly before my post where I've said that then there was nothing more to discuss (or something like that, I don't remember).

But it seems that can't hold my word. I still come to this thread with the hope of trying to find something positive from it. And some of your investigations could be interesting. But your intentionally skewed attitude towards a predefined finding is an obstacle to any constructive discussion.

[MCM]

Everyone who reads this thread for entertainment purposes, please raise your hand. Oh, I see...

*Raises Hand*.

Certainly not entertainment value from a crash, but from the amazingly wild and rediculous claims from someone who asserts they are just looking for errors, but who, right from the very first post, has had a one-eyed view and is doing what every investigator must not - allowing his or her personal hopes and beliefs cloud their investigation.

[Northwester]

Northwester,

When you say "made up things" you are not talking about "errors" but about things made intentionally wrong. Since this report is not the work of one single person, and the order to fabricate things has to have come from the highest levels, this is a conspiracy.

While you try to hide it, and probably you will deny it, it's evident (to me anyway) that your "investigation of the errors in the reports" is not neutral. Far from that, it's absolutely skewed to take blame from the Polish side and put it on the Russian side. You might be right in some cases, but that's not the point. You are not trying to find the truth. You are trying to find or interpret every thing, big or small, in a way that supports "your thrust" and to dismiss, "forget" or question those things that support "the official version".

There was pressure due to the previous incident: "On the contrary, the President was ridiculed".
There was a violation of the sterile cockpit: "Come on, that guy was not disturbing the crew".
The approach should have never been attempted to begin with: "It was the standard procedure and they were following the ATC instructions".
The knew that the weather was impossible: "They could not know until they try"
They initiated the go-around too late: "Well, depends on what of the twelve paths that I prepared you look, because in this one if you offset the time in half a second..."
The crew did not meet the requirements for the jobs they were doing: "But they were authorized"
The autopilot manual says that a go-around in autopilot is permitted only when in an ILS approach: "But it still works, maybe, sometimes, in other circumstances too".

Bullshit, bullshit, and a thousand times bullshit. "You don't want the truth. You can't handle the truth" (C). You are looking for a conspiracy. You want it. You need it. And all your posts have the conscious intention to steer the discussion in that direction: Conspiracy.

By the way, there is no need for me to make all that evaluation to reach to this conclusion. You've said yourself, when I questioned you, that you thought that this was not accident but an intentional magnicide, planed, executed and fakely investigated to look like an accident. That was exactly before my post where I've said that then there was nothing more to discuss (or something like that, I don't remember).

But it seems that can't hold my word. I still come to this thread with the hope of trying to find something positive from it. And some of your investigations could be interesting. But your intentionally skewed attitude towards a predefined finding is an obstacle to any constructive discussion.

I accept your critisism. And I admit that I made some assumptions in the past that turned out to be not accurate. If you are willing to share your expertise and discuss only the issues that in your opinion belong here and are interesting for you, I can take everything else off the table.

[Peter_K]

I'm smarter than you think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DIETlxquzY

PS. Sorry, I just couldn't resist

[Northwester]

An update of a previous story.
Marek Pasionek, a prosecutor who was overseeing the Polish investigation was formally charged in disciplinary proceedings. The proceedings are classified, but someone leaked out some details. There is a separate investigation trying to determine who is the source of the leak from the proceedings.

Pasionek was charged of releasing secret information to a third party. According to "Gazeta Wyborcza" Pasionek contacted CIA and FBI agents from the US Embassy in Warsaw, gave them information from the investigation and asked for help. The meeting was arranged by a former chief of the National Security Agency Bogdan Swieczkowski. The meeting took place at a cafe and at the US Embassy in Warsaw. According to "Gazeta Wyborcza" the American agent testified that the inquiry was about the possibility of generating fog, impacting remotely plane's controls, and altering the transmission from the control tower. The agent also testified that he suggested using formal channels because the issues were top secret.

[Evan]

There is a separate investigation trying to determine who is the source of the leak from the proceedings.

I would start at the cracker factory...

[guamainiac]

So some guys had lunch, the pirogi were good there.

In addition to the guy not being too bright, the possiblity of a machine to fog a valley is still too much, it sounds like you are saying in effect that the Polish government does not want to know? They are lock step with Ivan?