Polish President and wife killed in Tu-154 crash

[SYDCBRWOD]

You are absolutely correct. The same goes for the rivets. You can slowly peel off a piece of sheet metal popping rivets one by one and then you will not need a force that is a combined value of the capacity of all rivets. But when you have a piece of metal blown off in a fraction of a second, you will need that force.

So the explosive decompression of that heavily metal fatigued 737 classic (Aloha airlines) that became a convertible - to the passengers it would have seemed to have happened instantaneously - in reality, the metal ripped and tore one rivet hole at a time - the force would have been localised on each successive rivet - it need only have been fractions of a second for each rivet, but that's what would have occurred. Same in this case.

[Northwester]

So the explosive decompression of that heavily metal fatigued 737 classic (Aloha airlines) that became a convertible - to the passengers it would have seemed to have happened instantaneously - in reality, the metal ripped and tore one rivet hole at a time - the force would have been localised on each successive rivet - it need only have been fractions of a second for each rivet, but that's what would have occurred. Same in this case.

Are you saying that the top and bottom skin of the left wing started to peel off separating it from the structural elements, one rivet at a time, 200 or 300 of them, still in the air, or are you saying that the top and bottom skin of the wing peeled off, one rivet at a time, as the plane hit the soft,wet ground?

[SYDCBRWOD]

Are you saying that the top and bottom skin of the left wing started to peel off separating it from the structural elements, one rivet at a time, 200 or 300 of them, still in the air, or are you saying that the top and bottom skin of the wing peeled off, one rivet at a time, as the plane hit the soft,wet ground?

Take your pick. It doesn't matter. It is possible that the rivets failed sequentially albeit in rapid sequence one after another. What I'm disputing is your point that the only way the damage could have occurred is all rivets being popped at once. Even in an explosion super slow motion cameras capture things being blown apart in a high speed sequence - ie a progressive sequential failure.

[guamainiac]

Hitting firm trees in a wooded glen, not "firm ground" .... you put the cart before the horse.

If the Ruskies were going to "blow it up", why wait till it was on short final? Why not do it as it started descent where there was sure to be shredding and wide spread of the debris field. Did you see any scorch marks on those exploded components, how about the deformation.

The comments about the Aloha flight are absurd. It all happened so fast and in such a rush of noise from the rush of air and if any noise could be discerned from the rivets sequential failure it probably sounded like a small caliber automatic weapon.

[SYDCBRWOD]

The comments about the Aloha flight are absurd.

You're welcome.

It all happened so fast and in such a rush of noise from the rush of air and if any noise could be discerned from the rivets sequential failure it probably sounded like a small caliber automatic weapon.

Exactly my point - despite the speed of the failure it occurred SEQUENTIALLY. Not so absurd.

[Evan]

He also pointed to some other findings based on the photographs from the site. On pic 1 two men are holding a piece of the plane that has about 25 rivets pulled out. Every rivet has a capacity of at least 300 pounds. 300# times 25 gives 7,500 pounds or almost 4 tons acting on a very small piece. Such force can only be generated by an explosion. Pic 2 shows a part of the wing adjacent to the lost end piece. That part lost at least 200 rivets. That would indicate a force of at least 60,000 pounds, or 30 tons, acting on a relatively small section of a wing. Impossible except from an explosion.

Northwester, is this how a real investigation examines the possibility of damage by explosives? No. It's not. Do they deduce the cause simply from examining the way the rivets failed and running software simulations? No, they don't. Do they examine the actual wreckage instead of photos of it? Yes, they do. Why? Because your kind of investigation would be subject to false conclusions based on extrapolating only from the limited evidence at hand. Professional investigations are extremely thorough for a very good reason. Let me give you an example...

Example:

Here is an excerpt describing part of the TWA 800 investigation concerning the possibility of a bomb or missile attack. Notice the methodology does not include downloading pictures from the internet and constructing virtual simulations:

Trace amounts of explosive residue were detected on three samples of material from three separate locations of the recovered airplane wreckage (described by the FBI as a piece of canvas-like material and two pieces of a floor panel). These samples were submitted to the FBI's laboratory in Washington, D.C., which determined that one sample contained traces of cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX), another nitroglycerin, and the third a combination of RDX and pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN); these findings received much media attention at the time.

Trace amounts of explosives were detected. Is this true of Polish 101? No. It isn't.

Further examination of the airplane structure, seats, and other interior components found no damage typically associated with a high-energy explosion of a bomb or missile warhead ("severe pitting, cratering, petalling, or hot gas washing"). This included the pieces on which trace amounts of explosives were found.

Does the wreckage of Polish 101 bear these signs of explosive damage? No. It doesn't.

Of the 5 percent of the fuselage that was not recovered, none of the missing areas were large enough to have covered all the damage that would have been caused by the detonation of a bomb or missile. None of the victims' remains showed any evidence of injuries that could have been caused by high-energy explosives.

Did the Polish investigators examining the remains of Polish 101 find any such evidence of an explosion? No. they didn't.

Although it was unable to determine the exact source of the trace amounts of explosive residue found on the wreckage, the lack of any other corroborating evidence associated with a high-energy explosion led the NTSB to conclude that "the in-flight breakup of TWA flight 800 was not initiated by a bomb or missile strike."

So you see, even with trace amounts of explosive detected (which was later attributed to the aircraft's use in 1991 transporting troops during the Gulf War or its use in a dog-training explosive detection exercise about one month before the accident.) they did not jump to conclusions and still managed to conclude that the cause was not related to explosives.

Now, if your cabal of conspiracy theorists heard that even a trace of explosives was detected on the wreckage of Polish 101... that would be it, the smoking gun. You would be convinced that explosives were definitely the cause and nothing could convince you otherwise. You would say something like...

Impossible except from an explosion.

...despite a lack of corroborating evidence. And you would have been wrong and never discovered the real cause. That my friend is the difference between a conspiracy theory "investigation" and a professional scientific investigation.

Do you get it yet? You cannot conduct an air crash investigation over the internet.

[justLOT787]

The truth will come out!!

The good news is that Poland will get the planes wrack this year most likely around the fall time. Then we will get the true results and test done to show the doubters that it was a terrorist attack by joint current Polish gov (PO) and Russian gov. The truth will come out that this was not just an simple accident.

[SYDCBRWOD]

The good news is that Poland will get the planes wrack this year most likely around the fall time. Then we will get the true results and test done to show the doubters that it was a terrorist attack by joint current Polish gov (PO) and Russian gov. The truth will come out that this was not just an simple accident.

And I'm willing to bet that the inspection will support the original conclusions, whereupon the conspiracy theorists will postulate the airframes were switched .... (and on it goes)

[Northwester]

So this is how it goes:
- based on available information, TAWS data, photographs, etc., we can conclude that most likely this and this happened
- you cannot make any conclusions without examining and testing the wreckage, the original black boxes, conducting the autopsies, etc.
- can we then have the wreckage to test, the original black boxes to examine, and bodies to conduct autopsies?
- no, the wreckage will stay here, we'll keep the black boxes, and the bodies will arrive in sealed coffins that you are not allowed to open
- ok, so based on the information that is available to us we can conclude that this and this happened
- you cannot make these conclusions without examining the wreckage, the original black boxes, and the bodies
- so can we have the wreckage, the original black boxes, and can we check the bodies for the signs of an explosion like embeded pieces of metals or ruptured ear drums?
- no, you cannot have any of these

An so it goes. The biggest BS. If there was nothing to hide, the access to all information would have been wide open to verify all findings by a body of independent experts and remove all speculations. Both EU and US offered help with the investigation at the very beginning, but all outside help was flatly rejected.

[Northwester]

Hitting firm trees in a wooded glen, not "firm ground" .... you put the cart before the horse.

According to TAWS data, the only reliable data here, the plane was flying above the trees.

I don't know if you remember this, but the only "evidence" about the clipped trees came from the photographs of some amateur photographer who took snapshots several days after the crash. No professional photos where the date, time, camera position, type of camera, type of lens, focal length, shooting parameters, distance to the object, and scale are recorded.

If the Ruskies were going to "blow it up", why wait till it was on short final? Why not do it as it started descent where there was sure to be shredding and wide spread of the debris field. Did you see any scorch marks on those exploded components, how about the deformation.

Plan A - mis-guide the plane so it hits the ground somewhere in the ravine
Plan B - if the pilots somehow manage to recover, use explosives

1/3 of the plane, based on weight, is missing. 5 months after the crash a group of archeologists searching the site still found tens of thousands fragments of the plane.

[Northwester]

And I'm willing to bet that the inspection will support the original conclusions, whereupon the conspiracy theorists will postulate the airframes were switched .... (and on it goes)

I am not sure about switching airframes, but a nice cleaning job?
Pic 1 shows the wreckage shortly after the crash, pic 2 is the most recent one.

[Evan]

- so can we have the wreckage, the original black boxes, and can we check the bodies for the signs of an explosion like embeded pieces of metals or ruptured ear drums?
- no, you cannot have any of these

An so it goes. The biggest BS. If there was nothing to hide, the access to all information would have been wide open to verify all findings by a body of independent experts and remove all speculations. Both EU and US offered help with the investigation at the very beginning, but all outside help was flatly rejected.

So, are you saying that the Polish Committee for Investigation of National Aviation Accidents was not allowed to inspect the wreckage? Cuz that would go against the... um... facts...

"The experts that were with me in Smolensk did inspect the wreckage...” ----- Edmund Klich, Polish expert accredited to the Interstate Aviation Committee, commenting on examining the wreckage by the Polish specialists.

Did the Polish investigation team have access to the wreckage? Yes, they did.

Did they find evidence corroborating an explosion theory(such as "severe pitting, cratering, petalling, or hot gas washing")? No, they didn't.

Would they have found this if there had been an explosion? Yes, they would have.

Therefore, we can rule out any theory related to explosives.

[Northwester]

To set the record straight: Polish investigators had only a chance to do a short VISUAL inspection of the wreckage.

[Evan]

To set the record straight: Polish investigators had only a chance to do a short VISUAL inspection of the wreckage.

...in which they did not report seeing "severe pitting, cratering, petalling, or hot gas washing".

Concede Northwester. It wasn't an explosion.

[Northwester]

This is the position of the plane according to TAWS data. Trees played no role in the crash.