Polish President and wife killed in Tu-154 crash

[Peter Kesternich]

(...)Btw, it is puzzling why rational people cannot even remotely consider a possibility of a conspiracy here, given the political, geopolitical, and historical circumstances.

Btw, it is puzzling why rational people even consider the possibility of a conspiracy here, given the political, geopolitical, and historical circumstances... and given the fact that it is much easier to explain this accident without resorting to a conspiracy.

[Northwester]

Guilty!

I am. For keep engaging in this discussion. That's seriously irrational.

No, you are quite rational here. Just imagine a situation like this: An Argentinian head of state is visiting, semi-privately, the Falkland Islands to pay tribute to the fallen Argentinian soldiers. On approach his or her plane crashes and the British conduct the investigation. After few hours they declare that it was the pilots fault but they decide that they are going to keep the wreckage and the black boxes for years because the actual criminal investigation is going to take that long. Of course the only result of such a criminal investigation will be accusing the pilots and finding faults in their training. In the meantime a cell phone made film appears on youtube showing the crash site minutes after the crash with some people running around, shouting in Spanish and English, and sounds of shots. The Argentinian authorities are given only a token participation in the investigation. The British control most of it. They store the wreckage in the open for years and let it deteriorate. After two years they thoroughly wash the wreckage and replace the windows. A lot of contradictory facts are discovered by independent investigators, but because of lack of access to the original black boxes and disinformation campaigne, all the independent findings are labeled as crazy conspiracy theories. Argentinian scientists all over the world join the independent investigation and find gaps in the official reports that are big enough for a freight train to run through it. But the British ignore all of it. There is also a suspicion that some elements in the Argentinian government benefited from the crash and they are supressing the Argentinian part of the investigation, however toothless it might be.

Try to have some imagination. The world has seen stranger things than that.

[Peter Kesternich]

(...)

Try to have some imagination. The world has seen stranger things than that.

Hmmmmmm... let me think... No, it hasn't

[Gabriel]

Try to have some imagination. The world has seen stranger things than that.

You forgot the part where the crew:
- Did not hold the required qualifications for the job.
- Was trained and flying with dated manuals in a foreign language.
- Briefed a go-around procedure that was not permitted.
- Did not comply with sterile cockpit practices.
- Did not comply with stabilized approach criteria.
- Flew an NDB approach to a point that was well below the MDA and well within solid fog.

Add a few dozens of trees clipped in a way that very much resemble a plane flying through them.

And I'd say "It was CFIT".

[brianw999]

Post 2203.....and it's the one that most accurately describes what happened here. Everything else is unqualified conjecture.

[SYDCBRWOD]

You forgot the part where the crew:
- Did not hold the required qualifications for the job.
- Was trained and flying with dated manuals in a foreign language.
- Briefed a go-around procedure that was not permitted.
- Did not comply with sterile cockpit practices.
- Did not comply with stabilized approach criteria.
- Flew an NDB approach to a point that was well below the MDA and well within solid fog.

Add a few dozens of trees clipped in a way that very much resemble a plane flying through them.

And I'd say "It was CFIT".

Added to the facts that:

1. The presence of TNT supposedly detected is most certainly not used in Surface to air missile warheads - and has been rationally explained anyway.

2. The claims that the russians had generated fog for the occasion has never been proven (or even believed possible given the area needed to be covered).

3. The basic premise that the Russian wanted to kill all the Polish leadership has never to my mind been explained. Yes, I get that the Russians hated the poles in the 1940's, probably 50's less so in the 60's etc. But now? What threat is Poland to Russia? The world knows about the Russian massacre of the cream of the Polish army in 194X - how does murdering the heads of government and notable famous Poles 60 years later erase that? Answer - it wouldn't - it would and has just drawn world attention to the activities of the NKVD during WWII (own goal). Ergo - no reason to do this. If the Russians really wanted to kill so many of the Polish Govt, I'm damned sure they could have organised a massive truck bomb, leveled the national assembly building (or whatever it is called) in Warsaw and make it look like a minority terrorist act.

Occam's Razor gentlemen.

[SYDCBRWOD]

Indications of an explosion.

So, now the written indications on the photo's are showing:

Explosives in the rear fuselage.

Explosives in the engine

Explosives in the Undercarriage housing

And IIRC there was a claim many pages ago that the wing tip that separated much further outboard of the undercarriage location was caused by explosives too.

So, questions for you:
1. Who is the person qualified to make these assessments?
2. Why did the Russians feel that it was necessary to put no less than 4!!! pieces of explosive on the aircraft? One bomb has always been used in the past - surely 4 would just quadruple the chances of detection? Can you name any other aircraft bombing that showed more than one bomb used?

[Northwester]

So, now the written indications on the photo's are showing:

Explosives in the rear fuselage.

Explosives in the engine

Explosives in the Undercarriage housing

And IIRC there was a claim many pages ago that the wing tip that separated much further outboard of the undercarriage location was caused by explosives too.

So, questions for you:
1. Who is the person qualified to make these assessments?
2. Why did the Russians feel that it was necessary to put no less than 4!!! pieces of explosive on the aircraft? One bomb has always been used in the past - surely 4 would just quadruple the chances of detection? Can you name any other aircraft bombing that showed more than one bomb used?

To make a fully qualified statement about explosions one would have to do a full examination of the wreckage and conduct autopsies of all victims. Until then we can only talk about indications pointing to the character of deformations, punctures in the sheet metal, ripped rivets, glass discoloration, and signs of high temperature exposure.

As to several small charges vs one big one, several small charges would mimick better a fragmentation that could occur during a regular crash, would be easier to conceal, and would provide necessary redundancy.

As to the reasons, I don't know your background and how much you know about the geopolitical situation of Eastern Europe, but it would not take much insight to realize that Russia is trying to re-establish its sphere of influence in the Baltics and Eastern Europe through a whole range of economic, political, and other means. Kaczynski and his faction was a major stumbling block for Russia, besides being an annoying irritant after the Georgia incident.

[SYDCBRWOD]

As to several small charges vs one big one, several small charges would mimick better a fragmentation that could occur during a regular crash, would be easier to conceal, and would provide necessary redundancy.

Rubbish - having done demolitions training in the army an explosion leaves a signature that would be very hard to conceal by calling it 'crash damage' The smartest way to use explosives would be to use cutting charges to take out a main structural member or flight controls. It would still be detectable by a detailed visual examination but would not detectable by simply viewing exterior photos. That is how a professional organisation would do it (and the Russian intelligence services are nothing if not professional). Even if I agreed that the photos represented bomb damage (which I do not) I would point the finger at an amateurish terrorist act if they supposedly planted 4 TNT devices at various parts of the airframe.

[SYDCBRWOD]

To make a fully qualified statement about explosions one would have to do a full examination of the wreckage and conduct autopsies of all victims. Until then we can only talk about indications pointing to the character of deformations, punctures in the sheet metal, ripped rivets, glass discoloration, and signs of high temperature exposure.
.

So deformations, and ripped rivets don't occur during a normal prang? Pffft. As to 'glass discolourations' - cabin windows I believe are not glass at all (several different plastic/perspex layers aren't they)? As to the discolouration - if you bend these transparent plastics they can 'craze' with stress cracks - possibly leading the uniformed to claim evidence of heat.

What other signs of high temp exposure do you have?

[SYDCBRWOD]

As to the reasons, I don't know your background and how much you know about the geopolitical situation of Eastern Europe, but it would not take much insight to realize that Russia is trying to re-establish its sphere of influence in the Baltics and Eastern Europe through a whole range of economic, political, and other means. Kaczynski and his faction was a major stumbling block for Russia, besides being an annoying irritant after the Georgia incident.

So the best the Russians can come up with is to kill the Kaczynski government was on a Russian made airframe, over Russian territory with Russian controllers in the tower with a number of amateurishly placed bombs... That doesn't seem too suspicious does it? The Russians may be ruthless, but achieving local domination by a Stalin like purge of your neighbours in such an obvious fashion? Pfft. It may have worked or been undetected in the 1930's when nations pretty much minded their own business but not nowadays with smartphones and the internet? As I have stated before if they really wanted these people dead they would not have done it in Russia in a Russian airframe (doesn't do much for exports for your own aerospace industry does it?). It would be easier and smarter to have staged some sort of 'terrorist action' (retribution for the role the Poles were playing in Afghanistan) in Poland - blow up a building with a large truck bomb or a hostage situation where 'terrorists' storm the parliament.

[Northwester]

Rubbish - having done demolitions training in the army an explosion leaves a signature that would be very hard to conceal by calling it 'crash damage' The smartest way to use explosives would be to use cutting charges to take out a main structural member or flight controls. It would still be detectable by a detailed visual examination but would not detectable by simply viewing exterior photos. That is how a professional organisation would do it (and the Russian intelligence services are nothing if not professional). Even if I agreed that the photos represented bomb damage (which I do not) I would point the finger at an amateurish terrorist act if they supposedly planted 4 TNT devices at various parts of the airframe.

You are right. Any use of explosives can be easily detected if one does a proper investigation. Which unfortunately is not the case here. Only now, almost 3 years after the crash, a team of Polish prosecutors is being sent to Smolensk to do the measurements of the infamous birch to clear up the confusion about the height of the breakage point. And you might be into something here regarding the cutting charges. The birch for sure did not break the wing, the leading edge of the wing shows no damage, so maybe the cutting charges were used.

That they discovered traces of TNT (confirmed by the prosecutors) does not mean that TNT was used. The contamination could have come from many sources. Till someone does an extensive investigation, it is only a speculation.

The frustrating part here is that the whole investigation looks more like a cover up than a real investigation. 1/3 of the mass of the wreckage is missing, and the rest was stored in the open for almost 2 years.

[Northwester]

So deformations, and ripped rivets don't occur during a normal prang? Pffft. As to 'glass discolourations' - cabin windows I believe are not glass at all (several different plastic/perspex layers aren't they)? As to the discolouration - if you bend these transparent plastics they can 'craze' with stress cracks - possibly leading the uniformed to claim evidence of heat.

What other signs of high temp exposure do you have?

I am well aware that the windows are not made of real glass. But maybe you can explain the difference between how the windows look in these two pictures?

[Northwester]

So the best the Russians can come up with is to kill the Kaczynski government was on a Russian made airframe, over Russian territory with Russian controllers in the tower with a number of amateurishly placed bombs... That doesn't seem too suspicious does it? The Russians may be ruthless, but achieving local domination by a Stalin like purge of your neighbours in such an obvious fashion? Pfft. It may have worked or been undetected in the 1930's when nations pretty much minded their own business but not nowadays with smartphones and the internet? As I have stated before if they really wanted these people dead they would not have done it in Russia in a Russian airframe (doesn't do much for exports for your own aerospace industry does it?). It would be easier and smarter to have staged some sort of 'terrorist action' (retribution for the role the Poles were playing in Afghanistan) in Poland - blow up a building with a large truck bomb or a hostage situation where 'terrorists' storm the parliament.

You are answering your own question here. Since there are "better" ways of doing it, why would they do it this way? Maybe because it is more improbable and difficult to believe. Russians have fooled the West many times before and, no doubt, will do it again.
One huge advantage of doing it this way: they have a full control of the investigation.

Btw, if this was just a regular CFIT, why wouldn't Americans, and Polish government (they have them too), release the satellite surveyance photos to end all speculations?

[Gabriel]

I don't understand.
Did the co-pilot tried to land following the deceiving guide of an intentionally misplaced glide-slope aid (that was not supposed to be there) and the intentionally misplaced searchlights that were intentionally turned off at the last moment?
Or was the airplane blown-up by the Russians with a number of bombs and/or missiles?
And what was the B plan had the pilot taken the most likely and sound course of action? (divert and not attempt the approach)? And what would they have done with all those trimmed trees?