Polish President and wife killed in Tu-154 crash

[Northwester]

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?

No need to be sarcastic. There is a lot of contradictory information out there, and a lot of disinformation. It is very easy to discredit a theory, but much more difficult to explain one fact that does not fit the official version.

Just today Col. Bartosz Stroinski, one of the commanding officers of the now defunct 36th Air Regiment, said that something extraordinary must have happened after the GA command. "The GA command is sacred" he said, and added that it could have been not executed only if someone put a gun to the PIC's head or there was some malfunction.

[3WE]

"The GA command is sacred" he said, and added that it could have been not executed only if someone put a gun to the PIC's head or there was some malfunction.

Yes, the go-around command is so sacred that it also makes you miss trees.

And both kinds of trees.

The ones that have always been there within 30 feet of the ground.

...and the kind that the conspirators move around

...but I guess maybe not if they cut them before you got there.

[Leftseat86]

There is no point in arguing with conspiracy theorists unmoved by explanation of facts and evidence. Anything you present can be twisted into whatever it needs to be in order to explain the theory or proof of your own ignorance of their belief. This will go in circles ad nauseam. Just leave em be'

[Northwester]

This is Binienda's seminar at Carnegie Mellon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u816y0jUUmE&list=UUW2eNKQeNIvl6MgFNKwLgBQ&index=7

I know, I know, these are all crazy conspiracy theorists...

[SYDCBRWOD]

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?

1. Polish military or civil organisations don't have surveilance satellites at all. No polaroids in space = no pictures.

2. This is pretty much a low activity airbase isn't it? I'd guess that an airbase would only be under infrequent surveillance if it housed Tu160's or Tu22M's (nuclear delivery platforms). Just because the US has the ability to be able to ID people from space (the famed and now defunct(?) Keyhole sats) doesn't mean they have the whole of Russia under surveillance. Very high probability that this base was not being watched. And even if it were being covered - why would the US release pictures (that would give away that they were watching the russians in the first place and what they were looking at) that just agreed with the prima facie evidence of a series of unfortunate decisions by the Poles. The rest of the world doesn't see a conspiracy here.

[SYDCBRWOD]

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?

No I cannot. These two photo's are not of the same piece of structure - you do realise that don't you? As to why some pictures show a white, non transparent 'colour' whilst others don't - as these are different bits of the airframe it may be something as simple as the window shades are down in the LH photo? Dunno - we are too far away to tell.

[Northwester]

No I cannot. These two photo's are not of the same piece of structure - you do realise that don't you? As to why some pictures show a white, non transparent 'colour' whilst others don't - as these are different bits of the airframe it may be something as simple as the window shades are down in the LH photo? Dunno - we are too far away to tell.

I will make easier for you. The left pic shows a typical condition of windows after the crash, the right one - windows after more than a year of storage.

[kris]

Just today Col. Bartosz Stroinski, one of the commanding officers of the now defunct 36th Air Regiment, said that something extraordinary must have happened after the GA command. "The GA command is sacred" he said, and added that it could have been not executed only if someone put a gun to the PIC's head or there was some malfunction.

Wasn't the PIC the PF?

K.

[Northwester]

1. Polish military or civil organisations don't have surveilance satellites at all. No polaroids in space = no pictures.

2. This is pretty much a low activity airbase isn't it? I'd guess that an airbase would only be under infrequent surveillance if it housed Tu160's or Tu22M's (nuclear delivery platforms). Just because the US has the ability to be able to ID people from space (the famed and now defunct(?) Keyhole sats) doesn't mean they have the whole of Russia under surveillance. Very high probability that this base was not being watched. And even if it were being covered - why would the US release pictures (that would give away that they were watching the russians in the first place and what they were looking at) that just agreed with the prima facie evidence of a series of unfortunate decisions by the Poles. The rest of the world doesn't see a conspiracy here.

Polish authorities have received satellite photos from the US. That fact has been discussed in Polish media. These photos exist. Do you really think Russians would be surprised by the fact the they are being watched by Americans? One good picture would end all speculations and bring closure to this divisive event.

[Northwester]

Wasn't the PIC the PF?

K.

Yes, but why are you asking?

[kris]

Yes, but why are you asking?

I guess orders can be "sacred" for the rest of the crew but not for the one who gives these orders.

K.

[Gabriel]

One good picture would end all speculations and bring closure to this divisive event.

Unless conspiracy theorists used a strange dust spot in the picture to "prove" that it was tampered with and use that to further "prove" the conspiracy.

And what would such "good picture" be, for example?

[Northwester]

I guess orders can be "sacred" for the rest of the crew but not for the one who gives these orders.

K.

When both the PIC and F/O call for GA and then don't do it, and don't say anything about not executing it, something is wrong, and that's what Stroinski was referring to.

[Northwester]

Unless conspiracy theorists used a strange dust spot in the picture to "prove" that it was tampered with and use that to further "prove" the conspiracy.

And what would such "good picture" be, for example?

I don't know, maybe a photo that would confirm a position and condition of the plane at any given moment in the last 20 seconds of flight.

[Northwester]

Unless conspiracy theorists used a strange dust spot in the picture to "prove" that it was tampered with and use that to further "prove" the conspiracy.

Btw, since you are free of the confirmation bias, maybe you could explain this one small discrepancy. At point A we hear from the cockpit "And five miles" which is 9.26 km, but the plane is only 8.3 km from the RWY. At point B we hear "Four", which is 7.4 km, but the plane is 6.28 km from the RWY.