Posted on 07/01/2010 11:31:04 PM PDT by theanchoragedailyruse
What-40 pilot heard the commands issued by the Presidential tupolewowi tower in Smolensk. Apparently, investigators knew that the Tu-154 was a false path. But to what he had heard no Polish pilot in stenogramach.
As reported by Gazeta Poland "everything indicates that the transcripts , which months ago provided us with the Russians to be counterfeit.
Newspaper came to testify What-40 pilot who landed in Smolensk hour before the presidential Tupolev April 10. Apparently Peter had heard the command Wosztyl Tu-154 issued by the control tower.
Journalists write that Peter Wosztyl testified that the controller told the Russian Tu-154 pilots, "as well as at a height of 50 meters will not see a belt odlatujcie. The auditors knew that the vertical visibility in the area of the airport was only 30 meters. Tupolev Polish descent to 50 meters from the edge meant a clash ending in the valley. The pilots just before the crash were seen emerging through the fog banks, but at this point they were already no chance.
According to the newspaper Wosztyla Peter's testimony is contrary to the testimony of Paul Plusnina, flight controllers in Smolensk. Russian reportedly testified that forbade the pilots to descend below 100 feet.
It is striking that neither the Russian command, which he heard the lieutenant Wosztyl talking to descend to 50 meters, or even that the testimony of a Russian controller talking about 100 meters, which would be proof of the good intentions of the tower, there is no stenogramach. This is another condition for proving that the transcripts, as well as almost the entire investigation, falsified - the weekly says.
Yes, but was it done by the official government?
Or the military? Or disgruntled Russians Tower Staff?
“Translated”
It sure could have used some more massaging.
It’s clear Putin knew about it, because of all that “We’ll take care of the forensic investogation” stuff.
My bet is they had a man in place to take over from the head of the Army.
one may draw one’s own conclusions on this. I have no idea who did this enhancement, but it surely could be replicated by competent members ofthis forum..
this is allegedly a digitial enhancement of the crash footage with the alleged kill squad,.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread569884/pg1
fwiw, my bias in this is a suspicion from the time this event occured that it was kgb/putin-orchestrated. the synchronicity was too perfect, the message to the eastern bloc (and the world) was too clear, to believe this an innocent accident.
My son-in-law, who is Polish, could do a better translation, and I have yet to understand him.
Almost everyone can speak one language. Some can speak two. By the time you get to three or four languages what's going on just isn't the same ~ it's more like "simultaneous translation". People who speak 6 or more languages sometimes talk as though they are not in a conversation with you! Fact is, they aren't because they are usually "translating" the voices in their head through multiple languages until they get to the one they use with you. The little delays can be infuriating.
The air traffic controllers in this region of the world are going to have among their numbers people who are simultaneously fluent in English, German, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian and possibly Swedish ~ or maybe even Finnish. I would hope they don't have too many of those guys ~ just folks who can handle two languages at a time who are sitting next to a guy who can handle a couple of others.
This could simply be another lesson to add to the lexicon of "reasons why the international language for air control has gotta' be just English".
Normal ILS minimums in the US are 200 foot ceiling and 1/2 mile visibility. But these minimums are in effect for a very narrow zone that is carefully checked for obstacle clearance. I don’t know what kind of approach was provided at this airport, but I can tell you from personal experience that shooting approaches in 200 foot weather is about as exacting as it gets, and any pilot who is willing to compromise procedures and good practices has no place in the left seat.
In weather with low ceilings that is stable, like low winds with continual drizzle, there is really not any point in trying such an approach twice. It you got to minimums the first time and didn’t see the ground, nothing will be different when you try again. It is just inviting some failure to make the attempt.
These people should not have died.
There was only one approach.
What type of approach is the question.
ILS Russian military mins on ceiling is 35-60 meters.
The transcripts show the DH 60.
The airport was certified to 100x1000.
There was a PAR-10 NDB.
There is a marker beacon that is part of the ILS SP-50 or SP-70 at the NDB 1050 meters from the runway.
There is a RSP-10MN radar that is believed to be modified that was being used.
There were APM’s that are runway lights that are there.
The Russian ATC callouts were every 2 km with the callout being on course or on glideslope.
>>There was a PAR-10 NDB.<<
Oh, that would really be a confidence builder in low weather.
So what approach was actually being flown? I recall that the aircraft in which Commerce Secretary Ron Brown died was flying a NDB approach but they didn’t have even a hand-held GPS to backstop the crew for situational awareness.
When I shoot approaches, I am reassured when my Garmin 496 verifies what my FAA-approved King radios tell me. While it has yet to happen (thank God), I plan to bug out immediately should that ever be the case.
(I am reminded of ham-fisted, hide bound and life threatening bureaucracy while navigating IFR enroute where my primary means of navigation must be my FAA-approved VOR that is only +/- 4.5 degrees either side of the center line, but I am forbidden to use my non-FAA approved GPS that is +/- 50 feet either side of the center line. I must confess to glancing at the GPS from time to time to crosscheck the VOR.)
The Ron Brown flight, who knows what. Maybe NDB. I don’t know how you can conduct an investigation when the FDR and the CVR were removed.
That has been a sticking point with many. The other conspiracies build on that issue.
What I know is the airfield has had only one mishap. Icing.
And that an ILS system was in place 6 months ago. The PAR 10 NDB is integrated into the ILS system the Russians use.
I have a video of the system. Tactical in that they system is mobile.
The RSP-10MN details the vertical and lateral on scope, the marker is also integrated with the PRMG (ILS).
Russian military callsout glideslope and on course, while pilot gets callout. Pilot listens to both ATC and crew.
No communication takes place between ATC and pilot after plane enters glideslope and passes marker.
Given what is on the transcripts, it would seem a RSP and CAP - 60x800 minima.
No MDA. AP all the way to DH and on Ascend.
The FDR should shed more light.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.