Translated: "We got permission at 50 meters. Tupolev Tu-154 and Il also"(Smolensk ATC)

I am sooooo glad that you pointed out that a NDB does not have a DH.

Here is some food for thought DF, next time you come on these threads pointing out that the approach was a non-precision, I’ll just point to the link and your post.

The ATC called out a 50 meter DH.

Again you ain’t no pilot. A DF yes but but no pilot.

"The ATC called out a 50 meter DH"

Seriously, one of the first things one learns as a reporter is to ask, "Who says so."

Since we know that there are no Decision Heights, (DHs), only Minimum Descent Altitudes" (MSAs) on non-precision approaches such as the one at Smolensk, (and they require two very different flying procedures) and no pilot or controller would ever make such a nomenclature and procedure mistake, and we know the MDA or DH would be given in feet, not meters, then there is suspicion created for the entire supposed translation.

So, I ask, without prejudice or negativity attached, what is the source of the supposed comment or transmission that the "DH is 50 meters"

There is naturally a suspicion of someone who would make such a report with the obvious technical inaccuracies, so please, who claims that this was really reported or transmitted?

Again, I'm not trying to be a wise guy here. I think there has been a lot of wildly incorrect reporting about this crash, as there is with most aviation accidents, so I'm trying to get to the bottom of these obviously incorrect, and possibly purposely false claims someone made.

Here smart guy. The radar at Smolensk. It was part of the PAR and it accuracy is in meters.

The nav/2p in the cabin was calling out the height in meters, not feet.

How was the nav reading the RA again? In meters or feet? You had better get your stories straight.

Check the transcripts DF.

"...нить радиодальномер = (fiber, hairline) rangefinder, range sensor (not thread telemeter)

У РСП-10 нет международного вторичного канала RBS а только отечественный УВД (как в гражданском ДРЛ-7СМ), все ТУ-154 сейчас летают с ответчиком в режиме RBS, поэтому диспетчер не мог видеть высоту борта.

In RSP-10 there is no ICAO SSR unit, only national secondary radar channel УВД (as in civil ДРЛ-7СМ), all TU-154’s now flying with transponder in the mode RBS, so the manager could not see the height of the airplane. ICAO ground SSR = 1030MHz, Russian УВД SSR = 740MHz.

(ATCRBS = Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System). The whole RBS meaning is often somewhat obscure.

http://www.studfiles.ru/dir/cat34/su...332/page2.html

SSR and transponders were a mammuth problem during USSR"

Tell me something when you flew in the USSR, what was found at the radio beacon and is part of the ILS?

You really are a piece of work.

Also, please note the horrible quality of the translation from Polish to English. There is no way anyone can depend on this site for accurate information. These are EXACT paragraph pulls from the original posted article: "Is the controller from the tower in Smolensk presidential Tupolev crew allowed to go down to 50 m during the tragic flight on April 10? Remigiusz Mus, 1940 What board techniques that landed that day in Smolensk maintains that it did. In an exclusive interview with tvn24.pl Mus says that he heard the conversation (communication) between the Tu-154 and the controller sitting in the cockpit What, already at the airport." " In an interview Mus confirms that the Polish crew knew that at the airport in Smolensk spaces 100 m as the minimum height to make the decision to land (so-called decision height). The pilots had no right to go down and at that level took the decision to land the crew's What. Why Tupolev, contrary to current legislation went down below 100 if I was affected by a conversation with the tower, which according to our interlocutor was a few minutes before the crash - will have to explain the investigation." "The first approach Ila was about 15 minutes after our landing. They went almost perfectly on the waist, but not centrally. This is a large aircraft so it has exactly centered. (...) Il "doginał" - in my opinion - quite daring. The wings were on the grass at a height of about 3 meters and a large przechyleniami. Finally gave up and left. The first approach looked quite dramatically." "The first was about 15 minutes after our landing. They went almost perfectly on the waist, but not centrally. This is a large aircraft, so one must carefully centered. The belt had a width of 50 meters. Nam was easier. How is your wingspan of 25 m. Therefore, we could land up to half of the belt, and not necessarily on the center line." - - - - - - - Nothing personal, but with the translation being this obviously wrong and inexact. I would not depend on this article or website for any technical information.

I have tried to not engage you in any ad hominum attacks, but it has reached the point of incredible stupidity.

You are admittedly not a pilot. You have never flown a plane. You keep throwing out technical data as if you know what you are talking about.

With this post I have ceased trying to engage you in any reasonable debate. The pilots here on FR know you are simply spitting out technical terms with no understanding of their significance.

Aviation crash 101:

Pilots tried to descent below a minimum safe altitude and sneak into airport. They died trying.

Happens all the time. End of story.

Because you are piss poor pilot, you can’t even keep your story straight.

The pilots descended to the DH (100 meters per transcripts)and ATC was calling the glideslope and gave the command to level at 50 meters.

This is the ATC command (DH) that the JAK-40 pilot was referring to.

How does it feel to know that as you like to think, a non-pilot was right and you were wrong about the type of approach.

It was a PAR.

You didn’t even answer the question I asked on the ILS equipment used when you flew into the USSR.

Stay off the threads I post. You are a fraud.

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.