'Artificial fog’ may have brought down (Polish) president’s plane

The Telegraph, U.K. ^ | July 8th, 2010 | Matthew Day

[theanchoragedailyruse]

The aircraft crashed earlier this year as it tried to land at Smolensk airport in severe fog. The fog, which had thickened rapidly just before the arrival of the plane, had reduce visibility to little more than 650ft (200m), well short of the recommended minimum of 3,280ft (1,000m)

Poland reportedly wants access to US satellite photography that might cast new light on the weather conditions at the time of the crash, according to Gazeta Prawna, a Polish newspaper.

Prosecutors want help from American experts as to whether “there is a scientific and technical capacity to generate artificial fog”, the paper said.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

Here TOP GUN this is how they would do it over in Europe, since you said you flew there.

http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metinfo/codes/METAR_decode.htm

1: When used with FG, the qualifier 'PR' is used for fog banks, i.e. an extensive area of fog impinges upon an airfield, reducing visibility over part of same to less than 1 km; 'BC' [ patches ] would be used when a discrete, small-scale area of fog drifts/forms over the airfield, again reducing visibility below 1 km but not in all directions. In practice, it is not easy to tell the two apart!

Here in the U.S. it is a little bit different.

So given there are remarks in metar for a fog bank, how many times have you flown into fog or a fog bank? Keep digging your hole.

[MindBender26]

Sorry, having trouble ignoring you. Need to stay focussed with you until the Baker Act people can get there.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

Here you go TOP GUN. Now go and tell your BS to someone else.

You said you flew in fog. These are METAR obs from today out of Japan.

You are a fraud.

RJOB 132115Z (cont.) RMK 1ST000 3CU015 7CU045 A2987 0700W FG BANK NE AND SE-W 7 minutes ago via Twitter4J RJOB 132115Z 11003KT 1500 R07/0550VP1800U -SHRA BR BCFG FEW000 SCT015 BKN045 22/22 Q1011 (cont.) 7 minutes ago via Twitter4J RJOB 131216Z VRB02KT 5000 R07/P1800N -SHRA BR BCFG FEW000 BKN015 23/22 Q1012 RMK 1ST000 7CU015 A2990 1500W FG BANK NE-E AND SW-W about 9 hours ago via Twitter4J RJOB 131200Z 10003KT 070V140 3000 R07/1100VP1800N -SHRA BR BCFG FEW000 BKN015 23/22 Q1012 about 10 hours ago via Twitter4J RJOB 131142Z 10004KT 1600 R07/P1800N -SHRA BR PRFG FEW000 SCT001 BKN010 23/23 Q1012 RMK 1ST000 3ST001 7ST010 A2989 0800S FG BANK S-W about 10 hours ago via Twitter4J RJOB 131100Z 12003KT 0900 R07/0700V1200D -SHRA FG FEW000 SCT001 BKN002 23/23 Q1011 about 11 hours ago via Twitter4J RJOB 131031Z 11004KT 0700 R07/1200VP1800D -SHRA FG FEW000 SCT001 BKN002 23/23 Q1012 RMK 1ST000 4ST001 7ST002 A2988 1600NE-E about 11 hours ago via Twitter4J

[theanchoragedailyruse]

"...It was the Russians.... and the Joooz... and the bicycle riders."

Interesting comments you made.

The terminology "Jooz" is derogatory term used comfortably by racists.

And it seems you have no problem with using the term, when at no time was the topic raised.

Moreover, the president that was killed was very anticommunist and pro-Israel.

What part of Europe did you live and you seem to be familiar with the Ukraine and former USSR?

[theanchoragedailyruse]

For a guy that seems to know much about the accident and what happened, you don’t know much do you.

You dind’t even know the approach plate.

Look it up yourself on FR. It’s there. Just brush up on your Polish.

We are done.

[MindBender26]

You really do need professional medical help.

[MindBender26]

Seriously suggest you do not give your identity to this guy under any circumstances.

I think he is so far detached from reality that he could be dangerous to himself and others. He may well be a ticking time bomb, especially if he thinks we are in some way in collusion with the former Sovs. He may also be working himself up to take some “revenge” on some Russians.

Seriously suggest we do not engage him any longer. He seems to no longer understand humor or satire, and that can be a dangerous downturn on the stability scale.

Facts, etc. seem to not matter to him and he has now “attached an identity” to his delusional rage. It's the Russians now. We or other FReepers could be next.

Suggest we let him cool way down and get some help.

All the best.

[Yo-Yo]

Approach Plate from one of your previous posts.

Yes, run away without answering the dozen questions I asked you. I did brush up on my Polish and read the original entire released transcript as downloaded directly from the Polish Government website.

I found that the Air Traffic Controller comments are marked with a cryllic capital D (Д)

How many "Precision Approach" calls did the ATC make in this complete transcript? Here they are, all of them, both in Polish (as best as I can read it from the poor photocopy .pdf document) and the Google Translations transliteration into English:

10:39:80.7 "101-y, odleglosc 10, wejscie na sciezke" "101-s, distance 10, the entrance to the path"

10:39:30.1 "8 na kursie i sciezce" "8 on the course and path of"

10:39:37.3 "Pas wolny" "Free belt"

10:39:40.8 "Ladowanie dodatkowo 120-3 metry" "Loading additional 120-3 meters"

10:39:49.9 "Pochodzenie do dalszej, na kursie i sciezce odleglosc 6." "Origin to continue on the path of the course and distance 6"

10:40:13.5 "4 na kursie i sciezce" "4 on the course and path of"

10:40:26.6 "3 na kursie i sciezce" "3 on the course and path of"

10:40:31.2 "Reflektory wlaczcie" "Turn the headlights"

10:40:38.7 "2 na kursie i sciezce" 2 on the course and path of"

10:40:52.4 "Horyzont 101" "Horizon 101"

10:40:54.7 "Kontrola wysokosci horyzont" "Control the height of the horizon"

10:41:02.0 "Odejs????ugi krag!" "Re-ascend for second circle!"

One call at 10 km, one at 8, one at 4, one at 3 and one at 2 km. Consistent with ATC calling distance using traffic control radar, but nowhere near enough calls if this were a true Precision Approach Radar controlled descent. then two (ignored) calls to level off, and one urgent call to go around.

Therefore there was NO PAR Approach that day.

We are done.

[Yo-Yo]

Thanks for the sound advice.

I don't think he's anything close to unstable, but you have to realize the very deep seated hatred of the Russians by the Poles. It's akin to the hatred of Indians and Pakistanis, or Muslims towards Jews.

I understand that his viewpoint is colored by this hatred, and I can understand why he so desperately wants to blame the Russians for killing almost the entire Polish executive branch.

Imagine the reaction here on FR if President G.W. Bush flew into Saudi Arabia on a visit, encountered fog, and crashed. Imagine the conspiracy theories that would run rampant here.

I wish him the best, and I promise not to feed the trolls anymore.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

Well at least it is start with you.

Here, I'll help out this time.

Start here, you need Russian. link

The explaination of the approach systems.

link

Video presentation of the PAR10 (NDB) RSP-10MN radar, PRMG 5 or 76 in the link above.

As I said before, the Marker E-615.5 is seperate from the PAR-10 (NDB) and integrates with the PRMG.

Radio beacon 1050 meters from rwy 26.

The second picture above is one of the ATC radar systems at Smolensk.

The second radar system is found in the picture above. The Polish prosecution have confirmed the RSP-10MN radar and maybe updated.

The military PAR approach will give course and glideslope, the frequency depends on the controller and how often the plane falls of course or glide slope.

Both COURSE and GLIDESLOPE were given. This is a military PAR (CAP and RSP) period not a military SRA.

Prescion Approach Radar

link "...Precision approach radar (PAR) is a type of radar guidance system designed to provide lateral and vertical guidance to an aircraft pilot for landing, until the landing threshold is reached. After the aircraft reaches the decision height (DH) or decision altitude (DA), guidance is advisory only. Controllers monitoring the PAR displays observe each aircraft's position and issue instructions to the pilot that keep the aircraft on course and glidepath during final approach. It is similar to an instrument landing system (ILS) but requires control instructions. One type of instrument approach that can make use of PAR is the ground-controlled approach (GCA). An Air Force air traffic controller is reflected in the precision approach radar scope (1980)Precision approach radars are most frequently used at military air traffic control facilities. Many of these facilities use the AN/FPN-63, AN/MPN, or AN/TPN-22. These radars can provide precision guidance to a distance of 10 to 20 miles. The OJ-333 Radar scope is the indicator which the air traffic controller uses to provide instructions to the pilots. In the United States PAR are used mostly by The Navy. This is due to the fact that they present a more covert type of precision approach for use on Aircraft carriers. An ILS installed on a ship could provide guidance to enemy missiles but a PAR does not provide accurate guidance with out controller instruction."

And as I stated, the RSP-10MN is more accurate as the plane nears the runway. So the frequency will increase if neccessary.

And as I said, you made a good point on this. And the question is why did ATC tell the pilot he was on course and on glideslope at 2km when he wasn't.

You never answered.

Moreover, it could be one, they are missing from the transcripts or two, the guy was an idiot, afterall he was not properly certified and has "medical issues".

Some of your translation is off slightly like the "loading".

You said: "..then two (ignored) calls to level off, and one urgent call to go around."

The go around and do a second approach stated by ATC was ignored because the plane was frickin crashing.

Are you here to just post BS or do you want to learn something?

Because if you are here to try your BS, I will bury you with the proof, like I did with MindBender and his BS.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

They have a term for your condition, its called projecting ones own personality traits onto another.

Just ignore the threads and move on.

Stalker comes to mind?

[MindBender26]

It's a serious worsening of a paranoia when the afflicted person is able to concentrate on a specific supposed danger to themselves, as opposed to a generalized fear and/or hate.

Did a story once on an elderly town loonie who was constantly calling the cops because the Martians were on his roof and someday were going to land on his corner lawn, come inside and kill him.

This went on for 3 or 4 years,

Finally one Sunday afternoon, two kids were riding by on their bikes when one of the bike's chains slipped off the sprocket.

So boys tipped the bike upside down on the old man's lawn (remember how we would rest our bikes upside down sitting on the handlebars and seat, with the wheels up in the air when they need repair) so they could slip the chain back onto the sprocket.

To the old man, those two shiny chrome spinning gadgets up in the air were little flying saucers, and the kids were Martian warriors, right there on his lawn... just as he always knew they would!!!!!!!!!!.

He got out his 12 guage and killed one of them, seriously wounded the other, then had a snap of reality, realized what he had done and killed himself.

The wounded kid lingered about a week.

Never underestimate a paranoid’s danger. Schizoids live so much in their own world, or the Planet MU, that they can't make many plans to hurt you. A paranoid is “here” enough that he can make plans and carry them out!

[theanchoragedailyruse]

"...Imagine the reaction here on FR if President G.W. Bush flew into Saudi Arabia on a visit, encountered fog, and crashed. Imagine the conspiracy theories that would run rampant here. I wish him the best, and I promise not to feed the trolls anymore."

Okay we are done.

[MindBender26]

Just a few thoughts for clarity....

The sales video used to sell PAR systems is great. What three entities confirmed there was an operational PAR at Smolensk? What three entities confirm it was on line and working at time of the crash?

A PAR approach, like any instrument approach, has an altitude, AS SHOWN ON HIS COCKPIT ALTIMETERS below which the pilot may NOT descend unless he has a clear view of the runway environment.

Aircraft that size have at least three altimeters, two baro and one radar. They are final authority as to his altitude, and the altitude he was forbidden to descend below. PAR has lost incfuence and control by this point in the approach.

The choice of what altitude to fly is ALWAYS the pilots. Ruke 19: When flying through the air, try to stay in the middle of it. It's all very simple. The pilot tried to sneak it under the minimums. Many try. Many die trying.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

http://www.thenews.pl/press/?id=130342

"...Three days earlier the same pilot, flying the same machine, with the Polish PM on board approached from the other side where the beacons are at standard distance. His personal experience coupled with lack of information on the difference between the two approach routes and extreme conditions of dense fog could have brought the tragic effects, is the attempted conclusion."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_approach

A decision height (DH) or decision altitude (DA) is a specified height or altitude in the precision approach at which a missed approach must be initiated if the required visual reference to continue the approach has not been acquired. This allows the pilot sufficient time to safely re-configure the aircraft to climb and execute the missed approach procedures while avoiding terrain and obstacles.

(...)

An aircraft must not descend below the MDA until visual reference is obtained, which differs from a DA in that an aircraft may descend below DA without visual reference so long as the missed approach procedure was initiated at or prior to the DA.

ST: 100. (2P): In the norm. ST: 90. TAWS:PULL UP, PULL UP. ST: 80. 2P: Go around. Signal at F=400 Hz. (Decision height).

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20100410-0

The crew requested permission to carry out a 'trial' approach to decision height (100 m) and asked the controller to expect a go around.

Signal at F=400 Hz. ABSU. TAWS:PULL UP, PULL UP. TAWS:Sound of hitting trees. 2P: F*cking hell! TAWS:PULL UP, PULL D: Abort to second approach! A: Screaming F*ckkkkkkkkkkkk.....

ABSU operates in the following modes:

Automatic approach signal ILS (mode "Zahod")

Automatic flight glidepath signal ILS (mode "Gliss")

Automatic go-around ("Uhod")

Automatic approach ( "Zahod", "Gliss") enable the automatic flight on glidepath, on signals ILS, prior to a decision height (typically 60 m). Further descending and flare to be done in manual control mode.

http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0504.html#5-4-19 :

"4. Chart Terminology

(a) Decision Altitude (DA) replaces the familiar term Decision Height (DH). DA conforms to the international convention where altitudes relate to MSL and heights relate to AGL. DA will eventually be published for other types of instrument approach procedures with vertical guidance, as well. DA indicates to the pilot that the published descent profile is flown to the DA (MSL), where a missed approach will be initiated if visual references for landing are not established. Obstacle clearance is provided to allow a momentary descent below DA while transitioning from the final approach to the missed approach. The aircraft is expected to follow the missed instructions while continuing along the published final approach course to at least the published runway threshold waypoint or MAP (if not at the threshold) before executing any turns.

(b) Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) has been in use for many years, and will continue to be used for the LNAV only and circling procedures. "

http://aviationglossary.com/federal-aviation-administration-faa-definition/decision-height-dh-14-cfr-1-1/

Decision height (DH) is a specified height above the ground in an instrument approach procedure at which the pilot must decide whether to initiate an immediate missed approach if the pilot does not see the required visual reference, or to continue the approach. Decision height is expressed in feet above ground level.

This was a precision approach done under a military PAR. Consider yourself buried in your own BS. Now we are done.

[theanchoragedailyruse]

https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=1ezuxPAsPR2vz-qDdaiFVEzKandiLyVIZjzpoJmK8ojM&authkey=CMvjvKUG&pli=1#

[theanchoragedailyruse]

http://slimak.onet.pl/_m/TVN/tvn24/smolensk_.pdf

RSBN at Smolensk

[theanchoragedailyruse]

4.30.5 Approach Progress. The following procedures will be followed during approach:

a. The pilot flying the approach shall announce his/her progress and intentions periodically. [298]

b. The pilot monitoring shall observe the approach and provide a continual cross-check of the navigational aids, instruments, air traffic control instructions, and approach procedures. [299]

c. Any deviations from the prescribed procedure shall immediately be brought to the attention of the pilot flying. [300]

d. The pilot monitoring shall call out “1,000 feet above” and “100 feet above” all key altitudes, as well as “minimums” upon reaching the Missed Approach position. [301]

e. When the runway is in sight, the pilot monitoring shall state, “runway in sight.” [302]

f. If the runway is not in sight when the aircraft reaches the Missed Approach point, the pilot monitoring shall state, “go around.” [303]

[theanchoragedailyruse]

4.30.1 General. During instrument arrivals, all available navigational aids shall be used. When available, precision approach guidance (Instrument Landing System or Precision Approach Radar) will be used for all night arrivals except for specific events during training flights. [295]

4.30.2 Weather Minimums. Pilots operating aircraft shall land the aircraft only when the flight visibility is equal to or greater than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure being used. [296]

4.30.3 Destination Below Minimums. If the destination weather is marginal or below minimums, the PIC may proceed to a suitable alternate or may hold if the destination weather is forecast to improve and fuel for alternate and reserve requirements will not be compromised. The weather at the alternate must be at or above alternate minimums and forecast to remain so until the new ETA plus one hour.

4.30.4 Approach Briefing. Before starting an approach, the pilot flying shall brief the crew on the procedures to be followed during the approach and landing and in the event of a missed approach. The briefing will include a review of the procedure to be flown, including key altitudes and restrictions, as well as specific crew duties during the approach and landing. [297]

[theanchoragedailyruse]

ОСП - оборудование системы посадки ПА - аэродромный пожарный автомобиль ПВП - правила визуальных полетов ПДП - пункт диспетчера посадки ПДСР - пункт диспетчера старта и руления ПРЛ - посадочный радиолокатор ПМРЦ - приемный радиоцентр ППП - правила полетов по приборам ПРЦ - передающий радиоцентр PCN - классификационное число искусственного покрытия элемента аэродрома РГМ - разность глубин модуляции РЛС ОЛП - радиолокационная станция обзора летного поля РМА - всенаправленный (азимутальный) УКВ радиомаяк РМД - дальномерное измерительное устройство РМС - радиомаячная система РСБН - радиомаячная система ближней навигации РСП - радиолокационная система посадки СДП - стартовый диспетчерский пункт СКП - стартовый командный пункт ССО - светосигнальное оборудование УВД - управление воздушным TAR-A - airfield surveillance radar GSP - Equipment landing system PA - airfield fire engine VFR - visual flight rules RAP - Item Manager landing PDSR - item manager start and taxi PRL - PAR PMRTS - receiving radio center IFR - instrument flight rules PRTS - transmitting radio center PCN - Classification number element of artificial cover airfield WGM - the difference between the depth of modulation ADT radar - radar survey of the airfield RMA - omni-directional (azimuthal) VHF radio beacon RMD - DME measuring device PMC - ILS system RSBN - ILS system range navigation CPR - radar landing system PSD - starting tower UPC - start a command post MTR - lighting ATC - air control Smolensk had an ILS system.