Polish Presidential TU-154 Crashed

[NLExile]

Pictures of the wreck
http://portfolio.lesoir.be/v/monde/cras ... Kaczynski/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Last informations say it is the 101 (to be confirmed)
Seen here in May 2009 at Warszawa Okęcie

photo


V.P.

[camel1]

does this have consequences for the participation of Polish F-16s in Frisian Flag?

I don't think this is very important to know at this sad moment.

[K-9]

And why shouldn't that be important ? Okay, it's a big tragedy. But will the world stop turning ? Probably not....
It's a legitimate question. and i can very well understand why it's being asked.

However i think it will perhaps have some influence on the exercise. Perhaps later today or tomorrow, will give us more info...

[Piet Luijken]

more importantly are the other passengers:

The crash devastated the upper echelons of Poland's political and military establishments. On board were the army chief of staff, the navy chief commander, and heads of the air and land forces. Also killed were the national bank president, deputy foreign minister, army chaplain, head of the National Security Office, deputy parliament speaker, Olympic Committee head, civil rights commissioner and at least two presidential aides and three lawmakers, the Polish foreign ministry said.

but we will see....

Furthermore, age of aircraft is not the concern here, as these Tu-154s have just been overhauled and should be in excellent condition, well it was when I saw them.
Do you know the age of the American Air Force One? Well, they were ordered in fiscal year 1986.

Also, PLF101 is referring to the inhabitants, not the aircraft in particular.

[Basman]

What a sad day for Polish aviation and Polish society in general. And although Trueno's reaction might be a little harsh, I must admit that I was also rather 'surprised' by somebody worrying about Polish participation in Frisian Flag only hours after this tragedy happened.

Besides that, I was as well 'surprised' by the following quote:

Droevig nieuws, maar ik snap niet dat een tamelijk westers land als Polen nog met die oude Russische meuk vliegt.

As far as I know (and what my JP tells me) this Tu154 was delivered new in 1990. That makes it a year younger than for instance Mrs Merkl's airbus, three years younger than our own Gulfstream V-11, 4 years younger than the 32sq BAe146's and about the same age as Air Force One. So Russian it was, but not more 'ouwe meuk' (old junk) than what many other western heads of state are using.

Bas

[canberra]

With the relativly impressive pax list it might be worth visiting Warsaw around the funerals.

Would expect a quite good number of gvmt and other VIP aircraft.

[Arjan]

The fiscal years of the VC-25A's are giving as 82-8000 and 92-8000. But not really sure what's the truth in that!

[mwpeters]

The VC-25A serials have been re-serialized.

92-9000 = ex 86-8900, ex N60659

82-8000 = ex 86-8800,ex N6005C,ex N1788B

regards Maarten

[Thermal]

Gentleman, let's dispense with the inappropriate questions and stick to the topic.

Back to topic. Russian media says that the pilot attempted 4 landings despite advise from ATC not to land. Apparently Polish president Lech Kaczynski insisted that the pilot would land at Smolensk despite the warnings. It is not the first time Kaczynski did this. He did the same during a flight to Georgia in 2008. This pilot did divert because of bad weather and Kaczynski later accused him of disobeying orders.

[Stratofreighter]

Back to topic. Russian media says that the pilot attempted 4 landings despite advise from ATC not to land. Apparently Polish president Lech Kaczynski insisted that the pilot would land at Smolensk despite the warnings. It is not the first time Kaczynski did this. He did the same during a flight to Georgia in 2008. This pilot did divert because of bad weather and Kaczynski later accused him of disobeying orders.

Mr. Kaczynski was indeed very much capable of putting extreme pressure on people.

I hope accurate transcripts of the Cockpit Voice Recordings will be published eventually. Then we may know "for sure"...

[pjgross]

From Polish MoD website:

Information about Tu-154M aircraft The aircraft which crashed in Smolensk was one of the two Tu-154M operated by the 36th Special Air Transport Regiment in Warsaw. Aircraft of this type can take, depending on the cabin configuration, about 100 passengers onboard. The air crew is made up of 4 people, plus 3 to 4 of the cabin crew.
Aircraft that crashed in Smoleńsk had side number 101. It was a Russian made model produced in 1990.
Its life-time is set at 30 thousand flying hours or 25 years of service. The hitherto air raid is 5141 hours. During 20 years of the aircraft service, it was overhauled three times according to its maintenance schedule. The last major overhaul was completed on 21st December 2009. All current maintenance works have been conducted in accordance with the required procedures.

[FISHER01]

this was the 66th TU-154 crash

[corran]

I put a lot of effort to combine information's from different sources (Polish, Russian and English) to make this article where I point what happen. I have posted it in Polish on my blog: http://blog.corran.pl/?p=435 I have happened to publish articles in polish military magazines.

Translations from Polish by Google (with some corrections)


Disaster of Polish Tupolev Tu-154M 101

Tu-154M side number 101 has been specially produced for the Poland on 29 June 1990, delivered to the Poland on July 12 that same year. Aircraft for the entire period of his service was operated by the 36th Special Aviation Regiment operating from the military part of the Okecie Airport. Tu-154M in 2009, underwent a full restructuring coupled with the limited modernization, was equipped with modern navigation systems to allow for landing without visual runway visibility as the ILS (Instrument Landing System).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYOuYDGIuMk
Tu-154M Landing 101 in Prague, two days before the disaster, source: http://www.planesvideo.cz

Airplane departed at 7:58 with almost hour delay of the planned departure at 7:00 am (this time of departure appears on an official list of advertised passengers) on board were 88 passengers and 8 crew members.

In addition to the Tu-154M 101 other aircraft were planed to land at the destination airport this morning. About 7:15 pm Polish time (9:15 local) landed safely at the airport Polish Yak-40, also from the 36th Regiment. On board were the journalists who accompanied the president during the ceremony Katyn. Later, and before the arrival Polish Tu-154M to the airport approached the Russian Il-76 transport flying from Moscow. On board were members of the Federal Protection Service (Polish equivalent of the BOR's) who had secured a visit to the Polish president. Airplane undertook two failed attempts to land. According to witnesses (crew and passengers of Yak-40) attempted landing have to look very dangerous. After unsuccessful attempts, a plane headed to other airport.

During the intake to the airport (the airport control zone is located within a radius of 50 km) commander of the Tu-154 made contact with the tower at the airport Siewiernyj in Smolensk. It is cvill-military airport (the nature of this is from December 2009, before it was military airport). The airport does not have a modern radio navigational aid that are standard for civil airports and western military airfields like ILS. At the airport, the system was only working in standard SP-50. Communication is carried out in the Russian language, which (according to leading the conversation controller) pilots have had some problems (especially with numbers.) Visibility at the airport would be 400 m (recommended minimum while allowing visibility for landing without precision guidance is 1,000 m). Airport has a runway length of 2,500 mi is adapted to receive large aircraft (airfield was the base of aircraft IL-76).

During a call, the controller warned the crew about the bad weather conditions and advised that the airplane headed to other airport (options were Minsk, Vitebsk and Vnukovo). The commander decided to continue with the landing and decide whether to stop at the required height in this situation. He noted that it has enough fuel to proceed to the airport and then Siewiernyj outward flight to any of the alternative airports. Explicitly stated that the event of interruption of the first approach was to go to an airport and not try another approach. It should be noted that in case such decision is binding on the aircraft commander, not the controller.

For some reason the plane was lower than it should (it is possible that the crew had no awareness of this fact due to poor visibility). Was to be noticed by an inspector who informed the crew but did not receive a response. So far it has not been clarified whether the work at the airport navigational aids, and whether the pilots used them, not excluded is the failure of these systems (transmitters at the airport or receivers in airplane).

During the flight at low altitude aircraft wing caught in the trees and the antenna of one of its facilities. The first contact with the trees occurred at a distance of about 1200 meters from the airport, at a height of about 8 m, the plane was then near the axis of the runway, the plane then continued further cutting of trees. As a result an aircraft wing has been broken off from the plane, plane banked and changed the direction of flight as it moved away from the axis of the runway. The plane stopped after passing about 500 m. The aircraft tail and the second wing were broken off. Hull and the passenger compartment was burned completely. The crash occurred about 8:56 pm Polish time, the board was to be 96 people (passengers, security officers of the BOR and crew). Nobody survived.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8EnKwjPWrw
Remains of the plane several minutes after crash

More details about the talks with the pilots, traffic control and the course of the last moments of the flight recorders should provide the records are in black boxes.

What draws attention is that the first information that talked about a four-Approach landing, and the circulation over the airport. Some reports say that the plane circling up to 2 hours, this is physically impossible because the crash occurred about an hour after take-off aircraft from the airport in Warsaw.
Some leaks tahat occurred in the media (like BBC) taht passengers had to force a landing at the airport in bad conditions.

I must say that as a person in contact with the military, including military pilots, this situation was unbelievable for me. The actual course of events seems to exclude even the possibility of such a course of events, presumably the passengers were not aware of the situation until the last moment, when the machine began to hit the trees.

Weather forecasts for the airport Siewiernyj day as the disaster:
10:00Z (1pm) Temp 3°C Dew 2°C Humidity 94% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 4 kilometers Winds east 14.4 km/h / Mist
07:00Z (10am) Temp 1°C Dew 1°C Humidity 98% QNH 1026 hPa Visibility 0.5 kilometers Winds SE 10.8 km/h / Heavy Fog
04:00Z (7am) Temp 0°C Dew -1°C Humidity 89% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 4 kilometers Winds ESE 7.2 km/h / Mist
01:00Z (4am) Temp 3°C Dew -0°C Humidity 72% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 10 kilometers Winds SE 7.2 km/h /
22:00Z (1am) Temp 6°C Dew -0°C Humidity 52% QNH 1025 hPa Visibility 10 kilometers Winds SE 7.2 km/h

[corran]

Isee that I must alredy corect myself.

Acording to this: http://files.radioscanner.ru/files/down ... 7_58_1.mp3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pilot speaks fluent Russian.

I was using this interview: http://lifenews.ru/news/20288" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Piet Luijken]

Thanks for all the information.

To my knowledge, with experience of planning and landings into some Russian Airports, indeed ILS is not available on all fields.
However, NDB beacons are very common and can be used for approaches.
These approaches needs you to descend to a low height of about 200-300 meters inbound to the airport, waiting for a proper view of the runway.
After a timing from a known spot, like the beacon, without sight of the runway, you make a go-around.

Looking at the stories, I think the aircraft was making a approach with the use of precision ground radar and a ATC controller.
In that case, the radar controller can guide you into the runway.
There are two version: one with actual direction and height control (PAR approach) or one with direction control and height advice (SRA approach).
The latter gives you a corrections towards the runway, checked by radar, with the proper height you should aim for as a pilot, but unchecked by radar.

It is common not to read back these clearances of the controller, so the radio silence is not disturbing.

Also, it not uncommon to make a approach into the field with poor weather conditions.
You never know what the conditions are at the decision point while adhering to the approach is always safe of obstacles.

Furthermore, sometimes, only one runway direction will have a instrumental approach, for many different reasons.

Hope this is informative.