How about that president of Poland?

[waterinthefuel]

And how he returned to Earth unexpectedly. That must be awful. A nation in mourning. EDIT


Let's take a moment of silence for a nation suddenly in tremendous shock and grief after their president, his wife, and lots of high ranking officials all died in a plane crash that was totally preventable.

As a pilot and airframe mechanic I take this personally. It stings for me. I can't begin to imagine what their families, and country, are going through. A very sad day on the other side of the pond.

 

[tashasdaddy]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

the United States, is the only country that has a designated Fleet of planes and helos, just for the president.

also, the US, does not load all of its, high ranking people on to one plane.

 

[BLU LUNCH]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

It is so sad what happened, The plane crashed on the way to ceremony marking the 70th anniversary of the Katyn Massacre of 22,000 Polish military officers by Soviet secret police during WW2 . Prayers said for the victims families and the people of Poland.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

The aircraft involved, is a 60s vintage tri-jet - basically a clone of a Boeing 727. It was recently refurbished, apparently with "zero timed" engines, etc. It would be interesting, however, to know what sort of avionics were in it, as well as what type of approach the pilots were flying.

Based on a news story that I read, it sounds like the aircraft may have been off the centerline of the approach and below the designated altitude for the segment of the approach involved. They could have been flying an ILS approach and have been off both the localizer (left/right info) and the glideslope. They also could have been flyiing a localizer only approach (no glideslope) or some other "non-precision" approach and have been below the minimum descent altitude, for the segment of the approach that they were on. In any of these scenarios, pilot error is a very strong probability.

I agree that it was unwise to have so many high ranking officials on one aircraft. In most places, corporate flight departments don't even do that. They learned that lesson very well a long time ago, when a Lockheed Jetstar (4 engine business jet), owned by a company called Texas Gulf Sulphur, crashed with the company's senior execs and directors aboard. They lost essentially the entire managing structure of the company in that one crash.

To all of those with ties to Poland who may be reading this forum, my most sincere condolences. Losing your President, his wife and many governing officials, is a huge shock and the world is thinking of you now.

 

[Edko]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Polish Killed and (USA Equivalent)

President (Barack Obama)
First Lady (Michelle Obama)
Previous President (George W Bush)
Chief of Staff (Michael Mullen)
Head of National Bank (Ben Bernanke)
Head of National Security (Janet Napolitano)
Deputy Speaker (Chris Van Hollen)
Deputy Foreign Minister (Jacob J Lew)

That is a plane crash of serious magnitude.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

The latest news is that the pilot was attempting his fourth approach, when the plane crashed. That suggests to me that he felt pressured to get the passengers to the destination. It also is a situation that just begs for a mistake, because of the stress and fatigue involved.

Worse yet, there was apparently a previous situation with the Polish President, in which he severly chastised a pilot who elected to divert to another airport, when the destination airport had unacceptable conditions. This is similar to the scenario surrounding the Texas Gulf Sulphur crash that I mentioned. There was a known electrical issue with the aircraft and the pilots wanted to return to the departure airport, but the execs all wanted to press on. The pilots gave in to the pressure and all were killed as a direct result.

I've also read conflicting reports on the avionics. One claims that it had the latest in nav gear, one claims that it was lacking in some gear. I guess we'll just have to wait to see what comes out in the news, on that one.



???

 

[skysurfer2010]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Such a sad day indeed for Poland.

Regardless of what avionics were on board it shouldn't really matter as long as it had at least the minimum required for flight in IMC. Unless of course they had a malfunction. I don't like to play Monday night quarterback with fellow professional pilots, but I hope it wasn't just a case of get-there-itis. I know how hard it is to look at a high profile customer and tell them you can't get into their airport of first choice due to weather. I can't even imagine trying to tell that to the President, but at the end of the day safety should always take priority over convenience.

 

[tashasdaddy]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

extreme fog, was told not to land, but, he attemped to anyway.

 

[JustJason]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

i've been out in boston harbor, down marthas vinyard, off nantucket many a time when the fog rolls in like a landslide. You can't see 2 feet in front of your bow, I can't imagine trying to land a plane in it.
My neighbors flew into Poland to visit friends/family 2 nights before the accident, they aren't having the vacation they wanted.
Poland has 1 of the better economies in the world right now, it will be interesting to see how this affects it. Keep in mind Poland is a Democratic Parlimentry system. Although they did lose a president, they didn't lose their Prime Minister. It would be like if the queen of england died in a plane crash, awefull for the country, but the country still has a govt.
Signed another sad Pole.....
Jason Ustaszewski

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I've also read conflicting reports on the avionics. One claims that it had the latest in nav gear, one claims that it was lacking in some gear. I guess we'll just have to wait to see what comes out in the news, on that one.



???

I'm sure the airplane was ILS equipped, aside from a cat 1,2, or 3 ILS not much would have helped, and I'm doubt the airport had anything but a standard ILS, so not much help there.

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

He was trying his FOURTH approach -- after controllers suggested that he divert. There's a good rule of thumb that you don't make a third try for an approach, you go to your alternate. Some instrument-rated pilots won't even do a second approach.

A missed approach because of weather conditions (in this case, fog) is pretty unusual. So if the first approach is missed, the theory is that how much are the conditions going to change in another ten minutes or so? Especially fog, which oftens hangs around and changes only slowly.

From the outside looking in, it appears that the pilot made a serious mistake in aeronautical decision making. But, based on the passengers aboard, I bet that was the result of serious pressure from the VIPs on board to land "here, now". If so, it's a good reminder for all pilots that once in flight, the pilot's word is final. And if the passengers are unhappy, well, it's much better to be on the ground later dealing with that than ending up like this one did.

Sad. RIP to all aboard.

 

[DECK SWABBER 58]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

i've been out in boston harbor, down marthas vinyard, off nantucket many a time when the fog rolls in like a landslide. You can't see 2 feet in front of your bow, I can't imagine trying to land a plane in it.
Signed another sad Pole.....
Jason Ustaszewski

He was trying his FOURTH approach -- after controllers suggested that he divert. There's a good rule of thumb that you don't make a third try for an approach, you go to your alternate. Some instrument-rated pilots won't even do a second approach.
Sad. RIP to all aboard.

extreme fog, was told not to land, but, he attemped to anyway.

Condolence's Jason and everyone here tied to Poland.

Sounds like this tragedy could have been avoided.

 

[thrillhouse700]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

its very sad indeed, doesn't anyone think it seems fishy tho that all the brass was on one plane that crashed? Was it a dumb decision or was it something else?

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

A missed approach because of weather conditions (in this case, fog) is pretty unusual. So if the first approach is missed, the theory is that how much are the conditions going to change in another ten minutes or so? Especially fog, which oftens hangs around and changes only slowly.

I disagree. Depending on exactly what was going on weather wise, in flight visability can vary quite a bit over a 5-10 minute time period. There is nothing inherently dangerous in holding for a few minutes and trying the approach again as long as you have the fuel. When you're talking ILS minimums it doesn't take much of a shift at decision height to make a difference. I also have no problem commencing an approach in conditions reported below minimums, again because in flight vis can be so different than the weather station observed.

Now the human factors involved are a completely different matter, was he pushed to complete an approach and stretching below the DH/MDA trying to get the approach environment in sight? Who knows.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I agree that the aircraft would have been ILS equipped. The avionics and the pilots may also have been rated for Cat IIIb (autoland). Given that the aircraft supposedly had a complete retrofit in 2009, one would think that it would have the "latest and greatest" in terms of avionics - all glass cockpit, etc.

Then again, a TU-154 is a 60s vintage aircraft. Russia has always "copped" designs from the US and other countries and this jet is no exception. Its basically a clone of the Boeing 727, which was the mainstay of the US airline fleet during the sixties and seventies. So, if they are still flying these old "workhorses" as VIP aircraft in Poland, one never knows how old the avionics are.

Another issue is the airport. Just because an aircraft and its pilots are rated for something, doesn't mean that the airport is. It could have had a standard ILS and it might have had a Localizer only approach, with no glideslope. Further, no matter what it had, if you don't fly the approach correctly, bad stuff usually happens.

One could also speculate as to whether the glideslope on the ILS approach (if there is one) had an anomoly. This has been known to happen. That said, I doubt it, because when that sort of thing happens, the crash usually happens on the first approach.

To me, this accident has pilot error all over it. The first error was in failing to divert and the second was in flying the appraoch incorrectly. "Big Wheels" or not, he sould have just told them that he tried three times and the appraoch was not possible to accomplish. I woudn't even have used words like "safely." I would have just said no - it can not be done. End of story.



???

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I disagree. Depending on exactly what was going on weather wise, in flight visability can vary quite a bit over a 5-10 minute time period. There is nothing inherently dangerous in holding for a few minutes and trying the approach again as long as you have the fuel. When you're talking ILS minimums it doesn't take much of a shift at decision height to make a difference. I also have no problem commencing an approach in conditions reported below minimums, again because in flight vis can be so different than the weather station observed.

Now the human factors involved are a completely different matter, was he pushed to complete an approach and stretching below the DH/MDA trying to get the approach environment in sight? Who knows.

It is legal to begin an approach when conditions are below minimums but many pilots won't do it. It's another one of those things that are left to the judgment of the pilot.

The reason that many pilots think that it's a mistake to continue making approaches after one or more missed approaches is really the same reason that many pilots will only do one go-around before heading someplace else. After a couple of misses, it's easy for the pilot's mentality to shift into a "I've got to make this one" mode and when that happens bad things often follow.

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

To me, this accident has pilot error all over it. The first error was in failing to divert and the second was in flying the appraoch incorrectly. "Big Wheels" or not, he sould have just told them that he tried three times and the appraoch was not possible to accomplish. I woudn't even have used words like "safely." I would have just said no - it can not be done. End of story.



???

I agree.

 

[skysurfer2010]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

It is legal to begin an approach when conditions are below minimums but many pilots won't do it. It's another one of those things that are left to the judgment of the pilot.

Not 100% true in the US, Canada, Mexico, and South America. It's not legal to start an approach without the visibility required for the approach under part 135 and 121. Part 91 can, they just can't descend below MDA/DH.

I read somewhere that the airport they were flying into didn't even have an ILS. And shooting 4 approaches is 3 too many unless they felt the conditions were improving or after holding while waiting for it to improve.

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Not 100% true in the US, Canada, Mexico, and South America. It's not legal to start an approach without the visibility required for the approach under part 135 and 121. Part 91 can, they just can't descend below MDA/DH.

I read somewhere that the airport they were flying into didn't even have an ILS. And shooting 4 approaches is 3 too many unless they felt the conditions were improving or after holding while waiting for it to improve.

I stand corrected. As a Part 91 guy, I tend to not think too much about the 121 and 135 regulations.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

It is legal to begin an approach when conditions are below minimums but many pilots won't do it. It's another one of those things that are left to the judgment of the pilot.

for part 91 operations, yes the approach can be commenced. Of course so can a 0/0 takeoff, I'm not saying it's always a good idea, but it's not always a bad idea either.

for 121/135 I believe the required minimums have to be reported to commence the approach, but I'll let 135/121 guys chime in on that.

I would expect most pilots to take into consideration HOW the weather was observed, ASOS, weather observer, is there an RVR? VV etc.