Vazduhoplovne nesreće

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

SailorCG ::Šta je bio problem sa ovim B-52?

Verovatno je bila greska pilota

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Citat: Verovatno je bila greska pilota

sigurno je bila greska pilota,malo je "prevukao" masinu....a nije mu prvi put bio da izvodi takve "vrtolomije"...

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Pilot se ponašao kao da je u nekom lovcu... Kao da ima odnos potisak/masa 1:1!

Inače zna li neko kada se na B-52 da maksimalan gas koliki je odnos potisak/masa ukoliko je avion nenaoružan sa recimo polovinom goriva u rezervoarima?

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

CHARLIE JA. ::Pilot se ponašao kao da je u nekom lovcu... Kao da ima odnos potisak/masa 1:1!

Inače zna li neko kada se na B-52 da maksimalan gas koliki je odnos potisak/masa ukoliko je avion nenaoružan sa recimo polovinom goriva u rezervoarima?

da li se zna nesto podrobnije o razlozima ovog udesa ?
-----------------------------------------------------------

gledam snimak vec nekoliko puta .. i sve nekako ne mogu da se otmem utisku .. da se pilot od prve sekunde prezentovanog snimka .. zapravo .. bori za zivot .. tj .. za malo vise uzgona !
pogledajmo i zaustavimo klip na 4-oj i 5-oj sekundi .. uocljivo mi je (istina golim okom .. i jako jako subjektivno) da linija koja spaja vrhove i koren krila i linija trupa obrazuju .. ako tako mogu da kazem JEDNU RAVAN.. neka znacajnija promena ove geometrijske 'konstrukcije' (sve do 24. sec) se ne primecuje.
.. potom pilot polazi u levi 'zaokret' ali sa.. opet ako smem da primetim .. nedovoljnim (a ocekivanim i toliko potrebnim ?) 'hvatanjem' visine ? ..
u 31-oj sekundi uocljivo je da linija vrhova krila u odnosu na horizont zaklapa ugao od oko 70-tak stepeni (zasto toliko mnogo .. i da li je to dozvoljeno ??) .. i pri tom i dalje nema gotovo nikakvog (a ocekivanog?) povecanja visine .. (ako ja to dobro vidim ..)
nadalje .. sve do tamo neke 40-e sekunde .. polozaj aviona je .. kao da se 'bori da nos odrzi iznad povrsie vode' (?)
i onda sto je zaista zanimljivo .. u 47-oj .. i 48-oj sekundi snimka .. meni se cini .. kao da je b-52 zamahnuo krilima ? (vrhovi krila i koren krila nisu vise na jednoj pravoj! .. ako ja to dobro vidim)..
potom potonuce i pad ..
da li ovo mozda ukazuje .. da se pilot od samog pocetka ovog snimka zapravo bori za zivot ? .. i .. ako je pogresio .. gde je to kapitalno pogresio ?
....

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Nesto o Tu-154M No. 101 koji je pao.Mislim da je bio u odlicnom stanju.Zaista zalostno al opet ce bit izgleda pilot posve kriv.

Specific and factual on the technical status of the Tupolev Tu-154M No. 101 (No. 90A837)

It was produced in Russia 14 April 1990 and that same year went to the
Warsaw regiment. Her TBO was 30 thousand hours in
air or 15 years of service. The day of the accident, the aircraft reached 5,141 hours.
Tupolev was supposed to be subject three main overhauls. Before the last
overhaul, which began in May 2009, Tu-154 has logged 5000
hours 19 minutes and made 3,821 landings.
(Rather low average time of single mission: 1h20min)

The last major refurbishment of the aircraft, coupled with the prolongation of service life and
modification was made in the aviation industry factory in Samara in Russia.

Order "for Samara," covered the primary repair with another
service life extension and modification of two aircraft, eight main overhaul of
D-30KU engines (including two spare) and the APU TA-6A.

The works were valued at almost $ 25 million

She returned to the country just before the Christmas holidays, December 23.
After returning from Russia she has been again serviced acc. to 36 SPLT procedures
designed to double-check the technical condition of the
aircraft before being allowed to fly with VIP.

After the overhaul Tu-154M 101 could spend 7,500 hours in the air.
She has flown less than 140h.
For the last flight the aircraft took off from the Warsaw Okecie
Saturday, January 10, at 7:15 with 96 people on board. "

January 12, 2010 the second Tu-154 reg. no 102 flew to Samara.
Her renovation is expected to continue until the second half of July.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

raskoljnikov ::
gledam snimak vec nekoliko puta .. i sve nekako ne mogu da se otmem utisku .. da se pilot od prve sekunde prezentovanog snimka .. zapravo .. bori za zivot .. tj .. za malo vise uzgona !

da li ovo mozda ukazuje .. da se pilot od samog pocetka ovog snimka zapravo bori za zivot ? .. i .. ako je pogresio .. gde je to kapitalno pogresio ?
....

Istraga je utvrdila da je avion bio potpuno ispravan i da je razlog pada greska pilota. Barem tako kazu

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

klasicna greska pilota,izgubio je uzgon pri zaokretu a nije ga mogao kompezovati brzinom.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Hmmm

'Russia engineered air crash that killed President Kaczynski,' claims Polish MP

The Russian government prevented the Polish president's plane from landing four times to divert him from a ceremony to mark the 70th anniversary of the Katyn massacre, according to an MP.

Artur Gorski said the Russians 'came up with some dubious reasons' that the aircraft couldn't land because they feared President Leck Kaczynski's presence would overshadow a similar event hosted by the Ru More..ssian prime minister a few days before.

And their alleged plan ended in disaster when the Polish pilots made one final and disastrous attempt to land, killing Mr Kaczynski, his wife, and 94 others on board the plane.

One version of events says that the plane approached the airport four times, because every time the Russians refused it permission to land - they wanted to send the plane with the president to an airport in Moscow or Minsk,' Mr Gorski claimed in an interview published in the newspaper Nasz Dziennik.

'They came up with some dubious reasons: that there was fog over the airport, and that the navigation system didn't work as it was under renovation, and that airport had a short landing strip.'

The claims were made as shocking new details emerged of the final minutes of the flight before it crashed into a Russian forest on Saturday morning.

One of the Russian air traffic controllers involved in the tragedy said he believes the Polish air force pilot Arkadiusz Protasiuk, 36, was under severe pressure 'to land at any cost' so that the president would not miss the commemoration of the death of 22,000 Poles slaughtered by Stalin.

But he claims there were also serious language problems between the control tower at the military airport near Smolensk and the crew as the aircraft began its descent, and final approach, 'without our permission'.

The crew failed to report to the ground their altitude readings, said Colonel Anatoly Muraviev, a former pilot.

He believes the captain 'was desperate to land because of the high ranking passengers he was carrying. It killed both the crew and the passengers.'

It was known that Mr Kaczynski once fired a flight crew when they refused to land at Tbilisi - and flew to another airport, he said.

'Now try to imagine yourself in chief pilot's shoes. Fear, false shame, thinking that going to another airport is a disgrace - all this led to the fact that the crew died and killed all the others. I am a former pilot myself, I understand all this very well.'

The tapes of the conversations with the flight crew have not been released - so it is unclear if there is specific evidence of an order to the captain from either the president or the military top brass on board.

Polish investigators said they will probe whether there were 'any suggestions made to the pilots' from other people aboard the plane.

Colonel Muraviev claimed there were a number of specific causes of the crash - 'weather conditions, maybe a mistake of the pilot who did not watch his altitude, and also the pilot's wish to land at any cost'.

He said the controllers and flight crew stumbled in Russian and broken English to understand each other in the final decisive seconds of the flight.

Col Muraviev claimed that the fog 'was worsening' as the Polish president's plane came into land. One flight had landed earlier but another had been redirected to Moscow.

Of Kaczynski's flight, he said: 'At first it was descending OK, according to the rules, no problems. Soon our air traffic controllers began to worry. The head of our group three times ordered the pilots to stop this attempt to land, and try one more time, while also preparing to fly to another airport because of bad visibility.

'The crew did not listen to him. So the traffic control warned them about bad visibility and the necessity to fly to another airport.

'The crew did not obey, so the controllers had only one thing to do - to carry on leading in the plane and see what happens. There was only one attempt to land and the plane crashed.'

Because it was a civilian flight, they did not have the authority to order them to another airport, he said.

He said 'mainly we spoke Russian to the crew, partly bad English. Understanding was hard.'

The Polish pilots 'began to land without our permission' and 'did not report to us with their altitude data', he added.

Another controller Pavel Plyusnin confirmed the understanding was '50-50' as the plane approached its tragic end.

'It was hard to guess here if the pilot understood us properly,' said Col Muraviev. 'The language barrier did not help of course. I think it could have affected the result of this flight along with other circumstances.'

The Polish air force yesterday defended father-of-two Captain Protasiuk, saying he 'often flew with the president and other VIPs'.

A spokesman said it was 'ruled out' that the president could have forced the pilot to land at Smolensk.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Znaci, recept za katastrofu tacno kako se i desilo. Misljenja sam da nije bilo mesanja sa ruske strane i tako mracne odluke da zabrane sletanje, ali je vise nego ocigledno iz price da je bilo katastrofalna losa komunikacija i nesporzum sa jedne ili obe strane sto je i izazvalo udes. Ne znam zasto se jos uvek insistira na Ruskom jeziku pogotovo kod internacionalnih i civilnih kompanija ako je engleski pod obavezno?
Idiotski je i to sto je poljski vrh dopustio da svi najbitniji funkcioneri lete u istom avionu i verovatno je moguce da je Pilot bio pod presingom da sleti na vreme da ne bi propustili pomen zrtvama.
Sve u svemu, neverovatna glupost i neodgovornost.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Otkud sad konstatacija "Ne znam zasto se jos uvek insistira na Ruskom jeziku pogotovo kod internacionalnih i civilnih kompanija ako je engleski pod obavezno? " ?

U medjunarodnom civilnom avio saobracaju ruski kontrolori sigurno koriste engleski jezik, tu nema dileme.