« | »

Pravda: Crash Was All Kaczynski’s Fault

From Pravda:

Tu-154 Crashed Because of Pilots’ Mistake

April 12, 2010

Investigators continue looking for the bodies of those killed in the air crash on the outskirts of Smolensk in western Russia. Sources from the law-enforcement structures of the Smolensk region said that specialists would most likely have to conduct excavation works to find the remains of the victims.

Many Western publications wrote that the Tu-154 plane, on which the Polish delegation was flying to Russia, was an old aircraft. The crashed Tupolev 154 officially belonged to the ministry of national defense of the Republic of Poland. It was the only special jetliner equipped for the transportation of top officials. Polish President Kaczynski and Prime Minister Donald Tusk came into a conflict with each other once because of the plane.

Viktor Baranets, the military observer of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper, said that the Tu-154 was not actually a Russian aircraft.

“I would not say that the Tu-154 is a Russian plane. It is a Soviet plane. About 70 percent of the military aviation of the Polish army consists of the aircraft made at the end of the Soviet era. The situation with civil planes is the same. More than a half of civil planes in Poland were made in the USSR. Many of them had to have their engines replaced several times already. One can understand the Poles, because Soviet and Russian aircraft have earned reliable reputation in the world. Tu-154 planes crashed in Poland twice. Both crashes were caused because of poor repairs, as it was determined later,” the specialist said

The black boxes of the crashed airliner have been delivered to the special laboratory of the International Aviation Committee. The majority of experts say that the tragedy happened because of the crew.

The plane was technically sound. The pilots were warned about the unfavorable weather conditions, but they decided to land anyway. Two planes landed on the military airdrome of Smolensk before the Tu-154 of Poland. A Yak-40 with journalists on board landed successfully. The military Il-76 preferred not to take risks and asked for landing at Moscow’s Vnukovo. It is worthy of note that the Il-76 was piloted by a very experienced pilot who was very familiar with the area.

“Military airdromes are equipped with the Katet landing system. The difference between the military and the civil systems is as follows. The glide path beacons of Katet are placed some 50 meters in front of the landing strip. In other words, a plane nears the beacons, pilots steer the plane and then the strip begins. In civil airdromes, the beacons are placed from the very start of the strip, and the pilot steers the plane above the strip. This is the first aspect. The second one is about the fact that the majority of civil airdromes, especially those, on which presidential liners land, have special light fields, on which planes land.

“Of course, the Tu-154 has the Katet system. You can turn it on and the system will take you to the place where the landing strip begins, but not to the strip itself. Afterwards, a pilot looks for the light field, which most likely does not exist on military airdrome. The crew of the crashed plane was looking for land – it is absolutely clear. That crew was used to flying on civil airdromes. They could probably land on military airdromes, but it was most likely not a typical case for them.

“The plane crashed 300 meters before the landing strip. The fact that the plane broke into many pieces and everyone on board died means that the vertical speed was more than 7 meters per second. This is a very large vertical speed for landing. A plane may develop this speed when a pilot tries to correct a mistake,” an expert, who wished to remain anonymous said.

Another Russian exert believes that the tragedy in Smolensk has a prequel, which took place on August 12, 2008. The aircraft commander of the Tu-154 of the Polish government refused to land the plane in Tbilisi, Georgia, for safety reasons and landed the aircraft in Azerbaijan, despite Lech Kaczynski’s protests.

“The aircraft commander and all of his passengers stayed alive. In the recent situation the commander has found himself a hostage of the situation. If he tried to land the plane three times and crashed during the fourth attempt, one can assume that he was in the same story that happened to his colleague in 2008. Most likely, he was supposed to land the plane at all costs. I would say that it was not the aircraft commander who made the decision to land, but the main passenger of the jetliner,” another expert said.

The crew probably refused to land on reserve airdromes in Minsk, Vitebsk and Moscow because Lech Kaczynski did not want to miss the beginning of official events, The Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper wrote.

The mourning meeting in Katyn was to start at 11:30 a.m. The presidential liner was supposed to land in Smolensk at about 11 o’clock. The distance from Minsk (Belarus) to Katyn – 304 km, from Moscow – 397 km, which is a 4.5-hour drive. The distance from Vitebsk to Katyn is much shorter – 111 km. If they had landed in Katyn, Kaczynski would have been just an hour late for the ceremony. The Polish president apparently did not want people to think of him as an unpunctual person. In addition, landing in Belarus or in Moscow would have been politically incorrect, taking into consideration Poland’s tense relations with the two countries

Funny, how it would turn out to be the fault of Mr. Putin’s worst enemy.

Who could have predicted such a thing?

These events, as those in Kyrgyzstan somehow remind us of a quirk of the Russian language. In Russian, one shows possession with the phrase ‘y menya.’ The phrase literally means, ‘next to me’ or ‘by me’ or ‘near me.’

For instance, y menya kynigy is how you would say ‘my book,’ or ‘I have a book.’ But it also means ‘beside me is a book,’ or ‘a book is near me.’

So when Russians say something is ‘by them’ – or even ‘near them’ – they might also mean that it belongs to them. And of course Poland is ‘next to them,’ as is Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Ukraine, Afghanistan — and even Iran for that matter. It’s only naturally for Russians to think that they own these countries.

Just something to keep in mind when pondering Russia’s geopolitical tendencies.

This article was posted by Steve on Monday, April 12th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Pravda: Crash Was All Kaczynski’s Fault”

  1. proreason says:

    This can’t possibly have anything to do with Obamy abandoning the Poles as allies.

    They are perfectly capable of defending themselves agains an agressor country 3 times their size.

  2. GetBackJack says:

    Approach beacons. Glide path. Viktor says they’re different at the military aerodrome than a civilian airport. Bull(cough)

    What did I tell you?

    They effed with the pilot’s approach, changing the beacons around.

    But we won’t know that for 20 years.

  3. wardmama4 says:

    -‘The crew probably refused to land on reserve airdromes in Minsk, Vitebsk and Moscow because Lech Kaczynski did not want to miss the beginning of official events, The Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper wrote. ‘- I thought everyone on the plane died – so how come Pravda [//sarc off//] is even writing on an assumption and/or probability of what happened on the plane especially one so specious as a conversation and/or orders from one of the passengers?

    Our msm should take note of how to write bs in the form of a ‘news’ story – oh wait – they are the Obamamedia – they are experts at how to write bs sent down from the Oval Office as ‘news’.

    • jobeth says:

      “thought everyone on the plane died – “”

      EXCELLENT point!

      I let that tid bit slip right by.

      Only the Russians would know what went on in that plane before it crashed and killed everyone on board.

      And the “Obamamedia”. Two excellent points!!

  4. canary says:

    “The pilots were warned about the unfavorable weather conditions, but they decided to land anyway.”

    So, fog, during daylight, pilots said they were landing, but the Russians did not put on lights, instead closed down the airport? Did the Russia airport lie to the media the plane was not landing there, so they were rushing to another airport? No photos? And can we trust what the Russians say the black box.
    You are going to tell me it’s 2010 and they don’t have photos of the weather, temperatures that day? Primitive for Russia who had such super high-tech Helicopters that Obama & Gates purchased some from Russia. Was it one or two Russian helicopters that British soldiers in the Middle-East crashed and died from.

    according to these photos the fog doesn’t look bad at all. There is smoke & water hosing coming from the crash. An areal photo of the airport shows this a very large heavily populated city around the airport.
    photos, videos to the crash.

    I think these links are from Poland. Are some translated English parts discussing what doesn’t add up, aside the witness that said he saw it clearly from quite a distance.

    scroll down to photos of Putin at scene with lights in woods

    Behind Putin in at least 2 photos of Putin deep in the thicket woods, grassy ground, are “tall stemmed light poles.” Think they put the lights in the woods to confuse the pilot or, just weird Putin went to check in the place where the lights & plane both were.

  5. Mithrandir says:

    Russia can HAVE all the countries with –istan in their name. I know Reagan didn’t want communism to spread and all that, but couldn’t he just let it spread a little bit into the crazy -istan countires? Now WE have to hammer them. The Russians are great at tamping down the crazy Muslims, and they would have expanded their empire too far, and have cost them so much money they would have imploded like all the other empires in history.

    Sounds like I am talking about the U.S. now doesn’t it?

« Front Page | To Top
« | »