Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

dianawest.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#11

Post by lrem »

osipov wrote: post #5

How does one go from speculations about explosions on the aircraft to claims of assassination? How about applying an Occam's razor every once in a while?

Occam's razor? What about any common sense? Note that within minutes from the catastrophe there was already the government camp claiming that this was clearly an accident with no fault on either side and the president camp speculating that this was an assassination. The fact that investigation after that was kind of a bad joke didn't help to silence the second camp.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#12

Post by seele »

rubyrescue wrote: post #4

Sabotage seems incredibly unlikely as the pilot made repeated passes in heavy fog - attempting to land.

They made only one attempt and were on about 30 meters when the series of failures (engines, electrical power, deck computer, steering, etc.) were recorded by black box devices. The airplane broke into thousands of pieces over the swamp near the Smolensk airport.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#13

Post by osipov »

rorrr wrote: post #8

There would be traces of explosives. " But the tree impact that supposedly precipitated the crash wouldn't have caused enough wing damage to down the plane, said Binienda ... It's absolutely impossible that the wing sheared and then it crashed the way [government investigators] described " - that's all they have, an opinion of a conspiracy nut. I don't buy this for a second, and here's why: http://aviation-safety.net…

Agreed. Most the crashes are consequences of pilot reaction to an unusual event. In short, pilot error. Occam's razor people. Learn it, use it.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#14

Post by p_l »

osipov wrote: post #9

Aircraft pilots, even highly trained ones, overreact in non standard situations. The simulation argues that the plane could not have been significantly damaged by the tree. The simulation doesn't say anything about pilot's reaction to the collision event. An attempt by the pilot to compensate for impact is more likely to have caused damaged than the impact itself.

The simulation also didn't agree with facts, without proposing anything regarding why it the plane might end up where it was found.

Pity the facts, right?

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#15

Post by klearvue »

Audio recording of their final minutes is available on YouTube ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPjzMwAFrmc ) and is in line with the official version (for instance, pilots start swearing and screaming a couple of seconds before the end, right after the controller says something about height and a second approach)

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#16

Post by p_l »

lrem wrote: post #11
osipov wrote: post #5

How does one go from speculations about explosions on the aircraft to claims of assassination? How about applying an Occam's razor every once in a while?

Occam's razor? What about any common sense? Note that within minutes from the catastrophe there was already the government camp claiming that this was clearly an accident with no fault on either side and the president camp speculating that this was an assassination. The fact that investigation after that was kind of a bad joke didn't help to silence the second camp.

Because "accident" is how you call such disasters? Also, people in the industry knew the less-than-sterling reputation of governmental transport service.

EDIT: I should clarify that "accident" is a specific class of event in aircraft accident investigation, together with "incident". It's literally "aviation terminology" stuff.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#17

Post by seele »

osipov wrote: post #9

Aircraft pilots, even highly trained ones, overreact in non standard situations. The simulation argues that the plane could not have been significantly damaged by the tree. The simulation doesn't say anything about pilot's reaction to the collision event. An attempt by the pilot to compensate for impact is more likely to have caused damaged than the impact itself.

The overreaction of pilots couldn't make 100 tons of steel to break into pieces 30 meters over the ground.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#18

Post by jwr »

This article is a load of hogwash. "The heart of the pro-Western Polish leadership"? This is silly on so many levels.

I hope this kind of conspiracy theory raving will not make it onto the HN frontpage too often.

As to the crash, it was a CFIT (controlled flight into terrain). There are cockpit recordings right until the moment the plane hit the tree and then the ground. No explosions.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#19

Post by davidw »

jwr wrote: post #18

This article is a load of hogwash. "The heart of the pro-Western Polish leadership"? This is silly on so many levels. I hope this kind of conspiracy theory raving will not make it onto the HN frontpage too often. As to the crash, it was a CFIT (controlled flight into terrain). There are cockpit recordings right until the moment the plane hit the tree and then the ground. No explosions.

> I hope this kind of conspiracy theory raving will not make it onto the HN frontpage too often.

Yep, it's very off topic. Conspiracy theory debates are about the last thing you want on a site like this.

Re: Boeing engineer: more evidence on the assassination of Polish president in 2010

#20

Post by p_l »

seele wrote: post #17
osipov wrote: post #9

Aircraft pilots, even highly trained ones, overreact in non standard situations. The simulation argues that the plane could not have been significantly damaged by the tree. The simulation doesn't say anything about pilot's reaction to the collision event. An attempt by the pilot to compensate for impact is more likely to have caused damaged than the impact itself.

The overreaction of pilots couldn't make 100 tons of steel to break into pieces 30 meters over the ground.

Except it's not 100 tons of steel. It's a very delicate structure of tons of parts, and the part that got damaged wasn't the most resilient (nor did it account for 100 tons of steel). Breaking into pieces happened when the whole plane hit the ground in the worst possible (for airliner) way - upside down. At over 180 km/h.
Post reply on HN