Miller’s report is falling apart
SCIENTISTS FROM THE SEYM GROUP FOR INVESTIGATION OF THE REASON OF THE CATASTROPHE EXPLICITLY POINT OUT THAT MILLER’S REPORT IS ONLY A COLLECTION OF FREELY CONNECTED SPECULATIONS. IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY RELIABLE ANALYSIS OR INVESTIGATIONS
Decisions of the fluent investigators from Cracow Institute of Forensic Expertises of prof. Sehn, revealed the weakness of one of the circumstances of the Smoleńsk catastrophe which was pointed out by the report of the commission of the minister Jerzy Miller. It turned out that one of the certainties was invented by a click of a finger (we wrote about it in the 5th edition of the Catholic weekly ‘Sunday’). As there are no proofs that gen. Andrzej Błasik had been in the cockpit of Tu-154, the report is partly false at least. There is also credibility of other speculations published in this document under the question mark. We could see the biggest mistakes and weak points during the teleconferences of American scientists who cooperate with the Parliamentary Group for Investigations of the Reasons of the Smoleńsk Catastrophe.
Did they invent the birch-tree as well?
Scientists cooperating with the group of the parliamentarian Antoni Macierewicz do not claim for monopoly only for the right truth but point out mistakes, deficiencies, manipulations and contradictions both in the report of Interstate Aviation Committee and in Miller’s report. It turns out that there are more and more questions to which there are no answers. The minds of commentators are emotionally moved by questioning the reasons for the catastrophe, that is, the birch-tree which – according to the commission of Interstate Aviation Committee and Miller – had cut off a part of the left wing of the aeroplane Tu-154. According to investigations, simulations and estimations by an expert from USA – Professor Wiesław Binienda, the aeroplane should have cut the birch-tree, not changing its bearing surface or flight trajectory. The wing does not fall off, cuts the birch-tree regardless of the altitude or the orientation of the aeroplane – as Professor Binienda points out. Both the Polish commission and the procurators should consider his estimations. For, he is one of the best scientists in the sphere of the resistance of composition materials used in aviation. He works for NASA, and he was also a member of a group investigating the catastrophe of the space prom Columbia. It is worth adding that Polish experts have not done this kind of calculations and simulation of the clash between the aeroplane and the tree till now. Another American scientist – Professor Kazimierz Nowaczyk also points to the exaggerated and untrue thesis of the conclusions made so far. – In the reports of the Interstate Aviation Committee and minister Miller the methodology of the investigations was not specified and parametric readings of the aeroplane were subjected to unjustified corrections - as Professor Nowaczyk emphasizes. So, it turns out that the commission not only put gen. Błasik into the cockpit according to its way of thinking, but, according to similar criteria it also specified the flight trajectory just before the catastrophe. Both the Russian report and the polish report keep silent about the last register TAWS 38. The information of this device denies the fact that the aeroplane had collided with the birch-tree at all. However, if it had happened, the aeroplane would have turned left, that is, changed its direction. No data confirm that – as Professor Nowaczyk emphasizes. According to his calculations, the aeroplane had been much higher than it was written in reports. It starts rising near the birch-tree and falls suddenly during freezing the memory FMS (the computer which was tested in USA as the only proof). The contact with the birch-tree at the first radio beacon and the one which had apparently cut off a fragment of the wing of the aeroplane could not have taken place because the aeroplane had been at the altitude of about 14 meters higher than it was officially reported – Professor Nowaczyk explains. Scientific experiments are also supported by the expertise of fluent investigators from Cracow who did not read out the sound of the hit into the birch-tree. One of many Polish scientists who is not afraid of investigating the reasons for the catastrophe is Professor Marek Czachor, a physicist from Gdansk Institute of Technology. He points out that the cut-off wing has very untypical damage. And nothing proves that it was cut off by the birch-tree. – I want to appeal to procurators. If the wing and the birch-tree had really been investigated, as procurators stated, so I ask for revealing these investigations to the academic environment – Professor Czachor says.
Scientists easily find also the evidences refuting a theory that Tu-154 had turned over with the landing-gear upwards during the last phase of the flight. If it had happened so, the reading of radio-altimeter would have suddenly changed. This device with reflected radio waves shows the distance between the landing-gear of the aeroplane and the ground. – I will remind that according to the decisions of the commission, the last phase of the flight was to take place at the inclination of 150 degrees. There was nothing from which the radio waves would have reflected – Professor Czachor explains. Moreover, the parameters of the flight which were read from the black boxes do not describe the so-called auto-rotary barrel. So, what did the investigators of both commissions base their investigations on?- They concluded on the basis of their observation of some trees around the place of the catastrophe and ‘proved’ with using amateur photographs found on internet – Professor Nowaczy says.
Scientists cooperating with the so-called group of Macierewicz do not answer the question what the reason for the Smolensk catastrophe was. They rather say what reason was not and point out how exaggerated speculations of the reports of the Interstate Aviation Committee and Miller are; whereas the Polish state institutions, instead of support them in these investigations, put spokes in their wheels. As a result, many scientists are working in groups anonymously because they are afraid of vexations and loss of work. For, the public Polish opinion was made to believe that investigating the reasons for the Smolensk catastrophe is tactlessness at least and looking for the truth is just practising politics.
When last year a dozen of professors of mechanics wanted to organize a scientific conference on the catastrophe they were refused. ‘No’ was said, among the others, by the Mechanics Committee of the Polish Sciences Academy, and later by the National Investigations and Development Centre. Therefore, during teleconference in the Seym, professors from USA appealed for not intimidation or not discouragement of scientists from investigations on the catastrophe. They also appealed for setting up a new expert commission which would not only speculate like before, but would really try to explain the reasons for the catastrophe. – All my opponents base only on their belief, intuition and demagogue. None of the people, who discredit my results, have presented scientific studies or any simulations – professor Binienda says, denying accusations.